Where are the lightweight backpackers? Not on the JMT…

"Dare I say that no one is born a ULer? How many of us (honestly, now) began backpacking with all the traditional amenities? Think of what it took to convince you to change. "

For me a LOT of it has been Zen trying to figure out what I REALLY don't need by changing my behavior.

For example, when I first started out I would spend lots of time at night reading and then sleep in well after dawn until it got warm.

Now I go RIGHT to sleep at dusk and wake up at 5AM and start hiking immediately when its cold. I don't even make breakfast anymore.

This sounds like a small change but it has major ramifications… you don't need a heavy weight flashlight/lantern.

Lots of little tricks like this have been part of my gear/strategy since then and I've been able to shave weight because of it.

During my A.T thru-hike last year – Craig's post is what I thought of everytime I saw a boyscout troop walking by with the dead elephants that they seemly have to carry on their backs in external frame packs. I asked a Boyscout last year what he weighed (13 yrs old and around 5'5") and was told 110 lbs. I lifted his pack (and honest to god pulled a shoulder muscle doing it) and estimated it weighed over 50 lbs (I've backpacked for a week with 55 lbs so I know what it feels like — a dead elephant). They needed to do 14 and 18 mile days to finish off the weeklong trip (100 miles in a week). I just don't get it — everytime I see a troop they seem to be only further hindering the kids from learning ACTUAL ENJOYMENT and not just "manliness" of outdoor adventure. Knowledge taught from respected elders will always help more than having tons of stuff, when it comes to safety and fun in the outdoors.

PS — I highly respect what the BSA stands for and are trying to do. I only question the implementation as it relates to backpacking and learning to both respect and enjoy the outdoors.

Don't be this guy..

This is a silly thread. Why would you care what anyone else is using as long as they're out there? Get over it, some people don't have the time and money to be cyber hikers like half the people on this forum. Atleast they're out there and not on a computer.

"At least they're out there and not on a computer."

That's the kettle calling the pot black.

. Why would you care what anyone else is using as long as they're out there? Get over it, some people don't have the time and money to be cyber hikers like half the people on this forum. Atleast they're out there and not on a computer.

cause this is BPL …we need to feel elitist over all the poor downtrodden overweight masses ;)

virtual trips and gear is the lightest of em all =P

Manfred,

Congrats on the JMT with your family!

I hope your daughters realize how lucky they are to have you as a father and to get them out there to have an appreciation of the outdoors.

Epic trip with the rain.

Surprising as I have rarely encountered rain on my trips to the Sierras and nothing on my JMT trip last year.

Anyway….welcome back!

Regarding JMT and few UL/Lightweight backpackers…..08-2011- same story.

Very few UL backpackers….maybe one group of 4 people and our kits might have been ligther than theirs.

One moment that I remember was as we were flying past a traditional group that had stopped for a break before hitting what I think is referred to as the Golden Staircases (???), one of the women was panting for air after dropping her pack and commented as we blew past them, "Small packs…..must be nice."

I was very thankful for having the UL pack and did not want to imagine what it must have felt like to carry a heavier load.

-Tony

I'm not the one critizing people for not using lightweight gear.

@ The Saint,

You do have a very good point.

UL gear is simply a means to an end, which is to get out there and enjoy the outdoors.

There definitely can be a superior attitude where UL/lightweight backpackers look down on the traditional backpacker.

Perhaps it is easy to foget that there was a time when we were "that guy/gal" who was slogging the impossibly heavy pack, but we enjoyed dumping the pack and enjoying the outdoors- a lake side dinner and sunset, waking up in the morning and feeling the golden glow of the warming sun hit our face, hearing the crushing silence of the world without cell phones and computers.

Lord knows that I have carried 80-90 lbs before and that was when I was 135 lbs!

The best way that I can frame it is when I was on a trip with Jay Wilkerson, after passing a traditional group of backpackers, Jay simply looked over to me knowingly, "They just don't know….they just don't know."

Sure, there was something smug about it, but the fact is….they did not know any other way of "doing it."

Most of us are fortunate that we took the time to research, found BPL, and have been able to get educated about doing it a different and lighter way.

All we can do is to hopefully be humble about being lightweight and be willing to share with others, who are interested, how to lighten their load.

I definitely had my moments where talking about being lightweight has been almost preaching, which is a BAD thing.

Now I simply tell people that "I am crazy and carry a rediculously light pack. What I do works for me and is definitely not for everyone."

Best point that The Saint makes is….are you out there or simply online all of time indulging on what I call "gear p@rn".

I would rather get more nights out on the trail with a traditional pack vs. few to no nights out with a light pack.

Anyway, just my random thoughts.

-Tony

I enjoy the outdoors much more when I can hike faster and further all while being more comfortable. My point of the OP was that I was surprised and saddened to see red faced gasping teenagers and children carrying massive packs up 12000 foot passes- they were not having fun. Perhaps they would enjoy the outdoors a little more with 50 less pounds on their back.

I have been thinking about this for a long time. My initial thoughts are that this has a lot to do with money. The reason that I am saying this is that a lot of people (including myself) can afford one set of equipment. Take a backpack for example. If I were to pick a single backpack to meet my needs, it would need to have enough volume to meet my most voluminous trip: a 7 day winter trip to the Sierras. This means that I would been to bring a bear canister, a winter bag and clothes and fuel for the duration. I like the concept of down, however; don’t use it as I stick to synthetics (reliability?).
My other thoughts are that this has to do with transitions. I have been evolving to more UL gear; I have thinking of moving to a quilt but can’t justify the cost yet. My bag works and it is a little heavier, but, it works. The same can be said of my pad. Sure, a Neo-air is lighter, but my older pad still works. In a few years, my load will get lighter.
My last thought is on robustness. Now here are some of my personal thoughts and I will use Sawyer water filters as an example. It seems to me that some UL gear will work at 95% of the places I go. I have been looking into Sawyer filters and I don’t think that they can cover 100% of where I go. I have backpacked to a number of canyons in the UT, AZ where the silt loading is extremely high. I typically use an MSR Waterworks filter and do have to field clean the filter several times on a trip (yes, I pre-filter and occasionally bring a empty 1 gallon milk jug to let the particulates settle out). I have also filtered water in the Sierras after a thunderstorm where the water ran “milky” for ~ 12-20 hours. That and still pond where there was a lot of “stuff” in the water. On a recent trip through Parker Pass to Donohue to Tuolumne, a Sawyer filter would have worked just fine. But this goes back to having enough money to have replicate gear.
I guess that I am interested in what other people would recommend IF they could only afford one set of gear. It would be interesting to see what a UL pack list looks like for a 7 day winter trip where the temperatures drop down to the 20’s. A trip where there are chances of snow and that you may need to melt/filter all of your water.
I am learning a lot from this site and I expect my gear to evolve when things wear out and need to be replaced or when I see a significant advantage to upgrading my current. Those are my 2 cents and I would like to hear other people’s opinions on the matter. Jon

Jon,

Good post with good points, thanks for joining the fray!

I think it's important to note, at least from my experience, that overloaded/heavy packs have less to do with whether or not you have UL gear and more to do with what you're bringing. I would hazard to guess that many of those packs are overloaded/heavy because people have a tendency to bring a lot of unnecessary items, or items that they think will add to their comfort without taking in to account that for 2 hours of somewhat additional comfort in camp they're enduring many more hours of discomfort on the trail. They also bring items out of fear/safety that with a little time in the woods and a little direction from a knowledgable source they'll find they don't need (overloaded first aid kits come to mind). Lastly, no one has taught them the benefits of multiple use gear, so they have 'one of everything.'

I believe the most beneficial transition to lightweight backpacking starts with paring down the unnecessary gear before worrying too much about the weight of the gear left over. That, in my mind, is the second part of the transition.

As someone relatively new to the UL practice and still a work in progress, I didn't find the OP or the posts following to be judgmental but rather sort of baffled that other people don't know what they know. Not that there aren't the occasional UL disciples that act preachy and judgmental but for the most part I find UL'ers to be helpful and willing to share their knowledge. This forum has been an amazing resource for me. I'm not UL yet- my base pack weight is 16 lbs right now- but I'm getting there. I have gone from a Gregory pack somewhere in the 75L range to a 40L pack. I know many of you are going smaller and lighter than me, and maybe someday I'll be a real UL'er but for now I'm just happy to not be lugging a whole bunch of "just in case" items and enjoying my hikes a lot more.

Many things can be bought lighter at close to the same cost as items that are heavier. Also, many items will be lighter and higher quality so the long term cost will be less.

The amount of people who do 7 day winter trips is not a big number in the grand scheme of things.. so a gear list to do up to a 5 day 3 season trip is much more likely. Many of which are what people post up here and can be quite light.

on my Long Trail thru hike I saw a mix. I saw AT hikers that had 1500mi behind them that had their system pretty dialed, usually light but not UL. I saw a southbounder with a Lightheart Cuben Solo tent. Also saw plenty of section hikers and weekenders with giant packs and silly heavy things (canned food, full glass whiskey bottles)

a kid i hiked most of the way with started with 60lbs.. at his first resupply spot we sent 20lbs home and had him buy much smarter food and he left with 30lbs. he didn't have to buy anything.. just get rid of stuff that wasn't even being used.

That's awesome, Manfred. We need to get insights on your group gear from you! Two weeks out, what did you do to carry that much food and fuel? With 7 days out, over half our load was just those. What kind of cooking did you do?

The boys did comment about the little girls with beards and deep voices, though…

Jon,

as I work a lot with scouts I have found that UL backpacking is more of a mindset than a cost factor. Sure on this site with all the expensive cuben, titanium, etc. it can easily be assumed that UL is mainly a cost factor. But I think that is mostly true for UL backpackers who are going SUL.
Traditional backpackers like the scouts (to be more exact: their parents), I work with, save money when going lightweight or even UL. In many cases they save money by not getting gear – no expensive Leatherman, no mess kits with several pots, pans etc. In other cases they save money by getting cheaper, lighter alternatives – for example DriDucks instead of their heavy, expensive rain coat or a $150-$200 tarp tent instead of a $300 REI Quarter Dome. Then they save money by needing smaller versions of things – like requiring only the Osprey Exos 58 instead of the Osprey Aether 70 (or even Osprey Aether 85) as a backpack – thus saving half the weight (over 2.5 lbs) and over $60 or even $80. The savings can than be wisely invested in some down gear. In the down vs. synthetic discussion I have found that kids can take care of things — if they are taught properly and it is expected from them. My 9 and 10 year old daugthers just went two weeks on the JMT in epic rains and kept their down sleeping bags and down jackets perfectly dry. BTW. their down sleeping bags were 20F REI Subkilos that can be had for $179 at REI – so with a 20% off coupon they were also not a major cost factor compared to many synthetic sleeping bags I see with scouts. So I would say UL is mainly a mindset. In many cases I think it is about gaining skills and letting go of fears. I find it easy to bring scouts' baseweights to 10-12 lbs with no extra cost compared to the Philmont/REI lists their parents buy originally. Beyond that it often becomes indeed a cost factor.

Manfred

Yeah, I don't think it's about the money, either–at least at first.

The "UL Mess Kits" my scouts carry cost nearly nothing, once we consider the parts are scavenged from stuff we've already got: the plastic cup from the hideous clamshell mess kits, a saimin noodle "margarine container" and a minor investment in my roll of reflectix and aluminum tape. The Kelty Cosmic Down 20's are under $90 and the combination of trash compactor bag and some construction string is cheap. The parents are usually more frustrated that they can't "just buy" a better alternative. Getting the packs lighter is fun and effective.

Now, bear canisters, fuel, food, water containers (ie when full), tents, sleeping pads, packs and other amenities are where weight and expense come in.

I have to admit openly: I don't see or understand how anyone could be even a week out, with gear to deal with rain and hail, food to eat and fuel to heat it with in no-fire zones, water to drink, and be at ten pounds of pack weight. And two weeks, with fishing gear, too?

I call either Child Protective Services or B.S., ha ha!

Eric,

it seems like we are using different definitions of "base weight". The one I use doesn't include consumables like food, water and fuel. I believe it is a generally accepted way to describe the weight of the gear you carry in your backpack (incl. the pack itself).

Manfred

Gentlemen,

Thank you for your responses. I still have a question about money (or rather gear) though. It goes back to “if you could only buy one set of gear that would best meet your needs” what would it be? This drives things to the least common denominator. In my case, travelling in the Sierras require a bear canister (weight and volume). I do camp in the snow and I am not sure if a quilt will work for me below 32F (maybe). For a 7 day trip, planning on 1.5 pounds per day, that is an additional 10.5 pounds (and yes, I know that it will fit in the canister so it’s not extra volume). Yada, yada on the fuel and clothes.

While the Backpackilight forum is full of experienced and active backpackers, I would say that the average person that you meet on the trail goes, once or twice a year. With that usage, they buy for the least common denominator.
I can easily see a “fair weather” gear list for a 3-5 day trip (no bear canister) coming in at sub 10 pounds. It just seems to me that the same gear list would have to evolve to meet your most demanding trips and that equipment list would be quite different. I myself cannot afford 2 packs or 2 sleeping bags.

It would be interesting to see how what the average numbers of backpacks are owned by forum members (or how many sleeping bags / quilts for that matter).

I agree will all of the comments about removing excess baggage. Over the last 10 years or so, I constantly remove what I don’t use and replace worn out items with upgrades and continue to learn and reduce my weight.

Believe me; I am not knocking UL/SUL people. These efforts are driving innovations and developments that trickle through the industry. A lot of these innovations will find their way into my pack over the next few years.

The other item that I did not see comments on where the Sawyer filter. As I said earlier, I love the weight savings and I see it mentioned here on Backpacklinglight often. Is this a lightweight piece of gear but is it reliable work in all the sources of water that you wish to use? I am not that interested in UL gear that works 95%-97% of the time because knowing my luck, I will come into a 3% situation. Again, my 2 cents. -Jon

I have gathered some of my gear for quite a while. Many of my hobbies overlap. I am a rock climber first. road cyclist and a backpacker/day hiker. Much of my backpacking gear can be translated to climbing when I am camping. also much of the clothing is the same. that said I have been at this for a while so I have duplicates in a few categories due to a bit different needs. I have a pack for climbing, my normal backpack and a day pack (that i think can get stretched to a 1-2 night summer trip). I have a few different sleeping bags for different temps and a few different stoves i've used over the years.

I have a Sawyer Squeeze filter and have been happy with it other than their bags, which I have replaced with an Evernew 1.5L. I don't see why it would perform in many of your situations any worse than an MSR pump filter. It is able to be backflushed in the field faster than taking the MSR apart. It will perform better in some cases because with a small dipping cup you can skim out good water from small sources where the filter stirs up the silt. You also have the added benefit of being able to carry "dirty" water in the bags along with clean water in your bottles.

again, your "common" denominator is not that common. The amount of weekender people that you are trying to compare yourself to do not camp in the snow, winter, general bad weather. your food weight doesn't matter, see the definition of base weight. Most areas don't require a bear can.

Like everyone else, you need to figure out your needs and buy your equipment accordingly.

Andrew Skurka's gear talk. his example is a few day trip in the Sierras

Great Post, Jon Fong. I think and pack much the same way, although I do have a "car camp only" set of gear that duplicates some of my trail rig.

Manfred, I don't think we're using different definitions of "base weight": I'm not referring to it at all. I am referring to the "actual weight" of the pack my Scouts and I have to carry (or the persons with bloated packs and cast iron skillets referred to at the top of this thread) and although I strive to reduce my base weights, it remains absurd to tell a backpacker that his 40lb pack is actually "UL" because the base weight is only 6 pounds and he can hike in flip-flops. At least, it is to me.

In fact, my base weight, using the commonly-accepted definition, is high by UL standards because I use a 32 year old Kelty Tioga external frame that weighs more than my sleeping bag, partly so that I can also carry fishing gear, a first aid kit suitable for more than one person, a water filter, gallon water bag, foldable bucket, canister stove, camera, phone, and e-gear that are generally inconsistent with soloist hikers w/o responsibility for others (but probably similar to what you carry as a parent). However, both the base and actual weights are way lower than they used to be, thanks to this site and community.

The UL backpackers we chatted with at the JMT/PCT junction @ Thousand Island had small packs that barely fit their Bearikades and appeared to contain very light bag/tent rigs. They were wearing Dolphin Shorts and Salomon trail runners and after they joshed me about the big Kelty and we swapped, I guess they were around 25lb "actual" with 3 days to go. I was 44lb actual with 3 quarts on board (at 7 to go) and the only way I can currently see to get lighter than that is to compromise safety, comfort, fun, finances and likely all four. I remain willing to learn, however. More importantly, to learn how to further lighten the Scouts on a budget.

We saw plenty of hikers on the PCT, River Trail and around Clark Lakes, most with large packs and items that haven't yet been influenced by the UL movement (or at least, "enough"), such as big, apparently synthetic sleeping bags, giant back-saving luxo-pads, a dude really with a swinging skillet and less-expensive tents with fiberglass rods and steel caps for poles. We saw others with gear similar to ours, but still in "giant" packs that dwarfed what the "real UL" guys we met had.

The other Scouts we saw on trail tended to have later-model packs, lighter-looking gear and grins on their faces. As with my group, some of those grins came from the nutrition gained by eating the emaciated, nearly-frozen (before cooking) ultralighters we found gasping by the trail weighed down only by a very stylish Dyneema packs and titanium spoon/trowel/stove combos. Meat. It's what's for dinner. Be Prepared.

Eric,

Group gear for a family is of course easier than group gear for scouts, but the differences are not that big.

We used the following group gear:
– Two 2 person tarp tents – One for our daughters, one for my wife and me
– Caldera Keg-F Stove System – Pot, stove and caddy. The two halfs of the caddy were used as two cups – one to share for our daugthers and one for my wife and me.
– 2 fuel bottles for the alcohol
– SteriPen Freedom – This was amazing to use to treat water for four people. Last year we used the SteriPen Classic with 4 AA batteries. This was a nice weight saving.
– 2 PowerFilm Solar Chargers – One with USB port to charge the SteriPen Freedom and 2 AA batteries, one without USB port to charge 4 AA batteries — to power four Canon Powershot cameras, a GPS, headlamp and inReach.

We used the freezer bag cooking method. So all that was needed was to boil 2 cups of water in the Foster's can and add it to the freezer bag whihc containted a Mountain House meal.

Due to the fire ban in the national forest we would often cook the trout we caught in the Foster's can instead of preparing them over a fire. With some lemon pepper it made for a great tasting fish soup. That needed some extra fuel that we gladly carried. Here are some photos of the girls with their Tenkara pole and trout.


Bigger trout were also caught as you can see here

Tenkara poles weigh less than 3 oz and are worth it to us for the extra fun and extra food.
Our longest stretch between re-supplies was 7 days (from Muir Trail Ranch to Whitney Portal) which was managable weight and volume wise.

Manfred

Base weight is everything except food, water, fuel. so a 40lb pack is going to still be up there in base weight.

i'm not UL yet at around 16-18lb depending on what i'm bringing. That is sufficient for temps into the low 40's at night with my 20deg down bag.

calling out people who have packed poorly but light and are cold, hungry etc is a bit unfair to people who do it correctly and are sometimes more prepared than the gumbies with giant packs of useless junk.

I just finished 280mi in 18 hiking days (though 3-4 were half days). I was chilly 2 nights and had to add an extra layer. I always had enough food, and even in one of the driest summer's in VT I had plenty of water never carrying more than 2L. I used every piece of gear i brought except my nylon mitten shells.

http://jakedatc.wordpress.com/2012/08/15/lt-gear-list/

Many thoughtful posts and fun to read.

How many of us (honestly, now) began backpacking with all the traditional amenities? Think of what it took to convince you to change.

Honestly? Haha. One of my very first trips, when I had nearly no gear of my own, was with a group who firmly believed in "just in case." It was misery. That was all it took to convince me!

That said, I'm still dialing in my kit and learning what not to take. But I didn't start out with a 5 lb bag, 6 lb pack, and a 7 lb tent, and for that I'm pretty grateful for the lessons of that awful, early trip.

At the end of June/start of July, we did a 10 day trip around Mammoth which included the JMT and PCT for a couple days and SHR for the rest. We saw lots of people out on the JMT and PCT and anyone with a well developed tan was using a light pack. I'd say ULA packs were on the backs of every other thru hiker we met.

Lots of good comments here.

Manfred: well done!