I have noticed this year I am going away from things that don’t have breathable shells on them and instead will sometimes double up insulation layers if I need to instead. I have especially noticed this in hats, gloves and footwear where now I will wear a pair of fleece gloves with fleece mitts over them, up to two different Wind Pro hats and a liner sock and a thick pair of merino wool socks with my Chacos. I realized that with the shelled hats, gloves and the shoes I was wearing I was creating microclimates inside that would keep me warm until I stopped or took the outer piece off and I thought that was a bad thing.
Topic
Getting away from shells
Become a member to post in the forums.
- This topic is empty.
Depends on the circumstance. After overheating in a Pata H2No Torrentshell the previous day, I went up over a 13k pass during a decent rain wearing no shell, just my REI Sahara and merino 1 short sleeve … with shorts, just looking at all the other hikers in shells and ponchos. Nobody really looked at me since they were concentrated on footing but it was kind of strange. I felt fine until stopping for lunch and then broke out the insulation/H2NO … but glad I kept a shell packed. Then again I've been chilled on the Pacific coast in summer.
I usually don't use anything that has a weather resistant shell and insulation. A plain shell and separate breathable insulation works. The exception would be down jackets which are wind resistant because of the down proof fabric.
"A plain shell and separate breathable insulation works."
+1.
Depends on your climate. I like that idea and have messed with it. I needed more layers to stay warm and since it's so rainy here I just ended up with a bunch of wet clothes and no solution.
I have ended up with light shell. Wpb or not. And one or two light layers under it. I'm getting wet anyway for reason or another, I just keep the soaking layers to a minimum.
Bill Bryson made a similar effort to forgo shells in his book "A Walk in the Woods" and gets caught in an unexpected heavy fog in New Hampshire. Like all you northeasterners know, the only guarantee in New Hampshire is that there are no guarantees. This is pretty true in Vermont (it was 38º and raining in August at the top of Camel's Hump this year) and in Maine.
Bill Bryson almost got hypothermia and regretted not bringing rain gear. Another 16oz in his pack meant the difference between life-threatening cold and warm comfort.
Climate permitting, shells are optional. A Montbell Versalite or Outdoor Research Helium II would be a good choice, as they're super light and packable.
HOWEVER
I don't suggest taking the 95% of times you don't need a shell as a reason to get rid of a shell. The 5% of the time you need it, you might REALLY need it. None of us are immune to a long, unexpected period of being stationary from something like a broken ankle.
You wouldn't ditch your first aid kit because "I haven't needed it recently."
Max—totally agree. To me my Arcteryx rain jacket is a survival item pure and simple, and it has saved my butt a hundred times. Some trips I carry it but never use it. Other trips it's used to stay alive while hiking in 96 hour 35F rainstorms.
"Bill Bryson made a similar effort to forgo shells in his book "A Walk in the Woods" and gets caught in an unexpected heavy fog in New Hampshire. "
My memory of this scene in the book is that Bryson reaches into his pack for his "waterproofs" and they aren't there — he has forgotten to pack them, not made any effort to forgo carrying them. So this is somewhat unfair.
In the shoulder seasons up here theres no excuse not to bring a UL rain jacket or poncho for 5-8oz
Folks have died because they didnt have rain gear …
Even in the summer you might have several straight days of rain
My helium is the one of the least used things, but when u need it u REALLY need it
;)
I've considered ditching the shell for a poncho but then the very next hike, I found myself getting blasted with rain and wind on a trail where a misstep would have been catastrophic. Ok maybe "really bad" fits better than catastrophic. A poncho would have been a pill to work with in those conditions.
As far as not having any rain gear at all? Not too worried about getting into the cool kids SUL club enough to leave my shell behind. I'll get there eventually through other means.
I consider a windshirt a shell, and thus I always have one w/ me regardless of weather-it's probably the one piece of kit that is constant 12 months around; in the dead of winter I forego a hardshell (my windshirts have a pretty decent HH and good DWR), all other seasons a hardshell is in, even though I know the chances of using it are somewhat slim
Over the last three seasons I've been caught in very heavy rains/sleet in the Sierra during summer months. On one occasion the temperatures plummeted and I was in sleet for over four hours, heavy cold rain for another five. By accident I had packed my Rab event anorak instead of a lighter, not very good shell. I think that the Rab kept me from becoming hypothermic. I hiked out of that weather in one day; it continued for another three days. I would have been in trouble without a shell in those conditions. None of this was in the forecast! Now I always bring a shell.
"My memory of this scene in the book is that Bryson reaches into his pack for his "waterproofs" and they aren't there — he has forgotten to pack them, not made any effort to forgo carrying them. So this is somewhat unfair."
Upon reflection, you are right. The example stands true, and no slight to Bryson meant.
Become a member to post in the forums.

