On Gear and Three Bottles of Beer.

I just bring the lightest option available to me that will get the job done.  The most important thing for me is that the pack is comfortable.  I’ve developed some back problems over the past couple of years for reasons that have nothing to do with backpacking but limits how much weight I can carry on my shoulders.

I find it’s more important to worry about carrying a comfortable pack than it is to worry about a couple extra pounds.  If my pack weight is going to be at or over 25 lbs, then I’m leaving my frame less packs at home and bringing something like a ULA Ohm 2.0 that has decent weight transfer to the hips.   I’ll likely add a Unaweep to my quiver in the relative near future.

Many people would argue that $600 to save 3 lbs is a pretty good deal ($13 per ounce saved). If you have the budget and the tarp will safely and comfortably fit your needs, then why not? A 12lb base weight is great, and 9lbs will feel even lighter. Or it could allow you to carry two extra day’s food and resupply less often.

For comparison, with a 10 lb base weight, I definitely notice the difference on my back when 2 days worth of food (3 lbs) are gone. With a 12 lb base weight I suspect I’d still notice the difference. But +1 for C. Sweeney’s comments about the pack. The added carrying comfort of a slightly “heavy” 2-ish pound backpack is worth the extra weight for loads over 20 lbs.

Many people would argue that $600 to save 3 lbs is a pretty good deal

Not if you’re as broke as me!  Right now it’s either gas or gear and under those terms I’d rather get out.  Looking forward to a pack and shelter upgrade when the time comes though!

You’re both certainly on the mark about a few extra pounds being negated by increased carrying comfort; it’s not all just pure numbers.  Tom cringed when he saw 25lbs. in a frameless pack.  Fortunately I’ve got big shoulders…but I can certainly do better.

Looks like it’ll be the Vapor Trail until I can raise some gear funds!

Cans would be lighter. One could double as a cook pot.  8 pounds, ten pounds I can’t tell.

So let me get this straight in my mind…

18 lbs total new pack weight with consumables vs. 21 lbs using what you have. That’s a reduction of 14.2%.

I don’t know what you weigh, but let’s assume body weight plus current gear is 200 lbs. A 3 lb weight saving will reduce what your legs must support by a whopping 1.5%.

Now if you told us your shoulders just plain hurt using the Jam at 21 lbs, then maybe… but I don’t think that is the case, knowing you. Since I know how physically strong you are, I don’t think you are going to see any significant gains in performance by saving 3 lbs.

Now, if you were my age it would be a different story.

$600 buys a lot of gas. Let’s see, at $2.50 per gallon it is 240 gallons. If you get 25 mpg you can drive 6,000 miles.

If you want to try a lighter shelter, call me and I’ll lend you one. Unfortunately my UL packs are medium, but you are welcome to try my Mariposa Plus, which has a frame.

$600 buys a lot of gas. Let’s see, at $2.50 per gallon it is 240 gallons. If you get 25 mpg you can drive 6,000 miles.

I was doing that math earlier…only I get almost 40 MPG highway!

That’s a big trip.

Looking at taking my kids on a Sierra hike later this week.  Then going back for a solo the weekend after that.  And hopefully the weekend (or next) after that.  I love late August/September up there.

The heck with new gear!

Thanks for the shelter offer Nick.

8 pounds, ten pounds I can’t tell.

Neither can I Ken.

depends- if I’m already well within the comfort zone of my pack- 3 #’s won’t make much difference; if I’m at the upper limit of my pack, then 3 #’s will make a difference

as far as an additional 3 #’s on my ability to hike (or run), probably not much

as far as dough goes, with as much gear is for sale on this forum I can’t see myself buying anything new (save clothing maybe)- typically will be some good savings buying used here

see my thread on my increasing pack weight :)

“I don’t know what you weigh, but let’s assume body weight plus current gear is 200 lbs. A 3 lb weight saving will reduce what your legs must support by a whopping 1.5%.”

hey nick (and everyone), is a pound in a backpack on your back and a pound of bodyweight provide equivalent strain on our bodies as we move through space?

there may have been a simpler way to say that, but hopefully you understand the question. ;)

i’d have to assume that a pound in our body would be much easier to ‘carry’ than one in a protuberance on our back (or wherever), but i am willing to be told i’m wrong! your sentence just caught my eye.

you’re all welcome for derailing this thread into the weeds.

I’d take 3 cans of an imperial stout with me on the next trip.  See if it’s worth the 3 pounds.

I came to the realisation a few years ago that I not notice few extra pounds, so much so I stopped making gears lists and using excel for gear porn.

oh, and carry beer for the 1st night of most trips nowdays.

hey nick (and everyone), is a pound in a backpack on your back and a pound of bodyweight provide equivalent strain on our bodies as we move through space?

there may have been a simpler way to say that, but hopefully you understand the question. ;)

i’d have to assume that a pound in our body would be much easier to ‘carry’ than one in a protuberance on our back (or wherever), but i am willing to be told i’m wrong! your sentence just caught my eye.

There’s a saying, “The straw that broke the camel’s back.” It wasn’t that last straw, but the cumulative weight of all the straws that broke its back.

So yes, one or three pounds in a pack is much different than the same weight distributed over an entire body.

A Gallup poll recently revealed that the average American male is 17 lbs overweight. The average male could drop an extra 17 lbs without spending a dime or purchasing any new gear, be in much better shape, and not notice an hour extra 3lbs of pack weight. Sometimes scales and spreadsheets are counter productive.

Better to jettison every piece of truly unnecessary gear and replace as much gear as possible with improved skills. I keep hearing about this thing called “luxury items.” Humbug!

When I was in the military I spent a week in the Rockies doing SERE evasion training. I had a map, compass, poncho, sleeping bag, flashlight, knife, 1 qt canteen, a few iodine pills, some matches, and a small amount of food in my pockets. That was it. Didn’t even have a pack and had to deal with rain every afternoon and one night of snow. I had to hit checkpoints each day, and had to hike mostly at night because during the day there were dozens of “aggressors” trying to capture us, which was a painful and bad experience I avoided. This is what is possible.

For over 40 years I used external backpacks with typical base weights under 20 lbs, and an external pack can carry some pretty heavy loads. Here is a trip report with traditional gear and weights. Over those 40+ years I hiked thousands of miles and wasn’t constantly buying gear or playing with gear lists. I just continued to use what I had or could reasonably afford. When I approached 60 years of age, I noticed I could not walk as fast, as long (hours per day), or as far as I could a few years earlier. It was at that point I started to go really light.

Over the years Craig and I have done several trips together and he will confirm that my pack weight is probably half of his, which allowed me to do 20+ miles days, some of which included elevation gains of over 10K feet, and keep up with him (somewhat — he is a good and patient hiking partner), not to mention he was doing a lot of long distance trail running to keep in shape. I am old enough to be Craig’s dad. Nowadays I normally use one of two McHale packs I own, which are fairly expensive. So yes, I am dialed into minimum weight and high quality gear.

But this didn’t happen until my kids were grown and on their own, and I had significant wealth put aside. My point is that when you are young and raising kids, financial focus should be on raising your family and financial planning for the future, not a bunch of expensive toys. An extra 3 pounds isn’t going going to ruin a trip or even restrict a trip. It is most important to get out often and enjoy yourself as much as possible, which is something I know Craig does. I can’t speak for Craig, but I suspect he would be happier if he invested $600 towards a raft for his diving and spear fishing adventures.

This is the problem with so called ultralight backpacking, too much focus on gear instead of skill or frequent trips. The average person has around 120 days off from work each year. If one spent 50% of those days backpacking it would be a cumulative 2 months of backpacking per year. With that kind of time invested in walking there is no time left to fret about the newest shelter or backpack.

On BPL ultralight gear is often the epitome of materialism.

“hey nick (and everyone), is a pound in a backpack on your back and a pound of bodyweight provide equivalent strain on our bodies as we move through space?”

For me, no.  I’m overweight and the resulting hiking tax for me is I’m not the fastest hiker out there.  I still do 20-25 mile days with 5-7000′ of climbing, but I’m not breaking land speed records doing it.  If I were to carry my blubber in my backpack along with the gear I normally carry, a) that would be seriously gross, and b) anything short of a McHale or Unaweep backpack and I’d have some serious pain carrying it.  Same goes for clothes.  For the garments I’m going to wear all day, it’s much more important for me that they are comfortable than if they are the lightest option.  I really don’t know how much my worn clothes weigh but let’s say it’s five lbs, I might (might not) notice a slight difference between 20 and 25 lbs on my back, but I can’t perceive a difference between wearing nylon pants or wispy running shorts based on weight.

If you’re a top tier adventure race or ultra marathon athlete, then shaving grams here and there is important.  For the rest of us mere mortals, including the self proclaimed spreadsheet commandos, not so much, especially for worn clothing.

3 pounds of beer = 3 pints = 3 ounces of alcohol

Everclear is 95% alcohol

that’ll save 2 pounds 13 ounces

I believe they don’t sell Everclear in California? – I’ll send you some : )

You could probably get 100 proof = 50% alcohol so you’d save 2 pounds, 10 ounces

I figure I can tell 1 pound of pack weight, but just barely.  Below that probably doesn’t matter

As long as it feels like hiking and not hauling, I’m happy.

“i’d have to assume that a pound in our body would be much easier to ‘carry’ than one in a protuberance on our back (or wherever), but i am willing to be told i’m wrong! your sentence just caught my eye.”

I found it to not matter if it was body weight or pack weight.  I lost 40 lbs prior to a camping style backpacking trip.  On the hike out, which is 1.5 miles up a steep trail I carried a 40 lb pack.  Prior to the trip I commented that it should feel like walking up the trail without a pack now that I had lost the same amount of weight.  i know what that feels like as I had done it before at the +40 lbs weight.  I really didn’t expect it to be that much easier, but it was.  I was surprised.  Now, granted, in loosing the weight I was probably in better shape, but still.

So I blame Larry for that forty pounds I found.

“So I blame Larry for that forty pounds I found.”

Hey, hey, the pound might not have the high value it use to have, but 40 pounds still converts to 52.66 US dollars, which is nothing to sneeze at–tank o’ gas and a pizza…

(ok, so i have a weird and corny sense of humor)

The more and more I get out and actually use the gear I have, the less I care about adding a pound or three. Blasphemy!

Dontcha know they came up with a beer just for us geeks…Lite Beer!