Topic
Ultralight solo back packing for comfort minded middle aged woman?
Forum Posting
A Membership is required to post in the forums. Login or become a member to post in the member forums!
Home › Forums › General Forums › General Lightweight Backpacking Discussion › Ultralight solo back packing for comfort minded middle aged woman?
- This topic has 116 replies, 33 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 4 months ago by Bob Moulder.
-
AuthorPosts
-
Oct 10, 2016 at 4:11 am #3430338
I’ve used a Big Sky Mirage UL 2P and Revolution 1P for the past couple of years and like the ease of setup and quality of design. I initially looked at the Soul but prefer a side entry shelter as I find they are easier to enter and exit…..plus the Mirage and Revolution are both two door two vestibule design.
Oct 12, 2016 at 3:39 pm #3430816I know lots of people said “buy once, cry once” but I found that it took me a number of tries to dial my gear in. I ended up striking a balance between lightweight and comfort. I’m still significantly lighter than most people I backpack with, but my base weight isn’t UL. I am in Alaska, and the way even our summer temps in the mountains can drop to freezing made me make some warmer changes.
As a result, my best advice is to make liberal use of Gearswap. Typically what you buy used you can resell for the same price, so you’re not out much if you didn’t like the gear. Of the gear I use, my backpack (Granite Gear Vapor Trail) and sleeping bag (Western Mountaineering Versalite) were both purchased used and I’m thrilled with both of them. I’m a cold sleeper, and the Versalite for me was like finding the Holy Grail. My pad and tent I did buy new (Big Agnes Q-Core SL Wide/Long & Big Agnes Fly Creek UL2) although I’m still not 100% happy with the tent. I like side entry tents better, so I’m still looking for something I like better. I use a 2p tent because I tend to take my dog.
Oct 12, 2016 at 7:06 pm #3430862Ann, I live south of Tuscon. If you are in the area I have UL packs you may try including two ZPacks models, and I can show you some more UL gear.
Oct 13, 2016 at 2:30 pm #3430990I would just echo the advice on a framed z-packs pack so you can carry a lot of weight (water); no harm at all in getting a large capacity one, winter packing is bulkier and a large Bearikade Expedition bear canister eats a lot of space; don’t skimp on weight or dollars with your sleep set-up, go conservative on your estimates of how warm you need it; possibly look for used equipment which in many cases is barely used.
Oct 13, 2016 at 3:18 pm #3430997Pack Volume:
Always remember that what matters is NOT the volume of your pack but the total weight of what you are carrying.
If the pack is too small so stuff has to be hung all over the outside – not good. Apart from looking really amateur, you will lose outside stuff. If the pack is too large, just cinch it down a bit. Or pack your down gear more loosely, which wont hurt it at all.Cheers
Oct 14, 2016 at 11:43 pm #3431245Cameron – appreciate the advice. I have been leaning toward the Z pack ARC haul and still am. The point about just packing less into it is well taken. I can do that!!!!
Thanks DM – Cottonwood, AZ. Prolly a little far for a visit, but if I make it down your way, will contact you!
Oct 15, 2016 at 5:26 am #3431252If you order the Arc Haul make sure to get the optional lumbar pad. A few people find it unnecessary, but most agree that the lower crossbar causes discomfort in the lumbar/sacrum area, as it did for me. There is a thread about the Arc Haul here with some discussion of fit, options and issues.
For shrinking the pack volume — and it is rather large by UL standards — the side compression cords work extremely well when you want to keep smaller loads closer to your back.
Oct 15, 2016 at 8:36 pm #3431384i am a 50 yr old woman I have the arc haul love it would get the extra lumbar pad. I use the smd skyscape x love it but I always have trekking poles have cooked in it and been stuck for a day + multiple times use the neoair xtherm max full length keeps you warm from below I carry and use the thermarest ultra light chair kit also would not go without. a Wm 32 degree bag with extra fill or a 20 degree bag if needed. none of this is cheap but I go out for 8-12 days solo peakbagging and am very happy with my set up. i did make a bget esbit stove and custom windscreen for my cookpot, but as I said I go solo almost all the time. Do carry delorme inreach, phone with gps (backcountry navigator), suntastics 5 solar panel, 18650 flashlight with a miller charger. And my last 9 day trip with everything including ice axe and crampons started with 35lbs including food and water, off trail mostly and was very comfortable. kristine
Oct 15, 2016 at 11:38 pm #3431390Kristine, I use the smd skyscape x love it but I always have trekking poles. Where does the pole sit in relationship to the floor? Some of the tents seem like the pole is right in the middle… I am getting interested in the idea of using the trekking pole set up, even though I started out convinced I wanted a free standing. I too always carry trekking poles. Not sure I’ll be doing 9 day treks though!
Oct 16, 2016 at 6:43 am #3431395the poles on a skyscape go down the sides, definitely not in the middle like a pyramid tent.
you can’t really see the poles in this photo (https://www.oregonhikers.org/forum/download/file.php?id=25516&mode=view), but they are behind the two thin, vertical black lines of fabric at the middle of the tent.
great tent!
the non-cuben version is still quite light, and much cheaper.
Oct 19, 2016 at 9:59 pm #3432011My dear Lady Ann,
As a geezer may I say that “comfortable UL backpacking” is almost an oxymoron. But not quite if you choose gear very wisely.
Ex. Comfortable UL pack-> To me that demands a pack with a frame for comfortable load support on your hips and legs, not your shoulders and spine. My choice recently is the Osprey EXOS pack (58 size for me). Not only is it light but it is very comfortable, even “relatively comfortable” when overloaded to 50 lbs.
Comfortable sleeping bag-> That usually means a good down bag and one that is good down to 20 F.
Comfortable sleeping pad-> Here it’s very individual. I “like” some inflatable pads but am comfortable on a Thermarest Prolite.
Comfortable tent-> Again very individual but I chose a Tarptent Moment DW – and yes, it’s on the heavy end of UL B/C it’s a full double wall tent. Look around for a good solo tent, including other Tarptents with single walls.
Comfortable hiking shoes/boots-> This choice will have you trying on a lot of shoes. (Boots may not be necessary. And GTX may also not be necessary depending on your locale.) Beware of shoes with such a light sole that they do not protect your feet from golf ball sized rocks. (Don’t ask…)
The rest, 1st aid, stoves, cookware, water treatment, potty and personal toiletries, etc. will be a constant source of experimentation. Consult lightweight hiking books and this site for advice and warnings.
Ex. I love my Trail Designs Sidewinder ti Caldera Cone stove with ESBIT fuel tablets but you may prefer the convenience (“comfort”) of a light canister-top iso-butane stove. I’ve found a 3 cup pot is ideal for solo backpack cooking. A little, non-stick “one egg” skillet (handle cut off) is good for frying omelettes, pancakes, etc. Take aluminum pot grippers for pot and pan. You need them.
I’d recommend all your clothes be synthetic for fast drying and light weight, especially when wet.
This ain’t a cheap hobby but it’s much cheaper than, say, boating, motorhome camping, skiing and other high end hobbies. Good gear pays for itself over time IF you get out and use it.
Oct 19, 2016 at 10:35 pm #3432017IF you get out and use it.
The corollary here is that you should get out lots while being prepared to find some gear failures. Frankly, ‘gear tuning’ is a major part of the fun!Cheers
Oct 21, 2016 at 8:07 pm #3432281Well, I have a few words of advice for you sprightly young 50 year olds! I’m contending with a condition that affects my muscle metabolism, so what with age and illness it’s taken a lot of experimentation to find a way I can continue to enjoy hiking through challenging terrain.
You’ve been give wise guidance on the conventional “big three”, but I have my own big three and it as much to do with ergonomics as weight for its own sake:
- Ergonomic footwear
- Ergonomic pack design
- Ergonomic trekking-poles.
Ergonomic footwear.
First, I’d suggest you have a look at footwear. Over the years I’ve transitioned from conventional shanked boots through lightweight boots and conventional trail shoes to very minimal “barefoot” trail-shoes. US army research shows that a pound saved off the feet (at the end of your longest levers) is equivalent to five pounds off your back. But that was in the lab. On difficult ground I find it’s even more. Plus your whole power-train simply functions more naturally, with fewer aches and pains. I know this isn’t for everyone, but do give it a try if you’re open-minded. Just be sure to transition gradually and sensibly. For me, it’s meant reduced pain and fatigue, better balance, an end to blisters and a more intimate sense of contact with the ground I’m walking over.
Ergonomic pack design
Second, once you are carrying more than 15 pounds or so I would argue that pack carry trumps pack weight. I’m a devotee of the Aarn “bodypack” concept, with load-balancing front pockets. There is good independent research to show that this system improves balance and reduces fatigue and pain very significantly, and that’s certainly been my experience. I’ve always had neck and shoulder issues when load carrying, and these have disappeared completely since moving to an Aarn pack. (Though I’m less of a fan of the way Aarn implements his ideas – the packs are a bit heavier and more fiddly than they need to be, so I’m building my own version.) The convenience of having everything to hand in the front pockets is also pretty significant. Aarn packs are very adjustable and it takes a little time to get them dialled in, but they are well worth a try.
I’m also moving away from the idea of a very tight pack volume. It’s simply such a faff to get things packed in the morning when space is tight. Now I go for a roomier pack, and quickly bung my stuff in so I can get on the trail. I also have space in hand for luxuries like a nice loaf or bread or some fruit when I resupply, or for warmer gear, bear canisters etc when required. Look at thru-hiker vlogs and you’ll often see people who boast of their small packs rattling along with all kinds of stuff lashed on the outside. Keep away from the pissing contests and get something practical.
Ergonomic trekking poles
Third, after a lifetime of laughing at pole users I’ve been converted by the PacerPoles. These are far more ergonomically designed than conventional poles – once you’ve tried them there’s no going back. The idea is that they feel so comfortable and natural you become a human quadruped, and there’s something to their claim. Not the lightest of poles, but well worth a little extra weight in my experience, and a great saver of wear-and-tear on the knees in gnarly country. People who track themselves with GPS also find that they speed up by around 0.5 kilometers an hour, which adds up on a thru-hike.
On the broader issues, my base weight is currently around 10lbs (excluding a few luxuries like a Kindle and quality camera that I take on longer trips). This is for cold and windy alpine hiking – I can survive a force 12 storm and be comfortable to around -5c. It includes a warm bag, a full-length mat, an ergonomic pillow, a strong tarp-tent, a PLB, full cooking gear, my ergonomic pack. and rainwear for Scottish/Alpine conditions. So it can be done, without undue sacrifice!
Bearing in mind that I’m also more efficient with my shoes, pack and poles, and it’ a big transformation from a conventional pack weight. These days I can walk for weeks on tough trails without pain or undue fatigue. It’s the advice shared on forums such as this that have helped me achieve this. It will take you some effort and some $$$ to find the right balance for your temperament, physique and local conditions, but it’s a fun journey.
Oct 21, 2016 at 8:59 pm #3432289Hi Geoff
I tried an Aarn bodypack for a while in the Australian bush. It had four major defects for me:
Far too narrow, so that packing and unpacking and finding stuff was hard
The front packs made me sweat like mad in the summer. Just not workable.
The front packs made anything on a steep slope or minor cliff very difficult. I was being pushed out too far all the time. Any sort of scrambling was out.
And worst of all, I could not see where I was putting my feet. Now on a track this might not matter too much, but off-track it was bad, really bad. On some of our rough terrain it would have been seriously dangerous.
My 2c, for my conditions. YMMV.
Cheers
Oct 22, 2016 at 5:16 am #3432320I am with Roger on this one.
I have tried the Aarn style of packing with a large portion of the weight on the front. I modified two bags with clips to attach to my shoulder harness…much like you see with water bottles. After using it on a 5 day hike through the peaks area of the ADK’s, I found they didn’t really work. On the fifth day (hiking out,) I unclipped them and carried them in the pack. Each carried about 3.5 pounds of weight for a total of 7 pounds on my front side. I carried ~15 pounds total.
I agree, they do help posture if you can ever find a level trail. But, by increasing overall balance, they ended up putting more pressure on my shoulders and spine. I have had a a couple bad disks for many years and after two days, I was living on Tylenol and borrowed a few from my partner. I really noticed the extra carry weight on my spine. My normal slightly stooped posture means more weight is on my hip area.
A conventional pack forces you to lean forward (good for climbing.) Going down hill means a slip or other bad footing usually means you sit down. Because it tends to pull you back. Not so with the Aarn style front packs. They produce extra work while climbing, making you work to lean forward to climb/scramble. And downhill, there is no natural “pull back”. I was extra cautious climbing down. Even though the dual pocket design meant I could see my feet OK on most rocky or scree covered terrain, and, while bushwhacking.
After doing 7 or 8 peaks, hiking down & out, *without* the front packs, was far easier. The only place they were of any benefit was on a level or near level (I would say <10 degree) trail. Most trails in the east do not have these “level” trails, except in short sections.
Soo, my recommendation would be that if you do any sort of hilly trails, avoid the Aarn packs. Rig up a couple front pouches and try it before you spend lots of money on one of these packs. Don’t take my word on it. They will help with heavy weight packs, like your Gregory. But, for Light or UL travel, I have found they cause as many or more problems as they solve. You might like them.
Oct 22, 2016 at 5:41 am #3432321Hi Roger
How long ago did you try the Aarn? The ideas have evolved a lot, and the info on how to fit them has improved too. Your comments suggest that you were using early versions or that you didn’t have it dialled in right.
- The front pockets are too narrow: it took a bit of thinking through, but I’ve evolved a system that works well for me. Basically, stuff I won’t need to access during the day (mainly camp food) is packed at the bottom, at the back, or on the side away from the zip. Stuff that I’ll be accessing is on the top, at the front and near the zip. I also use stuff-sacks for organisation. For me it’s a minor inconvenience that loses me a couple minutes in the morning when I’m packing. During the day it’s not an issue – I can access water, guide, maps, compass, PLB, snacks, camera, phone, gloves, hat, buff, knife, spare socks etc pretty much without breaking stride, and my rainwear and first aid in seconds. On bad weather days I’ve walked from dawn to dusk without needing to take the pack off once. On my own prototype, I’m playing with different ways to improve organisation and access for the front pockets, but the standard design is perfectly workable.
- The front packs make you sweat: this one I don’t recognise at all. The pockets have a bendable stay on the back, and properly fitted there should be no contact with the chest and plenty of ventilation. I run very hot and have used the packs on steep 1500m ascents in fierce sun, and it’s been a non-issue for me. The packs are quite popular with desert and jungle adventure racers.
- Any sort of scrambling is out: this is more of a problem that I recognise, as we both enjoy off-trail walking. But for most users it’s a non-issue – you could do pretty much any of the major US or Via Alpina trails, for example, without any difficulty. If you do hit steep ground you have alternatives. For short passages, you can clip the swing pockets to the side. If it’s a side trip such as bagging an off-trail peak you simply detach the pockets and stow them with your other unneeded gear at the base of the climb – the backpack works very well on it’s own. If there are days with a lot of scrambling directly on your route, I would simply pack the pockets and their contents inside the backpack. As I’ve said above, I like to have a few litres spare to ease packing and add flexibility: the additional weight is minimal. It’s a question of the right gear for the trip. If it’s mainly technical mountaineering, you want another pack. If it’s on-trail, ski-touring etc you want an Aarn bodypack. If it’s mainly a hike with a bit of scrambling, you have a decision to make – personally I would always go with the superior carry of the Aarn and use workarounds on the steeper stuff.
- You can’t see your feet. This is another issue I don’t recognise at all. For example I recently did a circumnavigation of Dartmoor by the most remote and gnarliest off-trail route I could devise. Much of the going is terrible – but after the first few moments you simply forget that the front pockets are there. I’ve done a lot of off-trail walking with the pack now, and it’s never been an issue. It’s more than likely that your pack wasn’t properly fitted.
To sum up, I would simply say that for me the bodypack concept has been a transformation in comfort. To walk for weeks on tough trails carrying cold-weather gear and days of food without a single ache in my neck, shoulders or back is not something I ever expected to experience. And the better balance does significantly reduce fatigue. For all that I have reservations about the detailed execution of his packs, Aarn is a brilliant innovator and deserves wider recognition. As you discovered with your own tunnel design, the retail industry isn’t keen on new concepts that require explanation to market, so like the PacerPoles the bodypack concept is currently restricted to a few enthusiasts. But it is, unambiguously, an ergonomically superior way to carry loads. And in my experience it’s well worth accepting some minor inconveniences to enjoy the wider benefits.
Oct 22, 2016 at 6:00 am #3432324James – our posts overlapped.
Once again, I don’t recognise your experience. Given that this was something you hacked together yourself, I think it’s likely there was some fundamental misunderstanding in your design. The Aarn bodypack concept is sophisticated and took years of development with the active involvement of experienced ergonomists – best to try the real thing before you draw such firm conclusions.
In particular, there should be no pressure at all on your shoulders and spine – that’s the whole point. The Aarns are popular with people with neck and back issues for precisely this reason. The front pockets sit on the hip straps, they don’t hang from the shoulders.
Secondly, you seem to be saying that a forced forward lean is more ergonomic for ascent and descent. This doesn’t make any sense to me. With a properly designed bodypack, your centre of gravity is close to where it is naturally, so you ascend and descend in the much the same way as you would unloaded. So the implication of your argument is that a walker who is unloaded is at an ergonomic disadvantage compared to a walker with a conventional backpack and a forced forward lean? Sorry, but you lost me with that one…
Oct 22, 2016 at 12:12 pm #3432355Would any recommendation be different for a comfort minded middle aged man?
Oct 22, 2016 at 1:53 pm #3432361Hi Geoff
Yes, it was a few years ago, but I don’t think minor tweaks of the design can possibly alter any of the problems James & I have with the concept. However, everyone is different, so if they work for you, that’s worth knowing.
I found that I got far greater benefit from decreasing the weight in my pack, careful load distribution in the pack, and a good sprung frame. But that’s what suits my body. YBMV. Cameron – same applies for a middle-aged man.
Cheers
Oct 22, 2016 at 2:17 pm #3432364Systematically lightening the load solves MANY problems.
I’m 60 and backpack occasionally with my nephew who is 28. He’s amazed, but damn if he isn’t starting to catch on. :^)
Oct 22, 2016 at 2:52 pm #3432370Systematically lightening the load solves MANY problems.
Yup. I turn 60 this year and routinely hike with a couple of guys in their mid 30s. On a recent trip, as one of them hoisted his 40+ lb Osprey Aether (complete with MSR Hubba Hubba and LuxuryLite cot), he said “Damn your pack is small”.
Made my trip :) Well…that and the bliss of a 22 lb (wet) pack.
Oct 22, 2016 at 2:57 pm #3432373“40+ lb Osprey Aether”
Now there’s some irony for ya, lol!
Oct 22, 2016 at 3:35 pm #343237722 lb Arc Haul…more irony :)
Oct 22, 2016 at 6:33 pm #3432410Geof, These were what I thought to be, fairly well thought out. They had clips at the top, a single piece of arrow shaft as a stay, and another set of clips at the bottom to lock them into my hip belt. This caused some problems getting the pack off and on again, but still, I figured I could do something with that. I took it on about 20-30mi of morning hikes before committing to the hills. On the level with 25pounds of weight, it absolutely seemed like a good idea. That’s why I took it to some peaks in the ADK’s. After two days in the peaks, it didn’t seem like such a good idea, anymore.
For me, scrambling up peaks means as much or more than a 45 degree angle. Some are almost 80 degree scrambles for short stretches. Nope, the front packs were cumbersome, and at a typical 3″ or less more or less oval tube, they were in the way. As you say, in the pack they went. On the lighter slopes, I would often grab a tree or branch headed up. Again, I wanted to be a bit closer, not so much leaning back and straight up. On the peaks I could actually drop the pack and do an up and down, I pretty much climbed the same way…leaning forward. Nope, I don’t use hiking staffs going up there, either. Usually, these were collapsed and figure-8 tied to my back. They are too handy coming down to be without.
Coming down was a bit bothersome. I was always catching myself with a pole. In places, swinging around or climbing around a big boulder was tough going. Again, after the first descent, I slipped them in my pack till I got down to the trail. Slipping and landing on butt was always a typical complaint, but a lot better than a 7-10 foot drop on my head in a boulder field. A mile or two up, and a mile or two down then 2-3miles(or less) to where the next peak starts its ascent. Yup, I’ll take leaning back a bit over a head roll. But, I am stubborn, I still put them on when the descent got down to less than 20 degrees.
And yes, they were fairly warm. Between my back and front, too warm, really. If I loosened them up, they swayed around. Again, I figured another sort of harness (and more weight) would have corrected the sway.
Anyway, they are good if you are heavily loaded. 15 pounds is UL. I got back with just over 8 pounds that one summer about 15-20 years ago. No, I gave the front pack concept a pretty fair trial. It fails when scrambling up or climbing down. Just too much extra weight (the ones I built were fairly heavy at around 4.5oz each) to be carrying around when about 50% of the time they were just dead weight in my pack. With a 30pound pack, I might have felt differently. But I think the most I have carried in the past 20+ years or so has been 27-28 pounds for a two week trip out.
I didn’t use them for a full day before we left. We left camp after one set of hikers and met them coming down Mt. Marshal. He said “What happened to your boobs?” very innocently. I didn’t get it until my partner started cracking up. He was very good about it. He never said a single word.
Oct 22, 2016 at 6:34 pm #3432411Hi Roger
Well it seems that I won’t be able to get you to reconsider, but you have some influence here and I’m concerned that people will be left with the impression that you can’t see your feet and that the Aarn bodypack is “seriously dangerous” for off trail use.
As I’ve said, your experience was so out of line with the majority of Aarn users that I can only assume your pack wasn’t fitting correctly.
For me, the Aarn is one of the most exciting developments in backpacking, and it would be a pity if members were put off from checking it out. Yes, it’s an unfamiliar concept, but I would urge people to keep an open mind, give it a fair trial, and take the time to learn how to use it.
As for the idea that it’s dangerous, I’ll restrict myself to two points.
First, Ryan Jordan was very positive in his review of an early version of the mid-sized Aarn:
“I found none of the usual sore spots (shoulders, hips, upper back) when I loaded the Liquid Agility with 35 pounds for a 20-mile day, as compared to virtually any other traditional internal frame pack. I’m rather convinced that decoupling shoulder and hip belt movement from the load bearing suspension components has a significant impact on muscle fatigue when carrying weight for long days. The front pocket system, which is integrated with the suspension, greatly improves the maximum load carrying capacity of the Liquid Agility pack. It carries a 30 lb (14 kg) load in outstanding comfort relative to most 30 L-range internal frame packs on the market.”
And secondly, they say that a picture is worth 1000 words. So here is professional guide Vern Tejas leading his clients to the summit of Mount Vinson, the highest point in Antarctica. It goes without saying that this is a remote and serious undertaking where a false step could be catastrophic. I’d ask people to consider if he’d be using an Aarn bodypack in such a situation if he couldn’t see his feet…
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Forum Posting
A Membership is required to post in the forums. Login or become a member to post in the member forums!
Our Community Posts are Moderated
Backpacking Light community posts are moderated and here to foster helpful and positive discussions about lightweight backpacking. Please be mindful of our values and boundaries and review our Community Guidelines prior to posting.
Get the Newsletter
Gear Research & Discovery Tools
- Browse our curated Gear Shop
- See the latest Gear Deals and Sales
- Our Recommendations
- Search for Gear on Sale with the Gear Finder
- Used Gear Swap
- Member Gear Reviews and BPL Gear Review Articles
- Browse by Gear Type or Brand.