Forum Replies Created
- Jul 26, 2006 at 12:32 pm #1359958
This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.
First off, great test. I have one comment, especially about the SmartWool products. They do not make shirts in a light enough color, the albedo of a base layer plays a *huge* role in warm weather comfort. The fact that SmartWool makes a “microweight” crew that only comes in relatively dark colors is really silly. If you are hiking in the sun white, yellow or very light tan should be the only color you wear, but SmartWool refuses to make anything like this. The “clown” shirt at least appears to have realtively similarly toned halves, but it is worth noting that small changes in albedo can have a huge impact it hot weather comfort!
Great job!Jul 12, 2006 at 5:42 pm #1359278
Hmmm…. I like the technique. Just boil water and cook in a cozy. Also most recipes use items found in any store. Some other good information.
The recipe section, however, is rather lacking. So much so I initially was going to review this book more harshly, but it has other values.
In a quick survey of the recipes and a few trials there are errors and some horrible tastes as well (the man eats spam, enough said!). Definately test everything before you bring it with you, there are errors in water quantities (some errors are very obvious, others more subtle). A few things have enough onion flakes in them to fell an ox.
So, you’ll probably have to come up with and test your own recipes to ensure the instructions are accurate and the food edible. Following that you’ll have to develop your own menus that complement each other nutritionally. And well, that means you aren’t using more than half the book.
In summary, a few useful tips and a nice system. A great idea. When it comes to the execution of that idea (i.e. the recipes) I find the book lacking. Worst of all are the outright errors in the recipes in places, you’re likely to end up with soup or cruchy paste out on the trail if you don’t thuroughly test everything at home first!Jul 3, 2006 at 8:15 pm #1358922
So the crazy mesh shoes showed up today, I’ll second what Dave has said so far:
1. Ridiculously light – 2 oz for a pair.
2. They size to the small side, what I ordered was listed as 9-11 and has a 11 sticker on them. I’m a 9 and glad my feet aren’t any bigger!
3. Great camp shoes if you are good to them.
4. Perfect for crossing sandy fords. I’d say if you are up high where the water isn’t too treacherous yet and you can find wider, shallower crossings without rocks (trails for horses nearly always have such crossings) these are the hot ticket.
I’m going on a trip in a few weeks, not sure how much if any water I’ll cross, but I’ll find an excuse if I have to. I’ll give these a try. If they work, I’m ordering a few pair for myself and my wife – obviously not super durable and they are so dang cheap I’ll just stock up.
Thanks for the great tip!
KenJun 27, 2006 at 6:10 am #1358588
The GoLite Cave is 2 oz more than the Lair and significantly larger and longer. GoLite appears to be out of stock, but I do have one for sale on the gear swap forum. It is compatible with the Lair Nest mosquito nets as well.
KenJun 26, 2006 at 5:24 pm #1358566
Old thread, just adding info for the archive. I did bring a scale to Payless and compared the Airwalk sandles to the clogs. For a men’s size 9 the clogs wiegh 1 oz less for each shoe (so 2 oz less for the pair). The sandles weigh 11.4 oz for the pair. The sandles would definately stay on a lot better in a stream.
I decided on the sandles, they were on sale for $14.99. I’m also going to order some of those mesh shoes as well – for $10 and 2 oz how can I not try?
KenJun 18, 2006 at 10:49 am #1358177
So a hiker is flying out to a remote site in Alaska talking to his bush pilot. He tells the pilot he’s brought a 45 with him in case he runs into a bear. The pilot looks at him knowingly and says, “You better file the sight off the end of that barrel if you’re going to use it on bears.” The hiker considers this for a moment but can’t find the logic. He asks, “Why do I need to do that?” The pilot replies, “It’ll hurt a lot less when the bear shoves it up your ass.”
KenApr 4, 2006 at 10:33 pm #1354136
Pack is sold!Apr 1, 2006 at 11:54 am #1353948
Well I just doubled the number of holes and tested it out and sure enough the “breathing” effect stopped!
KenApr 1, 2006 at 7:44 am #1353936
So since I really can’t stand searching forums and finding a thread unresolved this post is for the archive…
It turns out it would appear my initial theory is correct, the problem is there is too much pressure in the sidewall and evenually the vapor bubbles back into the inner chamber. Following Paul’s advice I asked Tinny and he said he’d seen this before and believed it to be caused by having too much heat and or pressure as a result of having too little in the way of jets and described an oscillation mechanism similar to what I was hypothesizing.
I viewed the stove while pointing my head lamp into the center and sure enough as the flame heights reach their peak a bunch of vapor bubbles enter the center of the stove and then the pressure drops and the flame height drops. Then the process starts over.
A friends stove with more and larger holes doesn’t have the problem.
So, it sees like a “breathing” stove is the result of too few or too small holes for the jets. I may double the number of holes on mine as an experiment.
KenMar 29, 2006 at 7:09 am #1353739
Thanks for doing this, one problem I’ve found with the gear guide on this site is a strong bias for down bags (well, duh, they are lighter!). Unfortunately my wife is allergic to down so it has to be synthetic for us. I had a lot of trouble settling on a bag to buy.
I have the lightyear, but so far have only climbed into it in my living room! All my weekends are booked for the month already so it will be awhile til I can give it a try.
I can say I’m quite impressed with the design especially since it is such a bargain. Foot vent, double pull zipper (hip length), good zipper draft tube, little tie points to secure to a sleeping pad, functional hood design. For the record I’m just about 6’1″ and the regular length is just fine for me.
Does it really all work? Can’t wait to find out – certainly wins on the claimed performance, wieght, cost curve. I asked a few weeks ago if anyone had any experience with the bag and got no response.
The other nice thing, for my wife who sleeps cold, is they have a womens short version which even though it is much shorter has the same fill weight – so hopefully she’ll be comfortable at the same temps as me.
Oh, and REI stores do seem to stock this bag (for $110!!!, I remember a decade ago when there was actually stuff to buy at REI – even with their 20% coupons it is hard to find anything – outlet is OK sometimes – but I digress) so you can go check it out if there is one nearby.
KenMar 28, 2006 at 10:41 pm #1353711
Kelty Lightyear 3D 25 25F 38 Polarguard 3D $90 campmor.comMar 28, 2006 at 10:27 pm #1353710
Thanks for everyone’s input!
Yes, it seems as if for some reason the pressure in the inner/outer wall chamber is oscillating. I notched the inner wall in three places at the bottom with a hole punch and I did put a bead of JB weld along the top of the inner wall when assembling to prevent any vapor leaks up there. I didn’t bother with anything like that at the bottom since it is notched anyway. The design I used was the open jet stove on zenstoves.net and I pretty much did it straight up as the instructions state with the exception of adding the JB weld seal along the top (Pepsi-G stove suggests this).
I’m glad to hear this isn’t that uncommon. If it doesn’t effect the efficency it’s probably no big deal. It sounds like from various sources it almost doesn’t matter exactly how you burn your alcohol (open pan, open jet, closed jet, chimney, etc.) as long as you get the pot height and windscreen right.
Most of the time the breathing is pretty mild, but a few times the oscillations have been quite large – stove still kept itself lit though.
One theory I’ve got is that perhaps there aren’t enough jet holes and pressure builds so high that vapor manages to force its way back through the notches at the bottom into the central chamber and thus vents the outer chamber and the pressure plummets. Then more fuel vaporizes and the cycle continues. A poor analogy would be the way a nearly full 2 liter bottle glugs when you pour it as air rushing in and liquid pouring out compete and set up an oscillation. Current design has 24 holes made with #74 drill bit – maybe I’ll make one with 32 and see if there is a difference (Pepsi-G uses 32). Another difference with Pepsi-G is the notch sizes – and Pepsi-G specifies different notches for different types of cans so maybe that’s related.
Was cool to boil a pot of water in my sink with the little stove anyway!
Any other ideas or suggestions greatly appreciated!
KenMar 24, 2006 at 5:55 am #1353327
The Rae lakes area can be very bad as well as Yosemite. As many others have stated a few simple steps will greatly reduce encounters – cook somewhere on the trail in the afternoon and then hike further to make camp. Don’t camp where everyone else does (this assumes you are doing zero impact camping). Even if you do all of these things have your bear canister (or this year Ursack with the aluminum insert). I haven’t tried them yet, but the smell proof (reducing?) bags sound like a good thing.
Finally, as far as canister selection goes the Bear Vault is not allowed in Rae Lakes at the moment, it is still approved everywhere else while they investigate what happened last summer with a fair number getting popped in Rae Lakes.
KenMar 24, 2006 at 5:45 am #1353326
So what you guys want is a Personal Articles Floater. It essentially protects individual items from everything but intentional destruction with no deductible and no impact on your other policies. Frequently used on camera gear and jewelry. The problem with your homeowners/renters policy covering the loss is that typically if you are being savy about your home owners policy you have a high deductible and it won’t help with losses under a couple thousand. If you do have a low deductible and make claims for your lost gear, well you just made a claim on your very expensive policy and at some point your rates may go up as a result. Home owners policies are best for when your gear burns up with everything else you own and your house :).
A PAF policy on the other hand covers an individual item or group of items that are of high value and are most likely to be stolen or damaged *away* from your home. The typically cover all “perils” including you being an idiot and dropping the item off a boat with no deductible. Prices vary, maybe around $35/yr or so for $1500 coverage. For a camera this is a no brainer since people love to steal them and they are easy to break if you actually go out and use them. For backpacking gear you’ll need to better weigh the risks and decide if the price is worth it or if you’d rather just bring your stinky pack inside with you (it is ultralight after all :). You’d also need to check if your company would even underwrite backpacking gear.
One last thing, people who are really paranoid about insurance companies dinging them for making claims will often get their PAF policy from a completely different company than their auto/homeowners policy.
And of course if you are a gear head getting your pack stolen is just an excuse to buy lighter gear. Heck, in the past few weeks I feel like I was robbed just from all the purchases I’ve made after reading articles here :).