This is a preview of a member exclusive premium article.
Ultralight backpacking (the topic in general, the ideological principles, and the community at large) has been maligned by critics in some form or another since the niche was recognized by this "label" back in the 1990s. The reason for the criticism has more to do with people's attraction to sound bites than it does with any substantive failings of the ultralight ethos to solve hikers' problems. We (proponents) of ultralight backpacking must bear some of the blame, as a result of our own desires to compartmentalize what ultralight backpacking is ("...a base pack weight of less than __ pounds") and is not ("...in ultralight backpacking, we don't use camp shoes, camp chairs, or double-walled tents.")
2,050 words, 5 photos--- End of free preview ---
Member Exclusive
A Premium or Unlimited Membership* is required to view the rest of this article.
* A Basic Membership is required to view Member Q&A events
Discussion
Become a member to post in the forums.
Companion forum thread to: What is ultralight backpacking? (how we talk about ultralight)
To me, ultralight backpacking is the idea that one should solve a problem using as little as possible, but that which is used to solve the problem should be as effective as possible. Defined as such, the actual weight of individual pieces of gear, or oneâs pack, matters less, and takes a back seat to the performance-to-weight ratio of a piece of gear.
As usual, a thought provoking article . . . cheers.
“Havenât we changed since the days of whoever dies with the lightest pack wins bumper sticker.”
That is still the mantra over on Reddit/UL
With all gear getting lighter it will just be backpacking soon enough. Look at the changes in just the last 15 years.
“whoever dies with the lightest pack wins”
Whoever dies with the lightest pack……………..dies.
I thought this was about backpacking light not ultra light.
I started with weighing all parts of the packing in the nineteen eighties. It was all about being practical. For me the tent had to restrain rain, wind and mosquitoes plus have space depending on the number of people. Â Thereafter was the weight an price considered.
Reading about others packing showed what possible during their walks. But it depends much of where and when. If they walk in 20 degrees with no risk of rain and maybe only one or two nights, sure the pack only needs to weigh a few kilos. If you risk much rain and wind, and walks for a week or two, then that demands different equipment.
One survival instructor meant you only need a nice axe and with that one more or less you everything as was needed could be done, why carry food, when the are plenty in the nature. So ultralight packing was heavy in his perspective.
In my perspective it is all about being practical and being able to enjoy the nature, with minimal harming of the nature.
THE BOTTOM LINE….
“To me, ultralight backpacking is a practice centered around the idea that one should solve a problem using as little as possible, but that which is used to solve the problem should be as effective as possible.”
“Ultralight” means two things to me. One, in the broad sense, it means that I try to keep my pack weight at or below 30 lbs. on trips of up to one week. Two, it means that I try WITHIN REASON to find the lightest yet most reasonable way to take care of myself on said trips, and that I think about each and every item that I bring….do I need it, and is there are lighter one? And the more experience I get, I’m less inclined to pack my fears.
Without thinking about how and could I go lighter, I never would have thought I would like a tarp, or a quilt, or trail runners. Now I seriously enjoy them all.
Ultralight also gives me the option to add back luxury weight. Within reason. This could be an enhanced camp kitchen (I love to cook in the backcountry) or a flask of bourbon. I have done both on 8 day sections hikes of the AT in winter and kept my TPW at or under 30 lbs. I am 56 and arthritic, so this helps me stay out there now and hopefully for years to come.
Ultralight is about thinking about what you need. It is NOT about accumulating stuff like we do in real life. Minimalism vs. consumerism.
I think much of the more valid criticism focus on the term âultralight backpackingâ.
With terms like that, including (to a lesser degree) this siteâs name, it is logical that there is criticism of being focused on weight to the exclusion of all else, and that it is elitist.
In hindsight, it would have been better if we had a different term, something along the lines of: âintentionally-optimized-techniques-and-gear backpackingâ. However, that doesnât quite roll of the tongue ;-)
Thee are many other pursuits/items that have become named in a poor way:
I like the “bottom line” summary, too. It nicely packages up the philosophy.
I find the Outside Online article referenced in Ryan’s essay somewhat inflammatory and defensive of heavy packs. The author’s entire argument is framed within the context of her enjoying a day hike with heavy gear.  Nowhere in the editorial piece does she talk about her experience doing a multi-day hike or thru-hike. Her CVT on Outside Online is three articles that focus on day hikes with her dog.  I wonder if she’s ever really had the “pleasure” of loading six days worth of food & gear into a backpack and carrying it for miles on the trail.  One doesn’t have to be a thru-hiker or even hike 20 mile days to appreciate the decreased discomfort that going lighter provides.
To me, “ultralight” or how I prefer to frame the discussion, “lightweight backpacking”, is more about seeking less discomfort while on the trail than it is about obsessing over spreadsheet or LighterPack totals.
I also like striving for simplicity, and I feel like the LW philosophy helps to reduce clutter in one’s pack. I’ve watched disorganized backpackers in my group pull everything out of their backpack looking for that “one item” they needed during the rest break, creating that “yard sale” look on the side of the trail in the process. Clutter and managing too much “stuff” can have a mental cost.
Not that being organized implies Light Weight. I could have a well organized, clutter-free pack but still carry an 8lb tent and a 5lb sleeping bag! However, I do feel that the goal of reducing weight and the goal of reducing clutter can be complimentary.
Like Ray, I view “Top N” lists with suspicion. I find the count to be rather arbitrary. Why 10? Why not 8? Did you pick 10 just to appease 10 companies with whom you have affiliate links and/or advertising agreements? It reminds me of Backpacker magazine’s gear awards. Their categories seem arbitrary, and I feel like they’re picked largely so they can find a slot to highlight every advertiser’s featured piece of gear.
I think this is a good discussion. I’m not optimistic that it will significantly reduce the judging that occurs on all sides, but it’s still worthwhile.
The origin of Top X Lists and Best ___ of 2019 lists (i.e., listicles) are from the very well-studied field of “internet content marketing” – which has one goal – to sell you something.
Savvy internet marketers who’ve run a jillion A/B tests have determined that these two types of headlines are some of the most effective headlines you can use in order to invite clicks.
That means if you see someone using these headlines, you know they have read these internet marketing strategies and are employing them to their full potential with the primary motivation of getting ranked higher in search engines (because people search for these terms), and inviting clicks that lead to the sale of something else (ads, affiliate).
I’ve studied these strategies for years, and I loathe them. They are scammy, click-bait-motivated, with the end motivation being to sell something, not provide value.
I’ve even tested a few of them on this community through the years. Guess what, they work. However, this community is savvy and have called us out on them for being scammy, whether sponsored content that provides only advertising for the company, gear guides that only have affiliate links in them and don’t support non-affiliates, or headlines that aren’t honest. You hate them, so I stopped using them. It’s not worth giving up the soul of a community for the primary purpose of maximizing clicks from the outside.
Certainly, there are more creative and more honestly-motivated methods of generating website revenue that preserves trust and respect within a community.
“Certainly, there are more creative and more honestly-motivated methods of generating website revenue that preserves trust and respect within a community.”
Well researched articles, complete with field testing, that contain embedded links to suppliers?
“the actual weight of individual pieces of gear, or oneâs pack, matters less, and takes a back seat to the performance-to-weight ratio of a piece of gear.”
This principle seems easily open to abuse by newbies who interpret it literally, and with the budget /resources to buy many items of ultralight gear, they end up and then carrying heavy 40 lb plus packs for 4 night outings in a Sierra Nevada summer. (seen it happen).
This article touches the heart of my present personal and professional struggles. You had me at “As you immerse yourself in an area of study, defining it becomes more nuanced and complex â and irrelevant.”
I don’t know that I have ever commented on an essay in ten-ish years of BPL membership. But I was won over by this one. Grateful to read a well-crafted argument about why resisting the internet-marketing gurus’ “proven techniques” is an acceptable (if not down-right honorable) way to live one’s life.
Thank you.
So three things:
“Light, Cheap, Comfortable. Pick two. Ultralight requires you to give up one of those three. Yeah, you can focus on multi-use equipment and all the rest, but in the end, pushing the envelope is pushing the envelope. And as just about everyone here has noted, pushing the envelope isnât always a perfect solution to everything, just some things.”
This is a difficult for most Americans, used to having it all, to grasp, and runs against the grain of our current culture. Personally, I think one could use it as a starting point for developing a philosophy of life.
I borrowed that from a graphic designer who used to work for me. Hers said: quick cheap, good, pick two.
And the next guy had one that said: Our rates: $50/hr. $75 if you watch. $100 if you help.
Gosh, so many people over analyze, stress over insignificant things, and generally waste a good portion of their lives dwelling on the unimportant. More thoughts here…
http://popupbackpacker.com/how-many-miles-did-you-hike/
And perhaps we should just quit using these labels
Being old, I started backpacking using cheap WWII surplus gear bought at Ft. Leonard Wood in Missouri. It was heavy, but I was young, so no matter. Hike the Grand Canyon with a 65lb pack… no problem. That made my hiking muscles stronger for the rest of my life.
To me, ultralight backpacking was a movement that taught hikers 1) there is lighter gear out there than the army/hunting stuff you are using, and 2) you do not need all the comforts of home while camping. “But I must read my favorite Bible every night”… buy a tiny Bible. “But I can’t sleep without my favorite pillow”… sleep with the tiny camp pillow at home until you adjust. “But I love pan fried fish”… start eating dehydrated food at home to adjust. “But I can’t wear dirty sweaty clothes”… just do it!
The only real silliness I saw, and still see, in the Ultralight Backpacking theater is ‘Base Weight’. The only weight that matters is what the pack on your back weighs as you set out down the trail. Claiming a new low in ‘base weight’ is purely a technical boasting contest with no real world usefulness.
Say you and your clothes weigh 180lbs and your pack weighs 45lbs. That is 225lbs your legs must move along the trail. If you reduce your ‘Base Weigh’ to 8 lbs from 10 lbs last trip, then you have reduced your trail weight by 0.8 percent! Wow! Your legs are sure gonna feel so much better.
My new favorite metric is taking total body weight + total starting weight of all gear, worn/carried/in pack + consumables, etc. Let’s call this W.
Now using some type of body composition measurement device, maybe a bioelectric impedance scale, and determine your skeletal muscle mass. Let’s call this M.
Now determine your Ultralight Rank (U):
U = M / W
So take a hypothetical human with a bodyweight of 150 lb, M = 60 lb, dry weight of gear = 15 lb, packed for a weeklong trip with 15 lb of food.
That makes W = 150 + 15 + 15 = 180, so U = 60 / 180 = 0.33. What a rockstar. ULAF.
Now take someone with the same amount of muscle but now he’s kind of a fatter fellow, which means his clothes are a little bigger, so bodyweight is 170 lb, M = has 60 lb, dry weight of gear = 17 lb, food = 15 lb.
That makes W = 170 + 17 + 15 = 202, so U = 60 / 202 = 0.30. My god, that’s low.
Hopefully, this post emphasizes the folly of numbers. Maybe it even validates Bruce’s base weight silliness claim.
In reality, if you are looking to really study the metrics behind lightening your pack, stick with total gear weight. Base weight does seem pretty ridiculous. The idea that “the gear you wear shouldn’t count because it’s closer to your center of gravity” really doesn’t hold up to a strong scientific argument. When you do the calculations, see that there are very few meaningful differences, you start to realize that the argument is a bit contrived and kind of dumb – which frees you to take all that crap out of your pockets and put it back in your pack đ
Take what you need to enjoy the walk, but don’t pack your fears.
Cheers
PS: this does justify a bag of brandy-soaked cherry chocolates. :)
Good analysis. The total weight and the center of gravity are both important. But when your knees are trashed from motocross racing, what matters is the total weight pushing down on those abused meniscus. Seems like most customers of mine have some part of their body that is defective… spine, hip, knee, shoulder, etc. If you are a fit 22 year old hiker, you can do things like run down the trail with a 40lb pack. Soldiers carry a 100lbs. Ultralight backpacking helps those of us who strive to do more with a body that is doing less.
This article is so welcome on a website dedicated to equipment. I read it when it came out and couldnât recall what Iâd read like it before. Over the weekend I picked up Colin Fletcherâs, <span style=”text-decoration: underline;”>The New Complete Walker</span>, that my sister gave me for Christmas in 1974, and read this in the first chapter titled, âWhy Walk?â:
âThe important thing, then, about running your tight little outdoor economy is that it must not run you. You must learn to deal with the practical details so efficiently that they become second nature. Then, after the unavoidable shakedown period, you leave yourself free to get on with the important thingsâwatching cloud shadows race across a mountainside or passing the time of day with a hummingbird or discovering that a grasshopper eats grass like spaghetti or sitting on a peak and think of nothing at all except perhaps that it is a wonderful thing to sit on a peak and think of nothing at all.
The second pitfall is more subtly camouflaged. Naturally, your opinions on equipment and technique must never fossilize into dogma: your mind must remain open to the possibilities of better gear and to new and easier ways of doing things. You try to strike a balance, of courseâto operate efficiently and yet to remember always, that the practical details are only a means to an end. But I am not altogether convinced that after years and years of itâwhen you have at last succeeded in mastering most of the business and people have begun to call you an expert and someone may even ask you to write a book on the subject—I am not at all sure that it is then possible to avoid the sobering discovery that you have become, ex officio, a very tolerably accomplished fuddy-duddy.â
In 1971 I used visqueen. Now I use dyneema. Backpacking as light as practical has always been the objective. The important thing is to get out and do it.
“Identity culture, compartmentalization, and simplification through definitions are not inherently bad things. However, acknowledging their presence and recognizing their limitations is necessary if we are to release our hold upon them, and advance our sport and our community culture. Setting aside identities and the criteria that define them will allow us to foster a community that is open to new members, new ideas, and new methods that we can add to our growing arsenal of chaotic and unordered tools that we affectionately know as ultralight backpacking.”
Cheers Ryan.
Become a member to post in the forums.