What is ultralight backpacking? (how we talk about ultralight)

In many ways, I have to be a bit contrarian to this view that categories don’t mean anything.  Talking about UltraLight gear (or SUL/XUL) means understanding what Ultralight means. For example, a 5 pound tent is hardly UL. Yet people assume that lightweight is close enough to UL to count and join in discussions anyway.  Sometimes they are learning, sometimes just because they want to hear themselves talk.

The items used in UL also have a place in any pack..A light is needed. A tent is needed. A pack is needed, And so on.  Without a definition of items that will make UL, we end up simply philosophizing about these items, ie, is it necessary, is it useful, is it wanted or needed, can it be built lighter, can it be built more durable or simply is it light enough? Is this the name of the game now? Simply carrying things you want and talking about the good and bad?

There is nothing wrong with having a 6 pound base weight and carrying a 30 pound pack. I do similar to this for most two or three trips. Food, fuel, water, simply make up the majority of my load. If we didn’t discuss UL in terms of base weight, it would become difficult to think in systems. After all, it is rather hard to throw around a 30pond pack in the same manner I carry 2night, sub-10 pound pack.  But, base weight is only another metric. No different from Ryan’s computation above. A bit tounge in cheek, but equally valid.

No, without a clear definition of what ultralight packing means, it is difficult to talk of such things. On the trail, it means nothing…you are comfortable or you are not.

In last week’s heat wave, I was out hiking and didn’t use my jacket or sleeping bag. UL philosophy would have me drop these from my kit because I DIDN’T need them. I carried a spare set of batteries for my Steripen. I didn’t need them. But, I surely would have liked them if the temps were 40F and I needed a drink.

Anyway, packing is always contingent on conditions. Climbing mountains at 2 miles per day is a LOT different from hiking over flatter terrain at 22 miles per day. In both cases, I carry UL gear, but the gear WILL be different. (And, no, I don’t carry a 6 pound tent.)

I like your thoughts here Ryan. Nice job. The first time I went backpacking with my kids it had been more than 20 years since I last went backpacking. I had zero gear. I borrowed gear from a friend, took whatever I could scrounge up to make a trip work. The trip was 1 or 2 nights with less than 5 miles of hiking and a few hundred feet of elevation gain with the packs on. I don’t know my pack weight except it was a lot heavier than what I have now. But it was light enough to have a successful trip. We made it out there, had a good time, made it back, and we enjoyed ourselves. That was 4-5 years ago. I just returned from a trip with one of my kids and we went 30 miles with 7,000 feet of elevation gain. I don’t think I could have done this trip without improving my gear. The kit from that first trip just would not have cut it. Our packs were in the mid 20’s on this last trip which was light enough to complete our planned trip and not bust our budget. I came away with some things I will improve for the future. One improvement will allow us to break camp faster but doesn’t save weight. The other is that I would shorten up the distance to allow for longer time in camp because we had such a great time hanging out together there. So reducing weight is not the most important need from this trip. We just need to be light enough to complete the trip and enjoy ourselves without busting the budget. So… “backpackinglight enough”? :)

As long as it feels like hiking and not hauling…

To me the base pack weight definitions are critical; 10 pounds, 5 pounds, etc.  I regard them like breaking the 4 minute mile, the 10 second 100 yard dash, the 2 hour marathon. Abitrary yes, and these UL goals have taken me farther than I imagined.

When I was young and strong in NOLS and Outward Bound courses, a heavy pack was normal — In those days “you want a watermellon, sure through it in” …  When I retired at 65 my 41 pound pack for 5 days was much more challenging than I remembered.  I found Backpackinglight, and Ryan Jordan and took an UL Bootcamp. Then I thruhiked the Colorado Trail twice at age 67 and again at age 69, and my hiking partner for the second trip was 74.  Our base pack weights were 10 pounds plus/minus 1 pound.  Then I pursued a sub 5 pound base pack weight as a hobby for 3-5 day trips.

These weights were insane when I retired.  With a numeric goal, I found a way to actually achieve 10 pounds and 5 pounds and 4 pounds.  I grew my comfort envelope, increased my skills and radically reduced my pack weight.

Bottom line: without the ultralight goals, I would no longer backpack, I would have thought bakkpacking was something from my youth.  And my doctor proclaims I’m in the best health ever.  It is the healthiest thing I can do.

Meanwhile, I appreciate Ryan digging deeper. Thank you

Hike On!

It’s an ever evolving evolution.  My gear is now the roll-top pack (various volumes)/quilt/basic shell plus hoody variety.  The volumes correspond with the season, then there’s the shelters.  Those will correspond with the season and geography, though I’d like to ideally get some sort of low slung pyramid system for basic sleeping/changing clothes.
I remember a few nights at Point Reyes, one ultralighter had a very small pack, almost like a navy blue stuff sack with shoulder straps, but also a bungee system for strapping his ukulele on.  He left as I set up so didn’t have time to inspect the set up, but it couldn’t have been much.  Then still thinking of photography but that lends itself to 20 mm straps for tripods instead of 13 or even cordage.    That’s where all the fun begins as hiking and simply sleeping outside is pretty easy in the 3-season forest scenario.

So there’s “multifunction” once I stop long distance hiking, just not to have similar sized packs sitting around gathering dust.  Lately my gear dreams of the original version of the Mountainsmith Ghost pack – small volume but with a top zipper opening.   Probably wait until I get old (whenever that is) and probably have Chris Zimmer do a commissioned version of the Ghosty above with only top zip in either dyneema grid or possible DCF hybrid.

I REALLY want to yank that guy peering through his huge heavy lens and adjusting it back from the edge of the cliff and at least make him take his frigging pack off. His whole attention is focused on the lens and he can’t see his feet. In a moment of inattention he could easily take a step forward…or simply stumble slightly…like on the rock just to his left.

maybe it’s just me.

To me it is about the weight. Under 10lbs is ultralight backpacking. If you have a 7lbs pack and want to bring 3lbs of marbles, well, you’re still ultralight. You just really enjoy marbles and want to bring them, because that’s your mindset.

The alternative mindset of “I’m only going to bring what i need,” that everyone is describing is called minimalism.

You can see how the two ideas don’t necessarily have to intertwine, especially when it’s SO EASY, to get to 10lbs these days.

This conversation might also be about “Should 10lbs really be the “Ultralight” mark anymore, since it’s so easy to get to.”

@Rex
I suggest it is a constant balancing act. There is no ‘perfect’ solution.

Cheers

Also one more thing I should note. I road bike a lot and have spent thousands of dollars on getting the lightest frame, wheels, components etc and have realized that your body adapts. So, when switching from a heavier gear to lighter gear, yes, you will see an immediate improvement and that is when people write glowing reviews. But, after a few months, your body adapts and your average speed reverts back to what is was before when you had the heavier bike. So, to me, for 90% of athletes, weight doesn’t matter. It matters for professional racers where races are won by seconds or lesser.

I also think that our bodies adapt to heavier loads. With training, you can go as fast as lighter loads. The unknown is long term effects of stress on joints etc. I maintain a spreadsheet of my daily hikes, weight, time it took etc and some of my fastest times are with external frame pack with 40 bs – nowadays I am at 25 lbs or less.

I mean, people have used external frame backpacks to complete thru hikes right? Were they slower than present day thru hikers? maybe thru hikers of today “enjoy” the experience more because they have lighter gear? I don’t know.

I feel just like my cycling experience, backpacking is similar with respect lightweight stuff and maybe it is not required at all.

I wish there was a study of backpackers with varying weights completing thru hikes etc and how they fared etc – daily mileage, enjoyment factor etc There are lot of qualitative statements like lighter is better, will stress your body lesser etc etc. But with conditioning/training – I am not so sure.

Ironically, if you have osteoporosis etc, they tell you to do weight bearing exercises to make your bones stronger  – with the body – the mantra – use it or lose it is more important. So, I wonder if weight is really that important in the long run:-)

I also think that our bodies adapt to heavier loads. With training, you can go as fast as lighter loads.
Ha!
Try that while climbing a mountain. Not a chance.

Cheers

Murali C, I was intrigued by the link you provide to Mountain Training Institute. Looks to center on military training.Reminds me of when I used to run into infantry guys from Fort Knox training (leave) on the civilian trails North of the base. The hills (Knobs) are very steep and undulate nonstop for miles. The last infantryman I saw there said his TPW was 60 lbs. I like the way the Army places a lot of the payload around the waist, especially water. I also noticed a lot of soldiers carrying weight on the front of the rucks too. Balances things out. The gear looks god awful heavy, but very durable to be sure.

As far as heavier pack weights not having much bearing on performance, that might be true for those who aren’t going that far, however, when the serious miles come into play the effects increase dramatically. And I’m not a physics expert by any stretch, but with steep gradients the workloads increase exponentially as the weights go up. The Green Berets I knew embraced ultralight in a big way. They covered a lot more miles than grunts did though. One told me he didn’t even wear a helmet, just a bandana and a boonie hat. Poncho was his only shelter for weeks.

When I see what a few pounds means in handicap horse racing it dawns on me just how important weight can really be. And those are 1,000 lb animals by the way. But as the MTI research you posted shows, the most measurable slow down was observed at speed when the weights increased.

When I see what a few pounds means in handicap horse racing it dawns on me just how important weight can really be.
An exceedingly good point. But horse racing has the horses going absolutely flat out.

I suspect that if you are walking at a gentle speed for a medium distance AND your pack fits fine, a few extra pounds might not matter very much. On the other hand, doing very long distances every day for a week on end as fast as you can – another matter.

Cheers

Ya know, the JMT group does a hiker survey every year and tries to do a lot of analysis of the data.  You can dig through the survey data and reports here:   https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B9Fz_vc-zml_d1JIUGtpbzJ1aXM

And if you look at this document:  https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B9Fz_vc-zml_SmRDZmd1X0gyV00

You’ll see a significant correlation between pack weight and miles hiked per day, like this graph: