Not So Random Thoughts on Pack Weight

[Bearpaw]

There are, within the backpacking community, (much as there is within any sport where the truly passionate border on fanatical), various subcultures. One of the biggest criteria amongst these subcultures is packweight. Thus, I begin an expository journey upon the virtues and vices of the various camps of backpacking based on pack weight.

First, a few precautionary notes. I proudly claim that I am a member of the lightweight snob camp. With envy and determination, I sometimes even dip down into the ultralight ultrasnob community. (I doubt I will ever delve into the superultralight supersnob fringe, but that's just me.)

Second, the ideas I here espouse are by no means original. They are stolen, swiped, and foraged from a host of other sources, including a plethora of other websites as well as the hard copy book Lighten Up! by Don Ladigin (with awesome and hilarious sketches from Mike Clelland, another NOLS instructor whom I had the privilege to work with while I too was an instructor with the <ST1National <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com</st1:PlaceName>Outdoor <st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Leadership</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceType w:st="on">School</st1:PlaceType></ST1a dedidedly NON-lightweight institution).

Last, I obviously feel there is a great deal to be said for the lightweight and ultralight communities, since this is where I dwell, but the most important thing to remember is that what works best for you is what gets you out there enjoying the backcountry. When you try various weight categories and find the one that works best for you, you'll know what I mean. As wise hikers often say, "Hike your own hike", hereafter referred to as HYOH, and "Your mileage may vary" (YMMV).

First, we need to determine how to weigh our gear. There are three ways to do this.

Base Weight
This is a great way to compare apples to apples. Base weight is the weight of your pack minus consumables such as food, water, fuel, sunscreen, mosquito repellent, etc. It allows the most fair comparison of basic gear rather than comparing a pack with 2 days of food versus one with 5 days and a gallon of water.

Pack Weight
This is the weight of your pack with every thing you have in it. Food, water, the rock your "buddy" snuck inside, etc.

Skin-out Weight
This is how much every thing would weigh if, in addition to your pack, you stripped "plumb nekkid" and added your shoes, clothes, pocket items, trekking poles, etc to the scales. It isn't used that often, but is a great way for ultralight ultrasnobs to point out their superiority in planning by hiking in trail runners instead of boots. It really IS a good point to consider, however, when you look at your overall gear weight. Just make sure no one else is peeking when you weigh in.

SO, with these in mind, let me submit to you the basic communities of pack weight.

Expedition
65 lbs or more of pack weight at beginning of resupply.

This class is better known to mountaineers/hardmen/hardheads than backpackers. It often includes climbing gear or photographic gear in addition to "bombproof" tents to deal with serious mountain storms and more than a week of food. When I was a NOLS instructor, I usually sufferred under such loads as I stepped off after a 10-day reration of food along with climbing gear. I have since evolved from pack mule to mere horse's ass.

Traditional
More than 20 lbs base weight OR more than 35 lb pack weight at the start of a resupply.

This is where many new backpackers begin, with 6 1/2 pound empty packs filled with 6 pound free-standing tents, 3 pound synthetic sleeping bags and 2 pound thermarests. As an REI employee, I try to offer my customers lighter solutions, but many of my customers are so convinced that their lives and camp comfort depend on such gear that they insist on buying these more expensive, heavier items. "HYOH" I think to myself as I load them up (literally). "YMMV" I add, but I'm fairly certain their mileage will be less than mine. Still, I was in this group on my <ST1Appalachian Trail</ST1 thru-hike of 1999, so it IS possible to make big miles if you are in good shape, even in this category. I also call this the "Backpacker Magazine Group", since most of their gear recommendations tend to weigh down your pack and lighten up your wallet with this sort of gear.

Lightweight
Base weight of 20 lbs or less.

There is where I pretty much live now. With modern lighterweight gear, it is EASY to obtain the camp comfort of 10 years ago with simple gear selection, even from mainstream gear companies. With the advent of ultralight cottage companies, it is even easier. I believe this is the best balance of comfort on trail and comfort in camp, though I lean toward the lower end of this group most of the time (11 to 15 lb base weight). YMMV.

A great way to move into this category is to look at your "Big 4", your pack, shelter, sleeping bag/quilt, and pad. If you can get these below 10 lbs, you'll probably make it into the lightweight category. Below 8 (and this is relatively easy), you are pretty much assured of such success.

I took my heavier load of gear on the John Muir Trail this summer - my ULA Catalyst Pack (2 lbs 15 oz), Six Moon Designs Lunar Solo E Tarptent (29 oz with stakes), Homemade 25 degree Down Quilt (26 oz) and my Gossamer Gear Nitelite Pad (8 oz). Total 110 oz or 6 lbs, 14 oz. Even if I had beefed up my comfort and replaced the GG Nitelite with my REI Short Lite-Core Pad (18 oz), I still would have weighed in at 7 1/2 lbs. Even with a required 3 pound bear cannister among my other gear, I easily managed a total base weight of only around 17 pounds, and I was geared and clothed for temps down to freezing in perfect comfort. Just an example of what lighweight can do for you.

Ultralight
Base weight of 10 lbs or less.

This is possible with careful gear selection, solid techniques in hiking and camp selection, and maybe a small sacrifice in camp comfort. I've done this for overnight trips and three-day weekends, but not for the multiweek thru-hikes I tend to favor.

Signs of an ultralight hiker include a preference for lightweight footwear such as trail runners, use of tarps or tarptents, cut-down ¾ or ½ length foam pads which double as pack frames in sub-1-pound packs, small quilts instead of full sleeping bags, chemical treatment of water versus filters, and a scrupulous appraisal of all gear so that nearly everything carried will be used and usually serves multiple purposes (such as a large titanium mug that serves as cook pot, cup, and dipper for drawing water from sources). Clothing is minimal and typically designed to be worn while sleeping so a lighter than necessary quilt or bag can be used.

<O</ODisclaimer: It should also be noted that using an alcohol stove does not make one an ultralight ultrasnob. It makes you an alky stove user. I know of many in the traditional or lightweight camp who have made many alky stoves. This isn’t ultralight. It is a tinkering obsession. Like the greats before them such as Edison, Da Vinci, and Ugg the Neanderthal (who created the wheel), when you encounter an alky stove builder, your best course of action is to step quietly away without disturbing the nice man or woman busily working over a heap of aluminum cans with tin shears, tape, and ice picks close at hand…

Superultralight
Base weight of 5 lbs or less.

This is a category that requires tremendous discipline, experience, likely some tailor-made/homemade gear, advanced techniques, and a definite sacrifice of some camp comfort. The trade-off is the ease of dayhiking with an etherweight pack. Tremendous comfort on trail vs less comfort in camp. Oh yeah, and the "small" disadvantage of the inexperienced winding up like the kid in John Krakauer's Into the Wild . <O</O
<O</O

Signs of the SUL hiker include many of the hallmarks of the UL’er, only more so. Tarps are quite small and likely made of Cuben or Spinnaker fabric. Quilts are sometimes specifically made to double as a jacket worn poncho style. Half-quilts with feet tucked into a pack are sometimes used. Packs themselves are rarely more than a few ounces when empty and usually dispense entirely with any attempt at a frame since overall pack weight is typically so small.<O</O
<O</O

This category is often a hallmark of trail runners and record setters. It tends to attract a crowd that thrives on the opportunity to see what one “can get away with”. In some areas, like the southeast outside the <ST1Appalachians</ST1 in summer (where nights tend to be quite warm, despite precipitation), or the Sierras in summer (where cool nights are rarely disturbed by precipitation), this style can mean hiking virtually unimpaired by noticeable weight. When I encounter someone who claims to be superultralight in cold wet settings, I wonder if they mean they are SUL on dayhikes. This is not a category for the inexperienced or the crazy brave.

<O</O
SO:<O</O
Where do YOU fall? If you honestly have no idea (which is the case with most casual backpackers IMO), you are probably somewhere in the traditional range of backpacker. With a little effort and education, it is not hard to move into the lightweight category, and likely enjoy the experience of more miles for the same effort or the same miles with less soreness and fatigue.

In my summers off (I teach), I often average about 14-17 miles a day, with a number of 20+ milers, in reasonable comfort thanks to lighter loads. A lightweight or ultralight pack can make a real difference in this setting.

Conversely, if your main goal is to hike 6-8 miles in and set up a base camp for a week, the creature comforts that can be carried in a traditional pack may be worth the grunt work of carrying it. I have spent much more time in the last year on the upper end of lightweight, approaching traditional, with my new wife who enjoys some camp comforts on our 6-10 mile days.

<O</O
My personal opinion? It's better to be out there with a heavier pack that has what you need than not out there at all. My best advice? HYOH and YMMV.<O</O