A 2 1/2 Month AT Thru...

[WIAPilot]

I would really like everyone's thoughts on this. I have a friend who is thinking of doing a sort of supported thru with a friend. They would "leap frog" with their vehicles and both men are 40-50 yrs old. They believe that they can accomplish this in 2 1/2 months. I think that is somewhat optimistic due to rain, heat, terrain, etc.

What do you all think is a realistic time frame for them? They plan to aim for 30 miles daily. Or since they will be kind of slackpacking it in many areas, is this doable?

[kayak karl]

that's no days off and some major driving gymnastics. likely not doable without a support team.

[Driver8]

I would really like everyone's thoughts on this. I have a friend who is thinking of doing a sort of supported thru with a friend. They would "leap frog" with their vehicles and both men are 40-50 yrs old. They believe that they can accomplish this in 2 1/2 months. I think that is somewhat optimistic due to rain, heat, terrain, etc.

What do you all think is a realistic time frame for them? They plan to aim for 30 miles daily. Or since they will be kind of slackpacking it in many areas, is this doable?

It would depend on what kind of condition they're in, what their plan would be specifically - tenting or staying in shelters on nights not in motels, for instance - what their budgets would allow, etc., how much support they might have beyond each other and their cars. There have been supported hikes faster than that, but it certainly would be tough.

Averaging 30 mpd, taking into account zeroes and low miles days, would mean 71+ days. Averaging 30 mpd hiked, with a zero every week, would stretch that out to 81 days. Ambitious.

[10-K]

Too complicated. To hike that fast over a 2+ month period you about have to hike alone and be able to focus.

Adding another hiker and the car juggling thing and it becomes too much hassle.

[hikerboy57]

it doesn't sound like it would be very enjoyable I mean what's the point?

[Marta]

I would say it's probably optimistic.

My chief question to them would be, if the schedule starts to slip, what is the fallback plan?

The self-shuttling will take quite a bit of time each day, on top of ten hours of hiking. People with ambitious plans need to know going in whether they are committed to finishing the whole Trail, or whether falling off schedule ends the whole enterprise.

[hikerboy57]

the logistics of the car thing make it close to impossible. why not just start at the beginning and see how far you get

[max patch]

They are obviously looking for an easier way to complete a thru hike.

I would suggest they join Warren Doyles next expedition in 2015. Not my cup of tea, but it sounds right up their alley.

[moldy]

It could be done. The road crossing situation must be figured out. Serious planning is required. It's not as easy as you would think. They won't be hiking together. One hikes North each day and the other hikes South and they swap keys at lunch. They will be sleeping in the truck much of the time. Each day's distance will be determined by road crossings. They should shoot for 18 to 25 and hope for an average of 22 or 23. This would be fun to read about on Trail Journals. This will be hard hiking. To go Doyle style they need a third person to drive the vehicle, and help set up camp and cook. It will take at least 2.5 months and 30 miles a day may happen every once in a while.

[Lone Wolf]

they will fail doing it this way

[Wuff]

I slackpacked through Shenandoah doing 30 miles per day while my parents were visiting me on the trail. It was miserable - I didn't enjoy the scenery, I felt rushed, and it hurt like hell even without the fully loaded pack. And that was only 3 days. I'm sure its possible to do something like this, but it'd be the last way I'd want to hike. I had much more fun going at my own pace and not feeling like I'm in a race.

[rocketsocks]

I seem to remember a story where a couple flip-flopped this way. One would be dropped off and hike North, the other would drive 30 miles North and walk south, they'd meet in the middle and have lunch then at the end of the day the North bounder would get the car and go pick up the South bounder, they'd then drive 60 miles and start the next day, viable,practical....? That's about 90 miles each day, lotta driving, lotta gas, but hey if ya got the time and money, Why Not!....

[1azarus]

I agree with Marta... the driving is a really big problem. If you hike 30 miles a day between cars, that means you need to drive 30 miles back to pick up the first car, then 60 miles forward to set up for the next section. At least 90 miles of driving, not adjusting for the sometimes greatly longer road distances between trailheads. 90 miles at 45 miles an hour adds two hours or more to your daily schedule -- two hours you can't afford to give up at the pace you plan to go. I section hike and keep on falling into the trap of forgetting that, fast as it is to drive compared to walking, it still takes time. I agree with 10K... just forget the car and hike without it. A 100 day thru is very doable as an enjoyable adventure -- Garlic and Pickle did a few years ago and have written here about it. You just need to be a bit faster...

[1azarus]

sorry WIAPilot -- your FRIENDS just need to be a little faster. I think your really considering this for yourself!!!

[WIAPilot]

sorry WIAPilot -- your FRIENDS just need to be a little faster. I think your really considering this for yourself!!!

LOL I've been exposed!! I was just thinking that if I get anymore "popular" (definitely said with sarcasm here!) on WB - that I might want to skip the scenic route and just accomplish in as short a time as possible. There were some excellent points here, but I have pretty much given up this idea so we can close it.

[WingedMonkey]

I could do it, I can do anything.

[perrymk]

It seems most here are considering leapfrogging daily, then it occurred to me that you didn't specify a timeframe for the leapfrogging.

1. My thought would be that if they drop a car A off, say, 100 miles ahead, then drive car B back to the starting point.
2. Then they hike several days to car A.
3. Drive car A back to Car B.
4. Drive both cars to a new point, 100 miles or so ahead of where they picked up car A.
5. then return to where they picked up car A.
The leapfrog days would coincide nicely with resupply days and possible zero days. It's more practical (I suspect) than leapfrogging shorter distances as it doesn't take much longer to drive 100 miles than it does to drive 50 miles, especially considering the driving will probably be considerably more distance than the hiking.

Whether this would work with a 2.5 month schedule I cannot say.

I thought about something similar to what you describe, only I was thinking solo. My 'fantasy' trip requires a truck/van and motorcycle. Leave the motorcycle 100 miles north of Springer, drive back to Springer, park the van, and hike to the motorcycle. Motorcycle back to the van, load up the motorcycle, drive 200 miles ahead, drop off motorcycle, drive van 100 miles back. Repeat. Then I realized it was a lot of trouble and probably not a good idea for a number of reaosn, vandalism being number one. But it is one of the many thoughts that pops into my head.

[Don H]

I met a couple of ladies section hiking doing the same basic thing you describe. Two cars, drop one at the north end of the trail, drive south in the other one then hike north back to the other car. Drives south to pick up the other car then drive to a motel for the night. They said they were going for the record for the most expensive AT hike!

[tdoczi]

It seems most here are considering leapfrogging daily, then it occurred to me that you didn't specify a timeframe for the leapfrogging.

1. My thought would be that if they drop a car A off, say, 100 miles ahead, then drive car B back to the starting point.
2. Then they hike several days to car A.
3. Drive car A back to Car B.
4. Drive both cars to a new point, 100 miles or so ahead of where they picked up car A.
5. then return to where they picked up car A.
The leapfrog days would coincide nicely with resupply days and possible zero days. It's more practical (I suspect) than leapfrogging shorter distances as it doesn't take much longer to drive 100 miles than it does to drive 50 miles, especially considering the driving will probably be considerably more distance than the hiking.

Whether this would work with a 2.5 month schedule I cannot say.

I thought about something similar to what you describe, only I was thinking solo. My 'fantasy' trip requires a truck/van and motorcycle. Leave the motorcycle 100 miles north of Springer, drive back to Springer, park the van, and hike to the motorcycle. Motorcycle back to the van, load up the motorcycle, drive 200 miles ahead, drop off motorcycle, drive van 100 miles back. Repeat. Then I realized it was a lot of trouble and probably not a good idea for a number of reaosn, vandalism being number one. But it is one of the many thoughts that pops into my head.

if youre going to carry gear and supplies to backpack 100 miles why would you bother with the vehicles at all? the advantage of the vehicles, if there is one, is it enables you to not carry everything everyday.

there actually is someone who posts here on occassion who does the motorcycle/truck thing.

[perrymk]

They said they were going for the record for the most expensive AT hike!

My biggest fantasy hike was to have someone follow me in an RV and every 1-3 days swap out my clothes and supplies, plus take a shower. I would give it serious consideration if I thought I could find somone reliable enough. two big problems: 1, I wouldn't be willing to pay someone what I would require for me to perform a similar service. 2, Finding someone reliable and trustworthy to take 5 months out of their life to wait on me seems unlikely.