pack weight vs personal weight

[pickNgrin]

I am planning a week long backpacking trip next spring, after years and years of no backpacking. I am coming up on a milestone birthday and this will be my present to myself.

Most of my backpacking gear is old school. I have a 4 lb sleeping bag and a 4 lb external frame pack. That is eight pounds right there. I am going to get a lightweight hammock and go that route for sleeping, so I will be buying a lightweight tarp to go with it. I don't really want to spend a lot of money on new equipment in the quest to go lighter. I will go with a fact feast stove instead of my trusty Whisperlite.

Does it really even make sense to worry about lightening the load further when I am probably 30 lbs overweight? I am going to try to lose 10 before the trip. That's lightening the load considerably!

I am curious on people's thoughts about the "lightweight" backpacking movement, vs extra personal weight. It doesn't seem effective to spend a lot of money on ultra-light stuff if you're toting around a bunch of extra pounds in the belly area! :-?

[Berserker]

If you're getting back into backpacking and already have gear then just go out and have fun. If the bug bites you again and you see yourself backpacking regularly then start getting some new gear. I can't (and won't) directly comment on the "personal" weight. All I'll say is that I've seen plenty of people on the AT with extra "personal" weight and heavy gear doing just fine. If you are getting back into it and feel out of shape then just make sure to plan mileage you know you can handle.

[Berserker]

I am curious on people's thoughts about the "lightweight" backpacking movement, vs extra personal weight. It doesn't seem effective to spend a lot of money on ultra-light stuff if you're toting around a bunch of extra pounds in the belly area! :-?
You know, I just realized after I posted my response that I didn't actually answer your main question. In my opinion everyone can benefit from lightening the load on your back. It's just simple physics...less weight carried = less stress on the body. It's not a one size fits all of course. I've seen young guys carrying huge packs doing 20 mile days, and old guys carry tiny packs doing 10 mile days. So it really just depends on your personal conditioning and what you are comfortable with.

You also need to factor in carrying items that fit your "style". I tried going somewhat ultralight, and I just decided that doesn't work with my style. An ideal day on the trail for me is about 15 miles walking, getting to camp between 4 and 5 in the afternoon, setting up camp and then hanging out for a few hours. So I carry a few extra things to make my camping experience comfortable. A lot of the lightweight guys like to walk from sun up to sun down, set up and then go right to sleep. That's cool for them if that's what they like, it's just not my thing.

[Zach ADK]

I have sometimes wondered whether it would be more useful to discuss weight carried as a percentage of body weight. I am just over 7 feet tall and 200 pounds, so according to that theory my 4 pound tent is equivalent to a 2.5 pound tent carried by a 125 pound person. I assume there would also have to be some sort of distinction between ideal and actual weight for any individual. I have not gone below 190 in years and do not want to, and my bones and other innards are presumably sized proportionately to my overall size, while someone who is trying to lose weight may be in a sort of opposite position of having to carry more extra personal weight on joints that were designed for a lighter load and thus might benefit more from carrying lighter equipment. I find the whole thing a bit confusing. When I went for my first overnight backpack-carrying trip in 2009 I only had 3.5 miles to cover to get to my destination but because I had too much stuff, much of which was too heavy and a pack that was designed for a small masochist the hiking part of the experience was less than fun. By 2013 in one day I was able to cover 19 miles of hiking and about 15 miles of bicycling on a dirt road and the whole thing was quite fun because I had cut back on what I took and lightened several parts of the load(tent, sleeping bag, etc.) and bought an old (but somewhat newer) external frame pack that was adjustable and had a padded hip belt to take some of the weight. My "new" Kelty pack cost about $30 with shipping, and for around the same price I got a military surplus sleeping bag that I still use that is about 1/3 the pack volume and 1/2 the weight of the sleeping bag I used to have and is warmer to boot. Depending where you are starting from it can be feasible to go lighter without spending a lot of money. I still am glad I took that miserable slog in 2009 because it gave me a floor of unpleasantness to work up from and everything since then has been better.
Zach

[OCDave]

Yes, it makes sense to invest in lighter equipment. Lighter, updated equipment will help you get on the trail more frequently and log more miles. Eventually, this will have an effect on your personal weight as well. With 20+ years of hiking ahead of you, updating your equipment now is a great idea.

** Do not assume that a hammock is an automatic weight saver, my hammock set-up weighs mote than my tent set-up. Hammock camping requires its own unique equipment and accessories. In addition to a steep learning curve, hammock camping carries significant initial investment costs.

Good Luck and Have a happy 50th

[Traveler]

Ditto what Beserker said.

While there is a fairly broad range of light and ultra-light gear available it's probably better to figure out if you enjoy backpacking enough to make the investment. A week on any trail should be enough to convince you either way. Trying to keep your base weight (everything in your pack that isn't food or water) down is probably a good idea, which can be done by limiting the stuff you tote out onto the trail. There is no set weight for this really, though a common target is 30 lbs plus food and water.

Water and food can add a lot of weight depending what and how much you haul in the pack. Using dehydrated meals and carry enough water to make it to the next water site (with a bit more as a reserve in case it gets hot or its a little further than you thought), water is 1.9 pounds per liter so hauling 3 liters when you only need one is about a 4 lb penalty.

As Berserker said, depending on what kind of shape you are in, you can take a few practice hikes of a few miles carrying the pack with about 30 pounds of weight in it to see how it feels. Depending on the terrain you will be in, the miles you plan to do, and the overall elevation gain you will be doing, if you have a few extra pounds on your frame you will adapt to the pace you need to make the climb without killing yourself. Though as a caution, if you haven't been real active over the last several years you may want to let your MD know your plans and get a once over if you haven't had one lately to prevent any surprises.

Enjoy yourself and have a grand adventure!

[Tipi Walter]

One good thing is if you carry a heavy pack up and down mountains those 30 extra lbs of body weight will soon be gone. In fact, the heavier your pack weight the quicker will be your weight loss. Every trip I do I come back 10 to 15 lbs lighter.

Reminds me of a quote from George Steffanos in his AT thruhike book called Then The Hail Came. He said since Springer Mt (or Mt Oglethorpe back then) he's been losing about 5 lbs a week. He said by the time he got to Maine he'd weigh 24 lbs. Funny.

[Traveler]

One good thing is if you carry a heavy pack up and down mountains those 30 extra lbs of body weight will soon be gone. In fact, the heavier your pack weight the quicker will be your weight loss. Every trip I do I come back 10 to 15 lbs lighter.

Reminds me of a quote from George Steffanos in his AT thruhike book called Then The Hail Came. He said since Springer Mt (or Mt Oglethorpe back then) he's been losing about 5 lbs a week. He said by the time he got to Maine he'd weigh 24 lbs. Funny.

He got so thin he could walk between raindrops.

[Coffee]

I've seen many overweight people with very light and very expensive gear. I suspect that this is because for many people it is easier to spend the money to get light gear than to lose weight.

[AO2134]

Weight is not a monster. Don't make it so. If this is a "once in a blue moon" (yes, we just had one), then I would say it would be a waste to spend money on new gear just to save a little weight for 1-2 trips per year. If you are regularly getting back into it, then I would consider updating some of your gear, but I am more money conscious and less weight conscious then most hikers. I don't count lbs much less ounces or grams.

More important than the mere act of losing 10 lbs, I would imagine that the added fitness level to lose those 10 lbs would be more important on this hike.

Be flexible on your hike. Have ways to cut the trail short if the hike becomes too much. Plan for contingencies.

Finally, and most importantly, just enjoy yourself. Do a pace that you are comfortable with given what you are carrying. And when you start to get down and "too tired" just remember, at its most basic level, hiking is just walking, and even 2 year olds can walk.

[Another Kevin]

(1) The guidelines for how much weight you can carry are based on a fraction of lean body weight. If you aren't lean, be careful not to overload.

(2) I've had some fairly sizable weight fluctuations. Taking up hiking again caused me, over a period of a few years, to get down about 45 pounds below my previous weight (with no other lifestyle changes). I've since put back about 15 of that, simply because there have been too many times in recent months when I've been out of commission for hiking. My experience is that losing From Skin Out weight and losing From Skin In weight both make hiking a more pleasant experience. But the From Skin Out weight is actually more noticeable. Being too heavy in the body simply makes me grunt and sweat more uphill, and slows me down. Pack weight, though, also hurts to carry, and unbalances me. It makes scrambling a lot harder, works ankles and knees and core to keep me upright, and even makes me more likely to fall.

[Nodust]

Carrying less weight is easier no matter where it is.

I like lightweight gear because it's easier to carry and taking plenty of stuff means more to keep track of on the trail. I like minimal clutter and things to deal with while in the woods.

Now can you go have a fun 2-3 day trip in your shape and with your current gear? Yes you can. Just plan conservative miles and keep it easy. You will figure out soon what gear you want to replace first. After a few trips the backpack will start getting dialed in for how you want to hike/camp. And the body will start to get in shape with the pack.

Good luck and get hiking.

[sbhikes]

A 4lb sleeping bag likely has poor quality down, or a sizable percentage of feathers. If you choose to lighten your sleeping bag you may actually end up with a warmer bag and better sleep. Better sleep will help making backpacking more enjoyable.

If you do decide to lighten up on gear, make your pack the absolute last thing you lighten up. You can do a lot to lighten up your clothes and the little things. Bring fewer changes of clothing and lighter outer layers, smaller quantities of hygiene/medical items (like toothpaste, lotion, bug dope etc), fewer dishes and kitchen equipment.

In my opinion, losing body weight only helps a little. If you are obese, it helps a lot. If you're already pretty strong, losing more weight can actually not make much difference or even make you weaker. All of us need to ditch the idea that when we are at such-and-such weight it'll be better, whether with our body weight or our pack weight.

[mak1277]

We are all used to carrying our body weight around all day every day. Of course getting more fit and in better shape is a good idea, but no matter what, you're going to notice adding 20-40 lbs on your back that you don't carry all the time.

[Wyoming]

Some things to keep in mind from what you said. I.e. it has been years since you hiked and you are much heavier than you used to be. It is going to take you much longer to get in shape than it did last time. This includes your ligaments and tendons in addition to the muscles. Thus the extra weight when combined with your currently heavy pack puts you at a much greater chance of injury. Especially the knees or things like shin splints, plantar fasciitis, tendonitis, etc.

So, if you can afford it, it really makes sense to reconfigure your gear to drop a bunch of weight. Just to reduce the chances of injury. As you hike really take it easy and monitor your body. Remember the ligaments take longer to strengthen and to be careful. As you hike you will naturally drop weight and that of course lessens the wear and tear on the body. So do both the gear and the body for best effect.

[bigcranky]

For a week long trip it makes sense to spend some money to get a lighter pack -- you'll definitely feel it, even more so if you're overweight. If this were just a weekend or an overnight, I'd say don't worry about it.

You'll need to say when and where you're going -- "next spring" could mean early March at Springer, or late May in Virginia, and you'd need a very different sleeping bag for the two of those. There are some decent options that can get you close to 2 pounds for not much cash. The external 4lb pack is fine, that's not so far out of line and it'll work. Getting a much lighter pack involves getting everything else light first.

Then of course there's overpacking, which is common but fixable. :)

[Malto]

You know, I just realized after I posted my response that I didn't actually answer your main question. In my opinion everyone can benefit from lightening the load on your back. It's just simple physics...less weight carried = less stress on the body. It's not a one size fits all of course. I've seen young guys carrying huge packs doing 20 mile days, and old guys carry tiny packs doing 10 mile days. So it really just depends on your personal conditioning and what you are comfortable with.

You also need to factor in carrying items that fit your "style". I tried going somewhat ultralight, and I just decided that doesn't work with my style. An ideal day on the trail for me is about 15 miles walking, getting to camp between 4 and 5 in the afternoon, setting up camp and then hanging out for a few hours. So I carry a few extra things to make my camping experience comfortable. A lot of the lightweight guys like to walk from sun up to sun down, set up and then go right to sleep. That's cool for them if that's what they like, it's just not my thing.

^^^^^This.

Experience is is by far the most important and lightest gear you can have.

[Five Tango]

What is a good "rule of thumb" for pack weight vs body weight?Today I took a local spin in the woods with my new Aarn Load Limo tricked out with all my stuff including hammock,tarp,pad,etc and 4 days food with 2L water weight.Whole thing was 32 pounds which is 22% of my body weight of 145 pounds.Because of the weight distribution with the front pack to carry the water and "other stuff" like an 8 oz poncho which I used btw I don't feel overburdened.However I can tell that about 35 pounds would be my upper "comfort limit".The fact that I have lost 60 pounds of body weight,aka FAT,likely helps some but it's hard to say since I have been at this weight for 6 years and at I can't say I ever noticed body weight hampering my mobility.(backpain excluded but that was not a weight issue)

[BirdBrain]

If you hike long enough, you will lose the weight. However, once you have lost the weight, you will wonder why you did not lose it before the trail. It is hard work to lug a pack over long distances. It is even harder if you are overweight. Do some of that hard work at home and have a more enjoyable walk. As to the gear. Buy the lightest functional necessities you can afford. Only your opinion matters where that balance is. This is not an either or proposition. Do both. Lose the weight. Evaluate the gear. Streamline yourself and the gear.

[MuddyWaters]

I am curious on people's thoughts about the "lightweight" backpacking movement, vs extra personal weight. It doesn't seem effective to spend a lot of money on ultra-light stuff if you're toting around a bunch of extra pounds in the belly area! :-?

Its always effective to take weight off your back.
Thats just not all of some peoples problems, they need to lose body weight as well.
They should, but that doesnt mean that lightening their pack wont also help, because it definitely will.
Is the cost worth it to them? Thats a personal thing. $1000 is a lot of money to most people, but to many, its not even a consideration.

[Fredt4]

It's sort of like the sports drinks debates. Yes, possibly one energy drink might be marginally better than another, but increasing the frequency of hiking will have a much bigger impact. So don't worry too much if you have decent gear and get out and hike. Over time you can fine tune your gear list.

[Odd Man Out]

I'm not sure the % body weight rule makes sense. A 6' tall 180 lb person is in the healthy weight range. If that person puts on 30 lbs, they are in the overweight category. That doesn't mean that person should be able to carry more weight. If anything, that person should be carrying less weight.

BTW, a few years ago I was in much the same place your are now. My dad took me backpacking when I was a kid. I was a boy scout for many years. I did some backpacking in college. But then career and family intervened. It was right about age 50 I read some articles about UL backpacking and decided that this was the path for me to get back on the trail as my primary hobby (along with travel). For me, light weight backpacking (I don't really claim to be UL) is not about shedding weight for the sake of shedding weight or bragging rights, but rather it is to make it possible for an older and somewhat over weight 56 year old to enjoy backpacking again. Light weight gear from specialty cottage companies is often less expensive than the gear you buy from the outfitters. If like me your hikes are limited to warmer weather, you can pick up a 1 lb, 40 deg quilt and a light pack for not too much money.

There is a synergy to going lightweight. If you cut the weight of your gear you can use a lighter and cheaper pack, and then you can use lighter and cheaper shoes. One contributes to the other. And if I were to lose that 30 lbs, I would have a pack wight of negative 15 lbs.

[English Stu]

For your general health it makes sense to lose weight. Research gear a lot before buying. It also makes sense to buy light gear first off;otherwise you will buy twice as you get more experience and want light gear.One reason most of us have lots of gear.

[bigcranky]

I'm not a big fan of the body weight percentage for pack weights, either. Most of the "rules" say to carry between 1/4 and 1/3 of your body weight, which for me would be between 52.5 and 70 pounds. Um, yeah, done that and it wasn't fun.

My max pack weight these days is 30 pounds with food and water, which is 1/7 my body weight and feels just fine. If I were to get down to 195, which would be a better overall weight for me, I'd still be carrying 30 pounds in my pack.

[Another Kevin]

If you hike long enough, you will lose the weight. However, once you have lost the weight, you will wonder why you did not lose it before the trail. It is hard work to lug a pack over long distances. It is even harder if you are overweight. Do some of that hard work at home and have a more enjoyable walk. As to the gear. Buy the lightest functional necessities you can afford. Only your opinion matters where that balance is. This is not an either or proposition. Do both. Lose the weight. Evaluate the gear. Streamline yourself and the gear.

Getting out and lugging a pack is HOW I lose weight. It's just about the only strenuous exercise that I can stand.

[Zach ADK]

I no longer carry a pack weight more than 30 pounds either, except when I am carrying a canoe on top of my pack which adds another 30-40 pounds(and I don't travel nearly as far with the canoe as without it). If I was shorter I could fit in a smaller tent which might weigh less. I could also buy a lighter tent that is big enough for me but I don't think the savings of 1-2 pounds would be important enough to warrant the cost for me. I don't carry spare footwear because at size 16 my shoes are larger and heavier than seems at all reasonable. Arnold Lobel wrote a verse that begins

"Boom! Boom! My feet are large.
Each shoe is like a garbage barge."

It seems to me that some things (like a headlamp, for instance) are sort of universal and anyone can choose to buy a heavier or lighter one, but things whose weight is at least somewhat impacted by the size of the person using them might need to be looked at a little differently.
Zach

[pickNgrin]

Lot of great replies and different perspectives. Thanks everybody! I value each and every response.

I definitely want to lighten my load where possible. Back in the day I would read Colin Fletcher and he would say "look after the ounces and the pounds will look after themselves". As a young buck, I thought he was a obsessive old man….. as I hoisted up my 45 lb pack and slogged down the trail! Now that I am a bit older I understand the wisdom of his words. :)

My old 5lb "lightweight" tent is kaput, so I need new shelter. I definitely want to go the hammock route… not so much for weight savings (compared to a newer model tent), but instead because of the comfort and the ability to pitch on unlevel ground. I never was a comfortable ground sleeper, and the couple of times that I have overnighted in a hammock were heavenly by comparison. And it will save me some weight over the old days for sure. I am pretty excited about getting a nice lightweight hammock setup.

Here's the thing… does it make sense to shell out an extra $200 for a cuben tarp (over silnylon) in order to save a handful of ounces? Given the extra 30 POUNDS, it kind of seems like I'd be fooling myself a little. To turn Fletcher around….. I might need to think about reducing some POUNDS before I obsess over the ounces.

I have to say that the ultimate goal of reducing both personal weight and gear weight is a good idea. But for the immediate future I will go as light as I can using the stuff that I have and buying light where reasonable. The one thing that I want to keep as heavy as possible is my wallet!

[Five Tango]

Cuban tarp and a cuban food bag was worth the money IMHO........ditto titanium pot and alcohol stove etc.

[swisscross]

Head to Hammock forums. There are some uber light hammock rigs out there if you piece the components together from different venders...lots of research. Seems most hammock folks are not backpacking oriented so extra care must be taken to choose the best for YOU.

Hummingbird hammocks are about to release a tarp series that will fall between sil and Cuban. I don't know much about them but via emails I am assuming they will be made of a material similar to SpinnUL. Should be a good option.

I am in the same boat fighting the weight thing but it is just too easy to armchair these days. You mention you want to lose 10 lbs prior to your hike. Appears your hike is about 9 months away. One pound a month does not seem like much of an effort. Very productive diets should yield around eight pounds a month, shoot for four and that would put you at your fighting weight by the time of your hike.

Not all light gear is super expensive. It looks like you really only need a couple of items to vastly reduce your pack weight. I remember s thread a while ago where someone put together a list of reasonability priced UL gear.

[OCDave]

… does it make sense to shell out an extra $200 for a cuben tarp (over silnylon) in order to save a handful of ounces?

No. Think of all the other places $200 could help lighten your load and spend it there first. There are too many great tarp options available at 1/3 to 1/2 the price of CF to start with a CF tarp. From experience, I recommend you to resist allure of CF.

Your best spent dollars in a light hammock set-up will be on quilts. In MN my 20* quilt set gets used most through-out the year. In NC you might find you can save weight and dollars with a 40* set of quilts. While $200 won't pay for a quilt set it will get you on your way.

I have also found that I spend a lot on cordage: Amsteel, Dynaglyde, Z-line and of course spools of Zing-it and Lash-it, all in an effort to shave a few grams and reduce bulk. While I have outfitted several hammocks and tarps and some of my early choices could have been avoided, I am embarrassed to admit I have spent well over $200 in cordage alone.

Lighter stove, lighter cookware, a food dehydrator - any would be allow a greater weight savings/dollar than a CF tarp.

Eventually, a lighter backpack can be had around the $200 range. My ULA Catalyst was on sale for $225 at a local retailer.

Perhaps CF has some attraction to you other than weight? If not, spend your dollars elsewhere first.

Good Luck