View Full Version : What difference does it make?
One Half
10-04-2016, 20:44
What difference does 1lb make? Can anyone quantify it for me? But what effect does losing 1 pound from your gear make? Is it the same to go from 25lbs to 24 lbs (fully loaded) as it is if you go from 16lbs to 15 lbs? And what about 12lbs to 11lbs? (not even sure if that's doable for a full week with food)
AfterParty
10-04-2016, 20:49
Well none but going from 30 to 18 would but that's just me.
It's more important if you loose it off your body rather than your gear. I'm surprised there's not more attention paid to weight loss of heavy hikers.
Starchild
10-04-2016, 20:57
The military did such a study, basically weight = mileage (in an inverse relationship), I did know what the 1 extra pound meant, but yes it is significant and does add up.
Not so much if you plan your hike out, but on a free thru hike that means a further distance every once in an while (assuming shelter to shelter fixed distances).
In my own experience the 1 pound means a lot more when the pack weight is low (in the teens) then dead heavy (in the 20's :D )
Hikingjim
10-04-2016, 21:06
It's more important if you loose it off your body rather than your gear. I'm surprised there's not more attention paid to weight loss of heavy hikers.
Fair enough. But I would hike a lot better with 12 lbs of fat and a 20 lb pack instead of no fat and a 32 lb pack.
Hikingjim
10-04-2016, 21:09
What difference does 1lb make? Can anyone quantify it for me? But what effect does losing 1 pound from your gear make? Is it the same to go from 25lbs to 24 lbs (fully loaded) as it is if you go from 16lbs to 15 lbs? And what about 12lbs to 11lbs? (not even sure if that's doable for a full week with food)
different for each person. 1 lb is nothing. But if every major piece of gear you have is 1-2 lbs too heavy, then it's a problem.
Your pack weight fluctuates as you resupply and have full water (can fluctuate 10-15 lbs), so 1 lb does not matter. But if your pack weight is less on average then it makes your overall experience more enjoyable at certain points. Depends on your strength, conditioning, what pack you use, etc.
AfterParty
10-04-2016, 21:16
The military carries 40# craptastic rucksacks and 6# sleeping bags. Who did they study? It was probably one of the countless mandatory fun quizzes everybody fills out from time to time. I agree weight matters but you want to shave a pound look at your groceries. If they really did a survey the soilders,they just carried less on the last leg cause they ate all their food and knew the sooner they got done they could eat or sleep or shower. Just saying I had 16 years of it. I even been written up for not bringing stuff I wasn't going to use ever as in never ever never never ever. K rant over
Sarcasm the elf
10-04-2016, 22:08
If you have everything you need, then having an extra pound of unnecessary stuff, or heavier than necessary stuff is annoying and you will grumble about it to yourself when walking. Then again...
If it's cold, having an extra pound of insulation (or having a pound less than you need) can make a big difference.
If you are on a tight budget, spending $400 less on super expensive gear and instead buying slightly heavier but cheaper gear may be worth it if it means that you added a pound to your pack but also an extra $400 to add to your on trail budget.
If you buy a pack that is a pound heavier, but much more comfortable than another pack you tried, then that pound may be well worth it.
It's all about balance and everyone gets to choose what works for them. Which is nice. :sun
garlic08
10-04-2016, 22:42
Walk around with a 16 oz bottle of water all day. Never put it down. Then answer the question.
It's more important if you loose it off your body rather than your gear. I'm surprised there's not more attention paid to weight loss of heavy hikers.
"No more phone calls folks, we have a winner."
In my case, 40 pounds. Maybe 1 or 2 more. I didn't own a scale when the weight started falling off. Stabilized at 145 pounds.
I took a few pounds out of my backpack also.
I'm older than dirt and slower than molasses, but I had no problems in Colorado from 8,000' to 12,200' and back to 8,000'.
Shed pounds from your frame folks.
Wayne
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This site probably represents the extreme from ultra light gram wienies to the other extreme, "what if", "extra this", "contingency that", "fearing this" and then the "look how strong I am based on what I carry".
It's a very personal decision, leave extra insulation behind in a volatile climate at a transition time of year or at altitude.. "don't be an idiot", bring extra sleeping pads, repair kits, ground cloths and a four season tent in the middle of summer, "chill a bit, trust or learn some new skills"
For me, ultra light comfort backpacker, my base weight is about 11#'s depending on how many wet wipes I carry.
Puddlefish
10-05-2016, 00:19
There can be thresholds based on pack comfort certainly. The straw that breaks the camel's back, so to speak. 31 pounds and my pack drags at my shoulders more, at 30 it feels pretty good.
Just picking up a pack, before and after you add a liter of water, you can feel it. (Yes, the water is 2.2 lbs. per liter.) Can't necessarily feel the difference between 21 and 20 on my back however.
I'd imagine a lot depends on your pack design/fit/comfort if you can notice one pound.
MuddyWaters
10-05-2016, 05:42
Well, theres a real measureable difference.
You might not be able to discern 1 lb effect, but if you were to hike with
Both 30 and 40 lbs, chart miles, you could interpolate it. Probable on order of 1/4 to 1/2 mile per day. Miniscule, 5-10 min of walking, but its cumulative. Especially in steep mtns. You simply compensate for that 1 lb easily when needed so its really unnoticed. As you pile more of the 1 lbs on, its harder to do, at some point you cannot compensate and mileage falls or your super tired.
Different at lighter wts. Now also considering ability of light wt or ul packs to comfortably carry wt too.
One pound or two pounds of gear means more food I can take and eat :D
...If you are on a tight budget, spending $400 less on super expensive gear and instead buying slightly heavier but cheaper gear may be worth it if it means that you added a pound to your pack but also an extra $400 to add to your on trail budget...
Exactly! In putting together some new gear for our 2017 thru-hike I was really looking hard at the Zpacks Duplex, but ended up with a Tarptent MoTrail instead. The Duplex would have saved almost 1 pound, but at $630 vs $259 I could not justify the additional expense. I was able to trim some fat from my load in other areas, making up about 1/2 the difference, and spending about $100 of that almost $400 to do it. So in the end, I'm only carrying what amounts to the weight of an additional cell phone and I've saved nearly $300.
Will I notice that added weight? Since I've never hiked without it, probably not. I may hike .02 miles less each day, but what's the rush...I like backpacking. :-)
Walk around with a 16 oz bottle of water all day. Never put it down. Then answer the question.
Make sure you put it in a day pack, because carrying it in your hand is absolutely apples and oranges.
kayak karl
10-05-2016, 07:02
when i leave town with 4 days of food and i eat lunch and dinner the next day i don't notice a difference in weight, but each day after that i can feel the pack getting lighter and lighter. so I can feel a 2 lb difference which is a 10% drop.
The military carries 40# craptastic rucksacks and 6# sleeping bags. Who did they study? It was probably one of the countless mandatory fun quizzes everybody fills out from time to time. I agree weight matters but you want to shave a pound look at your groceries. If they really did a survey the soilders,they just carried less on the last leg cause they ate all their food and knew the sooner they got done they could eat or sleep or shower. Just saying I had 16 years of it. I even been written up for not bringing stuff I wasn't going to use ever as in never ever never never ever. K rant over
Some of your complaints are justified because the general military is infected with the "what if" attitude. But it needs to be in order to cater to the lowest common denominator in the field. You didn't need some of those items and probably wouldn't have even if you had been out for 6 months, but some brain trust somewhere decided that's what you needed.
Often these studies involve spec ops guys (lots of funding for this type of study in those budgets) who have much more freedom when choosing their loadout. Look at what a typical squad of operators is wearing for a 30-mile overland insertion vs that carried by infantry soldiers on a 30-mile ruck. The difference is night and day, and it's purely common sense and budget driven. They get to choose what they carry and the cost to outfit over a million soldiers and marines with high-end gear would break the bank.
bigcranky
10-05-2016, 08:03
One pound or two pounds of gear means more food I can take and eat :D
Exactly. A pound out of my gear means another eight or ten Snickers bars. :)
Sandy of PA
10-05-2016, 08:22
I can feel a pound, I even try to balance the amount of weight in my left and right water bottles. Over half the weight of my pack is food and water. When I am heading in for a resupply and only need one liter of water, I unclip my hip belt and dance down the trail!
Like that old joke...Which weighs more--a pound of feathers, or a pound of bricks?
What is that pound made of? Is it water in the desert? Is is stove fuel in the snow? Or is it a leather belt with a fancy buckle?
There's a rule of thumb that every extra pound slows a person down two seconds per mile.
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=1771473
I think that gets much worse than 2 seconds/mile as you get further away from ideal body and pack weight. I've known a few hikers packing a hundred extra pounds of body weight and substantial packs who usually hike four or five miles in a day. It's not so much the per-mile speed that hurts them as the moving parts threatening to break down that makes them need to stop, rest, and repair before continuing.
What's a pound? Turn steeply uphill, and every extra pound, of pack or body weight, hurts.
I look at pack weight as a percentage of body weight. A 15# pack is not much for a 200-pound person. For a 40-pound child, however, it's huge.
My husband and I have played with pack weight the way horses are handicapped. When we backpack together, we trade gear between us to even out our hiking paces. In general, he's got a better weight-to-strength ratio so he can carry more weight and we'll hike about the same speed. But if he didn't sleep well, or for some other reason doesn't feel great, and I do, I'll take some of the gear he usually carries, and our hiking speeds will equalize again.
A more extreme example was when I hiked several hundred miles with a young man half my age. We hiked about the same speed. He was carrying a 65-pound pack and I was carrying around 20-25 pounds.
Beyond having fun handicapping hikers, you just have to decide what your goals are. Even if I carried nothing at all, I still wouldn't be challenging Jen or Scott or Karl for the supported record. ;-)
pickNgrin
10-05-2016, 09:24
Obviously, since you have to carry that extra pound, you have to expend energy to do it. You have to lift it up slightly on every step, and you have to carry it up and over every mountain.
As an example, compare an 18lb pack to a 17lb pack. If it takes a certain amount of energy to carry the 17 lb pack, then it will take 18/17 as much energy to carry the 18lb pack. That is about 6% more energy. This is admittedly a simplistic analysis, but it gives a decent estimate of the difference.
If you could walk 20 miles in a certain day with the 17lb pack, then you could reasonably expect to only make it 18.8 miles with the 18lb pack (expending the same amount of energy). Over the course of five days, you would cover 100 miles with the 17lb pack, but only 94 miles with the 18lb pack.
Is that an appreciable difference? It is up to you to decide. You could do the same type of calculation with a different starting pack weight if you want.
Obviously, since you have to carry that extra pound, you have to expend energy to do it. You have to lift it up slightly on every step, and you have to carry it up and over every mountain.
As an example, compare an 18lb pack to a 17lb pack. If it takes a certain amount of energy to carry the 17 lb pack, then it will take 18/17 as much energy to carry the 18lb pack. That is about 6% more energy. This is admittedly a simplistic analysis, but it gives a decent estimate of the difference.
If you could walk 20 miles in a certain day with the 17lb pack, then you could reasonably expect to only make it 18.8 miles with the 18lb pack (expending the same amount of energy). Over the course of five days, you would cover 100 miles with the 17lb pack, but only 94 miles with the 18lb pack.
Is that an appreciable difference? It is up to you to decide. You could do the same type of calculation with a different starting pack weight if you want.
This is a simple analysis for sure, but/and a relatively good one. (Carrying) extra mass certainly equates to extra energy output being required (even downhill). But it doesn't quite convert mathematically to distance covered that readily or easily, and that's where things get messy. Individual variances have a larger effect.
For some (typically ectomorphs), carrying any extra mass is an exponentially more difficult task as the time doing so and incurred fatigue accrues. For others (e.g., mesomorphs/endomorphs), the added weight is merely a nuisance. As super moderator Marta mentions, a more optimal equation is perhaps to figure it all out as a percent of body weight added by way of the backpacking gear. (It would elicit a more accurate indication of effect.) A 200-lb dude carrying 20-lbs expends (relatively) less than a 100-lb woman doing so, all other variables comparable.
There's no easy way to to study something as complicated as backpacking long distances over varied terrain while encountering varied climatic and nutritional conditions. But your explanation is pretty much spot on in that it simply takes more work to carry more weight, regardless of amount.
One Half
10-05-2016, 12:24
Obviously, since you have to carry that extra pound, you have to expend energy to do it. You have to lift it up slightly on every step, and you have to carry it up and over every mountain.
As an example, compare an 18lb pack to a 17lb pack. If it takes a certain amount of energy to carry the 17 lb pack, then it will take 18/17 as much energy to carry the 18lb pack. That is about 6% more energy. This is admittedly a simplistic analysis, but it gives a decent estimate of the difference.
If you could walk 20 miles in a certain day with the 17lb pack, then you could reasonably expect to only make it 18.8 miles with the 18lb pack (expending the same amount of energy). Over the course of five days, you would cover 100 miles with the 17lb pack, but only 94 miles with the 18lb pack.
Is that an appreciable difference? It is up to you to decide. You could do the same type of calculation with a different starting pack weight if you want.
I like this analysis, as simple as it is, works very well.
Slo-go'en
10-05-2016, 12:34
At 20 pounds, 1 pound represent 5% of the weight, while at 10 pounds, it represents 10% of the weight. So that 1 pound has a larger impact when the initial weight is low than when it's high. Of course, it's a lot easier to loose 1 pound out of 20 then it is to loose 1 pound out of 10.
SkeeterPee
10-05-2016, 13:31
In marathon running I have read, it averages about 1-2 seconds per pound per mile. so if you loose 10 lbs, you pace / mile goes down 10-20 seconds per mile or 260 to 520 seconds over the marathon. Not sure if there would be a different effect on hiking as weight makes more difference on hills vs flat.
rocketsocks
10-05-2016, 14:29
Like many I can feel a pound or two, but it certainly isn't breakin' me down, even 10lbs. isn't a big deal...much ado about nuthin'
Speaking from the school of one who needs to lose body weight more than pack weight, but pack weight as well.... At the end of the day it comes back down to... Is it worth it? To you, and FOR you, no matter the weight and the work involved to carry it, or how long it takes you to get where you are going... if you can honestly and truthfully answer that it is worth every grunt and groan and you enjoy your hike immensely, then no further calculation or adjustment is required. If your weight or your pack weight or your travel time is steeling away some of your hiking joy, then find the culprit and adjust accordingly.
poolskaterx
10-12-2016, 18:35
1.5 lbs makes a HUGE difference!
You should see the smiles on my 2 buddies faces when at the end of the first day hiking I pull out the 3 beers that have been stowed away in my pack.
I have a weight that is comfortable for me and works well for my pack; I add or take away comforts for necessity. I am a gram weenie however I like getting my load light so I can add in comforts. Fully loaded for 3-4 days in the winter I will not go over 28lbs but in the summer I may still be at 27-28 just because it makes my experience more enjoyable.
A pound here and a pound there and pretty soon it ends up being real weight. One pound won't make much difference, but generally most hikers could shed much more than a pound.
One pound, not much difference. Five pounds or more, very noticeable, from the moment you put it on.
Forty years ago my hiking pals and I were beasts of burden lumbering through the White Mountains. We hardly ever walked more than eight or ten miles a day. Nowadays I carry half that load.
Regardless if you're into the UL thing or not.. I can't think of a time when carrying an extra pound for the hell of it made a lot of sense. The less weight = the less stress on your body with every step you take. All of that stress adds up over a long hike. I don't think it matters as much for short trips or those with little elevation change. If you need to carry an extra pound of gear to suit the hike - or for me an extra 7lbs of water - you do what you gotta do, but only if necessary. I find I hike farther, faster, and feel less destroyed at the end of a long day when I'm carrying 20lbs vs 30lbs.
Wouldn't you want to add body weight to the equation? I say 'yes'. It still takes energy to move even without a pack. If a person weighs 150 lbs, and puts on a 15 lb pack, then they increased their total weight by 10%. If they increase their pack weight to 20 lbs, then they added 33% more pack weight but only 3% more total weight vs. the 15 lb pack.
Obviously, since you have to carry that extra pound, you have to expend energy to do it. You have to lift it up slightly on every step, and you have to carry it up and over every mountain.
As an example, compare an 18lb pack to a 17lb pack. If it takes a certain amount of energy to carry the 17 lb pack, then it will take 18/17 as much energy to carry the 18lb pack. That is about 6% more energy. This is admittedly a simplistic analysis, but it gives a decent estimate of the difference.
If you could walk 20 miles in a certain day with the 17lb pack, then you could reasonably expect to only make it 18.8 miles with the 18lb pack (expending the same amount of energy). Over the course of five days, you would cover 100 miles with the 17lb pack, but only 94 miles with the 18lb pack.
Is that an appreciable difference? It is up to you to decide. You could do the same type of calculation with a different starting pack weight if you want.
Every little item doesn't weigh much by itself, but it sure does add up when you throw it in the pack. Heck, just carrying that extra set of keys in my pocket all day gets to be very noticeable.
A pound here and a pound there and pretty soon it ends up being real weight. One pound won't make much difference, but generally most hikers could shed much more than a pound.
I'm all for getting fit and losing extra body-fat, but 1 pound of fat rides completely different than 1 pound hanging off your back. Weight around my core is MUCH less noticeable than it is pulling against me. It's similar to the old adage about a pound on your feet equaling 5-6 pounds on your shoulders. As for comfort (and maybe some efficiency) a pound on your shoulders is probably equal to some undefined larger amount on your person. Many of us (me included) could stand to lose some weight, but 1 pound of fat doesn't equal 1 pound when it comes to taking it off your back. 1 needed pound by itself isn't a huge deal either way, but over the length of a long hike, I want to lighten the load as much as I reasonably can.
Every little item doesn't weigh much by itself, but it sure does add up when you throw it in the pack. Heck, just carrying that extra set of keys in my pocket all day gets to be very noticeable.
Where you put those items makes a real difference as well. Yesterday I was tweaking how I load my pack and when I had my tent (36 ounces) in the front mesh pocket, it caused the pack to pull away from my shoulders. I moved it to a side pocket and presto, completely different feeling with a pack that rode the way it should. On top of that, it'll now balance the weight from a full platypus on the other side. :-)
rocketsocks
10-13-2016, 07:21
I'm all for getting fit and losing extra body-fat, but 1 pound of fat rides completely differently that 1 pound hanging off your back. Weight around my core is MUCH less noticeable than it is pulling against me. It's similar to the old adage about a pound on your feet equaling 5-6 pounds on your shoulders. As for comfort (and maybe some efficiency) a pound on your shoulders is probably equal to some undefined larger amount on your person. Many of us (me included) could stand to lose some weight, but 1 pound of fat doesn't equal 1 pound when it comes to taking it off your back. 1 needed pound by itself isn't a huge deal either way, but over the length of a long hike, I want to lighten the load as much as I reasonably can.
Where you put those items makes a real difference as well. Yesterday I was tweaking how I load my pack and when I had my tent (36 ounces) in the front mesh pocket, it caused the pack to pull away from my shoulders. I moved it to a side pocket and presto, completely different feeling with a pack that rode the way it should. On top of that, it'll now balance the weight from a full platypus on the other side. :-)agree...it's a failed theorem of the "look at me" group.
AfterParty
10-13-2016, 08:19
If you can honestly tell the difference in 1 lb your pack suspension doesn't work very good or you have maxed out the pack suspension. Have some one put a 1 lb weight in your pack randomly and shoulder it 10 times at random and see how many times you get it right.
My experience is that I can feel the difference when a pound is gone, based on eating 1 to 1.5 pounds of food a day and noticing how the pack feels lighter every day on a multi-day trip. The lighter my pack, the more I enjoy carrying it.
Feral Bill
10-13-2016, 20:00
1 pound over a day with 2500 feet of climbing = 2500 foot-pounds at 10% efficiency in using food energy = 8 Calories = 1/29th of a Snickers.
rocketsocks
10-13-2016, 20:14
1 pound over a day with 2500 feet of climbing = 2500 foot-pounds at 10% efficiency in using food energy = 8 Calories = 1/29th of a Snickers.i can burn more calories droppin' the kids at the pool.
rocketsocks
10-13-2016, 20:16
i can burn more calories droppin' the kids at the pool....which lightens my load about a pound and a half.
Heliotrope
10-14-2016, 06:39
...which lightens my load about a pound and a half.
Which pool do you go to? How far is it round trip? And I would think your kids weigh more than that. Check your math.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
garlic08
10-14-2016, 09:31
i can burn more calories droppin' the kids at the pool.
Same here when I work on taking the Browns to the Super Bowl.
Sarcasm the elf
10-14-2016, 09:39
Same here when I work on taking the Browns to the Super Bowl.
Same here when I'm in my office doing some paperwork.
Cubicle humor.
squeezebox
10-14-2016, 10:09
Increased body wt is more complicated than just the wt. As if you carried 10 lbs of water vs 10 lbs of body wt.
The increased body wt affects your circulatory system and all other systems for that matter. So just maybe loosing body wt is more important than a lighter tent.
Spoken by someone who needs to loose wt.
My experience is that I can feel the difference when a pound is gone, based on eating 1 to 1.5 pounds of food a day and noticing how the pack feels lighter every day on a multi-day trip. The lighter my pack, the more I enjoy carrying it.
When carrying a total pack weight of 20 pounds, I can tell a difference very time I drink 4 to six ounces of water.
Its not about that one pound. Its a mentality. Its easy to justify many small things that only weigh an ounce or two when you take each one individually, but if you allow those small things into your pack when you don't really need them in aggregate they will equal several pounds. I dumped about 15 pounds of gear at Neels Gap and thereafter every week I would completely empty out my pack and carefully consider each item. By the end my rule was if I hadn't used the item in the last week I didn't really need it and would get rid of it. Why would you carry something for a whole week that you weren't using?
1 pound over a day with 2500 feet of climbing = 2500 foot-pounds at 10% efficiency in using food energy = 8 Calories = 1/29th of a Snickers.
That only covers the difference for the elevation gain, not the distance traveled. What's the calculation over a distance of, say 10 miles?
trailmercury
10-14-2016, 13:36
Will I notice that added weight? Since I've never hiked without it, probably not. I may hike .02 miles less each day, but what's the rush...I like backpacking. :-)
Engine,
I bet You'll notice the flaws of the end entry and single door versus side entry and dual doors...That plus the weight savings, and Cuben versus silnylon (sags when wet) to me is worth the extra dough. If I remember correctly you are hiking with a partner, in that case the Triplex probably fits two adult better. Two adults plus gear might be cramped in the Duplex... I have the Triplex in Camo and my twelve year old boy and I have plenty of room for both plus gear... and it's only 2.8 ounces more than the Duplex...
I will be using an Altaplex on my thru when solo and the Triplex when the boy joins me. Triplex is still much lighter than the Motrail and has more interior space both length and width.
Sorry if Hijacked!
HYOH