View Full Version : To all the stop and smell the roses crowd
It is now proven that you should be going faster. Lace up your trail runners and get moving. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/scientists-from-5-universities-say-doing-this-one-thing-faster-could-add-years-to-your-life-2018-06-05
But if you insist on smelling flowers at least make sure you aren't sniffing bees.
42845
It is now proven that you should be going faster. Lace up your trail runners and get moving. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/scientists-from-5-universities-say-doing-this-one-thing-faster-could-add-years-to-your-life-2018-06-05
But if you insist on smelling flowers at least make sure you aren't sniffing bees.
42845
the stop and smell the roses crowd doesnt walk slow. if anything they walk too fast. then get tired and have to stop. that or theyre too content to sit around for 4 hours staring into space or chatting about nothing with fellow hikers.
i just did a 10 day trip. everyday, several thrus pass me motoring along, panting, sweating. eventually i find them sitting still somewhere and pass them. this repeats all day long. eventually at the end of the day they stop for good and i do 4-6 more miles. happened the whole hike. the people i saw on day 1 were probably 50 miles back by the end.
last year on a hike (not on the AT) a man who was panting and sweating profusely told me that **I** looked tired. presumably because i was walking slowly. i got a kick out out of that.
no one can actually walk slow enough to only do 8 or 10 miles a day on even moderate terrain. the stop and smell the roses crowd is goofing off and not hiking. which i guess is what the term implies.
johnnybgood
06-06-2018, 18:50
"No rose without a thorn , French proverb" sometimes also means a rose with a suddenly agitated stinging bee . Ironically enough, this guy has gaiters like mine, except mine are black with white skulls.
rocketsocks
06-06-2018, 19:47
Actually when bees are actively feeding, you can touch them on the back, they’re very docile...speaking from first hand experience.
johnnybgood
06-06-2018, 20:06
Actually when bees are actively feeding, you can touch them on the back, they’re very docile...speaking from first hand experience.
Vehwee intuuhwesting, (My best Elmer Fudd voice)
At least they are not having conversations with the roses:
https://www.sfchronicle.com/travel/article/Forest-bathing-takes-tree-hugging-to-new-12844868.php#photo-15369733
Sarcasm the elf
06-06-2018, 21:54
It is now proven that you should be going faster. Lace up your trail runners and get moving. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/scientists-from-5-universities-say-doing-this-one-thing-faster-could-add-years-to-your-life-2018-06-05
But if you insist on smelling flowers at least make sure you aren't sniffing bees.
42845
You can tell from the pack size that’s clearly a no-nothing dayhiker. :rolleyes:
That's the goofiest pic of anyone snorting a flower while ripping one of all time Malto.
futureatwalker
06-07-2018, 02:32
Interesting link, but there's another interpretation: healthier people can walk faster than those are less healthy.
So, walking faster doesn't causepeople to be healthy. Instead, it could be the other way around, or it is due to some other factor (underlying activity levels, etc.).
Essentially, correlation doesn't prove causation.
O.K., off my soap-box now...
Interesting link, but there's another interpretation: healthier people can walk faster than those are less healthy.
So, walking faster doesn't causepeople to be healthy. Instead, it could be the other way around, or it is due to some other factor (underlying activity levels, etc.).
Essentially, correlation doesn't prove causation.
O.K., off my soap-box now...
Amen to this. There could be a small cardio benefit but I suspect there is much more to the story.
And to all the haters (Dogwood) this is a VERY rare picture. I will neither confirm nor deny that there was dual action going on. BUT, doesn't Skurka recommend smelling the roses and farting at the same time to be more efficient? Oh wait, that was pissing and walking, something I still haven't master or will even try.
garlic08
06-07-2018, 07:43
Interesting link, but there's another interpretation: healthier people can walk faster than those are less healthy.
So, walking faster doesn't causepeople to be healthy. Instead, it could be the other way around, or it is due to some other factor (underlying activity levels, etc.).
Essentially, correlation doesn't prove causation....
I heard something similar a few years ago. A medical professional claimed to be able to tell how long a patient would live by how fast the patient walked.
Along those lines, does anyone else get impatient with the normal walking speed of the general public? (One exception is commuters using public transport in a large city. There are some fast walkers near Union Station in Chicago, for instance.)
T.S.Kobzol
06-07-2018, 07:50
I have no idea what this thread is about
rocketsocks
06-07-2018, 08:05
I have no idea what this thread is about
something about atomic farts looking like pee-on-yur-knees while walking I think.
42846
Interesting link, but there's another interpretation: healthier people can walk faster than those are less healthy.
So, walking faster doesn't causepeople to be healthy. Instead, it could be the other way around, or it is due to some other factor (underlying activity levels, etc.).
Essentially, correlation doesn't prove causation.
O.K., off my soap-box now...
To remain healthy you only need to be faster than the slowest person in the group at all times. That way the bear eats you last. :-)
You may or may not find atomic farting helpful in this endeavor.
the correct term is huffing bees.
rocketsocks
06-07-2018, 09:05
To remain healthy you only need to be faster than the slowest person in the group at all times. That way the bear eats you last. :-)
You may or may not find atomic farting helpful in this endeavor.i employ “the crop dust” technique when I come across stragglers.
Odd Man Out
06-07-2018, 09:16
It's the milkweed flowers that get me. They smell soooooo good but they are always covered with bees.
Odd Man Out
06-07-2018, 09:20
BTW, I'm fairly sure they didn't test the effect of walking "slowly" for 12 hours per day carrying a 20 lb load up and down mountains.
T.S.Kobzol
06-07-2018, 09:23
the article was for the people who waddle from car to building, from building to car
LittleRock
06-07-2018, 09:59
The reason I can only cover 12-15 miles/day isn't because I walk slowly, it's because of my short, fat legs.
Seriously, 30" in-seam is the shortest men's pants you can typically find, and they're always a little long and a bit snug around the thighs.
cmoulder
06-07-2018, 20:05
The reason I can only cover 12-15 miles/day isn't because I walk slowly, it's because of my short, fat legs.
Seriously, 30" in-seam is the shortest men's pants you can typically find, and they're always a little long and a bit snug around the thighs.
Short legs are no excuse! Guess which one has more stolen bases...
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/b1/59/ca/b159ca0e56e6f8e533002787c83f6dd0.jpg
Sarcasm the elf
06-07-2018, 21:13
Short legs are no excuse! Guess which one has more stolen bases...
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/b1/59/ca/b159ca0e56e6f8e533002787c83f6dd0.jpg
The one that’s too small to tag out?
Sarcasm the elf
06-07-2018, 21:14
The reason I can only cover 12-15 miles/day isn't because I walk slowly, it's because of my short, fat legs.
Seriously, 30" in-seam is the shortest men's pants you can typically find, and they're always a little long and a bit snug around the thighs.
12-15 miles a day might not be that fast, but it sure ain’t slow! :sun
Amen to this. There could be a small cardio benefit but I suspect there is much more to the story.
And to all the haters (Dogwood) this is a VERY rare picture. I will neither confirm nor deny that there was dual action going on. BUT, doesn't Skurka recommend smelling the roses and farting at the same time to be more efficient? Oh wait, that was pissing and walking, something I still haven't master or will even try.
I heard by rumor that's what Anish has done. If that's what Andrew or Heather do fine for them. I ain't pissing on the fly unless a Grizz is on my heels or a Boy Scout troop might catch me in the act of watering the trees. Farting while walking pushes me along faster.
If REI is accurate in stating 95% of our lives are spent indoors I'll be glad to simply see people walking at any pace outside...not from fridge to couch to the porcelain god to car to more food. Getting up from the couch to answer the door for a Dominoes delivery doesnt count. My deepest respect goes out to over weight folks walking to change it up, doing something to get fitter.
I heard something similar a few years ago. A medical professional claimed to be able to tell how long a patient would live by how fast the patient walked.
Along those lines, does anyone else get impatient with the normal walking speed of the general public? (One exception is commuters using public transport in a large city. There are some fast walkers near Union Station in Chicago, for instance.)
Manhattan city walkers can crank it out to about 3.5 - 5 MPH. Two giraffe Uncles used to stomp it out at 5 mph walking through NYC and Union City NJ. I remember having to keep up as a young teen. OMG their gate lengths and endurance were huge.
It's not slow walkers it's obese slow wanderers looking for another Cheese Factory or Wing Joint to get extra fat who stand in the middle of the sidewalk or aisle that can annoy me. Stay right pass left.
FreeGoldRush
06-07-2018, 23:32
the article was for the people who waddle from car to building, from building to car
Exactly. Any semi regular hiker, regardless of speed, is healthier than the waddle crowd.
BuckeyeBill
06-07-2018, 23:38
I heard something similar a few years ago. A medical professional claimed to be able to tell how long a patient would live by how fast the patient walked.
Along those lines, does anyone else get impatient with the normal walking speed of the general public? (One exception is commuters using public transport in a large city. There are some fast walkers near Union Station in Chicago, for instance.)
I lived in New York City for 8 years and I swear everybody walked fast. The TV show images that show the crowded side walks are usually only in the AM and PM going to work then going home. Weekends are crowded with people going to the street fairs and farmer's market.
rocketsocks
06-07-2018, 23:41
Short legs are no excuse! Guess which one has more stolen bases...
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/b1/59/ca/b159ca0e56e6f8e533002787c83f6dd0.jpg
A picture tells a thousands words...pretty sure “Astro” is sayin’
“Tag dis...Moose”
rocketsocks
06-07-2018, 23:43
:D“Yeah, I got yur base right here pal”
For most people the difference in hiking speed is not that much. The variance in total distance covered per day is mostly a result of difference in time spent hiking, not speed.
rocketsocks
06-08-2018, 08:44
For most people the difference in hiking speed is not that much. The variance in total distance covered per day is mostly a result of difference in time spent hiking, not speed.this ^^^^^^^
johnnybgood
06-08-2018, 09:21
Cardiac sustainability is also a key element which goes back to walking briskly as a daily routine. I too get impatient with the younger people that walk so slow with no purpose of getting anywhere fast.
Sarcasm the elf
06-08-2018, 09:32
Cardiac sustainability is also a key element which goes back to walking briskly as a daily routine. I too get impatient with the younger people that walk so slow with no purpose of getting anywhere fast.
Young folks? Where are you walking? Middle age saunterers are the ones that I constantly want to push off the sidewalks.
TexasBob
06-08-2018, 10:16
The reason I can only cover 12-15 miles/day isn't because I walk slowly, it's because of my short, fat legs. ....
My wife is 5'4" and I am 6'. She is a much faster walker than I am. Her comfortable pace is around 4 mph on flat ground while mine is around 3 mph.
nsherry61
06-08-2018, 10:26
. . .
42846
I want to know where and by whom? I haven't laughed so hard at a piece of art in a very long time!!
rocketsocks
06-08-2018, 11:17
I want to know where and by whom? I haven't laughed so hard at a piece of art in a very long time!!first time I saw that I thought, “the artist nail it”
rocketsocks
06-08-2018, 11:23
My gait over the years has changed, now it’s more of a chihuahua’s, short and fast. Constantly lapped by older lady mall walker seems to give them a boost of confidence...and I’m okay with that.
lakegirl88
06-08-2018, 12:34
I have lost 60lbs since I started hiking and I am still fat, slow, and overweight. Totally happy to have the rest of y'all pass me up on the trail because at least I'm there!
I have lost 60lbs since I started hiking and I am still fat, slow, and overweight. Totally happy to have the rest of y'all pass me up on the trail because at least I'm there!
That is totally cool, hope you hit your weight goal. In no way was denigrating slow hikers with this thread. I was trying to have a bit of fun with what is probably a worthless article.
BuckeyeBill
06-08-2018, 22:27
something about atomic farts looking like pee-on-yur-knees while walking I think.
42846
This occurs when someone had too many atomic wedgies.
Slo-go'en
06-08-2018, 23:49
Saw this in yesterdays comics:
"It does not matter how fast you go"
"As long as you don't stop"
Holy Mole
twinsinpa
06-09-2018, 09:17
Aren't we all supposed to hike our own hike? Fast or slow?
Sarcasm the elf
06-09-2018, 09:35
Aren't we all supposed to hike our own hike? Fast or slow?
No, most of us are supposed to sit at our computers discussing it. :D
Another Kevin
06-09-2018, 19:34
It is now proven that you should be going faster. Lace up your trail runners and get moving. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/scientists-from-5-universities-say-doing-this-one-thing-faster-could-add-years-to-your-life-2018-06-05
19
But if you insist on smelling flowers at least make sure you aren't sniffing bees.
42845
The article defines 'fast' as a 5-7 km/h pace. I do that in town with a light pack, and I'm slow.
rocketsocks
06-09-2018, 20:54
Saw this in yesterdays comics:
"It does not matter how fast you go"
"As long as you don't stop"
Holy Molelike a failed shoot, its that sudden stop that’ll kill ya every time...
CYOC
Whenever possible...choose yur own chores
For most people the difference in hiking speed is not that much. The variance in total distance covered per day is mostly a result of difference in time spent hiking, not speed.
The avg pace for backpacking is generally given at about 2 MPH. For those that go big, from all that I observe, no matter what the fastest folks say, it's a combination of hiking faster at a more rapid MPH pace than avg - above 2 MPH AND hiking - actually on the move, longer hrs. Average 3 MPH rather than 2 MPH for a 12 hrs on the move per day you're looking at 12 extra miles per day alone. Be on the move 14-16 hrs rather than 10 hrs tack averaging a moderate 2 MPH you're in that 30 miles/day zone. It's not just about hiking longer hrs for those that consistently go big.
The older I get the slower I hike but I still hate to stop for anything. Then when I’m finished I think back to all the views, etc. that I missed and wish I had slowed down.
LazyLightning
06-10-2018, 21:27
The reason I can only cover 12-15 miles/day isn't because I walk slowly, it's because of my short, fat legs.
Seriously, 30" in-seam is the shortest men's pants you can typically find, and they're always a little long and a bit snug around the thighs.
I can't believe how fast most people hike... Sure I could do over 15 mile days all the time but not if I actually want to enjoy myself a little... Most thru hikers won't take a 30 yard side trail to a view cause they just want to push on, its kinda crazy sometimes... I'm doing every view/waterfall or anything that sounds good within a mile... 3 months and 1 day on trail in Harper's Ferry, averaging just about 11mpd overall, right on track to get up north during the prettiest time...
Anyway point is nothing wrong with 10-15 mile days, HYOH... If the trails too busy just take a break and "smell the roses" letting everyone fly by and knock out the trail like it never even happened ;)
LittleRock
06-11-2018, 10:29
I can't believe how fast most people hike... Sure I could do over 15 mile days all the time but not if I actually want to enjoy myself a little... Most thru hikers won't take a 30 yard side trail to a view cause they just want to push on, its kinda crazy sometimes... I'm doing every view/waterfall or anything that sounds good within a mile... 3 months and 1 day on trail in Harper's Ferry, averaging just about 11mpd overall, right on track to get up north during the prettiest time...
Exactly. Too many times I've seen thru-hikers push right past a short side trail to a spectacular view. What's the point of completing the trail if you don't stop and enjoy the scenery?
I know I could do more than 12-15 MPD - but I don't. After I get to about 12 miles (6-8 hours with breaks), things start aching, I start moving more slowly and enjoying myself less. I did one 18 mile day on my last trip, the last 3 miles took over 2 hours, and I was miserable by the end. If I'm taking vacation days from work to hike, is it really a vacation if I'm pushing hard to make big miles?
I can't believe how fast most people hike... Sure I could do over 15 mile days all the time but not if I actually want to enjoy myself a little... Most thru hikers won't take a 30 yard side trail to a view cause they just want to push on, its kinda crazy sometimes... I'm doing every view/waterfall or anything that sounds good within a mile... 3 months and 1 day on trail in Harper's Ferry, averaging just about 11mpd overall, right on track to get up north during the prettiest time...
Anyway point is nothing wrong with 10-15 mile days, HYOH... If the trails too busy just take a break and "smell the roses" letting everyone fly by and knock out the trail like it never even happened ;)
dont take this the wrong way, it isnt meant as an attack or anything, but i think its a good opportunity to highlight what i think is the real difference between "slow" and "fast."
lets start with your average, 11 MPD. lets say youre in an especially striking stretch of trail and you hike 3 miles in a day going to/from waterfalls and things.
that puts us at 14 MPD. we'll round it and say 15 MPD, total trail miles and side trip miles.
if you were to go hiking now, sunrise is at 5:24 am and sunset is at 8:28pm. thats roughly 15 hours of day light.
for sake of argument, lets say your pace while moving, be it either on the AT or on the 3 mils of sidetrails, is 1.8 MPH.
15 MPD/1.8 MPH is 8.33 hours of hiking time. lets round it to 9.
15 hours of daylight minus 9 hours of hiking leaves 6 hours.
my question is, legitimately, what are you doing with those other 6 hours?
whatever it is, i likely have no interest in doing it. thats why i "hike fast."
If I'm taking vacation days from work to hike, is it really a vacation if I'm pushing hard to make big miles?
if you do enough of it it eventually gets easier and your threshold at which it starts to not be fun gets higher. thereby allowing you to have more fun in the long run for dealing with some discomfort in the short term.
cmoulder
06-11-2018, 11:28
Exactly. Too many times I've seen thru-hikers push right past a short side trail to a spectacular view. What's the point of completing the trail if you don't stop and enjoy the scenery?
I know I could do more than 12-15 MPD - but I don't. After I get to about 12 miles (6-8 hours with breaks), things start aching, I start moving more slowly and enjoying myself less. I did one 18 mile day on my last trip, the last 3 miles took over 2 hours, and I was miserable by the end. If I'm taking vacation days from work to hike, is it really a vacation if I'm pushing hard to make big miles?
And there are those for whom 12 mpd is a lot, and to them you are a mileage maniac.
Do what you like—the only one you have to please is yourself. :sun
colorado_rob
06-11-2018, 11:35
dont take this the wrong way, it isnt meant as an attack or anything, but i think its a good opportunity to highlight what i think is the real difference between "slow" and "fast."
lets start with your average, 11 MPD. lets say youre in an especially striking stretch of trail and you hike 3 miles in a day going to/from waterfalls and things.
that puts us at 14 MPD. we'll round it and say 15 MPD, total trail miles and side trip miles.
if you were to go hiking now, sunrise is at 5:24 am and sunset is at 8:28pm. thats roughly 15 hours of day light.
for sake of argument, lets say your pace while moving, be it either on the AT or on the 3 mils of sidetrails, is 1.8 MPH.
15 MPD/1.8 MPH is 8.33 hours of hiking time. lets round it to 9.
15 hours of daylight minus 9 hours of hiking leaves 6 hours.
my question is, legitimately, what are you doing with those other 6 hours?
whatever it is, i likely have no interest in doing it. thats why i "hike fast." Exactly. What ARE people doing when not hiking? Mostly sitting around in camp or at a shelter, that's what I see. I call some of these folks "shelter rats", because they get up early, hike a moderate pace for 7-8 hours, doing their 14 miles or whatever, then they sit around all afternoon.
Some of us are out there to HIKE, not sit.
It's weird how folks will diss us higher mileage folks, yet still say "but hike your own hike". Why the diss first?
For the record, I'm a s-l-o-w hiker, barely over 2 mph on average, but I just love to hike, so I'll be out there hiking for 9-10 hours, hence my 18-20 mile days on average. I see just as much as you supposed "smell the roses" hypocrites.
Further snarkiness: I think there is an absolute correlation between folks that diss higher mileage hikers and just plain being out of shape/fat/whatever. Get in shape. Maybe eventually you'll actually enjoy hiking.
Exactly. What ARE people doing when not hiking? Mostly sitting around in camp or at a shelter, that's what I see. I call some of these folks "shelter rats", because they get up early, hike a moderate pace for 7-8 hours, doing their 14 miles or whatever, then they sit around all afternoon.
Some of us are out there to HIKE, not sit.
It's weird how folks will diss us higher mileage folks, yet still say "but hike your own hike". Why the diss first?
For the record, I'm a s-l-o-w hiker, barely over 2 mph on average, but I just love to hike, so I'll be out there hiking for 9-10 hours, hence my 18-20 mile days on average. I see just as much as you supposed "smell the roses" hypocrites.
Further snarkiness: I think there is an absolute correlation between folks that diss higher mileage hikers and just plain being out of shape/fat/whatever. Get in shape. Maybe eventually you'll actually enjoy hiking.
a similar sort of hiker i see sometimes, but rarely, is a weird amalgam of the two.
they sleep in until 10, dont pack up until nearly noon and they quit 6, if not earlier.
and in between they tear off 18 miles like it was nothing.
ive mostly observed this in thru hikers who have been at it a long time.
Seatbelt
06-11-2018, 12:46
15 hours of daylight minus 9 hours of hiking leaves 6 hours.
my question is, legitimately, what are you doing with those other 6 hours?
whatever it is, i likely have no interest in doing it. thats why i "hike fast."
I did this on a hike one year, hiking "with" others, we all stopped at the same location every nite. I remember a couple of nites that I hade several hours left over waiting on them and was bored to death. Looking back, I probly would have more enjoyed going on and leaving the group to hike my own hike.
LittleRock
06-11-2018, 12:54
if you were to go hiking now, sunrise is at 5:24 am and sunset is at 8:28pm. thats roughly 15 hours of day light.
for sake of argument, lets say your pace while moving, be it either on the AT or on the 3 mils of sidetrails, is 1.8 MPH. 15 MPD/1.8 MPH is 8.33 hours of hiking time. lets round it to 9. 15 hours of daylight minus 9 hours of hiking leaves 6 hours.
my question is, legitimately, what are you doing with those other 6 hours?
OK - first off, my backpacking trips are usually in April/October, so let's cut that total daylight down to 12 or 13 hours. What about the other 4 hours, you say?
I get up at first light (~6-6:30), but it's usually 1.5-2 hours before I start hiking. I cook and eat breakfast, and I sleep in my tent, which takes time to re-pack. In general, I'm very slow packing up because my brain refuses to work until my morning caffeine has had a chance to kick in. Not that I'm in a rush or anything.
I try to get 8 hours of hiking in, which puts us at 4:00 PM, 5:00 PM at the latest. I average around 2 MPH without breaks. With breaks it's usually more like 1.5-1.8 MPH depending on how difficult the trail is.
Then I set up camp, get/filter water, cook and eat dinner, etc. That takes another 2 hours. So there's 12 hours.
The rest of the time? In order of importance, 1) Sleep for 9-10 hours, because a) I can (I have 2 small children at home), and b) my body needs more rest after a full day of physical activity, 2) read a book/study next day's hike, 3) socialize.
colorado_rob
06-11-2018, 14:27
OK - first off, my backpacking trips are usually in April/October, so let's cut that total daylight down to 12 or 13 hours. What about the other 4 hours, you say?
I get up at first light (~6-6:30), but it's usually 1.5-2 hours before I start hiking. I cook and eat breakfast, and I sleep in my tent, which takes time to re-pack. In general, I'm very slow packing up because my brain refuses to work until my morning caffeine has had a chance to kick in. Not that I'm in a rush or anything.
I try to get 8 hours of hiking in, which puts us at 4:00 PM, 5:00 PM at the latest. I average around 2 MPH without breaks. With breaks it's usually more like 1.5-1.8 MPH depending on how difficult the trail is.
Then I set up camp, get/filter water, cook and eat dinner, etc. That takes another 2 hours. So there's 12 hours.
The rest of the time? In order of importance, 1) Sleep for 9-10 hours, because a) I can (I have 2 small children at home), and b) my body needs more rest after a full day of physical activity, 2) read a book/study next day's hike, 3) socialize.Exactly! You do it your way. Cool. Lots of folks do something similar, lots of other not. BUT, why do folks on here bad-mouth others' ways of hiking/backpacking?
It really is HYOH folks.
I do absolutely agree on your last comment, the sleep thing: Life on the trail is a fantastic way to really catch up on sleep. I sleep best on the trail. Well, not on the actual trail....
Odd Man Out
06-11-2018, 14:32
This is a wild rose I saw on the top of Sinking Creek Mtn, central VA AT. I stopped. I smelled.
42859
OK - first off, my backpacking trips are usually in April/October, so let's cut that total daylight down to 12 or 13 hours. What about the other 4 hours, you say?
I get up at first light (~6-6:30), but it's usually 1.5-2 hours before I start hiking. I cook and eat breakfast, and I sleep in my tent, which takes time to re-pack. In general, I'm very slow packing up because my brain refuses to work until my morning caffeine has had a chance to kick in. Not that I'm in a rush or anything.
I try to get 8 hours of hiking in, which puts us at 4:00 PM, 5:00 PM at the latest. I average around 2 MPH without breaks. With breaks it's usually more like 1.5-1.8 MPH depending on how difficult the trail is.
Then I set up camp, get/filter water, cook and eat dinner, etc. That takes another 2 hours. So there's 12 hours.
The rest of the time? In order of importance, 1) Sleep for 9-10 hours, because a) I can (I have 2 small children at home), and b) my body needs more rest after a full day of physical activity, 2) read a book/study next day's hike, 3) socialize.
so youre taking more time to setup/break down camp, spending more time asleep, reading a book and socializing.
i submit that I, and probably many others like me who are often described as "hiking fast" or "being in a rush" simply greatly curtail or do not do those things. that doesnt mean myself and others like me are going too fast or are missing things or are just in a rush to get done.
I did this on a hike one year, hiking "with" others, we all stopped at the same location every nite. I remember a couple of nites that I hade several hours left over waiting on them and was bored to death. Looking back, I probly would have more enjoyed going on and leaving the group to hike my own hike.
thats why i hike alone. even the few times i attempted to hike with someone who was on (at least) my level in terms of time spent hiking and distance covered in a day, the dynamics of moving as a pair instead of singly is just different.
to cite a simple example- you arent both going to need to stop and pee at the same time. so if youre hiking together youre now making twice as many pee breaks.
same goes for getting water, stopping to have a snack, to take a picture.... you name it. i found it easily adds up to a couple of hours a day less time to spend hiking.
BuckeyeBill
06-11-2018, 17:01
Normally when I hike, I get up around 5-5:15 AM. I stretch and cook breakfast (coffee, oatmeal and some kind of energy/grainy bar). I clean up and pack up and I am usually) leaving around 6 AM. I stop for a small lunch (crackers, cheese and summer sausage). Time spent for this is about 30 minutes. I hike until around 6-630 PM. I setup and cook something to eat. I then "socialize" until 8 PM, when I get in the hammock and sleep. That results in around 11 hours of hiking AND 9 hours of sleep.
Another Kevin
06-11-2018, 17:34
Once more into the breach ...
"You make only 8-12 miles a day? What do you do with the rest of the time?" seems to be a recurring question on this thread.
My answer:
I'm not in the best of shape, because I so seldom have time to hike. (Demanding job, daughter in the middle of a job change and interstate move and wedding, chronically ill wife, ...) I never get to hike enough to find my "trail legs."
When I do have time to take a hiking vacation, on the trails (and bushwhacks!) that I favour, I have to start slow, usually planning 8-12 mile days. But the trails and bushwhacks that I favour aren't the A-T, so that 8-12 mpd may not be the same sort of mileage.
If I'm on trail, I budget 30 minutes to the mile, add 40 minutes for each 1000 feet of elevation change, up or down. Plus a fudge factor for dodgy stream crossings, rock climbing, snow travel, etc. if I expect to run into those. Off trail, I may budget twice that time or more - bushwhacks in my part of the world are very rough going.
So let's look at a day I did a couple of Octobers ago, that, at 13.2 miles (12.8 trail miles plus 0.4 from a legal campsite to the trail) was just beyond that 8-12 mile limit. (Note that the times come from a spreadsheet that I have where I enter distances and elevations - it's not that I try to figure things to the minute, I just copied-n-pasted from the sheet.)
Miles
Elevation
Time
Description
0.4
0
0:08
Sundown campground-trail
3.95
+2850
3:13
Peekamoose Mountain summit
0.25
-220
0:14
Col
0.6
+220
0:21
Table Mountain summit
2.65
-1640
1:59
Neversink River
300
0:12
Add time for PUD's
0.15
+120
0:08
Trail junction
4.05
+1980
2:40
Slide Mountain summit
1.15
-920
1:00
Burroughs Range campsite
0:15
Add time to negotiate short class 4 scramble on east face of Slide
13.2
10:10
TOTAL
This trip was in October, so there were about 11 hours of daylight. I did stop at a couple of very nice overlooks for lunch and snacks. I came pretty close to the time bogey. I like to arrive at my campsite with time to hang my bear bag in daylight, and I had enough light left but not a lot of time left over - the sun was already behind the mountain to the west of me.
Now, I'd suspect that there was more vertical here than there would be on most sections of the AT outside New England, but I found that 13.2-mile day was pretty strenuous for me - 20 miles in those conditions would have had me hiking long after dark (and wouldn't have been safe, because there was more rock scrambling ahead). This was big mileage for me. I'd ordinarily budget 2-5 miles less and spend an extra hour or two on compulsive photography or writing.
What did I do with the few hours between dark and bedtime? Pitched camp. Fetched and treated water. Ate a cold dinner (I had had a hot meal for lunch - I often do that so as not to cook in camp). Bathed. Did a little bit of writing. And made an early night of it because I'm always starting off a trip way short of sleep and need a couple of days to get caught up.
I know I'm slow, but the critics here make me sound absolutely hopeless. No matter. I'll keep plodding and get there eventually.
Seatbelt
06-11-2018, 17:35
The older I get the slower I hike but I still hate to stop for anything. Then when I’m finished I think back to all the views, etc. that I missed and wish I had slowed down.
I can relate to this as well. I have wished many times (later on) that I had taken the time to see something on a side trail.
That results in around 11 hours of hiking AND 9 hours of sleep.
yeah i did the math and came to a similar conclusion too.
i'm not surprised at all, but it almost seems like the "stop and smell the roses" crowd just has hours in their day they can't really even account for. they attribute it to just walking slowly but i'm really convinced its impossible to actually walk that slowly for a sustained period of time.
Another Kevin
06-12-2018, 10:37
yeah i did the math and came to a similar conclusion too.
i'm not surprised at all, but it almost seems like the "stop and smell the roses" crowd just has hours in their day they can't really even account for. they attribute it to just walking slowly but i'm really convinced its impossible to actually walk that slowly for a sustained period of time.
Uhm. Yes, I am that slow. See the table in my last post. Ten hours hiking, eleven hours daylight because it was an autumn hike, 13.2 miles, held pretty close to schedule. The elevation changes really slow me down. I'm just not built to race on Upson Downs.
Uhm. Yes, I am that slow. See the table in my last post. Ten hours hiking, eleven hours daylight because it was an autumn hike, 13.2 miles, held pretty close to schedule. The elevation changes really slow me down. I'm just not built to race on Upson Downs.
the difficulty of the trail is obviously a huge factor and i am not familiar with the trails youre specifically referencing. it seems like at least some of them could be hard on the level of the whites. and certainly anything off trail is clearly a completely different story.
that said-
13.2 / 11 is 1.2 MPH. on very difficult trail thats reasonable, but lets put that aside for a moment.
lets assume its on easier trail, such as is 75% or more of the AT is. lets take an average AT section, lets say central MA or southern VT.
my firm belief, one which someone would have to show me physical evidence to the contrary for me to change my opinion, is that it is literally impossible to walk at a steady 1.2 MPH pace on such terrain. its an awkwardly, uncomfortably slow pace. unless we're talking about someone with some sort of physical ailment that slows them down somehow. a person of normal physical ability with no impediments can not comfortably walk that slowly. someone would have to literally show me otherwise for me to change my opinion on this.
someone who averages 1.2 MPH over easy to average terrain is not walking a steady 1.2 MPH, theyre stopping constantly while actually moving at closer to 2 MPH while moving.
the answer to going "faster" is to not stop as much.
LittleRock
06-12-2018, 16:19
someone who averages 1.2 MPH over easy to average terrain is not walking a steady 1.2 MPH, theyre stopping constantly while actually moving at closer to 2 MPH while moving.
And I'd wager that you "fast" hikers aren't actually walking at a steady 2 MPH, but closer to 2.5 or 3 MPH, which averages out to 2 MPH over the course of the day when factoring in breaks, judging by how quickly you all tend to pass me on trail. ;)
stephanD
06-12-2018, 16:30
5km = 5000meters = 3.12 miles per hour
And I'd wager that you "fast" hikers aren't actually walking at a steady 2 MPH, but closer to 2.5 or 3 MPH, which averages out to 2 MPH over the course of the day when factoring in breaks, judging by how quickly you all tend to pass me on trail. ;)
oh some are for sure, but its a small percentage.
i tend to only ever pass other hikers when theyre sitting still. in 10 days of hiking a couple of weeks ago i can probably count on one hand the number of times i passed a walking hiker.
the difficulty of the trail is obviously a huge factor and i am not familiar with the trails youre specifically referencing. it seems like at least some of them could be hard on the level of the whites. and certainly anything off trail is clearly a completely different story.
that said-
13.2 / 11 is 1.2 MPH. on very difficult trail thats reasonable, but lets put that aside for a moment.
lets assume its on easier trail, such as is 75% or more of the AT is. lets take an average AT section, lets say central MA or southern VT.
my firm belief, one which someone would have to show me physical evidence to the contrary for me to change my opinion, is that it is literally impossible to walk at a steady 1.2 MPH pace on such terrain. its an awkwardly, uncomfortably slow pace. unless we're talking about someone with some sort of physical ailment that slows them down somehow. a person of normal physical ability with no impediments can not comfortably walk that slowly. someone would have to literally show me otherwise for me to change my opinion on this.
someone who averages 1.2 MPH over easy to average terrain is not walking a steady 1.2 MPH, theyre stopping constantly while actually moving at closer to 2 MPH while moving.
the answer to going "faster" is to not stop as much.
conditions highly matter. throw snow, ice, mud, heavy rain, roller coasting tread- even if it is constant 100 ft up 100 ft down stuff, stumbling roly poly Rocksylvania rocky thread, wet tread on wet trail construction with wet leaves and roots on ascents and descents, sand on slabs, heat and humidity, fords, etc Add in being out of shape or not in hiking and, later, thru-hiking shape, struggling with conventional wt and high volume packs, culturally spoiled mindsets, food addictions(habits), failure(quitter) negative mindsets, etc These dont all have to apply by any means so dont say I'm saying that if youre of a more moderate MPD avgs. HYOH Why are we even caring to compare ourselves to others?...to maybe define our own social self worth?
Slo-go'en
06-12-2018, 21:15
Every so often you just have to sit down and enjoy the view for a while, or what's the point?
rocketsocks
06-12-2018, 21:21
I wanna know where all these roses are, Ive never one that wasn’t in a town.
conditions highly matter. throw snow, ice, mud, heavy rain, roller coasting tread- even if it is constant 100 ft up 100 ft down stuff, stumbling roly poly Rocksylvania rocky thread, wet tread on wet trail construction with wet leaves and roots on ascents and descents, sand on slabs, heat and humidity, fords, etc Add in being out of shape or not in hiking and, later, thru-hiking shape, struggling with conventional wt and high volume packs, culturally spoiled mindsets, food addictions(habits), failure(quitter) negative mindsets, etc These dont all have to apply by any means so dont say I'm saying that if youre of a more moderate MPD avgs. HYOH Why are we even caring to compare ourselves to others?...to maybe define our own social self worth?
1.2 MPH works out to roughly 100 feet per minute.
try walking 100 feet at a consistent, even, comfortable pace requiring you take one minute or more to complete that distance. you cant do it.
Every so often you just have to sit down and enjoy the view for a while, or what's the point?
i do stop and enjoy views.... whats awhile?
and even if one never stops for "awhile" theres still, potentially, plenty of "point."
theres whole stretches of trail of dozens if not hundreds of miles that have no views to stop and enjoy.... whats the point of hiking them?
1.2 MPH works out to roughly 100 feet per minute.
try walking 100 feet at a consistent, even, comfortable pace requiring you take one minute or more to complete that distance. you cant do it.
Betcha two slices of eggplant and sawsage and a icy cold Michelob from Vinnie's Pizza in Bellville I can.
Seatbelt
06-13-2018, 07:20
I wanna know where all these roses are, Ive never one that wasn’t in a town.
The thru-hikers already destroyed them....tic
Betcha two slices of eggplant and sawsage and a icy cold Michelob from Vinnie's Pizza in Bellville I can.
to be clear, are you proposing walking the 100 feet before or after eating?
you can have any pizza you want, but on the off chance i lose i am not spending money on michelob. youll drink a real beer and like it.
Odd Man Out
06-13-2018, 10:38
The idea that it is difficult to walk slow is supported by the biomechanics of walking. Assuming you are walking on level ground (I know, hard to find on the AT), your pace is like an inverted pendulum. Walking is energy efficient when, like a pendulum, energy from one step is transferred to the next. However for this to work, the pendulum must oscillate at its natural frequency. It's more difficult to make a pendulum swing slower than its natural frequency. My wife always complains that I walk too fast. I then explain to he the biomechanics of walking and the physics of pendulums. Oddly enough, the only makes the problem worse.
The idea that it is difficult to walk slow is supported by the biomechanics of walking. Assuming you are walking on level ground (I know, hard to find on the AT), your pace is like an inverted pendulum. Walking is energy efficient when, like a pendulum, energy from one step is transferred to the next. However for this to work, the pendulum must oscillate at its natural frequency. It's more difficult to make a pendulum swing slower than its natural frequency. My wife always complains that I walk too fast. I then explain to he the biomechanics of walking and the physics of pendulums. Oddly enough, the only makes the problem worse.
interesting. especially the part about the level ground.
i'm actually a firm believer that the easiest ground to walk on is an upward slope that is not sufficient enough to strain your cardiovascular system. it by far feels the most comfortable to walk on to me. much more than a comparable downhill and even slightly more than flat. i can walk uphill on a well graded, gradually ascending trail all day and never get the least bit sore or tired.
i wonder if there is anything about the biomechanics of walking that explain this.
approaching the issue from the opposite direction but still relevant and interesting about the calories thing-
https://www.verywellfit.com/slow-walking-burns-more-calories-easier-on-joints-3436873
1.2 MPH works out to roughly 100 feet per minute.
try walking 100 feet at a consistent, even, comfortable pace requiring you take one minute or more to complete that distance. you cant do it.
Youre not looking in the right place. It's customary to find these slow wandering vacuous penguins(no disrespect to penguins) in Wally World daydreaming about consuming something or impulse shopping. You'll often find them in the center of the aisle of the Grocery Dept leaving behind whatever food crumbs have fallen on the floor for some hapless "associate" to clean up.
Watch how fast someone who has reduced their world view to a 3.5" x 5.5" device screen walks. I've seen Gopher Tortoises move faster and more aware.
Another Kevin
06-14-2018, 11:44
the difficulty of the trail is obviously a huge factor and i am not familiar with the trails youre specifically referencing. it seems like at least some of them could be hard on the level of the whites. and certainly anything off trail is clearly a completely different story.
that said-
13.2 / 11 is 1.2 MPH. on very difficult trail thats reasonable, but lets put that aside for a moment.
My issue with assessing trail difficulty is that I suspect my experience is unusual. I may simply not have seen very much of the 'easy trail' of which you spoke!
I hike nowadays mostly in upstate New York. A few decades ago, I hiked mostly New Hampshire.When I was in high school, I hiked Harriman a lot because I was a NYC kid. To a city kid, Harriman looked tough. Then I went to school in New Hampshire, and learnt otherwise! To my eyes now, Harriman mostly looks 'dead easy' except, say, for the scrambles on the Suffern-Bear Mountain trail, which are interesting.
I'd assess the hike I described as being comparable terrain, say, with the AT over Moosilauke forty years ago before they built the steps up Beaver Brook, or maybe the stretch from Pinkham Notch to US 2. The 'add a factor for rock scrambling' was for one pitch that looks like https://www.flickr.com/photos/mountainvisions/3184443804 at the bottom and includes a pretty sketchy slab traverse https://www.flickr.com/photos/mountainvisions/3184443344 that tops out with a waist-high mantel move https://www.flickr.com/photos/mountainvisions/3184442762. No margin for error, if you wipe out you're going down that near-vertical slab from treetop height. I call it 'class 4' because in bad weather I want a rope.
There are lots of scrambles - the south side of Peekamoose is all 'hike 100 yards, of level trail, scramble a ledge, hike another 100 yards of level trail, scramble a ledge, lather, rinse, repeat" - but that one was the crux on that particular day,
Is that 'very difficult'? It's not too unusual for a Catskill or Adirondack trail. Saddleback and Gothics in the Adirondacks are harder, as are Twin and Sugarloaf in the Catskills.
I've not tried any long section on the AT. On the 137-mile Northville-Placid, I started out with a plan for 8-12 mile days and found out that 12-16 was more comfortable. But that trail is on relatively easy terrain; the chief challenges are the mud and the remoteness (there are two 40-mile sections that don't even cross logging roads).
On my personal scale, Harriman, southern VT or central MA on the AT are all 'pretty easy.' I've always figured that they were the exception rather than the rule.
Also, I do stop a lot when I'm just getting back into things - which seems to be all the time, lately, drat it. Until I've been hiking for a week or two, I can't sustain hiking all day long from sunup to sundown, and I'll get hurt if I try. So I lallygag - take pictures, write, watch wildlife, update trail maps, socialize - for a total of a few hours during the day while my body is getting used to hiking again. By the time I am used to hiking, it's time to go back to work. I need those stops.
I suppose I go briskly enough when I'm moving. Certainly I'd do the occasional 15-in-an-afternoon on the Erie Canal towpath; that'd take about five hours with a day pack. The point of 'stop and smell the roses' isn't about walking pace, it's about it being ok to be interested in other things than hiking - even when on a hike. Even roses, if there are any to be smelt.
Another Kevin
06-14-2018, 11:45
oh some are for sure, but its a small percentage.
i tend to only ever pass other hikers when theyre sitting still. in 10 days of hiking a couple of weeks ago i can probably count on one hand the number of times i passed a walking hiker.
I hear the speed demons coming up behind me and step aside, so I'm always standing still when you guys pass. :)
Sarcasm the elf
06-14-2018, 11:50
My issue with assessing trail difficulty is that I suspect my experience is unusual. I may simply not have seen very much of the 'easy trail' of which you spoke!
I hike nowadays mostly in upstate New York. A few decades ago, I hiked mostly New Hampshire.When I was in high school, I hiked Harriman a lot because I was a NYC kid. To a city kid, Harriman looked tough. Then I went to school in New Hampshire, and learnt otherwise! To my eyes now, Harriman mostly looks 'dead easy' except, say, for the scrambles on the Suffern-Bear Mountain trail, which are interesting.
I'd assess the hike I described as being comparable terrain, say, with the AT over Moosilauke forty years ago before they built the steps up Beaver Brook, or maybe the stretch from Pinkham Notch to US 2. The 'add a factor for rock scrambling' was for one pitch that looks like https://www.flickr.com/photos/mountainvisions/3184443804 at the bottom and includes a pretty sketchy slab traverse https://www.flickr.com/photos/mountainvisions/3184443344 that tops out with a waist-high mantel move https://www.flickr.com/photos/mountainvisions/3184442762. No margin for error, if you wipe out you're going down that near-vertical slab from treetop height. I call it 'class 4' because in bad weather I want a rope.
There are lots of scrambles - the south side of Peekamoose is all 'hike 100 yards, of level trail, scramble a ledge, hike another 100 yards of level trail, scramble a ledge, lather, rinse, repeat" - but that one was the crux on that particular day,
Is that 'very difficult'? It's not too unusual for a Catskill or Adirondack trail. Saddleback and Gothics in the Adirondacks are harder, as are Twin and Sugarloaf in the Catskills.
I've not tried any long section on the AT. On the 137-mile Northville-Placid, I started out with a plan for 8-12 mile days and found out that 12-16 was more comfortable. But that trail is on relatively easy terrain; the chief challenges are the mud and the remoteness (there are two 40-mile sections that don't even cross logging roads).
On my personal scale, Harriman, southern VT or central MA on the AT are all 'pretty easy.' I've always figured that they were the exception rather than the rule.
Also, I do stop a lot when I'm just getting back into things - which seems to be all the time, lately, drat it. Until I've been hiking for a week or two, I can't sustain hiking all day long from sunup to sundown, and I'll get hurt if I try. So I lallygag - take pictures, write, watch wildlife, update trail maps, socialize - for a total of a few hours during the day while my body is getting used to hiking again. By the time I am used to hiking, it's time to go back to work. I need those stops.
I suppose I go briskly enough when I'm moving. Certainly I'd do the occasional 15-in-an-afternoon on the Erie Canal towpath; that'd take about five hours with a day pack. The point of 'stop and smell the roses' isn't about walking pace, it's about it being ok to be interested in other things than hiking - even when on a hike. Even roses, if there are any to be smelt.
Yep, catskills are easy :D
I hear the speed demons coming up behind me and step aside, so I'm always standing still when you guys pass. :)
haha well i mean literally sitting down and taking an extended break.
it was really quite interesting the pattern that emerged on my most recent trip. i had never noticed it quite so fully and consistently before. basically everyday thered be 3 -5 people i ended up playing leap frog with all day, until they presumably stopped hiking and i never saw them again. then at night i'd maybe meet some people at camp or a shelter, we'd leap frog most of the next day and then suddenly theyd be gone. by the end of 10 days the people i was leap frogging on day 1 were who knows where, and my last day frogs stopped for the day 6 miles short of my endpoint.
these were almost all people who, arguably, hike faster than i do in the most literal sense of the term.
except, say, for the scrambles on the Suffern-Bear Mountain trail, which are interesting.
pingyp mountain i'm guessing. thats putting it mildly. ive only hiked that section once, in winter. definitely a challenge.
ive always thought it curious and perhaps enlightening that everyone and their cousin goes to breakneck ridge but that section of trail, which is very similar and perhaps even more difficult, practically no one ever goes to.
i guess its either the relative lack of views or the fact that to get to pingyp you either need someone to drop you off or to first hike several miles (my doing it in the winter was, in part, because it allowed to me to get away with some very "creative" parking on a road closed for the season) or somecombination of the two.
Another Kevin
06-14-2018, 13:40
Yep, catskills are easy :D
Heh. On that trip I thought we were taking the lazy approach by going up from the Neversink, after all, it's starting about 1500 feet higher than coming up from Ashokan. I learnt why the west approach is unpopular. :eek:
(Hobblebush tangles, blowdown, and spruce thickets were all worse than the scrambles, which were only moderately sketchy, as in "Kevin didn't want a top rope and a helmet, at least not too often.")
Partway through that trip, I said to Elf, "Am I being a wussy or is this some really tough hiking?"
He answered, "Kevin, let be put things in perspective for you. The typical AT thru-hiker..." He paused, as if trying to choose phrasing to let me down gently, then continued, "...would have had a panic attack about two hours ago."
But I know bushwhacking is nasty enough to scare off most hikers. It's on-trail hiking that I have trouble telling where the ranges are that run from "easy" to "hard" - maybe I just don't hike much on "easy" trail, which would explain why I just can't make the kind of pace that a lot of the people here consider to be reasonable. But how much does that matter? If I were in a hurry I wouldn't be walking.
Sarcasm the elf
06-14-2018, 13:48
Yeah, on that trip I thought we were taking the lazy approach by going up from the Neversink, after all, it's starting a good 800-1000 (tel:800-1000) feet higher than coming up from Ashokan. I learnt why the west approach is unpopular. :D
What was our pace on that section again? 1/4 Mile in 45 minutes? Less? I don’t think we touched the actual ground while climbing across those trees. We certainly got a chance to stop and smell the roses while picking through that blowdown patch. :banana