Completed thru hikes and pack weights

[Hammerhead]

I know that of all the people who attempt to thru hike each year, only a few actually complete the whole trip. I'd like to get an idea of pack weights for those who've completed. In other words, do ultra light types have a higher sucess rate? And yes, I know that your gear doesn't get you there. I'm just curious to see how much of a role going ultra light actually plays in completing a thru hike.

[Footslogger]

My pack weighed 43 lbs at Springer in March 2003. I switched packs and swapped out gear/clothing in Pearisburg getting my total pack weight (with food and water) down to around 25 - 26 lbs and finished my hike at that level.

Could I have made it all the way carrying the 43 lb load ?? Maybe, but it would have been less pleasant.

'Slogger

[Hammerhead]

My pack weighed 43 lbs at Springer in March 2003. I switched packs and swapped out gear/clothing in Pearisburg getting my total pack weight (with food and water) down to around 25 - 26 lbs and finished my hike at that level.

Could I have made it all the way carrying the 43 lb load ?? Maybe, but it would have been less pleasant.

'Slogger

I forgot to factor in the changes in seasons, thanks. I'm all about carrying less, but comfort for me is a little more important. I'm just trying to determine a good starting pack weight (NOBO).

[The Solemates]

We started in the winter (FEB 1) and my pack weighed about 33 lbs with around 4 days of food and water. My wife's weighed about 27 lbs. Our pack starting pack weight did not change any compared to our finish pack weight at Katahdin except for dumping the winter gear. At Katahdin, mine weighed around 27 lbs and my wife's weighed around 20 lbs. The two main weight-decreasing items came from the fact we were able to dump lots of clothes and our two heavier sleeping bags, replaced with a summer bag that we shared used as a quilt once it got warmer.

[Mouse]

Without food and water my pack weighed 22 lbs in the winter and 17 lbs in the summer. I'd say keeping my packweight low was a key factor in my completion.

One need not go as far as strict ultra-light, just choosing lighter weight gear can make a big difference.

[Blue Jay]

I carried (and still carry) 45 to 55 pounds. I may go less when I get old but I doubt it.

[Footslogger]

I may go less when I get old but I doubt it.

====================================

How old is old ??

'Slogger

[Time To Fly 97]

35-45 pounds depending on winter/summer gear, number of meals and water conditions.

TTF

[hopefulhiker]

The March start weight for me was 32 lbs with food and water. I dropped to about 26 lbs in the summer and finished up with about 26 lbs. I consider this to be just light weight, not ultra light... I carried an air mattress, cutdown ridge rest, pocketmail, ate mainly dehydrated food though.. If I were doing it over again, I might not take the 15 degree sleeping bag at the beginning, I would take the lighter one and just wear long underwear at night.

[Hammerhead]

The next thing I guess I'll do is post my gear list to be disected. Thanks for everyone's input, this site has been and will continue to be a HUGE help! :D

[Phreak]

I'm starting my SOBO hike in July of '07 with a base weight of 16 pounds. I'm hoping to drop another 1-2 pounds before the start. My goal is to stay around 22-24 pounds with food and water.

[Wolf - 23000]

I know that of all the people who attempt to thru hike each year, only a few actually complete the whole trip. I'd like to get an idea of pack weights for those who've completed. In other words, do ultra light types have a higher sucess rate? And yes, I know that your gear doesn't get you there. I'm just curious to see how much of a role going ultra light actually plays in completing a thru hike.

Hammerhead,

I travel by most hikers's ultra-light. To answer your question do ultra-light types have a highter sucess rate, I don't believe so. Most of your "ultra-light" that have their own websites, publish books, etc only go out for a short time - a couple weeks at best. Few will thru-hike a long distance trail.

I've also met or heard of several thru-hikers that really did not enjoy hiking "ultra-light" but did it for one reason or another.

My suggest is this, carry what make you happy. If your pack weight is too heavy that it bothers you, lighten it then.

Just my $.02

Wolf

[hammock engineer]

Hammerhead,

I travel by most hikers's ultra-light. To answer your question do ultra-light types have a highter sucess rate, I don't believe so. Most of your "ultra-light" that have their own websites, publish books, etc only go out for a short time - a couple weeks at best. Few will thru-hike a long distance trail.

I've also met or heard of several thru-hikers that really did not enjoy hiking "ultra-light" but did it for one reason or another.

My suggest is this, carry what make you happy. If your pack weight is too heavy that it bothers you, lighten it then.

Just my $.02

Wolf

That is kind of my approach. I haven't thrued yet, so this might change. I am somewhere around 20-21 lbs without food or water. I could easily drop weight by switching to aqua from a purifier and ditching the 11.6 oz digital camera along with other things. But some things I do not want to give up. I also hate being cold, so I pack a few more clothes than most. I do a lot of my practice hikes with 30 lbs and don't think it will be a problem.

In the end it will all work out. Just sit back and let it happen.

[Grampie]

I did a thru in "01" at the age of 66. I started at Springer with a pack that weighed about 40 lbs. with cold weather gear. After sheding my cold gear I weighed my pack at Damaskas, with food and water, and it weighed 36 lbs. I never weighed it again but did make some other weight saving cuts. I ended probably around 32 lbs.
My thinking was: All the folks who hiked the trail before say 1980 only had heavy stuff to carry. A lot of them still hiked the whole trail carrying over 40 lbs. If they could do it so could I.
Many potental thru-hikers think that because they are traveling light that they will have an easy hike. They soon find out that they are wrong and doing a thru-hike is just plain hard work for a long time.:sun

[Blue Jay]

====================================

How old is old ??

'Slogger

When I can't carry a measely 50 pounds up a mountain.

[Footslogger]

When I can't carry a measely 50 pounds up a mountain.
==============================
"Can't" or "Won't" ?? I can ...I just refuse to. Guess I'm finally getting old !!

'Slogger

[Barrel Roll]

I started out southbound. My pack weighed 65 lbs with 10+ days worth of food to get through the 100 mile wilderness. I (very stupidly) ignored the park ranger's advice and summitted Katahdin with that pack. My thru-hike almost ended that night : ).

At my lightest, which was early fall, I was 22-24lbs with food and water. Dumping all extraneous stuff, switching out gear, etc.

I finished December 11th so I had to get some extra winter gear, 0 degree bag, long underwear, etc... jumped to 30 or so lbs with food and water.

Learn as you go : ). I think a lighter pack helps make it a little more enjoyable, I certainly grew fatigued quicker, shedding weight and getting hiking shape makes the hiking better. But it certainly doesn't indicate whether you're going to make it or not. One of the guys I hiked 3 months with was around 45-50 lbs the whole trip and he loved every minute of it. Just bring what feels comfortable and if you ever start hating your pack, send some stuff home.

[StarLyte]

The next thing I guess I'll do is post my gear list to be disected. Thanks for everyone's input, this site has been and will continue to be a HUGE help! :D

ha ha that's funny--dissected---why don't you bring your full pack to a Ruck instead? There ya go.

[Hammerhead]

ha ha that's funny--dissected---why don't you bring your full pack to a Ruck instead? There ya go.

here goes.....what's a Ruck?:confused:

[StarLyte]

here goes.....what's a Ruck?:confused:

I love when I'm asked that question.

PA Ruck (http://www.paruck.com/)
PA Ruck photos 2006 (http://gallery.backcountry.net/PA-Ruck-2006)
PA Ruck photos 2005 (http://gallery.backcountry.net/album54)

Southern Ruck (http://www.whiteblaze.net/soruck/)
Southern Ruck photos 2006 (http://gallery.backcountry.net/Southern-Ruck-2006)
Southern Ruck photos 2005 (http://gallery.backcountry.net/2005-Soruck)

[Hammerhead]

I love when I'm asked that question.

PA Ruck (http://www.paruck.com/)
PA Ruck photos 2006 (http://gallery.backcountry.net/PA-Ruck-2006)
PA Ruck photos 2005 (http://gallery.backcountry.net/album54)

Southern Ruck (http://www.whiteblaze.net/soruck/)
Southern Ruck photos 2006 (http://gallery.backcountry.net/Southern-Ruck-2006)
Southern Ruck photos 2005 (http://gallery.backcountry.net/2005-Soruck)

You learn something new every day! Thanks! :D

[The Solemates]

I love when I'm asked that question.

PA Ruck (http://www.paruck.com/)
PA Ruck photos 2006 (http://gallery.backcountry.net/PA-Ruck-2006)
PA Ruck photos 2005 (http://gallery.backcountry.net/album54)

Southern Ruck (http://www.whiteblaze.net/soruck/)
Southern Ruck photos 2006 (http://gallery.backcountry.net/Southern-Ruck-2006)
Southern Ruck photos 2005 (http://gallery.backcountry.net/2005-Soruck)

http://gallery.backcountry.net/Southern-Ruck-2006/SoRuck_06_021
that's me where the blank is.

[Programbo]

I think this question would be much more interesting if you could go back about 25-30 years in asking as compared to now..Say for example how many people carrying 40 pounds or more completed the trail in 1980 as compared to how many people carrying that weight would complete it today....I think the average pack weight was much higher back in the 70`s thru early 80`s..That`s just how it was..If it turns out 80% of people carrying 45 pounds completed the trail in 1978 and only 20% of people trying to carry that much weight in 2006 complete it (Or dump the weight) then one has to ask why

[the_iceman]

If it turns out 80% of people carrying 45 pounds completed the trail in 1978 and only 20% of people trying to carry that much weight in 2006 complete it (Or dump the weight) then one has to ask why

I think the answer might be America has gotten soft. We want things quick and easy. When you hear terms like speed hiking, done in a day, etc. you get a feeling that anything that takes too much time or effort is less valuable. In contrast 20 years ago words like, handmade, aged, and craftsmanship meant quality.

When I was much younger I worked with an older woman, a true Yankee. She always said; “Kids these days, (me in the 70’s and I was in my mid 20’s) want everything easy. My parents never told me life would be easy. Life is hard, damn hard and no one should expect it to be easy.”

People who hiked back then expected to suffer when they hiked because that is what hikers did. But it was honest suffering and the rewards were worth it.

We have lost our patience. I know I have and it is a result of living in an instant society. I have a telephone in my pocket I can call and be called on anywhere in the world. Email takes 2 seconds to France. 20 years ago it was airmail in a week.

Patience is a virtue we have lost, that and the humility that comes from suffering a little. We have become whining babies.

[dloome]

Started in early March with a base weight of 11 lbs 4 oz, finished with a base weight of 6 lbs 12 oz that was just as adequate for the same conditions.

I think pack weight only affects your completion chances up to a certain point. Lighter is NOT necessarily better at all! (This coming from me, I know.) Yeah, I'm a fairly light packer, but I also like to have a warm sleep system, adequate rain gear, etc. Cutting weight at the expense of being cold and miserable will not improve your chances at all.

The trick is to have a good combination of weight and comfort that will make it mentally easier for you. Pretty much ANYONE is physically capable of hiking the AT- plenty of senior citizens have thru hiked. Staying in the game mentally is much much harder, especially if you hike alone. A few ounces in the form of a book, music, comfortable pad, etc. I think could drastically increase your chances of finishing.