View Full Version : figuring pack weight
volks-man
05-10-2009, 21:18
when i figure pack weight i have historically weighed in with my full complement for the hike including my supply of water and food.
is this not the way you folks do it?
i see UL folks running with 12-16 lbs with shelter and stoves and the like. surely this doesn't include food/water, right?
when i figure pack weight i have historically weighed in with my full complement for the hike including my supply of water and food.
is this not the way you folks do it?
i see UL folks running with 12-16 lbs with shelter and stoves and the like. surely this doesn't include food/water, right?It depends. Some folks just include the weight of their pack with gear, but not food. Some folks adhere to the FSO (From Skin Out), which includes everything, including food, water, the clothes on your body and the shoes/boots/sandals on your feet. Personally, I do FSO when I state my pack weight, but that changes depending on how much food and water I'm carrying.
Most people when referring to pack weight are giving the weight of everything EXCEPT food water fuel and what they will be wearing while hiking.
Pokey2006
05-10-2009, 21:52
I just weighed my pack for a one-night trip, and couldn't believe: 10 pounds. I knew I was going light, just didn't know I was going THAT light. That's with one day of food, no water, everything else (shelter, stove, etc) included. So, yes, it's totally possible for ULers to be packing 12-16 pounds.
garlic08
05-10-2009, 22:18
Western hikers typically use the term "base weight", which means no food or water, but not including clothing, shoes, watch, etc that are always worn while hiking. Most eastern hikers include an indefinite "food and water" component and don't seem to really care that much about pack weight. Less common, but as credible as any, are the "skin out" folks.
Most UL packs are less than ten pounds base weight. I know my AT pack never exceeded 20 pounds even for several 100-mile stretches. 15-16 pounds with food and water was pretty typical for a 60 or 70 mile carry.
I have a question. How do you define "with food and water"? How much food and how much water is that? It seems most don't really care, just load up for a typical weekend, step on a scale, grunt, and walk on. It is what is it.
volks-man
05-10-2009, 22:52
I have a question. How do you define "with food and water"? How much food and how much water is that? It seems most don't really care, just load up for a typical weekend, step on a scale, grunt, and walk on. It is what is it.
depends on the hike.
i will bring two quarts or so of water with me if i don't know of a good source to pump, for a two-three day trip. food, i have been figuring in meals per day.
i have not been cooking on my short 1-3 day trips. so i have been bringing granola bars, dried fruit, dried dates, and shelled almonds. three granolas, a handfull of almonds, several pieces of dried mango, and a few dates per meal. i can stay out a few days on a couple pounds of these dried foods.
garlic08
05-11-2009, 01:14
i have not been cooking on my short 1-3 day trips. so i have been bringing granola bars, dried fruit, dried dates, and shelled almonds. three granolas, a handfull of almonds, several pieces of dried mango, and a few dates per meal. i can stay out a few days on a couple pounds of these dried foods.
So I understand you'll be out for up to three days with two pounds of food? That's a light food load. By the way, I don't cook either. I carry tortillas and cheese in addition to what you carry. I need to carry 1.5 to 2 pounds of food per day, or on long trips it works out to about 1 pound for every 10 miles. (Sorry to divert your thread.)
Wolf - 23000
05-11-2009, 05:16
when i figure pack weight i have historically weighed in with my full complement for the hike including my supply of water and food.
is this not the way you folks do it?
i see UL folks running with 12-16 lbs with shelter and stoves and the like. surely this doesn't include food/water, right?
Why not? You figure 3-4 pounds, 2 pounds for water and the rest food equal around 12 - 16 pounds including food/water. With the newest gear out there you of course can do with less but my point still stays the same. 12 - 16 would be the total weight.
Wolf
stranger
05-11-2009, 07:07
Sure there are some hikers who can do 70 mile carrys with a total weight, including food and water, of 15lbs, but this is extremely rare.
Most hikers who are claiming a weight of 15lbs, would be talking about base weight, not total weight. Personally, I've never understood this, why talk about base weight when you will be actually carrying substantially more than that?
However, it's not too hard to have a total pack weight around 20-25lbs, including food and water, getting down to 15 is much harder to do, and means getting by on quite limited gear.
The lightest I've seen is 7.5lbs, including food and water, this hiker had no margin of error, he just accepted he would be cold and wet whenever the sun didn't shine, and could possibly be cold even on decent nights.
To each their own
Most hikers who are claiming a weight of 15lbs, would be talking about base weight, not total weight. Personally, I've never understood this, why talk about base weight when you will be actually carrying substantially more than that?
because we ALL carry food and water, but don't all carry the same other gear. it makes a very useful comparison between apples and apples.
if you go out for a 2 overnighter, with food and water, and i'm going out for a 3 overnighter, with food and water, how do you compare our gear? by weighing it without the food and water...
I can understand not counting food and water, but I don't understand not counting clothing worn.
I'm curious what Wolf -23000 uses for clothing normally worn. Not that I think he's cheating by wearing a snow suit or anything. I'm just more interested in the total skin out weight and clothing/sleeping system than base pack weight, especially when base pack weight is so insignificant as in his case. He must have some good ideas. Also curious about his sleeping strategies, like how many hours, hot water bottles, latent heat, skin temperature, etc.
volks-man
05-11-2009, 18:45
So I understand you'll be out for up to three days with two pounds of food? That's a light food load. By the way, I don't cook either. I carry tortillas and cheese in addition to what you carry. I need to carry 1.5 to 2 pounds of food per day, or on long trips it works out to about 1 pound for every 10 miles. (Sorry to divert your thread.)
i use the term 'couple pounds' loosely. i have not weighed the food or water alone.
what i do with the food is figure sugar for quick energy and protien for long term. throw a little fat in the mix and the high-ish calories of my choices and i can run on this light-weight food-mix for days.
total calories are probably a little light, but i welcome the challenge of reduced food and water on these short trips.;)
last trip i did 27 miles in 13 hours carrying approx 25lbs total pack weight.
(food, water, gear, everything except the clothes on my body.)
first 13.5 took 8 hrs, the second 13.5 took 5. that with reduced food and water. i like a challenge.:cool:
Actually if you want to skimp on food weight for a few days it should be low on fat, as you can always get that from the body. Same to a certain degree with protien, but the body can turn some protien into carbs but it can't turn carbs into protien so you might as well include protien, just not too much. All carbs aren't fast. Many carbs are slow, and you can spread it out while hiking. If I was only taking 2 pounds for 3 days, it would be mostly oatmeal, and some skim milk powder. If I was to carry 4 pounds for 3 days I would add some currants and honey and jerky, but still low in fat. If I evry get lean and mean again, then I would carry the full 6 pounds for 3 days and the additional 2 pounds would be fats, like almonds and peanuts and olive oil.
500ml honey is a good extra emergency food because it is very dense volume and calorie wise as carbs go, and you can just put it back on the shelf when you get home. So instead of bringing just a few honey packets with all that packaging waste and mess, you might as well bring a 500ml tub as your emergency ration. If you do run out of food you can make tea from bark and add just a little honey and ration it out that way, which will give you the energy to trudge along and burn body fat and muscle mass without bonking.
volks-man
05-11-2009, 19:49
Actually if you want to skimp on food weight for a few days it should be low on fat, as you can always get that from the body. Same to a certain degree with protien, but the body can turn some protien into carbs but it can't turn carbs into protien so you might as well include protien, just not too much. All carbs aren't fast. Many carbs are slow, and you can spread it out while hiking. If I was only taking 2 pounds for 3 days, it would be mostly oatmeal, and some skim milk powder. If I was to carry 4 pounds for 3 days I would add some currants and honey and jerky, but still low in fat. If I evry get lean and mean again, then I would carry the full 6 pounds for 3 days and the additional 2 pounds would be fats, like almonds and peanuts and olive oil.
i am not a fat guy. though i agree the body will find some to burn when needed.
i bring the almonds for the protein.
they are the highest nut in protein i could find easily (except for those nasty soy nuts).
i have been running the idea of homemade granola bars by the wife (cook). i saw a recipe around here (WB) somewhere. i like the idea of being able to tailor make my own compact dry foods.:cool:
I can see if you are already lean you would bring a more balanced diet, even when skimping.
Like you say it's not as crazy as it sounds, skimping for a few days. A pound is still alot of food if it is dry. If you are overweight like me a pound of food can be mostly carbs and protien, for up to 1800 kcal, and you can get another 3000 kcal in body fat and not miss it, for about 4800 kcal total. If you are already lean you might bring more of a mix, which might be 900 kcal in carbs and protien and 2000 kcal in fat, for 2900 and the other 1900 can come from a mix of muscle and body fat for the same 4800 kcal total. Sounds extreme, but 1900 kcal is only about 0.2 pounds of muscle fibre and 0.5 pounds of fat. Some people don't like the idea of losing muscle mass, but muscle is not just for doing work, it is also the way the body stores its protien reserves. Obviously not a good strategy for a thru-hiker, but its a normal strategy for someone travelling for 3 days, unless they are already like marathon runner thin.
Blissful
05-11-2009, 20:03
i see UL folks running with 12-16 lbs with shelter and stoves and the like. surely this doesn't include food/water, right?
With a simple sil nylon tarp and an alcohol stove in the mix, it sure can. Saw one guy with a daypack practically for his thru hiking pack this year.
I would still carry an extra 500ml of honey though, just in case I got lost or something.
Pokey2006
05-11-2009, 20:07
With a simple sil nylon tarp and an alcohol stove in the mix, it sure can. Saw one guy with a daypack practically for his thru hiking pack this year.
And it doesn't necessarily mean they're skimping out on necessities, or hiking with "limited gear." Or even that they'll be cold and wet. Just depends on an individual's comfort level.
I always thought base weight was generally considered without food and water, but the only weight I ever care about is what's in my pack at the start of the trip, which almost always includes food but not water.
I think a very doable skin-out weight, not counting food and water and fuel:
10 pounds Summer, for extremes down to 30degF.
20 pounds Spring/Fall, for extremes down to 10degF.
30 pounds Winter, for extremes down to -30degF.
Those values I would consider light, but not ultralight. In theory 10/15/20 might be sufficient for those temperatures, but you need more safety margin as you get deeper into winter, because nights are longer and bad weather tends to be less predictable and last for more days, and it can slow you down more. Of course on high mountains you can get some of that even in summer, other than the longer nights. Anyhow, its rather pointless to generalize, but I think skin out weight makes more sense, and it also depends on season and climate, and of course topography also.
stranger
05-12-2009, 07:29
Seeker that's still irrelevant because hikers vary in what they carry, yes we all carry food, but how much? How much water? Why do we discuss one hiker carrying a tent and another carrying a tarp, but not one hiker carrying 3 days of food and another carrying 5 for the same distance?
Last year there was a hiker at Neels Gap boasting about his 12lb base weight, was really into showing everyone what "he" was doing, this and that. He asked me what my base weight was and I said "who cares?" He then made some childish comment like "you should" or something like that.
Anyhow, we ended up talking right by the pack scale the next day and he weighed his pack, then he suggested that I weigh mine, guess which one was lighter? Mine, my pack was lighter cause I was going from Neels to Hiawassee in 2 days, and he was planning on more time, so he had more food, probably more water, and certainly more weight. My pack was about 2lbs lighter.
So, two hikers setting out for the same exact distance, he probably had less of a base weight, I would probably be around the 14-16ish mark (don't know for sure), but at the end of the day - the hiker with the "heavier" base weight hiked the next 36 miles with less weight on his back - this is why base weight is irrelevant.
Pack weight is usually discussed in terms of trying to minimize it, and food and water are usually around 50% of my total pack weight.
What is the point in discussing 50% of anything?
I guess the point in discussing base weight is to come up with a way for backpackers to compare the things in their pack that we all carry. For many like myself its an opportunity to learn from the techniques that others employ and perhaps improve my own skills. Unfortunatly, for many it is a whos D&*k is bigger competition and they are very vocal about whats right and wrong which causes lots of people to put up a guard when someone starts talking about base weight. Its really unfortunate because that type of discussion if had without ego is a great opportunity for hikers of all backgrounds to learn from each other.
garlic08
05-12-2009, 12:54
...Unfortunatly, for many it is a whos D&*k is bigger competition and they are very vocal about whats right and wrong which causes lots of people to put up a guard when someone starts talking about base weight. Its really unfortunate because that type of discussion if had without ego is a great opportunity for hikers of all backgrounds to learn from each other.
Well said, sir!
In my case, I know I had to want to change out my heavy pack before I would listen to the UL'ers. Luckily, I found some reasonable and respectful hikers (needless to say it was not on an internet forum!:rolleyes:) to help guide me through the transition, and it has worked great for me.
stranger
05-12-2009, 22:37
It's also a potentially dangerous discussion because what one person does will not necessarily work for another, and those who practice ultralight hiking tend to have a narrower margin of error, this is why experience is critical.
I haven't carried raingear since 1995, but I would never advocate that to another hiker. I've made that decision based on my experience over the years, and it works for me, might not work for another person.
Experience is all the teacher you need, walk 200 miles down any trail and it all becomes extremely obvious (it did for me atleast). Implementing another, potentially very experienced, hikers gear list might not be the best way of doing things.
But no matter what, you will be hard pressed to do any long distance hike along the AT without hearing the gear debate, as well as blue blazing, mileage, etc... Whether or not you wish to engage in the debate is irrelevant, it comes to you.