could you thruhike in 1969?

[mweinstone]

with what was available and with what you know now?

[Cookerhiker]

A teenager named Jeff Hancock thuhiked in 1969. The 2-volume set Hiking the Appalachian Trail by Rodale Press has his writeup.

One year later, Ed Garvey thruhiked and subsequently wrote his book Appalachian Hiker - Adventure of a Lifetime. Garvey is one of my AT heroes. I found his book very influential and helpful when I took up backpacking in the mid-1970s. Some of his recommendations seem archaic now (his clothes were all cotton) but a lot of them are still sound today. For example at a time when lots of backpackers were buying expensive dehydrated meals e.g. Mountainhouse, Garvey's food discussion showed how you can get all your culinary needs from a regular grocery store. He didn't use maildrops but hitchhiked into towns for his resupplying.

There was little in the way of trail services then but as a long-time active ATC member, Garvey had a network of people he could draw on.

At a time when the population of 2,000 milers was very small - especially thruhikers - Garvey listed all of them in his book. There were other thruhikers in prior years including Bill O'Brien who thru'd in 1969.

[Jim Adams]

Yes Matty, I could have thru hiked in 1969...but I wouldn't have remembered it!

geek

[Sickmont]

Not me. I wasn't even a gleam in my father's eye then.

[max patch]

Most could not because of the lack of company; many hikers of that era spent a lot of time alone.

[moytoy]

In one word, yes. In 1969 I was living in Bristol Tn. and I only wish I had thought of the idea then. In 69 I had already hiked all of the AT in the GSMNP and most of the Ga. AT trail. It just never entered my mind to do the whole trail. I was 22 and in great hiking shape. YES lets do it!

[Cookerhiker]

Matty, I may have misread your question - if it's meant to be personal (could I have thruhiked), then my answer is probably yes. But my mindset was so different then.

[4shot]

with what was available and with what you know now?


my theory is that everyone starts with the best gear available at the time more or less. So mentally you feel prepared gear-wise. I imagine in 50 years or so people will think our stuff was archaic.

Now if you mean, starting today at Springer with 1969 gear, I still think so - gear is such a small piece of the puzzle (imo). Or are you referring to hiking the AT without the infrastructure that exists now - guidebooks, shuttles, hostels, etc.? yes, I still think so due to my age -I grew up camping "back in the day" and a boy scout so I knew how maps, compass, etc. (and carried them last year).

No doubt it was a different experience back then but I think I would have enjoyed the solitude of the trip. Interesting question.

[skinewmexico]

Sure. Kelty was making a fine external frame then, and it wasn't that heavy compared to the Gregory internals of the 80s.

[fiddlehead]

No credit cards, No ATM's.
You would have to do it with travelers checks and when they get wet, they are no good.
Change needed to make phone calls.
Hiking boots weighed aprox 5-7 lbs.
Canvas tents is all we had in the boy scouts at that time. Don't know if they had lighter weight stuff.
All in all, you'd probably be carrying 50-60 lbs minimum.

Of course, it would be a challenge that now I would welcome.
Back then, I didn't have the money and..............well, I was in the Navy anyway. (making $83 a month)

But anyway: "Walkin's Walkin"!

[swjohnsey]

Shaffer did it in '48 carryin' around 45 lbs mostly no tent.

[off-pher]

only with my mommies permission

[sbhikes]

I think I could do it with 1969 gear. Grandma Gatewood's gear was available in 1969 and it wasn't heavy. Gear's not even the issue really. The solitude probably would be.

My question is, if you're white, could you hike the trail in 1969 impersonating a black man?

[Red Hat]

with what was available and with what you know now?

At the age of 22, I sure could have... except I was living in Texas and had a two year old. But with my old gear, and my present knowledge, I'd have been great. I'd have loved the roadwalks back then. Not so much rock climbing as now. would'a, should'a, could'a.... ah well

[endubyu]

Would take me longer and I would be more uncomfortable but absolutely yes I could do it under '69 conditions.

[the goat]

No credit cards, No ATM's.
You would have to do it with travelers checks and when they get wet, they are no good.
Change needed to make phone calls.
Hiking boots weighed aprox 5-7 lbs.
Canvas tents is all we had in the boy scouts at that time. Don't know if they had lighter weight stuff.
All in all, you'd probably be carrying 50-60 lbs minimum.

Of course, it would be a challenge that now I would welcome.
Back then, I didn't have the money and..............well, I was in the Navy anyway. (making $83 a month)

But anyway: "Walkin's Walkin"!

lol! this sounds like my 2001 thru hike!
i had no credit cards.
i used cash & travelers checks.
i had gigantic boots (5lb+)
my tent weighed 7 lbs.
i carried a bunch of change for phone calls/ called collect.

[Ron Haven]

with what was available and with what you know now?Mattewski, that may have been the year they closed the trail for repairs?:dance:datz

[Kerosene]

No problem doing a thru in '69.

New types of gear were just coming out then (Kelty and Jansport external frames, Vibram soles, single-wall nylon puptents with no ventilation to speak of, Svea white gas stoves, closed cell sleeping pads, et al). Of course, too many folks tended to rely on jeans rather than wool, as wicking synthetics were still a decade or two away.

Hitchhiking was easier back then, at least up north from what I recall.

True, there would have been a lot more solitude in the woods, but there were still quite a few dayhikers back then and the AT still followed a lot of roads. My sense is that there were a lot more small stores spread about back then, as opposed to everything centralizing to a strip mall or big-box store. Of course, most thru-hikers wouldn't know which way to turn to get to the closest store.

By '69, I believe that trail maintenance was much more consistent. Hikers would have to rely on travelers checks, cash and perhaps Western Union wired money. I carried about 50 pounds for weeklong early spring sections starting in '73 and I'm confident I could've cut that below 50 with experience. Finding well-fitted footwear was a bigger issue, and boots required weeks of break-in time.

Of course, people have journeyed for thousands of miles with less equipment and support well before 1969, including the less than 100 AT thru-hikers recorded to that point.

[perrito]

Could it have been done in a hammock?

[Sickmont]

Could it have been done in a hammock?

Who's to say the hammock idea wasnt originally hatched by a thru hiker in 1969?

[Wobegon]

It's stuff like this I think about when I get a bit depressed that I can't afford or have the lightest and best of modern gear. My stuff is decent enough, but I'm sure a bit on the heavy side of what others will have.

If people did it in the 60's and 70's with 50-70 lb packs and cotton clothes, surely I can manage.

[MoodyBluer]

Most could not because of the lack of company; many hikers of that era spent a lot of time alone.

Remember that my Dad and I hiked the approach trail and AT to Woody Gap in April 1973 and we saw 1 person in 3 days...notice that I said April...:-) things were a lot quieter on the hiking front those days, sigh.

[rustmd]

My oldest brother hiked GA to CT in '69--he had already hiked all of New England. I am section hiking now when I can. His stories are hillarious and amazing. . .light-weight gear back then translated to "small-size", so if that cast iron frying pan was "small", he carried it. Traveled from New England to Springer for the Approach Trail--he & his hiking partner got a ride from a friend who drove a VW, drove straight-thru from Mass. to the trailhead and dropped them off. At some point in VA, one boot (Peter Limmers) was totally worn through--he patched up an old sneaker, stuck it on his foot and continued hiking. They carried a pup-tent, canvas but mainly stayed in the shelters. They began in Feb. and for days hiked through rain, sleet & snow. He barely remembers eating, whatever they could find in small towns that they hitched to. He had an awful time! He still hikes a bit now, w/ much lighter gear.

[weary]

with what was available and with what you know now?
I hiked in 1993, using mostly gear I had been backpacking with for 20 years, that hadn't changed significantly from 1969 gear. My pack in 93 ranged between 35 and 45 pounds including six days of food.

I wasn't a particularly fit 64-year-old. But pack weight was not a problem. A light pack certainly eases a 2,000-mile walk. But a few pounds plus or minus plays little if any role, in a successful long distance walk.

[fiddlehead]

I see the solitude part of a '69 thru-hike as definitely being one of the pluses.
Who the hell wants 30-40 strangers around when they're in the woods?

[Sickmont]

I see the solitude part of a '69 thru-hike as definitely being one of the pluses.
Who the hell wants 30-40 strangers around when they're in the woods?

Could you imagine the fun of doing it in 1948? :D

[T-Dubs]

with what was available and with what you know now?

You telling us you finally got that 'way-back machine' figured out? If so, I'm in. I'd like to talk to my 17-year old self and let him know what's coming.

TWS

[beakerman]

If i follow the question's logic...

Could I hike the trail with '69 vintage gear and the knowledge I have today? that would be a yes with the following caveat: I get to do it with my 1987 body and lifestyle rather than my 2011 body and lifestyle. At this point I have too many financial obligations and too many pounds to pack that aren't gear unless you consider long term energy reserves gear (i.e. fat). With my then 165 pound lean/mean body and a devil may care attitude about paying a bill...sure...yo don't even have to give me the "knowledge of today" but just the body/mindset and the old style gear.

[Jim Adams]

It's stuff like this I think about when I get a bit depressed that I can't afford or have the lightest and best of modern gear. My stuff is decent enough, but I'm sure a bit on the heavy side of what others will have.

If people did it in the 60's and 70's with 50-70 lb packs and cotton clothes, surely I can manage.

You'll do fine...common sense is far better than new equipment.:cool:
Have fun!

geek

[max patch]

Who the hell wants 30-40 strangers around when they're in the woods?

I think most contemporary hikers do.

Maybe not 30 or 40 - thats an exaggeration -- but 6-8 (a shelter full!).

Thats why I think if you transported, say, last years successful thru hikers back to 1969 the drop out rate would be much higher than most would estimate.

[Graywolf]

I heard the old Cumberland Valley road walk at that time was nice and there were some nice places along the way too...

[Jim Adams]

I think most contemporary hikers do.

Maybe not 30 or 40 - thats an exaggeration -- but 6-8 (a shelter full!).

Thats why I think if you transported, say, last years successful thru hikers back to 1969 the drop out rate would be much higher than most would estimate.
Agree totally!...I do like the social experience.
I used to LOVE the solitude...now I find it boring at times w/o someone to share it with.:-?

geek

[Tuckahoe]

Yall do know that there were thousands of people humping gear and walking for hundreds of years before 1969?

[Sickmont]

Yall do know that there were thousands of people humping gear and walking for hundreds of years before 1969?

Yes, just ask any Roman soldier about the joys of marching and humping gear for months and years on end. Last time i checked, it is still a LONG walk from Rome to England.

[fiddlehead]

I think most contemporary hikers do.

Maybe not 30 or 40 - thats an exaggeration -- but 6-8 (a shelter full!).

Thats why I think if you transported, say, last years successful thru hikers back to 1969 the drop out rate would be much higher than most would estimate.

Sure, some people like going to the mall too.
I prefer the solitude to the crowds.
Last time I did GA, it was SOBO so, saw very few hikers, but the time before that, I remember walking by 3 shelters that were packed so full (daytime) as it was raining, and there were at least 20 inside each one.
That may be their (or your) style of hiking but is not for me.

[harryfred]

I had to think about this for a while and I can say yes.If i was 50yo in'69 with what was commonly available and the trail in the condition I can imagine in '69 I could do it. (baring illness and accident.) I just plain love to be outside and I love to walk, I love to see whats just around the next bend. I've been cold I've been wet I've gone without sleep for days Hell I've been dead:eek: and I could still do it just to see whats beyond the next bend.

[LDog]

Could it have been done in a hammock?

Well, the basic premise was "knowing what you know now."

[mweinstone]

we are talking about being placed in 1969 with money and buying gear and hiking a thruhike. so everything must be concidered. it asks if YOU could. meaning,..if you have a tattoo that says" remember 911 "you have to be ready with an answer. to thruhike with what you know now means ,...not accedentaly speaking words like ,"gortex' or "internet address" or "i wish i had a snickers with almonds and a midnight milky way".

get it? all inclusive planning here.you do so much as ask if the soda machine takes dollars and your in los alimo without a tinfoil hat. gabish?

[mweinstone]

heres my plan. since i was 9 years old back then, i got valid references like where my parents work or answers to questions like where did i learn to thruhike so well.(went to nols in the 70's but i could fake it and say my uncle is paul petzolt or some crap. then you would need certian things you would have to keep hidden. like bloodsugar monitoring junk and glucose pills. that i would keep in a false compartment i would sew into the foot of my sleeping bag. something as simple as falling and breaking a hip could land me in hospitol getting an xray that would show a prothesis i have inside me witch would be so far advansed, again,..i would be up los alimose without a foil hat with freaks probbing me analy and thinking im from the future. then they would have the simple task of useing sodium penethal and asking questions. when they would ask for proof im from the future, under sedation hypnosis,..i would prolly tell them of the location of shoemaker levey or exsplaine the hedron colider and what a bosin partical is. then they would disect me. only my choker with its single white blaze made by fishin fred would confuse them.

[mweinstone]

because of their confusion about my choker, they would watch the trail closely for years after my disection.looking for signs of timetraveling hikers. then,..in late february of the year 2011,, while coducting clandestine spying operations at the billville winter warmer, they would focus their sights on one matthewski weinstone. and in that day, i would have to step thru the wardrobe sitting in room 23 and return to narnia.

[Wil]

If people did it in the 60's and 70's with 50-70 lb packs and cotton clothes, surely I can manage.We had to wear animal skins.

As has been mentioned here, no credit cards, we had to carry phone booths with us, no dried foods, no nylon or synthetic fabrics. Backpacks themselves were tree branches latched together with vines.

Fact is, a comparable pack load in 1969 could be put together only two to three pounds heavier than today. Most people carried heavier because there was little talk of lightweight and minimalism at the time, but the tools were there.

And we were stronger hikers then because of the 10 miles every day through snow to school.

[mweinstone]

yes, you might make a popcan stove from a steel can and save weight. but would you attract attention? and what if your stove wasnt your only improvement? you could take an iv bag and some surgical tubbing and rig a bladder with a drinktube but would nasa wanna speak to you? and if you carved a spork what would happen to the timestream?! be careful!

[Mags]

In the two-volume series Rodale books, there is a very detailed gear list from 1969 by Andrew J. Gieger. His total pack weigh? 14 lbs! (page 1010..looking at it right now)

That includes a camera, a Camp Trails external frame pack (2# 13oz), a down sleeping bag at 2# 8oz, a foam pad, a Svea Stove, a poncho (doubled as a shelter), and lots other sundry items including a knife, a flashlight, waterproofing kit for boots and so on.

So, reading this list reminds me of two things:

1) Going light is really about going minimalist. Take what you need for your own comfort, safety and fun levels. True now, true in 1969, true in 2069.

2) Those uber-macho men who say they aren't light weight weenies and can carry gear like they did in the past...What past? 1913? ;)

So yeah..give me that 1969 gear list. I'd probably take a smaller knife, ditch the matches and stove, and a few minor tweaks.

Also, just to make it more interesting, he hiked from May 12 to Aug 18th. 99 days! Or a little over 20 MPD with 1969 gear. :)

Now he'd be derided for not stopping to smell the roses because he likes to walk all day. ;) (Smelling the roses = Code phrase for long lunch breaks, getting out of camp at 10am, and being in camp again by 5pm. Spending a lot of time in towns)


And a final note under the CONDITIONING heading: "I wouldn't recommend starting out to hike the entire Appalachian Trail without some kind of preparation. "

We still argue this point 40+ yrs later. ;)

So less people, a more remote feeling and a base pack weigh of ~12 lbs (perhaps less?). Yeah, I could have done the trail in 1969. :)

[Mags]

Yes, just ask any Roman soldier about the joys of marching and humping gear for months and years on end. Last time i checked, it is still a LONG walk from Rome to England.

Esp under water!:p

[earlyriser26]

See my photos. I was hiking on the AT in 1969. Even went hiking on the trail in Maine during Woodstock. I loved my Svea Optimus 8R. My favorite stove of all time. My boots still are about 5lbs each. No change since 1969 there. My attempt to hike the "wilderness" had my pack weighing in at about 90lbs.

[camojack]

could you thruhike in 1969? with what was available and with what you know now?

No. With what I know now, and I was somehow sent to 1969...I'd go to Woodstock instead. :bse

[Grampie]

It still is going to boil down to the determination factor. The equiptment doesn't matter that much. I like to believe that if you have the determination to do it you will.:-?

[the goat]

I see the solitude part of a '69 thru-hike as definitely being one of the pluses.
Who the hell wants 30-40 strangers around when they're in the woods?

apparently every weekend warrior in SNP.

this always baffles me: go visit any shelter in SNP in the fall and you will find 30 - 40 folks packed into a shelter area full of people they don't know.

so much for "getting away from it all"!:D

[Sickmont]

we are talking about being placed in 1969 with money and buying gear and hiking a thruhike. so everything must be concidered. it asks if YOU could.

In repsonse to your original question and then reading this, i would have to reply with a resounding "YES, I COULD".

[Jeff]

Not sure if hiker hostels even existed on the AT in 1969. Mr. Shaw had not opened his place to hikers at that point. Neither had Elmer in Hot Springs.

[WingedMonkey]

In 1969 I was backpacking the Mountains at Philmont Scout Ranch. First time I ever saw snow in the summer. Like the AT it wasn't so damn crowded back then. :sun

[Graywolf]

I heard somewhere in the grapevine that a guy hikes it in 1948. Dont know who he was but he wrote a great book on the journey and talked about his gear alot..

If he could do it in 1948, I'm sure 21 years later, you could do it too. ..;)

[Wil]

I heard somewhere in the grapevine that a guy hikes it in 1948Earl Shaffer. Did it again in the 1960s and again 1n 1998.

His pack frame was a version of the "Inverted T." Probably had a heavy canvas bag and the tubing was probably steel. I used a lighter weight aluminum tubing version with a gaudy green & white striped nylon bag, no waist belt. It was my go-to bag for my ultralight trips through the 1960s up until around 1985, when the shoemaker who used to sew up the bag's holes for me retired.

[fiddlehead]

Not sure if hiker hostels even existed on the AT in 1969. Mr. Shaw had not opened his place to hikers at that point. Neither had Elmer in Hot Springs.

In '77, when I first hiked, the church on the hill in Hot Springs ran a free hostel.
(and did up until about '90 I believe)
Also, there were a few fire houses that allowed hikers to sleep on their grounds.
I specifically remember Waynesboro VA, Front Royal Va, and Waynesboro PA as allowing this. The firemen seemed fascinated with the hikers and vice versa.

Of course, partying, trashing, drinking and crowds put an end to all of these places. Now, we get charged for our dis-behavior.

[Wil]

[QUOTE=Wil;1116250]Earl Shaffer ... His pack frame was a version of the "Inverted T."

I guess you can't attach pictures on this forum? Anyway I found a picture online of the WWII Mountain Troop rucksack which is probably exactly what Earl used. A really comfortable and useful pack up, great for moderate climbing and bushwhacking.

I may look at getting mine repaired. The foam in the padded shoulder straps has deteriorated also and I'd have to have new straps put on. Modern designers should look at this thing; it's a marvel (with lightweight tubing and a lightweight fabric bag replacing the original design's steel and leather/canvas.

http://www.quanonline.com/military/military_reference/american/wwii_equipment/mountain5.php

[4shot]

[QUOTE=Wil;1116250]
I guess you can't attach pictures on this forum? Anyway I found a picture online of the WWII Mountain Troop rucksack which is probably exactly what Earl used. A really comfortable and useful pack up, great for moderate climbing and bushwhacking.



this is exactly why I find the whole gear thing amusing. There were countless men who hiked across N. Africa and the European continent with gear like this, cotton uniforms and clothing plus carrying weapons and ammunition as well under combat conditions. And I can't walk from Georgia to Maine because I have Goretex boots instead of trail runners? My stove is an old MSR and not the Angel Lite Boron titanium XR2000 that is .0003 grams lighter than last year's model? Seriously?

[max patch]

The issue isn't the gear.

The issue as I see it is the days and days of solitude that todays hikers can't visualize. Hikers don't hike solo; they join up and hike in groups. Read the forums; hikers out for a weekend post and advertise for company. Read the forums; how many times have you read that the "best part of the trail is the people?"

I still believe that if you could take the successful thru's from this year, transport them back to 1969, most would fail. Different times.

[mweinstone]

what was the name of the great cobbler in hamburg all those years? was he mr wenzert? he was a friend to hikers and allways had your shoes ready fast and early and fixed right.

[4shot]

what was the name of the great cobbler in hamburg all those years? was he mr wenzert? he was a friend to hikers and allways had your shoes ready fast and early and fixed right.

Mr. Wenzert but he pronounced it WENZ-art instead of wen-ZERT if I recall, with emphasis on the first rather than the second syllable. the guy was an artist with Norwegian welt soles and was one of the more prominent cobblers in the region. Do you remember what type of tent and pack he carried on his section hikes?

[mweinstone]

a german paratroopers pack? i walked in there at 16 or 17 years old, after haveing known him a couple or three years, plopped my boots down and said id be back in the morning. he smiled, wrote me a slip, and handed me my cobb and "tobbacco" that i had left in my shoe stash. his smile said," i know you hikers better than you think and no bag of "tobbacoo" is gonna make me flinch. i took the baggie and cobb and walked out slightly impressed.and lucky.

[4shot]

a german paratroopers pack? i walked in there at 16 or 17 years old, after haveing known him a couple or three years, plopped my boots down and said id be back in the morning. he smiled, wrote me a slip, and handed me my cobb and "tobbacco" that i had left in my shoe stash. his smile said," i know you hikers better than you think and no bag of "tobbacoo" is gonna make me flinch. i took the baggie and cobb and walked out slightly impressed.and lucky.

rest of the story. Seems sly ol' Mr. WENZ-art maybe didn't return as much of your "tobacco" as you thought because I went in there shortly after you did that day. Mr. WENZ-art was eating chocolate donuts, pizza and some old gorp he got out of the hikers box down the street. 'Dark Side of the Moon" was blaring out of his 8 track stereo system. When I asked if my boots were ready, he just laughed and gave me a pair of ruby red slppers in size 6 (women's) and said there would be no charge. I left his shop and never did see my boots again. You don't have them by chance would you?

[Mags]

[QUOTE=Wil;1116263]

this is exactly why I find the whole gear thing amusing. There were countless men who hiked across N. Africa and the European continent with gear like this, cotton uniforms and clothing plus carrying weapons and

..who were also in their teens and early 20s (Pop was the 'old man' at 26!) and has the logistic support of the US Army. :)

[4shot]

[QUOTE=4shot;1116336]

..who were also in their teens and early 20s :)


imo the logistical support of the U.S. Army doesn't outweigh the mental duress of "hiking" for years under the constant threat of combat. Given my druthers, I think a thru-hike, while challenging enough, would be a cakewalk as compared to years of service in the infantry in WW 2.

[Tuckahoe]

[QUOTE=4shot;1116336]

..who were also in their teens and early 20s (Pop was the 'old man' at 26!) and has the logistic support of the US Army. :)

I think that you'd be surprised that the average age was alittle higher, with the average service age being 24-26 years of age. My maternal grandfather was drafted at 33 in 1943. So those teens and twentysomethings were certainly balanced out by a whole lotta thirtysomethings.

One thing that I think is pretty cool is how much surplused military equipment from WW1 and 2 ended up in the hands of boyscouts and outdoor enthusiast.

My M1910 tent comes in at about 4 maybe 4 1/2 pounds. The tent itself is about 3 pounds, but the set up was actually intended to be divided in half and carried by two men. M1910 canteens even today are just as serviceable and weigh about the same as any metal water bottle.

On the other hand my original 1906 manufactured wool blanket comes in at 5 pounds.

[Tenderheart]

with what was available and with what you know now?


No way!! It tood me 50 years to get up the nerve.


litefoot 2000

[pilgrim1]

crazy ? In 1969 was the trees on the trail in ever state marked with the white blaze?

[weary]

crazy ? In 1969 was the trees on the trail in ever state marked with the white blaze?
Pretty much so. The neglected maintenance during the war years had been pretty much been completed by 69.

[Mags]

imo the logistical support of the U.S. Army doesn't outweigh the mental duress of "hiking" for years under the constant threat of combat. Given my druthers, I think a thru-hike, while challenging enough, would be a cakewalk as compared to years of service in the infantry in WW 2.

Compared to the German army (which had 600k horses!) and the Soviets, the American troops did a lot less walking. Arguably General Motors, Ford with their Jeeps, bulldozers, 2.5 ton trucks and DC-3s/C-47s did more to help the US war effort than anything else (Some guy named Eisenhower said as such. ;) ) i.e logistical support


If you want to hike with cotton and canvas..go for it.

But even in the 1940s, this was not done as much as you think. :)




So those teens and twentysomethings were certainly balanced out by a whole lotta thirtysomethings.

.

But the amount of us soldiers in the infantry vs logistic support was quite skewed. Then, as now, the us military had a very large ratio of support troops to actual fighting troops. And, IIRC, the average age of the infantry solider vs logistic support was younger overall.


Having said, I'd pass on the invasion of Sicily, Anzio, southern France, Germany and liberating Dachau. :O

That's another topic though, and I'd happy to PM anyone ome raw stats if you'd like. :)

Guess the overall point, ya really can't compare the two...nor should you.


Apples and oranges. And a bit of romanticism to think otherwise.

[kayak karl]

yeah, i could have done the trail in 1969. :)
bs.........................

[LDog]

As has been mentioned here, no credit cards, we had to carry phone booths with us, no dried foods, no nylon or synthetic fabrics.

Are you forgetting the polyester double knit leisure suits some of us wore? I guess if you showed up in a shelter wearing one of those, you'd be laughed off the trail.

[LDog]

Check out page 17 on this link:

http://books.google.com/books?id=yeADAAAAMBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

[4eyedbuzzard]

The gear was heavier, and there was nowhere near the interest back then compared to now, but still quite a few people of different ages and walks of life did it. So even back then, if you had the motivation (same #1 obstacle as today), it was still just walking.

Here's a scan from Appalachian Hiker II with recorded thru-hikes from 1936 to 1970:

10238

[Pedaling Fool]

Check out page 17 on this link:

http://books.google.com/books?id=yeADAAAAMBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false
Interesting look back on history.

And again "environmentalists" are proven wrong about the thinking of how nature is fragile. From the article titled: Outting Impact -- starting on page 28.

It specifically talks about the impact of shelters on the AT (starting at the bottom of page 30).

I don't care if there's a push to remove shelters, but stop telling me that we need to because of the fragile eco-system:rolleyes:

[mweinstone]

mmmmmm....1969 bacon and related pork products...mmmmm......

[weary]

We had to wear animal skins.

As has been mentioned here, no credit cards, we had to carry phone booths with us, no dried foods, no nylon or synthetic fabrics. Backpacks themselves were tree branches latched together with vines.

Fact is, a comparable pack load in 1969 could be put together only two to three pounds heavier than today. Most people carried heavier because there was little talk of lightweight and minimalism at the time, but the tools were there.

And we were stronger hikers then because of the 10 miles every day through snow to school.
I bought my first nylon tent around 1949. Colin Fletcher in the first edition of the Complete Walker published in 1969 mentions numerous, items of nylon clothing, though he prefers either cotton or wool next to the skin as more absorbent of water. He even reports on a 2 pound, 12 ounce tent, though he thought it a bit flimsy for backpacking. My first tent weighed less than 2 pounds and I used it for years before buying a "modern" tent at 4 pounds, 8 ounces.

Gerry, then a popular outdoor gear manufacturer, published in the 60s a 21 pound gear and food list for a weeklong hike.

Wil is right. A 69 pack need only be a couple of pounds heavier than a 2011 pack.

But he fails to mention why people were better fit back then. Those 10-mile daily walks to school were uphill both ways.

[Pedaling Fool]

Check out page 17 on this link:

http://books.google.com/books?id=yeADAAAAMBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false


Interesting look back on history.

And again "environmentalists" are proven wrong about the thinking of how nature is fragile. From the article titled: Outting Impact -- starting on page 28.

It specifically talks about the impact of shelters on the AT (starting at the bottom of page 30).

I don't care if there's a push to remove shelters, but stop telling me that we need to because of the fragile eco-system:rolleyes:
I re-read the article this morning, with less tired eyes. And it's worse than I thought. I can't believe this was an article from 1973. I always thought the radical LNT principles are a recent thing. But this is every bit as stupid as LNT. It really is very much like that troll's ramblings (WisconsinHiker 2011).

One of my favorite quotes from the article:
"Even if the Appalachian Trail was closed tomorrow, it would take decades for the environment to recover its natural condition in areas around the shelters." :rolleyes::datz

I think some people just sit around and worry. They really think that if you trample grass you've hurt nature.

[russb]

As others have mentioned the gear isn't as important as what one knows. However lack of knowledge and skills can be overcome (masked?) with gear. I always chuckle a little inside when I hear "cotton kills" as it isn't the fabric but the lack of skill of the wearer which is dangerous. Fewer and fewer know how to avoid getting wet, and the resulting warning signs of hypothermia let alone what to do if one does get wet or realizes they or tothers are in beginning stages of hypothermia. The same is true with the other end of the spectrum... heat exhaustion and heatstroke. I suppose it is easier to just say "cotton kills" (does anyone have the history of this phrase?) so people with lack of skill can be safe(r). As gear becomes more idiot proof, more idiots can use it.

[mweinstone]

my list of junk not from 1969 we carry now:

cell
extra batt for cell
bag for cell
charger for cell
lanyard for cell
computer cord for cell
solar charger for cell
spot
drink tube
credit card
saveings club card
atm card
water filter
glo stix
pepper spray
male piercings
radio dog collars
extra batt for radio dog collar
wind up dog leashes
battery operated digital thermometers
brest implants
buttox implants
collegen injections
botox injections
bic lighters
ziplock bags
cordlocks
battery operated sox
extra batt for battery operated sox
chemical warming packs
chemical ice packs
bearcans
space blanket
gummy bears

[Tuckahoe]

I always chuckle a little inside when I hear "cotton kills" as it isn't the fabric but the lack of skill of the wearer which is dangerous.

Amen, Preach it brother!

[Wise Old Owl]

Buttock Implants? When did you get those Matty?:eek:




You forgot Thoios, and Thongs....

[Slo-go'en]

Although I didn't start collecting hiking gear until the mid/late 70's, it is about the same as was available in '69. I still have most of it:

Camp Trails external frame pack, 5 pound EMS "A" frame tent, SEVA 123 white gas stove and aluminum pots, 5" Buck Knife, Leather Limmer boots, Wool shirt, coated nlyon poncho.

I never did buy a 60/40 shell, would need to find one of those to go completely retro. And what ever I used for a sleeping bag back then is long gone.

[LDog]

Must not feed the trolls ...
Must not feed the trolls ...
Must not feed the trolls ...

[LDog]

And what ever I used for a sleeping bag back then is long gone.

I still have the REI down bag I bought in 1972, along with my Svea stove. I used both recently for a Ski Patrol Cold Wx Mountain Travel & Rescue course. That old bag is bulky and doesn't compress much, be she kept me warm, and the Svea fired up, melted snow and made great cowboy coffee...