PDA

View Full Version : speed hiking



Moose
05-14-2005, 10:40
i am 16 years old and am veery near earning eagle scout. Next summer, 2006 i and my friend (who is also 16), have decided to hike as much of the At northbound as we can in roughly 70 days. currently we have about 500 hiking miles undr our belt. and have done 180 miles in a straight hike at most. we are capable of 25+ miles a day with our old packs (50 lb) but now have our base weight under 10 lbs and are just getting into the cult of ultralight trekking. we calculated a rough 20-25 lb total load for 5 days and maybe less because of our rapid pace. TO ALL THRU-HIKERS do you think it will be possible to hike the Entire AT in our time constraints

rgarling
05-14-2005, 13:31
possible, but very unlikely.

chris
05-14-2005, 13:41
Yes, but unlikely. With a few exceptions (see Pony Express' 2004 AT Trailjournal at www.trailjournals.com), most speed guys are older.

The biggest problem you'll face is injury. Your young bodies are just not strong enough yet to withstand the kind of punishment that that kind of a sustained pace will deal out. Pony can do it as he runs track and cross country and has been toughening his body with other hikes (we hiked a long stretch of the PCT together).

What I would do is this. Set out from Springer and hike as far each day as you like. Try not to think about Maine. Just hike each day. If you roll along at 25 a day, great! You'll end up somewhere in Vermont. If you hit 30 a day, you'll finish.

If you are looking for a long trail that you can complete in a summer, consider the Colorado Trail, the John Muir Trail, the Long Trail, the International Appalachian Trail, or the Bruce Trail. All should be appropriate for your experience level and all can be done in a few weeks to two months time.

Pencil Pusher
05-14-2005, 18:49
Don't let anyone tell you what you can or can't do... eh, sort of. Go for it and learn.

Moon Monster
05-14-2005, 20:59
Go for it and learn.

I think if you want to be serious about this, then you need to learn as much as possible about this style of hiking before 'you go for it.'

I suggest you take the next year to seek out advice from other speed hikers. Do some research to find them. One thing you'll probably hear is that you'll very rarely need so many days of food at one time. Such a high pace will put you by food stores often.

Also, get your family doctor to refer you to a dietician for advice on how to maintain your health for this. There's waves of research coming out now about how different teenagers' metabolisms are compared to even folks in their mid-20s.

Can you afford to speed hike a couple hundred miles on the AT with resupply for this summer to get a feel for what it'd be like? Say at a 30 mile per day pace?

Mags
05-14-2005, 22:53
I think, as Chris suggested, doing a regional trail at a faster pace as a trial run may be a good idea.

It takes time to build the body up physically and mentally to handle the punishment of endurance sports. Most elite mararthon runners, bicyclists, triatheletes, etc. ( and speed hikers for that matter) tend to be in their early 30s.

Not that a person at 16 could not do a 30 MPD pace, but you may want to try a shorter trail at that pace first before attempting a 2200 mile trail at that pace.

To put it another perpsective, a fast 10km runner has to work up to be a fast marathoner.

Only you know what you are mentally and physically capapable of.

Ask questions, lighten up your pack weight as much as comfortably possible, get some hikes in, and above all else have fun no matter what choice you make. If you decide to do the AT in 70 days, keep us informed in how it turns out and we'll root for you both the whole way. :)

neo
05-15-2005, 20:23
i would choose a slower pace my self,i would do it in 110 days.i like averaging 20 miles a day:cool: neo

UCONNMike
05-15-2005, 20:40
what are you nuts! you are 16 and you have a baseweight uner 10 pounds, and you wanna do the AT in 70 days! Cripes man, or boy, that is a pretty bold schedule. I'd think this over, and be realistic, you are real young and even though you rae an eagle scout, the AT is a different ball game from ay hiking you have done. When blake and I did our shakdown hiek we had baseweight of 20 pounds and had been hiking for years, we set a schedule of 20 mile days, 25 miels days and so on thru CT and MA. We ended up doing about 15 a day, and had a whole new respect for the AT. Just take your time and figure it out, cause if you rush it and get to miles concious you will make youself open to a careless injury. Hike smarter, not Harder. The AT is an experience.

neo
05-15-2005, 21:34
do half the trail this year,and the rest next year,i have section hiked from
springer mountain to dalton mass,1554 miles from may 2001 to may 2004
my next hike is sept 2005 from dalton mass to gorham nh.:cool: neo

ImaStegasaurus
05-15-2005, 21:45
hey forget that, these pretentious old farts don't know what they're talking about.

so anyways, I'm 18 and an eagle scout too and this summer my friend (who's also an eagle scout from my troop) and I are going to go hike the AT.
And really I don't think hiking 25 miles a day is out of the question..I mean, logistically, with a light pack, if you start early in the morning and end a later in the night, and do a bit of trail running, you could go the distance. But, still, it'll be tough.
Personally, I'm a cross country runner and a track runner and on my own I do some biking. About every week I run five miles to school with my books in my Camelbak.
So, for my hike this summer, I only have like around 70 days too to hike before school starts; and so I considered hiking 25 miles a day too; but really, I decided not to push myself, to be in a rush the whole time trying to finish within a time limit. So instead, I've decided to just hike whatever I can each day and just enjoy myself and see where I end up in the Fall. And also, I'll have the rest of my life to do a thru hike..like next year.
Anyways, us young hikers gotta stick together; I'll send you my e-mail so we can keep in touch.

neo
05-15-2005, 23:13
go for it then,put your money where your mouth is,do it:cool: neo

saimyoji
05-15-2005, 23:15
neo: Don't feed the troll. :bse

Moose
05-15-2005, 23:49
u guys all have different views but i guess thanks for not shooting it down completely, i have a third person to my crew now so the community gear will be dispersed more and im working at a local ems so i believe my pack weight given my resources, sorry our pack weights, are going to be even lower, and yes i had considerred that at a fast pace wed be hiking past food places more often, i guess with the proper planning it will pan out correctly. i guess hiking the AT before i graduate high school or in other words the first time around;) is just to see if our determination will preservere in the end. and that this will put me and my 2 best friends in great shape for our fall sports obligations. we will probably do a couple of major warm ups this summer, i know the rocks in allentown pa are terrible. its funny that injury is mentioned because im more seseptable to injury in my first favorite sport (skiing) where i tore my acl and had reconstructive surgery and am going to prove to myslef that i can do everything i was able to do before it.

neo
05-16-2005, 00:37
i do 20 to 25 miles a day average on the AT,i have done a couple 30 mile days
i will be 47 in november this year,but i still would not try to do it 70 days,go for it,keep a journal,take lots of pictures,it is do able,but better not take any zero days:cool: neo

neo
05-16-2005, 00:45
check out this guy,he did the tripple crown,aproxx.7,400 miles in less than 9 months in 2001:cool: neo

http://royrobinson.homestead.com (http://royrobinson.homestead.com/)

Mushroom 96
05-17-2005, 14:42
I would say do it. Try and go as far as you want too. Just make sure your in shape before you head out so you can start doing big milage right away. In 70 days you can at least make Harpers Ferry in my view. I agree that you should talk to a dietian to figure out how to get the most calories you can. I lost a little over 45lbs when i hiked. Most days I hiked about 20-25 miles. My biggest was 36. And I didn't think Penn. was that bad at all. :-?

BookBurner
05-17-2005, 16:30
If a fast thru-hike is your passion right now, go for it! Follow your heart, not the general consensus. This trip may teach you lessons at a young age that most folks never take the opportunity to learn.

"Do not go where the path may lead. Go instead where there is no path and leave a trail ..." Emerson.

Enjoy and best of luck!

- BookBurner
www.enlightenedthruhiker.com

Highlander II
05-26-2005, 11:14
You may want to seriously consider the "communal gear" idea. Hiking paces vary, injuries occur, and sometimes people just don't get along. If you think you can be with your buddies 24/7 when you are all under the intense pressure of making miles, then maybe that's the way to go. If it were me, I'd carry all my own gear, then any issues that come up can be resolved by people going their seperate ways.

As far as milage, I don't see why it couldn't be done if you're dedicated and train for the hike starting now. But this type of hiking is not for everyone and the advice others have given to try this out before you go is very good.

neo
05-26-2005, 12:18
it can be done if you do 31.057 miles per day every day and take no zero days.
:cool: neo

Pencil Pusher
05-26-2005, 13:10
it can be done if you do 31.057 miles per day every day and take no zero days.
:cool: neo
Geek alert. Danger, danger, Will Robinson.

Dharma
05-27-2005, 10:34
Moose,
What's the difference between hiking as much of the AT as you can in 70 days and just hiking the AT for 70 days?


The AT is an experience.An experience best taken without any expectations. Just hike, let the mileage come naturally.

trip
05-27-2005, 16:04
32 miles per day is doable for much of the trail. The exceptions, in my mind are: (1) when you start, unless you've done a lot of pre-conditioning; (2) the stretch from Pinkham Notch, New Hampshire to Rangeley, Maine, since it's the most strenuous on the trail; and (3) trying to do 32 miles per day constantly may be too physically and mentally demanding for you; it is for most people.

For most of the trail you won't need 5 days food, at that pace, except for: the 5 days getting to Killington / Inn at the Long Trail, in Vermont, and the 5 days getting to Rangeley / Caratunk / wherever you resupply in southern Maine.

The problem with averaging 32 miles a day is a tricky one: you don't want to carry a tarp/tent since it increases pack weight, but that means you'll have to stay in shelters, if it's raining. People will pick on you if you don't have a tent; they say you're unprepared. I did a thru-hike in 96 days w/o a tent, and only had problems 3 nights (and all of those nights I found shelter). But if you have to stay in shelters, you're dependent on their location, which means you frequently have to do longer or shorter days (26 - 37 miles, is standard).

I suppose the things to do are: get your pack weight optimal; find the best shoes and gear; get someone to supply you along the way by car. Also, consult with someone who knows the location of all good food stops along the trail. The tendency is to carry too much food, which -- while better than starving -- slows you down.

It seems that if you go by a fixed schedule, you might not enjoy the trail as much. If it were me, I'd try to do the trail (it is possible), but don't force yourself to follow a pre-written date/location sheet. If you wanna hike farther or not as far, and you can afford to break your deadlines, it will make your lives much more enjoyable. Also, if you get injured, take a break. Don't destroy your knees, e.g., and have to feel it for the rest of your life.

I hiked the trail in ninety-six days, when not trying to set any speed records, and it would be very conceivable for me to drop off ten of those days just by starting off in good thru-hiking shape with the right gear. Needless to say, I was going ultralite ... have you trimmed your backpack straps to get rid of that .2oz? I know I have (and isn't it silly?).

BookBurner
05-27-2005, 16:24
Moose, I understand the difference between hiking the AT in 70 days and hiking the AT for 70 days. If you do too, go for it! As another responder recently wrote, why doesn't anyone get grief for waking up at 9:00 and only hiking 7 miles a day? A fast hike and a slow hike provide two totally different types of experiences. Neither one is objectively better than the other. They're simply different.

Anyway, I suggest you read Ray "Wall" Greenlaw's book about his record setting hike of the PCT (available at www.gossamergear.com). It will give you a good idea about the relentless pace, mental endurance, and physical toll that a speed thruhike requires. And oh yeah, the lifelong joy of a difficult goal realized!

Good luck -

BookBurner
www.enlightenedthruhiker.com

Mags
05-27-2005, 17:21
The problem with averaging 32 miles a day is a tricky one: you don't want to carry a tarp/tent since it increases pack weight, but that means you'll have to stay in shelters, if it's raining. People will pick on you if you don't have a tent; they say you're unprepared.
And they are correct. Hiking without any shelter is irresponsible. With a 5x8 tarp weighing 7.5 ounces, there is no reason to not carry shelter. Take a silynlyon poncho (very do-able on the AT), and your overall gear weight is even less.

My base packweight is sub-10lbs, with an 8x10 silnylon tarp.

Besides irresponsible, it is rude to expect people to make space in a shelter just because you do not have any kind of shelter of your own. Shelters suck anway. Noisy, crowded, not always spaced conveniently mileage wise.

Finally, try hiking out west without any kind of shelter. I suspect you may be in a for a bit of a shock. :)

Sorry to be so harsh, but telling somone to not carry any kind of shelter is not good advice.

Moon Monster
05-28-2005, 11:39
^ I totally agree with Mags here. It's irresponsible, not simply unprepared. And this responsibility is to yourself, of course.

Another reason to not shelter often with this style of hike is that you may hit a shelter at the end of the day, but if you weren't restricted to staying there, then you might hike as little as another half hour and get another 1-2 miles for the day. Also, there will be days on which when you feel much better than other days for some reason, and on a whim at the end of the day, you could go further rather than being restricted to shelter distances.

trip
05-28-2005, 14:43
Is it irresponsible to not carry a tarp? Everyone who said so on the trail was the kind of guy who wouldn't make room for me in a shelter if it's raining. "Irresponsible" is just a made-up word (are you carrying a Satellite phone?). But is it a risk? Yes. You can offset this risk by carrying a large rain poncho that can double as an emergency tarp. Exactly what is enough shelter is a question for a different forum.

If you are crazy and don't bring a tarp (like me), then you need to plan your day better. That is, plan out what you're gonna do if it's raining and that shelter you get to at 7pm is "full". As a side benefit, if you get to a "full" shelter, and you decide to hike on to the next one, then you are fortunate to not have to spend any time with those guys who refused to make room for you anyway.

Mags
05-30-2005, 22:28
Is it irresponsible to not carry a tarp? You can offset this risk by carrying a large rain poncho that can double as an emergency tarp. Exactly what is enough shelter is a question for a different forum.


Dude, that's what we said. You advocated not carrying any shelter. Now you are saying carrying a poncho...just like I said. Sheesh.

Anyway, again, why use shelters? Forget they are noisy. Forget they are crowded. Why would you want to restrict your mileage to something set by other people?

Is the whole goal of a hike to merely go from shelter to shelter?

trip
05-31-2005, 13:06
Dude, that's what we said. You advocated not carrying any shelter. Now you are saying carrying a poncho...just like I said. Sheesh.

I said "you don't want to carry a tarp/tent since it increases pack weight". I also said "You can offset this risk by carrying a large rain poncho that can double as an emergency tarp."

Those are both statements of fact; neither of them is an opinion or recommendation. We would prefer not to carry extra weight, and we can carry ponchos if we are worried about being shelterless. What shelter option is the best? I did not make a claim about that.

But back to the real question: What is responsible for you? Some people say you need to carry a tent. Some say a poncho. Some say a raincoat. Some say nothing at all. There is no universal notion of "responsible" for what gear to bring, and anyone who tells you otherwise is irresponsible^^. Every option requires thought, and none are worth dismissing without consideration.

Mags
05-31-2005, 13:55
If you carry no shelter on a outdoor trip you are not prepared. Anything else is naivety on your part.

Sorry, I did the debate team in high school. :) No more to add from me. If you add any more comments, feel free!. You win. Congrats! :D

Ender
05-31-2005, 17:35
As a side benefit, if you get to a "full" shelter, and you decide to hike on to the next one, then you are fortunate to not have to spend any time with those guys who refused to make room for you anyway.

OK, I'll make room for whoever somes along, but if a shelter really is full, why should those people be forced to add another person just because that person didn't think to bring something to keep the rain off of them while sleeping? Or more accuratly, decided that other hiker's nighttime discomfort was worth their daytime comfort. I'm all for helping other people, but I'm not for people who help themselves at the expense of others, even in small degrees.

Anyway, as far as a 70 day thru, yeah, you could do it, but would you really want to? Go out there to enjoy yourself and hike as far as you want each day. And if that gets you all the way through to the end, then there you go. Good times. But if that gets you only half way, well then, there you go. Good times.

In other words, no matter what you do, you'll probably have a great time, and learn a heck of a lot about yourself.

ARambler
05-31-2005, 22:11
While theoretically possible, this hike has virtually no statistical chance of being completed. So, it is easy for me to ask the question, what are worse reasons for planning a 70 day thru hike? Seems lack of time and lack of experience (of fast multi-week hikes) are the only drivers of this goal. Why not plan a challenging goal, rather than an unrealistic goal even with the proposed sacrifices in safety and enjoyment?
ARambler

neo
05-31-2005, 23:19
this what i carry when i really wanna go light,neo


http://trailquest.net/dlgctacomatarp.html

jersey joe
05-31-2005, 23:49
Hey, didn't some guy hike the trail in forty sumpthin' days? Heck the way I look at it you can do it in 70 and have 20 zero days... :)

Lone Wolf
06-01-2005, 06:36
48 days. He didn't run either.

Jaybird
06-01-2005, 07:31
i am 16 years old and am veery near earning eagle scout. Next summer, 2006 i and my friend (who is also 16), have decided to hike as much of the At northbound as we can in roughly 70 days. currently we have about 500 hiking miles undr our belt. and have done 180 miles in a straight hike at most. we are capable of 25+ miles a day with our old packs (50 lb) but now have our base weight under 10 lbs and are just getting into the cult of ultralight trekking. we calculated a rough 20-25 lb total load for 5 days and maybe less because of our rapid pace. TO ALL THRU-HIKERS do you think it will be possible to hike the Entire AT in our time constraints


i LOVE your enthusiasm...but, doubt your true hiking ability.

even with an "ultra-lite" attitude...the TRAIL will eat you alive...if you're NOT prepared....

i've seen plenty "20-somethings" that start the A.T. with 25+mile days in mind...only to quit the trail by NEEL's GAP....30 miles later...

the "S" on the chest fades quickly...when you arent prepared!

with all of that said...good luck in your attempt. :D

Aesop
06-01-2005, 07:50
48 days. He didn't run either.Hey LW,
Do you know who did that?

Lone Wolf
06-01-2005, 07:57
Pete Palmer.
http://www.extremeultrarunning.com/palmer.htm

The Solemates
06-01-2005, 09:33
theres an article in this months Backpacker Mag that talks of a guy who is attempting to record hike the PCT soon. i forget his name...

The Solemates
06-01-2005, 09:34
i LOVE your enthusiasm...but, doubt your true hiking ability.

even with an "ultra-lite" attitude...the TRAIL will eat you alive...if you're NOT prepared....

i've seen plenty "20-somethings" that start the A.T. with 25+mile days in mind...only to quit the trail by NEEL's GAP....30 miles later...

the "S" on the chest fades quickly...when you arent prepared!

with all of that said...good luck in your attempt. :D

this is funny...but true.

i would say unless you are an experienced long-distance hiker, youre chances are slim. possible, yes, but it takes a different breed and experience helps more than physical toughness.

chris
06-01-2005, 09:40
theres an article in this months Backpacker Mag that talks of a guy who is attempting to record hike the PCT soon. i forget his name...

That would be David Horton, the former AT speed record guy. He's being supported up the trail with a full crew, so his attempt shouldn't be compared with Wall's or Flyin' Brian's hikes. He is setting out from Mexico in a few days.

jersey joe
06-01-2005, 09:52
Do you know if David will be posting updates anywhere on the web where we can follow his progress?

Lone Wolf
06-01-2005, 09:52
Horton's PCT attempt http://www.extremeultrarunning.com/pct_record/index.htm

jersey joe
06-01-2005, 09:53
Damn that was fast L. Wolf...Thanks!