What's your opinion on this base weight/upgrade?

[GreenBlaze]

I've got my base weight down to 20lb 14.5oz. When I add food/water/fuel it'll go up to 31lbs. If I upgrade my shelter and pack I can save ~5lbs, but at a cost of about $500. My pack is an Osprey Atmos 65 AG, which carries extremely well, but what's your opinion on a 5lbs difference? Do you think I would notice it?

[capehiker]

If this was my scenario, yes I would make the changes. 5 pounds is a significant enough change in pack weight. If it's the issue of paying $500 to do so, then look at the rest of your kit. If you have a 20 pound base weight, then I guarantee you there are other places to shed weight before dropping the big bucks. Perhaps you can look at the rest of your set-up and leaving your pack for last?

[4eyedbuzzard]

Well, lets say you can save maybe 1 to at most 2 lbs on the pack weight itself at a cost of maybe $150 or so? But that's a comfortable pack. You're still going to be carrying 25 + lbs. A nice suspension and comfortable carry are a good thing - worth an extra pound or so in weight carried.

I'd more investigate saving that other 3 lbs on the shelter for the other $350.

Just a thought.

And look at all the other stuff as well . . .

[MuddyWaters]

A good pack will make 40 feel lighter than a poor pack will at 30.

Choose the wrong pack just to save wt and yes, you can end up less comfortable.

[Gambit McCrae]

I would say carrying 31 lbs would constitute posting a full kit list, itemized and a picture of it all spread out organized would help for people to say "leave this out, cut this in half" kind of thing. Now I have spent some money, and yes my pack weight base is about 10-12 lbs. But it can be done with a lot less $$$.

[Odd Man Out]

Is the gear you are replacing good enough to have some resale value? If so the net cost may be less.

[garlic08]

You can also look at lower cost replacements, though you may lose less weight. My Tarptent cost just over $200 and I got my Gossamer Gear pack on sale for under $90. Those two items together weigh under 2.5 pounds and are very comfortable and durable. In my case, I waited until I needed replacements anyway, and those items were cheaper than heavier gear, so I actually saved money getting lighter. Then I got a few bucks selling used gear, too.

In my experience, the only place it's worthwhile to spend a lot of money to get light weight is a high quality down sleeping bag. But if you spend a lot of time outdoors that turns out to be an excellent "investment" anyway, regardless of weight concerns.

I have seen poor results from hikers who replace the pack first with a lighter model. They save two or three pounds, but end up cramming 40 pounds after a resupply into pack designed to comfortably carry 30. You don't want to be that person. Before you buy an ultralight pack, your base weight should probably be in the 15 pound range, allowing room for ten pounds of food and some water in the pack.

[bigcranky]

I'd look for a lighter tent, first, and save the pack replacement for later.

I guarantee that you'll notice a two or three pound difference in your full pack weight over the course of a day. I certainly do.

[colorado_rob]

I would say carrying 31 lbs would constitute posting a full kit list, itemized and a picture of it all spread out organized would help for people to say "leave this out, cut this in half" kind of thing. Now I have spent some money, and yes my pack weight base is about 10-12 lbs. But it can be done with a lot less $$$.

All of this.

Curiously, and many would disagree, but dropping 5 pounds form a 20 pound base weight would be more noticeable than dropping 5 pounds from a 15 pound base weight. When your pack weight drops enough, your pack just simply becomes practically unnoticeable, assuming you have a well fitted pack. So yeah, find a way to drop 5 pounds or so.

I also agree there are free or cheap ways of doing this. Couple of examples: Nalgene bottles. Got those? Lose them. they are heavy. One can save a pound just by replacing 3 Nalgenes with 3 Gatorade bottles, with absolutely zero loss of function. Tent footprint? Why? Useless. If you disagree and just have to have one, get a piece of polycro and save some ounces (and $$$).

Knives? Why? A tiny 0.7 ounce swiss knife is all you'll ever need on the trail. Why do folks carry bigger knives? What would they ever do with them? (unless you need to clean fish or whittle). Heavy fleeces? A 10 ounce synthetic insulation jacket will save a good fraction of a pound (my old fleece is 24 ounces). But of course 10 ounce synthetic jackets will cost a few bucks, maybe 100 on sale.

And there are plenty of very nice, supportive, 2-3lb packs out there in the 50L range for about 150 bucks. Some current threads list a few fine ones. MW makes a good point; make sure any lightweight pack you choose is also comfy and supportive. Avoid a true UL pack (less than, say, 1.5 pounds) unless you get your base down below 10, then can you go with a UL pack.

[Gambit McCrae]

^^^
All good info

I wont go into a price and weight metric but for myself..
ULA Circuit
Tarptent Strato2
exped syn7 UL LW
Montbell 15* UL Down

That's the big 4 for my most popular kit but can shave all of that down to even light but a lot of comfort gots right out the window
Osprey Hornet
Sleep in a shelter
Synmat UL7
WM Highlite

That second kit brings down bas weight to about 4 lbs for big 4. I hiked Clingmans Dome to Davenport Gap with a 12 LBS kit. h2o, food, everything. Pretty much the picture below (-) the Tarptent Strato2 I was Carrying on the trip in that picture

IMG_2668.JPG

[Slo-go'en]

I've found 20 pounds is my tipping point. If my total load on my back is over 20 pounds I find it a lot more noticeable then if it's under 20 pounds. When it's under 20 pounds it generally means I'm almost out of food.

My base weight for spring/fall is in the 17-18 pound range, so it doesn't take much to get it over 20 pounds with some food and water. But so long as the pack doesn't get much over 25 pounds leaving town, it's not too bad.

With a 21 pound base weight (rounded up a little) you'll be pretty close to 30 leaving town and that's getting to be a pretty heavy load. Do what ever it takes to get well under 20 pounds and you'll be happy you did.

[mankind117]

Just get out and hike and stop worry about your base weight, 20 lbs is not crazy and 3 or 4 pound pack that is comfortable is better than a 1 pound pack that can't carry the load properly, you will figure out what you don't need with experience.

[Puddlefish]

Depends on your finances, $100 per pound is at least easily measurable. I've seen instances of people spending $100 to save an ounce, I think they're nuts (well, at least a lot richer than I am.)

[Gambit McCrae]

Just get out and hike and stop worry about your base weight, 20 lbs is not crazy and 3 or 4 pound pack that is comfortable is better than a 1 pound pack that can't carry the load properly, you will figure out what you don't need with experience.

If this was the only response the OP would feel that his attempt to better his hiking situation would be a mute point. He asked for feedback on improving his weight, not for anyone's opinion on if his attempt is relevant or not.

[Dogwood]

If this was my scenario, yes I would make the changes. 5 pounds is a significant enough change in pack weight. If it's the issue of paying $500 to do so, then look at the rest of your kit. If you have a 20 pound base weight, then I guarantee you there are other places to shed weight before dropping the big bucks. Perhaps you can look at the rest of your set-up and leaving your pack for last?

I would say carrying 31 lbs would constitute posting a full kit list, itemized and a picture of it all spread out organized would help for people to say "leave this out, cut this in half" kind of thing. Now I have spent some money, and yes my pack weight base is about 10-12 lbs. But it can be done with a lot less $$$.

You can also look at lower cost replacements, though you may lose less weight. My Tarptent cost just over $200 and I got my Gossamer Gear pack on sale for under $90. Those two items together weigh under 2.5 pounds and are very comfortable and durable. In my case, I waited until I needed replacements anyway, and those items were cheaper than heavier gear, so I actually saved money getting lighter. Then I got a few bucks selling used gear, too.

...place it's worthwhile to spend a lot of money to get light weight is a high quality down sleeping bag. But if you spend a lot of time outdoors that turns out to be an excellent "investment" anyway, regardless of weight concerns.

I have seen poor results from hikers who replace the pack first with a lighter model. They save two or three pounds, but end up cramming 40 pounds after a resupply into pack designed to comfortably carry 30. You don't want to be that person. Before you buy an ultralight pack, your base weight should probably be in the 15 pound range...

I like these points. I will strongly point out Capehiker's bold comment again. By the act of appropriately leaving "stuff" out of a nearly 21 lb kit you lose wt too! And, it cost no money with new gear purchases. Astonishingly simple, eh? It does require some thought beyond shopping though. Don't get hung up on solely reducing kit wt by buying. Don't fall back into being trapped by the entrenched cultural norms that money, shopping, or more is the best or only approach to satisfaction. These norms can be observed being played out in the hiking world too especially by gear junkies and UL fanatics. Light wt, UL, etc are much corrupted marketing labels. Saving wt hauled is more than saving gear wt too! Consider this. 1/3 of your wt hauled is consumable wt. Have you considered tactics, techniques, and strategies that can reduce consumable wt! Most folks don't think about that especially when entrenched in those cited cultural tendencies relegating themselves to not thinking more broadly beyond buying something. In short, hit the wt saving goals wisely in a timely manner from various aspects not just by narrowly reducing gear wt or spending currently questionable sums of do re mi on new gear when perhaps wt saving solutions exist already that do not require a $500 investment.

Everyone has their comfort level when it comes to spending money to save weight. Everyone is not on the same weight saving trajectory either. For you, making some assumptions about where you have evolved so far as a hiker and with this 31 lb load, it's my guess saving 5 lbs and saving, I would guess mass/volume, will be noticeable for you. Saving 5 lbs at a $500 cost comes out for you at spending $100 for each pound saved. That's quite a nice gear wt savings for $500 especially if you do it as Garlic said he did. He did it as his skills and knowledge and conditioning were commensurate with the appropriately replaced newer lower wt gear as old gear wore out. If you continue lowering the wt of your haul you'll likely find the gear wt savings payback will be increasingly less for the same amount of money.

[DuneElliot]

I would say carrying 31 lbs would constitute posting a full kit list, itemized and a picture of it all spread out organized would help for people to say "leave this out, cut this in half" kind of thing. Now I have spent some money, and yes my pack weight base is about 10-12 lbs. But it can be done with a lot less $$$.

I second this. Post a full list.

[Venchka]

I recently made yet 2 more visits to my local Osprey dealers. The first stop involved an Aether 60 pack loaded with about 20 pounds. I spent about an hour roaming around the REI store. I basically forgot that the pack was there. However, I know for a fact that I'll never go anywhere where I need an Aether 60 with a 20 pound load. I feel that the test was somewhat inconclusive. The next time I test drive the Aether 60 I will load it up much heavier.
I then went to the other Osprey dealer nearby. This time I selected the Atmos 65 AG and asked the young lady to "load it up." I got the pack on and adjusted it and again wandered around the store for about an hour. I could tell that the pack was heavier than the pack I tried at REI. It didn't feel overly heavy. Everything fit nicely. When it was time to go, I took the pack off. YIKES! She had indeed loaded it up. Approximately 47 pounds. I had no idea when the Atmos was on my back that it was that heavy. For once, the marketing hype, Anti Gravity, seemed to actually work. I was encouraged. Maybe I had found a suitable replacement for my 6 pound 12 ounce Load Monster Terraplane. In fact, I may go back with my real gear and see if the Atmos 50 AG will hold my stuff.

What's your point Wayne? While the Atmos packs are heavier than some of the Super Wonder UL packs around, finding a pack that fits me and handles any reasonable load (winter gear, snowshoes, etc.) is probably worth the extra pound or two. If I owned an Atmos 65 AG and it worked for me, I would replace it last. Look at anything you can leave at home. The easiest & least expensive weight loss plan. Then I would look at my sleeping bag and tent as places to save weight. I already replaced my sleeping bag saving about 1 1/2 pounds. Next in line would be a new tent. I reckon I can save another 1 to 2 pounds over my present 4 pound tent. Last up might be a new pack. My current 2 pack inventory weighs 2.5 and 6 .75 pounds respectively. As long as I can use the 2.5 pound pack I'm good to go. If I can find a sub-4 pound pack that equals the comfort of the Terraplane, I might buy it.
Next Test Drive: ULA Catalyst in June.
ps: The so called hip belt pockets on the Atmos AG packs are useless. Added weight, complexity and cost that serve no functional purpose whatsoever.
Good luck in reducing your weight.

Wayne

[colorado_rob]

Someone opened a thread about this pack a couple days ago, can't find it right off, but here's the pack:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00ZHV3E1E/...9cd7c44aa01e_S

Sure looks good for $70, a less than 3 lb 50L pack, looks like it has stuff people like. If you don't like it, Amazon has a great return policy, they even give you your money back instantly (you just have to mail the item back within a certain period).

Just food for thought. Save over 2 pounds for $70, probably a decent pack, good reviews on Amazon, at least. If I didn't have about a dozen packs already, I'd consider this one myself.

Just an example of bargain packs out there. Some will say, and I tend to agree, spend the extra $$$ for excellent gear (like the ULA Circuit everyone loves), but if you're a bargain hunter, this is an example.

[DuneElliot]

Someone opened a thread about this pack a couple days ago, can't find it right off, but here's the pack:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00ZHV3E1E/...9cd7c44aa01e_S

Sure looks good for $70, a less than 3 lb 50L pack, looks like it has stuff people like. If you don't like it, Amazon has a great return policy, they even give you your money back instantly (you just have to mail the item back within a certain period).

Just food for thought. Save over 2 pounds for $70, probably a decent pack, good reviews on Amazon, at least. If I didn't have about a dozen packs already, I'd consider this one myself.

Just an example of bargain packs out there. Some will say, and I tend to agree, spend the extra $$$ for excellent gear (like the ULA Circuit everyone loves), but if you're a bargain hunter, this is an example.

Thanks for the link. I've been hunting for something like this for a friend who is on a tight budget. Looked at the SMD Fusion that's currently on sale, but this pack might be better for him (cost and size). They have a slightly larger 65L one which has looks to have a great adjustable torso on it which would be even better, but slightly heavier

[brendathompson71]

That is such a personal thing, I would say it has to do with how much money you have, how many miles you want to do a day and your health. for me 5 lbs can make a word of difference... think about when your walking with your water about empty and right after you fill your water... I sure can feel the difference after I fill my water.