poles

[strollingalong]

It seems like a majority of people use them from the vids/pics I see... I've never used them. Should I get them for the AT?
Didn't use them on a 5 week 500 mile hike, but that wasn't anything like the ups and downs of the AT....

[Alpine Jack]

You've invited the avalanche of opinions.

I say yes, use them with a heavier pack (35lbs +). Strain will be less on the knees going downhill, stability will be achieved over high water/snow/ice crossings, and they can also double as tent/tarp poles to save weight.

[strollingalong]

I'm leaning towards them, though I still like the idea of just a walking stick... I used a very light but incredibly sturdy purpose crafted stick for the 500 miler

[Lone Wolf]

It seems like a majority of people use them from the vids/pics I see... I've never used them. Should I get them for the AT?
Didn't use them on a 5 week 500 mile hike, but that wasn't anything like the ups and downs of the AT....

i've hiked 16,000 miles on the AT and never used them. i personally don't see the need for them

[strollingalong]

i've hiked 16,000 miles on the AT and never used them. i personally don't see the need for them

glad to hear that as though ideally I would like just a stick, good to hear you've not done any damage without ski poles

[Spokes]

Six of one, half dozen of the other. My vote is yes.

Most people adjust them too high then wonder why their neck and shoulder muscles get sore by the end of the hike. Set the length a tad lower than "arms parallel" on level ground then fine tune the pole placement as you hike along. You'll be happily surprised.

Cheers!

[Buzz Saw]

I hated mine first time out thought my wife was trying to torture me. Now would not leave the trail head without them. I vote YES take them.

[Serial 07]

i'd take hiking poles...they will provide more comfort going up and coming down some of the crazy slopes you'll see out there...while not necessary for success, i have found that they are worth it...

[bigcranky]

Try the first 30 miles northbound and see what you think. You can buy a pair at Neels Gap if you want them.

We have met a lot of hikers who thought they didn't want poles who ended up getting them there.

[wvgrinder]

I never considered using them until my knee went out on me this summer in Vermont. Now, I will never consider hiking without them.

[Phreak]

I use them on all my hikes unless I'm doing really low mileage and then I'll usually leave 'em at home. Its a personal preference.

[Iceaxe]

I used converted ski poles before my first LD hike.
Then at mile 165 on the PCT I got the chance to buy them.. a new shiny red pair of Leki Makalu's.. yea I totally bought into it, hook, line, and sinker, and now I rarely hike without them.
It was funny while on a road walk section into Pie town when a couple stopped and asked me if: "them ski poles really help on flat ground?"
I realize it is mostly a habit now.
They are helpful on muddy or icy trail and during river crossings to steady myself.
I use them on hills and on flat snow with baskets.. and of course I use them to set up my shelter.
But mostly they spend their time lashed to my pack. Looking REALLY cool.
Yes, I am a total dork.. but I didn't get shocks!
So I am a shock-less dork.
They are my 1 lb shelter poles and sometimes trekking poles.. poles.
But they are so red and shiny...

[Spokes]

Previous studies have indicated using poles do help decrease load stresses associated with hiking. However a recent study conducted by the United States Sports Academy Academy found no benefit between standard poles, anti-shock poles, or no pole use.

Interestingly, a thesis presented by Sunny Blue Atchison, found "the use of hiking poles increases the physiological demand for fit, recreational hikers during uphill hiking at self selected speeds without increasing RPE" (rate of perceived exertion). In other words, poles make you work harder physically but trick you into thinking your not.

I still use mine.

[Elder]

[QUOTE=Spokes;1093698]Previous studies have indicated using poles do help decrease load stresses associated with hiking. However a recent study conducted by the United States Sports Academy Academy found no benefit between standard poles, anti-shock poles, or no pole use.



]

This study was on the reduction of impact on the feet. It does not address the reduction of shock on the upper body, arms and shoulders. The study only says the reduction of stress and impact on your feet are equal.
They also did not address the average 6 percent fewer footsteps per mile for two pole users. Accounted by a slightly longer, more relaxed stride, and no up/down hestation steps. YMMV. Usually up.

And Yes, I am the Leki rep.

For lots more information try www.Leki.com

[emerald]

Borrow or rent a pair and try them out on uneven terrain. I'd guess most people who choose to carry them find them most helpful when descending or fording.

[fredmugs]

In a study I conducted alone with numbers pulled completely out of my @$$ I have concluded that using hiking poles takes up to 20% of the workload off of your legs while climbing.

They are also great for slowing yourself on steep descents and balancing yourself when that is required. You can use them for setting up hammocks, tarps, etc.

I have also found that when you are on long boring flat stretches you can use them like a metronome.

The only time I do not recommend hiking poles is while summiting Katahdin.

[Sickmont]

All i know is when i was younger i used to hike all over the water gap without 'em, but as of the last few years i find the bigger the distance i hike the more my hips will start to hurt without poles. So, yeah, i'm a user.

[Spokes]

Previous studies have indicated using poles do help decrease load stresses associated with hiking. However a recent study conducted by the United States Sports Academy Academy found no benefit between standard poles, anti-shock poles, or no pole use.

............
They also did not address the average 6 percent fewer footsteps per mile for two pole users. Accounted by a slightly longer, more relaxed stride, and no up/down hestation steps. YMMV. Usually up....

....

Yes, the US Sports Academy study specifically addressed load stress reduction. Interestingly there was NO differences found.

The stride information mentioned comes from the Knight and Caldwell study conducted in 2000 titled "Muscular and metabolic costs of uphill backpacking: are hiking poles beneficial?". The findings were generally complimentary.

It investigated the potential use of hiking poles to reduce stress imposed by heavy backpack weights. Five male and five female regular backpackers were recruited for the study. They each walked on a treadmill for one hour set to a 5% incline while wearing a pack carrying 30% of their body mass. The speed was set to achieve between 55-65% of their age-adjusted heart rate maximum.

The results:

- Stride length increased 6.7%
- Stride frequency decreased 6.3%

however,

- Mean heart rate increased significantly
- The rate of perceived exertion was significantly lower

The greater body of evidence makes it hard to deny that using hiking poles increases physiological responses (heart rate, oxygen consumption, energy cost, etc) while only making the hiker "perceive" they exert less.

I still use mine.

Cheers!

[WI_Mike]

All these posts deal with poles or no poles, it seems.

What about 2 poles vs. 1 pole (or a hiking stick/staff)?

[strollingalong]

thanks, Mike. That was one of my original questions. I guess not that many people use them on the AT?

I loved hiking with one for 500 miles. It felt more natural, could use it as a mini-pole vault for small streams, great for decents and large boulders, leaned on it for a rest, carry stuff on it like a hobo, you can spin it round when you're bored, fend off dangerous dogs (a regular occurance!) and anything else, keep the gypsy kids at a distance (kidding)