Truth in gear weight?

[theoilman]

Does any company advertise their true "pack weight"?

For example I bought a sleeping bag, advertised as 2# 1 oz. I put it on the scale, it weighed 2# 5.4oz (in the cinch sack it came in). They must be advertising the weight of just the bag itself without the sack. But the real pack weight includes the sack!

Another example: Sawyer Squeeze filter system advertises pack weight of 3 oz. The bare filter dry actually weighs 3.4 oz, but when you add just the 2 smaller bags it is up to 5 oz., and after using when having residual water is about 6 oz.

The few I have checked are ALL under! Has anyone bought anything that was accurate?

I just wish they would advertise their real pack weight, not the bare, stripped down, that's not the way you carry or use it numbers.

[sbhikes]

I don't pack my sleeping bag in the stuff sack, so why should it count in the weight? You can always buy a lighter stuff sack or go without, too.

Another thing you should keep in mind that I learned recently (about making jeans anyway, maybe this isn't true for gear, but maybe it is) is that when they cut the pattern out of the fabric they use machines that can cut several layers at a time. Not all the layers will be exactly the same size when cut on a machine this way. That explains why cheap blue jeans might vary in size because they'll usually cut as many layers as the machine is capable of, thus getting a wider variation. If they do the same thing for cutting pattern pieces for backpacks or other things this might explain some of the minor variations in weight. Plus they might use different sources for plastic buckles, webbing and things, also adding to the variation in weight.

[Hoofit]

Very Strange............... -now you know Oilman, it's all in the geans!!!!!
Hey, with the obsessive demand for ultralight, sales are sometimes defined by their weight. Sad but true.
And with all the fat chicks on the trail, if they just lost forty pounds before they left, they would be carrying that pack for free - weightwise....

[Hoofit]

Just to clarify,
That's no slight on you 'sbhikes', just seems to be such a crazy desire for everyone to drop ounces when a lot of people are carrying loads of extra pounds around their gut...

[Raul Perez]

Depends on your packing style. I almost NEVER use the provided stuff sack. I tend to re-package items in lighter bags or consolidate clothes and sleeping systems into cuben dry bags. Consolidating the items in the end results in less weight with individual stuff sacks.

Other people just tend to cram everything in the pack with a pack liner (another way of consolidating).

But I've found that Montbell w/o the stuff sack is basically on point. Warbonnet's top quilts and under quilts have also been really close (off by maybe .2oz)

[garlic08]

All the stuff I've bought has been very close when I check it, within 1/2 oz either way, often lighter. I usually buy from the smaller companies like Gossamer Gear and Tarptent, which are owned by hikers who actually use the gear they sell. And I don't use the stuff sacks that are shipped with gear, either. Things fit in my pack better if they're just shoved in.

[daddytwosticks]

Quite possibly your scale could be off?

[skinewmexico]

I'll echo Garlic. The stuff I get from cottages companies (which is almost everything) is either right on, or right under weight. And you can lose all the stuff sacks and save a shocking amount of weight. Ziplock bags work well.

And yes, most people could lose weight off their middle. Stop reminding us, it's depressing. Easier to buy lighter gear!