Heavy Thinking with Tipi Walter

[rocketsocks]

Question---can a backpacker on an "expedition" trip carry 45 lbs of food and still be considered an ULer? Yes, their base weight is still light but what UL pack will hump 45 lbs of food?

This is exactly my mind set, I'm trying to cut weight where I can, so I can bring some things that will enhance my trips ie; paints (small pochade box), wooden native American flute, extra reading material (books) or what ever, these luxury items together don't weigh a whole lot, but cutting weight for me is a medical necessity (humping pipe on shoulders for 30+years) so to get my base weight down will help me to plan a trip where I can go farther (more food), not necessarily faster, I guess you could say "I hike to camp" each night, (don't we all), but I don't really care for the term as it suggests something other than my peers...and it's not, the only difference is the distance covered each day, but am always moving smartly forward, ever forward.

and to answer the question...Yes..and no, a ultra light pack will not handle a 45lb. load..at all.

[colorado_rob]

This is exactly my mind set, I'm trying to cut weight where I can, so I can bring somethings that will enhance my trips ie; paints (small pochade box), wooden native American flute, extra reading material (books) or what ever, these luxury items together don't weigh a whole lot, but cutting weight for me is a medical necessity (humping pipe on shoulders for 30+years) so to get my base weight down will help me to plan a trip where I can go farther (more food), not necessarily faster, I guess you could say "I hike to camp" each night, (don't we all), but I don't really care for the term as it suggests something other than my peers...and it's not, the only difference is the distance covered each day, but am always moving smartly forward, ever forward.

and to answer the question...Yes..and no, a ultra light pack will not handle a 45lb. load..at all.

But IMO "ultralight" changes definition with different requirements. Sure, a 7 oz Cuben fiber frameless pack cannot comfortably carry a 45lb load. Or at least I call BS if anyone says it can. But do you need an 8 pound pack (like tha Dana Designs Terra Plane that I used to carry) to carry 60 pounds when a 4.5 pound pack WILL carry that weight comfortably? Like the Osprey Aether 75 (like I use now to carry huge 60+ lb loads for multi-week, non-resupplied trips). I'm not claiming my Aether 75 is "ultralight" but it is 3.5 pounds lighter than the Terraplane, and I sure don't notice any difference in big-weight carry-comfort, and I've got a lot of miles on both packs. Make the Aether out of cuben fiber, trim the extras, lose the lid, get it down to sub-three pounds, and if the suspension is basically the same and it carries 60 lb just as comfortably, I'd now call it "ultralight". That's what "ultralight" is to me: getting rid of unnecessary weight. What is considered "necessary" of course varies with the individual. For myself, I carry what I need to be comfortable in reasonable conditions, and to survive in anything Mother Nature chooses to throw at me. Carry cartons of fresh eggs and a skillet? Well, might make for comfortable camping, but not so comfortable hiking.

[rocketsocks]

But IMO "ultralight" changes definition with different requirements.

That's what "ultralight" is to me: getting rid of unnecessary weight.

Well my older kelty pack weighs in at 4lb 8ox, and was replaced by the osprey exos at 2lb 8oz, for a terrific weight saving to me personally, I could have gone lighter, but this pack was a good fit for me, it wasn't just a weight saving issue, it's darn comfortable, now in a year I may just call it a dog, but not till I've giving it a fare shaking up. It's all relative to the individual.

Back to the thread question is it not the same if a ultralighter has a base weight of say 19lbs. and 1lb of water, and 30 lbs of food, now at 50 lbs, throw in winter gear to the kit, and man now your humping some gear, so are they still ultra light...yes and know, there base weight is of that on the lower end of traditional ultralight (these numbers seem to change depending on who your asking...and maybe that's the whole point) but the total pack weight has increased, both hikers start out being light weight, but one carries there food for extended stays, the other buys along the way or maybe receives drops.

If two hikers walk side by side, one carrying a small amount of food, the other carrying enough for three weeks. Hiker small food peels off the a town to shop, hiker heavy continues. small food hiker catches back up to hiker heavy, and a couple days later peels off for a town to pick up goods from the post office, and the post office is closed and won't be open till tomorrow, and now several days later catches back up to our heavy hiker getting lighter by the day. Now small food hiker peels off for a town to shop again, and the store burned done last night, they hike to a town 15 miles away, pick up supplies, and head back to meet heavy hiker getting lighter and lighter by the day, and then...several, several days later, they meet again, this continues and they both end up in the same place at the same time at the conclusion of the trip. Of coarse these are just but a couple scenarios, and way to many variables to conclude much from, but it is an interesting debate.

[colorado_rob]

Just for the record... the multi-week trips I was referring to had NO chance of any resupply whatsoever (think alaska), hence the heavy pack.

[rocketsocks]

Just for the record... the multi-week trips I was referring to had NO chance of any resupply whatsoever (think alaska), hence the heavy pack.

Got cha, didn't catch that first time round.

[Teacher & Snacktime]

Wow...I've been feeling like I've been excessive with a 7lb food bag for 2 people for 3 days.....It's nice to know that I can put back a few of the things I set aside as extravagant and still be on track weight-wise.

[Papa D]

It sure is fun to catch up with this thread - I've ran into Tipi on several occasions in Joyce Kilmer and he sure does have a complete kit that I admire. I have never "bought in" to the fast and light hysteria as he says but I do enjoy hiking fast and trail running and the satisfaction of traveling long-distance with a lightish load. I also enjoy traveling with a complete kit and getting things done in the winter, being comfortable, warm and well supplied. For me. it comes down to appropriate packing for whatever given trip one is undertaking - - if you want to travel 200 miles in a week, the kit needs to be pretty spartan - if your goal is to explore a wilderness area via several loops in wintertime over a week or two with no re-supply and assure comfort then maybe the 75+ pound pack is the way to go. There is no argument really - - different styles make our endeavor interesting.

[Wise Old Owl]

Well it is never boring... clearly this is up a notch!

[illabelle]

Here's a question for winter hiking:
We're doing a section next weekend on the AT in TN/NC. The Knoxville forecast calls for temperatures in the 60s over the next several days, expect low 50s at best in the mountains. So we're preparing for snow on the ground, maybe some snow still on the bushes. Does anybody carry anything to cut rhododendron that falls across the trail under a load of snow? I'm not really wanting to carry a machete, but neither do I want to squirm on my belly through the snow to get under the stuff. When we can we'll just walk around, but I'm thinking that may not always be easy. Is this never an issue?

[Papa D]

Here's a question for winter hiking:
We're doing a section next weekend on the AT in TN/NC. The Knoxville forecast calls for temperatures in the 60s over the next several days, expect low 50s at best in the mountains. So we're preparing for snow on the ground, maybe some snow still on the bushes. Does anybody carry anything to cut rhododendron that falls across the trail under a load of snow? I'm not really wanting to carry a machete, but neither do I want to squirm on my belly through the snow to get under the stuff. When we can we'll just walk around, but I'm thinking that may not always be easy. Is this never an issue?

you shouldn't really need anything but snow and ice does sometimes create some interesting tunneling of trails - esp in NC where everything seems to freeze up and curl in on you creating a tunnel around the trail - - you might have to step over and dodge some stuff but you won't need the machete.

[lemon b]

Thought it was discussion on 2,3 & 11 not a hijack.

[Another Kevin]

Wow...I've been feeling like I've been excessive with a 7lb food bag for 2 people for 3 days.....It's nice to know that I can put back a few of the things I set aside as extravagant and still be on track weight-wise.

Hmm. My guess is that the '3 days' has first-day-breakfast and last-night-dinner in town? Even so, that's a little on the lightweight side; 2 lb/person/day isn't that uncommon. I don't like going much lower than that because I like real food, so I'm not above carrying pouched tuna or shrimp or salmon or crab or chicken, or a dry sausage, or some real cheese, along with all the dehydrated stuff. But I'm just a clueless weekender, so you don't see me trying to tote supplies for an extended trip.

[rocketsocks]

Some people imagine I don't walk or sweat or have my butt handed to me on a regular basis by nutbuster climbs. To dispel this notion check out a recent trip report---

http://www.trailspace.com/forums/tri...30.html#128530



Everybody has their toys. Heck, I see backpackers with GPS devices which I consider totally useless dead weight and yet they love 'em. Just another toy. The $10,000 ATV and the bass boat are True Toys since they do not have to be hand-carried on your back. This simple chore greatly limits a backpacker's relationship to his toys.

My weight comes from several factors---the main one being heading out into areas which could be called wilderness where there are no resupply points and while carrying 20 days worth of food and a full winter kit. The food and fuel load alone comes to 45-50 lbs. And the only time I'm able to read a book in solitude and relaxation is when I'm out on a trip and so you add in the weight of 4 books and ZAP it builds, along with 32 to 44 ounces of white gas stove fuel.

The neat thing is, the books are burned and the food eaten and the fuel cooked and by Day 15 of the trip my pack is around 45 lbs---down from 80 lbs---and 45 lbs seems like a daypack to me and incredibly light. I still have 5 more days of food and fuel---actually 8 days of food as I like to have extra just in case I run into a problem and can't get out---so my pack is not as light as it could be. Plus, just my pack and tent together come to 16 lbs 8 oz---8 lb 10 oz tent and 7 lb 14 ounce pack. I like both and see no need for change.

So what if I start a trip with 80 lbs and only go 4 or 5 miles the first day? The corporate honchos came up with the Fast & Light campaign and the world of backpacking ate it up like the Next Great Snake Oil Elixir. The strangest thing is that now there are backpackers who don't feel genuine unless they cover 30 miles a day FAST and hump a 12 lb kit LIGHT. Question is, how many do it naturally as part of hiking their own hike, and how many do it after being bombarded and brainwashed by the Fast and Light hysteria? You know it's corporate groupthink when all a newb thinks about is starting out ultralight with a 12 lb kit. They are asking for trouble and don't even know the right questions. But it must be Ultralight at all costs. Weird.

So did anyone ever figure out just what kinda snake this is? Sorry link not working, check out Walters link to trailspace and scroll down to see snake. the first snake you come to, there are four different ones.

[Tipi Walter]

.................................................. ..................

[BillyGr]

Now if they would close the road permanently the Shenandoahs could have some peace and quiet from the roaring Harleys and screaming crotch rockets.

True - but you'd also eliminate the tasty food and drinks that so many have used during hikes (no point to having those without the people needed to make them profitable) - and eliminate an option for some that can't hike to visit some beautiful sites.

Maybe just enforcing the speeds and noise levels on vehicles would help?

[Venchka]

Colorado_rob,
Not sure which Terraplane you had. My 1994 medium size Arc Flex Terraplane weighs 6 lbs. 12 ozs. As verified recently on a digital scale. If I care to go lighter, I have the original UL frameless Jensen pack that weighs 3 lbs. 1 oz. With 4,000+ cu. In., it holds enough stuff for several days, my Pentax 6x7 and lots of film.
I tend to hang on to things that work for me. I don't chase Magic Bullets.
Have fun!

Wayne

[Luddite]

You know it's corporate groupthink when all a newb thinks about is starting out ultralight with a 12 lb kit. They are asking for trouble and don't even know the right questions. But it must be Ultralight at all costs. Weird.

12 lb kit is actually pretty heavy if it's summer. 12 lbs is a good base weight for a winter hike on the AT, in my opinion.

IMO, a 80 pound pack is asking for trouble. Have you injured yourself? I don't even think they soldiers carry that much for punishment.

[coach lou]

12 lb kit is actually pretty heavy if it's summer. 12 lbs is a good base weight for a winter hike on the AT, in my opinion.

IMO, a 80 pound pack is asking for trouble. Have you injured yourself? I don't even think they soldiers carry that much for punishment.

My Lance Corporal 0311 nephew carries 110lbs. into combat! In the desert, he was able to stay out of trouble, thank goodness.

[Luddite]

My Lance Corporal 0311 nephew carries 110lbs. into combat! In the desert, he was able to stay out of trouble, thank goodness.

I would be walking like C-3PO if I had to carry 110 pounds. That's insane! And in the desert???

[rickb]

Here is what I am thinking....

If you eat 2 lbs of food per day your average daily carry weight for food on a 5 day hike is 6 lbs:

(10 + 8 + 6 + 4 + 2) / 5 = 6 lbs per day average

To make the math easy I have assumed you eat your entire daily ration at the end of your hiking day.

But if you carry 2 lbs of food per day on a 10 day hike your average carry weight is 11 lbs.

(20 + 18 + 16 + 14 + 12 + 10 + 8 + 6 + 4 + 2) / 10 = 11 lbs per day average

So....

If you are willing to carry just an extra 5 pounds of food per day (on average), you can spend 5 more days in the woods before you are forced to break your stride and come in for resupply.

Doesn't seen so bad when you look at it that way, right?

I think Tipi is on to something. One thing is for sure, hikers resupply far more often these days that they did back in the day. :-)