Heavy Thinking with Tipi Walter

[Train Wreck]

Foot rotating within footwear sounds like the bad combination of a heel that's too thick and an upper that's not stiff enough. It may also be a matter of the heel cup not fitting correctly. With a low and less wide heel, a shoe rotating about the foot is unlikely to happen. This is a part of shoe education.

Education is what this thread is about, or rather, a lack of it. I think Tipi is reacting to heavyweight backpackers being called stupid and inexperienced by turning around and calling lightweight backpackers stupid and inexperienced. Stupid is stupid.

Leaftye,
The boot's upper was not stiff enough, that was the problem. Even though the shoe was marketed as a lightweight, go-to alternative for folks who usually wear high tops. As I said before, though, I don't mean to turn this into a footwear thread, I was just using my experience as a caveat emptor (let the buyer beware) against mindlessy buying into the whole lightweight marketing campaign in general. I really should have known better. The moderator is free to move my thread to the gear forum if he thinks that's more appropriate.

[Train Wreck]

Anyone that spends any time online comparing dental setups and weights for hiking is a loser and better never come near my daughters. Read those posts. Idiots

LOL!
why did no one just mention the obvious and decide to forgo dental hygiene altogether

[leaftye]

Leaftye,
The boot's upper was not stiff enough, that was the problem. Even though the shoe was marketed as a lightweight, go-to alternative for folks who usually wear high tops. As I said before, though, I don't mean to turn this into a footwear thread, I was just using my experience as a caveat emptor (let the buyer beware) against mindlessy buying into the whole lightweight marketing campaign in general. I really should have known better. The moderator is free to move my thread to the gear forum if he thinks that's more appropriate.

Did you think about what I said? Did the upper fail to supply enough stiffness? Of course. I said as much. But it's not alone. With a thin heel, there's not enough leverage to twist the shoe about. It's a combination. Are you familiar with the Archimedes quote:

Give me a place to stand and with a lever I will move the whole world.

A thick heel is a lever. Boots with thick heels absolutely must have stiff uppers to overcome the greater forces that tall heel would impart to the ankle. For an extreme example, take a look at inline/ice skates. The lever action on those is tremendous, and is why they counter the greater ankle rolling forces with extremely stiff uppers.

In any case, I've had high top hiking shoes, and I don't see how the high top can add any meaningful support. It does little more than keep rocks from entering the top of the shoe.

Should you have known better? In retrospect, it's easy to say yes. At least you're seemingly able and willing to learn from your mistakes. That's where it ties into this thread. Folks that aren't willing to learn from the mistakes of others and their own are stupid. It matters not if they pack heavy or light, walk barefoot, in light shoes or 5 pound boots. Playing stupid games has a great tendency to win stupid prizes.

[Train Wreck]

Leaftye,
OK, I understand the physics of what you're saying. If that's the case, it seems like the manufacturer failed to consider it thoroughly enough before redesigning and promoting this particular model. It was an expensive and painful lesson at any rate, and once burned, twice shy, you know, and I'm not likely to try another pair of lightweight hikers and spend another 3 months sitting on the sidelines waiting for torn ligaments to heal.
I still envy those of you who seem to be able to hike in anything from river sandals to crocs to sneakers or whatever...I guess I should be content with the fact that I never get blisters, anyway

[weary]

As someone new to backpacking I actually appreciate the Fast and Light guys. I know better than to think I'm ready to get my pack down to the weights they talk about (mostly due to funds) but it is a good reminder that you should be creative and find ways to solve problems that don't involve heavy, one-trick-pony solutions. Anyone foolish enough to be so absorbed with getting their pack weight down that they risk being unprepared is probably foolish enough to make some similar mistakes regardless. I'd say there is an equally risky trend of new backpackers packing in everything they could possibly want and end up ruining their trip (and back) trying to keep up with the weight.

At the end of the day backpacking is about knowing yourself and being responsible for your needs. That cuts both ways; taking too much on a trip can ruin the trip (and even be dangerous in some cases) just as quickly as taking too little. In my mind it is important that your opinion is represented as well as the fast and light guys'. It lets me know as a newbie that I need to figure out what works for me and ignore the 'hype.' For me I fall somewhere in the middle (as do most) but I like to read others' strategies and can adapt a bit of each into my own... Isn't that the point?

Ultralite, I suspect depends a great deal on expected climate conditions and length of trips -- and of course on each hikers budget. You can't safely hike in winter in Maine with typical ultralite gear unless you know the weather predictions in advance. If you are planning a trip weeks in advance as most of us do, your gear planning needs to consider the possibility of energy consuming deep snow and subzero temperatures. If you check the predictions on a Friday in preparation for a 3-day holiday week excursion and the weatherman calls for relatively balmy conditions, one can get by with much less.

Food weight needs again are highly variable. If you are ultraliting for a week or two after months of typical home consumption, it's easy to get by on a pound a day. In fact the body will welcome the change. But if one is on a low budget thru hike that requires minimal town stops, 2 pounds of food a day will seem pretty skimpy by the time the first few weeks have passed.

[Cadenza]

I think Tipi is reacting to heavyweight backpackers being called stupid and inexperienced by turning around and calling lightweight backpackers stupid and inexperienced. Stupid is stupid.

It seems to me that Tipi has only questioned the degree to which marketing hype has skewed the thinking of the masses of sheople.
I haven't noticed him calling anyone stupid for hiking their own hike.

There are different ways to skin a cat. Some are not necessarily wrong; not necessarily right. It just depends on the mission.

When I was much younger I carried a military CFP-90 pack loaded to the gills. Approaching 100 lbs.
As I got older,....it got harder. I kept telling myself, "Next time I'm not bringing so much stuff!"
Finally one day I looked at my buddy and said, "Until we get smaller packs we are never going to lighten the load."

The next year,....we went out with a Becker Patrol Pack, not much bigger than a school book bag.
We darn near froze to death on Stratton bald in July, and this was after having been sunburned there earlier in the day.

Over subsequent years we went through the process of learning the whole UL thing. I enjoyed the process.
But ultimately, we evolved back to sanity. The expected trip, season, weather, location, and conditions dictate the tactics.
If the plan is to cover trail miles in fair weather, I go lighter.
If packing in to hunt in the winter, I take appropriate gear. Heavier sleeping bags, bulky clothes, hatchet and/or saw for processing firewood, etc.
Tomorrow I'm leaving for a short trip. It's early December. I'll be at 5000 feet. Temps could range from 60F high in daytime, down to 20F at night.
My pack will be middle-weight, somewhere between two extremes, with a little margin for the unexpected.
I don't call that "fear." I call it common sense.

Light. Medium. Heavy. It's all good. If I hear a wood thrush just before dusk,....it's even better.

[Malto]

I think there is a huge misconception regarding UL which I think was caused by the need of some to have strict definitions regarding a weigh definition for UL. Nobody in their right mind would go on say a winter trip in Maine carry their normal three season UL setup. BUT, their four season gear setup may weigh say 12 lbs vs the 8 lb three season. In my case some changes beyond my 8lb base would be warmer gloves, a fleece layer, sleeping bag liner, extra socks, capilene bottoms, a white gas stove to melt snow, a VBL suit and snowshoes if needed. (I may have left off a couple of items.) But the same UL principles would be used resulting in a higher base weight than three season but much lower the traditional four season setups.

[Tipi Walter]

I am thinking that AT hikers choose to resupply far more frequently these days than in years gone by. I think some of that is driven by the desire to maintain the umbilical cord to plumbing and restaurant food, but also by the allergy to weight.

Your post reminds me of Eric Ryback who thruhiked the AT in 1971 and often wrote in his book about getting 3 weeks worth of food for the trail and leaving town with a butt heavy pack and the good feeling the weight gave him knowing he could stay out uninterrupted for many days.

[MuddyWaters]

Many (most?) thru hikers today seem to be ready for a town or hostel day every 3-5 days anyway. They have no reason to carry more food. They might be wimps, they might want to drink and socialize, or they might need to do it to get enough to eat.

While it may not be true that you can't carry enough food to eat, the normal hiker food you do carry is certainly not as appetizing as pizza, ice cream, and all-u-can eat buffets.

[WingedMonkey]

While it may not be true that you can't carry enough food to eat, the normal hiker food you do carry is certainly not as appetizing as pizza, ice cream, and all-u-can eat buffets.

I had pizza once in Damascus so I had something to go with the picture of beer. Ice cream twice, if you count the pint I ate for the "half gallon challenge". Three times "all you can eat" if you count KFC in Pearisburg.

Not that I didn't eat a lot in town but it was as I was packing. Half went in my food bag and half went in my belly.

I don't remember a single time that I made a trip to town just to eat restaurant food, other than The Home Place.

And I never dumped any food in the garbage or a hiker box.

I was quite content. But that was just me.

[Franco]

Quoting Tipi Walter :
"My point is that the Fast & Light groupthink is in part an advertising campaign trying to change everyone else."


So you quote from sub-forums called "Ultra Light Hiker Forums' and Super Ultra Light Backpacking ..
(yes it backpacking light might appear to be the reason for those forums...)
Next you will tell us that the guys at Digital Camera Review don't like analogue cameras...


As much as you try to tell everyone that the UL crowd is "preaching" it is you that keeps infesting the lightweight forums with your self imposed heavy weight stuff.
Reality is that the best way to put people off backpacking is to tell them that they need the kind of pack/mat and tent you use.
Here is one of your many gems :
"So what if I start a trip with 80 lbs and only go 4 or 5 miles the first day? "
Exactly , "so what" IF that is what you want to do, however you are not going to do the AT nor any other long trail like that and certainly it isn't may way of having fun on a shorter trail either.
Walking for 4 or 5 miles is more like "camping" than hiking but whatever rocks you boat...
But here is a reminder : Heavier pack= more energy needed=more food and water=more weight=heavier pack...
Safer ? I hardly think so. I rather fall over with a 30lbs pack than a 60lbs one...
(matter of fact I hardly ever fall, might have something to do with the way I walk)

[coach lou]

Quoting Tipi Walter :
"My point is that the Fast & Light groupthink is in part an advertising campaign trying to change everyone else."


So you quote from sub-forums called "Ultra Light Hiker Forums' and Super Ultra Light Backpacking ..
(yes it backpacking light might appear to be the reason for those forums...)
Next you will tell us that the guys at Digital Camera Review don't like analogue cameras...


As much as you try to tell everyone that the UL crowd is "preaching" it is you that keeps infesting the lightweight forums with your self imposed heavy weight stuff.
Reality is that the best way to put people off backpacking is to tell them that they need the kind of pack/mat and tent you use.
Here is one of your many gems :
"So what if I start a trip with 80 lbs and only go 4 or 5 miles the first day? "
Exactly , "so what" IF that is what you want to do, however you are not going to do the AT nor any other long trail like that and certainly it isn't may way of having fun on a shorter trail either.
Walking for 4 or 5 miles is more like "camping" than hiking but whatever rocks you boat...
But here is a reminder : Heavier pack= more energy needed=more food and water=more weight=heavier pack...
Safer ? I hardly think so. I rather fall over with a 30lbs pack than a 60lbs one...
(matter of fact I hardly ever fall, might have something to do with the way I walk)

Hence' this thread

[ljcsov]

I am new to this, but I found that I am not terribly interested in the ultralight craze, given I am not a thruhiker by any means. After purchasing all my gear, I realized all of the ultralight gear that was available from cottage industries. Nonetheless, most of my gear is the lighter stuff manufactured by some of the bigger names. I found that I am very pleased with carrying my 18lb baseweight pack. All the gear inside works for me and I am satisfied with the performance of my overall system.

Hey tipi, any suggestions for someone looking to get into winter backpacking? I plan on going for some overnighters this winter and was wondering what I can utilize to extend my normal gear into the colder months of PA.

[Tipi Walter]

Quoting Tipi Walter :
"My point is that the Fast & Light groupthink is in part an advertising campaign trying to change everyone else."


So you quote from sub-forums called "Ultra Light Hiker Forums' and Super Ultra Light Backpacking ..
(yes it backpacking light might appear to be the reason for those forums...)
Next you will tell us that the guys at Digital Camera Review don't like analogue cameras...


As much as you try to tell everyone that the UL crowd is "preaching" it is you that keeps infesting the lightweight forums with your self imposed heavy weight stuff.
Reality is that the best way to put people off backpacking is to tell them that they need the kind of pack/mat and tent you use.
Here is one of your many gems :
"So what if I start a trip with 80 lbs and only go 4 or 5 miles the first day? "
Exactly , "so what" IF that is what you want to do, however you are not going to do the AT nor any other long trail like that and certainly it isn't may way of having fun on a shorter trail either.
Walking for 4 or 5 miles is more like "camping" than hiking but whatever rocks you boat...
But here is a reminder : Heavier pack= more energy needed=more food and water=more weight=heavier pack...
Safer ? I hardly think so. I rather fall over with a 30lbs pack than a 60lbs one...
(matter of fact I hardly ever fall, might have something to do with the way I walk)

First off, my main point was ULers using the word "minimalism" when in fact they use high tech non-minimal gear and live in houses and use electricity and drive cars like the rest of us. So what's so minimal about carrying a minimalist's kit?? And the long list of links I added show the predominance of the Ultralight mindset in the backpacking world. Everyone with a blog thinks in order to be cool they have to be Ultralight. I call this the Ultralight hysteria.

Infesting the lightweight forums? Well, I was kicked out of your special lightweight forum for commenting on what I perceive to be the Fast & Light hype so popular nowadays, along with attaining this speed and lightness by frequent resupplies and short "snippet" trips. My question never got answered---can an ULer still be considered such if they pull an expedition style trip of 3 weeks with no resupply and with a food load of 45 lbs?? Which of their favorite frameless packs will handle such a load?

"Doing the AT" on a forced march is a specialized form of backpacking reliant on frequent town trips, frequent resupplies and a series of hundreds of shelters to access along the trail. This kind of backpacking helps to keep pack loads light. Hauling out an 80 lb pack for 21 days and doing 4 or 5 miles a day may obviously not be fun for you and it of course counters the Fast and Light policy directly. Let's just call it Ultraloading and we'll institute a policy of Slow & Heavy. Where are all the blogs for this?

Thing is, have you ever hiked 5 miles with an 80 lb pack? Do so and you will never again say "walking for 4 or 5 miles is more like camping than hiking." In this situation 5 miles will take all day. So what? The pack gets lighter as the weeks pass. But I don't do it to torture myself but to stay out for long periods of time without resorting to town trips, road crossings, seeing non-backpackers or exchanging cash for food or buffets or motel stays. I'm most interested in long trips without resupply. This means a much greater food weight.

Your equation "heavier pack=more energy needed" is a no-brainer, but I see it thus: "Heavier pack = longer time out and more freedom to stay out without interruption." This is my top priority, not miles walked or going fast or even overall pack weight.

[Tipi Walter]

I am new to this, but I found that I am not terribly interested in the ultralight craze, given I am not a thruhiker by any means. After purchasing all my gear, I realized all of the ultralight gear that was available from cottage industries. Nonetheless, most of my gear is the lighter stuff manufactured by some of the bigger names. I found that I am very pleased with carrying my 18lb baseweight pack. All the gear inside works for me and I am satisfied with the performance of my overall system.

Hey tipi, any suggestions for someone looking to get into winter backpacking? I plan on going for some overnighters this winter and was wondering what I can utilize to extend my normal gear into the colder months of PA.

My most valued winter items are my Western Mountaineering bag, rated to -15, and my Exped downmat sleeping pad, along with some down garments and my fairly large 4 season tent. With some care and consideration a good down bag is a person's ticket to long-term winter camping adventures. There's nothing quite like snuggling up inside an overkill 800-fill bag at 0F and you know you can get to -10F with no problem. A good bag like this is the most important piece of gear in my kit. It gives you that extra edge when things go south.

Beyond this, I think it's a great idea to take what winter gear your have and start sleeping outside in your backyard or on your deck or porch everynight if possible. Get used to using a sleeping pad and see how warm it keeps you and see how well your sleeping bag works. Now's the season for such "training" although I don't think of it as training but as just another opportunity to get my bag nights.

[Franco]

Tipi Walter
Terminology...I agree with you there.
Can't be a minimalist with three pages of UL items...
So I have coined my own term and that is "comfortably light"
Not UltraLight and I have too many bits (well not that many) to be minimalistic.


I suggest the stuff I use to newcomers as well as old timers, oddly enough most can comfortably do a few days out with their 2 pound something backpack and their sub 2 pound tent and so on.
Increasingly I see middle aged men and in particular women that come around to have a look at one of my tents because they have seen others using them and have figured out that for what they do a 2 pound tent is a lot more fun than a 6 pound version.
So I am helping some folk to keep going out.
If going out for 20 days in harsh condition is the way you have fun well good for you but don't impose those weights/requirements onto others.
BTW, if I wanted to do what you do I would use similar stuff too, still a Kindle would replace "books"...

[Franco]

BTW, my dad and his mates used to go on and on about carrying heavy weights like that, for example 50kg bags of cement (and they did...)
They all had something in common , a bad back well before my current age.

[ljcsov]

Thanks Tipi. I appreciate your feedback.

I think I might try one of those SOL Escape Bivys to extend the range of my bag beyond its 15 degree rating. Other than that, I think I have mostly what I need to do some overnighters. I always worry about my legs in camp though.

[Franco]

"I think it's a great idea to take what winter gear your have and start sleeping outside in your backyard "

Definitely a good application of that advice would be regarding the SOL Escape Bivvy...
I certainly would experiment with that at home first.

[Tipi Walter]

"I think it's a great idea to take what winter gear your have and start sleeping outside in your backyard "

Definitely a good application of that advice would be regarding the SOL Escape Bivvy...
I certainly would experiment with that at home first.

So would I. Augmenting an "insufficient" winter bag with a bivy works but comes at a cost---confining claustrophobia. Ljcsov---if you've ever spent a night zipped up tight in a mummy bag and found it too confining and tight, well, adding a bivy over it could push you into a fit of discomfort---unless it's for survival purposes only. Here's what happens---You toss and turn inside your mummy bag and the zipper gets on the opposite side of the bivy's zipper. Then in a panic you overheat and try to get out but cannot easily find the bag zipper or the bivy zipper.

A bivy can increase the rating of your bag and you should try it first like Franco says. If you don't find it confining or uncomfortable it just may work for you. And when you're out in extreme cold a VBL inside a bag and a bivy outside may be the ticket, but I'm talking -20F or -30F.