Are you a victim of the Ultra-lite craze?

[dvbl]

Along with cell phone companies scaring parents into thinking that their 8-year olds aren't safe unless they have a cell phone, the ultra-lite backpacking gear craze is one of my all-time favorite marketing coups. Yes, I know ounces add up to pounds, but subtracting ounces adds up to dollars (my apologies to the math majors out there). I'm guessing there are many reading this who have eyeballed a new tent and said, "Oh man, that would cut my pack weight by 1.5 pounds." Even though the tent you have is only 2 years old and is in perfect condition and you loved it when you bought in part because when you bought it, it was...you guessed it...lightweight. You see, it never ends. It seems every year, the gear you bought last year is no longer lightweight, and now you feel like you're carrying too much. And you get that twinge inside... "Mmm...will she be mad at me if I buy ANOTHER tent?"

I'm not talking about extreme ultra-liters. Tarp instead of tent, sneakers instead of boots, vitamins and jello-shots instead of food, etc. So they do a 4-day trip carrying 14 pounds instead of 33 pounds. That's different. Different thread. Different planet.

I'm talking about carrying the same gear you always carry, but always wanting/needing/yearning/jonesing to cut a pound or two. My view is simple for backpacking: I take what I need, and leave at home what I don't need. And when I buy what I do need, I try to strike a balance between reliability, price, and yes, weight. But no amount of marketing or orthopedic fear-mongering will ever convince me that my body can tell the difference between a 33 pound pack and a 31.5 pound pack.

 

[Neil]

How about doing a 3 day trip with a starting pack weight of 18 pounds? Different planet, much better one than my old one.

Ever dump a full Nalgene? I did that on a hike once and immediately felt enough difference to go and drop many more pounds. It wasn't that costly actually and some of the stuff I needed to replace anyway. I'm not a victim. I'm the victor.

 

[KMartman]

This one kinda goes hand in hand with "gearaholic" thread...

I agree though. I try to cut weight, but I don't know that 2lbs really is felt? What I have noticed is that having the weight, whatever it may be, sit on the hips instead of the shoulder/back makes a HUGE difference. I found that the Osprey suspension system handles this VERY well, however their packs are super expensive. I DO LOVE new gear though, and often find myself asking "will she be mad if I buy X" .

I am going to start carrying a tarp (sierra designs ultralite origami 2), so that I can get rid of the tent poles. I'd stick with my current tent if I could pitch it with hiking poles. It will only save a pound or 2 though...

M

 

[spaddock]

Man, and just 10 minutes ago I was on backcountry.com and just about bought the Big Agnes SL1!

My problem with ultra-light is that at 6'4" I find most of the gear ultra-small! But I agree it can be maddening.


-Shayne

 

[pilgrim]

...orthopedic fear-mongering...

Now there's a phrase you don't hear every day.

I've always liked the idea that if you want to carry less weight when backpacking, lose some lard off your body before looting your pack.

 

[cbcbd]

Depends on what you're doing... but usually every pound counts and if you are on the trail a lot you will notice subtleties like that.

The reason why I upgrade is because when I first bought my gear I bought too much, or not enough, was cheap and didn't get high quality to begin with, and in the beginning the image of the backpacker with a huge pack was what I thought I should look like. Now to me weight, quality, and function are a priority.

I still find uses for my old heavier weight gear and will occasionally use it on more laidback lower mileage outings where I'm ok with carrying the occasional extra comfort for a few miles.

Plus, I like covering lots of ground, going lightweight gives me that ability/freedom.

 

[chas]

I have to admit to being somewhat drawn in to the lightweight craze, but I definitely see the benefits. But the first place to start, IMO, is to leave home all the useless stuff that you might be carrying 'just in case' that you never really use (tent stake mallet anyone??). Some folks feel the need to carry stuff just because they bought it and want to get some use out of it. Being honest with yourself about what you are really going to use on a trip is the best way to shed pounds, after that go for the lighter weight gear (and food) if you want to go further. Someone used to suggest making two piles when you get home from a trip, one for stuff you used and the other for stuff you didn't.
I'm one of those that won't fill all my water bottles til the absolute last water stop before I camp. Really makes a difference, especially while climbing or covering longer distances.

Chas.

 

[onestep]

Are you a victim of All Crazes

Even though the tent you have is only 2 years old and is in perfect condition and you loved it when you bought in part because when you bought it, it was...you guessed it...lightweight. You see, it never ends.

If you never want what you have, you'll never have what you want!

Onestep

 

[Tom Rankin]

Yes, I know ounces add up to pounds, but subtracting ounces adds up to dollars.

This is like lingerie, the skimpier it is, the more expensive it is!

Using this logic, wearing (or packing) nothing at all would be mighty expensive!

 

[marty]

I strictly believe in the old adage, that if you watch the ounces, the pounds will take care of themselves. I have managed to reduce my weekend backpacking load from 35-40 pounds, to 18-20, depending on time of year. With that weight, I can hike all day without pack-related fatigue.

I did make an initial investment four or five years ago for a lighter pack, a down sleeping bag, tent, stove and other major areas where you can drop weight. The cost wasn't ridiculous, as ultralight gear is often cheaper. The only notable exception was a 20 degree, 800+ fill down bag, which cost me $229.00 on sale.

As I am very comfortable with the weight in my pack, I have not seen the need to upgrade most of my gear since that time. Yeah, I know things keep getting lighter and possibly better, but it's frankly not worth it to me. It would probably be worth it if I was going to thru hike the AT, however. I would also LOVE to buy the free standing Henry Shires Tarpent Double Rainbow, which is supposed to be coming out this month: Tarptent Double Rainbow. I may have to save up for this beauty.

I always check the weight of everything I buy. That includes clothing, which I never buy without knowing the weight.

 

[dr_wu002]

I'm in the "could care less" category. If I need to by something new I'm not going to deliberately buy the heavier option if it's a few bucks cheaper. If it serves a functional purpose and it's not ridiculously heavy and I can afford it, I buy it. Otherwise, pack weight is pack weight to me... most of it comes from lugging around 3 liters of water.

-Dr. Wu

 

[poison ivy]

I don't consider myself a victim despite trying to cut weight.

Shaving pounds (yes, even a couple) makes a huge difference in what I can accomplish. Carrying the first tent I bought -- which weighs in at 8 pounds-- just because it's still in perfect condition would be silly when my 30 oz Tarptent is just as roomy and much lighter. My base pack weight (without food and water) is about 12 pounds. It is a heck of a lot more comfortable than the 30 pound base weight I had when I started backpacking.

- Ivy

 

[Chip]

I'm talking about carrying the same gear you always carry, but always wanting/needing/yearning/jonesing to cut a pound or two.

That's the nature of the beast, no ? Most of us are getting older, I'm older than I was 30 years ago. I can't carry a 60 lb pack miles through the woods anymore. The past few years I've been "renting" most of my equipment, anyway: buying and selling through Ebay and upgrading. It's not expensive, and it keeps me "off the streets", you know ?

 

[spaddock]

Ultralight also helps people that aren't as big go further. At 240lbs I don't really mind 40lbs strapped to my back but my buddies or my wife who are much lighter certainly do.

That being said I'll still go as light as I can go comfortably.


-Shayne

 

[nazdarovye]

But no amount of marketing or orthopedic fear-mongering will ever convince me that my body can tell the difference between a 33 pound pack and a 31.5 pound pack.

So what's your beef? Are you saying you don't have the self-control to resist marketing? That ultralight gear is marketing hype only? Low on cash? ;-)

No one forces anyone to pull out their wallet or purse and lay down the cash for anything.

I think one of the best things about the ultralight movement is that it's gotten more people thinking about how much they carry. I've certainly found that less pounds = more comfort.

I don't go ultralight on every trip (in fact, last weekend I dragged a 50+ pound pulk up onto the side of Lassen Peak, we pitched a 10+ pound tent, and we had a great, comfy stay in the snow). But I do on a lot, and sure like it when I do. The other week we did a 25+ mile four-day hike on the Lost Coast, and my pack weight (all-in, save food and water) was about 13 pounds including a full-size double-wall tent.

We're all responsible for our own choices. More information helps make better choices. It's all good!

 

[Neil]

Now there's a phrase you don't hear every day.

I've always liked the idea that if you want to carry less weight when backpacking, lose some lard off your body before looting your pack.

LOL You got me right in the belly! However, the extra 10 pounds I carry around help keep in in shape. My neuro-musculo-skeletal system is fully adapted to bearing my "stored energy". Then, when I go hiking, anything I carry is new, extra weight for my physiology to deal with. The less the better. Since I'm already used to the larding, my pack weight represents a smaller percentage of increased strain on my aging frame. If I was lighter then that percentage would go up. Simple, huh? I gotta run that by my wife. Now, where's the fridge?

 

[sli74]

I find that the lighter my pack the better my feet feel at the end of the day. My lightweight obsession is fueled by 2 things:

My gear addiction
My desire to have other luxuries.

So, I did upgrade my gear to shave weight before I hiked the Long Trail. It made a HUGE difference in my enjoyment of my long distance hike since I could carry more luxuries and still have a pack light enough to not kill my back. When I started backpacking, my pack weight with food and water for a 5 day trip was 42 pounds, I was okay with that since I didn't know any better but since I have upgraded to lighter stuff, that same number of days on the trail is done with a pack weight of just under 30 pounds so the 12 pounds made it better on my feet.

Too each their own though, if you don't think shaving a few ounces or pounds is worth your money or time, you shouldn't get sucked in by what you call the "hype" BUT I for one am VERY glad there are lighter weight options and when I REALLY want something, I will save the money, a few dollars a week and buy it because it does 2 things:

Lightens my packweight
Reduces the shaking caused by gear buying withdrawal

Do whatever makes you happy, noone should judge your heavier pack anyway.

sli74

 

[Jkrew81]

The cost wasn't ridiculous, as ultralight gear is often cheaper.

I agree with this, if you know where to look lightweight gear can be much cheaper. For a small example a standard el cheapo lexan spoon is about 1/10th the cost of a $10 Titanium spork. The MSR Pocket Rocket is about 40 bucks. It does not get much cheaper than that for a high quality stove that lasts.

I found one of my biggest obsticles to lightening up was dealing with loss of certain comforts such as a big cushy sleeping pad or that huge "just in case" fleece that you never end up wearing. It is pretty easy to cut signifigant weight when you really analyze what you are carrying.

 

[sli74]

lose some lard off your body before looting your pack.

Ahhh . . . true . . . but try as I might losing that lard always proves to be MUCH harder than just buying lighter gear

 

[Tim Seaver]

I don't see it as a craze or some diabolical scheme on the part of the gear makers, but part of the same technological progression that is happening all around us. As I normally am carrying 20 pounds or so of photography gear when I am "working" the hills, any weight (and bulk) savings I can achieve with my clothing and other gear is welcome, and will allow me to go that much further in less time, with less fatigue, and spend more time seeking out interesting images.

I like to think that the mountain environments will eventually also benefit from lighter weight gear, as it enables people to do things as day trips that formerly would have been an overnight (avoiding the higher impact associated with camping).

The best way to justify buying the new stuff is to wear out your old gear first - which I find doesn't really take all that long.