WhiteBlaze Pages 2024
A Complete Appalachian Trail Guidebook.
AVAILABLE NOW. $4 for interactive PDF(smartphone version)
Read more here WhiteBlaze Pages Store

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 25 of 25
  1. #21
    Registered User
    Join Date
    06-10-2005
    Location
    Bedford, MA
    Posts
    12,678

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Malto View Post
    Wow, I had no idea that base weight was so ambiguous. It is everything in your pack minus food, water and consumables. Yes, base weight changes by season. Its not that complex.
    I'd go with that definition. It's just a standard, a means of comparison. Specifically meant to exclude the categories you cited, if only for purpose of discussion. To quibble, it does include the pack itself (not just "everything in it.")

    That it changes by season (or other reasons) should also be no surprise. Earl or late season calls for heavier or more layers. Mid summer, cut back on rain gear. Pack size and contents might change depending on remoteness or length or purpose of the trip. Etc.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    05-05-2011
    Location
    state of confusion
    Posts
    9,866
    Journal Entries
    1

    Default

    Only people that have trouble with base wt are those that erroneously think the purpose is to brag.

    Instead of to understand that base wt + fuel/consumeables + food+ water = total pack wt. To control your pack wt, you have to know and control each part. The only time it matters is for planning. Once on trail, things are what they are.
    Last edited by MuddyWaters; 10-25-2016 at 20:58.

  3. #23
    Clueless Weekender
    Join Date
    04-10-2011
    Location
    Niskayuna, New York
    Age
    68
    Posts
    3,879
    Journal Entries
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MuddyWaters View Post
    Only people that have trouble with base wt are those that erroneously think the purpose is to brag.

    Instead of to understand that base wt + fuel/consumeables + food+ water = total pack wt. To control your pack wt, you have to know and control each part. The only time it matters is for planning. Once on trail, things are what they are.
    I think we're in violent agreement so far. Choose what you take carefully. Go for the lightest gear that's will let you do what you want to do. Everything you bring, you're going to have to carry.

    And I do a lot of weight management in gear selection: I want this thing rather than that one because it's lighter. I'm going to leave that thing home because the likelihood that I'll use it isn't worth the weight penalty. No way will I hump a DSLR on a long hike, even though it'll get me marginally better pictures, because my pocket camera is good enough for a lot of what I photograph, at 1/4 the weight. I'll bring a Leatherman Squirt (because I want the pliers and itty-bitty screwdriver) rather than the Personal SuperTool I carry around town, because I don't need the other stuff that's on the bigger tool. I'll bring a Platypus bag rather than a Nalgene. Yeah, managing weight is critical.

    But I still don't get the significance of comparing a final number. All else being equal, lighter is always better than heavier. I'm fine with "if I were to buy that sleeping bag, it'd save me nearly half a pound. Hmmm, maybe I better save up for that." But on any given trip, I'm going to go with the gear I need and want to take, chosen from what I have. What that adds up to is surely significant on my back - but my back doesn't know numbers. I'm not going to be able to change the final number other than by changing the individual pieces (or making things do multiple duty, etc.) I've just never seen the point in worrying about or comparing what the grand total is, except as a general range to have an idea whether a pack suspension will be up to the task or whether I need to put the tails on my snowshoes.
    I always know where I am. I'm right here.

  4. #24

    Default

    If you can feel it on your back then it is not UL. Is someone is carrying 10 pounds of gear and another 10 pounds of food is it really UL? No because the average person can still feel it on their back. If you reduce the gear weight by 5 pounds or more, then you start not even noticing you have a pack on. It is interesting how people defined UL as 5 pounds or less in the 1990s, to now 10 pounds less. As equipment has gotten lighter, it became more expectable to carry more weight to be consider an UL backpack rather than less. It doesn't make to much sense does it?

    It is also a matter the size of the hiker. If someone weighting 200 pounds, carries around a 20 pounds on their back, is it real lightweight? They are carrying a 10% of their body weight. They might notice it but notice it less compare to someone weighting 100 pounds. To a hiker weighting 100 pounds, 20 pounds is 20% of their body weight. They are going to feel they have a pack on their back their entire hike.

    To keep it simple, right before leaving town I weigh my pack at the post office. If I'm leaving with less than 15 pounds (total weight), then I consider myself still as travel UL. Of course what really matters is can I notice my pack on my back. If the answer is yes, then I'm not traveling UL.

    Wolf

  5. #25
    Registered User Cesar1239's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-11-2016
    Location
    New York City
    Age
    30
    Posts
    4

    Default

    Thank you for your responses everyone. I guess I was looking at it from a comparison standpoint. A lot of people talk about their 10 pound base weight packs and I just wanted to know if the usually meant "skin out" or everything but food/water/fuel. I think I'm not going to count my trekking poles and my clothes I'm wearing minus my insulation layer. Thank you everyone!

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
++ New Posts ++

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •