How much is an ounce worth to you?

[CalebJ]

If you were in need of a new tent and bag (and had it in the budget), then that seems like a very reasonable purchase.

[Another Kevin]

Universal truths are sometimes assumed. What are universal truths changes. Sometimes, so much "truths' later turn out to be folly.

There's a huge disconnect here in the posts. Saving weight backpacking does not have to cost ANY MONEY or PURCHASING ANYTHING despite our tendencies to incorrectly assume otherwise patterned by a culture that tells us money and shopping are always the solutions. Here, yet again in abundant evidence, we are habituated to saving hauled backpacking weight thinking only in terms of gear weight.

What does saving a ounce of weight cost? Knowledge and trail savvy wisdom! Saving an ounce of wt is as simple as not carrying a bag of M&M's, that unnecessary hauling of more H20 than needed - 2-3 capfuls, ending a hike with left over food or fuel, or taking an extra uneaten granola bar.

There is entirely too much focus on money and shopping for gear to lower wt hauled when the largest single category of any one item most carry on multi day hikes are consumables. Not sexy, exciting, or entertaining enough though compared to the incessant never ending chatter about saving the tiniest amount - one ounce - on gear wt though, hey?

This.

The lightest weight piece of gear is the one you're not carrying. The lightest consumables are the ones you're not carrying.

But the questions about how to lighten up are always from the newbies who haven't learnt that yet.

And ... as far as consumables go, I'm one that carries a little extra, and the couple or three pounds are worth it to me. A lot of my hiking is a thousand feet of elevation above my water sources. If it's going to take me over an hour to fetch water, I'm going to carry extra. Maybe even a couple of litres extra - enough to dry camp and go down for water in the morning, if that's what I feel like doing. I also like to be prepared to have a trip run a day longer than planned, because I've had that happen. My food weight per day is a little more than some hikers, too, because I like to eat a little better. Life is too short to go around eating bad food, and if I can't have real coffee I'm not going.

I'd probably learn to cut things a little closer for a nice predictable plan like a thru- or long-section hike of a major trail. It really felt funny to me carrying nearly no water on the Northville-Placid - my longest single hike, - but on a trail where the answer to, "where's the next water" is often "you're standing in it!" it made sense. Come to a stream, run a litre of water through the Sawyer, chug half and carry the other half. (I can't use the 'camel up' system. If I drink unneeded water, I feel funny and hike weakly until I've peed it out again.)

[colorado_rob]

Hopefully you got a decent estimate to an answer to your actual question, OP.

WHENEVER weight-saving questions, even very specific ones like yours show up, and even in a UL forum where I would think it is understood that folks somewhat know what they are doing, the same old crew waxes philosophic about how everyone (except themselves) is probably doing it wrong with respect to other OBVIOUS weight saving techniques (water, food, etc, etc, etc), ad nauseum. Even though the two subjects are independent. Cyber hikers, me thinks.

[Kerosene]

For many years, my only substantial discretionary spending was on backpacking equipment (and lattes I suppose, but that was a requirement to sit through all-day meetings). With a large enough income the incremental cost becomes a bit less important. That said, I was probably in the $20/ounce category. I was willing to spend more to take more weight off of my aging knees.

[Cheyou]

The heck with the $10. Rule ! My 7 kids are all but one out of the house . It's time I spent some cash on me for a change!

Thom

[Sarcasm the elf]

I'm reminded of a few of Jester's blog posts:







Edit: I posted the above without realizing it was in the UL forum, sorry.

[rocketsocks]

Sometimes I think anpnco while you sleep leaning up against a tree is the way to go, no tent, no bag, no sleep pad...except on winter hike, for that throw in a killer down coat and pants and maybe a Christmas tree bag of sorts, that's some serious weight savings there. Any of you weenies ever try that?

[rocketsocks]

a poncho...ugh!

[Dogwood]

I have been trying to lighten my pack weight without sacrificing too much in comfort and safety in advance of a section hike scheduled for the end of next month. One universal truth seems to be that lighter is more expensive.

I was looking a top quilt and noticed that a bag with 900 pf down is almost 1 oz lighter than one of the same temp rating but filled with 850 pf down. However, it is also about $80 more expensive.

So, I started to wonder: What the going rate is for a one ounce reduction in weight? I'd be very interested in hearing some thoughts.

Hopefully you got a decent estimate to an answer to your actual question, OP.

WHENEVER weight-saving questions, even very specific ones like yours show up, and even in a UL forum where I would think it is understood that folks somewhat know what they are doing, the same old crew waxes philosophic about how everyone (except themselves) is probably doing it wrong with respect to other OBVIOUS weight saving techniques (water, food, etc, etc, etc), ad nauseum. Even though the two subjects are independent. Cyber hikers, me thinks.

A specific goal is sought,"I have been trying to lighten my pack weight without sacrificing too much in comfort and safety in advance of a section hike scheduled for the end of next month."

To achieve that goal, absolutely, unequivocally, despite whatever name you might arrogantly attach to other's answers, consumable wt is NOT independent of attaining that goal. It plays a vital, often primary wt saving role, often overlooked on a quest to lower pack wt by mega anal-yzing gear wt, AS IS BEING DONE HERE, and mistakenly assuming it always involves spending much money on gear to achieve the wt loss - as stated here is 1 oz. That is not waxing philosophical. That is the reality.

What is ad nauseam to one might be significant to consider for another having different knowledge about what is obvious.

And, PLEASE stop with the coy negative disreputable BS labeling of others. I know you can do that.

[ScareBear]

A specific goal is sought,"I have been trying to lighten my pack weight without sacrificing too much in comfort and safety in advance of a section hike scheduled for the end of next month."

To achieve that goal, absolutely, unequivocally, despite whatever name you might arrogantly attach to other's answers, consumable wt is NOT independent of attaining that goal. It plays a vital, often primary wt saving role, often overlooked on a quest to lower pack wt by mega anal-yzing gear wt, AS IS BEING DONE HERE, and mistakenly assuming it always involves spending much money on gear to achieve the wt loss - as stated here is 1 oz. That is not waxing philosophical. That is the reality.

What is ad nauseam to one might be significant to consider for another having different knowledge about what is obvious.

And, PLEASE stop with the coy negative disreputable BS labeling of others. I know you can do that.

The problem, as I see it, is that you take every opportunity possible to hijack a thread off the OP's topic or question to promote your personal "agenda". Whether that agenda is the nonsense that if you just would have lived your life all-naturally you wouldn't need painkillers to hike the AT, and other such nonsense about your all-natural wellness theory and your theories about medicine and big pharma or now, where your agenda is to distract the OP and thread away from gear and into your own little agenda about consumables. Like the capfuls of water nonsense. And your food nonsense. You see, Dogwood, your individual dogma is fine and dandy. It's just that I get tired of your relentless hijacking of threads to promote your personal agenda about your beliefs on life. And, the nonsensical hijacking of this thread into consumables when the OP wasn't asking about it, is a perfect example of your behavior. The OP was asking about dollars, not recipes or your personal idiotic decisions concerning water. I call you Dogma due to your abusive and relentless pursuit of foisting your beliefs upon OPs with thread hijacking. You asked, old chap. I answered.

[tarheelras]

Wow. I go out of town for two days and things get really interesting.

I appreciate all of the discussion of what I didn't realize would be a controversial subject. Thanks Colorado_Rob, I do think I got an answer to my question.

Perspectives obviously vary, but the general feeling that about $10-$20 per ounce is a good rule of thumb.

Thanks everyone.

[Dogwood]

More dogma from dogma accusers.

[ScareBear]

More dogma from dogma accusers.

Is this the Dogwood Pseudo-Intellectual version of "I know you are but what am I?"?????

[CalebJ]

Is this the Dogwood Pseudo-Intellectual version of "I know you are but what am I?"?????

Seriously? You may disagree with him, but you're the one continuing to drag this out. Let it go already!

[Ethesis]

Let's get back to discussing tents and equipment.

[DavidNH]

an ounce to me is worth one 16th of a pound!

[Alligator]

The problem, as I see it, is that you take every opportunity possible to hijack a thread off the OP's topic or question to promote your personal "agenda". Whether that agenda is the nonsense that if you just would have lived your life all-naturally you wouldn't need painkillers to hike the AT, and other such nonsense about your all-natural wellness theory and your theories about medicine and big pharma or now, where your agenda is to distract the OP and thread away from gear and into your own little agenda about consumables. Like the capfuls of water nonsense. And your food nonsense. You see, Dogwood, your individual dogma is fine and dandy. It's just that I get tired of your relentless hijacking of threads to promote your personal agenda about your beliefs on life. And, the nonsensical hijacking of this thread into consumables when the OP wasn't asking about it, is a perfect example of your behavior. The OP was asking about dollars, not recipes or your personal idiotic decisions concerning water. I call you Dogma due to your abusive and relentless pursuit of foisting your beliefs upon OPs with thread hijacking. You asked, old chap. I answered.

You hit the little triangle icon with the exclamation point on the post in question. It helps greatly if you reference the user agreement when you do so. Then a moderator will look at it. If you are going to call someone on a user agreement violation, as you have done here TOS #5, it's a good idea that you also don't break it yourself, see TOS #2. If we find that a user is being overbearing, overly repetitive, combative, or simply put, not well suited for the thread, we may at our discretion remove the user from the thread. I don't see that here, as the thread is not in Straight Forward and Dogwood was suggesting an alternative viewpoint.

I think somebody already explained to you how to use the Ignore feature.

[rafe]

Reducing consumables as a means of shaving weight has its own risks.

Lemme just say, running out of water is not a good thing. Bad for you. Can ruin your day. I prefer to err on the side of too much. Maybe that's just me.

[JRowan]

The actual cost I'm willing to bear varies a bit, but has definitely been in the tens of dollars for an ounce, maybe more. (Usually, however, if I get to the point where I'm thinking of spending a huge amount on an ounce, I take a deep breath and try to remind myself that I'm not gonna feel that ounce on my back.)

When it gets to the point where I'm starting to deal with serious $$$ for weight decisions, it's usually for something along the lines of cuben, high-fill down, etc., and once I get to that price point, I start to need something other than weight to push me over the edge- increased performance, increased packability, better form/fit/function, etc. This has been coming up recently, where I've been tempted to replace my 12oz puffy with a 6.5oz Montbell Ex Lite Anorak, which will not be as warm, but will be more than adequate for the trails I have planned over the next few years. However, about 1.5-2 oz of that difference is down fill weight, and the remaining difference is in things like stronger fabric (I don't need bombproof, but 7D is pretty gentle stuff), full zip, and other conveniences. The current puffy also has DriDown, which I've found at least counts for something when it's more humid out, although I'll refrain from throwing it in a lake. I'l probably keep the puffy

On the other hand, I'm in the process of replacing my current small flat tarp (~12oz) with an MLD Cuben Grace Solo (I'd be replacing the tarp anyway, so I'm spending SOME money somewhere). In .51 cuben, I'm getting a 6oz tarp that also gives me better coverage, will be more stormworthy because of the cut, and doesn't sag. That's probably going to be worth the money. Some of those features aren't inherent in me buying the more expensive version (I could get them in the sil version, which is $120 less, with the exception of the lack of stretch), so the weight becomes a factor there. (As does my general usage case, since I'm going to need to be more mindful of the fabric.)

I also may be willing to spend the extra money to drop an ounce if there's something that I can either use to learn a new skill, or which is reflective of a skill that I've learned as I've gained experience. (Can't think of any examples at the moment, but we're talking smaller/more minimal versions of items, things that can be multipurposed, etc.)

TL/DR version- Weight is a very serious factor in what I'm willing to spend, but I also usually have to get some sort of additional value beyond the weight.

[ScareBear]

You hit the little triangle icon with the exclamation point on the post in question. It helps greatly if you reference the user agreement when you do so. Then a moderator will look at it. If you are going to call someone on a user agreement violation, as you have done here TOS #5, it's a good idea that you also don't break it yourself, see TOS #2. If we find that a user is being overbearing, overly repetitive, combative, or simply put, not well suited for the thread, we may at our discretion remove the user from the thread. I don't see that here, as the thread is not in Straight Forward and Dogwood was suggesting an alternative viewpoint.

I think somebody already explained to you how to use the Ignore feature.

I don't think I'm the only person in this thread calling him out on his reply and his reply history....just sayin...

Is it OK for peeps to call him out when he does this(tilts the thread from the OP's question/topic to espouse on his personal "philosophy", or as you call it his "alternative viewpoint"), or am I relegated to the "waaah" button as my only reply/retort?

Not picking a fight, just wanting to know for future reference...