Skin out weight question

[gracebowen]

There's been a bit of thread drift in another thread so I decided to start this thread

I don't get the whole skin out thing.

For most people their body is used to wearing and therefore carrying the weight of shoes (I spend most of my time barefoot). So if you are hiking in shoes similar to what you wear what does it matter?

Same thing with wearing clothes. Everyone wears clothes so again I don't see why the weight of the clothes matters all that much if the hiking clothes are similar to what you usually wear.

[Feral Bill]

Clothes add up. Depending on weather 2-5 pounds or more. In pack or worn, it is work to move them up hill. Since what we wear varies, comparing FSO weight is more consistant. For competitive ultra lightness, it avoids cheating in the form of ignoring all possible worn weight. Personally, I have no interest in the next person’s pack or FSO weight.

[bigcranky]

Also, when ultralight gram-counting was a "new thing" and people were trying to get their pack weight below ten pounds (or whatever magic number they wanted), some of them didn't count anything that was carried in their pockets. So if I stick a couple of pounds of gear in my pants pockets (camera, phone, maps, whatever), I can still have an "ultralight" pack. Seriously.

[perrymk]

The next step will be abs out weight. That is, take the bodyweight at which you have visible abdominal muscles (for most people this occurs around 7-8% bodyfat) and add everything to that, including the belly.

Seriously though, I joked with a triathlete friend of mine how we will spend hundreds of dollars worrying about a few ounces yet be carrying around and extra 10-30 pounds of fat. She had recently purchased a carbon fiber bicycle (not sure what exactly is CF, maybe the frame, but she seemed to like it so good for her) and I had purchased a titanium p-38 style can opener (mostly as a lark).

I do work at keeping my pack weight light, however measured, but I also work at physical fitness so an extra pound won't destroy my hiking pleasure.

[garlic08]

I understand the "FSO" number intellectually, and agree with the above descriptions. But I never use it. I also have a comfortable base layer and shoes I wear all the time when I hike, and I think everyone who might ask me what my pack weighs understands that.

I grew up as a long distance hiker in the "PCT culture," where the term "base weight" was used pretty universally. I noticed on my AT hike that some hikers used the modifier "with a full load of food and water." The only place I've ever seen "FSO" is on the computer.

[Odd Man Out]

Trekking poles are carried so not usually included in pack weight. My first pole were full featured BD Alpine Ergo Corks. Very nice, but heavy. After a few hikes I began to wonder if lighter poles would make a difference. So I got a pair of Fizen. I liked the lighter poles much better, despite having fewer bells and whistles. It makes sense as you lift and swing the poles every step. There was also a study that showed weight on your feet (ie shoes) have a disproportionate effect on exertion. Bottom line is that grams that are worn and carried do matter.

[gpburdelljr]

While I always kept my gear as light as possible, I never weighed it because it’s not worth obsessing about.

[4shot]

For competitive ultra lightness, it avoids cheating in the form of ignoring all possible worn weight. Personally, I have no interest in the next person’s pack or FSO weight.

"competitive ultra lightness" ? I have never heard this phrase before. Please tell me you just made that phrase up and that "competitive ultra lightness" isn't an actual thing that exists. The thought that obsessing over, spending a fortune for - in money and/or time, and having "competitions" about the items that are mere tools that allow us to spend time outdoors is a bit disturbing imo.

[Feral Bill]

"competitive ultra lightness" ? I have never heard this phrase before. Please tell me you just made that phrase up and that "competitive ultra lightness" isn't an actual thing that exists. The thought that obsessing over, spending a fortune for - in money and/or time, and having "competitions" about the items that are mere tools that allow us to spend time outdoors is a bit disturbing imo.

Well, I just made up the phrase, but I fear that it is a real thing among some people. I also remember when people bragged about how heavy their packs were, which is even stupider.

[Heliotrope]

Well, I just made up the phrase, but I fear that it is a real thing among some people. I also remember when people bragged about how heavy their packs were, which is even stupider.

Should be a new topic on whiteblaze where people can hash it out and one up each other! I personally want to know the skin out weight so I know if someone is cheating when they tell me their base pack weight. Loading their pockets with phones, knives, paperback novels etc.

Seriously though. Clothing does add up and potentially inhibits freedom of movement. Ever notice how taking off those long pants and wearing shorts makes the hiking easier? If it’s in my pack most of the time it’s part of my base weight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Odd Man Out]

What about FSI (from skin in)? The truth is that for many (most?) people (including myself) the best way to trim a few pounds off your feet is to loose a few pounds of body fat, rather than nickel and dime ozs off your pack base weight. Just because you are used to carrying it (ie the fat) doesn't make it easy. Many people take about getting their "trail legs" a few weeks into a long distance hike, where the miles gradually become easier. This is generally attributed to conditioning. But some of that effect very well could be due to weight loss. You probably notice that 10 lbs of food you pick up from your resupply drop when hiking out of town. But if you've dropped 10 lbs in that first month, that food shows you what you had been carrying all along.

[rocketsocks]

First I heard/read FSO was Colin Fletcher’s book “the complete walker”

[Slo-go'en]

There is a minimum amount of clothing which is generally required to be worn while hiking. Generally pants (shorts) and shoes (+socks), with a top possibly optional. In my mind, that clothing can be discounted and considered part of my body weight. Everything else which will be carried on my back at some point is base weight.

[Feral Bill]

First I heard/read FSO was Colin Fletcher’s book “the complete walker”

Same here. He knew a thing or two.

[Venchka]

Mr. Fletcher was also fond of hiking in his skin only.
Wayne

[MuddyWaters]

There's been a bit of thread drift in another thread so I decided to start this thread

I don't get the whole skin out thing.

For most people their body is used to wearing and therefore carrying the weight of shoes (I spend most of my time barefoot). So if you are hiking in shoes similar to what you wear what does it matter?

Same thing with wearing clothes. Everyone wears clothes so again I don't see why the weight of the clothes matters all that much if the hiking clothes are similar to what you usually wear.

If you dont care, then dont concern yourself with it.

Wt of clothing worn varies s lot by season and conditions.
Several lbs.
Theres also items carried in other ways besides pack, ie poles. Phone in pocket, etc.

[Old Grouse]

It’s a lot easier to throw down some money for lighter weight gear than to lose body weight. I’d like to be able to spend a few hundred dollars to drop that extra weight. But even better would be if I could buy back a few years. (Sigh)

[Starchild]

I mentioned some of this in the base weight thread, but FSO is very useful once one is measuring things to a high degree of accuracy and as mentioned overcomes the shortcommings of base weight measurement for getting actual weight carried down. (and baseweight analysis has many shortcomings).

So it is not that we are not tuned to carry cloths and not feel like we are carrying, but a total analysis of what we are carrying that is more accurate and useful then base weight if the goal is to find ways of carrying less total weight (as opposed of carrying less baseweight, sometimes at the expense of carrying more total weight). Though to the advantage of base weight is a phycological advantage of believing the pack is lighter that it is, and yes that is a real advantage.

But both baseweight and FSO weight are pre-hike analysis, and often not exactly what one carries, sometimes by quite a bit. That's where 'scale on trail' comes in. That one is the reality check, finding out what the pack weighs while hiking. This method has slapped many in the face with cold hard reality, and opened some eyes as well.

[cmoulder]

But both baseweight and FSO weight are pre-hike analysis, and often not exactly what one carries, sometimes by quite a bit. That's where 'scale on trail' comes in. That one is the reality check, finding out what the pack weighs while hiking. This method has slapped many in the face with cold hard reality, and opened some eyes as well.

This is why folks who want to play the gram-counting game have to be honest with themselves about what is actually in their packs (complete gear list) and what things actually weigh (on a good scale).

If spreadsheet weight and trail head weight are significantly different, then something has been overlooked. Food and water weight are frequently underestimated.

And putting things in pants/shirt pockets so that they're not counted as base weight is just plain silly.

[shelb]

There's been a bit of thread drift in another thread so I decided to start this thread
I don't get the whole skin out thing..

I mentioned some of this in the base weight thread, but FSO is very useful once one is measuring things to a high degree of accuracy and as mentioned overcomes the shortcommings of base weight measurement for getting actual weight carried down.

OK, Sorry all... I think I might have been the one to instigate this discussion with a post in another thread.

I focus on Skin Out Weight because I found that it was easy for me (or my comrades) to load our pockets and put on our heavier clothing and then say our packs weighed.... ----. For ME, I felt that "skin-out" weight kept me "honest." This is the weight of EVERYTHING!

I get that many people look at the "Big Three," but when I couldn't afford expensive gear, I looked at total weight. Yes, this means I only have three shirts: one to hike in, one for town, and one for sleeping (um... my way of spoiling mysel!). I only have two shorts (1 to wear, 1 for extra - that has zip off legs). I am VERY careful with weight.

Others noted that body weight is the worst thing to carry. Yes, it was amazing when I dropped 50 plus pounds. I could fly! However, I kept trying to drop skin out, which is good because I just had knee surgery. (***: Went from hiking 200 miles on AT in 2 weeks last year, doing a 1/2 marathon on trails in August, and two Ragnar Relays (200 mile relays) last year... without a problem, but this January, my knees became unhappy on a step machine! Guess what I am saying is, we never know when age will catch up with us. Keeping weight down will, hopefully, help. I am just hoping that I can still do my 200 mile section this year, even if it is in August...