three (minor?) questions for the more experienced UL hiker

[GBarron]

Hey all,

After 30+ years of climbing, my interests are shifting to long distance UL hiking.

Last year, I bought a Tarptent Moment, Exped Synmat UL, and an MSR Titan pot and I find them all more than satisfactory.

Just ordered an Enlightened Equipment Rev X 40* quilt which I eagerly anticipate receiving, and I think this should round off my major UL purchases. I expect my base weight to be <10 kg or 10-12 lbs.

I'm planning two trips for this summer: the 140 km Padjelantaleden in northern Sweden (solo) and 150 km of the Great Divide Trail (including 10 mountain passes) in the Cdn. Rockies with friends. And I can't wait til the snow is off the trails!

Questions:

1. Last summer I did successful multiday trips with a 35L Arcteryx Cierzo pack. It's basically a collapsible climber's summit pack (650 g). It was fine that season, even though I carried a heavier (1 kg) sleeping bag and GSI Dualist pot. Assuming my base weight drops this year, is there any merit to upgrading to an UL 45 L pack (maybe the larger Osprey Hornet) or building a MYOG framesheet for the Cierzo?
2. As a climber, I quickly learned to bury my boots in the pack and complete approach hikes, frequently without trails, wearing approach shoes or runners. Last summer, I hiked 250+ km in my just-retired road running shoes. One small blister, probably due to to too-thick socks. Which makes me suspect that once one abandons traditional hiking boots, details of fit, traction, and waterproofing become far less crucial. Runners are just inherently more comfortable. So... any merit to upgrading to a purpose-built trail shoe or will I be OK with whatever running shoes I've just retired?
3. I use a single ski pole as a third leg on sideslopes, downhills, and stream-hopping. I kinda think it looks underused when I make camp, so I understand the appeal of trekking pole supported tents. But I love the Moment! But I don't see the value of two poles when walking. More support, sure, but the bilateral arm-swinging annoys me. And, yes, I've put in lots of km backcountry skiing. Any reason for me to hike with two poles?

I suspect these are more matters of personal taste than dogma, but just wondered if the collected wisdom in these forums (fora?) could shed light on nuances I may be missing.

Thanks!

[FarmerChef]

1. Can you use a 35L pack? Sure - in the summer. But come winter it gets hard to pack all your layers inside without having to resort to lashing stuff to the outside. At least that's been my experience. A 45L frameless pack (if you're still trying to go for a light weight) might suit you well. Best advice is to take all your gear to an REI or similar and try some 45L packs to see what you like and don't like. Then make your decision from there.
2. There are several threads on trail runners here on the site. Without regurgitating all of them, if you are comfortable in them, a purpose-built trail runner can be a wonderful hiking experience. If you will be on rocks, especially wet ones, then a more aggressive tread will do better at not slipping than a traditional road running shoe. I've tried both and vastly prefer the trail runner. I use minimalist trail runners as I am a minimalist road runner when not on the trail. This works great with a light pack. Go heavy and feel the pain. I've learned that the hard way.
3. Only reason to use two poles is if you like how they feel/help you. If you've tried both and prefer only one then go with only one. I prefer two but only use one pole with my tarp. Fwiw, I use two because I like the balanced feeling it gives me over one pole. It makes descending steep hills easier for me as I can use the pole on each footstep rather than every other one. Same on the climbs. The biggest help has been to my knees, especially where speed arresting on the descent is concerned. But this, like many things hiking, is a matter of personal taste.

[Kookork]

Hey all,

After 30+ years of climbing, my interests are shifting to long distance UL hiking.

Last year, I bought a Tarptent Moment, Exped Synmat UL, and an MSR Titan pot and I find them all more than satisfactory.

Just ordered an Enlightened Equipment Rev X 40* quilt which I eagerly anticipate receiving, and I think this should round off my major UL purchases. I expect my base weight to be <10 kg or 10-12 lbs.

I'm planning two trips for this summer: the 140 km Padjelantaleden in northern Sweden (solo) and 150 km of the Great Divide Trail (including 10 mountain passes) in the Cdn. Rockies with friends. And I can't wait til the snow is off the trails!

Questions:

1. Last summer I did successful multiday trips with a 35L Arcteryx Cierzo pack. It's basically a collapsible climber's summit pack (650 g). It was fine that season, even though I carried a heavier (1 kg) sleeping bag and GSI Dualist pot. Assuming my base weight drops this year, is there any merit to upgrading to an UL 45 L pack (maybe the larger Osprey Hornet) or building a MYOG framesheet for the Cierzo?
2. As a climber, I quickly learned to bury my boots in the pack and complete approach hikes, frequently without trails, wearing approach shoes or runners. Last summer, I hiked 250+ km in my just-retired road running shoes. One small blister, probably due to to too-thick socks. Which makes me suspect that once one abandons traditional hiking boots, details of fit, traction, and waterproofing become far less crucial. Runners are just inherently more comfortable. So... any merit to upgrading to a purpose-built trail shoe or will I be OK with whatever running shoes I've just retired?
3. I use a single ski pole as a third leg on sideslopes, downhills, and stream-hopping. I kinda think it looks underused when I make camp, so I understand the appeal of trekking pole supported tents. But I love the Moment! But I don't see the value of two poles when walking. More support, sure, but the bilateral arm-swinging annoys me. And, yes, I've put in lots of km backcountry skiing. Any reason for me to hike with two poles?

I suspect these are more matters of personal taste than dogma, but just wondered if the collected wisdom in these forums (fora?) could shed light on nuances I may be missing.

Thanks!

10 kg equals to 22 lbs.

If you are interested in using one pole( I switched from climbing to long distance hiking too and after switching I use two poles) then you can buy a tent that uses just one pole as tent pole. Henryshire tarptent and Nemo equipment have some models of ul tent that is designed for using one pole. But if you already have a moment and do not want to use two poles it does not seem beneficial to buy another tent to save a few ounces to me.

[staehpj1]

I use a single ski pole as a third leg on sideslopes, downhills, and stream-hopping. I kinda think it looks underused when I make camp, so I understand the appeal of trekking pole supported tents. But I love the Moment! But I don't see the value of two poles when walking. More support, sure, but the bilateral arm-swinging annoys me. And, yes, I've put in lots of km backcountry skiing. Any reason for me to hike with two poles?

If you need more poles for your shelter than you choose to hike with, there are lighter options. They range from zero grams (improvising with trees, rocks, or sticks) to 30-60 or so grams for a dedicated tent pole. Personally, I like to go as simple as possible and therefore I prefer no trekking pole. Depending on the location I may or my not take dedicated tent poles.

[Dogwood]

1)I'd be careful with the AT Cierzo pack as far as the wt you carry in it(it's frameless) and the amt(volume!) of gear plus food plus other gear needed/desired(35 L or 2150 cubic inches) you haul in it. The AT Cierzo is a very good basically summit or day pack possibly allowing fairer summer weather multi-night(MAYBE 3-4 nights!) treks of this nature IF you not only have UL or light wt gear but ALSO the gear is UL or low in volume!. It's great FOR THAT. IMO. you'd DEFINITELY be surpassing the intended use and design goals of the Cierzo on 85-95 mile summer higher elev treks with just the kit you described so far on a straight(no resupply) hike. Might work though. The Cierzo would be nice on the possibly wetter GDT. Might have to do a resupply(maybe two depending on pace) along the way though on both planned summer treks in Can and Swe.

2) This is not correct! - "Which makes me suspect that once one abandons traditional hiking boots, details of fit, traction, and waterproofing become far less crucial." IMHO, you'd be foolish to assume this! Perhaps, these "details" are even more critical to get right on the GDT and Pad. T

3) Personal preference but the two poles give better balance and once one gets into the rhythm of two UL trekking poles it can help to getting into the long distance hiking pace "zone."

[Bronk]

The difference between trailrunners and plain old running shoes is that trailrunners will put up with more abuse on rougher terrain...you'll get a lot more miles out of trailrunners than you will with running shoes.

[staehpj1]

The difference between trailrunners and plain old running shoes is that trailrunners will put up with more abuse on rougher terrain...you'll get a lot more miles out of trailrunners than you will with running shoes.

I guess it depends on the model, but I have not really found that get more miles than road shoes with the trail shoes I have worn. I guess some are more robust. The ones I have used do generally have more aggressive tread and a rock plate though.

[garlic08]

1) I'd suggest looking at even lighter packs. You should be able to get under 500g without breaking the bank. Look at Gossamer Gear and Zpacks for starters.

2) Long distances on trails (40km+/- per day) introduce different challenges in shoe fit and comfort. And everyone has different feet. My favorite shoes feel like the box they came in to some. You'll have to figure out what works for you on long trips. Some do well with discount store shoes, some use sandals, some need specific soles and widths and insoles, a very few even go barefoot.

3) No reason to carry two poles. I've hiked many miles with a single pole, and many more miles with no poles. I like having one hand free, like when frequent map checks are needed. If the terrain is moderate and the trail is decent and I don't need a pole for shelter, I don't bring one.

Welcome to Whiteblaze!

[BrianLe]

Poles definitely do seem to be individual preference, but I think there's a real age bias. With garlic and a few like him showing up as outliers? Most older hikers I know use two poles, and IMO two poles are a fundamentally different experience than one.
I really hated/resisted the idea of using anything more than one pole occasionally until I started feeling some knee pain on a trip in my mid to late 40's. Switched to be a two-stick hiker on the theory that the best way to fix knee problems is to not get them in the first place.

What I initially hated was not having a hand free. That just doesn't seem to be a problem now, I'm used to unconsciously shifting the pole out of the way (strap still on my wrist) to do most anything I want to do. It is, however, possible to get repetitive injury issues if you do a lot of miles; best IMO not to grip too tightly on the handles, use the straps more.

The upside is that when two poles are integrated into your process, you become a bit like a four-legged creature. It's easier for me to take in views as I walk, so long as the trail quality isn't bad. But primarily it takes stress off my knees on steeper downhill stretches, in a way that a single pole just doesn't. Also infrequently helpful to fend off aggressive dogs.

[handlebar]

... It is, however, possible to get repetitive injury issues if you do a lot of miles; best IMO not to grip too tightly on the handles, use the straps more.

+1 on using the straps more. I find I can only lightly hold the pole grips while resting the strap across my palms after positioning my hand through the straps from the bottom (like ski poles). I find that not only do the poles take a lot of stress off my knees, but I can push back with my lats and arm muscles to add a little extra length to each stride.