Trouble justifying the cost of "lightweight" backpacking

Ask questions and share your experiences with hiking & backpacking gear, and share trail recipes and gadget tips. Please see classifieds forum for buying/selling stuff.
User avatar
retired jerry
Posts: 12484
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm

Re: Trouble justifying the cost of "lightweight" backpacking

Post by retired jerry » October 29th, 2015, 4:27 pm

yeah, baseweight is everything on your back except the consumables like food, fuel, and water. I'm maybe 12 pounds. 20 pounds total for 4 nights.

okay, maybe I was being a little judgemental saying someone is crazy for having heavy gear :)

back when I bought my 5 pound tent, sleeping bag, and pack, that's all there was

User avatar
Koda
Posts: 3436
Joined: June 5th, 2009, 7:54 am

Re: Trouble justifying the cost of "lightweight" backpacking

Post by Koda » October 29th, 2015, 4:46 pm

retired jerry wrote:baseweight is everything on your back except the consumables like food, fuel, and water.
IMO kind of. I think it would be confusing to include everything non-consumable, I only consider the baseweight the things essential for staying the night. Everything else thats non-consumable is optional or trip specific, such as an extra layer or jacket, camera, or perhaps microspikes or even a gps device. By breaking it down this way I can see exactly that I don't really need certain items but if I included all the other gear as the baseweight Id never achieve the 10lb benchmark.
lightweight, cheap, strong... pick 2

User avatar
retired jerry
Posts: 12484
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm

Re: Trouble justifying the cost of "lightweight" backpacking

Post by retired jerry » October 29th, 2015, 5:49 pm

of course these are just tools to help you micro analyze

you can do it any way you wish

by counting all non consumable weight, then you can add the consumable weight per day X number of days. Convenient way to do it.

by making a list of items and their weight, it's easier to get the big picture and hypothesize what things you could do to lower weight

carry on
Posts: 1
Joined: March 4th, 2016, 9:42 pm

Re: Trouble justifying the cost of "lightweight" backpacking

Post by carry on » March 4th, 2016, 10:25 pm

I am just getting back into backpacking and am getting lighter weight gear for myself. In the early 80s, as a kid learning to backpack, I thought part of the experience was the pain and exhaustion. With lighter weight options, now it does not have to be that way. But light weight usually (maybe not always) mean more expensive. So for me, I am shopping sales, with a rule of thumb of trying for at least 40% off. Still expensive though.

But i want my kids to get into it as they get older, but I realized it will be real expensive to get light gear for three kids, too expensive. And I would feel like a bad dad if we went out hiking, and i had all top notch gear, and they had cheap, not warm, not good stuff.

So weight is what will give. They will get safe, warm gear, but will be cheaper mostly because it will be heavier. I then will share the weight, take some of their heavier gear in my bag to make it fair, and to make it so we can go further than a few miles.
I already got a six moons bag, still pretty light, but way bigger than I need by myself, thinking when my kids start backpacking I will have room for some of their gear.

I am also planning with a friend to do some sort of parent run, family backpacking collective, family explorer club thing, where we can buy gear for kids all together and share the costs of gear for families, and also just share info, and moral support etc. to get our whole families doing great, longer trips together.

User avatar
retired jerry
Posts: 12484
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm

Re: Trouble justifying the cost of "lightweight" backpacking

Post by retired jerry » March 5th, 2016, 6:14 am

Teenagers can be so hard on equipment. Lightweight stuff sometimes doesn't survive.

A lot of weight can be saved by not carrying un-needed stuff. Extra clothes, food, water can be heavy. Not that you shouldn't have some spare stuff, but don't take more than you need for safety.

User avatar
Koda
Posts: 3436
Joined: June 5th, 2009, 7:54 am

Re: Trouble justifying the cost of "lightweight" backpacking

Post by Koda » March 5th, 2016, 9:11 am

carry on wrote:But light weight usually (maybe not always) mean more expensive.
not always. There is some excellent gear out there that doesn’t cost too much... depending on perspective. Take a look at the ideas in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=10531&hilit=ultralight+gear+list


good first post BTW, welcome to the forum.
lightweight, cheap, strong... pick 2

Lurch
Posts: 1258
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Location: Aurora
Contact:

Re: Trouble justifying the cost of "lightweight" backpacking

Post by Lurch » March 6th, 2016, 11:28 am

retired jerry wrote:A lot of weight can be saved by not carrying un-needed stuff. Extra clothes, food, water can be heavy.
And a lot of searches that turn into rescues are because of exposure and lack of equipment/knowledge

matimeo
Posts: 45
Joined: October 16th, 2015, 8:33 pm

Re: Trouble justifying the cost of "lightweight" backpacking

Post by matimeo » March 6th, 2016, 2:19 pm

I appreciate the responses from everyone since I started this thread. As I looked to get back into backpacking, I think I was just a little taken back at how much the biggest voices in backpacking advocate the lightest packs. I've realized a few things as I have begun acquiring some of the necessary gear and getting better educated about backpacking.
1. It probably is a lot more fun when you don't bring a lot of unnecessary things that weigh you down.
2. The above being true, I also don't think that I personally would have that much fun leaving behind certain things, because I enjoy as much the bushcraft aspect of hiking as I do the hiking part.
3. People who say you can get into ultralight backpacking (10 lb base weight) without breaking the bank are obviously wealthy and on a different plane than myself or are just lying.
4. A 20 lb base weight is easily achieved on a (non rich person) budget, with a great deal of comfort. I could sleep under a tarp, but I'd rather my hammock thank you very much.
5. I'm still figuring this all out for myself, so I'm probably mostly wrong still.

User avatar
retired jerry
Posts: 12484
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm

Re: Trouble justifying the cost of "lightweight" backpacking

Post by retired jerry » March 6th, 2016, 2:58 pm

"And a lot of searches that turn into rescues are because of exposure and lack of equipment/knowledge"

You missed what I said just for you - "Not that you shouldn't have some spare stuff, but don't take more than you need for safety."

Like bring an extra pound of food. Maybe an extra pint of water if there isn't a lot of water available.

I don't bring a lot of extra clothes, I bring clothes that will work when wet and make double sure my sleeping bag doesn't get wet.

Don't bring an extra pound of fuel. Don't bring an axe.

Bring the 10 essentials

Lurch
Posts: 1258
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Location: Aurora
Contact:

Re: Trouble justifying the cost of "lightweight" backpacking

Post by Lurch » March 6th, 2016, 3:17 pm

Oh I saw it ;)

Unfortunately, most people cut down their gear without having the knowledge and experience of what they can eliminate. I've always said people running pure ultralight are putting themselves on a thinner knife-edge than the average hiker. If you're going to run that route, you should have the expertise to back it up. People new to hiking, don't generally have that.

Post Reply