Home A - Z FAQ Bookstore Art Prints Online Library Discussion Forum Muir Weather Maps Lodging About Search

It;s not about the Big Three

Hiking, backpacking, running, biking, climbing, rafting, and other human-powered activities in Yosemite National Park

Moderators: Wickett, dan

It;s not about the Big Three

Postby balzaccom » Wed Jan 12, 2011 9:01 am

Every backpacking book or website will tell you that it's all about the big three: tent, pack and sleeping bag. Get the very best of those, and the rest of your backpacking will be a breeze.

Well, we disagree. It's not about the big three. It's really about getting outdoors and on the trail. And if you are going to obsess about your equipment instead of hiking, you really are missing the point.

Sure, the big three are the main ingredients to your home on the trail. And sure, it would be wonderful to have the very best, lightest and latest version of each item. But it isn't a requirement. In fact, it doesn't really make a big difference.

Examples? OK. Some of our early equipment would never meet the standards of today's equipment geeks (even though it served us through some of the greatest trips we have ever taken!) A couple of full sized sleeping bags that weighed five pounds and didn't compress much smaller than an ice chest cost us about $40 each. A three-man Eureka tent that we originally bought for car camping and weighs nearly eight pounds and costs us another $150. And a pair of Eureka backpacks that we picked up at a box store for under $50 apiece.

Our total pack weights just for the big three were something like 17 pounds for P, and another 9 pounds for M. And that's without food, water, cook kit, or clothing. That sounds like a lot. But then again, when we left for a four day trip in Yosemite that covered over thirty miles in four days...the sutuff worked just fine, and we had a phenomenal trip! Our total pack weights were 35 pounds for P and 25 for M. And our total expenditures (including stove and water filter) were just over $420.

That's not unbearable by any means. We picked up a great aluminum pot for a buck at Goodwill, and that's also where we bought all of our fleece layers. And we left the skillet at home, and didn't bring our tuxedos...but we had all we needed, and that's all that really matters. Those are reasonable pack weights for most people, and if you can carry that, you can have some great adventures in the mountains, even if you don't own the latest ultra-light airskin equipment.

Do we still use that stuff? The answer might surprise you. Over the years, we've upgraded our equipment a bit. We picked up a couple REI Sub-kilo sleeping bags for under $200 each, and that cut almost three pounds off our packweight. And P made a little two-man tent that cut another found pounds of his load. But we still sometimes use the Eureka when we have a guest along, and it works just fine. And our packs? The same old ones we started with. They work just fine, thank you very much.

So now our base weights are lower. For the big three, M carries just six pounds, and P carries about nine. Which means that on a an eight day trip last summer over three 10,000 foot passes, our starting trail weight was 36 pounds for P and 26 for M--only a pound more than that earlier trip in Yosemite.

That was nice, but we could have done the same trip carrying the extra ten pounds between us.

And so can you.

So don't spend your life making constant upgrades to a kit you don't use. Get out there with whatever you have, and over time that equipment will take care of itself. If you REALLY want to look like a pro, it's always better to have older, well-used equipment on your back instead of brand new equipment sitting in your living room.

Always.
balzaccom
Veteran-poster
Veteran-poster
 
Posts: 1725
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:51 am
Location: Napa CA

Postby LVRAY » Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:38 pm

I agree with the general idea behind your post, but your cynicism toward going light is over stated and seems to be based and cost alone. If you are not a believer in the benefits of going light (and you obviously are not), then there is probably no convincing you otherwise. But going light as possible while maintaining comfort & functionality is comon sense. Why? Because it will greatly increase your enjoyment of the whole experience - which is the point of going backpacking. You will concentrate less on the weight you are carrying and more on your surroundings. You will be able to go further and do more. You seem to equate light weight with exprensive. That is not necesarily true. Many of the ultralightest I know are using home made equipment that cost them little. Anyone wanting a good introduction to lightweight backing and its benefits should read Ryan Jordan's "Lightweight Backpacking & Camping". It is a bit out dated now, but the core info is still worthwhile. The lightweight packing forum also contain plenty of good info:
http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin ... index.html
LVRAY
Frequent poster
Frequent poster
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2009 6:26 pm

Postby oakroscoe » Thu Jan 13, 2011 3:05 am

A lot of my lighter gear (whitebox alcohol stove http://www.whiteboxstoves.com/buy.html ) was some of the cheapest, so I don't think that the lightest gear has to be the most expensive. I will say that my back is much happier carrying my GoLite Jam pack thats under 2 pounds as opposed to carrying my REI pack that weighs well over 5 pounds before putting any gear in it.

Also, if you're willing go without a tent during the summer, you've just saved a few pounds and a lot of money.

If money is really an issue, there's plenty of great deals to be had out there, check used gear swaps and craigslist for gear that people are getting rid of.

I will agree that all the gear in the world does you no good if you're not getting out there and using it! I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm jonesing for a trip. I may have to get a quick cheater trip into Preston Falls on my next set of off days.
oakroscoe
Veteran-poster
Veteran-poster
 
Posts: 123
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 12:22 pm
Location: Bay Area

Postby Wickett » Thu Jan 13, 2011 8:06 am

For me getting new gear is exciting, like Christmas. I do research on products that would make my trips easier, lighter, etc. when I am not able to go backpacking. I plan a trip just so I finally get to take the stuff out and break it in.

That is why I now have a hammock instead of a tent, way better IMO and my back doesn't hurt and I actually sleep.

The figure 9's are another awesome thing that save me so much time setting up and breaking camp. Those little things are awesome and weigh nothing.
Wickett
Veteran-poster
Veteran-poster
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Sacramento

Postby balzaccom » Thu Jan 13, 2011 5:39 pm

I never said that we didn't think that weight was important--after all, our big three these days is pretty darn light. SO please don't take that as the primary message of the post.

What I was really saying was the people often spend too much time obsessing about equipment, and not enough time out on the trail!
balzaccom
Veteran-poster
Veteran-poster
 
Posts: 1725
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:51 am
Location: Napa CA

Agree with the Sentiments

Postby KC » Fri Jan 14, 2011 12:40 am

I think I like what everyone has to say here. I'm always looking for ways to go lighter. And, when I get a new piece of lightweight gear, I typically can't wait to try it out. In fact, I've been doing a lot of research on tents because I think I'm ready to ditch my REI Quarter Dome T1 (Anyone here try the Fly Creek UL 1?). It's setup sucks and I am ready for something lighter. I know I'll be giddy to try out whatever tent I get.

All that being said, I've had great times with a heavier pack. Did a 50 mile trip through southern Yosemite in 4.5 days with a 40 lb pack and had an excellent time. It really is about the adventure and serenity--though new gear can be fun too.
KC
Veteran-poster
Veteran-poster
 
Posts: 106
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 12:11 am

Postby oakroscoe » Fri Jan 14, 2011 1:36 am

KC, I have the fly creek ul2, and if I have to bring a tent, that's what I carry. I'd advice going with the ul2 instead of the ul1, I believe its only 4 more ounces, but its a bit more room. The UL2 isn't really a "true" 2 man tent, its closer to a 1 and a half man tent. I've been out in the rain with it multiple times, and it performed well each time. The downside is that you have to stake it in order to get the full size out of it, but that was a price I was willing to pay. Staking is pretty much necessary when it rains, otherwise you will get condensation in the tent. Also, I would highly recommend that you get the footprint as well, because the material is very thin (another trade of for weight) and is susceptible to being ripped if there is anything less than pristine ground under the tent. Unfortunately the footprint is another 10 ounces and costs $50, but I think it is essential to protect the bottom of the tent.

I would wait until you get your annual 20% off sale at REI in March and use whatever dividend you have to help offset the costs. Also, buying at REI you know they have an excellent return policy, so if for some reason it doesn't live up to your expectations you can take it back.
oakroscoe
Veteran-poster
Veteran-poster
 
Posts: 123
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 12:22 pm
Location: Bay Area

Postby bill-e-g » Fri Jan 14, 2011 8:31 am

Lose the tent... and turn it into the Big Two.

One reason I find now to bring tent is for bugs... but if solo
or wife not with... I rarely bring one anymore other than
on some trips to get some use out of them or longer trips
in winter where weather is too iffy.
Bug Bivy when bugs are really bad, open air all others.
Tarp and Bivy for rain, etc.

(didn't bring one last weekend... not bringing one tmr)

Of course do what you are comfortable and confident with
that will keep your butt warm and dry. Hypothermia kills.

Have fun
User avatar
bill-e-g
Veteran-poster
Veteran-poster
 
Posts: 795
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 5:57 am
Location: Table Lake, YNP

Postby balzaccom » Fri Jan 14, 2011 12:47 pm

Hi Bill

My wife does insist on a tent, both for bugs and for "privacy." Go figure--since the last trip was three days without seeing another soul.

But I love backpacking with her....so what she wants, she gets!
balzaccom
Veteran-poster
Veteran-poster
 
Posts: 1725
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:51 am
Location: Napa CA

Postby bill-e-g » Fri Jan 14, 2011 4:19 pm

balzaccom wrote:But I love backpacking with her....so what she wants, she gets!


That's how it always works. Take the tent.
:)
User avatar
bill-e-g
Veteran-poster
Veteran-poster
 
Posts: 795
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 5:57 am
Location: Table Lake, YNP

Postby orion » Sat Jan 15, 2011 9:52 am

good point on the gear. when a backpack finally wore out after a decade of heavy use, i found the exact same one on craigslist, used by a human once ten years ago, as spider habitat in a garage ever since. it was remarkable to see them side by side.

over-attention to gear is much like fashion: for the wealthy and/or misguided. one needs to know the difference between material neccessity and wanton consumerism.
orion
Veteran-poster
Veteran-poster
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 4:02 pm

On the gear points

Postby KC » Tue Jan 18, 2011 10:26 pm

I'm hoping to check out the new jetboil stove when it comes out. That said, does anyone use an alcohol stove for backpacking here? Been very tempted to make one since they're so light.

But it's still all about the scenery etc. . . .
KC
Veteran-poster
Veteran-poster
 
Posts: 106
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 12:11 am

Postby balzaccom » Wed Jan 19, 2011 3:45 pm

I've made quite a few alcohol stoves. We still have two around here somewhere. They work very well for boiling water. I'd like mine to have a slightly narrow burn area, but all in all they really work.

But when we backpack, we sometimes want to simmer something, and alcohol stoves don't do that very well. They're either on or off. My wife is a chef, and she really likes the Pocket Rocket and its variable flame...
balzaccom
Veteran-poster
Veteran-poster
 
Posts: 1725
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:51 am
Location: Napa CA

Postby oakroscoe » Wed Jan 19, 2011 6:11 pm

While I love the weight of my whitebox, I think can all agree that alcohol can be a pain to cook with. I split it pretty evenly between taking the alcohol stove and my snow peak giga power.
http://www.rei.com/product/660004?prefe ... erralID=NA

I have to say, I have been very happy with the giga stove. For only 3.5 ounces, its pretty amazing. A isobutane canister is only another 7 ounces. Its pretty tough to beat that combination of weight and use-ability.

Of course you could bring no stove at all and cook by fire...

Anyways, I have to say, I have enjoyed all the discussions on gear and saving weight. It does help distract from not being up in the mountains.
oakroscoe
Veteran-poster
Veteran-poster
 
Posts: 123
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 12:22 pm
Location: Bay Area

Postby Wickett » Wed Jan 19, 2011 9:30 pm

Speaking of mountains in gear, anyone is the Sac area who wants to go snow shoeing? I got my snowshoes this past weekend and I really want to go, none of my friends are into it.
Wickett
Veteran-poster
Veteran-poster
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Sacramento

Next

Return to Yosemite Hiking & Backpacking

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests