Comments on: Lightweight backpacking – Evolution not revolution

By: Ben

Ben — Wed, 05 Nov 2014 18:54:35 +0000

I read that gossamer gear post. I find these discussions of lightweight vs traditional backpacking, what “weight” means lightweight etc . . . tiring after a while. It is just backpacking, not rocket science, and most people aren’t thru hikers. First as you say even mainstream gear is getting lighter. If you go to REI and spend a reasonable amount of money the weight of your big 3 won’t be that bad. Most people who backpack a few times a year probably don’t care about the minutiae of whether that pack is a pound lighter and I think this image of all these people carrying 50 pound packs because they don’t know any better is silly. With some of this disuccsion it makes it sounds like there is an evil heavy gear mafia making people darry too much and I think there are a lot of backpackers with OCD on internet forums. Everyone who I have backpacked with who goes regularly quickly figures out that carrying less is easier (and none of them carried 50 pounds on their first trip!) and has figured out what they really need to bring for the conditions in terms of food, extra clothes etc . . . Most have gotten lighter gear if they intend on backpacking regularly or not always. I backpack several times a year with a former AT thru hiker who always backpacks with her 5 pound osprey pack and has no desire to change; she likes it and it works but what goes in the pack is light. In any case people seem to figure it out and enjoy themselves without obcessing over whether a 3 oz alcohol stove is too heavy compared to someone elses 1 oz stove.

By: Paul Mags

Paul Mags — Wed, 05 Nov 2014 16:31:02 +0000

In reply to Dirk Rabdau. Dirk, you are probably correct. A person out one or two weekends a year is not going to replace their gear that still works well. If a person starts doing longer trips, then maybe. My townie bicycle is rather heavy compared to other bikes I could buy. But since I use it, well in town only, works just fine. If I did long bike tours, as with John, I'd rethink my gear. I suspect most casual backpackers are similar. Having said all that, mainstream gear is getting lighter. So evolving for sure.

By: Dirk Rabdau

Dirk Rabdau — Wed, 05 Nov 2014 09:49:09 +0000

Great points in this post.. Does a correlation exist the number of days backpacking per year and the weight of equipment? I I wonder how many nights the average backpacker goes out each year? For a lot of people, I imagine the investment in lighter gear isn’t worth it for a couple of weekend trips. It seems similar to the camera debate – there is a segment of backpackers who invest in excellent camera systems because they want to maximize the photographic potential of any trip. Then there are the masses who are satisfied with the results they get from their point-and-shoots or cell phones. Photography hasn’t died because people are content with middling optics; rather, to the point you have made, it has evolved to include disparate expectations.

By: John

John — Wed, 05 Nov 2014 09:14:56 +0000

Speaking as a backpacker / cycle tourist who began in the 60s with a combination of ex-army and ex-school clothing plus a plastic mac, I think the greatest improvements to comfort, performance and weight carried have all come as a result of improvements in the materials available to gear manufacturers. There have arguably been revolutionary moments. For example, GoreTex meant I could carry less spare clothing. Others might make the same claim for the introduction of cuben fibre, but I wouldn’t as it has not changed anything else about what I pack. GoreTex did.

The real disappointment though, is that it is harder than ever to buy simplicity – clean designs which include no unnecessary features – from main stream retailers. I don’t think they even prototype gear anymore, which is a shame as the big companies all started out as small companies which cared.