now that i'm refreshed after a good night's rest on my packaging (kidding!)

if we flip the graph to emphasize the psych (p curve)
then maybe it better portrays the lunatic fringe (rectangle)


(let me repost the graph - did not work right)

Edit: I was only kidding, both the GG 1/8 and the torso look fantastic and will become an integral part of my Big 4. The price is an excellent value.

Edited by gmatthews on 04/03/2007 11:52:34 MDT.

OK, folks.

I went to an engineering school (the Naval Academy) where I was a history major (36 hours) with LOTS of engineering, math, and science hours (88 total). The Engineers always used to call us "bull majors". Well in this case, I know enough about bull AND graphs to see who is REALLY slinging some bull.

"If you can't dazzle them with data, baffle 'em with BULL!"

However, I DO appreciate the thought that goes into this. It DOES "sort of" quantify the otherwise intangible aspects of lightweight backpacking. However, the graph doesn't specify the perfect "sweet spot". Therefore I figure I should simply add gradations to the x- and y-axes that specify MY most common load weights as OPTIMAL! Peak Bull achieved! ;-)

Shawn busted us : )

At some point in your search for lighter and lighter gear, you enter a realm where you go beyond rational thinking. This trip takes you out of the village and towards the fringe where the lunatics dance nimbly in the moonlight, howling their song.