You can get a 600$ trip from Chi town to Dublin on sale from Aer Lingus.

"You can get a "roll royce feeling" big load pack for 2-3 lbs. There's no good reason to go over 3.5 lbs for pack weights under 50 lbs. I'm all for having the right support and padding for the job at hand, but that's not the reason why these's packs are 4-6 lbs."

Dan, of course there is. If you are something less than a skinny, 170 lb person, you may need something with a larger belt and larger shoulder harness and maybe a longer torso. Add in custom fabrics and superior construction and the weight adds up. Sorry Dan, but although I love ULA packs and have owned three (also spent time with the inventor, Brian), they are not nearly as robust with the same attention to detail as a Mchale. Truly, a Mchale is an F'ing work of art and without ever using one, you can't make such generalizations. Well, actually you can. This is an open forum.

Sweet Lord.

I am 6 foot and 215 lbs. I have a 35" waist but a 47" chest. You should see what I squat. Same reason why I can't buy off the rack pants and my pants weigh more.

Guess what? My pack is going to weigh more. Empty.

But I can also tell you that an extra 1 or 2 lbs means nothing to my fitness and strength level. It would not tax my fitness capacity at all.

But please Dan, tell us which packs can carry 50 lbs for a distance in comfort that weigh less than 3.5 lbs? Your Catalyst? Tee Hee.

"But please Dan, tell us which packs can carry 50 lbs for a distance in comfort that weigh less than 3.5 lbs? Your Catalyst? Tee Hee"


Doesnt Mchale himself make 3.5lb packs capable of carrying 50lbs? Sorting through his website it appears.his sub pop pach states it easily handles 40 plus lbs at 3.25 lbs. So by liminting options and making light fabric choices on a Mchale and ou could get a sub 3.5 lb pack carrying 50lbs.

"Doesnt Mchale himself make 3.5lb packs capable of carrying 50lbs? Sorting through his website it appears.his sub pop pach states it easily handles 40 plus lbs at 3.25 lbs. So by liminting options and making light fabric choices on a Mchale and ou could get a sub 3.5 lb pack carrying 50lbs."

Probably. Dan is a genius.

But then making a stripped pack to just get under an arbitrary figure of 3.5 lbs seems strange. Maybe some additional exercise would allow one to carry side water bottle holsters and a front pocket.

Well this whole thread has been rather strange. The original discussion seemed to be around a typical 1 week UL backpacking trip / thru kie and strayed from there. Of course you are going to use a tool that works for what you need to carry.

Edited by GregF on 03/17/2013 00:47:19 MDT.

"Cesar, I've followed a few of your posts, with fervor. You're what I like to call "one end of the spectrum." "

Thanks, I think :) Glad someone has read my posts with fervor! PM me if you ever have any questions or anything, would be happy to help you out if I can.

"Your carry weight is DEFINITELY in the frameless camp. That's intended as a compliment. I don't know if I'm ready to go that ultralight, ever. Especially not with camera gear."

Thanks again. I didn't think I would ever go UL, let alone SUL and even XUL when I first found this website and started evolving as a backpacker. The biggest thing, and I don't mean to beat a dead horse but it is an important point, is to just get out there and try it. Give self reflection on how things went. What helped me a lot, and I try and do this with many things in life, is to think of a 1-10 scale of "fun" or "experience" on a given trip. With 1 being horrible and a complete waste of time (this I contend does not really exist) and 10 being perfect (again, non-existent). It takes courage and maturity to be able to admit to yourself that maybe what you are doing is a well, let's just say below a 9.

I have written this before, but when I was lugging around a 2kg backpack with a 10kg base weight, looking back I'd say it was around a 6 or 7. It was fun, but I didn't know the potential was there to improve until I let entropy take over, which can be a very good thing so long as you do so sans bad faith. Thing is, you can feel that your experience is a "9" at the time, but then when you try something else that is more of a "real" 9, you realize that you were to an extent wrong or fooling yourself. I am not saying that this is the case with you or anyone else--I speak only for myself.

So do what you think is best for yourself. If you feel strongly enough that using a 5lb backpack is the best possible option, and that your experiences with it are a 9, good for you. But if you try using a frameless pack and lowering your base weight, and give it an honest try, and still feel like the 5lb pack is better--say your frameless UL trip is a 6 or 7 or worse--you can go back to using the 5lb pack and heavier base weight with a much more informed and solid personal conclusion.

"I'm 6'2", 170lbs, athletic but almost all in my legs because I'm a cyclist. My shoulders and back aren't that powerful, just a little rock climbing. I appreciate good pack distribution, especially when I have to carry a little extra."

It makes more sense that you are looking for better distribution of weight. I agree with others that there are packs under 5lbs that probably just as good with dealing with a 30lb load. I would also encourage you to look into functional strength training for your core, back, and shoulders. This you can do without buying any equipment or anything, just do simple body weight training--push ups, pull ups, crunches, etc. I have even loaded up packs with lots of weight by filling them with bottles of water, then doing intense hikes around my neighborhood. If you are really looking to improve functional strength, I am a user and big fan of kettle bells. Just make sure to do research and/or get training on how to use them properly. As a cyclist your legs ought to be solid and you don't have to work them much, especially if you still cycle.

Good luck with whatever you do. BTW, I have an MSR Titan kettle pot and it is in my go-to cooking system. Great piece of gear. Hope the above helps :)

I've read most of this thread, and it's been pretty entertaining. I think what it boils down to is Max, using some tortured reasoning, trying to justify the Baltoro as a "poor man's McHale". It's not really; I've used both and they are totally different packs.
Happy St Pat's-Its sunny and snowy and We're going skiing!

Edited by Adox on 03/17/2013 06:35:30 MDT.

"If you are something less than a skinny, 170 lb person, you may need something with a larger belt and larger shoulder harness and maybe a longer torso. Add in custom fabrics and superior construction and the weight adds up...although I love ULA packs...they are not nearly as robust with the same attention to detail as a Mchale. Truly, a Mchale is an F'ing work of art..."
I'm not trying to debate pack companies here, just pack philosophy. IMO, weight tends to add up primarily because designers try to add every feature to please everyone (ie. Max's pack with at least EIGHT zippers), and secondly, because everything is overbuilt for users who have no concept of taking care of their stuff. Larger harnesses, good fabrics and proper construction don't shift things by more than half a pound normally. IMO, the ultimate pack fabric is McHale's 3.5oz pure dyneema + cuben laminate, which probably weighs 8oz total for enough to make a big pack.

"But please Dan, tell us which packs can carry 50 lbs for a distance in comfort that weigh less than 3.5 lbs? Your Catalyst?"
This thread is (was?) about packs for heavier but not monster loads - maybe 30-40 lbs and not exceeding 50. For this use, there are a ton of great packs from McHale, HMG, Osprey, ULA, Granite Gear etc that are under 3.5 lbs. I'm not going to extoll my 2.5 lbs (size large) Catalyst without using it outside of the living room, but it is one example of a pack that should meet this general use requirement. Considering a 31oz HMG Porter generally accomplishes this task, I think it's tough to argue that nearly doubling this weight (to 54oz) is insufficient to get a solid pack.

"I can also tell you that an extra 1 or 2 lbs means nothing to my fitness and strength level."
The trouble with this argument is that people use it for every decision they make. I'm not saying you do, but I see lots of people saying this and then at the end of the day all those ounces and pounds that didn't matter ends up being 10 lbs that does. It's essentially the traditional backpackers philosophy.

Edited by dandydan on 03/17/2013 07:43:55 MDT.

Look what happened to this thread while I slept!!!!

Max, I very much get that you want to learn. You are so in the same place as so many of us when we find BPL, but as Stephen mentioned, you do have a problem with your delivery ;)

We all swear that we would never try this, or never go to that...I thought frameless (or minimally framed) packs were silly, I swore I would never sleep under a tarp, that alcohol stoves were too much work and who wants that?!

Of course now I have a minimally framed pack and loath the idea of getting something slightly beefier for the JMT. I have a zpacks hexamid tent and am seriously considering the trailstar (that looks awesome!) and I don't want to bring my canister anymore because I really really like my caldera cone set up.

The only difference is you are asking questions by (unintentionally?) challenging the choices people make here, while most of us just read and say to ourselves "well that's ridiculous! Why would I ever want such a flimsy pack?!" Then as Cesar said, little by little we reflect on what we really need, start to notice how the lighter weight on our backs really does translate to a better hiking experience, then lo and behold we find what works. I am still looking for that, but I'm getting closer. And my bank account is telling me what I have is just fine thank you very much.

And perhaps the Boreas is uncomfortable because it's not the pack for you? Don't discount ALL frameless packs because one isn't as comfortable as you'd like. Besides, I'm learning that packing technique and skill matters quite a bit here, too.

Now get out there and hike!! If you can run 6 miles, then go hike a few!

"I can also tell you that an extra 1 or 2 lbs means nothing to my fitness and strength level."


Unless you have figured out a way to defeat the laws of physics, you are wrong. That extra weight affects how fast, and how far you can hike. You just dont realize it.

What you are saying clearly, is you dont hike far enough in a day, for it to matter to you. Thats fine for you.

If you have ever been to the point of thorough exhaustion, where you literally couldnt take another step uphill, you would realize it.

"Unless you have figured out a way to defeat the laws of physics, you are wrong. That extra weight affects how fast, and how far you can hike. You just dont realize it."

What you are forgetting with respect to the laws of physics is the capacity of the motor. i.e. strength. Carrying a load does not happen statically.

Also, consider that the human body can fluctuate a whopping 5 lbs daily. When it gets too high do you consider cutting off an arm or is your body used to the change? Is it well within its capacity to continue to move efficiently and without effort or do you simply sit on the couch at that point, unable to move?

"What you are saying clearly, is you dont hike far enough in a day, for it to matter to you. Thats fine for you."

What you are saying is that 1-2 extra pounds will limit you from not hiking far enough a day (how would this be defined?). If this is the case, then leave the water at home.

I generally hike where it provides me a challenge: http://blog.hyperlitemountaingear.com/?p=1069

All this talk of packs has reminded me I need to buy a big load hauler to replace my Catalyst.
Oh well that's going to keep me occupied at lunch breaks for a while :-)

My take on pack weight is that people tend to exaggerate when they talk about how comfortable a pack (or its weight) is. They'll say:

"It carried like a dream." (?? Huh. What does that even mean?)

"I had it loaded with 30 pounds and I forgot I even had it on."

"Didn't even notice the five extra pounds."

This happens at least as often with people talking about heavier packs as it does with ultralight packs. Max seems to think people on BPL are way slanted towards UL. Well, I know I've read plenty of the "carried like a dream" nonsense about heavier packs too. When they're talking about thirty pound loads I have a good idea how non-"dreamlike" that would be for me.

I don't care what people _feel_ like saying (out of enthusiasm or out of an attempt to justify their gear choices). I know for a fact that all else being equal, carrying fifteen pounds is better than carrying seventeen pounds. The difference may not be great. But it exists. And it's incremental. Add more weight and the difference grows. Add an ounce and there will be a difference. I might not notice it, but I _know_ carrying an extra ounce is something to be avoided, all else being equal.

I understand that there may be a five pound pack that may make carrying, say, 23 pounds of cargo (28 total) an overall more comfortable experience than carrying that same 23 pounds in a two pound pack (25 total). In that case the extra carrying comfort added by the heavier pack must outweigh the bodily discomfort and wear and tear that gets added by its three extra pounds. As others have already said, this is unlikely to happen if I'm already very comfortable with a (well-designed and well-fitting) lighter pack that's appropriate for my cargo weight. Moreover, I don't think it's something someone can tell me; I need to test for myself; proclamations of "carried like a dream" and "didn't even notice I had it on" are not helpful. At most they tell me that you like your pack (which is of course good for you).

Edited by hes on 03/17/2013 12:16:33 MDT.

Stephen,

I've got a Kelty 90L if you need a load hauler. Search my Red Cloud on Gear Swap and see if that's what you're looking for.

Cheers,
MD

Cheers Max,

I think "poor man's McHale" is possibly the best way of putting my opinion that there is. It's 2lbs too heavy and not as custom-fit, but I could do worse. I said it before; If it's not awesome, I have a return policy to fall back on, but as I also said before, the Gregory Baltoro isn't the point of the thread.

Sorry for the delivery. I'm sure nobody's losing too much sleep over it, but I could probably toss around a few more smiley faces and caveats to make it clear that I'm not challenging anyone here. Thanks for the feedback.

I have to agree with those who say there's a difference between 15 and 20lbs, but I also have to address Cesar's very good point that there's a spectrum of enjoyment. The enjoyment difference between 15 and 20 pounds might be non-existent for some users, and very present for others. To each their own.

"Unless you have figured out a way to defeat the laws of physics..."

I know, let's eliminate the Higgs Boson so that our gear won't have any mass!

Why didn't we think of this before?

Plus, we can quit purchasing more Higgs Bosons.

--B.G.--

If I were a rich man, I'd buy five different packs along the line between UL and overbuilt, and then go do five week-long hikes. Soberingly, I've got to finish my undergraduate and then pay for it. I try and make due by listening to other people's experiences so when I do get out and hike, I'm better off than where I could have been.

I figure if a pack weighs 1 pound more I won't notice. More than that I start noticing.

So if I want to reduce my pack weight, I have to come up with enough improvements to total 1 pound or more or it doesn't really matter.

Cutting holes in tooth brush handle or cutting margins off maps - waste of time, except maybe it puts me in the right mindset so I can come up with enough changes to be noticeable.

Jerry,

If you cut the handle off your toothbrush, cut the margins off your maps, cut the tags off your shirts, trim the extra webbing off your bag, cut the belt loops off your pants, take the stuff sacks off your sleeping bag and mat, swap your shoelaces for shock cord, take the daisy chains off your pack, and unwrap your CLIF bars, now you're looking at a pound.

-Max

Edited by mdilthey on 03/17/2013 12:42:54 MDT.