[pct-l] cook vs non-cook

[Jason Moores]

Hey Kevin,

For me there are several factors as to why I go stoveless while on the
trail. Of course one of those reasons is weight. Any way that you wish to
look at it, you are still carrying say 11oz away from your resupply. Yes the
weight decreases each day, and yes 11oz doesn't seem like much of a burden
for a hot meal. If you were carrying a seven pound base weight 11oz and an
extra bottle may seem a bit more significant, especially in a ultralight
pack. An empty sour cream/cottage cheese container with lid works well as a
sub for a ti pot. Ziplocks work but can be a pain in the butt.

Another aspect is tracking down fuel while in town. This is not difficult to
do but usually requires another chore while in town. If I am not staying in
town all I need to do is buy/repackage food and hit the trail. This is not a
huge time saver but I get frustrated with the amount of time that chores
consumes while I'm in town. I want to be resting and eating not hopping from
store to store.

If you are resupplying along the way, what cookable foods are you likely to
be buying? Knorr/Lipton sides? I've already eaten my fill of these dinners
and don't care to make them a staple of my diet. Have you checked out how
much sodium is in these bags. Now, hot mashed potatoes are tastier than cold
but for the 11oz saved without the stove, cold is fine.

A large part of the reason that I go without a stove has to do with hiking
"style". From the time I get up in the morning until I'm back in my sleeping
bag at night, I am eating. At least a few hundred cal. per hour, hour and a
half with a larger meal mid day. By the end of the day I don't feel the need
for a 1000+ calorie meal, usually 4-500 cal. is plenty and I don't need a
stove for that. A Snickers will cover over half of that(I usually save
simple sugars for the end of the day or on a long break to reduce the
"crash" effect).

Probably the biggest and yes least tangible reason for me to go stoveless is
that when it comes to cooking on the trail, I am lazy. I want to get down on
the ground, snuggle up in my bag and relax. Cooking and cleaning is just not
something that I care to do. By the time that most hikers get their water
boiling over their little stoves I've eaten, washed up, rolled cigs for the
next day and am in my bag looking at my maps.

For me it's not just the weight of stove and fuel, it's time and convenience
as well.

Jackass


On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Kevin Cook <hikelite at gmail.com> wrote:

> I understand the main goal is to eliminate the weight of the cooking gear,
> stove, pot, fuel, etc. A secondary benefit may be the reduction in prep
> time, but that could be minimal since you will have to soak things anyway.
>
> Let's look at the cooking gear in detail...
> Spoon - no savings here usually, unless you're eating that muesli with your
> fingers?
> cookpot or cup - do you just eat out of a ziplock? My K-Mart greasepot
> (Wal-Mart no longer has one, and K-Mart's is better anyway) only weighs
> ~3.7oz.
> stove - my soda can stove weighs ~14g or 0.5oz. OK this is a weight
> savings,
> but not much.
> windscreen stand combo - mine weighs 23g or 0.8oz.
>
> We're up to a total of ~5oz so far. Not insignificant, but not a lot for
> the
> luxury of a warm meal IMHO.
>
> We still haven't talked about fuel. This is where the non-cook folks claim
> the biggest weight savings. Yes, it's true that you do not have to carry
> fuel, if you aren't cooking, but I look at it another way. The fuel gets
> used up as I eat, right? So why isn't it just counted as part of the food
> weight? Each dinner has its weight, plus a little bit for fuel. I don't
> think it's reasonable to include fuel weight as part of the cook system. Do
> I include the weight of the food when I talk about the weight of bear
> canister? We can talk about the weight of the bear can, so we should
> include
> the weight of the fuel bottle. How much does a 12oz water bottle weight?
> Another .5oz? So really, cooking only requires an extra 5-6oz. If you still
> carry a cup or pot when you don't cook, the weight difference falls to less
> than 3oz. Is 3 oz worth having to eat cold food and a limited menu?
>
> Anyway, I'm sure I'm not changing any minds, and that's not really my
> intent. I just have always viewed the fuel differently, and I keep seeing
> it
> counted towards the weight of cooking accoutrement. You can count the
> bottle, but not the fuel.
>
> As always, YMMV and HYOH ;)
> _______________________________________________
> Pct-L mailing list
> Pct-L at backcountry.net
> To unsubcribe, or change options visit:
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
>
> List Archives:
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/pct-l/
>