[pct-l] ultra lite packs

[rmoak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Ronald Moak)]

>>  I normally don't use a hip belt when day packing or on the approach to a
climb if the weight of my pack is under 20 pounds. I find I ventilate
better. But over 20 pounds and my shoulders start to feel the need for a
little help.
I can't imagine going 12 hours with 35 pounds without the shoulders
demanding it
  	  That's my main beef with the ultralites. <<

Dave,

I can't tell if your beef is with ultralighters or with the packs. I
certainly don't know of any ultralighters demanding you take anything, hike
any style or do anything on the trail you don't want to do. In fact in
recent weeks, those on this list who purport to be an ultralighter have been
pretty quite.

If you look carefully out there you'll see a round of next generation
ultralight packs that designed from the beginning to offer the support
needed to carry the heavier loads required by long distances between
re-supplies. My own new pack is the first frameless pack that offers a true
suspension. While the pack itself weights in at less than a pound and a
half, it's designed to carry 35 pounds in relative comfort. It was in fact
designed to overcome some of the problems you've stated. Just how successful
the pack is in fulfilling that task will undoubtedly be up to the user to
decide.

Never the less, even if my effort were to fail, I'm sure there will be
others that soon follow suit. You could also get something like a P2 which
is a great light pack and still carries reasonable weight.

>> But Ray Jardine wrote a book on ultra light backpacking with just one
thing in mind: as a method of putting in high mileage days on the PCT, the
simple minded math stating that the more miles you put in in a day, ....<<

While it's all well and good to paraphrase Ray's message, it really misses
the fundamental message of lightweight or ultralight hiking. In fact the
movement has moved well beyond Ray. To Ray, dropping the weight entitled him
to hike further more comfortably. In effect it enhanced his backpacking
experience. In reality Ray's goal was to have a better experience. The
approach he took to attain that  goal was to reduce his weight and improve
his backpacking skills. The goal was "improving the experience" not
"reducing the weight."

Each day I talk to more and more people who are looking to lighter
solutions, not so they can put in long mile days or travel a thousand miles
or more. No, they are going light simply so they can go at all. Some because
of heath problems others because of age or conditioning, all bound with a
simple desire to get out there. For them, not going light means not going at
all.

>> The new dogmatists have arrived stating lighter is always better. <<

I don't know if I'm one of your "new dogmatists" or not. Nor do I
particularly care. While I often expose the benefits of going light, both
orally and in written form, I make no demands upon my listener. In fact if
you've read what I've said before, my mantra these days is "Focus on
Maximizing the Experience, not Minimizing the Gear". Now for many people
there is a very tight linkage between gear weight and positive experience.
For others the linkage is less clear.

It is, however, incumbent upon the user to determine for themselves just how
much the gear they haul over endless mountain ridges, detracts or enhances
the overall experience.

-Fallingwater