RE: [pct-l] Outside's GoLite story

Tom,

This is closet theorizing with a chip on the shoulder to match. Did you 
write the article for Outside? Give the prospective thru-hikers out there a 
break and withhold the un*substantiated dogma.

Hike your own hike,
- Blisterfree


>From: "Reynolds, Tom" <reynolds@iLAN.com>
>To: Brett Tucker <blisterfree@hotmail.com>, pct-l@backcountry.net
>Subject: RE: [pct-l] Outside's GoLite story
>Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 02:40:04 -0800
>
>I read the Golite story on Outside's web page. My impression is that anyone
>who wants their gear should purchase it soon because the company won't be
>around very long in its present form. The market for this kind of gear is
>simply not there. The company postulates that their market is "people who
>want ultralight gear but don't want to make it." I don't think that market
>exists.
>
>The company is selling the Ray Jardine philosophy, a philosophy that 
>appeals
>only to long-distance backpackers and only a  subset of them. The average
>backpacker spends several hours, either in the morning or the evening,
>piddling around the campsite. Their campsite is a comfortable
>home-away-from-home to be enjoyed, not a quick "stealth camp" between 30
>mile sprints.
>
>The "buyer" of expensive backpacking equipment works 50 weeks a year and
>sets aside time every year for the annual backpack. It is an aging group as
>the article points out. The younger generation is opting for more exciting
>fare. The "buyer" of expensive backpacking equipment will pay for gear that
>will lighten their load. After all, they aren't as young as they once were.
>Notice, however, that not many of the old-dogs on this list subscribe to 
>Ray
>Jardine's philosophy. And notice, if you will, that not many of the current
>thruhikers are willing to make the sacrifice to a type A lifestyle to
>acquire the money for expensive gear.
>
>The main benefit of Golite's gear is that it costs less than comparable
>products. I am personally in the market for a lightweight pack. To waste 7
>pounds on an internal frame sack to carry maybe 50 pounds total [this
>includes food and water] when starting the trip seems absurd. I can save 5
>pounds using the Kelty Cloud 60 and still have a "real" pack with a hip
>belt. The Golite pack appears no better and is certainly less flexible than
>the Kelty Cloud 60 so I will pay Kelty's steep price.
>
>The sleeping system is actually heavier than a Feathered Friends bag plus a
>Ridgerest pad so I will pass on the "fur" sleeping system .
>
>The tarp tent is not nearly as good an idea as Kurt's Wanderlust Lite but
>even the Wanderlust will stay home because I, as most of the "geriatric"
>set, do not hike alone and will share a tent.
>

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com


* From the Pacific Crest Trail Email List |  http://www.backcountry.net   *

==============================================================================