I carry a backpack or Maxpedition Jumbo with me every day. I'm looking for a snack-bar style food that I can carry in there. Something that I'd be willing to eat, even if it isn't an emergency.

Sounds easy enough, but everything I've tried either melts, or is crushed in an unappetizing way.

And, um, no pemmican please... :-O

-john

how about putting your snacks in a small lock and lock or tupperware?
That way, It wounldn't get crushed.
You could have hooah, snickers etc inside without worrying....

Jerky? Hard candy (wrapped) like Werther's? Dried fruit?

Sue

I would look at trail mix bars/gorp bars. Trail mix is trail mix for a reason. Doesn't go bad, has some sugar and some protein and doesn't crush (well it does but it doesn't matter, so you tip the bag in your mouth rather than eat it like a bar). Whatever you decide on, carefully evaluate the protein/sugar/fiber content. Having your glucose level spike quickly then drop is not optimum in most situations. I always mix in oats, and recommend you do the same. Most recipes are a little too fast carb for me, and the oats help balance it.

Marc

I'm not familiar with a lock-and-lock, but so far hard sided containers are too bulky to fit in my Jumbo unfortunately. Barely room for two snack bars.

FWIW, the Snickers melt.

Thanks for the ideas tho.

-john

Hard candy is a good idea. I want some protein too, but some of the hard candy is bulletproof.

-john

Good idea. I'll take a look around and see what I find.

Thanks,

-john

Malted milk tablets? Not the balls,but the hard tabs. Couple brands out there. The Vermont Country Store has the Horlcks, some other places do- try google

CLIF bars (available from REI and elsewhere, but not in New Zealand). I seem to recall liking the carrot cake ones and one of the chocolatey ones. Mmmm.

Here in New Zealand we have "One Square Meal". It's two bars made from apricot, oats and nuts and other stuff, which are packaged side by side to make a square shape (about 5" to a side). Each square is a fully balanced meal (it is alleged). It's more like tramping/sporting fodder than survival stuff. I don't think eating three "One Square Meal" packets a day would be good for you after a few days.

A

go to the supermarket and look at the snack section, choice what you like, try it at home. When you like it buy it more often. Buying "special" foodbars and stuff is way to expensive, for something that i may eat daily.

Okay, no pemmican, so did you look at the bif bar recipes we posted a couple weeks back? Those are pretty bulletproof and darned good trail food.

As for pre-packaged, I packed Hooah bars in Iraq all the time in my EDC and BOB and never had a problem. They are pliable so even though they would disfigure from the handling, they were never gross. They seem to work well for a lot of people. I also packed a lot of those single serving peanut tubes that they sell two for a dollar at most stop and robs. Peanuts are good trail food, and tolerate a lot of abuse and have a pretty good shelf life. Corn nuts also seem to do well. I find that the extra salt is more desirable on the trail than sugar. They can pulverize a little easier than peanuts do, but generally are rugged enough for extended stowage.
Toasted soy nuts are also fairly rugged and high energy and reasonably palatable.

Try the pharmacy section at Walmart. They have six pack boxes of Snickers Marathon bars for <$6 here. The multi-grain crunch tastes more like something edible than any of the other bars I've tried.

I don't know about corn nuts if you want to keep your teeth -- but the Hooah bars are supposed to be available at WalMart too, but I haven't seen them locally at WM here in Oh

I know what you mean. I got teeth like a dog, so crunching unpopped popcorn kernels and gnawing the marrow out of bones is no big deal for me, but my brothers' teeth are rotten, and they have to be more careful than I.

I've seen Hooah bars here at the local WM, but my guess is like a lot of other things they don't stock them in every store. These aren't the same Hooah bars I had in Baghdad, but close. I keep a six pack in my BOB.

I buy the Honey Nut Cheerios bars from Wal-Mart - 42 cents each by the box of 6 ($2.49)

Thanks for all the suggestions so far.

What do you folks think of honey roasted peanuts? Peanuts, honey and salt...

-john

Those will work, and may last longer so long as they don't get wet.

Many outdoorsy types make their own snacks. If you are eating them fairly regularly this may be your best option. Look for backpack recipes, stuff from cavers tends to be pretty durable and the stuff from the ultra light crowd usually gives you a lot of bang for the weight.

In the same area as the Honey nut bars, look at all of the many types of cereal/granola bars for about $2.50 a box.

Stay away from those with chocolate chips/coatings for warm weather use since they can be a mess when they get hot.

Chewy granola bars or trail mix bars keep well for weeks. I have carried them in pockets or packs on many trips. They are not bad even when you sit on them. There are so many different types and they are not expensive. Available at any grocery store.

If you want a more dedicated emergency-type food, Mainstay rations seem to be popular. I haven't tried them but plan to get some soon. 5-year shelf life, high-calorie, formulated not to require much water to digest. It is sold through many survival outlets, typical links include
http://www.bestglide.com/Mainstay_3600_Info.html
and
http://www.survivalunlimited.com/mainstay.htm
and
http://www.epcamps.com/Mainstay_Food_Ration.html

Steve

I use paydays backpacking in desert heat and they do not melt.

I was gonna suggest those, only I can't eat them in the heat of the day, they are just a little too rich.

Hmmm... Mojo bar from Cliff is a good choice. I buy these in bulk ever since REI sent me a free sample...

http://www.clifbar.com/eat/eat.cfm?location=mojo

It tastes much better than any health food/energy snack. It has its own uniqe flavor that will either win you from the first bite or you will hate it forever. It is priced better than anything yet not as cheap as granola bars.

Another thing is power-jel in bannana-strawberry flavor. That goo really tastes good and can be molded (while still in the packaging) to fit into any free space you have left in your bag.

Matt

The Mainstay bars aren't too bad, kind of like lemon cookie dough. I ate a 3600 calorie pack for lunch/snacks over a week's time to see whether they would keep me going. For me, they are just about perfect: cheap, good source of sustained energy and palitable but not so tasty that I would be tempted to break open a pack because I wanted a snack. I always carry a couple packs in my BOB and car. One less thing to worry about, since I know they'll work for me. YMMV, of course <img src="/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

the better bars to pack don't have chocolate that could melt.

1-Cliff Bars!

2-PowerBars

3-Boulder Bars

4-many Granola bars that don't have chocolate coatings

5-peanuts

6-pretzels

7-beef jerky

7-hard candies (Atomic Fire Balls, my favorite!)

...this was a short list of items I take, eat, and like...and they keep well in the heat.

I highly reccomend Clif Bars. Unlike other 'energy' bars out there, it is actually made of and tastes like real food. And unlike candy bars, it's actually pretty healthy. It's got good amounts of protein, complex carbs, fat, fiber, vitamins, and not too much sugar. If the bars are reallly old or in cold temperatures, they can be hard, but I'd take a stale Clif bar over a fresh bar of another brand any day.

If you're looking for a purely survival food, where volume is limited and caloric density is the main concern, they may not be the best choice, since a bar only has about 240 Calories. But if you want something convenient and healthy that makes a descent substitute for a meal, that you'll actually want to eat, give them a try.

If you shop around you can find them for $12 a box, which is $1 per bar.

II have a Maxpedition Jumbo and the smallest Lock and Lock fits in the front pocket easily and a larger one would most likely fit in the main compartment, though I haven't tried it.

I usually stick some MRE crackers and peanut butter in the bag and they do okay.

Target has the cliff bars for 97 cents. There in the pharmecy section with the diets bars.

I tried some of the cliff bars over the weekend, I guess in a total emergency, they are edible, but not preferrable. Given them or bugs, I guess I would do cliff bars, but wouldn't look forward to it. Think I will stay with payday bars or bagged nuts or beef jerky.

I tried the chocolate hooah bar over the weekend too, but didn't think much of that one either.

I have small box in my briefcase where I have 2 breakfast bars. I do not eat at home, therefore, when I have to get to a meeting somewhere, I miss the breakfast (or lunch). This is the time when these bars come very handy.
Actually, I like have them so much that I take them with me for travels abroad. Last time I was in Norway. When we came out from the plane, we had to take the bus very quickly that we did not have any time to buy food or exchange money. The bars were my savers - my wife sinked her teeth into them instead of my arm. <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
So, 500 ml bottle of water and 2 breakfast bars is my everyday carry food when I go to the office (and I have lots of oat meals there in my desk for breakfast). <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

The problem with candy bars is that they are very high in sugar. Although that will give you energy in the short run, high sugar foods cause an insulin spike which actually lowers blood sugar levels and makes you feel more tired afterwards. You want as much complex carbohydrates as possible, which will give you sustained energy, and moderate amount of fat, which is filling and an essential nutrient limited in nature (For purely survival situations, you'd probably want more fat).

Most candy bars(and many other processed foods) also have partially hydrogenated oil, which is very unhealthy and really should be banned, but I guess that's a bit off topic.

I just saw a segment on the news last night about the effect that the new regulation requiring the display of trans fat content on food products is having. I can't remember if the regulation kicks in now or is still down the road. Anyway, seems that the trans fat content of many foods has gone down since food manufacturers have known that they'll have to display this info on their products.

So, yes, Junior, go ahead and gorge yourself on those cookies. They're good for you now! <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Yeah, as of 2006, the FDA now requires trans fats to be labled. Unfortunately many manufacturers still lie about it, by manipulating serving sizes so that there is less than .5 grams of trans fat per serving, so that they can legally say it has 0 grams per serving. Always read ingredient labels, and if it says hydrogenated or partially hydrogenated oil, then it has trans fat, regardless of what the nutrition label says.

I think the sugar spike thing is really a bunch of marketing hype even though it has merit in competition sports.

Marketing by who? The only sugar related marketing I've seen is that ridiculous low carb BS. Almost everything else still has massive amounts of sugar. Complex carbs are really the best fuel for your body in any situation.

I was reading a survival book yesterday. It says that you do not need a lot of water to digest food with sugar. So, there is an advantage, not speaking about good reserve of calories. But if you are really bothered about calories you can alway eat less.

Actually, in a survival situation, I believe fats and proteins to be far superior to any carb consumption of equal measure. They pack more energy per given weight, allow the metabolism to regulate easier, do not require as much metabolic conversion prior to cellular utilization, are absorptively self regulating, and more efficiently support aerobic activity, which is what you are more likely to experience in a chronic survival episode (as opposed to running for your life, where the carbs would be preferable).

Since the focus of this thread appears to be away from meat based snacks, it seems that the most appropriate food blend would favor a greater amount of nuts and legumes, with high protein content grains included, and sugars used really only as a flavoring, not as a substantial source of energy. Candy bars with a large amount of nut content (like Paydays, as previously cited) are decent. Another really great snack in this gendre are sesame snaps, which pack quite a wallup of calories balanced in fats, proteins and carbs for their relatively small size (I believe 300+ calories in 3 ounces). I've posted links to sources for these snack items in the past.

Complex carbs are a good fuel source for your body in a controlled environment, where restricted caloric assimilation and nutrient balance is of greater concern. When I am trying to stay warm and functional in a cold, relatively inhospitable environment, I am going to be looking for a much higher, more concentrated, more efficient, and longer lasting energy source than what is practical to pack in a complex carbohydrate form.

Complex carbohydrates would be almost as undesirable as packets of table sugar in my BOB.

The problem that I've seen with the Trans Fat issue is that with products I've looked at, they've replaced the Trans Fats with higher Saturated Fats, so the fat content is worse.

Yup, there's just no getting around the marketability of the pallette prefence. We've been engineered to prefer those nasty saturated fats and those sugary sweets, so it is a constant effort slapping that Twinkie out of junior's hand before he stuffs it down the cake hole.

How did you know I was a Jr?

Protein is the least efficient energy source, and has less energy per unit of weight(protein and carbs both have 4 calories per gram, but protein uses more energy to digest). Protein also requires the most water to metabolize, so is very undesirable, except possibly for long term survival situations. Fat is the most concentrated nutrient in terms of calories(9 cal/gram), so it is important for survival foods, but I'm pretty sure fats take more energy to digest than carbs. Carbohydrates are the most efficient fuel for your body, and complex carbs break down slowly, providing sustained energy which is important for any survival situation.

I think the ideal survival food should have mostly complex carbs, with plenty of fat and very little protein.

It is true that protein alone is not such a grand energy source for consumption, but it is necessary to support the metabolic process, and the enzymes and catalysts (like Cytochrome-P-450) cannot be supported with a diet that contains several amino structures. There's also the issue of catabolysis of muscle tissue, which no amount of carb intake will mitigate. I include protein because it is necessary for the other two sources to work right.

Enzymatic processes between amino and oleic acids really are the regulating elements of the digestion process, and the assimilation of simpler compounds for cellular health. Carbs break down to simpler carbs, such as clycogen, which support the anaerobic process in muscle tissue, or they are converted to fat by enzymes. Since the body can only store about a two day reserve of carbohydrates (mostly in the form of Glycogen in the liver), the balance of carbohydrates must be converted to fats to be retained or it is lost.

Conversely, fats are fairly easily broken down into usable oleic acids, when proteins are included in the diet, provided the carbohydrate consumption is not very high (carbohydrate intake stimulates insulin production, which interferes with the digestion of fatty acids and proteins). Bile is an efficient and abundant enzyme in our systems made just for the purpose of digesting or breaking down fat and protein into cellular food. It is the top performer in our digestive process, responsible for liberating nearly 80% of the available energy from the food we eat. While a certain amount of carbohydrates are necessary for balancing the absorption and utilization of nutrients (anyone who's experienced the Atkins diet understands that without carbs, the body will not retain fat, no matter how much is consumed), it is almost exclusively fatty acids that feed cellular tissue under nominal activity levels. The protein is there to keep the cellular processes going and to keep the enzymatic levels balanced for all digestion and absorption. Take away the protein, and you will lose muscle tissue regardless of how much fat or carbs you eat, and your health will deteriorate quickly.

I would give up the carb loads long before I would think about losing the proteins. Even if it isn't animal based, I know I can last longer on a nut and legume diet than I can on a sack of potatoes or rice weighing double or more. In a snack balancing act, I would look for a high fat content first, with the carbs and protein content at least equal to each other. I don't think it matters much what form the carbs are in, simple or complex, other than simple will be more efficiently utilized. What makes complex carbs last so long is the amount of work the digestive system has to do to convert them into a usable form (either sugars, or fats). Since the end product of complex carbs is the initial goal in my diet, I would prefer to take the short cut to get there.

Something else to note, my experience is that carbs don't do a great deal for satisfying my appetite. They can taste good, but I don't reach that "Had enough" point with them like I do eating fats and proteins. I can eat about a half a cup of pemmican and not feel hungry for at least 4 hours, even under moderately rigorous activity. I can eat half a dozen whole wheat pancakes with syrup (roughly three cups of food), and two hours later my appetite is peaking again. (not that I'm recommending pemmican in this thread mind you, just citing it for comparison purposes <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />)

However, in a survival situation, I'll take whatever I can find. There's no such thing as too much.