Trekking poles

Posted by: Anonymous

Trekking poles - 01/03/09 04:09 AM

We are hiking the Canol Trail this summer.

The rigorous Canol Heritage Trail is one of the most challenging in North America, suitable only for experienced, well-equipped hikers. Built during World War II as a pipeline route through the mountains from Norman Wells to the Yukon, the Canol route is still dotted with abandoned equipment. It's long, remote, unmarked and frequently washed out. Disorienting box canyons can be difficult to navigate. No services are provided, emergency or otherwise. You must make arrangements for provisioning, drop-off and pickup in advance. Once on the Trail, you're on your own.


While doing research, some websites recommend trekking poles to help with the treacherous river crossings and to help save the knees on in general on such a long and difficult hike.

We have never used them before, however some people who have, swear by them. When we hiked Kindersley Summit (not my photo) and other trails in the Rockies this past summer, we only seen a few people and they all had trekking poles.

Are trekking these poles actually worth using or are they just the latest fad. I would appreciate any feedback from people here who have actually used these poles.

Thanks.
Posted by: tomfaranda

Re: Trekking poles - 01/03/09 04:37 AM

Well I always found it amusing to see people walking with two poles. But I confess that in the last couple of years I have started using one pole.

It helps with balance in tricky places - three legs are better than two - and it takes some of the pressure off my left knee at times. I had arthroscopic surgery and had about 60% of the meniscus removed from the knee about four years ago.

So I would suggest - go with one pole. I think two are overkill, unless you've got two bad knees. To give a bit of perspective, I am 57 and played rugby for 20 years. I hit the gym almost every day.
Posted by: Jeff_M

Re: Trekking poles - 01/03/09 05:17 AM

Well, I may look amusing to you, but I've been backpacking regularly for 35 years, most often on long, solo, off-trail trips in all sorts of conditions. I know what works, at least for me. But I'm certainly not concerned about being fashion conscious while doing it.

A two week trip often means starting with a heavy pack. I started using two poles about 10 years ago, progressing from a staff, to one pole, then two. They not only improve balance and markedly reduce the risks of potentially injurious falls, they also reduce the legs' workload and improve endurance. In addition, they do double duty as tarp poles.

"Two legs bad, four legs good" - George Orwell, Animal Farm

Jeff
Posted by: scafool

Re: Trekking poles - 01/03/09 05:19 AM

When I was 40 I would have said they were just a waste of effort.
Now 12 years later I have 4 standing in the corner by the door to chose from.

I have a bad knee from a pretty serious injury 3 years ago, it gets sore away too easily.
So,yes I find hiking staffs handy, especially when going over rough or slippery ground.

Mine are all just a bit short for hiking in the wild woods but are fine for country walks.


One is a modern technical wonder by a company called Paws (that might be a pun).
It telescopes from cane length to about 5'9", has a rubber tip that can be removed to expose a pointy wicked sharp hardened carbon steel spike.

Then there is a 5' piece of 1.5" white oak dowel, nice and straight grained.

The next one is a bit odd.
It is a handle for a half sized garden shovel, 40" long in ash. I put a rubber crutch tip on the taper.
The nice thing about this is when I take the crutch tip off the taper fits a Cold Steel Bushman socket handled knife, or a Cold Steel "Spetznaz" shovel's socket, no screws needed. I take it when I am out collecting wild foods.

The fourth is a piece of beaverwood (please, no crude comments). Beaverwood is usually poplar but this piece is red alder.
Beaverwood is when the beavers cut it to length for you, clean all the bark off and then put it on top of their lodge to dry and cure for you until you can come by and pick it up.

For hiking that trail I would likely take the techno-wonder or the oak stave if I was taking one, but knowing me I likely would not take either one.
I would most likely expect the beavers to have prepared a few choice sticks knowing I would be by for them soon.
I might also hope to find a nice piece of diamond willow.

Posted by: Desperado

Re: Trekking poles - 01/03/09 06:04 AM

Said trekking poles also make nice rests for a firearm or a camera (some even have a camera adapter).
Posted by: M_a_x

Re: Trekking poles - 01/03/09 08:04 AM

I decided to give them a try this year. At the start they where awkward to use but I got used to them quickly. I started using ham gear from summits last year so I can tell the difference. Hauling the equipment put a lot of strain to the knees especially on the downhill part. They make hiking much more comfortable especially when it goes uphill or downhill. I decided to get telescopic poles as they can be packed away more easily. I consider this as a big advantage on the parts where I have use both hands.
In conclusion I´d say they are worth using. Get them and get used to use them. It´s important to learn to use them properly.

BTW: With many people I see using them, I get the feeling that they are some kind of fashion item. On the bright side you do not stick out as much when you use them too.
Posted by: MoBOB

Re: Trekking poles - 01/03/09 03:28 PM

My two cents:

First penny: Disclaimer - I do not use or own trekking poles. However, I did dream about them in a Holiday Inn once. Further disclaimer -- I am not afiliated with Holiday Inn in any way.

Second penny: I think the logic behind the "Animal Farm" quote is well worth considering. Even if you use only one, have a second as a backup or augmentation when needed.

Third cent (freebie): Poles are on my master "stuff" list.
Posted by: tomfaranda

Re: Trekking poles - 01/03/09 06:47 PM

Jeff

haha - I enjoyed your deserved putdown of my little comment. From your picture, you certainly don't look funny to me, and if you were to see what I generally wear, you'd know I'm not very fashion-conscious.

For the techno-record, we have three black diamond trekking poles. A matched pair and a sinlgle one, which also has the little screw thingie on top, to use it as a camera monopod.

They are very good poles, and I can find no performance difference between the shock absorbing ones and the non-shock absorbing single.

I still plan on only using one pole, and not two, at least for the foreseeable future.

Posted by: Tom_L

Re: Trekking poles - 01/03/09 08:08 PM

I suppose trekking poles MIGHT be marginally useful. Marginally in the sense that they will make hiking seem a little easier for a while until your arms tire and that's about it. Somehow I just find them amazingly annoying as an increasingly popular fashion statement, though. Everyone seems to bring along a pair nowadays, even on really easy treks and EVEN in the cities! That, to me, is just plain ridiculous. I must also admit that I know not a single serious outdoorsman under the age of 50 who ever uses trekking poles to any extent.

YMMV but to me, trekking poles are pretty much unnecessary weight. I prefer to keep my hands free most of the time. Makes it easier to grab a rock or tree when negotiating difficult terrain. On longer treks I do like to cut down a straight hazel sapling, 5-6' or so. Just like folks used to do many, many years ago before the trekking pole fad cult took over.

If you genuinely need some extra support a long, sturdy wooden stick is a lot more practical IMO. Trekking poles are really too short if you have to negotiate steep slopes. With proper technique you can use a long stick much more effectively, either choke the grip or lengthen when necessary. You also get to keep one hand free and a long stick is a helluva deterrent against a hostile dog or some other form of vicious wildlife.

I just find it incredibly sad that a skill as basic, simple and universal as walking with a staff has been forgotten. Now the industry is pushing the Nordic walking fad to make a quick buck and most people simply follow the bandwagon.

Well, to each his own but I'll just stick (pun intended) to a hazel staff like my gramps, RIP, showed me a long time ago. When people still knew how to walk on their own feet and could whittle themselves a nice walking staff in a couple of minutes with a pocket knife... smile
Posted by: oldsoldier

Re: Trekking poles - 01/03/09 09:22 PM

I prefer them. I never used to use them, but, well, my knees are shot, and I'm only 38. That, and I use them as part of my shelter system when hiking. Personally, I dont hike without them (REAL hiking, not city walking). I absolutely needed them coming down mt. washington 2 years ago; my knees were giving out, and it took a LOT of stress off of them.
Posted by: OldBaldGuy

Re: Trekking poles - 01/03/09 09:39 PM

"...knees were giving out, and it took a LOT of stress off of them..."

I think that is the whole thing. You see people hiking along on flat level ground, and a pair of hiking poles look pretty silly, they often don't even touch the ground. But once you hit rougher country they really help, 'specially on the downhill. I think that a solid method of adjusting the length is important. I just don't trust those twist lock things, if they are to suppord me and my load going downhill. I prefer the spring button type of lock. Not quite as adjustable for length, but a nice solid lockup...
Posted by: bmisf

Re: Trekking poles - 01/03/09 09:48 PM

Originally Posted By: Tom_L
I suppose trekking poles MIGHT be marginally useful. Marginally in the sense that they will make hiking seem a little easier for a while until your arms tire and that's about it. Somehow I just find them amazingly annoying as an increasingly popular fashion statement, though. Everyone seems to bring along a pair nowadays, even on really easy treks and EVEN in the cities! That, to me, is just plain ridiculous. I must also admit that I know not a single serious outdoorsman under the age of 50 who ever uses trekking poles to any extent.


Not a single serious hiker I know *doesn't* use them, at least sometimes, if not all the time. Amongst my hiking buddies and acquaintances are writers for an ultralight backpacking magazine and a photographer for other outdoors publications, long-distance ultralight hikers, and a group of friends with whom I get out backpacking in the Sierra Nevada and elsewhere many times a year for trips where we cover anywhere from ten to 20+ miles a day, with thousands of feet of elevation change.

Trekking poles are particularly useful for easing strain on knees, for safely crossing streams, and for adding extra oompf on uphill stretches. They also can serve double-duty as poles for tarps or tarptents.

I personally favor ultralight carbon fiber poles like those GossamerGear makes; they weigh only a handful of ounces each, so I hardly feel them (especially when attached with a keeper strap, so that a strong grip is unnecessary), and they've saved a lot of wear and tear on my body.

So, "hike your own hike", as they say, but definitely don't discount or disparage trekking poles out of hand, especially if you've not tried them.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Trekking poles - 01/03/09 09:48 PM

I myself and the five others of our group that will be hiking the Canol Trail do not use trekking poles at all. The suggestions we have read in taking the poles is to aid in some crucial spots along the trail such as the river crossings. The trail itself is mostly in wide open country such as seen below and as you can also see there can be a dearth of suitable downed trees for obtaining a decent stick....if and when it would be needed. We do not want or physically require the poles as daily walking assistants, rather we would carry them strapped to the packs and used for the river crossings as seen in the second photo below



Posted by: Jeff_M

Re: Trekking poles - 01/03/09 11:55 PM

Originally Posted By: tomfaranda
Jeff

haha - I enjoyed your deserved putdown of my little comment. From your picture, you certainly don't look funny to me,


That's just because the picture's too small.

Originally Posted By: tomfaranda
and if you were to see what I generally wear, you'd know I'm not very fashion-conscious.

For the techno-record, we have three black diamond trekking poles. A matched pair and a sinlgle one, which also has the little screw thingie on top, to use it as a camera monopod.

They are very good poles, and I can find no performance difference between the shock absorbing ones and the non-shock absorbing single.


I agree. Shock absorption is a marketing thing.

Originally Posted By: tomfaranda
I still plan on only using one pole, and not two, at least for the foreseeable future.


Viva la difference. Know what works for you.

Jeff
Posted by: Colourful

Re: Trekking poles - 01/04/09 01:07 AM

In the Northwest Territory section, from McMillan Pass to Norman Wells is definitely hiking pole country. Getting out of there by plane can be costly.

In the Yukon, the South Canol, from Johnson Crossing to Ross River is a fairly well used gravel road.

The North Canol from Ross River to McMillan Pass is a driveable but rough.



Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Trekking poles - 01/04/09 02:00 AM

Originally Posted By: Colorama
In the Northwest Territory section, from McMillan Pass to Norman Wells is definitely hiking pole country. Getting out of there by plane can be costly.


McMillan Pass to Norman Wells is the actual Canol Trail. You are correct, flying in / out of Norman Wells is extremely costly, not to mention the cost for the plane to / from Macmillan airstrip.

We have not decided which way to go yet. Some prefer east to west, some west to east...either way the cost is going to be the same.
Posted by: tomfaranda

Re: Trekking poles - 01/04/09 02:49 AM


Jeff

you are right - whatever floats a person's boat and keeps them going.
Posted by: PackRat

Re: Trekking poles - 01/04/09 03:20 AM

I have used two poles for hundreds of kilometers of hiking and my knees really notice it when I forget to bring them along especially when hauling a heavy pack over mucky terrain or covering a lot of vertical.

The only place where I don't like poles are on steep scrambles where two free hands are more useful that a couple of pointy sticks.

I use Black Diamond poles that have a "Flick Lock" system to lock the pole length and it allows me to quickly shorten the poles for the uphill and lengthen them on the down hill. The Flick Lock can be adjusted with mitts on and have worked well in the winter where I have seen other poles freeze up.

I prefer a three section poles as compact a little smaller and can be strapped to a pack when not needed.

Pole shafts are also a great place to store some extra wraps of tape.


Posted by: dougwalkabout

Re: Trekking poles - 01/04/09 06:21 AM

I have always carried a staff of some sort while hiking, whether hand-carved from a saskatoon (serviceberry) bush or an old downhill ski pole picked up at a garage sale for a buck.

The amount of stability it adds in rough or slippery terrain, and the protection it gives to my trick knee, makes it indispensible. Surprisingly, it helps you slow down while packing a load, meaning you have more control over where you step and how hard you land.

I generally only use one pole, except while snowshoeing. I switch sides on a regular basis.

A few years ago, I acquired a collapsible 'trekking pole.' It's not as sturdy as a heavy-duty downhill ski pole, but I like the fact it can go short and be used like an alpenstock, just marking time until you need a little extra push to hop a boulder or puddle.

I would be worried about getting tangled up with two poles while crossing a strong stream. But from my limited experience in wading streams, I would say that one pole is certainly worth having.
Posted by: DesertFox

Re: Trekking poles - 01/04/09 06:18 PM

I recently started using the collapsible poles on hikes with lots of hills. They seem to reduce the punishment my knees take, especially with a heavy pack. There is greater fatigue to the upper body. But what the heck. It's a good workout.

For the hike Sherpadog is making, judging from the photos, a hand carved staff from a branch picked up along the way should do just fine.

I find the poles are somewhat of a nuisance on flat, level terrain. There might be some advantage on a really long hike over flat ground. But I haven't done one of those in a while.
Posted by: Jeff_M

Re: Trekking poles - 01/04/09 07:57 PM

Originally Posted By: DesertFox
. . . I find the poles are somewhat of a nuisance on flat, level terrain.


I find that I maintain a slightly more upright posture using two poles under a heavy pack. Mine have the angled grips, which I think is useful.

I do make measurably better time swinging my poles along in a good, steady, rhythmic upright stride, rather than the classic heavily laden, hunched over plod, thumbs typically hooked under shoulders traps. Your mileage may vary.

We've seen a lot of fads and fashions, pushed by marketing hype, in outdoor sports, as well as many front-country poseurs in designer labels. But don't let that put you off occasionally trying new things. Some are actual improvements, not just fads and hype for the gullible. For me, dual, three piece, angled grip have long since proven themselves superior to their single ski-pole predecessor and my collection of hiking staffs before that. For you, they may not work. But maybe something else will.

Jeff
Posted by: tomfaranda

Re: Trekking poles - 01/05/09 01:14 AM

Packrat

My Black Diamond poles also have the "flick-lock" system and I find it works really well.

I really like the poles, but as I said above I only use one as a walking stick and on the theory that three legs are better than two in tricky spaces.
Posted by: Nicodemus

Re: Trekking poles - 01/05/09 05:23 AM

I had the opportunity to do one particular stretch of the Appalachian Trail twice, and the second time I had a trekking pole with me. It made for a better and safer trip.

The particular part of the trail I'm referring to is in the Shenandoah Valley and the terrain is rocky with most of the stones being, as best as I can describe them, about the size of your average spiral sliced ham lol. A good portion of the rocks are loose and tend to shift when you step on them. Due to the terrain, the first time through I made extremely slow time fearing at every step I'd either twist an ankle or fall.

I had a map and compass, and could have taken another route, but that would have had me walking through neighborhoods on one side or walking through private farmland with No Trespassing signs on the other. Neither option really appealed to me.

On the second trip through, I had a trekking pole, and it helped immensely. I was more confident and I covered the trail in better time, allowing me more time at the destination. When the pole wasn't needed, I could easily attach it to my pack.

Anything can be a fad, useful or not. Either way, I don't care what people think of me for using a trekking pole. And truthfully, I don't care if anyone uses them because they are popular. Those people don't affect me one way or the other.

I also have two 1 liter Sigg Bottles in Neoprene covers strapped to my backpack and a fadtastic Camelbak with a clip on bite-valve to boot. I find these items useful, but I'm sure someone somewhere will have something smarmy to say about them.

But really... Who cares?
Posted by: Jesselp

Re: Trekking poles - 01/05/09 02:57 PM

I never thought much of trekking poles - until I was a few days into my "trek of a lifetime." The plan was to walk from the end of the road in Jiri up to Kala Patar (Everest basecamp) and then back to Lukla for a flight out to Katmandu.

I can tell you that after my second 1,000 meter decent (right after a 1,000 meter ascent) my knees were crying out for help, and the poles made a HUGE difference.

Currently, if I'm going out for a dayhike, even over moderately rough terrain, I'll leave them in the car. However, if I'm carrying a heavy backpacking pack I find them very useful for maintaining balance, even on easy terain. Even though my arms are more tired than they would have been without, I am usually less fatigued as my core muscles have had to expend less effort keeping me fromm falling over - once you start to lose your balance, it takes a lot of effort to stay up with a heavy pack.

One time I try and use them no matter what is if I'm carrying my son in his backpack carrier. If we're on a trail and he's on my back, I'm using the poles. I just have no interest in finding out what kind of injury he'll get if I fall while carrying him, and I'm less likely to fall if I'm using the poles. Of course, if we're just walking around the mall or on a paved path at a park, I agree that poles would be rediculous.

Finally, I have found that using two poles reduces strain much more than using just one. When I've gone out with just one pole, the stresses on my body (and specifically my knees) become unequal, and lead to additional aches and pains at the end of the day.

Hope this helps. If I was going out on a multi-day backpack trek over rough terrain, I'd absolutely bring poles along.
Posted by: benjammin

Re: Trekking poles - 01/05/09 07:17 PM

I always carry some sort of hiking stick(s) with me when elk hunting. Not only does it help with the hike, but if done right it's a great support from which to shoot (as opposed to off-hand). Two sticks crossed make a great expedient bi-pod.
Posted by: jshannon

Re: Trekking poles - 01/06/09 03:26 AM

I use two trekking poles on almost every trip. There will always be the occasional fruitcake that makes jokes about hiking with poles.
Posted by: CANOEDOGS

Re: Trekking poles - 01/06/09 05:13 AM

i have never understood why two poles..a single walking stick seems to work just fine and leaves one hand free.transfering weight from legs to arms does not make alot of sense as legs are made to carry the weight and arms are small and weak in comparsion..a stick to help in odd spots where the footing is tricky or as a aid in high step up..but just walking along with poles like your on XC ski's======??
Posted by: Tom_L

Re: Trekking poles - 01/06/09 06:04 AM

Well, I guess I'll always be a dumb old fruitcake then, making good fun of pencil necks struggling with trekking poles... laugh

On a more serious note though, I had a look at Wikipedia the other day: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_walking
It says that Nordic walking burns 46% more calories than plain walking and also mentions "significant increases in heart rate at a given pace". Which is kind of bad for purposes of trekking or outdoor survival in my view.

OK, if your goal is fat loss then I suppose Nordic walking would be better than plain walking. It would still be an inefficient way to improve one's conditioning, though. I see very few people Nordic walking at anything approaching the intensity sufficient for any significant gains. It's also a poor way to improve upper-body strength or bone density. Maybe acceptable for sedentary old folks or the extremely obese, but other than that everybody else would benefit from a more intense, faster paced activity.

In terms of hiking though, burning 46% more calories per given distance is a major disadvantage. It means you'll need to bring more food and carry a heavier load. No big deal on a short hike but starts to become a factor on longer treks.
Posted by: ducktapeguy

Re: Trekking poles - 01/06/09 04:47 PM

I admit I used to be one who would always snicker to myself at the people using trekking poles, until I finally broke down and tried it for myself. It took me a while because I just didn't want to be one of "those people", you know the kind with brand new expensive North Face jacket while skiing on the bunny slopes. But just because other people don't use their gear properly doesn't mean you should discount the equipment. Are 4x4's useless just because everyone else is using SUV's as mall-cruisers? And it's true, a lot of people I see on the trails just aren't using the poles correctly or don't know how.

Just think of the poles as the modern day equivilent of a hiking staff. In almost all the pictures you see of old time mountain men, they always carried some sort of staff with them. IMO, one staff is good, two poles are better. I started out with one pole, and really didn't see much of a benefit. But for some reason I decided I would try two, and I've found it to be much better for some reason. Can't really explain why, other than you can get into a rhythm using two poles that you just can't get with one.

The harder the hike, the steeper the descent, and the heavier the pack, that's when you'll really start to appreciate having something to aid in balance. I can't even count the number of times it's saved me from taking a really bad fall, or twisting my ankle. About the only time they become a burden is when climbing/scrambling uphill on rocky areas, in which case most trekking poles can be collapsed and stowed away, not so easy with a wooden staff. Plus in many areas it's just not possible to find a suitable branch on the ground to use, and it's illegal to cut one off a tree.

There's a big difference between using the trekking poles for a Nordic walking workout, and using one for hiking. It does burn more calories overall, but it also lessens the load on your leg, so you actually can hike farther with less fatigue. Usually your arms aren't doing much anyway when you're hiking, might as well put them to use. If you're using them correctly, you're not really giving your arms much of a workout anyway. I would say 46% increase in calorie burning is quite extreme, the numbers I've read are more like a 10% increase, which isn't much.

I know quite a few people who had the same initial impressions as I did (especially other guys). They see hiking poles as unmanly, or something only yuppie hikers would buy. But just wait until they're exhausted coming down from a really long hike, they'll grudgingly accept the poles, and by the end they'll realize how much they help.

They're definitely not for everyone though, some people just don't like the feeling of holding something while hiking. If all your hikes are on flat land or well traveled trails, then poles are probably unneccessary. But I doubt trekking poles would be so popular for so long if it was only a fad and didn't have real benefits.

Posted by: haertig

Re: Trekking poles - 01/06/09 05:10 PM

I slip down on my butt a LOT less when using poles on steep downhill loose gravel slopes.

I feel a LOT more secure when picking my way down the rocky "stair-step" slopes.

My feet stay a LOT drier when attempting to cross a fallen tree over a stream.

I do find some humor in watching people carrying their poles along, pointing down and forward, but never touching the ground with them. Ditto for the folks who "tap" their pole on the ground every 7 or 8 steps. When I'm using my poles (which is almost all the time now), I use them like a four legged animal would. Animals don't skip using their front legs regularly. It's a regular pattern where all four are used in a defined sequence, left rear working with right front, right rear working with left front (ignoring loping, jumping, and pouncing movements). During steep climbing or descending this rhythm is of course broken as you pick your way through obstacles.

Trekking poles: A big YES from me.
Posted by: ducktapeguy

Re: Trekking poles - 01/06/09 05:41 PM

Another advantage I forgot to mention when using poles, is enjoyment. I find that I am a lot more observant of my surroundings if I have poles, because I am not constantly staring at my feet watching every step. I can actually lift my head up and look around without worrying about spraining my ankle or falling.

If you think about it, when hiking you really only have one point of contact with the ground at any time, the other foot is always in the air going for the next step. That one foot has to support all your weight plus the weight of your pack, and you have to use your muscles to balance which put additional stress on your foot. With poles, there is always at least two, and sometimes three points of contact with the ground, which is a lot more stable. You can try it for yourself at home, put on a fully loaded pack and just try and balance on one foot and see how long you can stay there. Now try the same thing while holding onto a hand rail for balance. You can stand there a lot longer with a lot less exertion. That's what hiking poles are like, a hand rail with every step.




Posted by: benjammin

Re: Trekking poles - 01/06/09 06:54 PM

Hunting side slopes in the Blues for elk one season I had my rifle slung with the muzzle down due to it raining and not wanting any moisture in my barrel. As I was transitioning down the side of a draw covered in crescent wheat, my foot would lay the wet stalks over running downslope, which inevitably negated traction and caused me to slip into a sitting position. Unfortunately, in so doing, the muzzle of my barrel got stuffed into the dirt, and I ended up with a barrel obstruction. I spent the next half hour snaking my barrel out and looking for a stick somewhere nearby to aid in my descent.

After that, I started packing shooting sticks along on my little expeditions. Sometimes I only need to be taught a lesson once. However, I got another chance a couple years ago when I was coming down a steep hill without a pole or stick as aid and my foot slid sideways right into the edge of a rock and I broke the bone right behind the little toe. It broke because I had nearly all my weight on that foot when it impacted, and the contact was just above the welt where there is virtually no protection.
Posted by: clearwater

Re: Trekking poles - 01/06/09 07:26 PM

An outward bound instructor I worked with, who also surfed,
filled his trekking poles up with sand to keep his arms in shape
during our backpacking courses.
Posted by: clearwater

Re: Trekking poles - 01/06/09 07:29 PM

Originally Posted By: benjammin
Hunting side slopes in the Blues for elk one season I had my rifle slung with the muzzle down due to it raining and not wanting any moisture in my barrel. As I was transitioning down the side of a draw covered in crescent wheat, my foot would lay the wet stalks over running downslope, which inevitably negated traction and caused me to slip into a sitting position. Unfortunately, in so doing, the muzzle of my barrel got stuffed into the dirt, and I ended up with a barrel obstruction. I spent the next half hour snaking my barrel out and looking for a stick somewhere nearby to aid in my descent.


You must have heard of the single layer of electrical tape
over the bore? Shoot right through it?
Posted by: ohiohiker

Re: Trekking poles - 01/07/09 02:41 AM

I don't like buying or carrying nonessential stuff. I was skeptical of hiking poles, but decided to try them out. I got a pair of cheap $20 telescoping poles last year, and so far they've held up fine in hilly terrain. Every time I hike on steep trails without them, I wish I had brought them along. I even use them Nordic-walking style on flat trails sometimes.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Trekking poles - 01/17/09 04:29 AM

Update:

Tonight, we purchased 2 pair of trekking poles. We went with the Black Diamond brand as the Flicklock system is much easier then the twist and lock methods of other poles.

We will try the poles out to see how we like them tomorrow. We are leaving early in the morning for an overnight winter hike and camp. The weather should be perfect for this, it will be just below freezing during the day and about -10C (14F) overnight.

A photo of the poles we purchased.






Posted by: tomfaranda

Re: Trekking poles - 01/17/09 05:30 AM

I'm sure i'm not the only one who'll be interested in your reporting back on the poles.

I think the Black diamond locking system is excellent.
Posted by: oldsoldier

Re: Trekking poles - 01/17/09 01:46 PM

I have a pair of REI ones with the flicklocks (they may actually be BDs though, as REI only brands, not manufactures). I went to the flick lock system when I had a twist lock failure, resulting in me falling over.
Posted by: Dagny

Re: Trekking poles - 01/17/09 03:58 PM

Another hearty endorsement of hiking poles. Especially if you have a bum knee and a history of ankle strains (as I do). And if you are hiking on rocky trails, crossing streams or going to be on steep descents. And as someone has already noted, very handy for clearing spider webs.

I carry one for shorter hikes (a few miles), two for longer. Highly recommend these REI super-light poles, which are half-price right now during their January sale. Far as I know, they are the lightest poles available.

The pair weigh 11.2 ounces

http://www.rei.com/product/756152


"These are the lightest, strongest trekking poles out there! Made for those up to 5'10'' who pursue minimalist backpacking and adventure racing."
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Trekking poles - 01/18/09 05:13 PM

Update:

We tried the poles out yesterday over varied terrain that included wet and dry open forest, open plains /rangeland, and a flowing rocky creek bed with some minor ice build up on the rocks in the creek and alongside the creek in the higher sections, I have to admit that the poles helped quite a bit in the creek bed and on few steeper downhill sections in the open areas.

It took a bit to used to the poles, but after about an hour, it was hardly noticeable. I ended up only using one pole as I always carry my 3mm camera in my left hand.

As for my partner, she found the poles very useful and did not suffer as much from "sausage fingers" as she normally does after walking an hour or so. She also ended up only using one pole and switched hands every so often as it there was no need for two due to the weight of her pack (21 lbs) and the terrain was fairly easy to walk on.

For both her and I, the most disconcerting aspect that took some getting used to was purposely putting some weight on the poles especially on the downhill sections and hoping that the quick locks hold. Also feeling the poles flex more then a wooden walking stick does gave us both a certain uneasiness for the first while.

Overall, we like the poles and will use them more when we go out so that we used to them more.

There was only one issue with the poles. This model does not come with the the rubber feet that you can put on the ends. The sales person gave us the wrong rubber feet and of course we did not try them on until yesterday and they were too big. A generous wrap of electrical tape fixed this and they rubber feet held fine for the duration. Needless to say, we will be getting the proper rubber feet before our next outing...
Posted by: ducktapeguy

Re: Trekking poles - 01/19/09 04:41 PM

On the flex issue, are you holding the poles correctly? Look at the picture on this site.

http://www.personal.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/poles2.htm#Features

The weight should be held entirely by the strap, in fact you should be able to open your hand while supporting all your weight. The only reason you really need grip the pole is to lift it up off the ground. If you grip the handle too tightly (as in trying to use it like a staff to hold your weight), it puts side loads on the poles which cause them to flex, not to mention your hand will get tired and sweaty. If you let your weight hang off the strap, all the weight goes straight down the poles with no flexing.

Also, I have found the rubber tips aren't very useful outdoors in most terrain. Maybe on dry asphalt or clean, dry rocks, but any water or dirt will cause them to slip. The carbide tips give much better traction on most trails, especially ones with wet rocks or sand covered rocks.
Posted by: dougwalkabout

Re: Trekking poles - 01/19/09 05:05 PM

My trekking pole is a Black Diamond as well. The locks have held up quite well considering how I abuse them. Note that it is possible to crack the plastic by tightening the screw way too much.

When going downhill, I think you have to grip the handle firmly to get any real benefit. At least that's been my experience.

I know cross-country ski poles are designed so the strap takes most of the force, but they are very long and so push you from behind.

When walking in rough terrain I need to brace myself from a full range of angles.

For a walking pole, I remove the strap entirely. I think it's a bloody nuisance, but that's just me.

I also remove the rubber/urethane tip when walking. It's great for the car and for shipping the pole in luggage. The carbide tips can be sharpened with a diamond file or a small grinder like a Dremel.
Posted by: unimogbert

Re: Trekking poles - 01/19/09 05:56 PM

If you like to use the rubber feet, be sure and carry spares.

I've left several in various mudholes around the Colorado mountains when they get sucked off the end of my Tracks staff. And for wear-thru.

For my pole I've found chair leg tips of the proper inner diameter work fine. Buy 'em by the bag :-)

Originally Posted By: Sherpadog



There was only one issue with the poles. This model does not come with the the rubber feet that you can put on the ends. The sales person gave us the wrong rubber feet and of course we did not try them on until yesterday and they were too big. A generous wrap of electrical tape fixed this and they rubber feet held fine for the duration. Needless to say, we will be getting the proper rubber feet before our next outing...