Weight

Posted by: JBMat

Weight - 06/11/10 02:18 PM

As most of us have realized, it's not space, it's weight that is the killer. I read that the weight for the average infantryman has not changed since pre-revolutionary times. When something gets lighter, the powers that be add something else to the mix. I can personally attest to this.

There are two types of weight in my way of thinking - fixed and discretionary. Fixed - water is always gonna be 8 lbs per gal, more or less. Discretionary - instead of two gallons, I carry one and some water purification tabs instead.

So what I am gonna do, in my copious free time, is decide what I "need" v. what I "want". Then try and cut down the weight on the needs (plastic matchsafe v. brass one) Redundancy is good, but too much of a good thing is too much.

What I am trying to do is get my BOB weight into a managable range that I could carry for an extended period of time, should I have to.

Any ideas or things that you do to cut weight.

(and to all you ultra-lite campers, I am not cutting labels off stuff.)
Posted by: adam2

Re: Weight - 06/11/10 02:36 PM

Water is essiential to life, and in many cases will be the heaviest part of any pack, whether for planned outings and adventures or emergencies.
A great deal therefore depends on the terain.
Non drinkable water is found most everwhere in urban or suburban areas, therefore little need be carried, only means of purification.
Butane lighters are lighter than most alternatives, and suitable for all but the most extreme conditions.
Lithium batteries are lighter than alkaline and give exended service.
Posted by: desolation

Re: Weight - 06/11/10 03:45 PM

Many backpackers go for weeks on a sub 30 pound pack (some are even lighter at sub 20 pound). It is possible to go light, but it requires, as you indicate, compromise. And money. The light stuff is expensive.

Posted by: MostlyHarmless

Re: Weight - 06/11/10 03:51 PM

Look to the ultralight crowd and see what you can learn from them...

I like the UL philosophy that you attack on two fronts: The big heavy ones AND the total accumulated mass of all the little things. One added benefit is that the total number of items is reduced, which reduces complexity and makes it A LOT easier to find stuff.

Their primary targets would be the biggest, bulkiest and heaviest single items: Your pack, your sleeping bag and your shelter (tent/tarp/whatever). Unfortunately, they are also the most expensive to replace with good UL alternatives.

The backpack can be much lighter if the load inside it is reduced in weight and volume. It's a negative feedback at play: The bulkier / heavier gear, the heavier your pack must be to provide comfort with the heavy load.

Another thing to learn from UL people is the thoroughness they apply when composing the gear list, always looking for multi-purpose items and discarding single-use items. There is no law that dictates that you cannot have redundancy for critical gear (knife, fire etc.) through multi-use items. Example: Your multitool is also the handle for lifting pots off the fire (the dedicated handle is then left at home), a backup knife and a backup saw.

Learning from UL people and applying to your situation does not make you UL ... I'll never be in the UL crowd, but I do try to cut down on superfluous redundancy. Personally, I think the cutting the toothbrush and removing the labels are more UL rites-of-passage than anything else.
Posted by: LED

Re: Weight - 06/11/10 05:38 PM

Originally Posted By: JBMat
.

Any ideas or things that you do to cut weight.


Get a cart. Something like the hunting carts from Cabelas, Tipke folding cart, etc. Or find a way to mount the heavy stuff on a bike and push or ride it. Carrying heavy loads from miles is too hard on the knees IMO. A 72hr.+ BOB is gonna be heavy no matter which way you slice it.
Posted by: comms

Re: Weight - 06/11/10 06:26 PM

I guess the real question is: What is your manageable BOB weight? Are you 6'1 and 210 lbs or 5'8" and 160 lbs?
Are you looking at urban, suburban or rural Bug Outs?
Is this something you would use for less than 2 days to get to a cache/safe area or long term?
Is this a solo BOB or family items included for kids?

If it's just a weight issue, then you can certainly drop about 30% of your gear weight just by upgrading or multitasking gear. Zero comfort. And knowing the terrain, obstacles, hazards. You may not need to carry as much water in NC as I do in AZ, for example.

I EDC 24/7 so my base pack weight for a trail run is a pound or two heavier than others in my group, but I don't consider them UL compared to me. Conversely, my base weight for long day hikes or overnights is 50% less than those same people.
Posted by: MDinana

Re: Weight - 06/11/10 06:59 PM

Buy a horse. lol

I'm kidding. But there's lots to be said about carts or beasts of burden. Of course, lots to be said about getting blisters since you're probably not used to moving a cart for extended distances.

Do you plan strictly on walking? Where do you plan on going that you need so much to get there?

Bicycle bags are an option as has been mentioned in the past, if you decide to bike out. There are some front/back bag combos that help distribute the weight a bit. Personally, I found in high school that I could carry a 50lbs bag for days on end. I didn't like it...

Somewhere I read that a backpack shouldn't be more than 1/3 your weight. Most folks can go up to half their weight for a limited time period. If you're not in good shape though, you're just asking for an injury.
Posted by: comms

Re: Weight - 06/11/10 07:06 PM

Originally Posted By: MDinana


Somewhere I read that a backpack shouldn't be more than 1/3 your weight.


I don't think my old Platoon Sgt ever read that little tidbit.
Posted by: JBMat

Re: Weight - 06/11/10 08:01 PM

The 1/3 your body weight stuff doesn't apply to the military.

I've had rucks go well over 100 lbs. At the time I was 6' about 165. Now I'm still 6' but 195 +/-. During a series of tests we did back in the olden days, we were weighed before and after donning equipment for a jump. With rucks/weapon/ammo/unit gear/main and reserve there wasn't a guy there who weighed under 250, most closer to 300. The medics/RTOs/Machine gunners had the most weight. And yes, just my luck I was the CO's RTO.

I would like to get my BOB down to under 30 with water on board. Personally, I can rough it. DW on the other hand... let's say she has mellowed and likes some amenities. I can see carrying 40 lbs and not being too stressed. She can probably carry about 30 and be ok. What I have been doing is looking at multi-task stuff and dropping some redundant stuff. One Leatherman instead of a Leatherman, a SAK and a mil issue jackknife for instance.

As to the water issue - summer here (heck, anytime after May 1) is 90+ with humidity varying from 60-90% most of the time. Water is a no brainer, it's just how much and where can I get more.

I'm still not cutting labels outta my undies to save weight tho, lol.

Posted by: ireckon

Re: Weight - 06/11/10 08:18 PM

I guess I shouldn't have laughed at my girlfriend when she suggested bug out bags with wheels. What do you guys think? Practical?

http://www.amazon.com/High-Sierra-At-Lug...0907&sr=1-1

Posted by: Art_in_FL

Re: Weight - 06/11/10 09:57 PM

Assuming your in shape and acclimated to the conditions the rule of thumb I'm familiar with was that one-tenth your body weight could be carried with little slowing but increased fatigue. For maximum mobility you want to keep the encumbrance under this level.

(US infantry is often at this level with little more than body armor and boots.)

one-quarter of your body weight is as heavy as you can go and maintain any ability to run. Even a jog for a short time.

One-third of your body weight is as heavy as you can go and walk fast.

One-half your body weight is as heavy as you can go if you want move faster than a crawl.

Note that these expected speeds are over a considerable distance/ time and most everyone can muster up the strength for short bursts of speed.
Posted by: chickenlittle

Re: Weight - 06/11/10 10:24 PM

One of the things I learned was to weigh stuff.
I am not a gram weenie, but the grams do add up to kilograms and 5 kilos can make the difference between a reasonable hike or a miserable and exhausting slog.

If you take all the trinkets and put them in a bag and weigh them all together you are likely in for a rude surprise.
Small items that weigh nothing tend to add up fast and suddenly you find yourself with 10 lbs of small tools, and usually they all copy each other's functions.

Packaging matters too. I have seen people with half their pack full of the packaging their stuff came in.
That stuff all weighs.

Check how much all the holsters and pouches on stuff weigh and be sure you need them. Often you can get better protection by stowing some gear inside other gear.

For example: My GPS unit is usually either in my pocket or in the pack.When in the pack it needs some protection.
I keep it in my spare socks instead of the special pouch (which stays home).

Another thing to weigh is the pack itself.
You need a certain amount of material to make a strong stable pack. After that every extra bit of pocket, zipper or strap is adding extra weight so you want to be sure they help.
I have two expedition packs here that are the same size but one is twice as heavy as the other. The heavy one is designed to stand up to the abuse of rock climbing.

I always suggest people load their pack and walk about one mile out and back, then get the scales out and start looking.
If you are doing it in a city be sure to include some hills and stairs.
Posted by: Am_Fear_Liath_Mor

Re: Weight - 06/11/10 11:35 PM


Quote:
Any ideas or things that you do to cut weight.


Get the titanium version (half the weight of the steel version), get the down version (half the weight and half the packable volume of the synthetic version, hence smaller and lighter backpack) and get the most reliable highest performance kit (not necessarily the lightest) you can afford for the weather and terrain conditions that you can expect so you don't need a backup or a backup to a backup.

The quality of the backpack and its ability to move with the hiker whilst keeping the load stable and the load bearing ability on the hips is also important. Most UL packs are lacking in this respect. The extra 1 or 2 lbs in additional weight for the pack might be very worthwhile for long term comfort.

The cooking and sleeping systems need particular attention. For example a gas cartridge cooking system will be lighter and higher performance than an alcohol stove if the time out in the wilds is greater than 2-3 days.

For shelter a lightweight tent might also be the way to go when compared to a tarp or basha/ground sheet/bivi bag combo as the differences in weight could be very slight especially when considering the weather performance difference.

Much will be dictated by the terrain and the weather conditions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73KKZDhoj_0

And sometimes you need a really good tent to cope on a blustery rainy day. whistle

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4NN3cltuuY















Posted by: hikermor

Re: Weight - 06/12/10 01:19 AM

The aluminum version is also half the weight of the steel version and is considerably cheaper.
Posted by: Art_in_FL

Re: Weight - 06/12/10 02:18 AM

Originally Posted By: hikermor
The aluminum version is also half the weight of the steel version and is considerably cheaper.


Yes, replacing a steel version of a piece of gear with aluminum, or titanium can save half the weight. Finding out you can do without that piece of gear can save you all of the weight.
Posted by: Byrd_Huntr

Re: Weight - 06/12/10 03:43 AM

I'll admit that I struggle with the whole 'bug-out' concept. My first instinct would be to 'shelter in place', the second would be to 'shelter with a nearby relative', and a distant third, 'to walk out'. I'm well covered with the first two, but I have made provisions for the third, even though my plans for that scenario are nebulous at best. When planning to travel overland, I leave the equipment matters to the experts; the US military. I don't need to reinvent the wheel, or spend a fortune. I go the the surplus store and get what I need. I have PSKs, trunk kits, containerized camping gear, daypacks, FAKs, portable food and water stored in my vehicles, garage, my provisions area, and a rented off-site storage area. By purchasing some used military rucks, cargo bags ($15), and duffles ($5), I can put together any size BoB very quickly. With the gigantic Molle II external frame backpack ($10), I can carry 70 pounds on my back if I have to, and there is a smaller pack for my (smaller) wife. I also obtained a collapsible game cart rated at 300 pounds, and a garden wagon with removable sides. I can strap the Molle II pack to the cart, or lighten it to carry and strap a lot of other gear and provisions to the cart or wagon. I doubt I would ever resort to walking out, but most of the gear required is multi-use.
Posted by: SETI6equj5

Re: Weight - 06/12/10 06:49 AM

Make a copy of your packing list. Pack in reverse order, priority items packed last, like you normally would. When you do this, you'll catch yourself tossing the stuff you really don't need, but want, in the bottom of the bag. Scratch off whatever you don't actually use when you get home from each trip. Also, look at places that teach or give guided mountaineering/backpacking trips. A lot of them have detailed required gear lists online. More often than not, if you don't see it in their list, you probably don't need it.
Consider replacing some of those under layers with silk, get a few silk ski masks that you can fold/roll up off your face to use as a hat. A few pairs of silk gloves. That sheds a lot of weight and bulk, though all relative to the trip lengths. Do you have a scale that reads grams? Weigh your matchbox against a Bic lighter. I'd rather have the lighter than the matches.

Talk yourself into things like "everything MUST be flat packable", and, "everything MUST have multiple uses". Almost impossible...still, those two will kick your creativity into gear. I winter trek a lot, and cutting weight is always on my mind - but only if it's practical, with my well-being at the top of the list first. I don't consider myself an ultra-lighter, because if I'm goin' campin', I plan on eatin'... a lot.

If there's no fire restrictions where you hike,cook all your meals over open fire. Making (or buying) a .016" thick stainless steel backpacking stove that burns wood instead of an alcohol stove or regular backpacking stove for your back-up cuts some liquid weight off. Or you could do the Esbit thing.

I have a frameless pack with a hydration pouch, for 2-4 day non-winter treks. I keep my cooking grate and my sleeping pad in the pouch. Now I have a sturdy frame and padding. If you go that way, make sure it all fits before you buy. Some pouches are tight and that might cause bulging into your back. If you use a self inflating closed-cell like I do, just experiment with the valve to try different back support levels.

The shelter system is based on what you can afford, and prefs. Out under the stars in a bivy/tarp system? Or a tent? My 4 lb two person tent has been good enough, but middle age is creeping up on me. I am considering weighing up a set of custom carbon fiber poles against the dac aluminum ones to see if there's significant difference in weight. It can get pricey. I've also been eye-balling the Go-Lite Shangri-La 1 in case I want to drop a little more weight in the future. The tent body, which is really just a fly, weighs 1 lb.,plus 3 ounces for 6 stakes and the optional floored nest is 15 ounces. Go-Lite didn't list that as the packed weight, and I would assume it also comes with a stuff sack, but who knows. There's no included poles because it's pitched using 2 trekking poles or by hanging it with 2 lines. If you don't use trekking poles, you can custom make poles, or use some sticks you find laying around.

Thinking about how you plan, prepare, and cook your meals can change things enough to where you may decide that the fry pan can be kicked to the curb also. Unless it doubles as your lid and/or plate. I just stew or fry in my pot, eat from my pot. Aside from oatmeal, all the other food types are grilled or kabob.
Pre-cooking certain foods can have it's advantages, like removing excess water weight, grease, it lowers the chance of spoilage, and you just have to re-heat instead of a full cook time. If you like dehydrated foods and snacks, you can save a lot of money on camp food if you buy a home dehydrator and do it yourself. Personally, I dislike those pre-packaged dehydrated foods, because they taste like crap, cost too much money per portion, have less nutrition, and force people to carry more water. That same water weight can be fat juicy steak. You can control how much re-hydrating you need with a home kit. Overall, you'll eat better, have more fun, and can pump the savings into better gear.




Posted by: LED

Re: Weight - 06/12/10 08:08 AM

I hike about every other day for exercise and walk the dog daily for at least a mile. Even without a pack, it can be a PITA. Especially if my knees decide to stay home that day or another old injury rears its head. You guys may be in a much better position to BO on foot. For me, thats the absolute least desirable scenario. Hence the bike and cart suggestions. Recently got back into bike riding after a long hiatus and its amazing how much more distance you can cover with casual biking than you can walking. I'll take a sore butt over sore knees anyday. Come to think of it, a modified moped/50cc scooter might also be an option.