Try using a small, lightweight silnylon tarp supported by trekking poles. Also make a great place to cook under when raining. A 4'x6' works well and minimal weight.
Buck
Long distance hikers
- Thread starter lingo
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
Try using a small, lightweight silnylon tarp supported by trekking poles. Also make a great place to cook under when raining. A 4'x6' works well and minimal weight.
Buck
Sweet!! I'll try that!
Regarding the folks that are loobying for luxury (weight), but have experience limited to 2 week hikes: There is a big difference between a 2week hike and doing the AT. If you are starting in GA, somewhere into NC, you'll curse every extra ounce.
What the hell do I know, I still use an external fram pack. ;-0
What the hell do I know, I still use an external fram pack. ;-0
Wow that tarp stuff seams to be made of gold....$80 bucks for an 8X10!! Maybe I won't be trying that any time tooo soon 
I know they aren't cheap but they work well and it is a great tool. I was camped on The Froze To Death Plateau in Montana and set up a 4x6 in a lean to manner. A storm blew in and the gusts were so strong that the shocks in my trekking poles would completely compress. The tarp never gave way nor did the eyelets tear out. The goat hole where I was filtering water froze over in that storm. It was one heck of a night.
Shop around for the best deal, I think you can find them a littler cheaper.
Buck
Shop around for the best deal, I think you can find them a littler cheaper.
Buck
Just as an fyi, it was 69 pigboy and I on that Montana trip.
Buck
Buck
Go over to trailjournals dot com and look up a user named postcard and read his story.
Hés a guy I knew back when I lived in the empyre. mid 40´s, 6 foot, maybe 200 lbs.
It´ll give you some ideas for sure.
Hés a guy I knew back when I lived in the empyre. mid 40´s, 6 foot, maybe 200 lbs.
It´ll give you some ideas for sure.
So do I ! A 15 year old Kelty. I wouldn´t trade it for any of the new outerspace crap.
I get to check out all sorts of backpacks that tourists bring with them.
Most are junk. Cool looking, junk with adjustable everything
25 to 30 miles a day is quite possible. 30 miles is only 3mph for 10 hours. With good leg strength, a proper pack it should be doable.
What most people error in is they try to keep up X pace all the time irregardless of terrain. You set your pace based on energy output. It takes a level of self awareness, but it can be done. Another thing is to know when to refuel and hydrate. Breathing properly is also important. Keeping your energy levels up and staying within your aerobic capacity is key to long term sustained high output. To do that you will need to eat and drink often as well as breath well. Eat the caloric energy amount now that you will burn .5 to 1.5 hours from now. Eat often so new fuel is available all the time while you are hiking. For water, drink before you are thirsty. My general rule is you need to drink enough that you need to piss a few times a day. Breathing is also very important. Your aerobic capacity sets the absolute limit as to how much energy you can expend over long periods of time. If you are getting lactic acid buildup in your muscles you are expending to much energy for your aerobic capacity. Breath deeper and or slow down or your body will slow you down much more later. Lactic acid buildup comes from not having enough oxygen for complete conversion of a couple different sugars into ATP which is used for moving the muscles.
Another note on muscles. To little leg strength for the pack weight and you are forced into anaerobic burning of fuel no matter what. You need to have you plus your pack weight under some percentage (80%???) of the maximum you can lift one legged. The percentage may be different than that but I expect it is around there for everybody. Why is this, because at some strength output point your body switches over from only using aerobic muscle fibers to using both aerobic and anaerobic muscle fibers. The kicker is the anaerobic only fibers are only good for a short period then they need a day or two of not being used to fully recover.
Backpack note: Have the backpack transfer the weight to your hips. Only balance and control the pack with your shoulders. It takes energy for a muscle to hold position. Load it down more it uses more energy. Any weight bearing down on your shoulders not only needs leg muscle energy use to hold it up, but also needs back and shoulder muscle energy too.
I didn't own an internal frame pack till a few years ago.
Now I only seam to do short 1 to 2 night photography hikes. Most of the hiking gear I use now is ultralightish, but my pack still weighs allot. That is because of the photographic gear, 20 to 40 lbs worth. I also usually carry all the water I need for the hike.
Last overnight hike I used an Adventure Medial Kits Thermo-lite bivi sack plus 1/2" foam pad instead of a sleeping bag and tent as a test. First issue is it doesn't breath so any moisture builds up.
It was plenty warm, wearing a couple layers of clothes, for a 30F night.
The foam pad is to insulate between you and the ground. The sack can't do that. I also use the foam pad to line my backpack to protect the camera gear. Due to the moisture buildup I wouldn't use it more than a couple nights. I had to change socks in the morning due to mine getting wet from pooled condensation. Also the initial evaporating of the moisture in my clothes when I got out of it made me feel quite cold for a good 20 minutes. Changing into a dry set of clothes in the morning may have been the best way to handle it, but that means two sets of clothes. I do normally carry two sets. Set two is an emergency set that also serves as padding for photographic gear. I've dunked one to many times in an icy mountain stream to not have a dry set of clothes along. I pack everything inside dry sacks. I usually use 3 to 5 on a hike. One is for food and toiletries only. No other sack has food in it and I have never packed food or toiletries in any of the other dry sacks. One is for food prep equipment. Often now I no longer take it. One is for the med kit only, it's red. The last one or two are for clothing, camera gear, and anything else that can't get wet.
Food is boring for me. My current hikes are only 2 to 3 days so I only take CLIF bars, nuts, dried fruits, and dried meats. Nothing that needs any preparation. It also has the advantage I can easily eat it while moving. For the nuts, dried fruits, and dried meats I prepackage them into roughly half hour energy burn quantities*. That way I eat two an hour just before and while hiking.
Makes meal planning quick. No stove, pots, or dishes, but 4 oz of 95 proof drinking safe alcohol. It serves as emergency fire starting fluid and wound cleaning.* Go find a calorie burn calculator to figure out who many calories you would burn per hour hiking. It is different depending on your weight. I would include your gear weight. This calorie burn calculator says I burn 750 calories per hour hiking. I put in my weight plus pack weight.
Now I'm even more confused. I used to think weight on hips was good, but my buddy who is hard core hicker said weight high is good. So now I'm so lost, but I still use an ALICE pack so I really don't have much choice with that gear. Now the MOLE pack I have does have a practical hip strap, but it wieghs so much more.....
Ah, the internal frame verus external frame debate begins. Gear geeks think internal is the ONLY way to go. External has its benefits.
If you are climbing, especially in really cold weather, the internal probably prevails.
Otherwise, my vote is for external. Get's weight to your hips, where it belongs (ever seen a spinal x-ray?). And, it provides for better ventilation, so you don't get swamp back. If you go with a heavy load, an external is even more important.
If you are climbing, especially in really cold weather, the internal probably prevails.
Otherwise, my vote is for external. Get's weight to your hips, where it belongs (ever seen a spinal x-ray?). And, it provides for better ventilation, so you don't get swamp back. If you go with a heavy load, an external is even more important.
Actually any time of the year the internal is better for climbing. It gets the weight closer to the body which improves balance. They are also much better for scrambling over rocks too. As for getting the weight to the hips. Newer internal framed packs have gotten very good at this so it is a wash between them and external framed packs. The thing is not all currently on the market internal framed packs are good at transferring the weight properly.
Weight high, but transferred to the hips through the pack's frame and hip belt, not your shoulders.
Densest stuff high and against the body. For most this is the water bladders. For me it is my camera lenses. As the stuff gets less dense it goes further from the back and lower in the pack. Some stuff needs quick access so it gets priority placement for quick access.
Wow that actually did clarify what I've heard. I was expecting mud and I got clear vis 
lots of good info in here.
any opinions on jansport stuff?
i've been eyeballing this:
Klamath 68 Internal Frame
any opinions on jansport stuff?
i've been eyeballing this:
Klamath 68 Internal Frame
that pack just by looking at it and not there other products on their site looks awful. This is my opinion of course so don't take it too harshly or seriously. Here's why (maybe take this more seriously now):
First off it's a 68L which is huge. I have a 66L bag which I use only for week long trips where I will see serious elevation gain that puts me on glaciers and very technical climbing so I need a bag that not only can pack my essentials (tent, food, sleeping) but ropes, protection, crampons, technical and mountaineering ice axes, helmet, etc. If you are not doing that why such a huge pack? I might also mention that at times I could be on a longer outing so I need some good survival gear because I could be four days walk away from the closest person.
Next it has that dread zipper on the bottom. The only reason to have to pull something from the bottom of a bag is because you brought too much stuff to begin so pulling everything from the top is too much work. I avoid them for two main reasons: zippers let water in and zippers fail. Ever have a zipper break? We all have, all the time. Now what happens when a zipper busts on the bottom of your bag? Lets just say gravity prevails.
Does it have a removable hipbelt? if a bag that size doesn't I'd pass and material looks tough but heavy. I find that nicer bags tend to be just as tough but lighter by alternating fabrics used throughout the pack and putting them where durability is needed.
Remember a bag doesn't have to last 20 years but it does have to survive your outings
First off it's a 68L which is huge. I have a 66L bag which I use only for week long trips where I will see serious elevation gain that puts me on glaciers and very technical climbing so I need a bag that not only can pack my essentials (tent, food, sleeping) but ropes, protection, crampons, technical and mountaineering ice axes, helmet, etc. If you are not doing that why such a huge pack? I might also mention that at times I could be on a longer outing so I need some good survival gear because I could be four days walk away from the closest person.
Next it has that dread zipper on the bottom. The only reason to have to pull something from the bottom of a bag is because you brought too much stuff to begin so pulling everything from the top is too much work. I avoid them for two main reasons: zippers let water in and zippers fail. Ever have a zipper break? We all have, all the time. Now what happens when a zipper busts on the bottom of your bag? Lets just say gravity prevails.
Does it have a removable hipbelt? if a bag that size doesn't I'd pass and material looks tough but heavy. I find that nicer bags tend to be just as tough but lighter by alternating fabrics used throughout the pack and putting them where durability is needed.
Remember a bag doesn't have to last 20 years but it does have to survive your outings
thanks for the input. i'm new at this.
also been looking at the osprey atmos 65. lots of good reviews.
i'd be trekking thru Southern Appalachia so not really any need for special climbing gear.
also been looking at the osprey atmos 65. lots of good reviews.
i'd be trekking thru Southern Appalachia so not really any need for special climbing gear.
Glad this got bumped up. There is some great info here. I'm actually leaving for a week long AT trip on monday...perfect hurricane timing.