"Elvenising" my equipment.

[Rain man]

Hi. OK bit of a philosophical view on kit here, might get lenghty...
I am quickly getting sick of going out in the woods with my Sabre 75 (with side pockets) filled to bursting with "essential" gear. Its awkward, too heavy too bulky, just too much!! If anyone has watched half as many films as I have you would have seen the epitomy of woodsman, the Elves. (Hear me out!) Theyre portrayed as forest dwellers who travel light with minimal gear and craft items of very light construction. And I came across the idea that I would attempt to Elvenise my equipment. I.e. Miminise what I really need and to find lighter (and preferably natural materials and neutral coloured) replacements. I have swapped over from tent to hammock, or bivvi, and I'm currently sourcing materials for a custom made ultralight hammock. I have found a lovely titanium pot to replace my heavy zebra billy, titanium spork instead of steel KFS etc etc
I have read the threads about sleeping bag vs blankets and the discussions usually address warmth to weight ratio, but i have not read much about the bulkiness. I usually put my bag in my rucksack then wonder where all my 75 litres went! I am trying to work out what equipment I'd need to sleep out with no bag or blanket at all! Ray mears built a shelter in the Rockies and a long fire stating he could sleep out with no bag to -50C!! So lying clothed, next to a fire on my thermarest prolite 4, basha if need be, and maybe just a cotton bivvi to cut out some wind and protect the mat from embers, I could survive reasonably cold temps? Any thoughts?
Also designing a custom bag. Has anyone done this too and what type was it? materials used? any nice ideas?
So, fantasy imagary aside, I would love to hear form anyone who carrys a 40L or lighter for a week in the woods and what they carry. I will post a list of the stuff i usually carry in all seasons at some point.

 

[dogwood]

On the bags and blankets front -- I'm a blanket guy -- bear in mind that the right blanket can take the place of several pieces of gear (tarp, jacket, sleeping bag..)

I think your goals are incredibly worthy. I've focused on taking less for the last 10 years and it makes the outdoors more fun.

Rather than focusing on the elves, I suggest you look closely at the gear carried by real world woods people who had to travel far and light: the native Americans and the longhunters in the US. In both cases they concentrated on traveling light and effectively. In the case of the Native Americans, I'd zero in on their post contact gear because pre-contact they had to rely on things like buffalo hides (heavy!!!!) and post contact they went to wool. Wool and steel transformed lives for the Native Americans and made them vastly more comfortable.

Two things of note:

1) one of the best ways of lightening your load is to take less food. A lot less. We typically lug around WAY too much on the trail. I now take ridiculously small amounts of food with me and I'm happier for it.

2) give some thought to shelter issues. The traditional woods people could just start hacking away at the forest and, given today's usage and current thinking on low-impact travel in the backcountry, you want to be sure you've thought through the practical and ethical issues of shelter closely. That said, a good bedroll (blanket and bivvy) can do wonders for you.

Good luck. The road you're heading on it the right one, I think.

 

[Bravo4]

Is your sleeping bag down filled? Down bags are very compressible, about half the weight of synthetic and about twice the cost. I've got a really light summer bag and a mid weight 3-season bag, one goes in the other for winter; and a bivy bag depending on what's what. All three together weigh less and compress much smaller than one synthetic 3-season bag. But they cost about, I don't even want to guess compared to a wool blanket. I've always been a bag guy but I'm going blanket for awhile.

I hear you with the pack weight thing, too many "essentials"; I think I used to be a half inch taller. A few years of backpacking for uncle sam and my feet were a half size bigger.

Wasn't sure what to expect by "Elvenising my equipment", good placement of the "Hear me out".

 

[Chinkapin]

You can be misled by looking at paintings or illustrations of either Native Americans, or Appalachian hunters. We have all seen the pictures of Dan'l Boone types easing silently through the forest primeval with nothing but a rifle, a powder horn, a knife, and a small "possibles" bag.

Yes, they did this but they were hunting near home and expected to spend the night back at the cabin or they were on long protracted hunting trips. These hunting trips were launched with horses, wagons and tents and ample necessities such as flour, lard, bacon, coffee and sugar. No doubt, some "white lightening" as well. Base camps were set up and these hunters operated out of them.

These base camps had heavy, cast iron cooking pots, fire irons, cooking grates, etc.

The woodland Native Americans had semi-permanent villages with heavy and durable goods that they operated out of as well.

These images have been exaggerated over time, and romantisized .

This is not to say that either group did not make journeys of several days, carrying almost nothing but pemmican and/or jerkey.

My point is simply that, yes its natural to want to copy as much of how they traveled light as is possible. Also, as has been stated above, we take way to much food. You can easily fast for three days with no ill effects if you are healthy. Conversely, if it comes a downpour, do you really want to just ignore it and push on (with no raingear)? I don't think so. If you want to be dry, warm and comfortable, and have a hot meal you cannot go equipped as they did. Its got to be whatever compromise suits you.

 

[dogwood]

Chinkapin,

I don't dispute your points about all the gear carried in a certain context, but I'm most certainly not romanticizing the longhunters or Native Americans.

I think it would help to define the circumstances in question. If we're talking about longer term travel -- i.e. more than 10 days or two weeks -- and/or settling a new location, of course the points you make are accurate.

If we're talking about trips of less that two weeks, then going ultra lightweight lightweight is absolutely possible and desirable.

In truth, the average longhunter and Native American didn't often take trips away from camp longer than a week or so on foot. If they were gone for longer they did have horses (or boats, canoes, etc.)

However, I suspect that 95%+ of the trips people are talking about here are less than two weeks in duration and so my comments stand.

I've done the handful of pemican and parched corn approach many times for four or five day trips and there's a lot to recommend it. There's a kind of purity and simplicity to it that gets lost in our over-geared outdoor adventures. (Well, OK, as a vegetarian, it wasn't actual pemican, but protein bars... but you get my point )

 

[Phil6201]

Chinkapin,


If we're talking about trips of less that two weeks, then going ultra lightweight lightweight is absolutely possible and desirable.

Tell that to this guy:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/news/2317997/Walking-had-become-missing-trampers-passion

I guess different environments call for different approaches, but this is not the first European or North American visitor killed while tramping in New Zealand due to being an enthusiast of lightweight tramping.

Might be popular and trendy, but it can also be deadly. I'd rather carry a bit more and live than die for the sake of a couple of kilos.

 

[dogwood]

Might be popular and trendy, but it can also be deadly. I'd rather carry a bit more and live than die for the sake of a couple of kilos.

It's always important to understand the environment you're going to be in, irrespective of how much gear you carry.

But don't be too quick to equate carrying more gear with greater safety -- loads of people end up in enormous distress because they're lugging too much, break an ankle far from home, etc.

And besides, I'm not talking about being dangerous, I'm talking about taking the bare minimum needed for a safe and enjoyable trip. (Nothing to do with being trendy either, everything to do with enjoying the experience more...)

But hey, carry what you want I'm not here to change your mind. I was just supporting the OP in his desire.

 

[Phil6201]

I'm sure none of the ultralight trampers killed in NZ thought they were doing anything dangerous.

It's that assumption of understanding their environment that lead them to the bad end they met, not some crazy idea to consciously do something dangerous.

It's when you find out the hard way you have misunderstood your environment, and find out that in the interest of saving as much weight as possible you have inadequate shelter and warm clothing, and that you have no food left because that river you walked across two days tramp ago is now a raging torrent and you can't get out for another week - that's when you realise that actually you didn't understand your environment very well at all. And yes, it is a lot about following a trend, what has become to some people an obsession with saving weight. The guy in the article was proud he saved a few grams by dispensing with his watch strap!

Being adequately prepared with extra provisions and extra equipment, to use if the weather turns bad is not the same as being overloaded through ignorance of your needs. You may not need the extra food, or the shelter you are carrying, because the weather stays fine and you complete the trip in the planned time, but it's having the capability to manage, to survive, when the weather does not meet your ideal expectations that is important.

Ultralight tramping erodes the margin for error, or simply the ability to cope with an unexpected (through lack of understanding) change in conditions to an unacceptable level. Going out equipped to survive only in ideal conditions is not acceptable. Simply ignoring the (likely) situation of conditions changing significantly, either through ignorance or just blind faith is foolish.

I keep using the example of weather changing, because it is a feature of the outdoors that is often not fully understood, but having an accident and injuring yourself is another typical example with similar outcomes.

 

[dogwood]

Going out equipped to survive only in ideal conditions is not acceptable. Simply ignoring the (likely) situation of conditions changing significantly, either through ignorance or just blind faith is foolish.

OK, I'm going to respond to the above and then keep my piece because I'm not sure anyone benefits from having a two person debate. But since you intimate that that I'm foolish, I will say for a final -- I promise -- time:

You greatly misunderstand the goals of going lighter if you think it intrinsically only prepares you for fair weather, etc. The idea is to take what is necessary for every *reasonable* turn of events one might encounter and have a plan of action if something more extreme arrives.

I did NOT advocate ignoring the environment -- in fact a couple of posts ago, I said "understanding your environment is important."

And I'm not talking about leaving your watchband off. What I AM talking about is taking a close and constant look at what you use and need outdoors -- in all conditions -- and taking just that. Nor am I a weight nazi -- I'm the guy who carries blankets,etc. But, yes, I can do a week in the Sierras -- safely, even if a early summer snow storm hits -- and carry less than 20 pounds to do it.

(And yes, I AM talking about taking less food -- almost everyone takes way too much food on every trip.)

Mind you, I've done trips that range from unsupported monthlong treks in the Alaskan wilderness to 150 mile hikes through the Sonoran Desert so it's not empty theory here and I know a bit about extreme conditions.

Nonetheless, *anyone* who is outdoors a lot is constantly analyzing the things they take and the bias is nearly always trying to slim the load.

Can people take going light too far? Of course. No argument. But taking too much can be just as big a problem.

It's worth remembering that some people get so paralyzed by fear of what might happen that they carry so much crap that they're miserable and never go outdoors again.

The vast majority of the time, the world is not as dangerous a place as some would have you believe. Learn enough about the world around you and suddenly you find that you can go easily into it without fear and without 60 pounds of gear.

And no, I'm not saying be blind, I'm just saying people get way too scared and think that gear is the solution. It isn't. In fact, sometimes gear can give people a false sense of security and invite them to do things they shouldn't.

And with that, I'll cede the field to you respond as you will because I've said more than I should on the subject and I'm probably boring everyone silly.

 

[Phil6201]

I was not saying you are foolish, and please, don't think everything (or anything for that matter) in my post is aimed specifically at you, actually nothing at all is aimed specifically at you.

I presented an example of a recent event that backs up my assertion that people can get too carried away with lightening things to the detriment of safety. This wasn't a dig at you.

I agree with your points about understanding your environment, but you will see that the point that I make, and is made by the unfortunate individuals who are dead, is that no matter how experienced someone thinks they are, they simply don't know what they don't know. This is what leads them into trouble, and incidents have proven that the fascination with lightening everything leads people to be poorly prepared when the environment exceeds their expectations.

I make the comment in my first post 'different environments call for different approaches'. You are clearly an exponent of lightweight tramping - that's clearly worked well for you and allows you to enjoy the outdoors, and just because I don't agree with the concept as applied in it's extreme should not imply I don't understand it. It simply doesn't translate well to my environment, and as we both agree, environment is something that needs to be considered. Ultralight tramping is not something to be blindly adopted as unquestioningly the 'best' way. It is one way, but not necessarily the best in all situations.

It needs to be adopted hand in hand with increasing outdoors experience and risk management skills, something we both clearly agree on as well.

I do not advocate carrying everything plus the kitchen sink, since I injured my back at work several years ago I strive to cut as much weight as I can as well, but I temper the enthusiasm for cutting weight. I was simply putting forth an alternate view regarding saving weight, even if you yourself have the experience not to over do it, history shows me that others do not.

 

[malcolmc]

I’d love to lighten my kit, most of which is a substitute for lack of skill and knowledge. I like the elfin idea but in the back of my mind is the thought that they always have a complete film crew, complete with catering van, behind the camera backing them up.

On a more serious note this forum has helped me to start ditching the kit I am very unlikely to need or be able to use, thanks to all for that.

 

[PropThePolecat]

@Rainman

Looking to the past and getting inspiration from indians, nomads etc is fine enough. Im sure you can learn alot from those ppl. But you can also draw benefit of todays technological advances and the latest in weight-saving equipment.

Some time ago there was a debate on a norwegian forum about what to take for 1-week fell trip. This was in turn posted on a danish forum which is where i got it from. In the end ppl came up with this list that ive taken the liberty to copy, translate and paste. Im not norwegian and there are alot words that i didnt understand or that google translate couldnt handle. Ive posted some questionmarks near those, maybe some norse ppl could help with that?

Backpack: (Mountain Laurel Super Prophet), 255 g, 155 USD
Sleeping pad: (Jysk) 126g, 40 NOK
Sleepingbag (down): (Millet XP 500), 450g
Tent: (Terra Nova Laser Photon) 760 g, 299 USD
Stove: (Primus MicronStove) 69 g, 630 NOK
Pot: (FireLite SUL-900 Titanium Cookpot) 79 g, 70 USD
Fuel: (100g gascan) 198 g, 60 NOK
Cutlery: (FireLite SUL Short Handled Titanium Spoon), 7 g, 5 USD
Food: (Real i brødpose til middag/lunch, gryn til frokost, 0,391 kg pr day????) 1805 g, 650 NOK
Reservefood: (SL-9) 230 g (??? NOK)
Waterbladder: (Platypus 1 L pose). 30 g, 300 NOK

Light Jacket (MontBell Ultralight Thermawrap Jacket) 246 g, 145 USD
Underwear (Longpants) 140 g, 320 NOK
Gloves (Arcteryc wool-gloves) 30 g, 200 NOK
Balaclava (Devold wool balaclava) 40 g, 200 NOK
Ekstra socks (Bridgedale trekking wool) 80 g, 200 NOK

Knife: (Spyderco Lightweight Knife) 16g, 35 USD
Tape (Scotch) 50 g, 150 NOK
Cord (for guylines/shoelaces/div rep) 30 g, 50 NOK
Matches 10 g, 20 NOK
Map and compass 80 g, 120 NOK + 150 NOK
FAK 85 g, 11 USD
Watertight pack bag (Søppelsekk ???) 64 g, Knæbb en fra rullen hjemme!
Lamp (Petzl E-Lite) 27 g, 300 NOK
Toiletpaper 20 g, Take a little from the roll at home!
Toiletry (Toothbrush, toothpaste, soap, zalo (???) 43 g

Total weight 4970 gram. Thats not bad is it??

Of course these things are sure to cost abit, but thats the way it is.

Please note that this list isnt meant for YOU! You can modify it as much as you like to make it individual. So please dont rip my arm off and beat beat me with the wet end cos i omitted an extra pair of socks or whatever.

You also write that:

"Ray mears built a shelter in the Rockies and a long fire stating he could sleep out with no bag to -50C!! So lying clothed, next to a fire on my thermarest prolite 4, basha if need be, and maybe just a cotton bivvi to cut out some wind and protect the mat from embers, I could survive reasonably cold temps? Any thoughts?"

Ive seen that episode...Then its pretty vital you get that fire going, right?? Not much room for errors!! Id rather invest in a lightweight tent and winter downbag but STILL have the knowledge/equipment to make that fire!

 

[johnboy]

Hi,

This is an interesting thread. I'd like to add to it as I'm also here in NZ I'd add that i've been lucky enought to Tramp in lots of differing parts of the world including the US, Alaska and the UK. I appologize if I'm going off topic.

The whole lightweight revolution that has happened within hiking / backpacking/ tramping starting in the US with Ray Jardine. Hasn't really happened here in NZ for quite a few reasons:

1. Our Terrain punishes kit to the extreme. A lot of lightweight Kit ( Golite etc) simply doesn't last here in NZ. Ever wondered why Macpac kit is well made? The environment dictates that it is. Being 10 days from anywhere with a busted shoulder strap on your pack is bad news.
2. Our climate is extreme and we have a lot of terrain types packed into a small landmass which is difficult to cater for with lightweight kit. It's possible to go from a Beach through bush, monatane forest into open tussock and into the alpine environment and back. Getting regular kit to cope with this varience is tricky. Also It's entirely plausible to get rained in for several days at a hut. If your food is pared to the bone then you do not have the extra to cater for this.
3. We have exceptionally low population density, (as does Alaska).there is just no one out there to help Hence PLB's are a really good idea.
4. Tramping here is hard yakka and again our terrain is very misleading you just cannot cover the same distance on the ground than you might expect, especially in bush. I was in the UK last year and covered 35K off track on Dartmoor and 25k off track in the Brecon Beacons with ease in a days tramping. That would be a good effort here, for example I did a 20K day on the round them mountain circuit in Taranaki over Waitangi weekend and that was a good effort...

It is possible to lighten down things like 'base load' with some sense. I think anyone who gets out with a pack (not a bergen) on their back can relate to that However every Year the NZ backcountry claims lives of both New Zealanders and increasingly overseas visitors who are under equipped. Several notable cases involving overseas visitors have been soley related to lightweight Hiking practices being implemented.

The view amongst a lot of the NZ tramping community is that lightweight 'style' is ill suited for NZ terrain and conditions.

Just my 10C

Cheers

John

 

[Lasse]

Johnboy, lightweight isn't just about gear that weighs hardly anything, it's about the gear that is lightest AND suitable for the job. Sometimes 30kg on your back is lightweight, all depends... Taking a down sleeping bag instead of a synthetic one, taking titanium gear instead of heavy iron, using a backpack made of fe cordura instead of leather, etc. Going lightweight in harsh environments simply means carrying less weight for the same job, the tools may still have exactly the same qualities (preferably better), often resulting in paying a lot more (not always!), but absolutely not in putting your life at more of a risk... At least imho.
Going "lightweight" often just means knowing what you're doing (not carrying any useless gear, only what's needed for a certain level of comfort and safety).
The opposite of lightweight is taking "anything but the kitchen-sink" and not thinking about weights. When someone dies because of going "lightweight", they were either very unlucky or unfortunately didn't know what they were doing...

 

[Tengu]

According to Katherine Briggs, Elves were pastoralists so presumably there would be some pack animal, a woman or at least an enchanted mortal to carry stuff.

Something made from iron or steel is vital; you dont want people to go thinking you hate the stuff. (Iron very hi tech to an elf.)

You also need a good supply of condoms for all the raping you are going to do.

(where does this all go on the Stith Thompson index??)

 

[johnboy]

Johnboy, lightweight isn't just about gear that weighs hardly anything,

Hi Lasse,

In the context of the true lightweight backpacking / Thru Hiking movement from what I understand of it and have read on the subject and have seen and as espoused by Ray Jardine and others. It's exactly about reducing your packed weight to as little as possible. For example wearing sneakers / trainers instead of boots I think that is a reasonably famous Jardine example.

Going "lightweight" often just means knowing what you're doing (not carrying any useless gear, only what's needed for a certain level of comfort and safety).

Isn't that just regular Backpacking/ tramping?? It certainly is here in NZ IMHO.


Again sorry if the thread is bieng hijacked.

Cheers

John

 

[wentworth]

Ultralight tramping erodes the margin for error, or simply the ability to cope with an unexpected (through lack of understanding) change in conditions to an unacceptable level. Going out equipped to survive only in ideal conditions is not acceptable. Simply ignoring the (likely) situation of conditions changing significantly, either through ignorance or just blind faith is foolish. .

Ray Jardine, considered the father of ultralight hiking recommends carrying spare clothing, which he terms "precious cargo" to be carried incase of an emergency. He also recommends carrying a rain jacket and rainpants as emergency items, though he mostly just uses an umbrella.
He also uses synthetic quilts, incase it gets wet. As well as an emergency firelighting kit, carried at all times.

I'm seeing a lot of margin for error here: Spare warm clothing, emergency rain suit, synthetic insulation, 2nd fire kit.

You appear to have lumped all ultralighters together as inexperienced outdoorsmen who don't have an understanding of changing weather. Strange how newspapers don't feature stories on ultralight practitioners who didn't die.

My current load of 12lb (excluding food and water) is considered ultralight, yet that's including spare insulative clothing, 1st aid kit, emergency fire gear, large orange garbage bags in case of shelter malfunction, spare cordage, mobile phone etc. I always make sure I have more clothing than I need.
Any true ultralighter prepares for the worst.

Superultralight is considered a base weight of under 5lb. Those who go this route forgo most of the emergency supplies listed above. I can't speak for this approach, though it sounds about as risky as stories of people going out with a knife and metal mug and "survivin off the land". Hmmm.

As to those who tout the "equipment needs to be tough for this harshest of climates".... how much of your equipment needs to be bombproof? I carry a canvas and cordura pack when doing bushbashing trips here in Oz. I have done the same trips with my ultralight packs, but would prefer not to baby my gear too much. As the pack is getting scraped over rocks and sticks, sure, being tough helps.

Same with the shelter, to withstand extreme storms. But silnylon (1.1oz per square yard) and even "Cuben" (0.3oz per square yard) have a tensile strength similar to that of pu coated nylon from memory. Meaning they will withstand similar gusts of wind. I'm not wrapping myself up in my tarp as I bushbash, so why does it need to be abrasion resistant fabric?
Sleepingbags need to be strong enough to lie ontop of you while you are inert. No 12 oz canvas fabric needed for that one either.

Cooking pots need to be strong enough to hold water and not melt or buckle when exposed to flame.... I think my titanium pot -might- just be up to the task.
I could go on but you get the idea.

I appologise if I come across as overly narky in this message, but I'm tired of reading about ultralighters being bagged as "rookies, inexperienced, underprepared, teetering on the brink of death" or any other titles.

Only certain items need to be supertough.The ones that don't get lots of abrasion can probably cope with being lightweight.

 

[sandbender]

Its worth bearing in mind that the Elves weren't human and thus could wander the forests of the world with limited equipment. Legolas's ability to walk atop deep snow without snow shoes being a good example of their 'other-worldliness'.

I have traveled light and quick before and would recommend that you look into the Buffalo range of clothing, as long as your active these will keep you warm (but not dry) in very rough conditions, not very natural I know but they're cheaper than seal/reindeer skin jacket.

There were a bunch of French people who were doing the whole 'Elfendom' thing a while back, nice leather-work, armour and bows, sadly their site is offline now, however thanks to the wonders of the 'Internet Archive' you may still peruse it...

Homepage
Crafts
Gallery

 

[Boston973]

When i wen ton my survival course in thailand. First off I was in the U.S. Army so it was not as awsome or intelligent as it could have been. However all we had was our Assoult packs. No ruck sack and our packing list was

1. Poncho
2. 2 qourt canteen
3. Kukri
4. E tool
5. Poncho Liner
6. Compass
7. A crap load of 550 cord
8. 1 qourt canteen
9. canteen cup
10. spare knife
11. toilet paper
12. shaving kit
13. Booney Hat.
14. flashlight
15. And of course broken down MRE's. We were able to resuply every few days though but we alwase had seven broken down MRE's. Most of the time during the month we only ate one per day and the rest of the food was foraged or we had to kill something. Usually chickens.
16. a very cheep but very comfortable hammock
17. I was not told to have this but i did also get a bug net for my head. I was offered a 100 bucks for it a week in. I did not sell.
18. Bug Spray!

Ok not it was a long time ago for me so I may have forgotten stuff. In fact I am sure I did.
There are definetly a few thigns I would add to that list now. Like soem fishing line, bobbers and some hooks.

 

[Phil6201]

Johnboy, lightweight isn't just about gear that weighs hardly anything, it's about the gear that is lightest AND suitable for the job. Sometimes 30kg on your back is lightweight, all depends... Taking a down sleeping bag instead of a synthetic one, taking titanium gear instead of heavy iron, using a backpack made of fe cordura instead of leather, etc. Going lightweight in harsh environments simply means carrying less weight for the same job, the tools may still have exactly the same qualities (preferably better), often resulting in paying a lot more (not always!), but absolutely not in putting your life at more of a risk... At least imho.
Going "lightweight" often just means knowing what you're doing (not carrying any useless gear, only what's needed for a certain level of comfort and safety).
The opposite of lightweight is taking "anything but the kitchen-sink" and not thinking about weights. When someone dies because of going "lightweight", they were either very unlucky or unfortunately didn't know what they were doing...

What you describe above, is to me just normal tramping/hiking. No one I know would use a leather pack (I've never even seen one for sale in NZ), and aluminium (or even titanium more rarely) is the norm. Down bags are common, although not universal due to their uselessness if they get wet. This isn't 'lightweight' in my experience, but the standard.

'Lightweight' or ultralight is far more extreme than that. As Johnboy's listed examples illustrate, or the visitor who died recently in New Zealand who was so proud to save a bit of weight by not having a watch strap (also didn't wear boots), ultralight by it's very nature is about compromise. Heading into the outdoors, compromise with the gear that keeps you alive does not always pay off.