Quick and honest question regarding pack weight

[squeekieslayer]

First off, this site is full of mostly hard-core guys so it is more of an obersrvation of behavior on other sites, but every day I see people on other sites (AT/bowsite etc...) posting about how a MR or eberlstock or whatever pack is too heavy or how they spend an extra few hundred dollars for a sleeping bag that weighs six ounces less etc. etc....

Here is my question.... Why not just lose a couple lbs off your backside and save the money? I am not trying to be rude, but everyone one of us could probably shed major pounds from our "set up" by watching our diet and working out harder.

I am probably going to get the response that even if you lose 10 pounds 1 more pound of pack weight is still better, but it just seems that sometimes we give up so much money and effort for weight savings that we ignore the obvious.

Not to mention, you will feel better at the top of the hill and live a longer, healthier life.

PS: this is NOT a thread implying ANYONE on here is out of shape or fat. In fact most on this site are pretty hardcore and in shape, I was just afraid to post this on some other sites because I knew it would offend them.

Joe

 

[squeekieslayer]

For the record, I started thinking about this question shortly after I had a 5'9'' 250 pound guy tell me he spent about $1100 dollars in after market parts for his new snowmachine that "made it 17 pounds lighter." with no other obvious increase in performance.

Joe

 

[Beastmode]

I agree with you Joe. I have a hunting partner that always has to have the lightest gear possible because he says it gives him more energy to use when he gets to the drainage we start hunting at. Yet this same person is 30 lbs overweight and will eat Mcdonalds or other fast food on his way TO the TH. I'm sure alot of guys even on this site including me could afford to shed a pound or two. Comes back to how to be a successful hunter these days you have to be the best you can possibly be.

 

[Ryan Avery]

Here is a thread Aron brought up on this subject. Beast I totally agree. I have two friends that are very plump. Can't get them on a treadmill. But will think nothing of dropping three hundred bones for the latest and greatest light weight gadget.
http://www.rokslide.com/forums/show...t-on-a-backpack-hunt!&highlight=losing+weight

 

[Matt Cashell]

Ryan,

I can't believe you would describe me as plump.

Ouch.

This thread makes a great point, but weight off your body is not exactly the same as weight out of your pack.

I prefer to watch both weights closely.

 

[dotman]

Ryan,

I can't believe you would describe me as plump.

Ouch.

This thread makes a great point, but weight off your body is not exactly the same as weight out of your pack.

I prefer to watch both weights closely.

X2... Both are good to watch it is cheaper to lose the weight off your body though

 

[Beastmode]

Ryan,

I can't believe you would describe me as plump.

Ouch.

This thread makes a great point, but weight off your body is not exactly the same as weight out of your pack.

I prefer to watch both weights closely.

I agree Matt. I try to watch both as much as possible too. Being in shape is huge as well as a light pack. Spending $2000 on lightweight gear when a person can afford to lose 40+lbs doesn't make sense. At the same time being in great shape and having a 70+lb pack for a 3-5 day hunt doesn't make sense either.

 

[Ryan Avery]

BB, If anyone's plump it's me. Roking the scale at 5'8" 188. But Let me tell ya. I get on the Treadmill!

 

[a3dhunter]

I'm one of the guys focusing more on losing weight than spending money on lighter weight gear, and I can tell you it is easier to spend money than do the hard work to lose weight.
Most people want to take the easy way out these days.

I've lost 60-70 lbs in the last year and a half and have more to go, the benefits are life giving in my opinion.

 

[RosinBag]

I agree that watching your weight is great, but I employ both keeping in shape and watching my pack weight. Best of both worlds for me.

 

[Slim Jim]

Losing weight on both ends is great but remember to train with weights for body strength or losing body weight will usually result in less strength needed to carry the pack weight.

 

[2rocky]

If you spend all your money on lightweight gear there is no money for McDonald's Big Macs and Starbuck's FATafrappaccinnos. Weightloss and cool gear! WIN-WIN...

Then the rest of the story....

You spend all your grocery money on the lightest and greatest gear. Your wife takes the kids, house, car most of your paycheck and leaves. So now you are the best outfitted homeless person in the neighborhood. You sell all your weapons but one and live out of your backpack in the national forest. You become intimately acquainted with all the game animals in a 100 square mile area. Come opening day you kill the monster of the mountain and submit your story to a hunting magazine and the pro staff free stuff comes rolling in.

This is called the Dirtbag Approach to Hunting Notoriety.

An acquaintance wrote a column on the ultra lightweight gear phenomenon...It is not just limited to hunting...

http://www.rokslide.com/forums/showthread.php?2666-Perspective&highlight=PERSPECTIVE

 

[Hardstalk]

I consider gear in leagues. There is the majors the minors and everything else.

Does a middle school child that runs track need a pair of limited edition major league running shoes with removable steel cletes and carbon fiber insoles?? Probably not. His time around the track is not as valued to others as someone in the olympics competing for their country. But if his spoiled buddy has a pair, chances are he/she will want them also. Will they improve his performance? Highly doubtful. Main reason being is this certain competitor does not yet know the fundamentals of running fast with or with out shoes on.

Point im getting at is people who are spending less than a week afield a year probably will never truly feel the benefits of a couple ounces of pack weight. But more power to the companies that provide the highest end gear for creating the feeding frenzy that makes some people believe they "need" the item. Imo most of the major league gear available today has been engineered,designed, tested for folks who make a living using it. Hunting items used to be vague and everyone didnt mind using the same gear for different hunts/terrains. The game has changed and hunting has branched into so many niche categories that have a need for certain items that no longer apply to all hunters. Minimalist/ultralight/ hardcore/road hunter/ treestand i think your more frustrated in the mentality of some folks than you are about their purchases. Just because your 5day pack weighs in at 39lbs 6.7665 ounces doesnt give you the title of a hardcore backcountry hunter. It simply gives you a light pack weight.

 

[fillthefreezer]

this forum desnt really suffer from this but on some others theres lots of people that post in threads about backcountry hunting and even just by avatar pics or other pics theyve posted, its clear theres no way they could make much more than a mile from the truck....

 

[sk1]

yes i agree that could be a first step in taking off some total weight....so your overall weight on your feet is lighter, but the lighter my pack is the better my shoulders and hips feel.....although i also imagine your body feels better after losing weight also, but the lighter my pack is the happier i am. your theory makes sense to a certain extent, but doesnt apply to me as im one of those guys trying to gain weight....my wife would kill me if i tried losing weight for hunting because she already tells me im too skinny lol.

 

[mtnkid85]

Maintaining a healthy body weight is exponentially more effective and effecient than losing weight from gear. Body weight you are moving ALL the time, EVERY movement you make you have to move your body. On the other hand the only time your moving the pack... is when your wearing it.
Shouldering a pack weighing 30lbs is a quick and noticeable change, while losing the weight off the body is (hopefully) a slow and gradual not so noticeable change.

Roadbikers talk about this alot, some bikers will spend literally thousands to cut grams.
Some guys though are doing alright 6'1" 140lbs, they need to keep that pack on or theyll blow away! lol

 

[swat8888]

I just hope that when I run into sheep hunters on the strip I would much rather run into gear-queers (an enduring term I would classify myself in as well) who are a little "plump" as you put than a hunters who are in great shape but might not have the lightest-best gear.

I tend to run into the latter more than the former....at least in the sheep mountains.

 

[slim9300]

I'm 6' 2" and 165 lbs. I'm in good enough shape to walk the vast majority of "hardcore" men into the ground in the mountains and I can carry 120 lbs. on my back just fine. My conditioning has never limited me while hunting. (Maybe if I did the "extreme" running some of you do. Forget that BTW.) My wife and friends keep telling me that I need to gain about 20 lbs. I explain to them that I would have to then carry that extra 20 lbs. around the woods for a few hundred miles each year and clearly that would suck. They seem to concede.

Are you telling me I have an excuse to drop a few grand a year on newer, lighter gear to shave a few ounces? Oh wait, too late.