Priority?? Weight or Bulk?

[packdaddy]

If your a gram weenie your are probably more concerned with comfort while moving than comfort while at camp. I personally like to set up a base camp and make day hikes from it. But I also like to move base camps if I am on a week or two outing. I like it ultra lite since I do not spend much time at the camp site. Most of my time at base camp is spent sleeping so that's where I will "spend" my grams... On my sleep setup.

Bulk is not an issue until it become uncomfortable to hike with or gets in the way.

[nothermark]

FWIW - when does weight stop being an issue for distance?

My thought is that dropping from 40 to ~20 makes a big difference. From there down it seems on that one can afford as much as choices starts to kick in. I really question if base weights under 10 move into the area of leaving out the safety margin after moving to all ultralight and minimal gear.

[TheFirePitGuy]

I have tried to be a gram weenie since pack weight matters. For me pain is born when hiking with a full backpack. So pack weight matters a lot. My age amplifies the frequency. Being comfortable and sleeping good at night relives the pain and gives my body a chance to recharge for the next days' hike. With that in mind my UL experiment with a 14 oz cuben fiber tent gave me the weight loss in my pack that I desired but I did not sleep good at night on the ground. So I decided to go back to a hammock. More weight indeed, so something else in my pack must go.

My priorities: need>weight>luxury>bulk

In my situation need (+naproxen) and luxury are the same with a good hammock to sleep in.

[jmsdgrf]

I've been finding lately that if I'm under 12# base pack weight (weight of back minus consumables) that going any lower doesn't make a big difference. However, a total pack weight over 25# really starts to make things uncomfortable and I notice a drop in performance.

Weight is still my biggest concern, because if I cut enough weight in one area that means more luxury where I want it. A good trade-off in my opinion.

James

[sargevining]

FWIW - when does weight stop being an issue for distance?

My thought is that dropping from 40 to ~20 makes a big difference. From there down it seems on that one can afford as much as choices starts to kick in. I really question if base weights under 10 move into the area of leaving out the safety margin after moving to all ultralight and minimal gear.

There does come a point of diminishing returns, where that point is will differ from individual to individual.

[Womble]

At the moment I'm mostly motorcycle or car camping. Because of the motorcycle I'm limited in bulk, not so much in weight. But when my back gets better, I intend to go again for longer hikes and then weight will be an issue as well. So I'm looking at both, but prioritize bulk for now. Like some say, usually small items weight less.

[lpranal]

FWIW - when does weight stop being an issue for distance?

My thought is that dropping from 40 to ~20 makes a big difference. From there down it seems on that one can afford as much as choices starts to kick in. I really question if base weights under 10 move into the area of leaving out the safety margin after moving to all ultralight and minimal gear.

I was thinking about this the other day. To some people, the endeavor of going lighter is an end to itself, it's a hobby like anything else. For me, going lighter enhances everything about hiking and backpacking. I can go farther, longer, see more, and be more comfortable while I'm doing it, so I can focus on my surroundings and not my sore feet. I don't see one reason as being more 'valid' than the others, but some people go super-ultralight just to see if they can do it. I enjoy the learning and problem solving of going lighter, but like most others I can only sacrifice so much comfort and safety... but even as a bigger dude (6'3" 200 lbs) going from 40-25ish lbs was a HUGE improvement. As for the original question, by default I'm more weight conscious than bulk conscious, although I will definitely sacrifice an ounce or two here or there to significantly cut down on bulk. Clothing is a good example of this, especially in summer months.

[Trambo]

I don't see one reason as being more 'valid' than the others

There's not a more valid reason at all,
which is why I enjoy this thread.

Another one that intrigued me was Grizz's thread about the
journey to ultra-light. He packs so small, I consider him to be UL,
but he views that he has further to go (I forget the weight of UL).

For me, as long as my pack is not too bulky, I can load it correctly
and the weight does not bother me. Of course, I'm use to a military
rucksack and a ton of gear!

I might have a much more enjoyable trip if I am around the 30 pound
mark. I am in the middle of evaluating my loadout to see how low
I can actually get to. For this reason, I am using smaller "day packs",
and I have a second "antenna bag" that straps around my waist for
my shelter and insulation. I plan to leave this second bag at camp,
with my hammock, and have the smaller day pack for in and out hikes.

For this reason, the majority of my bulky items (regardless of their weight),
will be left in camp, and only my small pack will go with me.

[Dead Man]

Both. It's subjective.

I'm fully convinced that I can be comfortable and safe and still have low weight and less bulk.

It's all about the choices I make and again, it's subjective. Comfortable for me may not be comfortable for others. Safe for me may not be safe for others (though the gap may be narrower here) and what is light/less bulky for me may not be light/less bulky to another. HYOH and enjoy the journey, otherwise, you're probably doing it wrong.

[ringtail-THFKAfood]

I have the choice between a down hooded coat at 16.2 oz. or the combination of a fleece 300 hoodie at 17.9 oz and windshirt at 3.8 oz.

The down packs smaller.

They both give about the same amount of insulation.

The fleece feels good worn next to my skin.

The fleece does not compress as much when slept on so that I can stretch my 3 season underquilt to almost zero. I save 8 oz. on the winter underquilt, but give up 5.5 oz. for the fleece.

While active it is much easier to not wet the fleece from the inside when worn without the windshirt.

The laundry comparison between down and fleece is startling.

Wait, I think I just made the case that the heavier and bulkier is the better choice.

I can hike with a base weight as low at 8 pounds - but seldom do because I like to have separate sleep clothes. I generally go out with a base weight at about 12 pounds for up to three nights. With more food I have to go to a frame pack and the base weight goes up to about 15 pounds.

Food also provides a good example. If you are only concerned about weight and bulk then a stick of butter rolled in sugar is the perfect food. Lots of calories per oz. and low bulk. Add a multivitamin and Metamucil and you're good to go. Not sure I would want to do that, but...