Pack Poll - What gets included in your pack weight?

[Robo]

Yes, that ever popular topic of pack weight!
I'm sorry if the 'old hands' here understand all this 'inside out' but I'm a bit of a confused 'Newbie' ...

So I thought a Poll might be fun, and hopefully informative too.

This is not a Poll about precisely what you pack. But about what types or categories of things you include when weighing your pack.

Do you include food, water (how much), trekking poles, your phone, your camera ....

I'm struggling to get my pack weight down, and I think it might in some small part be due to the fact that I am including things in my pack weight that perhaps others might not be.

I'm taking the view that anything I am not actually wearing, gets included in my pack weight. So the only things not included are the boots, socks, underwear, pants and shirt that I would be wearing. i.e. anything I might need for additional weather protection, goes in the pack weight.

If you don't even carry trekking poles for example, just leave that blank.

Obvious things that most people would carry, we can leave out. Toiletries, spare clothes etc. As well as things that most people would NOT carry. Like a stove or tent.

This is more to get an 'Apples v Apples' comparison or 'standard' for what people include when weighing a pack.

What do you include? (We can also assume the weight of the pack itself is included)

 

[newfydog]

Yeah, should they include the bags in their hands???

 

[Robo]

Must be on a Round the World Trip!

 

[lfamiglio]

I am doing "ftso". From the skin out

Everything gets included.
Everything.

 

[Robo]

I am doing "ftso". From the skin out

Everything gets included.
Everything.

I think that's probably the best measure of all!

 

[fraluchi]

I am doing "ftso". From the skin out

For the purpose of clarity, does one indicate this weight in pounds or kilos?

 

[Robo]

For the purpose of clarity, does one indicate this weight in pounds or kilos?

I would suggest KGs. Or if you came from the US, pounds. Except that no one else will have a clue what amount you are talking about.

P.S. Tongue firmly in cheek!

 

[Alyssa]

For the purpose of clarity, does one indicate this weight in pounds or kilos?

How about both? (The beauty of using a spreadsheet ).

 

[Kanga]

Litres. Backpacks are measured in litres. For the flat earth types ); pints. Or is that beer?

 

[Kanga]

For me it is the pack when it goes on the scales at the airport. So it does not include the clothes I'm wearing, passport, wallet or phone. Or water. It does include walking poles (inside pack) and everything else. It includes two additional balance pockets at the front of the pack which add to the weight.

 

[koilife]

I would suggest that pack weight includes everything except the clothes that you are wearing on an all-day basis. Thus, if the weather is such that I will always be wearing my fleece, then I would exclude it from pack weight. But, if I'm likely only to wear it on a brisk morning, then I include it in pack weight because that is where it will reside much of the time.

I know my FSO, but don't include it in pack weight because I generally consider it to be meaningless. I wear my clothes all day long, every day, and their actual impact is negligible. Because clothing weight wears the same as body weight, I'm frankly more interested in losing a kilo of fat than clothing. The extra weight that I don't wear daily is what concerns me.

The biggest issue with backpack weight isn't the weight, it's the deflection it creates against your center of gravity, which deforms your walking mechanics and stresses your body abnormally. Weight transference is the second biggest issue, because the same weight on your shoulders is far more likely to stress your body than the same weight transferred to your hips. Actual weight of the pack comes in a distant third as an issue, but it definitely multiplies the effect of the first two.

Thus, the same weight in a bulbous pack causes a greater deflection than one worn close to the body, and it will feel heavier and cause greater exhaustion and body stress over time. Similarly, where the weight is carried on the shoulders instead of transferred to the hips. Once I pass the 8 kg mark, I move from "ultralight" packs with reduced transference to heavier, more traditional packs with actual frames because it helps increase the transference. Even though I gain a kilo in the actual weight of the pack, it's far better for long-term weight carriage.

Kanga's AARN pack takes the above mechanics into perspective by helping balance front/back weight to solve the center of gravity, and is designed to give good transference to the hips. I'm not a big fan of the front insulation effect or the front weight when navigating steeper climbs and descents (it throws my balance of and obstructs my view of where I'm placing my feet, but that's a personal thing). For something like the Camino (as opposed to the Colorado Trail), AARN (or similar DIY rigs) makes a lot of sense.

Probably the biggest variable in all of this, however, is the person her/himself. I have a friend who is six years older than I and who is in really good shape. He can carry an 20+ kg pack and absolutely waste me in distance, speed, and endurance day after day after day, even if I'm carrying a <5 kg pack.

 

[koilife]

As to the "struggle to get weight down", there is likely a LOT of weight savings to gain without resorting to cutting off the handle of your toothbrush or cutting off tags from your clothing. I would offer three pieces of advice.

1) Your most likely source of weight will be packed clothing (including rain gear, jackets, etc.), followed by your pack and your sleeping gear. You only need two sets of clothing, one to wear and one to carry (the ultra-lights here and elsewhere will argue even the need for the second set). If using normal backpacking clothes, your biggest savings will be in your outer shell and insulation layer. A smaller, frameless pack that still uses a stiffener to provide rigidity and load transference to your hips will typically save you a kilo or more against a larger internal frame pack. If your gear weight load is small enough (< 5 or 6 kilos), you can comfortably take advantage of the lighter, smaller pack and multiply your weight savings. Sleeping gear (bags vs. sacks) is well covered elsewhere, but I would tend for lighter gear and then wear extra clothing on colder nights.

2) Get yourself a good gram scale and make a spreadsheet. Weigh and categorize each piece of equipment so you can quickly tabulate clothing versus electronics versus sleeping gear versus whatever. Sort your sheet by weight and focus on the larger weight items and categories. Look for alternatives for each item. If carrying a Nalgene water bottle, can I use a standard water/juice bottle instead and save 4-6 oz? Can I use a lighter fleece with my second shirt and save 4-8 oz? Can I skip the waterproof pants and just spray my backpacking pants with a water repellent treatment and save 10-18 oz? Do I need a larger Swiss Army knife, or can a small "Classic" Swiss Army knife do just fine and save 3 oz? Can I simplify my first aid kit, get/replace what I need along the way at the many pharmacias, and save 4-8 oz? Do I need a separate camera, or will my smart phone suffice, and save 5-8 oz? Gearing changes (although potentially expensive) can make a real difference in weight w/o requiring ruthless and sacrificial behaviors.

3) Worry less about the actual weight and focus more on training with the weight you will carry. Your body will adapt and strengthen over time for the weight you carry. The critical point is a week or so in, after your body is broken down but before it really begins to build in endurance and strength. Adequate training will lessen the impact of that "bottoming out" point. Many people on the forum walk with 8 to 10 kilos, and even more on the Camino itself.

 

[Travellingman]

As to the "struggle to get weight down", there is likely a LOT of weight savings to gain without resorting to cutting off the handle of your toothbrush or cutting off tags from your clothing. I would offer three pieces of advice.

1) Your most likely source of weight will be packed clothing (including rain gear, jackets, etc.), followed by your pack and your sleeping gear. You only need two sets of clothing, one to wear and one to carry (the ultra-lights here and elsewhere will argue even the need for the second set). If using normal backpacking clothes, your biggest savings will be in your outer shell and insulation layer. A smaller, frameless pack that still uses a stiffener to provide rigidity and load transference to your hips will typically save you a kilo or more against a larger internal frame pack. If your gear weight load is small enough (< 5 or 6 kilos), you can comfortably take advantage of the lighter, smaller pack and multiply your weight savings. Sleeping gear (bags vs. sacks) is well covered elsewhere, but I would tend for lighter gear and then wear extra clothing on colder nights.

2) Get yourself a good gram scale and make a spreadsheet. Weigh and categorize each piece of equipment so you can quickly tabulate clothing versus electronics versus sleeping gear versus whatever. Sort your sheet by weight and focus on the larger weight items and categories. Look for alternatives for each item. If carrying a Nalgene water bottle, can I use a standard water/juice bottle instead and save 4-6 oz? Can I use a lighter fleece with my second shirt and save 4-8 oz? Can I skip the waterproof pants and just spray my backpacking pants with a water repellent treatment and save 10-18 oz? Do I need a larger Swiss Army knife, or can a small "Classic" Swiss Army knife do just fine and save 3 oz? Can I simplify my first aid kit, get/replace what I need along the way at the many pharmacias, and save 4-8 oz? Do I need a separate camera, or will my smart phone suffice, and save 5-8 oz? Gearing changes (although potentially expensive) can make a real difference in weight w/o requiring ruthless and sacrificial behaviors.

3) Worry less about the actual weight and focus more on training with the weight you will carry. Your body will adapt and strengthen over time for the weight you carry. The critical point is a week or so in, after your body is broken down but before it really begins to build in endurance and strength. Adequate training will lessen the impact of that "bottoming out" point. Many people on the forum walk with 8 to 10 kilos, and even more on the Camino itself.

Yes, good advice. I have been campaigning on this forum for years (under another username) about the virtues of reducing pack weight, to little avail, I fear.
I won't bore everyone with my latest packing list for 15 days on the Camino Madrid + Frances, but suffice to say total weight including food and 1 litre of water is around 6 kilos, and that is for camping, so hooped bivvi, inflatable sleeping mat and sleeping bag included in the total.

 

[Cyndy]

Hi Kanga, would you share a little more about balance pockets?

 

[koilife]

Hi Kanga, would you share a little more about balance pockets?

See the information at http://www.aarnpacks.com/.

 

[bystander]

koilife, bravo, a very refreshing piece of logic and reason re: the Aarn pack with balance pockets.
Makes total sense.
Thank you.

 

[Rambler]

How about both? (The beauty of using a spreadsheet ).

There is a very good spreadsheet in the Resources section here in the Forum that will do FSO; Pack only; pack, food and water...
It is great.
Rambler

 

[Rambler]

Litres. Backpacks are measured in litres. For the flat earth types ); pints. Or is that beer?

As in "How many pints do I have to drink before I will put the pack on?"
Rambler

 

[Alyssa]

There is a very good spreadsheet in the Resources section here in the Forum that will do FSO; Pack only; pack, food and water...
It is great.
Rambler

This one, Rambler? (Does that mean you weren't impressed with mine?)

 

[Odem]

For me it is the pack when it goes on the scales at the airport. So it does not include the clothes I'm wearing, passport, wallet or phone. Or water. It does include walking poles (inside pack) and everything else. It includes two additional balance pockets at the front of the pack which add to the weight.

Hi Kanga, do you take your backpack as a carry on or do you check it? I did not get the walking poles because heard you are not allowed to carry them with you on board. I am leaving next week.

 

[Kanga]

I

Kanga's AARN pack takes the above mechanics into perspective by helping balance front/back weight to solve the center of gravity, and is designed to give good transference to the hips. I'm not a big fan of the front insulation effect or the front weight when navigating steeper climbs and descents (it throws my balance of and obstructs my view of where I'm placing my feet, but that's a personal thing). For something like the Camino (as opposed to the Colorado Trail), AARN (or similar DIY rigs) makes a lot of sense.

.

The AARN balance pockets have the advantage of being able to see your feet - they are specifically designed that way, which is why there are two separate pockets, rather than one. It would be lighter to have one single balance pocket but that is one of the compromises between weight and comfort that koilife talks about. I use the pockets for small but heavy items and things I need to access all the time (camera, wallet, maps etc). I don't stuff them. The weight of the pockets does add to the overall weight and sometimes I've walked without them but I always come back to them. They are so convenient and the weight distribution just works for me. We've played around with taking a tent for Caminos in France and I'm confident of the AARN pack managing the extra weight of tent and sleeping mat.

Other packs I've seen with a front load do obstruct vision downwards.

 

[Kanga]

Hi Kanga, do you take your backpack as a carry on or do you check it? I did not get the walking poles because heard you are not allowed to carry them with you on board. I am leaving next week.

I check it in. I currently have Black Diamond Z trekking poles, which fold up small enough to go inside the pack. Turn all the belts inwards to face the pack and strap everything up tightly. We've always checked in our packs - the size is over allowable limits for carry-on luggage. When I had poles that were too long to fit inside the pack I bought a cheap red and blue woven plastic bag, strapped the poles to the outside of the pack with duct tape, and put the whole lot inside the woven plastic bag.

 

[Rambler]

This one, Rambler? (Does that mean you weren't impressed with mine?)

My apologies Alyssa. On my forum, your embedded links aren't really evident, so I did not know you had linked yours. It looks real good as does Erik's.
I was referring to this one that Ivar had put up:
http://www.caminodesantiago.me/comm...amino-packing-list-with-auto-calculation.106/
Don't take it personally. Just my lack of basic computer knowledge.
But I have been spelling Albuerge wrong for 6 years...
ALBERGUE

Rambler

 

[xin loi]

Must be on a Round the World Trip!

Actually they are traveling light if they are on the Gringo Trail in Latin America. Lot of people on the Gringo trail carry a big pack on their back and another on their front....and they are carrying EVERYTHING they own in the world! Interesting people!

Pack weight--if you are only carrying a couple Kilos why do you need hip straps? Cut them off--I have removed them on one pack and have a couple older packs that did not have hip straps. Just more excess weight and if you can't carry a couple kilos without those straps, you have physical problems. Did 15 miles with 30 pounds of sand in my pack today--think I'll take my iron.

 

[Alyssa]

My apologies Alyssa. On my forum, your embedded links aren't really evident, so I did not know you had linked yours. It looks real good as does Erik's.
I was referring to this one that Ivar had put up:
http://www.caminodesantiago.me/comm...amino-packing-list-with-auto-calculation.106/
Don't take it personally. Just my lack of basic computer knowledge.
But I have been spelling Albuerge wrong for 6 years...
ALBERGUE

Rambler

It's all fun and games, Rambler. I've actually spent the last couple of hours redoing mine using Erick the Black's as a base. Now if I could only embed it in my blog... As for spelling albergue, well, it became even more confusing when I looked up Refuge Orisson's site and they were calling it an auberge.

 

[Kanga]

It's all fun and games, Rambler. I've actually spent the last couple of hours redoing mine using Erick the Black's as a base. Now if I could only embed it in my blog... As for spelling albergue, well, it became even more confusing when I looked up Refuge Orisson's site and they were calling it an auberge.

Albergue=Spanish
Auberge=French

Always amazes me how crossing an invisible line on a map translates on the ground to completely different culture and language.

 

[koilife]

Those silly French and their spelling skills.

 

[Alyssa]

I think I'll just spell it phonetically (U.S. English pronunciation, of course)...Al Berg.

 

[Saint Mike II]

Litres. Backpacks are measured in litres. For the flat earth types ); pints. Or is that beer?

Kanga - in the US the volume is measured in cubic inches, but as most of the backpacks are made for the EU/Aust market they are marked in litres.

Robo - my recommendation of what to include/exclude in pack weights depends upon "what you have packed". To achieve a "less is more" have a look at some of the packing lists that have been posted on the forum. When you have decided what to take - weigh it on an accurate kitchen scales. Then if at some time the item is more likely to be "in the pack", rather than "on your back" then it gets included in pack weight. Hope this helps.

 

[Houlet]

Everything from the skin out. i.e Pack, boots, clothing worn, food and water.

 

[OzAnnie]

I weigh the 'pack' for the pack weight. To me this includes the pack and anything in it and that's it. This includes rain gear , sleeping bag, and anything you want to add, such as water, food, extras., but not the clothes I wear, nor boots, hat, walking poles.
I haven't before added the weight of my bum bag either, as I never feel it, but to me that is the only thing that possibly could be part of the carry weight?
Annie

 

[Susannafromsweden]

I don't include food and water. Because that can differ very much. If there's a long day with nowhere to fill the water bottles, then I got to carry more water. But if there's a day with lots of fuentes along the road, then I don't carry more than necessary.
And also the picnic food can differ a lot.
I wonder how you do when you include the picnic food in your pack weight? Do you make a bocadilla at home, and weigh it?

 

[OzAnnie]

Hey Susanna
That would be difficult wouldn't it.. I've only had a bocadilla in Spain not Oz.
No, regarding weight for food allowance, I would add an average weight of what I would often carry. For me that is usually no more than maybe a banana and some mixed nuts or small chocolate .. And my full bottles of water.
And this is ONLY to give true weight I'm carrying -to compare apples/ to apples. No one could predict exactly what weight they will carry any time of every day. If I'm thirsty and my bottles are almost empty, then my pack is certainly a lot lighter!

 

[OzAnnie]

Thinking more on what the OP was looking for and Susanna's exclusions, I can see that if other pilgrims were trying to work out how far off the 'norm' their weight is - it WOULD be easier to give pack weight as Susanna gives it. Everyone excludes the same items (the variables like the weight of a particular qty of food or water ), and pack weight is X .
That is after all, the item everyone wonders how the other got so light?

 

[Susannafromsweden]

Thinking more on what the OP was looking for and Susanna's exclusions, I can see that if other pilgrims were trying to work out how far off the 'norm' their weight is - it WOULD be easier to give pack weight as Susanna gives it. Everyone excludes the same items (the variables like the weight of a particular qty of food or water ), and pack weight is X .
That is after all, the item everyone wonders how the other got so light?

Yes, I agree, that sounds good.
But I don't include the clothes I'm wearing when walking and not my trekking poles either.

My backpack and what's in it is 2793 gram.
To that comes my waist pack, which is 178 grams empty, and there I will put my iPhone, passport, money etc.
I haven't finished weighing that yet.

 

[HalfDomeOrBust]

I think I'll just spell it phonetically (U.S. English pronunciation, of course)...Al Berg.

New York City Variant--- Al Burg. Southern US Variant--- Al ya-all Berg. Alaska Variant Al Iceberg.
Thats enough. I've been way to silly already.....Ed

 

[Canuck]

New York City Variant--- Al Burg. Southern US Variant--- Al ya-all Berg. Alaska Variant Al Iceberg.
Thats enough. I've been way to silly already.....Ed

Canadian variant: Al burg eh!
San Francisco variant: Alber gay

 

[whariwharangi]

The only time I "weigh" my pack is when I put it on.

As in "(expletive deleted) is that heavy".

A long time back packer, I've gotten away with carrying heavy packs with extra stuff under the rationale that if you need it you need it bad, particularly on day 5 of a ten day hike.

There is also the old saw that says "anyone can be uncomfortable out in the field".

So the only reason I would know my pack weight is if its measured at an airport. That typically includes boots that would normally be worn but not water, food, and fuel for a stove.

You'd think all this hiking experience would help when planning for a camino. It didn't. I carried too much weight because I was basically taking a hiking pack without tent and stove. I carried a lot of stuff that wasn't needed including a multiday 90 liter back pack that weighs 1.5 kilo empty and a -10 C rated sleeping bag. I mailed stuff home and it was still too heavy. There was some gear that didn't get used at all including rain pants and stuff I used only once including thermal underwear that were worn under shorts during a snow day.

All you need is stuff for basic hygiene, a change of clothes, rain gear, a warm jacket, a water bottle, and a sleeping bag. Everything else can be found along the way or done without for a day or two. If the weather requires a parka or a wet suit then maybe its time for a 'no' day. Anything else you want to carry is luxury. You should be able to get all that plus lunch into a 50 - 60 liter pack without straining the zippers.

Sawing the handles off tooth brushes will interfere with hygiene. Your back may thank you but your teeth won't.

 

[Kanga]

How about prison toothbrushes? Very short handles

 

[AJ]

So the only reason I would know my pack weight is if its measured at an airport.

Same here.

 

[Kanga]

Same here.

Me too

 

[tyrrek]

Me too

Me too. I can't remember if I weighed mine at home before my first Camino, but now I know what I need and just take it. The scales at the airport always come out pretty similar, but I suppose they would act as a final warning if I'd packed anything stupid. I've no idea what individual items such as fleeces and toothpaste weigh, and would be unlikely to behave differently if I did.

 

[Cejanus]

For me it is the pack when it goes on the scales at the airport. So it does not include the clothes I'm wearing, passport, wallet or phone. Or water. It does include walking poles (inside pack) and everything else. It includes two additional balance pockets at the front of the pack which add to the weight.

Hi Kanga! How did you go getting your hiking poles through security? I am presuming that your backpack was carried onboard with you. It's a problem for me as I don't walk without them and I have read time and again that others who have sent them in a tube in the cargo hole have lost them at times. I have Z poles that really fold up. I was thinking that perhaps the whole pack with the poles inside should be bubble wrapped at the airport but will they still reject them????? I want to take my pack on board so I can just walk straight out without hanging around.

 

[Kanga]

Hi Kanga! How did you go getting your hiking poles through security? I am presuming that your backpack was carried onboard with you. It's a problem for me as I don't walk without them and I have read time and again that others who have sent them in a tube in the cargo hole have lost them at times. I have Z poles that really fold up. I was thinking that perhaps the whole pack with the poles inside should be bubble wrapped at the airport but will they still reject them????? I want to take my pack on board so I can just walk straight out without hanging around.

No, I don't take them on board, I check my pack through. I can't see the point struggling with an oversize bag - to the annoyance and resentment of other passengers and crew- and I've never had a problem checking bags through. My z-poles go inside the pack.

 

[Robo]

I think we're starting to get a view of what 'most' people actually count, as part of their pack weight.

As others have said, whilst it's a very personal thing, it helps to have an idea of what most people include in their pack weight. Just as a bit of a Benchmark.

i.e. I might be carrying 12 kg. Is that considered heavy or light? Without knowing what gets included in a 'standard' pack, it would be guess work.

Sorry......my business gets involved in performance Benchmarks and KPIs ! So I'm always looking to compare Apples with Apples where possible.

Many thanks to those who completed the Poll.

 

[Anniesantiago]

This thread hurts my head.
My pack weighs 13 pounds.
I'm going to bed.
2 more sleeps.
Nite pilgrims!

 

[Robo]

This thread hurts my head.
My pack weighs 13 pounds.
I'm going to bed.
2 more sleeps.
Nite pilgrims!

LOL Then I'd say you have done well! Buen Camnio. Very jealous

 

[dougfitz]

No, I don't take them on board, I check my pack through. I can't see the point struggling with an oversize bag - to the annoyance and resentment of other passengers and crew- and I've never had a problem checking bags through. My z-poles go inside the pack.

This year I travelled to and from London to undertake the Camino Ingles (I was there for family reasons). I checked my pack (11kg) with my poles strapped to the outside. The pack went through EasyJet's special handling bay at Gatwick, and came out as normal baggage at Santiago. On the return it was handled as normal baggage at both airports. There were no problems at all - pack and poles arrived intact both times.

The big issue was that in the logistics arrangements leading up to my departure, in the rush to get everything done I didn't cull sufficiently. In particular the tech goodies that I had needed in London and didn't need on the Camino didn't get removed, and I somehow got left with the family first aid kit rather than my much lighter trekking kit. As I was the last to leave, I also carried a couple of other items that other family members had left in our hotel room! That became a badge of honour with my wife that I was not going to dispose of some of her stuff, but carry it the whole way.

I think airlines have come a long way since I first began travelling, and safely and consistently handling unusual luggage has been part of that.

Regards,

 

[Kanga]

I think airlines have come a long way since I first began travelling, and safely and consistently handling unusual luggage has been part of that.

Regards,

They certainly don't lose luggage they way they used to. "Breakfast in London, lunch in Paris, luggage in New York" used to be the saying in our family.

 

[dougfitz]

I think we're starting to get a view of what 'most' people actually count, as part of their pack weight.

As others have said, whilst it's a very personal thing, it helps to have an idea of what most people include in their pack weight. Just as a bit of a Benchmark.

i.e. I might be carrying 12 kg. Is that considered heavy or light? Without knowing what gets included in a 'standard' pack, it would be guess work.

Sorry......my business gets involved in performance Benchmarks and KPIs ! So I'm always looking to compare Apples with Apples where possible.

Many thanks to those who completed the Poll.

Robo, there is a general agreement in the ultra-light and other hiking fraternities that base pack weight and FSO load target are the best benchmarks for comparison purposes. Base weight is generally considered to exclude consumables (food, water and fuel) but includes items such as extra protection (wind and rain protection clothing and warm clothing). FSO or from the skin out is exactly that. It provides a guide to the level of impact your load will have. At a FSO load of 20% of body mass, most people can continue to walk comfortably. An FSO load of 30% of body mass is generally considered a practical limit, and both walking speed and endurance will drop considerably at this level. Unlike the 10% 'rule' generally used here, FSO load targets have traceable antecedents. I ask from time to time if anyone can identify where the 10% figure came from, and the on the only occasion someone suggested they could identify the source as a CSJ document, that had been removed and the guidance being provided by the CSJ changed to 10-15%.

The big advantage of using an FSO load target rather than the CSJ 10-15% is that it forces one to look at the weight of worn and carried items like boots, clothing and poles. The weight difference between my heaviest trekking boots and lightest trekking shoes is over a kilogram, the difference between my lightest and heaviest sets of poles is 150 gm. Making sensible choices here is just as useful as any that can be made in the short handled toothbrush department.

The good news is that if pack weight is in the 10-15% range, it will allow one to carry a reasonable amount of water and food and still be around the FSO 20% target weight.

 

[Robo]

Robo, there is a general agreement in the ultra-light and other hiking fraternities that base pack weight and FSO load target are the best benchmarks for comparison purposes. Base weight is generally considered to exclude consumables (food, water and fuel) but includes items such as extra protection (wind and rain protection clothing and warm clothing). FSO or from the skin out is exactly that. It provides a guide to the level of impact your load will have. At a FSO load of 20% of body mass, most people can continue to walk comfortably. An FSO load of 30% of body mass is generally considered a practical limit, and both walking speed and endurance will drop considerably at this level. Unlike the 10% 'rule' generally used here, FSO load targets have traceable antecedents. I ask from time to time if anyone can identify where the 10% figure came from, and the on the only occasion someone suggested they could identify the source as a CSJ document, that had been removed and the guidance being provided by the CSJ changed to 10-15%.

The big advantage of using an FSO load target rather than the CSJ 10-15% is that it forces one to look at the weight of worn and carried items like boots, clothing and poles. The weight difference between my heaviest trekking boots and lightest trekking shoes is over a kilogram, the difference between my lightest and heaviest sets of poles is 150 gm. Making sensible choices here is just as useful as any that can be made in the short handled toothbrush department.

The good news is that if pack weight is in the 10-15% range, it will allow one to carry a reasonable amount of water and food and still be around the FSO 20% target weight.

FSO seems to make a lot more sense as a comparison I think...

 

[Stellere]

I counted everything that I carried, but not the weight of what I wore every day ("base" clothes: boots, pants, light long-sleeved shirt). I did count warm clothes that I didn't expect to wear most of the time, like a fleece or gloves. I added hiking poles about 5 days in, so I don't even know what those weighed, but if I were packing for a new trip, I wouldn't count them in my backpack weight.

When I was planning at home, my goal was 6.5 kg including water and food, which I calculated at 1.5 kg, so my aim was 5 kg, although I didn't quite meet that.

When they weighed my bag at the pilgrim's office at SJPP (fully loaded with water and food for the following day), it came in at 6.8 kg, but I was wearing my fleece. Depending on how many layers I was wearing and how much food/water I was carrying, I'd say that my pack weight varied between 6 and 7 kg.

 

[dougfitz]

@Robo, the other question you seemed to be asking is whether a particular pack weight is heavy or light. This really requires an understanding of the pack weight relative to the individuals weight - but which weight?

I admit to my BMI normally being over 30 - technically I am obese. I try to get into the overweight zone before any long walks, and might succeed in getting my BMI under 30, but I would be lucky to get it under 28. So what should I use for setting my weight targets - current actual weight, realistic achievable weight, or perhaps my BMI=25 weight?

By way of example, my pack this year had a base weight of 11 kg, my actual weight was 92.5 kg, at which my BMI was 29.7 (phew!). But that's 15kg over my ideal (BMI-25 weight). If I used my ideal weight, my FSO 20% target would be 3kg lighter than if I used my actual weight.

Value | Achieved Weight |Ideal Weight
Weight | 92.5 kg | 77.4 kg
FSO 20 tgt | 18.5 kg | 15.5 kg
Worn Items | 2.9 kg | 2.9 kg
Pack Base Weight | 11.5 kg | 11.5 kg
(measured at departure airport)
Gap for Consumables | 4.1 kg | 1.1 kg
(sorry about the format, but the forum app keeps stripping spaces)

I generally carried 3.5 kg of water (its a religious thing!) some fresh fruit, chocolate, sweets, and some muesli bars at the beginning of each day. All up probably 4.5 kg of consumables. Clearly this put me over the FSO 20% target at the start of the day, but well within it later in the day based on my actual weight. But against my ideal weight I would have been starting the day with a FSO weight of about 25% - well out of the comfortable walking zone.

So what? Knowing this meant that I was able to adjust my expectations about what average walking speeds I could sustain, and how often I should take a break. It also meant that I adjusted my daily walking targets down when I could, and where I couldn't, I phoned forward and booked a bed in a private albergue for that night so that a late arrival wasn't going to be an issue.

Getting back to your question of whether a pack is 'heavy' or 'light' I think that depends on whether there is sufficient gap for the consumables you feel you need to carry to be comfortable and safe, and still maintain the pace and distances you feel you need to achieve. My pack certainly wasn't light, but I averaged 25km a day for the Camino Ingles and Finisterre, and achieved my plan, so it wasn't so heavy that it stopped my doing what I had wanted to do.

Regards,

 

[Stephen Nicholls]

I've just weighed my back-pack. It's full and weights 2.6 kgm. That's enough for three weeks on the camino.
Mind you, I'm wearing the poncho, gaiters and rain gear because it's raining: I'm wearing four pairs of underpants to keep warm, and wearing three pairs of socks, 'cos they say then I won't get blisters.
All the food I usually carry is in my stomach, 'cos I was hungry.
My overcoat is over my arm - it may get cold on the plane.
But ... let's be fair - 2.6 kgm for a back-pack's pretty good!

 

[dougfitz]

I've just weighed my back-pack. It's full and weights 2.6 kgm. That's enough for three weeks on the camino.
Mind you, I'm wearing the poncho, gaiters and rain gear because it's raining: I'm wearing four pairs of underpants to keep warm, and wearing three pairs of socks, 'cos they say then I won't get blisters.
All the food I usually carry is in my stomach, 'cos I was hungry.
My overcoat is over my arm - it may get cold on the plane.
But ... let's be fair - 2.6 kgm for a back-pack's pretty good!

I actually saw someone like this arriving in Santiago. His pack was so small that he was wearing both his fleece and rain gear on the plane from London, and had no room for it in his pack. I doubt he had room for food, and would have relied on carrying bottled water and regularly refilling it. I don't think he had a sleeping bag, but that appears much less of a limitation on the CI, where all the albergues I used had blankets. That's not how I like to walk. I am much happier with a pack that can carry everything inside, and to have everything I reasonably need with me for a safe and successful walk.

I will admit that my view of reasonable might be quite different to others, but I equally saw as many people walking with larger packs than mine as I saw walking with smaller ones. On the CI in Apr, the largest pack I saw was an 85 li travel pack which wasn't full. One couple had 65 and 60 li packs that looked pretty full, and the oddest were a couple where he was carrying a fairly full 75 li pack, and she was carrying a 30 li pack. I'm sure she appreciated his efforts.

Regards,

 

[Stephen Nicholls]

I actually saw someone like this arriving in Santiago. His pack was so small that he was wearing both his fleece and rain gear on the plane from London, and had no room for it in his pack. I doubt he had room for food, and would have relied on carrying bottled water and regularly refilling it. I don't think he had a sleeping bag, but that appears much less of a limitation on the CI, where all the albergues I used had blankets. That's not how I like to walk. I am much happier with a pack that can carry everything inside, and to have everything I reasonably need with me for a safe and successful walk.,

Hi Doug! [or Fitz?!]
To be honest, my back-pack is 7.4 kgm, BUT - I wear a water bottle and bum-bag around my waist. So I guess it all depends what you include
The important thing is that I've been walking with back-pack AND belt attachments for the last two months, so I should be OK with them. If anyone's really interested, I also have a spreadsheet showing itemised back-pack weights etc for the last three caminos.
Nice to meet up again, Doug. We may meet one day on the camino, but I'll be the old timer you leave miles behind!

 

[tictoc]

How about prison toothbrushes? Very short handlesView attachment 9392

Guess I'll have to do a stretch in clink to getr one of those then

 

[koilife]

. . . the oddest were a couple where he was carrying a fairly full 75 li pack, and she was carrying a 30 li pack. I'm sure she appreciated his efforts.

Was there a rice cooker in the larger pack???

 

[tictoc]

I've just weighed my back-pack. It's full and weights 2.6 kgm. That's enough for three weeks on the camino.
Mind you, I'm wearing the poncho, gaiters and rain gear because it's raining: I'm wearing four pairs of underpants to keep warm, and wearing three pairs of socks, 'cos they say then I won't get blisters.
All the food I usually carry is in my stomach, 'cos I was hungry.
My overcoat is over my arm - it may get cold on the plane.
But ... let's be fair - 2.6 kgm for a back-pack's pretty good!

You sound like a man after my own heart, wear everything, stuff your pockets to bulging, who needs a backpack

 

[Stephen Nicholls]

You sound like a man after my own heart, wear everything, stuff your pockets to bulging, who needs a backpack

Yes .... but I'm still trying to work out how to wear three peairs of shoes ....

 

[Alyssa]

I'm currently at:

Base Weight (all gear, excluding gear worn or carried, excluding consumables): 4.96 kilos (10 lbs, 14.9 oz )
Total Pack Weight (all gear, excluding gear worn or carried, including consumables: 7 kilos (15 lbs, 5.3 oz)
Skin-out Weight (all gear, including gear worn or carried, including consumables): 8.7 kilos (19 lbs, 3.8 oz)

Total Pack weight goes down to 6 kilos (13 pounds, 1.9oz) if I switch from 2 1-liter bottles of water to 2 0.5-liters of water. There are a number of other things I could do to reduce the weight: Trading out the Teva Terra Fi Lites for a pair of Crocs would reduce the weight by about 284 grams is one example. It's fun playing around with all this and reading everyone's advice.