Update: The images and attachemnets are now back, we are generating new thumbnails.... (this takes time with 20 years of photos). I know the notification icon gives an error. That error should be gone within an hour or two. Sorry again! Ivar
For 2024 Pilgrims: €50,- donation = 1 year with no ads on the forum + 90% off any 2024 Guide. More here. (Discount code sent to you by Private Message after your donation)
...providing weight and volume advice based on from the skin out measures makes so much more sense than just pack weight, and staying within a 20%FSO target would be more realistic guidance.
That would then flow onto guidance about pack size. For an average sized person from the US, they might...
...open pharmacy in places.
Finally, consider your 'from the skin out' weight. This includes all the things that you are currently worrying about. FSO is everything you will be wearing and carrying. So it includes your pack and its base weight contents, your clothes and anything you are...
@MARSKA, if you have made the effort to understand the relationship between BMI, height and FSO weight targets, you are clearly well ahead of the many members who rely solely on the widely discredited 10% of body mass rule of thumb for bare pack weight. Well done! You seem to be well within the...
...for walking in summer. When one has to contemplate warmer clothing or more reliable wind and rain protection, there is greater risk of reaching a FSO weight that will reduce one's speed, endurance or both.
Anecdotal evidence here is that many of us start out with packs we find too heavy, and...
Thank you for explaining that. I apologize for misinterpreting your earlier comment, quoted below, as indicating that you were advising others not to use a FSO approach.
@davebugg, we clearly have quite different approaches to planning here. The very reason that the FSO approach gives greater consistency is that once one has settled on a FSO weight budget, let us say 20% of our walking weight, this allows one to analyse the effects of both large and small...
...still live.
This appears to completely miss the point of using a from the skin out approach to weight targets. One great advantage of using an FSO target is that it doesn't change from season to season, unlike base weight targets, and the very fact that it includes consumables and worn items...
...Walker IV. They recommend a from the skin out approach, and suggest what range of values this might take, and how that will affect walking speed and endurance. As a result, I adopt a 20% FSO target for my weight planning. This work is also based on the authors' extensive practical experience.
...need to carry a little more than that in spring and autumn, and a lot more if you were walking in winter.
I advocate using a from the skin out (FSO) approach rather than merely pack weight. You here is a link to one my earlier posts on this...
...a 50 li pack larger than might strictly be necessary, it doesn't seem too much larger to me.
@Ussasx, what I do find interesting is using an FSO target of 15%. When I researched this, I took the guidance offered in the US walking classic, 'The Complete Plain Walker IV' by Colin Fletcher and...
...have raised.
I also prefer to do my planning calculations based on a 'from the skin out' approach, and limit myself to 20% of 'ideal weight' FSO. That gives me a target weight of 16 kg, compared to the 18 kg that I might have if I used my regular, slightly obese, weight.
Which raises for...
...they were carrying under 5 kg, but had discounted a variety of clothing because they either wore it or carried it outside their pack. Using FSO rather that base pack weight, pack total weight, total base weight or some other measure establishes a common foundation from which to compare...
...to achieve under 15% of my ideal walking weight as a bare pack weight.
I think a more reliable measure is to calculate your from the skin out (FSO) load, ie pack including consumables, clothing, footwear, poles, etc. As a rule of thumb, if your FSO load is less than 20% of your ideal walking...
...regarding weight given by Colin Fletcher and Chip Rawlins in The Complete Walker IV. That is
Noting that these authors use from the skin out (FSO) measures, and they also acknowledge that pack weights vary by season, I have estimated that the the lower limit of their guidance (one fifth of...
...Base Pack Weight and the weight of everything being worn or carried except consumables.
I think that the underlying point is that if you set a FSO target weight, say 20% of one's ideal walking weight, then the difference between Total Base Weight and the target weight is then the measure of...
...community, where I have often seen references to 'bare pack weight' indicating that this weight excludes consumables (food, water, fuel, etc). This allows pack weights to be compared in a consistent way. It is not a perfect solution, which is why I prefer the FSO approach that I mentioned...
I presume that you are talking about using what is commonly known as from the skin out (FSO) measures. There are many reasons why this is a better way of measuring and comparing the effects of different loads than merely measuring the weight carried in the backpack. For a start, it measures the...
...he was wearing fleece, rain jacket and rain pants and not counting them in his pack weight. One way of avoiding this dissembling is to use the FSO approach, where absolutely everything is counted. It is the only reliable and consistent way of testing various weight claims that people make...
This site is run by Ivar at in Santiago de Compostela.
This site participates in the Amazon Affiliate program, designed to provide a means for Ivar to earn fees by linking to Amazon