- Time of past OR future Camino
- Frances 15,16,18
VdlP 23, Invierno 23, Fisterra 23
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) |
---|
I am doing "ftso". From the skin out
Everything gets included.
Everything.
For the purpose of clarity, does one indicate this weight in pounds or kilos?I am doing "ftso". From the skin out
For the purpose of clarity, does one indicate this weight in pounds or kilos?
How about both? (The beauty of using a spreadsheetFor the purpose of clarity, does one indicate this weight in pounds or kilos?
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.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.
See the information at http://www.aarnpacks.com/.Hi Kanga, would you share a little more about balance pockets?
There is a very good spreadsheet in the Resources section here in the Forum that will do FSO; Pack only; pack, food and water...How about both? (The beauty of using a spreadsheet).
As in "How many pints do I have to drink before I will put the pack on?"Litres. Backpacks are measured in litres. For the flat earth types ); pints. Or is that beer?
This one, Rambler? (Does that mean you weren't impressed with mine?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
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.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.
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.
.
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.
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.This one, Rambler? (Does that mean you weren't impressed with mine?)
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.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 - 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.Litres. Backpacks are measured in litres. For the flat earth types ); pints. Or is that beer?
Yes, I agree, that sounds good.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?
New York City Variant--- Al Burg. Southern US Variant--- Al ya-all Berg. Alaska Variant Al Iceberg.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
So the only reason I would know my pack weight is if its measured at an airport.
Me tooSame here.
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.Me too
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.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.
This thread hurts my head.
My pack weighs 13 pounds.
I'm going to bed.
2 more sleeps.
Nite pilgrims!
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.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.
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,
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%.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.
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!
Hi Doug! [or Fitz?!]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.,
Guess I'll have to do a stretch in clink to getr one of those thenHow about prison toothbrushes? Very short handlesView attachment 9392
Was there a rice cooker in the larger pack???. . . 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.
You sound like a man after my own heart, wear everything, stuff your pockets to bulging, who needs a backpackI'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!
Yes .... but I'm still trying to work out how to wear three peairs of shoes ....You sound like a man after my own heart, wear everything, stuff your pockets to bulging, who needs a backpack
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?