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) |
---|
markss said:Do these and other such measures really make that much difference?
vagabondette said:markss said:Do these and other such measures really make that much difference?
They can, depending on how many such measures you take. I read a thread on an ultralight forum and a guy lowered his pack weight by over 1.5 lbs by removing tags, trimming straps and doing that kind of thing. So, the 1-2 oz you save by trimming your toothbrush may not make a huge difference but if you add it all up it can be significant savings.
Also, 10% is a guideline not a requirement. It's not like they weigh your gear at the beginning of a camino and don't let you walk if you're over. However, for a walk like the camino which is essentially a series of day hikes, having a 10% guideline can be good for newbies as a baseline and for experienced backpackers as motivation to get rid of the unnecessary backpacking gear.
markss said:This post is primarily directed toward "newbies" and suggests that perhaps they can relax that 10% rule a bit. Nevertheless it is probably a good idea to leave the leather bound volumes of the Complete Works of Shakespeare at home.
PingHansen said:deodorant (clean sweat doesn't stink)
PingHansen said:Try using a better soap and washing the clothes frequently :wink:
Admittedly, some people have different body chemistry. How you live and what you eat, can also influence the odor. I may be lucky in that regard.
markss said:But, 10%: Just doesn’t work for everyone.
I believe that you should use the ideal weight for your height (BMI=25), not your actual weight, if you are overweight. You might have good reasons to think that your ideal weight is greater than that, but it is a start point. (I have no source for thatjanetharder said:What baseline body weight are we using - fully clothed with boots/shoes, or just after a shower?
This is just one of the issues that an FSO approach highlights. My most recent pilgrimage, St Olav's Way, was done at about 30% FSO of my ideal weight. The biggest issues were boots, having to carry up to five days food, and carrying extra water (~3.5li). In contrast, I know that my load at the end of the Camino Frances in early spring would be around 18% FSO, and could be brought down more by choice of footwear than by any other weight saving.janetharder said:The choice of boots (to help protect the ankles from sprains) vs the very light-weight trekking shoes seem more important than the handle of a toothbrush.
jirit said:Instead of the 10% rule, I have what I call the "three day rule".
1. Pack your gear up into the backpack you plan to use and take.(this includes water)
2. Go for a 20 km walk on day 1
3. Repeat the following day 2 and 3
4. If your back, legs, knees, shoulders, etc are not complaining, then you are probably okay to go
5. If they are complaining - then lighten up, remove some stuff and repeat steps 1-3
jirit said:Instead of the 10% rule, I have what I call the "three day rule".
1. Pack your gear up into the backpack you plan to use and take.(this includes water)
2. Go for a 20 km walk on day 1
3. Repeat the following day 2 and 3
4. If your back, legs, knees, shoulders, etc are not complaining, then you are probably okay to go
5. If they are complaining - then lighten up, remove some stuff and repeat steps 1-3
markss said:Someone somewhere arbitrarily came up with this guideline that one should strive to restrict the weight of their backpack to 10% of body weight. This gets passed around over and over again and seems now to have become a golden rule. Where does it come from?
Obviously it helps to limit weight, but there is no reason to blindly follow some artificial rule that may have worked well for the person originally establishing the measure, yet may not necessarily be appropriate for a good many others.
Factors not directly related to body weight, such as a person’s physique, level of physical conditioning, body strength, state of health etc. determine the amount of weight that one can comfortably carry. To base the decision soley on body weight doesn’t seem to make all that much sense.
I’ve seen people who go to extremes to keep their backpack weight low. Things like removing staples from papers they may carry, cutting off and discarding half of the toothbrush handle and drilling large holes in the remaining portion to reduce miniscule amounts of weight, packing half of a comb. Do these and other such measures really make that much difference?
This is not to discount the validity of suggestions to minimize weight. But, 10%: Just doesn’t work for everyone.
One caveat: Postage rates can be expensive if you find yourself overburdened and need to post items home.
I think the English vernacular has entered here. It is a "rule of thumb," which has been shortened to "rule" in this thread. A rule of thumb is just a general guideline, far less binding than an actual rule. Personally, I think a healthy male can carry 9kg comfortably (before food and water), a healthy female a bit less. I have met hundreds of pilgrims who have kept it down to 6kg. That requires starting with a pack that is very light when empty, and having a lot of ultralite items, such as a very small towel.I don't know where this "rule" comes from
There is a false legend that has attached itself to the phrase. It says that the original rule of thumb appeared in English Common Law. The alleged law said that it was illegal for a man to beat his wife with a stick that was thicker than his thumb. Beating her with smaller sticks was permitted, and in some regions encouraged, to keep the woman in her place.
While the belief that such a legal doctrine existed is quite old, the specific claim that the phrase rule of thumb comes from such a legal doctrine is quite recent, appearing in feminist texts starting in the 1970s. From Del Martin’s 1976 Battered Wives:
For instance, the common-law doctrine had been modified to allow the husband “the right to whip his wife, provided that he used a switch no bigger than his thumb"—a rule of thumb, so to speak.
While it was certainly true that in many places in the past (and unfortunately to this present day), men were permitted to beat their wives, but this so-called rule was never codified. In fact, this explanation does not appear until relatively recently and its appearances are in American courts that claim such an old English law exists without citing it specifically.
Blackstone in his Commentaries on the Laws of England (1765) contends that in times past a man might be permitted to give his wife “modest punishment,” but states that hitting one’s wife was quite illegal by the late 17th century, about the time the phrase appears, and Blackstone makes no mention of thumbs at all:
the husband also (by the old law) might give his wife moderate correction. [...] But this power of correction was confined within reasonable bounds; and the husband was prohibited to use any violence to his wife, aliter quam ad virum, ex causa regiminis et castigationis uxoris suae, licited et rationabiliter pertinet [other than what is reasonably necessary to the discipline and correction of the wife]. The civil law gave the husband the same, or a larger, authority over his wife; allowing him, for some misdemeanors, flagellis et fustibus acriter verbare uxorem [to wound his wife severely with whips and fists]; for others, only modicam castigationem adhibere [to apply modest corrective punishment]. But, with us, in the politer reign of Charles the second, this power of correction began to be doubted, and a wife may now have security of the peace against her husband; or, in return, a husband against his wife. Yet the lower rank of people, who were always fond of the old common law, still claim and exert their ancient privilege, and the courts of law will still permit a husband to restrain a wife of her liberty, in the case of any gross misbehavior.
And as far as American law goes, the Massachusetts Bay Colony specifically outlawed spousal beatings in 1655. And by 1870, almost all the US states had laws on the books to punish wife beaters, some with very severe punishments attached.
falcon269 said:I think the English vernacular has entered here. It is a "rule of thumb," which has been shortened to "rule" in this thread. A rule of thumb is just a general guideline, far less binding than an actual rule. Personally, I think a healthy male can carry 9kg comfortably (before food and water), a healthy female a bit less. I have met hundreds of pilgrims who have kept it down to 6kg. That requires starting with a pack that is very light when empty, and having a lot of ultralite items, such as a very small towel.I don't know where this "rule" comes from
Buen camino!
but do quote sourcesfalcon269 said:As a rule of thumb, don't accept urban legends
Cecil's Storehouse of Human Knowledgebut do quote sources
Hmmm - that doesn't sound like nearly as much fun!falcon269 said:Or lose 20 lbs, and then the pack is a sum zero addition...
NicoZ said:If the 10% rule has any value it's for some mythical average person.
BeatriceKarjalainen said:I'll not come as low as 10 % of my body weight, currently my list (what I will carry in my backpack) weights in about 8,8 kg with camera etc and 1,6 l water. Then I wear some clothes and shoes and will have some stuff in my skirt pocket and in the money belt.
nreyn12 said:BeatriceKarjalainen said:I'll not come as low as 10 % of my body weight, currently my list (what I will carry in my backpack) weights in about 8,8 kg with camera etc and 1,6 l water. Then I wear some clothes and shoes and will have some stuff in my skirt pocket and in the money belt.
In my opinion, the 10% rule is a goal but not an absolute. And it is 10% of your ideal body weight (for those of us with a 10kg mood swing), and includes only the items you will actually carry each day (not boots, clothes you are wearing, and trekking poles).
The problem with carrying too much weight is a greater risk of blisters, tendonitis, and general crankiness - all of which can be prevented. Bring what you need and want, and if it gives you trouble, discard or post ahead those items you discover you don't need. I recently carried my netbook for two weeks so I could work at the end of each day. I was very cranky most of the time, but it was a burden I'd chosen to carry, so no complaints.
Just be sure you enjoy the journey!
BeatriceKarjalainen said:it is always good to have someone elses view on the packlist (someone who has been there) to see what I could leave at home or more important what have I forgot to put in my backpack.
It has been traced to an early CSJ printed publication by one forum member, but the CSJ website as it is structured now is very circumspect about it, sayingnreyn12 said:Who knows where the 10% 'rule' comes from, so use it only if it helps!
without identifying the 'some people' or providing a source of any kind.Some people advise carrying no more than 10-15% of your own body weight
It would be a very disputable 'fact'. If you are using a From the Skin Out (FSO) approach, the general guidelines in The Complete Walker IV are to use a 20% target for comfortable trekking, and its authors recommend staying below 30%.BeatriceKarjalainen said:And when did the stuff you wear got included in the 10 %? I read a long thread in another forum where that was the fact.
I prefer using an FSO target, so these are important considerations. My pack weight budget is my FSO 20 target (15kg at my ideal walking weight) less what I would expect to wear as a minimum (~3kg). This gives me a target of 12kg. Depending on how much food and water I want to carry, my pack and equipment target is around 8-10kg. Eight kg is a bit above the 10% guideline, while 10kg is well within the 15% at the upper end of the guideline.JabbaPapa said:IGNORE the weight of your clothes, hat, shoes, etc. for determining your pack weight.
dougfitz said:My other observation about the 10% guideline is that it can only be right for very limited range of circumstances, which I think broadly equate to doing the Camino Frances in summer. If you want to take a better quality camera, tablet computer or have to carry a medical appliance like a CPAP machine or walk in early spring or late autumn, then be prepared for your pack to be a bit heavier. It will mean you slow down a little, but provided you don't try madly to keep up with the walkers with light packs, you will be okay.
Regards,
'd be happy to look over your packing list, as I'm sure others on this forum would.
You could also take a look at my list: http://thecaminoexperience.com/whattobring.php
Who knows where the 10% 'rule' comes from, so use it only if it helps!
BeatriceKarjalainen said:Well I walk quite fast in the Swedish mountains with 11-12 kg on my back, keeping a average speed of 5-6 km/h when walking.
dougfitz said:BeatriceKarjalainen said:Well I walk quite fast in the Swedish mountains with 11-12 kg on my back, keeping a average speed of 5-6 km/h when walking.
If you are already an experienced hiker, you might find you are more cautious in your packing. I bush walk regularly, and carry enough even on a day walk to make sure that I can survive a night in the open - emergency blanket, fleece gloves, neck band and beanie, first aid kit, knife, torch, whistle as well as a compass and map of the area I am walking in. The weight quickly adds up, and many of the items one needs to survive safely in the bush and mountains aren't as important on the Camino.
I found that I was able to remove (reluctantly) or adjust some of these things for the Camino.
Regards,
But you shouls and cut the bristles. LOLDon't exceed 10% of your body weight if you can avoid it. There is a minimum amount of gear required, and it may exceed the guideline for the petit(e)s, who will have to accept it. More than 10% and you may regret it, or incur a huge postage cost to send it home (15 Euro for my sleeping bag once).
By the way, the uncomfortable ultralite backpacks are not particularly uncomfortable at 6kg. Over 10kg is when you will dislike them. So if your gear and pack are about 6-7kg, consider saving some weight with a lighter pack.
My equipment has been stripped of unnecessary items like labels, ice axe hooks, ladders for external gear, etc. It has permanently removed about a half pound of weight, so I don't have to cut my toothbrush in half.
I concur for newbies is correct. My thought is walk around for many miles fore hand to see how it feels in all terrain . Im 6" 208lbs not in the best of shape but do a fair bit of hiking and biking and i smoke and drink [they go great together] And when i head into the wilderness ill take 35 to 40 lbs for many tough miles [food & water] and just pace it all out. Yes keep it free of things you do not absolutly need . CheersActually, I think the 10% rule is most important for newbies because they're the ones most likely to overpack a bunch of unneeded crap "just in case". Just look at some of the gear lists people post and you'll see what I'm talking about.
You seem to keep hinting (no matter what you actually state) that people are saying the 10% guideline isn't a guideline but a set-in-stone requirement. It's not, and I don't think people are. When people mention it, I think it's with the assumption that most of the people reading the suggestion have a brain capable of independent thought and making personal decisions that will ultimately effect the total weight of their pack but by providing the 10% guideline, they're giving said people a target to shoot for.
Someone somewhere arbitrarily came up with this guideline that one should strive to restrict the weight of their backpack to 10% of body weight.
One caveat: Postage rates can be expensive if you find yourself overburdened and need to post items home.
Tell that to the police at the exit of St. Jean Pied de Port who stop all pilgrims and make them throw away items until their pack is no more than 10% of their body weight...The 10% rule is a suggestion - that's all
Not all; some will accept bribes. And experienced pilgrims know to load their underwear and socks with stones to temporarily increase their body weight. Eating a substantial lunch in several of StJdP excellent restaurants is also advisable.Seriously!! Do they actually do that...
Not all; some will accept bribes. And experienced pilgrims know to load their underwear and socks with stones to temporarily increase their body weight. Eating a substantial lunch in several of StJdP excellent restaurants is also advisable.
Not all; some will accept bribes. And experienced pilgrims know to load their underwear and socks with stones to temporarily increase their body weight. Eating a substantial lunch in several of StJdP excellent restaurants is also advisable.
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?