|
Hungryjack posted:I have an old Kelty Redwing 48L and it's been around the world with me and the only thing I've ever broken was the sternum strap clip, which they promptly replaced without so much as a second thought. My Kelty is wonderful, but it's old and on the heavy side by today's standards. If I were to buy a new pack of that size, I'd be very tempted to get one of Osprey's packs that has that Anti-gravity harness system. My wife had the Aura 50 and it was ventilated and comfortable as hell. My previous pack was a 15 year old Gregory, and putting on the Exos for the first time was like night and day. You could actually feel how far packs have come in those 15 years.
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 17:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 22:02 |
|
|
Tsyni posted:Yeah, I've been eyeing the atmos because lots of reviews seem to be a fan of the comfort/ventilation. I've got an Atmos 50L and it's really good. It's not the lightest of packs but it really makes up for it in comfort. It's just hugging your back in the best possible way.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:02
|
|
|
Pryor on Fire posted:At some point the ultralight movement got so far up it's own rear end that everyone started ditching their stoves and switched to eating cold mush. You see quite a bit of that nowadays especially in the cross-country thru hiker crowd and the people who read their blogs and wish they were thru hikers. I think there are some fundamental differences in how some groups of people enjoy being outside and as competitive athleticism has spread to areas outside of traditional sports. For some people it's about pushing themselves as hard and as fast as they can and I think they truly enjoy the outdoor aspect but it's part of the challenge to push themselves or beat records or things like that. Other people are out in the backcountry because they love the experience and are fine with taking their time, making themselves as comfortable as they want while enjoying the scenery, etc. The two groups don't always seem to understand each other all that well
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:06
|
|
|
Tsyni posted:Yeah, I've been eyeing the atmos because lots of reviews seem to be a fan of the comfort/ventilation. As a sweaty baby I can attest that the ventilation on the Atmos series is excellent.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:11
|
|
|
Re: stoves vs. No stoves. I'm with levitate - it's really two groups that just enjoy things differently. Personally, I'm in the stove camp. There's not much better than warm oats and coffee when you wake up in the morning while camping. But, some people would rather just hit the road and stuff their mouth with trail mix or w/e. More power to 'em.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
I'll give you my JetBoil when you can pry it from my scalded, dead hands.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 19:34
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=De7rbB2bteE
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 06:42
|
|
|
This should also be in the Everest thread.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 06:51
|
|
|
TLDR: I have big triangular feet which , tried wide sizes but my heel is far too narrow for them. Being in the UK restricts trying out any wide sized footwear in the flesh. Hello all, I am having some troubles finding the right type of footwear. I am a wannabe coastal hiker, based in England. I have size 12 feet, but with horrendous looking paddle shape with a narrow/average heel and claw like toes that constantly rub against each other. Last year I attempted a week long coastal walk from Dartmouth to Whitsand bay and only managed 33 miles in one and a half days before I was in complete agony, my pinky toe had turned into a hard sharp blister due to the narrow Karrimors I had been wearing. I had to cancel the trip and consign myself to a campsite. This year I would like to attempt this again. I purchased sets of Injinji toed socks, which are absolutely fantastic. However this means my already wide feet now require an even wider toe box. Purchasing wide shoes has been an absolute minefield. Unlike in the US there are very few stockists of wide footed shoes in this country. I did try one stockist but they tried to rip me off really badly (4 times the price the shoe is in the US). So going blind I ordered a set of New Balance 703 Country Walkers from the US. US Size 13 4E width (UK 12.5) and a set of New Balance 610V5 Trail Runners in US Size 13 2E Width (UK 12.5). I am a UK Size 12, but New Balance wide fittings only seem to jump from UK Size 11 to 12.5. The 4E Country Walkers were actually narrower in width then the 2E Trail Runners and the heel and middle portion of the boot was far too wide for me to be comfortable in. The 2E Trail Runners have a far roomier toe box. The left shoe fits about right, but this is where I discover my right foot to be of significantly less volume then the left. Last Sunday I decided to go on a solo walk 15 miles from Seaford to Eastbourne on the famous Seven Sisters route. I used the 2E Trail Runners with Injinji Sock liner and Injinji Mid-weight Outdoor socks. I also lace up using the Heel lock method. I got no blisters at all, however I had to tie up my laces so tight on the right boot that by the middle of the walk the top of my foot was quite painful due to the laces cutting in through the tongue. As the material on the Trail Runners is very thin I didn't feel like I got a huge amount of traction. I can’t help shake this loose feeling from my right foot, pivoting on the heel makes it feel even worse. As the foot expands mid walk it feels less loose but I still need the laces to be really right. I have ordered a Superfeet Tongue Depressor to put another layer between the lace and the top of my foot and hopefully push my foot into my heel more. It seems pretty obvious that I have mismatched triangle shaped feet, which are probably the worst feet to buy for. I am sort of at a loss of what to do next, it was great that I didn’t have blisters, but I don’t trust the Trail Runners to last a week of intense walking with a 9KG camping pack. They are very breathable but very little toe protection and are not waterproof. The Country Walkers are being sold on (Imported them from the states off of Ebay so cant really return them), i'll keep the Trail runners because they are literally the best pair I have had used even though they are still far from what I desire in a hiking shoe). ******************************************************* So my questions! Did a Tongue Depressor help you at all to push your foot into the heel and cut into the top of your foot less? Is there anything else I could do to help the Trail Runners be more comfortable? The current insoles are… OK. Do custom insoles actually make much of a difference in comfort? I can’t see how spending £60 on some would actually make much difference. What brands or models of lightweight Low/mid hiking boots/trainers would you recommend that could cater to my triangular feet? I have tried Keen Kovens before which felt fine on the heel but the toe box was not quite wide enough with the Injinji’s on. Should I just suck it up and accept that I will be in pain regardless of what I do? *******************************************************  (Awesome photo of the Seven Sisters that I took.) Asomodai fucked around with this message at 13:14 on May 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 10:03
|
|
|
I just want to say that as a geology nerd that is an awesome photo. If I was there I'd be squealing hysterically like the time I went to Arches National Park.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 10:18
|
|
|
^^ My sympathies, buying shoes for larger feet really sucks--I wear 14EE, and nothing is consistent. I will say that my favorite boots have been Lowa Banffs, and for day to day I usually wear Merrell Moab Ventilators. I recently picked up some New Balance Leadvilles after someone here recommend them, and I'm definitely in love. New Balance makes excellent shoes for sasquatch footed people. With yours, have you laced up the last two holes near the top of the tongue? That helps lock your foot in if the shoes are slightly too big. Pulling up and tightening the laces closer to the toes also helps. Those don't tighten if you just pull on the end of the laces, you've gotta tighten them up one at a time. Ungghhh.... All this pack talk is really making me want this Osprey National Parks Centennial Pack  I just can't justify spending another hundred fifty after dropping a hundred in a slightly smaller pack last week 
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 12:29
|
|
|
Asomodai posted:TLDR: I have big triangular feet which , tried wide sizes but my heel is far too narrow for them. Being in the UK restricts trying out any wide sized footwear in the flesh. Have you tried Altberg? They do a number of width fittings, and if you really need to, they do custom-made boots at their factory in Yorkshire.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 13:01
|
|
|
no thanks posted:Have you tried Altberg? They do a number of width fittings, and if you really need to, they do custom-made boots at their factory in Yorkshire. I haven't, but they dont stock anywhere near me. I may have to make a day trip. I dont suppose you can recommend anything that is more of a low cut trail runner like my New Balances? Trail Runners are my preference. OSU_Matthew posted:^^ My sympathies, buying shoes for larger feet really sucks--I wear 14EE, and nothing is consistent. I will say that my favorite boots have been Lowa Banffs, and for day to day I usually wear Merrell Moab Ventilators. I recently picked up some New Balance Leadvilles after someone here recommend them, and I'm definitely in love. New Balance makes excellent shoes for sasquatch footed people. With yours, have you laced up the last two holes near the top of the tongue? That helps lock your foot in if the shoes are slightly too big. Pulling up and tightening the laces closer to the toes also helps. Those don't tighten if you just pull on the end of the laces, you've gotta tighten them up one at a time. Yeah I do lace up to the last two lug holes and I use a Heel lock style lacing technique. I also tighten them up near the toes as much as possible. I'll take a look at the Merrells as they look perfect! Whats the heel like on them? It's a pity they don't do their half sizes in the wide fitting as well. 12 1/2 US is my size. Merrell do not supply the wide sizing outside of the US Similarly what is the heel like on the Leadvilles? They do a 2E and 4E in 12.5 US. Again no UK stockists. I don't know whether to go for 4E or 2E as NB's width sizing is really inconsistent. Asomodai fucked around with this message at 13:36 on May 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 13:15
|
|
|
Asomodai posted:
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 02:18
|
|
|
I recently bought some Columbia Royce Peaks a little while ago, though I've only taken them out on one camping trip. They're slimmer fitting and very stretchy - they're a 2-way stretch fabric that they've gusseted in multiple places with the fabric going in the proper direction to stretch (crotch, knees). I quite like them, they're a nice light hiking pant. The con: I slipped on some loose gravel while hiking in them, took a very minor spill. Now, would I have been wearing my normal hiking pants (carrharts) there would have been no issue. However I was not, and I got a couple small gashes on my knee from the gravel, and ... I'm not willing to call it a complete tear, but a minor scuff on the pants themselves. With any thicker pant, that would not have happened. I'm still taking them with me to field camp, along with a pair of carrharts. Would I buy them again? Probably, but never two pairs at once - one set is enough.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 02:49
|
|
|
Altra Lone Peak 2.5's have a crazy wide toebox, maybe look into those? I wear size 13 shoes but am really a 12 because of how wide my feet are, and those things are still so big that my feet actually slip a touch. Saucony Peregrines have been my go-to's for over a year now, although I'm not a big fan of the new Peregrine 6 sole. As far as insoles, after I got a pair of Super Feet Green for my Peregrines I started wearing them in every shoe (I have high arches). I actually found these inserts to be even better than Super Feet. The Arch is higher and seems stronger. Pryor on Fire posted:At some point the ultralight movement got so far up it's own rear end that everyone started ditching their stoves and switched to eating cold mush. You see quite a bit of that nowadays especially in the cross-country thru hiker crowd and the people who read their blogs and wish they were thru hikers.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 03:48
|
|
|
Pryor on Fire posted:At some point the ultralight movement got so far up it's own rear end that everyone started ditching their stoves and switched to eating cold mush. You see quite a bit of that nowadays especially in the cross-country thru hiker crowd and the people who read their blogs and wish they were thru hikers. I have never backpacked with a stove. To me food is just sustenance. I am not an athlete either, I am not out to beat times or distance etc. My backpack is about 7-8KG with my tent and my body thanks me! I totally get the allure of having a stove, but I just weighed up the pros and cons. Asomodai fucked around with this message at 12:01 on May 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 11:33
|
|
|
I just got back from 8 days in Utah and hiking/camping in the five national parks. Angels landing was incredible! Slot canyons are a lot of fun too. I can't wait to get back.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 12:35
|
|
|
There's a big Amazon Gold Box on Yukon Outfitters hammocks and accessories. I have been thinking about springing for Zpacks wonderful 7oz rain tarp for $250, but I grabbed the Yukon 16oz tarp for $25. Twice the weight at 1/10th the price? We shall see...
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 15:04
|
|
|
Can anyone recommend any hiking watches? Looking to spend less than $400CAD, main features would be altimeter, barometer, distance traveled (would this require GPS?) and the ability to transfer my hiking data to a computer. Thermometer would be cool to have but certainly not a requirement and I don't care about a HRM.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 15:58
|
|
|
I don't know much about hiking watches, but I think that'd need a GPS. Or you get a step counter and know your step length.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 16:05
|
|
|
whatupdet posted:Can anyone recommend any hiking watches? Looking to spend less than $400CAD, main features would be altimeter, barometer, distance traveled (would this require GPS?) and the ability to transfer my hiking data to a computer. Thermometer would be cool to have but certainly not a requirement and I don't care about a HRM. Suunto Ambit
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 16:05
|
|
|
If you are OK without the distance travel feature Casio Pro-Trek watches are a good option. They are cheaper than Suuntos (generally) and because they are solar they don't eat batteries. I would note that any GPS watch will have pretty limited battery life when actually using the feature. Garmin is another option for GPS based stuff as well.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 16:11
|
|
|
whatupdet posted:Can anyone recommend any hiking watches? Looking to spend less than $400CAD, main features would be altimeter, barometer, distance traveled (would this require GPS?) and the ability to transfer my hiking data to a computer. Thermometer would be cool to have but certainly not a requirement and I don't care about a HRM.  I've had a couple Casio Pro-Treks which have altimeter/barometer/compass and are solar powered, pretty foolproof and useful. You can expect about ±10% deviation from the real values on the altimeter, since it's pretty much guessing based on pressure. The thermometer is nigh-useless because it's so affected by your body heat; you need to take the watch off for 15 minutes to get an accurate temperature reading. If you want distance measures you'll need a GPS like Suunto uses. Compared to the Casios these are more expensive and require recharging when the GPS is in constant use, but they are very popular.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 16:12
|
|
|
Not a watch but you could get the Gaia GPS app and use it to get all those stats you're talking about (at the expense of your phone battery and not having it on your wrist)
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 16:21
|
|
|
I use maps to tell me how far I've gone
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 16:41
|
|
|
JAY ZERO SUM GAME posted:I use maps to tell me how far I've gone This.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 16:41
|
|
|
n8r posted:If you are OK without the distance travel feature Casio Pro-Trek watches are a good option. They are cheaper than Suuntos (generally) and because they are solar they don't eat batteries. I would note that any GPS watch will have pretty limited battery life when actually using the feature. Garmin is another option for GPS based stuff as well. Vivian Darkbloom posted:
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 17:40
|
|
|
 I managed to get out yesterday! My friend too this of me when I decided it would be more fun to take the snow down.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 17:41
|
|
|
whatupdet posted:Thanks, are the Casio Pro-Treks able to send this data in a graph to keep track of or just provides info on the fly? It keeps some records of high and low altitudes, and it has a little graph of altitude or pressure for the last half hour, but no connectivity to other devices. Casio has a smartwatch coming out that's supposed to do a lot more stuff, at the cost of battery life (and $500!)
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
Vivian Darkbloom posted:
Is that Whitney? Elbert?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 18:10
|
|
|
Looks like Whitney and you're not going to find 14,500 ft anywhere else in the lower 48 (though yes Elbert is close)
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 18:12
|
|
|
Eh, Elbert's within the 10% range of error of that watch  Heh, so is any 14er. beefnoodle fucked around with this message at 18:21 on May 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 18:18
|
|
|
I think the watch was reading something like 14,300' when I got to the Whitney peak, I set the altitude based on the plaque there. Technology!
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 18:33
|
|
|
Sawatch Range doesn't look like that, but the Sierras do. Watches don't help with that, either.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 18:35
|
|
|
JAY ZERO SUM GAME posted:Sawatch Range doesn't look like that, but the Sierras do. Weird. That's pretty much exactly what I remember the summit of Elbert looking like. Google Image Search thinks so too.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 18:41
|
|
|
beefnoodle posted:Eh, Elbert's within the 10% range of error of that watch JAY ZERO SUM GAME posted:Sawatch Range doesn't look like that, but the Sierras do. Yeah I was mostly basing it off the view from the top of Whitney.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 18:42
|
|
|
Looks like Whitney to me!  
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 18:58
|
|
|
Tigren posted:Looks like Whitney to me! Sadly, I wouldn't know. I shat myself silly on the first 1/3 of the trail, not really conducive to summiting. Never eat at that pizza place in Lone Pine.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 20:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 22:02 |
|
|
Rodenthar Drothman posted:Sadly, I wouldn't know. I shat myself silly on the first 1/3 of the trail, not really conducive to summiting. I puked myself crazy after I got off the peak. Altitude sickness is real.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 22:03
|
|