|
I'm heading out on my first backpacking trip in a month or so. I've done camping and hiking (sometimes with a pack) a lot so I'm not too nervous. It'll only be for two nights. However, I have a set of hiking poles from a friend - should I bother taking them? What do hiking poles actually... Do?
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 21:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 21:58 |
|
|
BONESAWWWWWW posted:I'm heading out on my first backpacking trip in a month or so. I've done camping and hiking (sometimes with a pack) a lot so I'm not too nervous. It'll only be for two nights. However, I have a set of hiking poles from a friend - should I bother taking them? What do hiking poles actually... Do? Hiking poles essentially ease the stress on your legs/feet/knees by bearing some weight, improving traction and balance. I will say, I rarely notice any negative effects of carrying poles but I feel like I always hike further and easier when I have them. I was a skeptic at first, considering I was in my late 20s I felt like I didn't need them and they were only for old people or skiers. I've since changed my tune and adopt poles for most of my trips over 10 miles. My knees feel less sore and climbing up and down always seems 10x easier with poles. Try them out. If you feel like they were dead weight, leave them home next time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 22:06
|
|
|
BONESAWWWWWW posted:I'm heading out on my first backpacking trip in a month or so. I've done camping and hiking (sometimes with a pack) a lot so I'm not too nervous. It'll only be for two nights. However, I have a set of hiking poles from a friend - should I bother taking them? What do hiking poles actually... Do? Hiking poles reduce the load on your knees going down-hill a bit and if there is a lot of steep downhill and you have any knee issues then they can be very nice. You can also use poles on flat terrain to propel yourself forward slightly, spreading some of the work of hiking to your arms. To do this you need to plant the poles kind of directly to your side/slightly behind your foot and push yourself forward. What I find poles most useful for is muddy/wet/slippery terrain, like lots of coastal hikes in the PNW, but other places too obviously. Being able to just quickly dance through a mud bog can save a ton of time. Just going downhill in general with poles I find to be a lot faster because you're less worried about slipping with those extra points of contact. That being said, depending on your poles they can be less useful on hikes that are mostly just bare rock. It's always an option to just bring one to try, and many backpacks have easy ways to secure them to your bag when you're not using them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 22:13
|
|
|
Interesting. I had never considered that! I think I'll take them and see what happens. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2019 00:47
|
|
|
They can also be pretty useful for creek/river crossings.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2019 06:33
|
|
|
Hell, mine are part of my tent!
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2019 06:47
|
|
|
also if you use them enough you get ripped triceps
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2019 10:47
|
|
|
I've got a hiking pole I made out of steel tube, Carbide tip on the end and an old ski pole handle for the handle. Works marvelously for crossing streams. Its a bit on the heavy side (~4 pounds), but I've been on 10+ km hikes with it and its never been a bother.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2019 11:27
|
|
|
wesleywillis posted:I've got a hiking pole I made out of steel ... Its a bit on the heavy side (~4 pounds),
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2019 16:33
|
|
|
Anyone ITT happen to have/used the Pure Outdoor by Monoprice Jetboil clone? It's stupid cheap on sale right now, I just don't want it to melt down and fail because of that. https://www.monoprice.com/product?p_id=35040 Looking to get something for weekend, 1-3 night packing trips, and wondering if this is decent enough, or if i should spring the extra 50bux for a JB flash. My other thought is something like a pocket rocket 2/olicamp xts. E: picked one up. price is too drat good not to give it a shot. if it sucks, i've got a 30 day return window. first trip with it is in a couple weeks. Tedronai66 fucked around with this message at 20:01 on Jun 7, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2019 16:54
|
|
|
Costco has the Cascade Mountain carbon fiber hiking poles on sale for $29 right now if you're looking for good, low cost poles. https://andrewskurka.com/cascade-mountain-tech-quick-lock-trekking-poles-review/
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2019 18:46
|
|
|
Ah crap, as soon as I saw this thread shoot up to the top, I knew I had forgotten to use my 20% REI coupon. Anyone remember when the next one might be coming? I've got $100 in dividend burning a hole in my pocket off a $300 purchase I meant to do. =(
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2019 19:46
|
|
|
SwissArmyDruid posted:Ah crap, as soon as I saw this thread shoot up to the top, I knew I had forgotten to use my 20% REI coupon. Anyone remember when the next one might be coming? I've got $100 in dividend burning a hole in my pocket off a $300 purchase I meant to do. =( Probably November-ish, if this guys site is to be believed: https://mschausprojects.blogspot.com/2015/05/rei-member-sale-and-coupon-timing.html But the seasonal sales might have something too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2019 19:50
|
|
|
Hiking pole chat: another thing they do is improve your balance. Without poles when you step on an uneven side-to-side surface like a rock or something, all the effort of keeping you in balance goes to muscles and tendons in your ankles and legs. Even when you don't injure yourself (which is most of the time), it adds exertion and strain. Having the poles in-hand, especially with one pole planted, gives your upper body the ability to add to the forces keeping you upright. Like... a lot. I'm probably not explaining this too well, but hopefully you get the idea. I think having poles reduces your chances of an injury in certain body positions that are common when hiking. I also like them when hiking on an overgrown trail, you can kinda sweep a thorny thistle or some poison oak out of your leg's path. And, if you fully invest in always having them, you can buy a tent that uses hiking poles as the uprights, saving you some space and a little weight.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2019 19:58
|
|
|
My friend also has one of those tents and it really intrigues me. But at the same time, I'm desperate to try out some hammock gear in the wild, so I will likely be trying that instead. But it's on my radar for sure. After all these testimonials though I will grab his poles. I'll pick up my own set if I come out of the other side of this trail as a believer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2019 20:08
|
|
|
BONESAWWWWWW posted:My friend also has one of those tents and it really intrigues me. But at the same time, I'm desperate to try out some hammock gear in the wild, so I will likely be trying that instead.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2019 20:42
|
|
|
I prefer to hike with just one pole (I like having a hand/wrist completely free to do other stuff). Super great for stream crossings, and useful to dig in going steep uphill, and plant down before you step going down. It's also the main support for my tent (Zpacks Altaplex).
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2019 22:16
|
|
|
CopperHound posted:Use the poles to hold up one end of your tarp when you end up trying to hammock camp in an oak Savannah where the trees are 50+ meters apart. California oak savannahs are the main reason I haven't gone full hammock, it's just more comfortable having the peace of mind to not worry about those scenarios
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2019 05:54
|
|
|
CopperHound posted:I can't say that I've ever considered using a digging bar as a walking stick. Ummm... Its not, I made it from some scrap steel I had laying around at work.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2019 18:11
|
|
|
wesleywillis posted:Ummm... Its not, I made it from some scrap steel I had laying around at work. It’s a joke, 4 pounds is way heavier than most walking poles/sticks/whathaveyou
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2019 18:22
|
|
|
Taking a shot in the dark here. Anyone have a good recommendation for reasonably-priced but quality binoculars for someone who hikes often? After going to Yellowstone my Dad wants a decent pair, not something so powerful you need a tripod to use it, but there was quite a few things he would've like to get a better view of. He hikes a lot and I want to get him something better than the Amazon Basics $30 model (unless its actually just as good as a more expensive one). And if there is a better thread for this let me know.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 17:03
|
|
|
OK first off, terms. Binoculars are listed with two numbers: magnification, and primary lens size also known as aperture. For example, 7x30 means 7x magnification, and each lens is 30mm in diameter. When I was doing amateur astronomy I always recommended 10x50s. At that size, you can separate the Galilean moons of Jupiter, see a few of the brightest nebulas/galaxies/etc, and star fields are gorgeous to just pan across and explore: but, not so much magnification that you get lost trying to look around, and light enough to be more or less portable, usable without a tripod, etc. I've seen astronomy recommendations down to 7x50, which is also fine - you get a wider field of view, at the expense of some magnification. For daytime observing I'd say a minimum aperture of 25, and minimum magnification of maybe 5x. Light gathering power is much less important, magnification is still important but you might prefer more field of view, and you can reduce weight and size by going for smaller objective lenses. For spotting for target shooting, identifying sparrows from a kilometer away, etc. then you want higher magnification of like 15+, and with that high magnification, your minimum aperture starts going up again to 50mm+, or your image will just be too dark; plus your field of view becomes super constrained, it's like looking through the scope of a rifle. Magnification is inversely related to field of view. The more you magnify the image, the less of the image you see. Think about it for a bit and this will make sense. You are always trading off weight and capability. The smaller the objective lenses, the less light gathering power and thus a dimmer image. The larger the lenses, the heavier they are, and the focul length gets longer so the binoculars are either quite long, or require prisms to shorten them, which adds weight (and width). Don't combine very high magnification with very small lenses, you'll have a miserable time trying to see anything. Large lenses with low magnification get you loads of bright light and clarity and a gorgeously wide field of view, but are not great for making far away things be up close. Also, the higher the magnification, the more the image jumps and wobbles as you hold the binoculars; at some point you've got to lean against a prop or use a monopod or tripod just to get a stable image. The heavier the binoculars, the harder it is to hold them still, and the more fatigue you get holding them up to your face. There's a few other things like eye relief, whether the binoculars have diopter adjustment, adjustable eye cups, multicoatings on the lenses, how smooth and well made the hinge mechanism that lets you set the distance between each eye, the type of prism used (if any), whether the pair comes with a case or lens caps etc. etc., it goes on and on. And then there's ruggedness of construction, weight, general quality, warranty, and of course... price. For brands, consider the major camera makers (they make good lenses) - nikon, canon, olympus, etc. - and also the telescope makers: meade, celestron, orion. There's also the expensive lens specialists like leika, zeiss, and some reasonable less-expensive binocular/monocular/scope specialist brands like bushnell. Really depends on your budget, you can spend anything from ~$40 at the low end of decent quality, up to thousands of dollars at the high end. For the rest of this post I'll refer to products from Bushnell. That's a recognizable name brand that targets the lower end of the market; they're not making garbage toys, but they're also not making anything a "professional" would be buying. By all means go for a nicer well-rated pair from a more premium brand if that's in your budget, I'm not meaning to super endorse this brand. It's just a reasonable "sportsman" brand that I think makes sense for a lot of people's budgets. My pair of Bushnell 10x50s I got in the late 1990s for well under $50 are still doing well, and I don't mind risking them on a hike because they're not too expensive to break or scratch up or something. basically these. Bare budget and OK with a heavier pair with plastic construction but functionally useful I'd go something like this. This is certainly the heaviest I'd go with for long distance backpacking, but I think these are fine for day-hikes where you're not lugging a lot of other kit and can afford a couple pounds on binoculars. At a higher price point for better quality construction, ruggeder, a bit niceer, there's these "powerview" 10x50s for about $55 that I'd recommend above the cheap ones. Still about 1.5 pounds to carry around, and not waterproof, but you're probably not doing astronomy in the rain, so I think waterproofness is less important? Most small/compact hiking type binocs are your 10x25s and similar, often waterproof and with rugged construction, but in particular focused on being lightweight and compact. here's a cheap pair. I'd happily use these in the daytime for birdwatching or something, but I think the light gathering power at night for astronomy isn't good enough, and someone might find the field of view limiting at 10x. For a higher budget, Bushnell has these 8x32s, which are considerably better made, better optics, a bit more light gathering and wider field of view, and 15.5oz for under $80. If I was shopping for someone I knew wanted ruggedized backpacking binoculars with good all-around capability for under a hundo, I might pick these. For a nice compromise between the compact hikers and the larger, heavier 10x50s - and a significant jump in quality - consider something like these Bushnell "L" series 8x42s. These are reasonably well made, water resistant, have no prisms which keeps weight down a bit, come with good accessories, and are protected by a fairly reasonable limited lifetime warranty from Bushnell. They weigh about 1lb. If I was going to get someone an all-purpose pair for day-hiking, bird watching, general use, and reasonable night-time performance, and my budget was $150, I think this'd be a great choice. Again, I'm not saying to buy any of these specific ones, nor am I making GBS threads on anyone who wants to spend considerably more (or less). Just trying to give a range and some explanations, and I think it's useful to stick to one brand when doing that kind of comparison.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 06:01
|
|
|
I have Nikon Monarch 5 10x42 for bird/critter watching. They are hefty but very good quality and run around $250. Definitely not worth the weight for backpacking but I will take them on day hikes
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 16:04
|
|
|
I have some of the cheap ($50) Bushnell binoculars and they're great for the price. I have a set of the big ones that I leave in the car and the compact ones I take hiking. They've been great and I think the price point is perfect.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 16:39
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:
Wow, that was really informative. I have a pair of binoculars that I got a while back. I've only used them once for a local bird watching hike. It was overcast and raining so it wasn't the best day but I learned a little bit, and naturally forgot it. They worked just fine and I plan on taking them hiking now. I don't remember where or when I got them, at least 5 years ago, but I got the Bushnell Trophy Binoculars, 8x32. They are more of a budget pair but I know nothing about binoculars and they work I guess. Clear image, focuses just fine I guess. I don't have any experience so I don't know if they're good or bad. Decent amazon reviews I suppose. Anyway, I want to take them hiking with me next time. Probably just to check out birds or something. Not sure. Pennywise the Frown fucked around with this message at 16:53 on Jun 12, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 16:50
|
|
about binoculars
|
If he's going to be walking far then he might want a compact pair - a lot of binoculars with apertures over 28mm are pretty large and not super light. I have a pair of Hawke 8x25 compacts and they are great, they have a belt pouch which is convenient when walking. Typically during day the reduced light gathering power isn't a problem, it's only really the field of view that you lose. I'm sure a similar model from other brands would be just as good. For comparison, the Hawke 8x25 are 310g, 8x32 are 539g.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 10:45
|
|
|
Anyone go on a trip with only Coghlan's gear?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 21:10
|
|
|
...I'm sure its doable, but it sounds like the kind of thing you do as a stunt for your camping-centric Youtube channel.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 23:54
|
|
|
SwissArmyDruid posted:...I'm sure its doable, but it sounds like the kind of thing you do as a stunt for your camping-centric Youtube channel. It would be a good contrast from the "These are the basic items you need to go camping on a budget" videos where they require a $200 cooler.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2019 05:39
|
|
|
FogHelmut posted:It would be a good contrast from the "These are the basic items you need to go camping on a budget" videos where they require a $200 cooler.  stop watching those videos
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2019 06:15
|
|
|
Coolers have gotten so weird. I have a good Coleman that I got for like 30 bucks and when I wake up the next morning on the lake it’s still full of ice and cold beer. Yeehaw. I think rich people are running out of trendy spending ideas. Ooh a 500 dollar cooler that comes with a sticker that tells people I have a 500 dollar cooler? Yes please!
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2019 14:37
|
|
|
I have a Yeti that I got for free from work, and it is a really, really, really good cooler. I use it on my boat a lot where it gets kicked around and stood on a lot, and the older style Igloo Marine Cooler wouldn't stand up nearly as well to the treatment. It's also nice to stick in the storage bin on our dock, fill it with ice and drinks at the beginning of a long weekend, and not worry about putting more ice in it until next time. I know guys who do a lot of fishing and hunting, and the rotomolded coolers have become standard because of how much longer they last than traditional coolers. They're heavy as poo poo though, even empty, and don't have as much interior space as you'd think from how big it is. However, these days there are plenty of other heavy rotomolded coolers that cost a fraction of the Yeti. If I had to buy one these days, it wouldn't be a Yeti, and it'd probably have wheels on it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2019 15:17
|
|
|
Yeah my old Igloo lasts 3 day weekend just fine and it has wheels. I can see the need if you're really using and abusing it. But car camping at a luxury campsite once a year doesn't seem to need bearproofing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 02:07
|
|
|
Yeti makes a good product with even better marketing. Ignoring the price there's nothing wrong with the brand, but they aren't light years beyond everyone else (thermodynamics sayin hell no to that). Then once you do compare the price tags Yeti gets really unattractive. But that marketing I mentioned? Price don't matter when everyone is convinced you're the best.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 04:08
|
|
|
So what rotomolded cooler hits the best price/performance ratio? I could use one for some of the climbing trips I go on.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 10:49
|
|
|
FogHelmut posted:But car camping at a luxury campsite once a year doesn't seem to need bearproofing. Except in bear country.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 11:26
|
|
|
armorer posted:So what rotomolded cooler hits the best price/performance ratio? I could use one for some of the climbing trips I go on. Yeti has some older competitors like RTIC and Orca. Monoprice makes them now that are rotomolded. A bunch of other companies are making super duty coolers with their own tech that perform at those levels. Pelican, Lifetime, and Coleman's Esky brand all come in much cheaper than Yeti, but I think? they use their own types of plastic and manufacturing process. Even the Walmart brand Ozark Trail makes a heavy duty cooler.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 15:11
|
|
|
armorer posted:So what rotomolded cooler hits the best price/performance ratio? I could use one for some of the climbing trips I go on. A lot of guys I know like the Rtic cooler. Their slogan for a while was something along the lines of "Just as good as Yeti, half the price". Their prices have gone up a bit, but it's still a significant discount over Yeti. I've also seen good things about the Monoprice Pure Outdoors Emperor coolers. Those are less than half the price of a Yeti.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 15:15
|
|
|
Ahhh, of COURSE Monoprice got in the game. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 15:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 21:58 |
|
|
armorer posted:Ahhh, of COURSE Monoprice got in the game. Thanks! They make a pair of carbon fiber fliplock trekking poles that are pretty good too. https://www.monoprice.com/category/pages/14
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 15:44
|
|