From: owner-utahoutdoors-digest@lists.xmission.com (utahoutdoors-digest) To: utahoutdoors-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: utahoutdoors-digest V2 #102 Reply-To: utahoutdoors-digest Sender: owner-utahoutdoors-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-utahoutdoors-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk utahoutdoors-digest Tuesday, July 7 1998 Volume 02 : Number 102 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 10:52:53 -0600 (MDT) From: David Kenison Subject: [OUTDOORS] Backpacking article There's an article in today's Salt Lake Tribune titled "Backpacking basics: Be honest about how much you can carry." See: http://www.sltrib.com/1998/jul/07071998/outdoors/42080.htm The article talks about backpack sizes, normal loads, the "internal vs. external" issue, etc. Some interesting stuff. One paragraph from the article said: "Holbrook said while there are no hard and fast rules for distributing weight inside a backpack, it is usually a good idea to put the heaviest gear on top and the lightest on the bottom. When hiking in more rugged terrain, he suggested putting the heaviest gear in the middle so there is no problem with the center of gravity." I've always put heavier items towards the bottom or middle, not the top. Anyone know why the recommendation for top-heavy packing? I've seen scouts literally tip over because of packs that were top-heavy... of course, most scouts tend to WAY overpack anyway, but that's another topic. - ---------------------------------------------------- David Kenison - Orem, Utah dkenison@xmission.com My Homepage URL: http://www.xmission.com/~dkenison/ Internet Lists: LDS-GEMS, Cougar-Net, UtahOutdoors, Brasil-SUD - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 11:06:50 -0600 (MDT) From: Eric Cytrynbaum Subject: Re: [OUTDOORS] Backpacking article That's sounds very surprising to me. I always try to pack heavy stuff as low and close to my back as possible. My impression is that changes the center of gravity the least (lowering it, if anything). Convenience of access is the only reason I would do otherwise (I have a single, top access bag). Can't imagine any benefit to a top heavy bag ??? Eric > One paragraph from the article said: > > "Holbrook said while there are no hard and fast rules for distributing > weight inside a backpack, it is usually a good idea to put the heaviest > gear on top and the lightest on the bottom. When hiking in more rugged > terrain, he suggested putting the heaviest gear in the middle so there is > no problem with the center of gravity." > > I've always put heavier items towards the bottom or middle, not the top. > Anyone know why the recommendation for top-heavy packing? I've seen > scouts literally tip over because of packs that were top-heavy... of > course, most scouts tend to WAY overpack anyway, but that's another topic. > - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 11:16:28 -0600 From: "Jeff Porcaro" Subject: RE: [OUTDOORS] Backpacking article My understanding of load balancing is: The Heavy packing on the top of the pack is most used when you have a External Frame pack. The Low load balancing of an internal frame pack works better when the weight is on the bottom. Jeff Porcaro > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-utahoutdoors@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-utahoutdoors@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Eric > Cytrynbaum > Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 1998 11:07 AM > To: utahoutdoors@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [OUTDOORS] Backpacking article > > > > That's sounds very surprising to me. I always try to pack heavy stuff as > low and close to my back as possible. My impression is that changes the > center of gravity the least (lowering it, if anything). Convenience of > access is the only reason I would do otherwise (I have a single, top > access bag). Can't imagine any benefit to a top heavy bag ??? > > Eric > > > > > > > One paragraph from the article said: > > > > "Holbrook said while there are no hard and fast rules for distributing > > weight inside a backpack, it is usually a good idea to put the heaviest > > gear on top and the lightest on the bottom. When hiking in more rugged > > terrain, he suggested putting the heaviest gear in the middle > so there is > > no problem with the center of gravity." > > > > I've always put heavier items towards the bottom or middle, not the top. > > Anyone know why the recommendation for top-heavy packing? I've seen > > scouts literally tip over because of packs that were top-heavy... of > > course, most scouts tend to WAY overpack anyway, but that's > another topic. > > > > > - > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 12:29:00 -0500 From: "Andrews, R. Boyd" Subject: Re: [OUTDOORS] Backpacking article Having used a number of different packs packed a number of different ways - and watched as many others have as well - I think there is no set way to achieve perfection - though I concur on the internal/external frame observation made earlier Here are several things that have helped me :(I tend to travel heavy as I travel with assundry others who are less than able) I like the heaviest stuff smack in the middle (non-lunch food +fuel+stove) I've added a couple of H2O holders and a small carry case (from Lowe) on to my front straps - this takes maybe 4 pounds (possibly 10%) and shifts it forward and helps on convenience - I go wide and not up - a balanced, wide load that is a bit easier to negotiate than a mile high pack I studied the guide on how to correctly (sequentially ) adjust straps that adorn the new packs - it's vital to how you will carry the load on your back - (just as important as how you stuff your pack) I always offer my Gross Old Rotten Peanuts to the group first - lightens the load sooner I enjoy the list - keep the recommendations on spots coming! ---------- From: Eric Cytrynbaum To: utahoutdoors@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [OUTDOORS] Backpacking article Date: Tuesday, July 07, 1998 1:06PM That's sounds very surprising to me. I always try to pack heavy stuff as low and close to my back as possible. My impression is that changes the center of gravity the least (lowering it, if anything). Convenience of access is the only reason I would do otherwise (I have a single, top access bag). Can't imagine any benefit to a top heavy bag ??? Eric > One paragraph from the article said: > > "Holbrook said while there are no hard and fast rules for distributing > weight inside a backpack, it is usually a good idea to put the heaviest > gear on top and the lightest on the bottom. When hiking in more rugged > terrain, he suggested putting the heaviest gear in the middle so there is > no problem with the center of gravity." > > I've always put heavier items towards the bottom or middle, not the top. > Anyone know why the recommendation for top-heavy packing? I've seen > scouts literally tip over because of packs that were top-heavy... of > course, most scouts tend to WAY overpack anyway, but that's another topic. > - - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 11:54:04 +0000 From: "Randall R. Arabie" Subject: Re: [OUTDOORS] Backpacking article I have an internal frame pack and have always tried to load the heaviest items on the bottom. This just seemed the most logical way to load the pack and has always worked for me. I have heard the "heaviest on top" recommendation before, but I have not tried it. I was told that having heavier items on top would distribute the weight straight down (or place the burden) onto your hips, whereas if the heavier items were in the bottom, the weight there would pull down (or place the burden) on your shoulders. Randall R. Arabie Senior Staff Scientist EnecoTech, Inc. 1580 Lincoln Street, Ste. 1000 Denver, CO 80203 randyarabie@enecotech.com (303) 861-2200 - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 13:11:53 -0600 (MDT) From: Terri Smith PlanB John Horn Subject: Re: [OUTDOORS] Backpacking article I know the worst trip I ever did was with a full water bladder at the top of my pack. Too much weight, too high and threw my balance off. Now, at 5'2" my center of gravity is lower than most and at 105# my pack is only 30# but its all relative. I pack the heavy stuff in the middle. Terri Smith planb@xmission.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 21:34:11 -0400 From: "Roger Jenkins/Susie McDonald" Subject: Re: [OUTDOORS] Backpacking article Ok time for our two cents worth. I hve been backpacking for 21 years, and am noted for my non-small packs (or body, for that matter.) I have owned several packs, two external frame (both Kelty Tiogas) and am on my second internal frame. (First was Lowe Special Expedition, now I am wearing a Gregory Denali). The latter is the most comfortable pack I have ever put on, even when pushing 65 lbs. (I weigh 210, so such is not an unreasonable load, especially when my partner is only 100 lbs dripping wet.) First, when thinking about packing the pack, forget weight. What counts is density (weight per unit volume.) ( I know, I am starting to sound like some damn engineer or worse, yet, a chemist - the latter is who I am.). Except for some of the small metal objects in your pack (knife, SLR lens, etc) probably nothing will be as dense as the water you carry. Dense things need to go close to the point at which the pack system attaches to the body (shoulders and hips)..Why? Remember your high school physics class? The concept of leverage: a small force a long way from the point of support can lift more mass than a large mass close to the point of support. You don't want movement, so put the dense stuff where it can not act as a big lever. Near your shoulders, back and hips. That said, virtually everything in the main compartment of a backpack gets so squished together, it is all pretty much the density of packed nylon. I am not sure that moving it around inside the main sack will help much. I usually put the tent and and thermarest inside the pack, standing up. The rest of the gear (other than sleeping bag and incidentals, which go in the lower compartment) just get stuffed in. One last comment: my opinion is that people get packs that are too small, and end up hanging all kinds of gear on the outside. Think what that does for leverage. when I moved from external frame to internal frame, I measured the volume of all the bags that were on the outside of the frame (at the time, food sack, tent, sleeping bag and pad) and added such to the known volume of the frame's sack and came up with ca 7000 cu. inches for an 8 day trip. so that is the internal frame pack size I have. Roger Roger Jenkins/Susie McDonald Co-Editors: the Tennes-Sierran Our newsletter is available at: www.cs.utk.edu/~dixon/hbgsierra.html Check out the report of our Grand Canyon Backpack at: www.kaibab.org/happy/gctr9805.htm - - ------------------------------ End of utahoutdoors-digest V2 #102 **********************************