My hammock setup in the desert: http://hennessyhammock.com/images/up...astent5465.jpg

Where I tour, hammocks are actually desireable because there are too many trees in many areas, or the terrain is not level enough, for tents. My beef is I just don't find them comfortable. Also, the real hammock nuts carry a lot of gear to make them comfortable, I don't think they are as light as some other options. I am going to try a bridge hammock, if that doesn't work I will probably give up for a while. I notice a lot of the guys who seem really to love them are skinny as hell or clown/acrobats.

I've been doing the ultralite thing since 05, and as part of hiking since '78. Everything about our lives keeps getting more cluttered. Take the advice to carry an iphone to surf for greenspace. I can't imagine needing that in the NE, trees are everywhere, but it is a good idea. It is also extra gear. And everything has more zippers, pockets, thorn proof layers, gears. Disc brakes weigh more. MTBs weigh more. Modern people weigh more, and the standard touring frame weighs more.

Ultralite is actually very traditional. When I worked in a camping shop in the 80s, the lightest tent we sold was for cycle camping, it was assumed cyclist needed minimal gear, but over the years they learned to carry heavy loads.

I don't think my bike looks unusual, I carry 4 bags but they are small, I used 2 racks but they are the original Blackburn aluminum wire racks that weigh very little. I have the range to carry a lot of stuff, but the stuff I carry is ultralite. Works for me. As usual this new craze is being pushed by a new series of products, bikepacking. But the old gear was well worked out, just leave some of it at home, or in the store, and learn the basics of modern camping.

Rolled up and stuck in a jersey pocket?

2012 http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=270234

2010 or 11http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=270235

2007?http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=270236

http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=270237

UL camping site http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=270238 and another lightweight camping site using panniers http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=270241

light loads, short trips.

I'm going to spend the winter sewing up a new UL shelter with no-see-um netting.

Dan, you really are the man.

Actually Nun, you got it backwards. Before the bike boom, people tour with pretty light weight stuff on their 10 speed bikes. The lowest acceptable gear inches then was only 27". Yeah 27". Now, you need something like 16" or 20" GI or you don't have it low enough. Difference is the weight some people carry these days. I even see people tour cross country in the Rockies with 53 gears!

The so called touring bikes then were not made so heavy and so oversized tubings to resist the heavy loads of the rear panniers. I mean, some bikes sold in the early 80s were weighing not as much as a decent cyclocross bike now. Today, trucks like the LHT or the Raleigh Sojourn seemed to be a necessity. I was told that during the bike boom, this era attracted people from all walks of life to do bike touring and these people practically wanted to carry all the creatures comfort that you can camping and thus, people start carrying more stuff than they need to and bike companies make bikes to resolve issues like overweight panniers causing fish tailing by building heavier touring bikes. Just look at the average North American tourist heading to Mexico or Hawaii on a 1 or 2 week vacation with big 62" linear inches suitcases. I can do that with smaller than 18" carry on or even a small back pack.

Yes, the trend now is moving back to minimalist, just like the trend from aluminum bikes in the mid 90s back to steel now. It's not new, but it's a replay of the old.

I've done a few "fast and light" bike-camping trips. The lightest I've done is around 15 lbs base weight. Still lugging around 3 lbs of panniers though ;)
http://www.ziligy.com/photos/posts/C...Ultralight.jpg

I think the problem is the perception. The bike is a beast of burden on which to, well, burden. Backpacking is different, and I always marveled at how a backpacker could cut their gear weight to 10lbs while cycle touring had a 30-40lb requirement among some members of the community. When I see most touring bikes, I see four backpacks strapped to a frame and I think "What is so important that you had to put all those on?"

This is a good read... Some nice decision points and the pros/cons of each.

Like the extra ~1 pound for a solo tent vs a bivy and tarp. I could see arguments either way, depending on where you were going and for how long.

Twenty pounds of gear including panniers, a 2-person tent with real mosquito netting, Thermarest, tools and a change of clothes. All on a 19 pound bike.

http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/y...PICT1630-1.jpg

About 20-25 ponds of gear on a Peugeot PX10 (20 pounds) 45 years ago. My sleeping bag fills one pannier.
http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/y...1974tour-1.jpg

As a long-time mountaineers and backpackers we went through the "enlightenment" period a couple of decades ago. The conclusion that I came to after having "been there and done that" is to keep my loads as light as I can, based my objectives, where I'm going, what luxuries I want to take with me, time of year etc.

Why is it when someone "discovers" something "new" everyone else is doing it wrong? I think a lot of it has to do more with a feeling of elitism. I've seen this in other sports such as skiing. The telemark skiers I know (me included) look down on alpine skiers who have not seen the error of their way. There really is not a wrong way to go on a tour, just different ways.

Actually the same also goes for skiing:)

Low gears are good, I like them as much as low weight because they make the cycling more fun.

When I got back into cycling about 10 years ago (my mid-life crisis and way cheaper than a porsche) I defaulted to the setup I had on my Claud Butler Majestic back in 1977 which was a saddlebag and a handlebar bag and various racks to strap stuff to.

I love backpacking like I cycle tour, and vice versa. I'm climbing the haunted Glastenbury Mountain in VT this weekend, overnight, with 16 lbs of gear including food, plus a variable water weight.

I mean, put it this way:

You're going to be hot and sweaty. Wear an athletic fabric that repels odor and skip bringing 5 changes of clothes.
You're not going to want to cook. Forego the big pots and settle on a camp stove and easily rehydrated foods like instant potatoes and ramen.
You're on a bike. Bring one extra pair of lightweight shoes.
You're colder at night than during the day. Bring a good sleeping bag and leave sweatshirts and sweatpants at home.
You pass a rest stop every day. Carry 1-2 days worth of food.

Now, obviously these vary depending on what you want from touring, but these generalizations can be accepted by the majority, and the majority doesn't realize it.

Actually, this is a very interesting thought, because it is the modern touring bike that is a beast of burden. Most people didn't realize that bikes in the 70s and 80s were well built, but were a bit lighter than the trucks being sold and embraced now. People seem shocked to hear that a nice triple butted steel bike of the mid 80s that can be used for touring weigh no more than 21 lbs or 22. I mean that isn't as light as a Cervelo or a Madone, but it certainly is a lot lighter than the Raleigh Sojourn or decked out LHT. I mean, a low end road bike is about that weight range anyhow.

In the mid 90s, companies were playing tricks with people suggesting that it is the steel bikes that was the beast of burden. Aluminum was the answer -- lower weight and stiff frame makes the best of both worlds plus you can still carry all the junk you want. But then, this is simply not true as well made steel bikes are sometimes the same or lighter than their aluminum counterpart. In the end, steel made a come back and now even Cannondale themselves aren't making anymore T series touring bikes.

People tend to carry more because they want the same home luxuries they expected to be on the campsite. You see families camp and they want the hot bacon and eggs breakfast with espresso or hot coffee. When I was touring with my ex, I went from bare minimum to bloated 4 panniers because we see others doing the hot bacon and eggs with espresso, hot coffee and making waffles or pancakes and she wanted the best. Don't forget the portable cooler we have to bring along and then the contraptions we carry to hang our food up and away from the bears.
I'm not saying that all women cyclists are like that. Some can be as minimalist or more, but those 4 bags have to carry something and that sometimes mean luxury items people will cherish the most. :thumb:

I meant "Evangelism" to be slightly ironic. I do think that less is more in the context of baggage, but I'll still happily talk to people who have 4 x panniers.

Low gears are good, but not silly low. I mean with a 30" gear loaded, you can pretty much climb anything up to a 16% grade with a light bike and load. The reason why people need lower gears is because they are carrying too much crap. My CX bike has a 25" GI as low and that's very low in my preference but good to have a bail out gear; 27" would be good enough for me too. What people do not realize is that, it's ok to walk up a hill with the bike and it's probably easier. I mean, it's easier to walk a 21 lbs bike with a 20lbs load than a 38lbs bike with a 50 to 80lbs load! When I suggest to people that walking is cool and probably faster than biking up a steep hill; I can really tell what load they carry. If they struggle up a modest hill walking and having to keep hitting their shins on the pedals, they are not walking upright. They are straining themselves to push up the bike, because it's heavy. You don't strain yourself pushing a light bike up a steep hill do you? So, they need low insane 16 or 14" gears just so that they could make it over the hill on their trucks.

I find that touring light is great. In fact, some of my friends were inspired by what I did with my carbon bike and the touring I did that blew them away (I was constantly way upfront) that 2 of my friends had switched from a heavy touring bike setup to a lighter setup and had been extremely happy with it.
I sometimes do luxury camping tours, but it's usually short and usually with friends who want the whole 9 yards -- bacon and eggs with coffee, pancakes etc.. I have a trailer for that and my bike which tows it has a low 20" gear to climb hills with. But for the most part, I tour light. It's better that way!

However, I still have friends who evangelizes the virtue of the 4 pannier system and claim that ONLY REAL TOURIST tour with 4 panniers. Suggesting that anything less than 4 is not real. I guess some people have this ego thingy that they seemed to like to inflate. Sadly, their followers suffer. There is a place for 4 panniers and that would be expedition and overseas where you need to carry more provisions and parts.

I like my steel frame bike, and I haven't got the means to replace it sooner than next summer, but the thing weighs 29lbs stock. I got tires that weigh half, took off all the extras, got a lighter rack, and a lighter seat so I suspect my Raleigh Port Townsend is down to 26, but then I'll see a beautiful early 90's chromoly serotta coming in at 19-20lbs and my mouth waters....

Time to check Craigslist again.

Raleigh's steel bikes are, in my opinion, way too piggy for my taste. There are better and lighter steel frames, but you need to find them. Just this year, I met a young lady (student I think) and she was riding a roughed up touring bike. It was a Nishiki International of a nice vintage (she's a nice vintage too), comparable at the time against the Miyata 1000GT. She had the perfect setup. 2 used cheap panniers, cheap tent and cheap sleeping bag strapped to the rear. It was not overloaded, but she looks like she has very little money anyhow. She was even embarrassed to tell me what she had. Ofcourse I knew what she had. A gem and the setup she had for 7 days camping was perfect. She was told by her other camping friends that she had a lousy bike, must have a LHT truck or something and 4 panniers to be a real cyclist. Yeah sure, until you hit a hill. See how's king then!

it seems that every tour is different.

different times of the year
different weather patterns to deal with
a variety of logistical options
distances
caloric demand, etc..

however I will say this much
that once you learn to be able to be self sufficient in the dirt, pavement is much easier.

easier in that logistics are that much easier to locate.

and there simply are not gradients on the pavement that are so common to mountain biking.

I finished a quick jaunt down the west coast
I honestly don't recall 1 hill coming down the coast. there are a few climbs, but climbing is just part of riding. I've become very comfortable climbing.
(a few months ago, I did a ride from Lahina, to Paia, then up Haleakala and back to Lahina, thats over 10k ft in one hill)
where I met/crossed paths during multiple days, a group of young adults all on LHT's, and all with at least 4 panniers.

wow, their camp scene every night was nothing short of impressive!
massive dinners, a lot of food, stoves, cookware, groceries, etc...
I simply marveled.

it was as if a scene from being home with friends.

the Hunter 29er, even shod in a fresh set of 2.1" Nanos was capable of +15mph av on the pave.
most days, I'd do a loop somewhere thru the dirt, exploring areas that were new to me, then eventually landing at the next camp.

some days I'd feel bad, when I'd see the group ahead, while closing the gap at over 20mph.
the difference is simply just amazing.

obviously the key here is to simply not carry too much.

it would be even that much faster if adopted to a road bike.

I've had thoughts of using my CAAD10.

from my experiences with the Oregon and Cali coasts
the road bike would be a very doable option
especially in light of the abundant amenities, especially in Oregon.

however, the 29er shod in the likes of Nano's, gives you the very real option of riding mtb trails, fire roads until your hearts content
at times I've thought of perhaps an LHT with frame bags and the likes of Schwalbe Marathon Extremes

while I still have a set of OMM racks and panniers
I admit that they are stashed away somewhere.
I never use them.
I can't get over what logic seems to pervade by using metal to hold something up, then hanging bags off of center line of the bike.
in my opinion its crazy, and to waste frame space on water bottles?
even crazier. the bike is a rack.

I am a fan of granny gears even on a twenty some pound bike with fifteen pounds of bags and gear. My low is about 21 inches, with a high of just over 100. Long days, lots of miles. I don't like to push if I can help it, and I hate being spun out. Just because I have it does not mean it always gets used. But at the end of a 100+ mile day, when all that between me and someplace to sleep is that last hill, it can be nice.

Interestingly while I really like ultra light touring(which I consider to be rackless, with under fifteen pounds of gear)I really like the look and even the feel of going all out with four bags, rack top bag, and a handlbar bag . When I do that, I go full bore, with both tent and hammock, full cooking gear, both an inflatable and closed cell pad, and so on. Options are greater, the wardrobe is nicer and helps you stay cleaner. But even full on, with my largest tent with two vestibules, clean wool socks every night and day, and cooking nice two pot meals with and using a real fork, electric toothbrush, and all that I generaly have a good time. And seldom get the load over forty five pounds. I tend to do that if I can talk someone into going with me. Usualy its only an overnighter.

i don't think that ultralight touring gear is expensive
and that lightweight gear is expensive

simply being that buying any gear costs money

zero grams = zero gear = zero money

the hardest part is simply not carrying crap.

so one thing that I've found useful is to use some masking tape, cloth medical tape, etc...
and place a piece on every single tiny piece of junk that you carry.
each time you use that item, make a hash mark on the tape.
you will quickly discover what you use, how much you use it, and the things that you don't use AT ALL.

you'd be amazed how much junk you actually carry.

every piece of equipment better serve at least double duty.
it should be multi task
if its an item that has a single focus use, it better be very important, perhaps like nitro tabs, or medications

my latest discovery is the Shoe Hammer!

laffs.

it actually works quite well.
I use Sidi Dominators with SPD's
using a shoe like a hammer, making the strike contact on the metal cleat, works amazingly well.
that only took me about 5 years to figure out. duh!

Do you take a first aid kit? if it gets no hash mark do you leave it behind? Just the first thought that hit me when I read your tape idea.(good idea)

I tend to use light running shoes on tour, can't hammer with those. But yes, everything should have a dual pupose. And as you say, there are so many variables on conditions and time of year, there is no one set packing list, at least for me.

I'm still trying to figure out how to cram the kitchen sink into my Ortliebs. My hat's off to y'all.

But I don't mind the extra weight if I have a vehicle (bike, kayak). If I have to carry all on my back (hiking, XC-skiing), it's another story. I wonder if there are self-supported long distance swimmers? :eek:

--J

There's a set bare minimum amount of gear needed to live outdoors on a bicycle.

you need warm clothes, you need a place to sleep, you need shelter. you need food.

to reduce this to such small loads it fits into a couple of small bags is ultralite fanaticism. I do it, but it's thoroughly an exercise in extremism. I don't have a four bag touring bike setup right now, and kind of miss it.


I don't know how I'm going to haul my winter tent and winter sleeping bag on this.

http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=270332 and I'd never get my skis on it! http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=270333 although i did sleep under a tarp on both these trips.

a more enlightened goal for bike touring is a comfortable setup. lightweight is a valuable goal. Using found material for insulation? Sleeping on bubble wrap?

You may have wandered off the path into the brush.



Asceticism isn't necessary to enjoy bike touring. a good book and warm sweater, maybe.

Personally I think that rule has caused of a lot of bad decisions. Dual purpose stuff can be good but it isn't a given that a multipurpose item is a better choice. I'll quote the following from my article to explain my thoughts on this.

"I have read where a number of tourists mandate that all items must do at least double duty. No single purpose items allowed. At least one of the proponents of this philosophy rejects better options out of hand because they were single use items and would give the item no consideration.

On the face of it the mandate sounds like a good idea. Items serving multiple purposes has to be a good idea, right? Well actually it might not be in many cases. The thing is the following have to be considered:

1. Does the multifunction item actually weigh less than the single purpose items it replaces
2. Does the multifunction item actually do the functions all as well or at least well enough
3. Are all of the functions actually necessary, if not is the item lighter than the single purpose items that it replaces that are actually necessary
4. Are any problems created by the multifunction item? For example do you need it for two different purposes at the same time or will the item be wet or dirty from one use when it is needed for another

Note that I have not found space to be a big concern, but if it is for you the items in the list where weight is considered you may need to consider bulk as well.
After considering all of that, some multipurpose items make sense and others not. Also the answer is not necessarily a simple straight forward one.

Bottom line... Consider multipurpose items but consider everything and only use them when they make sense."

That looks like a sweet setup. I found that when I used something similar it worked out very well.

I have gone to light dry bags for my recent tours, but two panniers on the front is a pretty sweet setup. I have been tempted to go back to it and might if I had lighter panniers in the correct size. I might even wind up making some panniers out of some light dry bags. I really like having the bags stay on the bike in camp. With panniers I find that I pack up and break camp quicker because anything not in use stays in the panniers which never come off the bike when on tour. I like that the bags stay upright and things seem more accessible.

Bottom line... I have to concede that by going to dry bags I save a bit of weight, but do lose some convenience.

Good thing, otherwise you'd have practically no one to talk to when you're touring. The question is, will they talk to you? Probably not, if you're evangelizing.

Thanks. That was from two years ago and the most ultralight I've gotten. Actually right prior to that, I purchased the Sea-To-Summit compression sack hoping to replace the panniers. I was never able to pack it with the stuff in the two panniers and mount it comfortably on top of that front rack. I also realized that access would be extremely cumbersome. The sack went back to REI.

The weekend trip I was doing (in the photo) was in warm weather. I carried a summer therm-a-rest quilt (25 ounces), my Big Agnes SL-1 using the fly only option (39 ounces w/ stakes), and a short therm-a-rest pad (14 ounces). That weekend I also left all my electronics at home (phone, gps, camera). Although I enjoyed the simplicity of the weekend I couldn't imagine that kind of minimalism on long tour. In fact on my next two long tours (Alaska-2011 & Newfoundland-2012) I reverted to my 35 lb base weight.

I have enjoyed nun's and your posts over the years, but I'm still not convinced that ultralight is right for me on a tour longer than a couple of weeks.

It may not be, it isn't for everyone on every tour.

The longest I have gone U/L was 33 days and I didn't see any desire to carry more cropping up during that time. Perhaps it might if I was going much longer, but to be honest 3 months is probably as long as I have any desire to tour at one time and for that I think I would be fine. Then again it might depend on locale, mood, and style/theme/focus of the trip.

On the evangelizing of folks met on tour thing... I think a bit of evangelizing either way (heavy or light) is fine as long as it isn't judgmental or too pushy. I had some nice discussions about weight carried with folks carrying very heavy loads. Some were very happy with their strategy and a few were seeking advice on how they could go lighter. I have noticed that the folks on the heavy side of the argument are more likely to be sensitive about the issue so I typically do not broach the subject unless they bring it up first.

The evangelism is ironic. Whenever I've talked to "loaded tourers" they've been intrigued by my setup, particularly when I pitch the Contrail. I find that the amount you carry isn't nearly as popular a topic of conversation as the gradient of the road or good places to eat.