I keep going back to the backpacking comparisons, because I think they're useful. Another thing to note: while some might strive to hit specific points, like a 5 pound base weight. Plenty of people are happy to get to 9.5 pounds and not ever be concerned with going to 5 pounds. I think the same can apply here. Asana usually puts it best, but the less ir more attitude applies here. It's all personal and relative to your own goals for touring and riding. It's fun for us gear nerds to shoot for certain weights, but if we end up on a trip where we need to add a pound or two to our carefully tailored sub 10 pound list, we aren't going to have any sleepless nights over it. It's just a bit of fun to see what is possible and maximizing the ride itself.

I can see why they would test it out. Otherwise you don't really know how well the exercise worked. That flavor of this madness doesn't appeal to me but I can see the attraction. Lets face it there is some level of compromise in creature comforts in any form of camping and that is part of the attraction.

I mostly agree with that.

Again I agree. Trimming the gear weight comes first and then it starts to make sense to reevaluate you heavier bike choice.

Well said.

+1
Bek does contribute a good content, but the petty jabs do get old. Obviously he can do as he pleases, but I have to say I don't get it or find it particularly appropriate.

Well said.

Off-topic, but that's a Kickbike. I see one every now and then, apparently people use them for commuting.

--J

Yes gear comes first. For most people the greatest weight reductions are there and its less expensive. Once you've had a good go in that direction you might consider the bike, but it's a big investment and I wouldn't recommend that anyone buy a carbon bike or a road bike with the specific intention of touring until they are comfortable with a lightweight gear load on a more regular touring/sport touring bike and have addressed how they will carry their gear on the bike. Also the type of touring has to be considered. A carbon frame with 25mm tires and fairly high gearing is only going to work on good roads, no bush wacking or trail riding.

+1

UL fanatics and gear nerds get a lot of fun out of weighing stuff and shaving grams......but most tourists aren't as bothered about that, they mostly want to travel and have fun. However, getting back to the "evangelism" part of all this, I think that ALL tourists would benefit by applying a few simple ideas and approaches from UL. Obviously 99.9% of people don't want to travel in XUL/SUL style if reduction in weight significantly impacts comfort off the bike, but I'm surprised that so many want to travel at the other end of the spectrum with 100lbs plus of bike and gear. That surely also makes bike touring more uncomfortable than it needs to be. I admire the stuff these guys do, but maybe they would have more fun with lighter loads.

https://www.facebook.com/americabycyc...6807696&type=1

I'd love to see most people who tour reducing their loads by 10lbs or 20lbs rather than competing for how much they can carry or, indeed, competing for how little they can carry.

I want to see pics of people's rigs

From specific mentions in this thread ("This is my touring bike with a 28 pound long-haul touring load") or in general? If the latter, here:
https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread...ur-loaded-rigs

IMG_8242 by mbeganyi, on Flickr

Dated pic of my paved rig


IMG_9474 by mbeganyi, on Flickr

boy you said it, especially after seeing the facebook page of them weighing their bikes. Assuming her bike weighs in the 35-40lb range, lets assume 40, if her total bike with stuff weighs 110 or whatever, thats 70lbs of gear!
I have mentioned numerous times on this forum how when I biked in the Gaspe region way back in I think 1990, I had too much stuff and it just wasnt fun on the steep stuff (and just damn heavy in general). I learned reeeeally quickly that I never wanted to repeat that, and certainly took a good 10lbs off or more for the next trip.
I really cant imagine lugging 70, 80 or more lbs of stuff, not for me in any case and my legs. As you say, I too can admire (or rather marvel) how some people can physically do that, but I think its fair to say that first timers will often make the error of taking too much stuff, from inexperience not really choice, and adjust afterwards (or during a trip).

when I spent some time in Costa Rica this May, I had about 25lbs of stuff I think, rear panniers and handlebar bag only, and even that amount was so much more fun going down curvy mountainous downhills than fully loaded. The bike handled really well and this touches on what a number of you have touched on, the fun factor or riding-how the bike feels when lightly loaded, and I completely agree with all of you on this point.
There is a real joyfullness in riding a bike that isnt truck-like, and while I havent toured as light as you guys have, I really do see the appeal simply from the "tossability" angle--and especially so if on dirt trails or anywhere where you have to be making directional changes a lot and/or using body english to move around stuff etc. (not to mention as Asana said, about carrying ones bike over stiff etc etc)

a final note-one of the numerous reasons I tend to always migrate to the touring section is how the postings and tone here are usually well thought out, informative and especially respectful . I put the last point up there as the strong point of this joint and hope that this doesnt change.

There are some pictures of rigs at the beginning of this thread, but at the risk of repetition here are my bags, gear and ride. They are not as minimalist as some, but I've reached my weight/comfort balance.

complete with at least 3 days of calories.

almost current setup

below is a rig i rode 5 years ago, packing SUL with a silver American Emergency Medical bivy, headnet and down vest for insulation. Course, the bike was kind of heavy, but my gear list was parsed to the extreme on that trip.

I remember catching some grief from one BF member at the time about my SUL methods, despite it being a clear cut example of how to go minimalist. -and very similar to others current assorted extreme minimalist setups of dog tarps and bivy bags.

And to think, if i chose a carbon bike, i would have had the weight allowance for a dutch oven, cutoffs and spare media device!

Can you point to anyone here who uses dog tarps and extremist measures?
Asana pushes the limits, he also races, which is a different nut altogether.

If you don't dig what's going on here, it's cool to disagree, but we get it by now, in your vast experience (which i like reading about for the most part) youve explored this rabbit hole and have concluded its for fools. All good. But come on man. The negative nancy **** is getting stale.

If I lost 30 pounds I could carry the big screen TV. If I lost 30 pounds and rode carbon fixed gear with a bamboo handle bar and no brakes I could bring the generator with me to power everything.

staeph1 has been using a dog tarp and a bivy. I don't have any problem with that- other than it's impractical for most people. And I'm still using UL methods for most of my trips.

sorry to have a scathing sarcasm about some elements of this discussion. I'm trying to interject a little bit of critical humor into the discussion. I blame some of my tone on the nature of the internet, and i apologize. I do like to see people out bike touring, and respect everyone's tactics.

I find some of the commentary about going ultralite by riding a lighter bike amusing.

Think of me as one of those two old coots in the balcony on the muppets show, or Montgomery Wick in Vertical Limit.

I did use the 5'x5' Mountain Laurel Designs dog tarp along with a bivy on my last couple tours. It worked out well to shelter the upper half of the bivy and a bit of gear. It could also be used to cook under, though I have seldom done that. I am not sure I consider anything I did as all that extreme. I am planning to go to a much lighter bivy and a more full sized tarp though and still might use a tent in some conditions. The idea is that the lighter DWR bivy will be lighter and much more breathable hopefully allowing it to work better in hotter buggier conditions, but it will require more protection from hard rain, hence the bigger tarp. The whole package will wind up being lighter and hopefully functional in a wider range of conditions, possibly to the extent that the tent option will be discarded altogether.

BTW: While I do agree that the "negative nancy ****" is getting stale, but at least he does also post useful and interesting stuff. There have been folks here in the past who posted a lot of negative stuff without anything of even slightly redeeming value.

I think of the option of riding a lighter bike as one of the benefits of carrying a lighter gear load. I think folks mostly get the choices backwards. To me it makes sense to decide what gear you need to carry to be happy, safe, and as comfortable as you require. In my opinion only then should you pick a bike and baggage scheme that support those choices. People lose sight of the fact that the bike is only the means to an end and not the goal itself. Then again for some maybe it actually is the goal itself.

I like that

I have made my point about the bike being included in weight, but to ram it home a little:

To discount the bike is like saying an UL backpacker can pack light... into an eight-pound, heavy-duty, galvanised-steel-tube-framed, canvas pack... and still be walking UL.

C'mon, the bike is an essential part of the whole touring package here. Without it, there is no touring, let alone L, UL or SUL touring.

I've found that after the initial large improvements in touring comfort associated with gear weight reduction the comfort returns for further lightening have diminished and I believe that if I go any lighter they will actually reduce my overall comfort. Should I forget the kung fu shoes....I could, but then I wouldn't have a pair of shoes to wear in the showers that I don't mind getting wet or to walk around town that don't make crunching noises on the concrete like my SPD shoes do. I could easily get by without the kung fu shoes, but I would miss them at the end of the day. The same goes for my ridiculously heavy saddlebag. It just works so well for the way I tour. I've tried a compression dry sack and it was great to ride with, but at the end of the day it was a pain to find things and I ended up with a gear explosion and stuff spread all over the picnic table. It's a balancing act full of compromises and weighing of factors like personal preferences, terrain, weather and length of tour. There's no UL touring police. UL advocates might not see using a bivy and a trap, or using a single walled tent, or going rackless as extreme, but most of the touring community will. And this is where I fear that our "fully loaded" fellow tourists will see this approach as Stupid Light and so fail to adopt some of the ideas to lighten their own loads. They shouldn't jump to the extreme of a 18lb bike and 10lbs of gear, but maybe they can look at that 6lb tent and the heavy rain jacket or the multiple sets of clothes and heavy pans and reduce their gear from 70lbs to 50lbs or 40lbs. We want to go sensible light, not scary or stupid light.

https://andrewskurka.com/2012/stupid-...ght-or-better/

The bike has to be right for the route too. bmike's Fargo rocks for his trail riding, my Cervelo would not work so well on those.

You make a great observation. People decide to go touring usually start by choosing a bike and buying their luggage and then set about filling it with stuff. This is the wrong way round. They should get their gear together and then think about what bike and baggage they need. If you start out with a common set up like a LHT with 4 x panniers and a handlebar bag and then fill them up with gear, you are bound to finish with a heavy set up.

Of course maybe without the bike in their minds it would be even worse and they'd have all manner of big heavy stuff.

That is probably true for some at least, but... I will say that I have gotten a lot of nice "thank you" emails from folks who pack pretty heavy and will probably never break into even the light range, but who none the less used some of my ultralight hints from my article to lighten their load. So some of the heavier packers will still use info that we share even if they find much of it way beyond anything they would consider. I figure that even though they may consider going with a sub 10 pound base to be way more extreme that they have any desire to do they at least are armed with the knowledge that it is possible and therefore may make more moderate weight reduction efforts themselves.

BTW: I think that those we actually meet on tour are more likely to be open to adopting some of those ideas if they camp side by side with us for a ways rather than just reading about them on a forum. I have had comments like "I had no idea that could actually work so well" from folks who I camped with when they saw that I really wasn't lacking for anything.

That's good to know......an example of some evangelism, hallelujah

That's where I'd disagree.... a person sleeping under a tarp, making popcan stoves as needed and foregoing extra shoes is riding SUL, even if their bicycle is a Trek520 or a LHT or an ordinary.

Correspondingly, a rider on a Cannondale CAAD 6 is NOT riding SUL if they're carrying a pair of jeans and a kindle, but still under some arbitrary weight limit.

a bicycle is part of the base of the equation of bicycle touring, not a variable. each person has to ride exactly 1 bike.



Some of the more analytical types will want to include discrete values for all this stuff. And, weight weenies by definition look to shave ounces in a competition with themselves or others.

UL touring is a mindset and gear philosophy, not a weight off a scale IMO.

Haven't seen much discussion of this, but backpacking and bike touring are quite different activities. On a bike, all of your equipment and gear, your bike and you are on wheels. Weight you roll along while riding a bike is quite different than weight you carry on your body while hiking. Shaving grams off your gear would seem to pay significantly greater dividends for a backpacker than for a bike rider. While I certainly understanding the benefits of reducing weight for both riding and hiking, the relative benefit of reducing weight must differ to some degree. Is there a formula that says, for example, the reduction in 1 pound for a hiker is equivalent to a reduction in 5 pounds for a bike rider?

I don't have a formula, but I imagine reduction in weight isn't a big issue when you're free wheeling down a hill. Its benefits become apparent when going into corners and climbing mountains. If we are going to take the weight of the bike into consideration we should (unfortunately) also consider the weight of the "engine".