Gee, I was in SF for a few days (walking in my Jesus 2.0 sandals, 'natch) and didn't realize this thread had continued to grow.
Here's my deal - every sport/activity has generational overlap. You see it everywhere - skiing, surfing, motorsports, etc. Old(er) schools can usually be readily identified by their tendency to stick to what worked during the era(s) they first became involved.
I use surfing as a frequent example, because besides fishing/camping/hiking, it's what I've done for decades. Most guys my age gave up long ago trying to either (a) compete with the kids; or (b) bother trying to keep in shape. The typical result is:
- they ride a bigger board (aka a "crutch")
- when lying on their stomachs, they pivot on their bellies like a rocking horse
- they look sort of foolish (and of course stand out because of their condition & over-sized boards)
- they bark in frustration at all and everyone who is paddling quickly around them, taking waves, and generally making their lives not so fun
My wife refers to these types as walrii ie plural of walrus in pig Latin. To make the picture complete, many times they have red faces and 'walrus' mustaches.
So what's the point? The point is that those who continue to pursue the "he-man" approach to backpacking are generally mocked and dismissed by the younger crowd who live & breath the trail. (We're called JMTers or 'day hikers'.) Within not-too-many-years, we'll all be gone from the scene, along with the memories, and the styles & approaches popular today will become the (new) standard.
How the "he-man" thing got going in the 60-70s is worthy of its own study. The early pioneers like Muir, Brewer, et al certainly weren't shlepping their own sh!t - that's what pack animals were/are for. Ditto for Sierra Club outings - who in their right mind would reduce themselves to a draft animal?
Besides, we evolved over 2m+ years not carrying anything. We (barefoot) walked, strolled & jogged 5-10-20 miles/day sans possessions. Bipeds cannot efficiently carry loads, which is why (obviously) we bred/developed domesticated pack/draft animals. Those who persist can end up crippled if they continue doing so. As for snow conditions, the good ol' IceMan had these for shoes:
http://www.iceman.it/en/clothing-equipmentMy guess is it's tied in somehow to Clyde. Some NY marketing person realized if he could simultaneously promote the ideal & shame the weak, he'd have himself a nice little niche in which to exploit and jerk around an early generation of outdoorsy consumers.
The problem with this approach in the face of science is many-fold:
- down fill power is now 900, soon to approach 1000. 15 oz of 1000FP is 15,000 ci or around 20-25 degrees CLO. Add 5-6 oz of super-strength shell material, and a 20-25 bag will weigh in around 20 oz.
- synthetic materials research is driven by milspec requirements. Climashield, Dyneema, Kevlar (ie Ursack), etc, etc have all made their ways into other products like backpacking years after the troops used them as everyday equipment
- medical research. While the author of 'Born to Run' popularized the notion, it's this Harvard anthropologist who developed the initial research & theories:
http://www.barefootrunning.fas.harvard.edu/The bottom line is clear: lose weight, walk/jog and carry light loads. You of course are free to disagree with this free advice, but you'll be spending more time debating on 'Net forums rather than actually getting out and hiking if you insist on ignoring the evidence.
PS For a demonstration of the generational effect, you can view it in action on these forums. Young(er) people who are actually walking the walk aren't debating the relative merits of this vs that; no, they're out there hiking and sharing their experiences via social media:
http://www.pcta.org/live/If this doesn't make you want to get out there again right after you've gotten home, then you've successfully avoided the bug.
