The handles have a good feel to them, with straps that never failed. I depended on them extensively when fording streams and glaciers.

A trick I learned was to shorten the uphill hiking pole when hiking on snow. With the snow baskets, and a shortened upside pole, navigation was simpler. At this point an ice ax wasn't needed. Ski poles are not adjustable so I was pleased to have hiking poles instead.

I believe I paid about $60 for them and bought them from Sierra Trading Post. The pair weigh about 18 ounces, and they have curved handles and cork grips. Snow baskets were included.

Whisperlite Stove

The entire package weighs 18 ounces.

Although heavier than some ice axes I saw on the trail this year, the Grivel Monte Blanc ax has a quality that speaks for itslf. After all, the purpose of an ax is to chop steps in ice, aid in traversing or descending treacherous, icy tread in snow on high mountain passes, and most importantly, saving one from a fall into oblivion by use of self-arrest.

No one I saw (except the weekenders coming up the Whitney Portal Trail) carried crampons. The sole ice and snow safety equipment were axes and / or hiking poles.

As a safety measure, my ax (when not in use and securely strapped to my pack), has a rubber point guard. This fits snugly over the head and weights approx 48 grams, less than 2 ounces.

At 60 grams, or just over 2 ounces, the leash is more valuable than gold. It is firmly attached to the ax by a web strap knotted through a hole in the head of the ax. The strap is 4 feet long, serves as a wrist leash and allows one to have the ax secured should it be forced or slip out of your hands. This can happen easily in a fall, self arrest or bout of hypothermic clumsiness. The leash will hold you to your ax, in a self arrest, or keep your ax from falling over the wall if it falls out of your hands. Note: the leash is only as good as the knot that holds it to your ax. Check the knot frequently. The knot came out of mine once unexpectedly.

Another hole in the shaft point end allows one to cinch the ax securly to the pack. A three point secure system is recommended against loss and shifting.

The ax itself is 400 grams, or 14 ounces. It has a remarkably serious look to it. I carried it confidently and also considered it a defense against wild creatures, whether they were walking on two or four legs. No fear of gear failure here.

It has some scratches on it now, proof that I considered it necessary in the High Sierra, even in a light snow year.

Smart Wool Socks

At Kennedy Meadows, where we all got High Sierra gear (cold weather clothing, bags and ice axes) my smart wools (90 grams, just over 3 ounces) were selected and the liner socks (15 grams) were thrown away .

Wool stays warm, or relatively so, even when wet. I was amazed at the comfort and warmth they provided while climbing Mt. Whitney (14,500 ft.) and crossing the various high snowy passes. Many times these socks were wet morning til evening, but still were comfortable and warm.

Rainmaker wore Smart Wool socks with Nike sandals from Bend, Oregon until Skycomish, Washington; about 500 miles. His pair seemed to have dificutly staying up. I gave him a spare pair and they performed well. Apparently, there are various styles. A pair I use for sleeping, which are extremely cozy, weigh in at 110 grams, nearly 4 ounces. They are expensive, costing $15 at Campmoor.

Bottom line, they make great Christmas presents, work wonderfully in cold, wet weather, and are heaven as foot sleepwear.

Faded Glory Trail Shoes

Rainmaker sent my second pair, this time high top Faded Glory trail shoes to Mojave. A thicker sole and tighter tread pattern solved the previous problems. I added new inserts 600 miles later, and shoe glue on the stitching after 1,000 miles of hiking. They did seem to hold alot of water, making them heavy in the four day rain. Removing the inserts helped them to dry faster.

All told, the high tops served better than the regular cut, giving me 1400 trail miles of service. They each were purchaced at Wal-Mart, costing around $15 a pair. I had very few blisters. The high tops being my favorite, other than the weight they gained when wet.

Bottom line, I would definitly buy another pair.

Nike Day & A Half Pack

Weight of this sharp looking pack is 21 ounces. It has two side pockets with zippers. Also, with one large front zipper pocket, and a mesh pocket with elastic draw cord across the entire front, there is great potential for organization not common in many internal packs.

The pack has an approximate capacity of 2,000 cubic inches. I sewed two cinch straps to the lid which allowed the easy addition of a stuff sack where I now carry my sleeping bag. It doesn't come with a hip belt, but the addition of one made it very trail worthy. The sholder straps have sufficent padding for the loads of 30 pounds or so I commonly carried with the water and 7 days of food needed on the PCT. No seams, straps or zippers showed any signs of strain after using it on the northern most 600 miles of trail to Canada.

This pack was bought in Bend, Oregon at an outlet store. Costing just $24, a true value in gear. I plan to use it on the 2002 AT thru-hike.

Svea 123R Stove

Rating: 3

I purchased a Campmor goose down bag in 1993 and I've used it extensively. It is the 20 degree Mummy Long presently available for $119.97 (order #40066). It is 86 inches long, comes with a draw string hood and is made for people up to 6' 6" tall.

Its weight is 2 pounds, 11 ounces, which is 5 ounces over the advertised weight of 2 pounds, 6 ounces. I called Campmor about this, and they said that I could return it if I didn't like it. They declined to go through their inventory and try to find a bag that was closer to the advertised weight. I got the impression that they get quite a few calls complaining about the real weights versus the advertised weights of their sleeping bags, and that what they told me was their standard response.

It will fit in the 7 x 14 inch stuff sack that is included (also included is a larger storage sack), but you may have to fight with it. In order to ease the pain of packing up, and to conserve the bag's loft, I switched a larger stuff sack. Since I carry my sleeping bag outside my external frame pack, this was not a big deal.

My bag has lost a small part of its loft (which was originally 5 inches) over the years, but I still trust it down to its rated temperature of 20 degrees. However, in weather that cold, I will be in a tent, with a full length pad under me and wearing a balaclava, medium weight wicking long underwear, and fleece gloves and socks.

The quality of the workmanship has been adequate; there have been no zipper or seam failures. The elastic material used for the draw cord seems a bit thin and flimsy, but apparently it is stronger than it feels and looks, since it has held up since 1993.

This model is available only in purple, which I'm not crazy about. Other than the color, and the higher than advertised weight, I have been very satisfied with it.







Spenco Footbeds

Submitted By: Rainmaker

Rating: 5

I began using Spenco footbeds in 1992 during my thru-hike of the AT. About half-way through PA, I seriously considered getting off the trail because of pain in my feet. A few days later, I bought a pair of Spenco Hiker footbeds and put them in my boots.

The results were almost immediate. Combined with some cushiony Thor-Lo hiking socks, I was able to continue my hike, and finished at Mt. Katahdin several months later. There is little doubt in my mind that the Spenco footbeds helped save my feet, as well as my AT hike.

I believe Spenco's are now selling for about $18 per pair; expensive, but worth it for a long distance hiker. My pair (size 12), which has lost a little "tread", weigh 3 ounces.

They are very durable; I usually get between 1,000 and 1,500 miles from a pair.

I'd suggest buying footbeds before you buy your boots or shoes; that way you can take them with you when you try on new boots / shoes. Spenco's are thick, and you may need to purchase a slightly larger size boot if you are going to use them.







Z-Rest Sleeping Pad

Submitted By: Rainmaker

Rating: 5

My chronic lower back problems have forced me to try many different sleeping pads. The Z-Rest has so far been the most comfortable and user-friendly.

This pad utilizes an "egg carton" type design, and folds up without resistance into a square shape. Unlike pads that have to be rolled, the Z-Rest doesn't fight back.

Also, the egg carton design allows dead air to be trapped underneath you. On a cold night, the air trapped in the little squares under you is warmed by your body heat. In addition, the egg carton design seems to offer more comfort and support than a standard "flat" design.

My full length pad is 72 inches long, 20 inches wide and 3/4 inch deep. It is advertised at 16 oz., however, it weighs only 14 oz. When is the last time a piece of backpacking gear weighed LESS than advertised? I believe the 3/4 length models weigh about 9 oz.

The full length model is available for $25 - $30, and the 3/4 length models sell for a little less.

Z-Rests are very durable, but I have found that after several months of continual use, they seem to lose a bit of their loft (like a sleeping bag does).

They are made with closed cell foam, which means that the pads will not admit moisture. For instance, even if the pad is submerged in water, it can be dried with an article of clothing or a towel and used immediately (water remains on the outside of the pad, it does not penetrate it). The Z-Rest will also remain flexible at sub-zero temperatures.







Eureka Gossamer Solo Tent

Submitted By: Rainmaker

Rating: 4

I purchased my Eureka Gossamer tent several years ago, in 1991 to be exact, to use on my 1992 thru-hike of the Appalachian Trail. However, I found another tent I liked better, a North Face Tadpole, and took it instead. I chose the heavier Tadpole over the Gossamer because I can sit up in it, and there is room inside for my external frame pack.

As a result, my Gossamer was still "new" when I dusted it off in 1999 and decided to use it on my 1,000 mile section hike of the Pacific Crest Trail. Although my Tadpole is still usable, I chose the Gossamer for its lighter weight (2 pounds, 14 oz.).

When I began my hike of the PCT, I didn't care too much for the Gossamer, mainly because it is not free standing, my full-size external frame pack doesn't fit inside (though a smaller internal frame pack could probably be rolled up and stored inside), and I can't sit up inside it. However, by the time I reached Sonora Pass 3 months later, I liked it a lot.

The tent is 2' 2" high, 2' 8" wide, and 8 feet long. It has a 2-hoop design, and as I mentioned, it is not free standing. Although I am 6' 2", I had plenty of head and foot room. There is also ample space inside to store gear.

The Gossamer is very wind resistant. If the tent is pitched correctly (with the back end facing into the wind), it should stand up to winds in excess of 40 mph.(mine did, anyway) .

The tent has a mesh top, a rear mesh vent and a storm door over a mesh door. The storm door and mesh door have separate zippers. The rain fly is permanently attached to the tent, and can be rolled up when it is not needed.

In order to get a few inches of space between the tent and the rain fly, it is necessary to push forward on the rear hoop while pulling back on the rear guy line. There is nothing in the instructions about this; I learned it only after spending a few damp nights. If the tent is pitched according to the instructions, the rain fly will be lying slack and loose on top of the tent.

The easiest way to pitch the tent is to insert the 2 hoops into their sleeves, stake out the back of the tent, and then pull the tent taut to stake out the front. It should then "pop up" into position.

Like most Eureka tents I've owned, the Gossamer leaked a bit around the corners, although I feel that its weather resistance was adequate. However, when seam sealing, I'd recommend using extra sealant in the corners.

I had no problems with the tent, except for a zipper failure shortly before I got off the trail. This was partly my fault. The zippers make a 90 degree turn, and pitching the tent too tightly puts stress on them. Anyway, I forced the mesh door zipper around the elbow of the 90 degree turn once too often and it separated. I feel that if I hadn't pitched the tent so tightly (and put stress on the zippers), this would not have happened.

The Gossamer is presently available from Campmor for $90. The Solitare is basically the same tent, but comes with a fiberglass frame. I'd strongly recommend spending the extra money, and getting the aluminum frame. I believe the Gossamer is the least expensive of the high quality, full feature, double wall, solo tents presently on the market.

Additional specs and info can be found at the Eureka website:

http://www.johnsonoutdoors.com/camping/eureka/eureka.html







G4 Pack From GVP Gear

Submitted By: David Spellman

Rating: 4

I originally ordered one of the production G4 packs, but missed out on the original production run, so I got a "semi-custom" pack done.

Essentially, this is the same pack, but built by one of the friendly seamstresses at GVP Gear, rather than by the people who are doing production. There are some additional options available, but nothing out of the ordinary. My pack was made out of 2.2 urethane-coated nylon as a base material, rather than that 1.3 silnylon of the original plans. I didn't request this, but it looks like this will be the material that goes into the second production run of packs. There's also been a slight change in the material that goes into the "black" portion of the packs as well. The new production run will feature some other changes, including a different shoulder strap mount point, which will make the pack work a bit better for shorter torso people, and will likely make it ride a bit higher.

My pack arrived in one of those Postal Express Mail "document boxes", which are 9x12" and sized about right for 1.5" of document pages. That was amazing by itself. My last Gregory Shasta backpack came in a monster box that the UPS guy had to wrestle with to bring in the door. Out of the box, the pack weighed in at 13 ounces, including the bits of closed cell foam that Glen encloses for those who don't want to put their socks or gloves into the velcroed hip belt and shoulder strap pockets for padding.

I immediately set about tossing some of my gear into the bag to see how it was going to work. First in was my homemade sleeping "quilt" in one of those GoLite silnylon stow sacks with the waterproof twist collar necks. The pack is wider at the bottom to accommodate a sleeping bag in this space. The pack is pretty much shapeless until packed, so I rolled my 3/4 Ridgerest pad and stuffed it into the pack above the sleeping bag to give it a little form, thinking that I'd pull it out of there once the thing was packed. Eventually, I decided to leave it in there, since it protects the fabric from being punctured by any sharp objects I toss into the bag's interior (though that should never happen anyway, right?).

Once I'd dumped enough clothing and other stuff into the bag so that it looked like a pretty representative load, I put the six-panel Z-Rest into the pockets on the back of the pack (these form the "frame" of the pack) and put it on. It took a couple of minutes to get used to it -- I really expected the fat hip belt and shoulder pads of the Gregory, and there was none of that here. But what was really missing was the weight. The pockets will also accept an 8-panel Z-rest, and you can use this as your sole sleeping pad as well. The nice thing about packing up this way in the morning is that you can sit on your Z-Rest while you're packing everything else and then just stuff it onto the pack at the end. For starters, it's a cool place to carry your Z-Rest.

The first serious hike that I took it on was a 5-day with three other people into the Klamath Wilderness. I ended up carrying some rather heavy community gear, and started off with a packweight of about 35 pounds; within the capacity of the pack, but not what it was designed for. Nonetheless, I was about 15 pounds lighter than the rest of the crew and it made a serious difference. On the way back, my pack was well under 30 pounds and I flew off the hill. Since then, I've gotten the total pack weight for a trip like that to well under 30 pounds, including food and water (about two quarts). Now we're talking.

The net pockets are made of a fairly lightweight, somewhat stretchy net, and I didn't have high hopes for them, since where we were going had quite a few blowdowns and the trails were a little out of shape. Those net pockets are so darned useful, I found myself taking full advantage of them. One of the side pockets got the Platypus with the hydration tube. The other got the bag with the "essentials" and the bug juice, etc. And the big pocket on the front of the pack got ground clothes, tent bits, etc. And, of course, lunch. I'd taken along a big garbage bag for a pack cover (if needed...and it wasn't), but most of the stuff on the outside was pretty waterproof anyway.

Inside the pack, the quilt was on the bottom in a waterproof bag, and my clothes bag was another of those GoLite twist-top silnyon bags that fit perfectly in the tunnel produced by the RidgeRest. On top of that went the sack with the purifier, the first-aid kit, my rain gear, a sack with gloves, mittens, hat and neck warmer, a sack with stove and cookware and a foodsack.

The pack has a pretty high "collar" section (there's no top pocket such as most bags have these days), and the top can be closed two ways. The drawstring can simply be yanked down through a loop at the bottom of the pack, or the top can be rolled and velcroed down to the sides of the pack, much like a kayaking dry bag. If you seal the seams on the pack, this can result in a very water resistant, if not completely waterproof pack.

With an under 30-pound load, the pack is well within its design parameters, and it's very comfortable. The Z-Rest forming the back panel is no worse a sweat-producer than some of the "breathable" net panels on some well-known pack designs.

In camp, a lightweight hiker ends up using virtually everything in his bag (my clothing bag becomes my pillow at night), so the pack itself ends up being a small shapeless wad of fabric and webbing. In this case, the rolled up pack had no problem coming into the tent at night. The rest of the packs, with their hard plastic frames and bulky hip and shoulder pads, lived outside, either in a vestibule or on the ground outside the tent.

With a lightweight pack like this, durability is, of course, an issue. It's not designed for hauling up the side of a mountain on the end of a rope, scraping along the rocks on the way. Nor is it a great choice for doing a lot of bushwhacking. It's really designed for trail hiking with a lightweight load, and within those parameters, it works very well. Surprisingly, after quite a few miles, the net pockets have yet to show any holes, though I haven't babied them. After the first trip, I sent the pack back to have some additional web loops added, and the seamstress, who was delighted to see a pack after a trip, took it upon herself to reinforce a couple of areas with some additional stitchery (though nothing had come loose or torn away). These were places that she now understood were stress points, and I think she's made some recommendations to Glen about these areas that will help future production packs. Since then, and several miles down the road, I washed the pack (tossed it into a *front* loading washer and dryer on "gentle" and low temp with some tech wash) and inspected it carefully. I found just one area on the hip belt attachment where there are a couple of stitches coming loose, and I'm sure this is because I was bouncing down some rocks with just one shoulder strap (and the hipbelt) on and a heavier-than-normal load inside. I don't stand or sit on this pack, and it receives careful treatment, but that care level goes for a lot of the lighter-weight gear. Under those conditions, it flourishes.

Would I buy another? You betcha. Matter of fact, another is on its way for me, and a third one is on the way for one of my hiking partners. I'm not replacing the old one -- just putting this second one on file in my gear closet, partly because I might want to teach a friend how to hike lightweight, and partly because I don't want to be without one if something should happen to this one on the trail.

In the end, the tradeoff of lightweight for extra care is just fine with me. I realize that I can get a high-abrasion version of this (for about $550) if I go to one of the Kelty Spectra white packs, but that's a lot of money for pack qualities I just don't need at this point. For what it is, and what it's designed for, the GVP G4 is a helluva pack.

Additional information and specifics concerning this pack can be found at

http://www.gvpgear.com

Glen at GVP Gear charges $70 (plus $5 shipping) for the production pack. There's always a waiting list. You can also get a semi-custom pack done more quickly for about $140 plus $5 shipping. Patterns and instructions available for $10 so that you can build your own.

Glen is making improvements on the next bunch of production packs, and I have one of those on order, so I'll be able to do an addendum later on about what's changed. If you order the semi-custom pack, you can get the pack with a heavier-duty mesh (adds a little weight) or solid fabric side or front pockets. You also have more choices of colors, etc. and can choose between a couple of versions of top closure.







Avocet Altimeter - Barometer Watch

Submitted By: Rainmaker

Rating: 4

I have owned one of the above watches for about 3 years. It served me well on the PCT in 1999 and 2000.

The easiest function to use is the altimeter, and it is very accurate. In fact, I am convinced it is far more accurate than the instruments used to measure altitude when areas were first mapped many years ago. This function, which will measure altitude to 40,000 ft., is very useful while using a map and compass to find your way. It is also very convenient when you have to make a sizable ascent or descent. You can keep up with your progress and determine at any given time how close you are to reaching your objective. However, the altimeter must be reset several times per day at known elevations to be accurate, since changes in barometric pressure will cause inaccurate readings.

The barometer is a bit trickier to use, but unless you take a weather alert radio, it is the only weather forecasting instrument you are likely to have on the trail. Used correctly, the Avocet will accurately monitor changes in barometric pressure and alert you of approaching storms. The barometer monitors pressure at a known altitude. The watch will determine altitude if you know the correct barometric pressure, or it will measure barometric pressure if you know the correct altitude.

When you cannot give the watch either figure, there is no way it can measure altitude or barometric pressurely accurately. Therefore, it is essential that you have maps or other data (like the Data Book) which provides altitude at known locations. In other words, if you are on the PCT and reach Forester Pass, you can check the elevation in the data book and then set the altimeter to 13,200 ft. The watch will then show the correct barometric pressure.

The watch will also track barometric trend, if you set it at a known elevation and remain there (since the altitude won't be changing), such as in camp. For example, if you are camping at 6,500 ft., set the altimeter and barometer to 6,500 ft. when you arrive, the next morning it will tell you how much the barometric pressure changed overnight.

However, it will not accurately measure barometric trend (and neither will similar watches) if you are on the move and don't know the elevation, since it would not have a "benchmark" of either known elevation or barometric pressure to work with.

This probably all sounds more complicated than it actually is. Once you've worked with the watch for a week or so, it will make more sense.

The Avocet also has a thermometer, stop-watch and a date display, although it has neither a day of the week display or a light. To get an accurate reading for the temperature, the watch must be removed from the wrist. I believe the light was purposely left off to preserve battery life, which is about 2 years. When the battery dies, the folks at Avocet strongly recommend sending the watch to them for a new battery and a "tune-up". They charge about $20 for this service.

It also has the following functions, which are probably of interest only to "techies": Daily vertical feet / current ascent rate, total vertical feet / maximum ascent rate, ascent timer/ average ascent rate, split / lap timer and split / lap group selection and recall. It also has a ski display, which will show descent or ascent rates in feet per minute, and will count the number of runs skied.

My watch is now 3 years old, and I've subjected it to some rough use. I've had no problems with it, except that the band broke. The band is so wide that I will probably have to return it to the factory to have another installed. I've had no luck at Wal-Mart.

The model I have, the Vertech, was recently replaced by the Alpin. The Alpin appears to be mostly the same watch, and retails for $160.

The Avocet website is located at http://www.avocet.com/ . In addition to providing information and photos, this site also has a printable instruction manual for the watch.







Clark Jungle Hammock

Rating: 4

Submitted By Viking

A Night To Remember - Or Not?

Finding a couple of honorable trees with proper separation along the Toccoa River in North Georgia was easy enough. Every few feet along the banks a multitude of possibilities presented themselves.

Some folks camping nearby on the level mud of an over-used tent site looked inquisitively my way as I walked several feet up a steep embankment to pitch camp. They watched for the entire four (3-4) minutes that it took to set up the Clark Jungle Hammock Ultra-Light Version. (Glad I practiced at home first) Following my usual fare of noodles and sauce and a short journal entry, I found the light waning behind the tree line. Although not particularly tired, I was yawned to bed, or should I say, to hammock for the night.

Having walked into this area via the Benton McKaye Trail and the 260-foot suspension bridge that carries the trail across the Toccoa River, I now found myself surrounded by my favorite environment, the sounds of forest and stream. Birds chirping and jumping up and down on the guy lines provided the alarm clock, thus I awoke in the morning at 10 AM! Thirteen hours of sound sleep! WOW, I don't recall EVER sleeping that long or that well on any hike. If that doesn't impress a weary trekker then what would? My back wasn't sore or tender from lumps in the earth. My neck wasn't "cricked" for lack of a pillow. I didn't even need one for a change.

After all two (2) minutes of breaking camp, it took about an hour to share the info that those other hikers eagerly requested about the hammock and lightweight backpacking.

Wood's Hole�

The hike had started with rain, thunder, lightning and the sight of dozens of day hikers running for their lives, jumping into minivans, and pressing their noses against the windshields to see if nature would follow them into their sanctuary. I guess they forgot the umbrella?

And so, from the Byron Reece Park , I ambled along Byron Reece Trail to cross the AT and join the Freeman Trail. This route would circumnavigate Blood Mountain, below the summit and most of the dangers found there which befall the careless hiker(or windshield tourist) in really foul weather. Especially, Thor's thunderbolts. Rejoining the AT south of Blood you find the access trail to the new Wood's Hole Shelter. It's a � mile walk off the AT, so it should offer some solitude and respite from nature's bigtop.

Undoubtedly, the mice over in the shelter watched with interest when they discovered me setting up in a heavy downpour. Not much rain can bother you if you are already soaked to the bone. Setting up the hammock in a record 2 minutes, I was acutely aware of a distinct advantage over my tents. At no time are the innards of the hammock exposed to the elements if it was rolled up correctly. Therefore, the bedroom is bone dry when slumber time comes. This condition of course was altered later. During the night, a small amount of wet stuff seeped through along the tarp's ridge seam. The no-see-um netting averted the occasional drip from entering the bedroom. The ridgeline on the tarp is pretty tight and I didn't feel the need to seal it when first out of the box. In a normal rain, this probably would be acceptable, but tonight was hardly normal. The rain gods were using ball peen hammers to drive home their point for over six hours.

Solution: About 1/8 ounce of SilNet cured the seepage, which was proven on the next aquatic hike.

Rain, Rain Go Away�.Aahh, who cares?

On Springer Mountain, there was only a whispering wind caressing the hammock as I retired near the Appalachian Trail's Springer Mtn. Shelter. Three good days of trail maintenance and three good nights of sleep in the Clark Hammock had proceeded this particular evening. But a full night of rest did not ensue. The caressing breeze had now become a cold torrent of air as the temperature had plummeted to 45 degrees during the night's horrendous rainstorm. Not a drop of aqua entered my domain, but a different problem had reared its ugly head.

That cold wind was exacting its toll on my backbone. After two hours of tossing and turning, I realized that my back had compressed my sleeping bag against the bottom of the hammock leaving no insulation from the outside world of frigidity.

Solution: The Z-Rest pad went under the bag. Voila! I'm warm again. Any closed foam pad would have the same results. My pad is modified to 17" x 41" which weighs 7.6 ounces and is all I use under my bag when on the ground, so it was twice what I needed for this application. Aahh�sweet slumbering!

Comments:

Out of the box, the weight of the hammock as shipped was as advertised at 2 pounds 7.6 ounces.

I took the liberty to make some modifications based on personal preference:

1. The drip-ring devices weighed in at 1 ounce. I replaced them with four 5-inch cotton strings at 4-inch intervals on each end of the main line starting at 1 inch from the hammock material and under the tarp protection. Each string was passed through/between the braids of the main line; tied over the line with a square knot; then tied under the line with a square knot. These served well to wick water off the line and no water reached the hammock material under the tarp. The total weight of all eight strings is 1/16th oz. The original nylon drip-rings were beginning to chafe the line after 4 days of use and were becoming contorted. I received the new aluminum replacements later, but haven't tried them yet. Plan to do so on the next trip.

2. In lieu of the guy lines supplied with the hammock that weighed 2 ounces, I used a product called TripTease LightLine that weighed only 1/2 oz. This product is interwoven with 3M and is highly visible from a flashlight in the dark and therefore you won't trip over it. Different knots can be tied and untied easier, wet or dry. Added a couple of extra lengths to tie off the tarp's bungee cord.

3. Four Easton tent pegs at 1.8 ounces total weight are carried along to secure guys where brush or trees are not available.

Synopsis:

Weight - a major consideration for a minimalist hiker, this version of the Clark is very much in contention. My philosophy is that of K.I.S.S. combined with lightweight gear, however one must consider where to draw a line in the sand. The Clark satisfies the simplicity of camping yet still provides a very light weight shelter. With the modifications, the additions, and a little trail detritus, the total weight is now a very respectable 2 pounds 9 ounces.

Size - packs down to a small stuff sack that will fit in the rear pocket of my Breeze backpack. That's where a hammock or tent or tarp should be kept. When it is wet, it will drip and bake dry in the sun.

Comfort - the first night spent was indeed a satisfying surprise. An addendum to previous comments will suffice: The Royal Suite would be a good name for this supremely comfortable forest-bound bedroom.

Stability - The main reason for not having used a hammock in the past was quickly dispatched the very first time I crawled into the Clark. A stable platform for sitting upon while reading, cooking, or removing hiking shoes, I never felt like it would dump me on my head in the dirt. It became such a natural thing to go over and sit on the edge instead of looking for a wet log or rock.

Protection - With the proper adjustment on the tarp, anything short or a typhoon will stay outdoors. It can be pitched flat like a wing above to keep debris down and views superb. Or angle the corners down by degrees necessary to shed the rain and still have ample view and ventilation. If the horizontal rainsquall comes knocking, wrap the tarp down and around the hammock for a roomy bivy style cocoon. Of course when the forecast is good, the tarp can be flipped to one side or removed completely for celestial delights.

The no-see-um netting is the see-thru wall that allows you to study bugs from the safety of your bed. Zippered netting on both sides of the hammock allows quick and easy exit and entrance, even in the dark. As it is my practice of checking the lilies in the night air, I had reasonable practice with this feature.

Quality - A sore point with me on so many pieces of gear on the market today, the Clark has obviously been well thought out. Each individual part of the hammock is constructed of the best material for its purpose and joined to the whole with high quality stitching and craftsmanship.

Comparison - I once tried a hammock in a famous equipment store. That one had a door/slit in the bottom. Unique? Maybe. Awkward? Definitely. Advantage? None. I found it difficult to enter and exit, especially while trying to remove or don the shoes, day or night. You can't sit on the edge and do anything. To get out, the salesman said just push your heal against the slit and the door opens. What happens during a restless night when my foot wanders to the forbidden portal? Am I summarily dumped into…? The entire product is one piece, disallowing any flexibility in pitching. 'Nuf said.

Finale - The Clark Jungle Hammock UltraLight Version is a pleasure to carry because this you know:

The end of the march beckons the weary sojourner to a quick, easy to pitch, bug-free, dry, and comfortable abode.

To see this article at the Clark website, click here .

Viking







New Balance 803 All Terrain Shoes

--Submitted By AT Viking98

Rating: 5

This well made synthetic shoe weighs in at 28 ounces a pair. I have hiked in the 802 model and found both to be of comparable material and workmanship.

To Compare:

The 803s are the same weight as the 802s, however the 803s have improved toe kick bumper pads which are more ample for rock hopping. Also, the 803s have the added feature of pull/assist loops located at the heel and on the tongue. I even like the laces better on the 803s since they have more purchase in tying.

The tread of these two models is very similar and probably meant more to differentiate the shoes rather than improve traction.

Cost: $79

Comment:

These shoes are ideal for an ultra light piece of gear. They provide excellent support and I believe they will last about a thousand miles or so, but the essence is the lightness.

They are SOOOooooooo comfortable..........








Mountain Hardwear Solitude Tent

--Submitted by Opie

RATING: 4+

3 Season, Non-freestanding

Floor Dimensions: 38" x 105"

Peak Height: 35.5"

Average Pack Weight: 3 lb. 10 oz. (although I feel this value may be inaccurate).

I purchased this tent from the Nanathala Outdoor Center in October 99 after seeing it there in March during a hiking trip. I had tried to buy it during the summer, but they could never keep it in stock. After my 10% discount, I think it fianlly cost me $178.00.

I bought this tent after I was flooded out of my North Face tent the previous weekend. I was doing a 10 day trail maintenace trip in the Smokies and was concerned that the my old tent just wouldn't work. I received the tent one day before leaving which gave me the oppurtunity to check out the instructions and cut out a ground cloth (I ordered the footprint, which cost $25.00, and it was waiting when I got off trail).

It has a nylon bathtub floor, i.e. the floor seams are off ground, and a D-shaped door as well as a polyester ripstop rainfly. I really like this as it's waterproof and does not stretch over time. The rainfly also has a clear window and 5 external guy points.

The tent itself sets up pretty quickly (no more than 5 minutes) with 2 poles and 5 stakes. I would recommend switching out the factory stakes (they are weird shaped and are a pain to stick in the ground) and replacing them with Easton aluminum ones. I did not have time to seam seal the seams before the trip. The fly has taped seams (which I will not bother to seal).

During the maintenace trip I had all types of weather to test the tent. We had a torrential downpoor one night that lasted nearly 10 hours with no leakage whatsoever (I checked at various times throughout the night). There were also winds up to 35 knots and temps were down in the single digits for 2 nights. I really wished it had snowed so I could have tested that also. There was never a ventilation problem and I was warm as a bug in a rug.

For those not used to sleeping in a one-person tent, you may find yourself cramped. I liked the smallness of the tent which forced me to bring in only what I needed. I had no problem reading or writing in my journal, either. Changing clothes in it is a little difficult, but is very doable.

I would highly recommend this tent. I ranked this as a 4+ and not a 5 mainly because I thought they could have made the vestibule a little larger. Also, I didn't like the tent stakes. Other than that it's fantastic.

Opie








Peak 1 Aries Tent

--Submitted by Brawny03

RATING: 2* (See Last Paragraph)

Stats:

Two Person, Free Standing

Floor Space = 88 x 56 inches

Center Height = 42 inches

Pack Weight = 5 pounds, 2 ounces

I saw this tent as a floor model in a sporting goods store at a mall. It was on sale, and the salesperson also gave me a discount, so I walked away with this two person tent for $89.00. Campmor sells it for $99.99.

The set up on this free standing dome tent is remarkably easy. The aluminum poles are tightly corded so they almost link themselves together with a simple shake of the wrist. The body clips on, so no sleeves need to be threaded. This is particularly nice during a rain storm. It has a substantial fly, which was one of the features which first caught my eye. The fly extends over the door and back window (on the opposite side) about a foot. It goes nearly to the ground on the remaining two ends, where it clips. There are mesh vents at the top. I could feel the quality in the components when I bought it.

I used it as a one person tent and was in the lap of luxury. However, when it is used as a two person tent, a faulty design feature becomes apparent; someone sleeps on the door side, and the "inside " person is reduced to climbing over them. They have the advantage of a large window on their side. A compensation?

In addition, during a heavy, wind-driven rain (if you have the misfortune of the door facing the wind) the vestibule becomes sadly inadequate. Also, the D - shaped door, when unzipped, hangs over the inside of the tent and steadily drips onto gear.

There are many similar designs on the market, and I feel they all should be considered closely before buying one. They are roomy enough, and fairly light. The price is good, and the tent stays dry in reasonable rain conditions. However, as a two person tent, I regret having to rate it a 2, mostly because of the scanty vestibule and the position of the door. As a one person tent,weight aside, I would give it a 4.








PHOTON LIGHT

--Submitted By Bookworm

RATING: 4

My first exposure to the Photon light occurred after dark seated around a campfire. Mesmerized by the campfire, I was suddenly aware that blue and red strobe lights were approaching from the wilderness. Having assured myself that aliens hadn’t landed, I discovered Viking and his latest camping discovery.

Smokestack and I were so impressed by the Photon we ordered several as Christmas gifts and selected the red and yellow varieties for ourselves. Anyone interested in the latest developments related to the Photon can go to their web page at http://www.photonlight.com/ .

Essentially the Photon light �hides under a quarter and is the same weight, a mere 5 1/2 grams�. It will attach to a lanyard or key ring. The light bulb is built in and reported to be unbreakable and comes with a manufacturer's lifetime guarantee. It is powered by a watch battery and depending on the color can last for 120 or more hours of continuous on. There are 8 colors each with their own advantages and disadvantages. It would seem redundant to go over each color when the web page does such a fine job. The Photon II has a constant on switch built in which is easily turned on and off with a flick of the fingernail. It can be squeezed for a burst of light as well.

We chose the red because it doesn�t interfere with your night vision and we can look at astronomy pages when using our telescope. It also would be useful as an emergency beacon in the wilderness. I personally don�t use the red very often but know that in an emergency I will be grateful to have it.

Smoke and I are very pleased with the yellow bulb Photon. It easily illuminates the interior of the tent brightly enough to find items in the pack, read a map or book, locate the zipper for the nightly trip, etc. I haven’t tried cooking after dark using it but have no doubt that it would work fine. Since it weighs nothing, I leave it on a lanyard around my neck while I am sleeping. No more fishing around the tent trying to find where the Maglite rolled. It would be difficult to use to hike after dark. Although they can be seen for miles in the woods, it doesn�t illuminate the trail well. The color yellow is similar to when your normal flashlight is losing energy and running on low. The advantage is that it would run on low for 120 hours. In a pinch, you could scan the terrain and find your way home safely with it. On long distance hikes where weight is a concern, I would have no problem relying on my two Photon�s for light.

They are pricey at about $20 with "tax, tag and title" but well worth the money. I don�t hesitate to recommend them to anyone concerned with weight and in need of a light source for long distance hikes.







NORTH FACE CAMP SERIES POLARGUARD 3-D SLEEPING BAG

"Tigger" Model - Dimensions: 71" x 26" x 18"

- - Submitted By Brawny03

RATING: 4

This bag is sold as a "kids" bag, and the description states that it fits people up to 5 ft., 1 inch. They mean what they say. I am an adult and just three-fourths inch taller than that, and it is a bit snug. The bag weighs only two pounds, which is exactly what they promised. I felt the weight reduction for less roominess was a good trade off. It came with a very nice stuff bag.

The Tigger is rated for 20 degrees. I suppose that is accurate. I sleep cold, and needed additional clothes to feel warm on a cold, windy night of about 30 degrees. I was surprised to find that this mummy bag does not have a drawstring in the hood. It is instead shaped to form the hood, with a velcro closure at the top of the zipper.

I was happy with the workmanship. I paid only $79.00 through Campmor. Its a nice deep blue, and has no indications that it was cut for "kids". I would give this bag a rating of 4 on the Rainmaker Scale.







NEW BALANCE "800" SERIES TRAIL RUNNING SHOES

--Submitted By Rainmaker

RATING: 4

I used a pair of New Balance 801's in the summer of 1999 to hike just over a thousand miles on the Pacific Crest Trail, from the Mexican border to Sonora Pass. I found these shoes to be very comfortable, durable and lightweight. The Vibram-type lug sole provided very good traction. In addition, they provided good ventiliation and dried very quickly. I had no problems with them at all.

My pair of size 13's weighs 1 pound, 15 ounces. They are "low-cut"; basically they are jogging shoes with lug soles. Being without the ankle support of a standard pair of hiking boots felt a little strange at first (my ankles felt kind of naked and vulnerable), however, the feeling of reduced weight on my feet quickly made up for it. I had no problems with my ankles. When I hiked the AT in 1992, I had to switch to jogging shoes for about 700 miles because of tendonitis. Since that time, I have often wondered why I ever went back to regular hiking boots for 3 - season hiking.

My 801's now have over 1,200 miles of rough backpacking on them, and I'm still wearing them. However, they are about done. The fabric near the top of the shoe is beginning to separate, and the soles are also starting to separate from the fabric portion of the shoe.

These shoes run a bit small, especially in the toe box area. Like any other type of footwear, they are best purchased at a store, where they can be worn before purchasing. If they are purchased on-line or from a catalog, I'd suggest ordering them a half size or full size larger than your normal size.

The 801's have come and gone, and apparently so have the 802's. I recently saw a pair of 803's. It appeared to be the same shoe, but had the appearance of being beefed up a bit. The price was about the same as the 801's, but I expect the new ones may be an ounce or two heavier than their predecessors.

My 801's were purchased from LL Bean for $85 in 1999. At the time, Campmor had them for $79.99, but I haven't seen them in their recent catalogs. However, the New Balance 800 series Trail Runners are very popular, and should be relatively easy to find on-line, and also at mall type athletic shoe stores such as Athlete's Foot.







Nomad Tent (Original Design)

--Submitted By Mrs Gorp

RATING: 5

The following is a review of the first Nomad tent I purchased in November of 1998. I am now the proud owner of a 2000 Nomad Lite model. I haven't used the new model yet this season but will in May when I hike the ALT. From what I can see, the tent has gotten a wee bit heavier due to improvements in design. Further information about the full line of Nomad tents can be found at www.wanderlustgear.com

I would give the original Nomad tent a "5" rating on the "Rainmaker" scale.

The original single wall Nomad by Wanderlust Gear is a perfect soloist tent. The simplicity of the single unit design makes set up quick and easy. I use three titanium stakes and my Leki poles. The tent is shaped like an odd diamond. I no longer use a Typar(R) ground cloth.

To set it up, simply insert one stake in each of the head and foot loops, then insert the Leki poles inside the tent for center support and height (handles down and tips in the plastic roofline elbow), insert the foot spreader bar, with the third stake rough out the vestibule awing and insert the awing poles (2), tweak the tent for tautness and I'm done. In less than 5 minutes the tent can be set up and ready for an evening of peaceful slumber.

The tent is spacious enough for me and all of my gear. In addition, I can sit up in the tent. It's well ventilated. The mesh door keeps out night insects. Ingeniously the door opening is sealed by the use of Velcro, no zipper teeth to pull apart. I really like the vestibule for an area to store my muddy boots. It's generous enough of an area to cook in, but I don't like cooking and sleeping in the same place so I've never used the vestibule area to cook under. You can clip the vestibule up and out of the way for those perfect star filled nights. It weighs 1 lb 10oz. This tent has seen downpours along the Long Trail in Vermont, the Presidentials of NH, and along the AT in Virginia. I was very pleased with the tent's performance in high wind driven rain. Most importantly I remained dry. The silnylon is very slippery material and using a Z-Rest cuts down on the amount of slipping and sliding inside the tent.

Here are some specs:

Length: 10 feet

Width: 5 feet

Height: 3 feet 4 inches

Weight: 1 lb 10 oz. (This is the Original Nomad, the new ones are pushing 2 lbs.)

Floor space: 28 sq. feet inside, 8 sq. feet under vestibule

Materials used: waterproof 30 denier siliconized ripstop nylon.

All edges were hot-knife cut.

Pack size in stuff sack included is 18 x 5 inches.

3 Season tent, I've never used this in snowy conditions.

Cost in 1998: $225

Other tents owned: Stephenson Warmlite, Bibler I-Tent, Kelty Vortex, and a Kelty 6 person Dome(party tent). I also own an OR Advanced Bivy Sack.







ESBIT STOVE

--Submitted By Rainmaker

RATING: 4

I'm the guy who said, "Backpacking stoves are actually patient, calculating psychopaths, silently plotting the painful demise of their owners". To me, a stove is a "necessary evil"; kind of like a lawnmower or toilet plunger. You'll never love 'em, but you can't get by without 'em. I've owned many stoves. Several have crashed and burned; a few have tried to take me with them, kind of like little tin and plastic kamikazis.

Anyway, in 1998 I bought a little Esbit stove from Campmor for $10. The thing weighs only 4 ounces, has no pumps, valves, or generators and no mechanical parts (other than the sides that fold up, when not in use). When folded up for carrying, the stove is the shape of a pack of cigarets, and about half again as large as a pack of cigarets. It folds out into a "U" shape (with a flat bottom). The fuel tablet sits inside the "U", and the pot sits on top of it.

I used the Esbit everyday on the Pacific Crest Trail for 3 months while hiking just over a thousand miles in 1999. It worked like a charm. Just light the fuel tablet, place it in the stove under your dinner pot and wait 10 minutes. Stir your dinner once or twice during the burn time, and presto, you have a meal.

I "cooked" mainly ramen, cous-cous and instant rice, and augmented the mix with Knorr-type soup mixes and various spices. Actually, I soaked all this stuff for 15 minutes before cooking to rehydrate it. Then, I used the Esbit to heat up the concoction to make it taste better. I didn't think that I was "cooking" as much as "heating".

I opted for the less expensive hexamine tablets. They come in boxes of 24, and burn about 9 minutes each. They work well, but they are hard to find. The regular Esbit tablets cost about $6 for 12, and the burn time for each is about 13 minutes. Frankly, when the fuel starts costing more than the food, I start looking around for a good Plan B. Hence, the hexamine tablets.

To give myself the option of burning alcohol in the Esbit, I carried a metal mayonaisse jar lid in the stove. A lid full of alcohol will burn about 15 minutes.

I used a foil windscreen around the stove, and this seemed to greatly improve its performance. When conditions became so windy that I had difficulty lighting the stove, I took it inside my tent long enough to light the fuel tablet, then brought it back outside.

The stove, a small pot, a foil lid, the windscreen, 2 Bic-type lighters, an aluminum pot lifter and a week's worth of fuel weigh just over a pound. Everything fits nicely inside a quart size zip-loc bag (except for the pot). I'll rate it a 4.

(Please note: We now have hexamine tablets for sale. For further information, click here , then look for "Hexamine Tablets" in the list of products.)







The Breeze Backpack

--Submitted By AT Viking_98

RATING: 5

Designed by Ray Jardine, and made by GoLite this backpack is a long overdue improvement for the trekking scene. The website for http://www.golite.com/ contains almost all information you need, but herein I will provide a touch of highlight and addendum for your consideration.

Details:

The Breeze comes in two sizes, "Large" (for folks 5'9" and over like me), and "Medium" for folks who are under 5'9". The large size weighs in at a whopping 12.5 ounces and medium is 11 ounces.

The pack is constructed under high quality standards. The main material utilized is spectra-ripstop nylon and is touted in the industry as being 3-4 times tougher than Kevlar. I am convinced of that after treating it rather roughly for the past 7 months.

The capacity of the main compartment and pockets is 3300 cubic inches, but the extension collar brings it up to 4500 CI, should the need arise for an extended desert trip with extra water, etc.

I personally find it very enjoyable that this pack, when filled with all of my essentials (excluding food and water), weighs 7 pounds and 12 ounces. Some backpacks on the market which are advertised as "the" pack for a distance hiker can weigh as much as 8 pounds empty! Can you imagine? With these weights, I found the use of a hip belt totally superficial. Fully loaded for a 4-5 day trip, my total pack weight including food and water is usually about 15 pounds. This is only possible by first getting rid of major sources of weight that are unnecessary. The pack is the first culprit, and the Breeze amply corrects the dilemma.

Cost: A respectable $120

Comparisons:

(1)I also own a pack by Lynn Wheldon called the Equinox which weighs in at 14 ounces. It is made of a mesh which looks like a fish netting and is apparently very durable. I met two thru-hikers near the end of their 1999 PCT/AT doubleheader and one had the Equinox. It looked a little battered, and some duct tape held it together, but it was still doing a fine job after about 4,700 miles. However, the advantages I found in the Breeze, are the external mesh pockets that are lacking in the Equinox and of course the heavier weight of the Equinox. Look under http://www.lwgear.com/ for more info.

(2)The new G4 pack also seems a viable alternative, but I prefer not to need to stuff my dirty socks into the shoulder strap pockets and waist belt for comfort. The material is 1.5 ounce silnylon and I am not convinced of it's durability for use as a backpack material for extended trekking. Otherwise, it seems to be a very marketable item worth your research. Look under http://www.gvpgear.com/ for more info.







Wingstove-Esbit Comparison

--Submitted By Magic

RATING: 4 (Both)

I recently purchased some of the "Wingsoves" from Adventure Tools at http://stores.yahoo.com/adventuretools/wingstove.html . I did a comparison between the Esbit stove and the Wingstove to satisfy my curiosity and thought I'd share the results. The first thing I noticed is the difference in distance between the pot and the fuel. The bottom of the tab on the Esbit is 5mm from the bottom of the pot while the Wingstove is half as much. Since the wingstove legs are cut-out for a smaller pot (or cup) this would make that distance less if you were to use one of those.

Time for the burn test! I like that part! Heh! Heh! I put two cups of water in a pot with a cover.The temperature of the water was 54 degrees for each test. The Trioxane tabs (blue color) burned 7 minutes in each stove. The water was not boiling in either test but it was 9 degrees hotter in the wingstove. I then started over with the (regular) esbit tabs. These tabs burned 15 minutes! I blew them out because the water was boiling. The wingstove managed to boil the water in 12 minutes while the esbit was a minute longer. You absolutely need a windsceen with both stoves.

These are my conclusions: Either stove will burn the Trioxane tabs, but for my money I'd go with the 15 minute tabs. Might be a little more wind, or if you're trying to get the cooking over with because of weather, or just would like to let the thing burn while you do other stuff not messing with it would be better in my humble opinion. The Esbit is heavier and needs a level surface, the wingstove is a little easier to make level because of the small footprint. I bought two esbits with tabs today for $5.97, so they aren't pricey. The wingstove is 2.75 but they get $6 for shipping. They both work fine to "heat water" as RM says.

I'm putting some links to pics I took of the stoves if you haven't seen them:

http://www.geocities.com/hey_magic/photopagespiral1.html

http://www.geocities.com/hey_magic/photopagespiral2.html

I rated both stoves at 4 and any tablet that burns less than 12 minutes a 1!