Dan's Outside

Gear Review: REI Peak UL Trekking Poles

I never used to use trekking poles, despite recommendations from friends who said that they saved their knees from stress and provided additional balance in dicey situations. A few years ago I finally picked up a pair of REI poles… and then carried them in my pack without useing them for a season or two.

Finally, in the past couple of years I made an effort to use them more consistently – perhaps because as I passed the age of 50 I occasionally experienced some knee stress. While I was once anti-pole (but not anti-Pole! ;-), I have now pretty much switched over to the other side and I use them more often than not when backpacking. (I have not yet gotten to the point where I use them for day hiking, however.)

Earlier this year I picked up a new pair of REI Peak UL Trekking Poles. They are phenomenally light, weighing only about 3/4 pound per pair. In large part, the weight reduction is due to the carbon fibre pole material. This, of course, increases the price; they are not cheap at a list price of $130/pair.

They worked quite well for me on the three pack trips I have taken so far during the 2005 summer season. In fact, they seem bit less prone to bending and scratching than my old metal poles.

One odd feature is the addition of small compasses to the top of the handgrip on each pole. At first I thought this would be completely useless – and I wondered who the heck would need two cheap compasses! However, I have to admit that it is convenient to be able to quickly get a general fix on the compass points while hiking. (This sort of compass obviously is only good for general direction and can’t replace a real compass for serious orientation.) I still feel a bit silly carrying two compasses though.

I sometimes use a tarp and bivy instead of a tent and, when I do, the poles must serve as supports for the tarp. They seem to work fine in this role but, since I us the poles pointed end up, I think that the compasses will eventually become scratched. Oh, well.

My older metal “ultralight” trekking poles collapsed a few inches shorter than the Peak UL poles. This isn’t an issue while hiking with them, but they do protrude a bit more from the top of the pack on those occasions when I carry them instead of using them. This is a bit more of a significant issue – though still not a deal-breaker – when using a smaller ultralight pack.

The only other problem I encountered has to do with the “DuoLocks” that let you adjust and secure the pole sections by twisting them. I found that if you loosen them too much you sometimes cannot tighten them again: you’ll loosen them up and adjust the poles, only to find that when you turn them to relock the sections they never do lock up. When this happens the solution is to separate the pole sections and manually expand the locking device a bit – just enough so that it is a bit hard to reassemble the poles. Put the poles back together and turn to lock. To avoid the problem, I only loosen the DuoLocks just enough to adjust the poles.

***Bottom line:
I like my REI Peak UL Trekking Poles. The poles work quite well and they seem to provide a good combination of very light weight and sufficient strength. While the built-in compasses may seem a bit goofy at first, there are situations in which they are a convenience. It is important to not over-loosen the poles to adjust them, and these poles do not break down quite as short as some of the other 4-sections models.
—–

September 4, 2005 Posted by gdanmitchell | Gear Reviews | Comments Off on Gear Review: REI Peak UL Trekking Poles

Gear Review: BearVault Solo

For many years I’ve been annoyed at having to carry a full-size Garcia bear canister, even when traveling by myself and on short trips. The Garcia models are just fine functionally and they certainly work effectively (and make great camp stools, as well) but they are bulky in my smaller packs.

Earlier this year I picked up the small model of the BearVault canister, called the BearVault Solo. Its diameter is about the same as the Garcia, but at 8″ high it is only 2/3 as tall. This makes a big difference in the pack. It is also nearly a full pound lighter; 1 pound, 14 ounces vs. 2 pounds, 12 ounces.

Other differences range from cosmetic to functional. At the cosmetic end of the spectrum, the BearVault is made of bluish nearly transparent material. A more functional consideration is the design of the lid. The very secure Garcia lid attaches by 3 small locks that must be twisted with a coin or similar. The BearVault lid screws on. Just before it is screwed on all the way, a small tab on the lid must pass by a small tab on the body of the canister. This blocks the lid from unscrewing unless you press in the edge of the lid to deform it enough to let the two tabs pass by one another, a feat that no bear (not even a Yosemite bear!) is likely to be able to perform.

The lid works well for the most part, though I did notice two minor issues – neither of which would keep me from using the BearVault. First, it can be difficult to press in the tab on the lid when it comes time to open up the canister, especially if your hands are cold. Secondly, the threads on the canister seem to be subject to friction on occasion, perhaps due to dust or other material getting on the threads. When this happens it can be difficult to get the lid closed all the way and, I assume, it would be quite difficult to remove it. When this happened to me I resisted the temptation to force the lid on; instead I unscrewed it, wiped the threads a bit, and tried again. It worked fine. It might be possible to somehow lubricate the threads a bit, but I haven’t experimented with that yet.

(Update: BearVault tell me that they do ship a thread lubricant, but that it isn’t really designed for the newer model that I own. They also suggest wiping the threads with a bandana every day or so, which seems like a simple and effective solution to me.)

Another experiment that I forgot to try on the two trips on which I used the BearVault was to see how well it works as a stool. This is not unimportant! As I mentioned above, the Garcia makes a pretty nice, if somewhat heavy, camp stool. The BearVault Solo might be a bit too short for this but I’m not certain. I might be a bit concerned about the effect on the threads since they already have a tendency to bind a bit.

***Bottom line:
Despite some minor issues, I like the BearVault a lot. I’m very happy to reduce the size of my canister by 1/3 and save a pound of weight. Despite its smaller size (433 cubic inches* vs. 615 cubic inches for the Garcia) I’m confident that I could easily get 4-5 days of carefully selected food into the BearVault. It is a great solution for short trips and/or for those who travel solo – and is my first choice now unless a longer trip requires me to use my larger Garcia.

*A larger BearVault that is comparable in size to the Garcia unit is also available. It weights 2 pounds 6 ounces, carries 693 cubic inches of food, and has dimensions that are very slightly larger than the Garcia.

September 3, 2005 Posted by gdanmitchell | Gear Reviews | 2 Comments

Gear Review: Marmot Helium Sleeping Bag

I once again succumbed to “gear lust” last week and picked up a Marmot Helium sleeping bag. It will probably replace two of the bags that I currently own – more on that below.

The Helium is a 15 degree-rated bag made with 900-fill down, some of the lightest available. By using this type of down, along with very lightweight fabric and a half-length zipper, Marmot is able to keep the weight of the regular size bag to 1 pound 13 ounces. This is quite light for a bag with this temperature rating.

I was a bit concerned about the half-length zipper since I frequently use a sleeping bag more like a blanket in less-than-cold conditions. However, after using it on a weekend trip in Yosemite I think that this zipper will provide enough adjustability for my purposes – though it is clear that I will need to sleep in this bag and not under it.

The Helium also has a different design for the hood portion of the bag. First of all, there is no velcro to attach the two sides of the zipper, but it doesn’t seem necessary. Secondly, the hood does not open flat – it is designed with a rounded hood shape with a smaller opening than I’m used to. Third, the location of the drawstring is not at the zipper but in a spot supposedly less likely to put it in your face.

Over the years I have had several down bags: A very old The North Face Superlight, another The North Face bag that I can’t identify by model, a Marmot Never Summer bag, and a Marmot Arroyo.

Two of them were not what I would consider sufficiently filled when I got them. The North Face Superlight (purchased as long as 20 years ago) was underfilled, but I opened up some seams and added down to turn it into a warm enough bag to use in light winter conditions. The Arroyo had a similar problem. It is a very lightweight bag (under 2 pounds) rated to 30 degrees and using 800-fill down. When new, it was usable at this temperature as long as I was willing to wear some extra clothing on cool nights. However, as the bag got older the down’s loft seemed to deteriorate to the point that there are unfilled spots, making it only marginally warm at temperatures just above freezing.

The Helium does not have this problem. It lofts up nicely, filling all of its baffles. I think that it probably will be usable at the rated temperature. In addition, it manages to weigh almost the same as the Arroyo, and fit into the same small stuff sack. At this point, it is hard to think of a good reason to use the Arroyo – and the Helium is likely to be virtually as warm as the heavier Never Summer bag.

Oh, the price may the an issue. The list price on the bag is about $380, which is perhaps twice the price of heavier but comparably warm down bags that don’t use 900-fill down. However, I found mine on sale for about $250. In my experience good down bags can last a long time – frequently a decade. At $25/year it is not such a bad price after all.

***Bottom line:
It’s hard to find any real problems with the Marmot Helium bag. It is as light and compressible as my old (nearly) 30-degree bag. It fluffs up nicely with even loft all over. It has a well-designed hood section. It promises to be significantly warmer than the bag I was using. The cost is high for this state-of-the-art item, but a cheaper bag may seem like a poor bargain on a cold night on the trail.
—–

September 1, 2005 Posted by gdanmitchell | Gear Reviews | Comments Off on Gear Review: Marmot Helium Sleeping Bag

Gear Review: Gregory G-Pack

Last year, trying to keep up with my ultra-light friends, I purchased a Gregory G-Pack on sale. I finally had an opportunity to use it a couple of times this month.

This pack holds about 3000 cu. in and weighs under 3 pounds. While made of extremely lightweight material like most ultra-light packs it has a more traditional suspension system than many of the extremely light packs. I appreciate this. It has adjustable and padded shoulder straps, a sternum strap, a padded waist belt, a frame sheet, and padding on the back.

The main sack is pretty basic. It is constructed of extremely lightweight silicon impregnated material. It seems very flimsy but seems to hold up well enough. (You can actually see your gear through the material in the right light!) There is a surprisingly large removable top-flap pocket. While there are no side pockets, the whole back of the pack is covered by a large pouch that can hold quite a bit of gear where it is accessible. The pouch is secured by 3 straps that attach vertically to the top back and sides of the pack. (The pouch attachments have been updated on the current version of the pack.)

The pouch turns out to be a slight source of weakness, at least in my case. The main part of the pouch is made of a mesh material and seems strong enough. In the center back portion it is constructed of a more typical woven nylon material. This material seems a bit subject to damage from abrasion, for example from rubbing against rocks. In my case this is more of a problem since I use the pouch to carry a fairly large (by backcountry standards) tripod. The material in question tore a bit in one spot after a few trips.

I don’t regard this as a criticism as much as an observation. Obviously, Gregory cannot make a pack that weighs less than three pounds that is as durable as old-style packs that often weighed more than twice as much. It seems that one of the trade-offs for using such a lightweight pack is that you must be a bit more careful about how you handle it. That seems like a reasonable compromise to me.

The pack carries quite comfortably. Normally, people recommend that you carry less than 30 pounds (sometimes much less) in a pack like this. However, I’m certain that I have carried more weight than that (I typically carry 8-9 pounds of photo equipment) and I did not encounter any problems. I would certainly feel comfortable about using this pack on a 4-5 day trip.

***Bottom line:
All in all, I think the G-Pack is a fine pack for those who want to lighten their loads a bit and who are willing to exercise a little extra care to avoid damaging the lightweight material.

August 30, 2005 Posted by gdanmitchell | Gear Reviews | Comments Off on Gear Review: Gregory G-Pack