Hi,

We have been approached by a TGO reader who is interested in contributing to our new Big Debate feature on the subject of "Does lightweight have limits?" - ie. is it too flimsy for the rigours of Scottish winter walking, for instance...

Would anybody like to have a go at contributing the opposing argument?

We'd be looking for about 350 words - drop me a line if you're interested in taking part.

Thank you,

Emily

yes it does have limits ..
...dont have the time at the mo but would love to hear other peoples views in this area.
I pride myself that i always only carry a 35l pack which started because i have a very short back with long legs and found nothing fits me untill the haglofs "orc" came along..
THEN i found my equipment which ive built over the last few years.

YOU DONT HAVE TO COMPROMISE SAFTEY to achieve this.....
keep me posted.

Personally I'd just leave this one alone.

It depends what you mean by limits. Colin Ibbotson carries a baseweight of only 2 kilograms and he is perfectly safe!

There seem to be some people spoiling for a fight here. It seems to me that it is a matter of choice. A personal observation from this year's event is that there are many folks who would benefit from a little lighter kit, but it's a matter of personal choice.

Of course everything has limits. I know the limit is way under the average challenger's load. There would surely have to be some specification that this heavy weight backpacker put forward as unsafe for Scottish Winter walking. It would be very complicated to specify: duration of trip, days without resupply, average day height, maximum camp height,number in the party, crampons, ice axes, ropes?

It might be of more general interest if it was moved to the challenge in May and specified as a low level route, a solo person and say 3 days food without resupply ( 2 camps).

Or perhaps he would like to specify a 2 person team in The highlands in June for 2 days. I am thinking of the Lowe Alpine Mountain Marathon, which we just competed in.
You cannot have a sensible debate without better parameters

On second thoughts ask on a mountain marathon site for a contribution from a member of one of the elite teams.

As Derek says, you need parameters. My base weight is usually ultra-light/light, but it isn't flimsy. If the 'heavy-weight' walker put there argument forward first, it might be easier to counter it.
As long as you have everything needed for winter backpacking, why is it 'safer' to carry a lot of extra weight?

Just another thought. Why do heavyweights always feel the need to have a go at UL'ers? Why isn't there more of the 'is it dangerous to carry a monster load in winter' type questions?
Maybe the heavyweights are just angry people? :)

I posted a thread about this some time ago if I remember correctly. Back then, the same criteria as in the replies to this post were advanced, to qualify the "limits".

I suspect that the many (negative) opinions about "lightweight" are purely subjective and probably anecdotal.

I am a hillwalker, neither SUL, lightweight or anything else. I carry only what is needed for any specific trip. I do most of my hillwalking in winter and I carry more in my pack then, than I do in summer. With the benefits of modern materials and technology, these "minimum" requirements are getting lighter year by year. I am coming up for my 45th year of winter hillwalking in Scotland and my pack is much lighter than 10, 20, 30 or 40 years ago. The equipment is not only better, it is also lighter ( except my crampons, which are more or less the same).
The premise that lightweight gear isn't up to the rigours of Scottish Winters is absurd and doesn't merit debate.

Yours aye

I think some of the lightweight ideas around winter do have limits I would not cross.

I remember the debate about lightweight footwear and lightweight crampons. I would never do this and would not feel comfortable about it either. I saw a group of three on Ben Vorlich last winter wearing keen mid boots and lightweight crampons, I realised quickly that they had little if no winter experience. The fact they were using an ice axe with the rubber protective cover still on gave it away. I asked why they had decided to use lightweight and one refered to Chris Townsends article. They had the boots already and decided to go with strap on crampons. The Girl in the group felt uneasy on ice and decided to descend the two guys reached the summit.

I dont think lightweight is for inexperienced walkers but I have embraced lightweight clothing and rucsacks but footwear in winter is four season boots and strong g12 crampons.

Every man to there own as long as they feel safe

I think the point angry climber made is the important one- 'every man to their own as long as they feel safe.' The girl in the story would have felt no more safe on ice if she had been wearing 4 season boots and g12 crampons- she made the sensible decision and played safe. The other climbers would have carried on with their 4 season boots and g12 crampons (had they been wearing them) and they would still have had the protective covers on their ice axes and still been just as unsafe whilst believing they had the correct gear. Andy Skurka on his 'ultralight in the nation's icebox' trip carried approx 11 kg for all clothing and gear on a 380 mile trip with average temperatures of 5F. There are very few limits with gear- the limits are with knowledge and skills. These days, with improvements in materials and technology, good strong gear can weigh a fraction of what it used to- look at the Henry shires Scarp tent, a double skin tent that can be set up to resist huge snowfalls (check out the photos on CT's blog) and weighs around the same weight as an Akto. Note also that the person interested in the debate has said 'lightweight' not even ultralight. By leaving out unnecessaries, anyone can become lightweight and still carry everything they need. It is no coincidence that the concept of 'all the gear and no idea' has been around for a lot longer than the modern concept of 'lightweight'.