[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [at-l] Frogg Toggs don\'t gots pockets!



On Sun, 18 Jun 2000 12:40:25 -0400 Jim Mayer <jmayer@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
 For lightness do we sacrifice breathablity with pit zips and chest zips?
>
>How much pit zips help is a bit controversial.  From my own experience, I
>would take a jacket (full front zipper) without pit zips over an Anorak
>(partial front zipper) with pit zips any day of the week.

That's what makes the world go 'round. I wouldn 't have an Anorak or a jacket without pit zips on a bet. 

>> For lightness do we sacrifice a pocket to carry our gloves or gorp?
>
>My pants have pockets.  I don't really need them in my jacket too.

Same again. Pants pockets just aren't warm enough. And, now that I think about it, I've had too many DI's yell at me for having my hands in my pants pockets. Plus people wonder what you're doing....=o). I love my Patagonia Zephyr...but I'm having pockets added.


>> For lightness do we sacrifice the time and concern it takes to be sure we
>> don't abraid the fabric?

>I've worn "micro supplex" pants for several years and never worried about
>abrading the fabric.  When they wear out I'll repair or replace them.

I wear the same type...and love'em. But an ultralite pack wouldn't last me one trip.

>> For lightness do we sacrifice the ability to "field repair" with duct
>tape?
>
>How does this affect lightness?  I've never heard anyone suggest not
>bringing some duct tape along.

I agree.

>> For lightness do we sacrifice better workmanship and stitching?
>>
>
>I don't see how lightness has anything to do with workmanship and stitching.
>Jack Stephenson makes a jacket out of siliconized nylon that weighs almost
>nothing and, if it is like his other stuff, has beautiful workmanship and
>stitching.  It isn't even all that expensive (though I don't have one).  You
>can find badly made light stuff, and badly made heavy stuff.

very true


>There's also a question of gear "lifetime."  I don't own a Frogg Toggs
>jacket, but I suspect a three-ply Goretex jacket (or a coated nylon jacket
>for that matter) would last longer.  On the other hand, I can buy three or
>four Frogg Toggs jackets for the price of one Goretex one, and if the jacket
>is durable enough in actual use I don't really see a problem.

Yup


>> For short term and section hiking, one can get away with some of the
>things
>> that could prove disastrous on a long hike.
>> What is the final cost of all this "light" gear if it doesn't withstand
>the
>> "normal" use of a backpacker.
>
>But lots of folks have hiked the PCT and AT with ultralight gear.  Other
>than running shoes and snow, I haven't heard of a lot of problems.
>
>>
>> Is there a "happier medium" between the superlight "temporary" or
>> "occasional use" items and the heavy-duty Expedition weight clothing and
>> gear?
>
>I don't know that you've got the right dichotomy there.  For example, I
>suspect that if you were going "Jardine style" ultralight and found that you
>wanted pockets on your jacket, that Ray Jardine would suggest that you sew
>some on.  The whole point is to match your gear to your needs as efficiently
>as possible.

The bottom line...for everyone, including Coosa. She's questioning the ideas for her.


[ *** too many quoted lines.  automatically truncated *** ]

* From the AT-L |  Need help? http://www.backcountry.net/faq.html  *

==============================================================================