It's the Friday before New Year's. For some inexplicable reason some people have to be at work which is almost entirely pointless this entire week.
So let's discuss a favorite HAZ topic!
Apparently the 2016 Self-Propelled Cyclical Totals thread got locked after going off the rails so I'll post this question here. Try to keep it civil and on-point so hikebot doesn't get an itchy trigger finger on the lock button.
Would anybody like to propose an informal estimated formula/multiple for miles hiked with a backpack versus without?
For example, if Donald* hikes 100 miles of day hikes with never more than 5lbs on his back, but Bill* hikes 75 miles with a 35lb pack shouldn't his 75 miles be "weighted" more? Maybe a 25% weighted-mileage increase? I don't think that Don's miles should be diminished, but I definitely put a different level of appreciation on Bill's achievement.
I'm sure there can't be an actual consensus here on the weight of weight miles, but it's interesting to consider that some people rack up huge miles carrying nothing at all, while others are primarily backpackers hauling big packs all the time.
*I made up the names. These people aren't on HAZ and don't exist. Don't get butt-hurt.
Does this really matter? If it does, then perhaps just use the activity to make the decision.
I happened to break the top ten in both distance and elevation this year. A lot of that was carrying a 25lb. pack around Deem Hills, but a good chunk was backpacking with probably a sub 25lb. pack. So when I backpack, I tend to carry less than when I just go for a hike to stay fit to backpack. Yesterday I walked about three miles in sandals. I had to be careful not to stub my toes on all the rocks. Should we weight by hazards too? Whatever.
@chumley
I'm going to hijack this thread just because it seems like a good topic to hijack.
What I'd like to see is to get the number of days right on the trips. This applies to multi-day trips. Only the first day is counted. For example, if I go on a five day backpacking trip from April 28 to May 2, This only shows as one trip on April 28, and nothing for May.
And now to get back on topic, then what mileage should be credited for each day and since this was backpacking should that count more?
rcorfman wrote:if I go on a five day backpacking trip from April 28 to May 2, This only shows as one trip on April 28, and nothing for May....what mileage should be credited for each day
Some of the more, eh, detailed, folks on this site have been known to split such trips into separate triplogs so as to get the proper mileage credited to each month.
I prefer to reset my monthly stats on the full moon rather than irregular Gregorian months. My annual stats reset on the summer solstice. Not sure who decided that January 1 has any significance over any other day.
For distance traveled, the miles are the same as those traveled. For calories burned/difficulty, the additional weight causes an increase in the effort output and thus calories burned. I don't know that the 5 lbs vs 35 lbs is enough to make up the 25 miles traveled discrepancy in your scenario as we do not know how much Donald weighs, nor the elevation gain in those miles.
I would say I am more impressed by someone who has backpacked 1000 miles than someone who has hiked 1000 miles.
Depending how you log your trips you can inflate your stats - as rcorfman points out you could log each leg differently or else all part of one trip. A few years ago HAZ stats added the average X per trip statistics which helped to combat this, but doesn't address the rollover when the trip spans the month boundary.
I think to address your complaint HAZ could make the "calories burned" statistics public. But since that would require you reveal how much you weigh, I doubt that many would participate.
Hike Arizona it is full of sharp, pointy, ankle-twisting, HAZmaster crushing ROCKS!!
Hike Arizona it is full of sharp, pointy, shin-stabbing, skin-shredding plants!
Hike Arizona it is full of striking, biting, stabbing, venomous wildlife!
Interesting topic, and one I've had a few conversations about. Backpack weight certainly makes for a more difficult mile vs daypack weight. And so does fpm. Someone getting an average of 300 fpm is working a lot harder than someone getting 100.
Since all the fields currently exist in a triplog, seems like a calculation could be made, even if only on your personal analysis page.
This website has some interesting formulas for incline and pack weight:
In thinking about it further, calories burned would put men at the top, since an average man weighs more than the average woman, they will burn about 75% more to twice as much for the same trip. So perhaps calories burned/weight could be a statistic that tells you how active someone really is and might help reduce the gender inequality.
Hike Arizona it is full of sharp, pointy, ankle-twisting, HAZmaster crushing ROCKS!!
Hike Arizona it is full of sharp, pointy, shin-stabbing, skin-shredding plants!
Hike Arizona it is full of striking, biting, stabbing, venomous wildlife!
@nonot But, generally speaking, don't men always burn more calories than women, whether resting or active? So it's not like men are suddenly working harder than women while hiking.
I'm always jealous while hiking with anyone taller than me since their advantage on stride equates to less steps per miles.
Yes, since men burn about twice the calories but weigh about twice as much, that's why I am thinking calories divided by weight would be necessary to provide an activity comparison.
lindaagm wrote:@nonot But, generally speaking, don't men always burn more calories than women, whether resting or active? So it's not like men are suddenly working harder than women while hiking.
I'm always jealous while hiking with anyone taller than me since their advantage on stride equates to less steps per miles.
Hike Arizona it is full of sharp, pointy, ankle-twisting, HAZmaster crushing ROCKS!!
Hike Arizona it is full of sharp, pointy, shin-stabbing, skin-shredding plants!
Hike Arizona it is full of striking, biting, stabbing, venomous wildlife!
Hike Arizona it is full of sharp, pointy, ankle-twisting, HAZmaster crushing ROCKS!!
Hike Arizona it is full of sharp, pointy, shin-stabbing, skin-shredding plants!
Hike Arizona it is full of striking, biting, stabbing, venomous wildlife!
@chumley 165?!? For once, a category where I'm happy to be 20% below average.
I would guess that an average hiker would be below those averages, and an avid hiker (unless much taller than average, or a heavy weightlifter too) would very likely be below those averages.
So, if a 125 lb person carries a 30lb backpack, she has just tacked on 24% of her body weight. If a 180 lb person carries that same pack, he has only added 17%. The lighter person is expending more energy, pound for pound, over every mile hiked.
This is why I always make Joel carry my stuff. With all his heavy camera gear it's easy to hide a few beers and a tent in his pack without him knowing it.
So, if I'm looking at the self-propelled totals, is there a way to differentiate between those who racked up 90% of their milage on ritualistic 'exercise' hikes close to home and those who tallied 90% of their milage on actual adventures in wilderness areas and whatnot? That's the thought this thread is leading me to. I mean, you could hike hundreds of miles every year carrying nothing but a water bottle..
Route Editor
Route Scout
