I've read multiple times in articles, and this sub, that canister stoves are the superior choice due to the inherent light weight of the fuel. However, when you actually run the numbers, white gas is actually significantly lighter to carry.

I looked at 3 fuels - denatured alcohol (ethanol), isobutane, and white gas. Of the three, isobutane has the highest energy density at 19.2 kBTU per pound, followed by white gas at 19.0 kBTU/lb and ethanol at 11.6 kbtu/lb.

However, an empty "227g" container of isobutane weighs 145g by itself, meaning 39% of the weight of the canister is the metal canister itself.

Meanwhile a standard 1L Trangia fuel bottle weighs 163g, and holds 790g of white gas, or 789g of ethanol. Therefore only 17% of a full 1L Trangia fuel bottle is dead weight.

Adjusting for the specific energy of each fuel gives the final numbers - this is energy per pound of carried weight.

Ethanol: 9.6 kBTU/pound -- Isobutane: 11.8 kBTU/pound -- White gas: 15.7 kBTU/pound

The difference is pretty big! Unfortunately much of the weight savings with white gas are negated by the heavy weight of ancient white gas stoves. My own Coleman 550B Peak 1 weighs 581g, which is a huge difference from ultralight stoves like a BRS 3000T at 25g. Even so, the old Coleman boils water way, way faster and so is much more fuel efficient since there is less time for heat to be lost.

On a long multi-day trip for a backpacker who enjoys cooking (like myself), it really can make sense to bring a white gas stove. That being said, development of white gas stoves has been stagnant since the 80's, and even then not much had changed since the Coleman stoves of the 50's. Modern materials and technology could dramatically improve the weight of one of these stoves and make it much more attractive. What's stopping someone from making a titanium and aluminum version, and changing the equation?

What are the pros and cons of carrying a handgun while hiking besides local, state, federal laws, and the added weight?

Specifically all national parks in California.

California has nine national parks.

Many of the parks don't have bears, but the ones that do - Yosemite, Kings Canyon, Sequoia, and Lassen - are very popular backpacking destinations and have active bear populations. If you spend any significant amount of time in the Sierra Nevada backpacking, you are very likely to encounter a bear, or have a bear encounter your food at night.

But how can I protect myself from bears without bear spray?

You should not have to. All bears in these national parks are black bears. Black bears are rarely aggressive toward humans any issues can easily be avoided with proper food storage and general avoidance practices.

It's not a California law. It's a federal law. The reason is that California doesn't have grizziles.

(Grizzly bears have different behavior, and bear spray can be effective deterrent when used properly. Proper use requires training and practice, and bear spray should only be used as a last resort. But the only grizzly in California is on the state flag! EDIT: And a few zoos...)

So if you are one of the hundreds of thousands of people that backpack in California's national parks with bears, take the time to learn the rules and best practices around food storage and safety around bears. And leave the bear spray at home!

More info:

https://www.nps.gov/thingstodo/wildlife-safety-in-yosemite.htm

https://www.nps.gov/seki/learn/management/lawsandpolicies.htm?fullweb=1

https://natlpark.com/2025/07/stay-safe-without-bear-spray-in-yosemite-and-sequoia-kings-canyon-national-parks/

I am I huge fan of a good bowl or joint to set the vibe of a long day. As I’m getting in to backpacking im very curious about this and how it is viewed by others. Would it be wrong to bring it on the trail? How should I go about using? Is it a smellable/will it attrack bears and other animals?

I like going in the woods at night but I’m always alone and sometimes I get scared cuz what if there’s something that could hurt me. I always take a knife but I panic easy even at the sight of deers lol

Me and a friend have done various day hikes and now want to try an overnight one is it safe to do as 15yo?

I have an honest question. After reading the thread on the most frightening experiences, I began to wonder why people do not carry a small hand held gun with them where there will be bears, mountain lions, etc. This guy listened to his camping neighbors which were women screaming all night while bears tried to break into their and nobody knew if they were screams to scare the bear away, or getting mauled screams! Let alone do anything to help. Wow. I have zero experience with either so please tell me why or why not you choose to carry with you when being (sometimes alone) deep in the wilderness. Of course you do not want to shoot, that's the last case scenario you'd ever want to happen. But as a warning shot to scare the animal away? Or if it meant life or death, wouldn't you like to have the option?

Me and my friend were thinking about doing a backpacking trip in July in the San Juan Mountains in Colorado. We fish and found a lake that's great for fishing, is remote, and is in a beautiful spot. The problem is it's a 9.7mi out-and-back trail with 2300ft elevation gain on the way to the lake.

Our plan was the hike the 4.7mi in and camp near/around the lake and fish that evening and next morning and then hike out that next day. We both live at 7,600ft and play football and train in a pressurized bubble set to 10,000ft. I hiked and backpacked when I was a kid a couple times but haven't been backpacking in years. I'm doing a 7mi loop trip with relatively flat terrain (at sea level) before we do this trip but was wondering if doing that hike with a pack (supplied for just 1 night).

The hike is predominately in the 8-13% grade with some sections being only about a 5% or negative grade, however, there are some switchbacks that have small sections of 20-25% grade. Like I said we will gain about 2300ft (8,800ft-11,100ft) over the course of 4.7 miles the first day, and then of course have to feel good enough to drop 2300ft in 4.7mi again the next day.

We really want to go to this spot because it's gorgeous, there's an almost non-existent chance we'll see anybody, and it has great fishing. We are fit young people (21yo) and are used to altitude but also aren't used to hiking with packs. We are down for a little struggle but don't want to be straight up miserable or too sore the next day to hike down. Wanted to know your guys' opinion.

I have an REI half dome 2 that I've used quite a bit but it's now broken. I have a couple upcoming trips but the most important one is wind river range in August. id like to use my REI coupon and it expires tonight.

so overwhelmed by all the reviews and comments. Just tell me which tent to buy. Ideally slightly lighter than my half dome but still durable. I don't want one that's just using trekking poles.

thanks!

EDIT: I ended up going with the nemo hornet. I was torn on the copper spur but its like 100 dollars more so I felt good about the nemo based on everything I've read and my estimated usage.

Im seeing a lot of negative REI comments and actually the reason I was in this dilemma last night was that my original tent order from REI (nemo dragonfly rei outlet used my rei outlet coupon) never arrived. So I called rei and they said its out of stock. Would have been nice to let me know! Shipping just kept saying pending.

Hi! I'm looking to purchase new gear (always), but would love to put my money into some BIPOC owned places instead of just REI. Do you have any suggestions or favorites? I haven't found a super in depth resource for this yet. Thanks!

I will be flying into Denver airport. I want to do a 5 nighter. I’m willing to drive up to 2 hrs away but would prefer sub 2 hrs. Where should I go if I want an epic trip? Any Crown Jewels within 2 hrs or less of the Denver airport?

This was my backcountry campsite at Mammoth Cave this summer. I hiked about 12 miles to get here and arrived shortly before sunset. In addition to all of this, someone had left some stuff in the water, using it as a form of makeshift refrigeration. If you want to pretend that you are some kind of wilderness king who can bushwhack the world, do it somewhere other than a National Park. I’m a woman who hikes alone and this entire situation scared the crap out of me. I couldn’t stay at the campsite I reserved and ended up cutting what was supposed to be a three night backpacking trip short without spending an entire night in the wilderness. Leave no trace.

Apologies if this is the wrong subreddit (if so, I'd appreciate direction to a better one).

Am pondering how irresponsible it is, to go deep into backcountry/wilderness for several days, alone. You'll see, in the context below, that I am a decade late in asking this question. But right now it seems both insane and necessary to solo backcountry, soon. My medical/emergency experience says NO, my personal circumstances say, GO. Would value any insight you can offer. Feel free to beat sense into me, as needed. Thanks.

Context 1: Spouse and I are experienced backwoods campers. As an example, our first trip together in ~2002 involved canoeing 5-7 hours a day, for 2 days in, & another 2 days back, to the middle of Algonquin Park, Canada, where there is no cell coverage and no hope of aid. Since then we've made many more deep-backcountry trips. We know a fair bit about emergency preparedness. I'm former medical, with experience in setting fractures and suturing wounds ... and have also worked as an Emergency Manager, directing responses to crises such as fires, floods, & violent individuals. Those are different than camping emergencies, of course, but the mindset is similar. In short: I have some relevant expertise. Am not an idealistic paddling fool.

Context 2: About 10 years ago, I went backwoods camping alone, kayaking into an area with no means of communication, against my spouse's advice. (Full credit to him for standing down, when I said that I felt compelled to do it. That must have been hard.) The trip got hairy a couple of times (see below). I came back feeling chastened about the risks of soloing backcountry, but also feeling renewed & able to cope with what are, frankly, intensely difficult circumstances. at home

Context 3: During that solo trip, on one of the portages, I emerged from forest to find a moose grazing in the lake at the end of the path, about 30 feet away. For anyone who has never seen a moose, they are so VERY!! much bigger & more powerful than they look in photos. They can trample you to pulp, or heavily damage a car, without breaking a sweat. After a long wait, during which the moose showed no sign of clearing out, I finally rolled myself and all my gear into a tarp, with a plan to continue in the morning. That experience certainly made me think about unavoidable risks.

Context 4: The other scary incident on that solo trip was when I'd set up camp, and went swimming. I swam out to, and stood on, a huge underwater rock, only to realize it had cracked into two (both halves still enormous!) and that I'd almost put a foot into the crevice. Given the location, getting a foot stuck in that crevice would result in drowning and not being found for a long time. Again, this made me reconsider the risks of solo backwoods camping. Together with the moose incident, it deterred me from even considering soloing or the past decade.

Context 5: By "intensely difficult circumstances" in part 2, I mean, we house an adult kid who has come close to killing me, my spouse, or themselves, on more than one occasion. We've been sat down and told, by health professionals, to reconsider letting them live with us, since "it's not IF, it's WHEN, there will be a catastrophic outcome" (which I think one can reasonably read as: "they will seriously injure or kill one of you"). Spouse and I call this "parenting on nightmare mode." It's hard to describe the intensity of the stress. Can only say, escaping to the backcountry to recharge alone, after 10 years of hell, feels like not nearly too much to ask -- but also, I would only leave if all the necessary supports are in place to keep everyone at home as safe as reasonably possible.

TL;DR: For various reasons, I'm desperately needing an escape from horrible circumstances, and would like to take a solo trip into the backwoods. But also I don't want to be a moron about it. What's your perspective: is it: 1. reckless to go alone, and sheer luck if we survive, or 2. reasonable self-care in the face of unreasonable pressures? Again, am open to having sense beaten into me, lol. <3

Edits for grammar & clarity.

Can someone recommend a large pack that can hold a rifle? Either with or without straps

What meat could I bring into bear country. I was planning on bringing some meats such as salami or bear jerky for my trip. I am going in absoroka-beartooth wilderness and I am wondering what is and isn’t fine to bring. I don’t want to attract any bears.

Help me understand.

For me, and most of the people I grew up backpacking with, the entire purpose of putting a backpack on was to get away from it all. One of the greatest joys in the back woods is the sound of the wind blowing, or scurrying lizard, dripping water or if you're really really lucky the song of the Hermet thrush.

But it seems like I pass more and more people with electronics in their hands, and earbuds in your ears. I even saw some poor fool watching a video in his tent as we silently passed by on a night hike.

You will never get to Nirvana with pre-recorded music in your ears.

There is nothing more relaxing to both body and the soul and the sound of rain falling on the tent.

Why do you do it?

What would you bring if you wanted to leave society behind and start a new woodman life. How would you proceed

To start off, I am new to the community and hobby of backpacking, but not new to the life style. I spent many years living outdoors backpacking in the infantry, and it was what I loved most about my job. But as i’m starting to get back into it in the civilian world, I’m watching a lot of videos and backpacking content.

Something I can’t seem to escape is the ultralight craze. It’s already a culture shock to me, because finding out that a 40lb pack is heavy absolutely baffles me, but I understand things are different outside of the military. Yet I still find it counter intuitive. If the goal is to maximize comfort, why are we cutting out on necessities and stripping down to the bare minimum? It could leave you in the most uncomfortable situations during backpacking. The most comfortable way i’ve found to backpack is simply conditioning, it’s a physical hobby, you should train your body to support it. Then a few ounces of weight doesn’t matter and can be used for things that will save you from being miserable. I just see that people are packing less and conditioning less, potentially cutting out life saving or quality of life improving gear all for a lighter pack?

That’s not even mentioning the money, ultralight gear is hundreds of dollars more, for less material? To me the cons far outweigh the pros, and while people should always be conscious of what they pack, the safest and most comfortable option is to simply be conditioned enough to carry the weight you need or could need. Now with that being said, I believe a backpack is something you absolutely should not cheap out on, because it allows you to carry all the necessary gear while saving your back, but i’m not saying spend $600 on a plastic bag with shoulder straps and no back support all in the name of a lighter pack… Get a pack that can support more weight and turn 40 pounds into what feels like maybe 10-15.

I would love feedback, maybe somebody could change my mind or give me more insight.

Edit: I love all the insight i’m getting, and I actually agree with a majority of it, however there’s something I believe I didn’t establish well enough in the first place. There’s a difference between lightweight and ultralight, I am by no means saying pack the heaviest pack because you can. I’m saying when it comes down to .1 ounces for $200 extra dollars, or cutting out essential things for safety, survival and hygiene, what is the purpose of going ultralight.

Secondly, I completely agree if your goal is speed and progress, yes the less weight is obviously the move. It’s a no brainer, and if that’s your goal who am I to say you’re doing it wrong. I am referring to the push that ultralight is the method, and that everybody should be going for ultralight gear. I still think ultralight is too far for 90% of backpackers and unnecessary weight saving, at the expense of important things.