Others not obsessed with "Packing Light?"
Jun 3, 2018, 11:06 am
#151
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,271
When I check in my pelican tool case I am always surprised at how "light" it is (37.8lbs) because it "feels" like it is much more than that as I lift it in and out of rental car trunks, haul it up a flight of stairs, etc. I do try to pack "light" but the operative word is try - as much as I can given the facts of what I must bring with me on work trips. I don't think I would ever get to the point of using the weight of my clothing to make choices though, but it is food for thought and an entertaining read.
It may not be relevant to what you have to carry but as an example, remember what I wrote above about drilling holes in a toothbrush to reduce weight? The same principle can be applied to many tools. An example is a simple wrench set. By combining the best strength to weight material like Titanium with yes, drilling holes, you get a lightweight wrench set like this:
https://www.rockymountainatvmc.com/p...ion-Wrench-Set They can weigh as little as 25% of the weight of a standard steel wrench. The point is, you don't know if something lighter is available until you try to find it.
Regarding clothing in your situation, I would consider it even more important simply because you may have more limited chances of reducing your equipment weight. You presumably lift two items out of the car trunk, your tool case and your suitcase. If both weight 37 lbs. what would it be like if only one did and the other weighed 20lbs. instead of 37? Obviously, that would be more comfortable for you to lift and carry. Your total weight to lift and carry would go from 74 lbs. to 57lbs. That should indeed give you 'food for thought'.
Jun 3, 2018, 11:11 am
#152
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,271
Traveling light is NOT about travelling with less items or less fashion or whatever other criteria someone wants to meet. It is simply about carrying less weight by choosing the lightest weight example of any item someone needs to take with them.
It is not an 'obsession' as per the title of this thread, to want to carry less weight. It is simple common sense. But then as the saying goes, 'if common sense were indeed common, meaning everyone has it, the term would not need to exist.'
It is not an 'obsession' as per the title of this thread, to want to carry less weight. It is simple common sense. But then as the saying goes, 'if common sense were indeed common, meaning everyone has it, the term would not need to exist.'
Jun 3, 2018, 1:13 pm
#153
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Canada, USA, Europe
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 31,452
Why do people seem to have such trouble understanding a concept/principle and attempt to argue against something with examples that aren't really rebuttals of the principle?
84fiero, your examples are examples of things people have a reason to need to take for one reason or another. They have nothing whatsoever to do with trying to travel light. If you need to take stuff to a family member, you take it. The question is, what do you take that is for your use when travelling and do you or don't you try to take the lightest weight possible for those items.
LondonElite, where do you come up with the idea that travelling light is an 'obsession'? It is simple logic. The less weight you have to carry, the more comfortable you will be. Nor did anyone suggest anything in terms of what type of clothing someone should pack. As noted already, if someone wants to pack a 'little black dress', then they should pack one but that does not mean they cannot choose to pack the lightest weight one they can find. You say don't tell people not to pack more items. In fact, I've already said, pack as many items as you feel necessary. Nowhere has it been suggested someone pack less items than they feel are necessary. You are simply taking things out of context or twisting them to try and make an argument. Someone can say, 'I need to carry a hair dryer.' All I am saying is carry a lightweight hair dryer.
There is no logical argument anyone can make for carrying more weight than you have to. It would be like someone saying, 'I'm fat and happy but could not be happy if I were not fat.' Really? You want to try and argue that point?
As for not getting the memo about wheels on suitcases, perhaps you should ask Bernard Sadow (I suppose you will need to look up who he is), for his suggestion as to how they will help you lift your suitcase onto a train or lift your bag off a carousel (I laugh watching some people attempting to do that) etc. Or do you only ever travel where you never have to actually lift your bag yourself? You attempt to suggest that examples of where weight doesn't matter to you means there will never be any instances when it does matter to you.
Which do you think makes more sense, the guy with the big dumb grim in the middle or the woman on the left with the little red bag at her feet? Because he can lift it doesn't mean he's smart.
84fiero, your examples are examples of things people have a reason to need to take for one reason or another. They have nothing whatsoever to do with trying to travel light. If you need to take stuff to a family member, you take it. The question is, what do you take that is for your use when travelling and do you or don't you try to take the lightest weight possible for those items.
LondonElite, where do you come up with the idea that travelling light is an 'obsession'? It is simple logic. The less weight you have to carry, the more comfortable you will be. Nor did anyone suggest anything in terms of what type of clothing someone should pack. As noted already, if someone wants to pack a 'little black dress', then they should pack one but that does not mean they cannot choose to pack the lightest weight one they can find. You say don't tell people not to pack more items. In fact, I've already said, pack as many items as you feel necessary. Nowhere has it been suggested someone pack less items than they feel are necessary. You are simply taking things out of context or twisting them to try and make an argument. Someone can say, 'I need to carry a hair dryer.' All I am saying is carry a lightweight hair dryer.
There is no logical argument anyone can make for carrying more weight than you have to. It would be like someone saying, 'I'm fat and happy but could not be happy if I were not fat.' Really? You want to try and argue that point?
As for not getting the memo about wheels on suitcases, perhaps you should ask Bernard Sadow (I suppose you will need to look up who he is), for his suggestion as to how they will help you lift your suitcase onto a train or lift your bag off a carousel (I laugh watching some people attempting to do that) etc. Or do you only ever travel where you never have to actually lift your bag yourself? You attempt to suggest that examples of where weight doesn't matter to you means there will never be any instances when it does matter to you.
Which do you think makes more sense, the guy with the big dumb grim in the middle or the woman on the left with the little red bag at her feet? Because he can lift it doesn't mean he's smart.
You’re simply wrong by labelling light packing as common sense.
Jun 4, 2018, 3:16 am
#154
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,307
It is neither logical as you have again mentioned, or common sense. It's a personal preference and not one many here chose. As you've done before, you seem to be taking your preferred option and saying it's right for everyone. And as before, posters are lining up to tell you it's not. Do you see a pattern developing?
Jun 4, 2018, 3:30 am
#155
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Canada, USA, Europe
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 31,452
I could equally argue that it is illogical for me to spend time thinking about how to save on weight when the airline allows me to check in two bags at 32kgs each for free. We would I restrict my clothing choices while travelling? How bizarrely illogical to come to that conclusion. 
Jun 4, 2018, 7:58 am
#156
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: SFO/TPA
Programs: DL PM
Posts: 199
I could equally argue that it is illogical for me to spend time thinking about how to save on weight when the airline allows me to check in two bags at 32kgs each for free. We would I restrict my clothing choices while travelling? How bizarrely illogical to come to that conclusion.
When I traveled for work I always checked my bag and never worried about what it weighed. That was a thousand years ago when hauling everything on board just wasn’t a thing and Baggage Claim was where you met your ride.*
Now retired, I don’t check bags if I can avoid it because I don’t want to deal with damage to my bag, theft from my bag, or a misplaced or lost bag. Sometimes I am only going to be at my destination city for a few hours or a day before hopping a train elsewhere. Dealing with lost luggage when you’re moving from town to town is a huge hassle that I prefer to avoid.
I also obsessively pack light because I am older now and although I’m in good health and strong for my age and gender, I’d like to stay that way. Anyone who has ever experienced a torn rotator cuff will understand. I do a lot of train travel in Europe and I like to walk to burn off all the calories I consume while over there. So I book hotels walking distance from the train — but that could be as much as 2 miles and could involve stairs. cobblestone, steep climbs, and multiple times where the bag needs to be picked up and put down. I also like knowing that I am not reliant on cabs or Uber when I exit the train once I get home because I can always walk if I have to, even though it’s a mile and a half, much of which is a steep uphill climb. FWIW, I can always check bags for free, so this is not about that.
After doing this for 9 years, I’ve got it nearly perfected but I have to admit that it did take a lot of up front time, trouble and money. I’m still fine-tuning and there is always the constant need to replenish. I totally get why most people who aren’t moving around on regional planes and trains from city to city, who aren’t worried about inflaming their sciatica again by lifting a heavy bag repeatedly or tearing a rotator cuff getting it down from a bin or rack, wouldn’t see the point to all this obsession with packing light.
*Side bar: One of the traveling jobs involved bringing a complete audio/video presentation plus several items from the product line. I worked for a speaker manufacturer and this was in the 1970's when speakers were enormous and very heavy. My boss and I traveled with 22 anvil cases. They barely fit in the huge station wagons we rented. We always checked these 22 anvil cases (plus our own bags) at the curb. Hard to believe nowadays, I know, but back then, you could just give $20 to a skycap (most folks still called them redcaps back then) and the whole lot would disappear like magic curbside. Nothing was ever lost, stolen or damaged (though damaging an anvil case is not an easy feat).
Last edited by dalehill; Jun 4, 2018 at 8:26 am Reason: embellishment :)
Jun 4, 2018, 9:13 am
#157
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,271
Why is it that the same handful of posters always hit the 'like' button for each other on thread after thread when they attempt to argue against any comments that do not conform to their collective view of things? Then they try to suggest that since they all agree, they must be right and the non-conformist must be wrong.
When someone posts a view that is contrary to the herd, it does not make that poster wrong, it simply makes their view contrary to the herd view. History is full of examples of contrary views that were proven right, regardless of what the herd believed. The world is flat and packing light is not an advantage.
Now we have LondonElite suggesting: "I could equally argue that it is illogical for me to spend time thinking about how to save on weight when the airline allows me to check in two bags at 32kgs each for free. We would I restrict my clothing choices while travelling? How bizarrely illogical to come to that conclusion." (my bolding)
Well OK LondonElite, how did you get your two 32 kg. bags to the airport? How are you going to get them from your arrival point to wherever your final destination is? Where did you read anything about restricting clothing choices?
You write as if the only factor that matters is how much weight the airline restricts you to. Do you really believe that is the only thing that matters when you travel? Have you ever tried lifting two 32 kg. bags onto a train? Tried carrying them up a flight or two of stairs? Pulled a back muscle lifting them in and out of the back of a car? The airline restriction is not the only factor in what matters when it comes to luggage weight. It is bizarre to think that making such a suggestion is logical.
I'm done with this thread now. The message is clear and irrefutable. Travelling light is preferable to travelling heavy. If someone cannot see that as simple common sense, then I suppose there really are people who can get themselves to believe something like, 'I'm fat and happy but I could not be happy without being fat.'
When someone posts a view that is contrary to the herd, it does not make that poster wrong, it simply makes their view contrary to the herd view. History is full of examples of contrary views that were proven right, regardless of what the herd believed. The world is flat and packing light is not an advantage.
Now we have LondonElite suggesting: "I could equally argue that it is illogical for me to spend time thinking about how to save on weight when the airline allows me to check in two bags at 32kgs each for free. We would I restrict my clothing choices while travelling? How bizarrely illogical to come to that conclusion.
" (my bolding)Well OK LondonElite, how did you get your two 32 kg. bags to the airport? How are you going to get them from your arrival point to wherever your final destination is? Where did you read anything about restricting clothing choices?
You write as if the only factor that matters is how much weight the airline restricts you to. Do you really believe that is the only thing that matters when you travel? Have you ever tried lifting two 32 kg. bags onto a train? Tried carrying them up a flight or two of stairs? Pulled a back muscle lifting them in and out of the back of a car? The airline restriction is not the only factor in what matters when it comes to luggage weight. It is bizarre to think that making such a suggestion is logical.
I'm done with this thread now. The message is clear and irrefutable. Travelling light is preferable to travelling heavy. If someone cannot see that as simple common sense, then I suppose there really are people who can get themselves to believe something like, 'I'm fat and happy but I could not be happy without being fat.'
Jun 4, 2018, 9:25 am
#158
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Canada, USA, Europe
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 31,452
Why is it that the same handful of posters always hit the 'like' button for each other on thread after thread when they attempt to argue against any comments that do not conform to their collective view of things? Then they try to suggest that since they all agree, they must be right and the non-conformist must be wrong.
When someone posts a view that is contrary to the herd, it does not make that poster wrong, it simply makes their view contrary to the herd view. History is full of examples of contrary views that were proven right, regardless of what the herd believed. The world is flat and packing light is not an advantage.
When someone posts a view that is contrary to the herd, it does not make that poster wrong, it simply makes their view contrary to the herd view. History is full of examples of contrary views that were proven right, regardless of what the herd believed. The world is flat and packing light is not an advantage.
Now we have LondonElite suggesting: "I could equally argue that it is illogical for me to spend time thinking about how to save on weight when the airline allows me to check in two bags at 32kgs each for free. We would I restrict my clothing choices while travelling? How bizarrely illogical to come to that conclusion. " (my bolding)
Well OK LondonElite, how did you get your two 32 kg. bags to the airport? How are you going to get them from your arrival point to wherever your final destination is? Where did you read anything about restricting clothing choices?
You write as if the only factor that matters is how much weight the airline restricts you to. Do you really believe that is the only thing that matters when you travel? Have you ever tried lifting two 32 kg. bags onto a train? Tried carrying them up a flight or two of stairs? Pulled a back muscle lifting them in and out of the back of a car? The airline restriction is not the only factor in what matters when it comes to luggage weight. It is bizarre to think that making such a suggestion is logical.
" (my bolding)Well OK LondonElite, how did you get your two 32 kg. bags to the airport? How are you going to get them from your arrival point to wherever your final destination is? Where did you read anything about restricting clothing choices?
You write as if the only factor that matters is how much weight the airline restricts you to. Do you really believe that is the only thing that matters when you travel? Have you ever tried lifting two 32 kg. bags onto a train? Tried carrying them up a flight or two of stairs? Pulled a back muscle lifting them in and out of the back of a car? The airline restriction is not the only factor in what matters when it comes to luggage weight. It is bizarre to think that making such a suggestion is logical.
I know this will kill you, but last year when we travelled from Europe to our vacation home in the US we had eight suitcases for our family of six. On the return, having done a fair bit of shopping, we filled two large duffel bags we had brought along empty. And, As I posted upstream, I recently spent ca two weeks across the US with only a small rolling Tumi bag. Neither is right or wrong.
I'm done with this thread now. The message is clear and irrefutable. Travelling light is preferable to travelling heavy. If someone cannot see that as simple common sense, then I suppose there really are people who can get themselves to believe something like, 'I'm fat and happy but I could not be happy without being fat.'
Jun 4, 2018, 9:27 am
#159
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,271
A perfectly valid personal preference. Completely understandable. Everyone’s circumstances are different though, so other preferences are also perfectly valid, though perhaps not as easily understood.
When I traveled for work I always checked my bag and never worried about what it weighed. That was a thousand years ago when hauling everything on board just wasn’t a thing and Baggage Claim was where you met your ride.*
Now retired, I don’t check bags if I can avoid it because I don’t want to deal with damage to my bag, theft from my bag, or a misplaced or lost bag. Sometimes I am only going to be at my destination city for a few hours or a day before hopping a train elsewhere. Dealing with lost luggage when you’re moving from town to town is a huge hassle that I prefer to avoid.
I also obsessively pack light because I am older now and although I’m in good health and strong for my age and gender, I’d like to stay that way. Anyone who has ever experienced a torn rotator cuff will understand. I do a lot of train travel in Europe and I like to walk to burn off all the calories I consume while over there. So I book hotels walking distance from the train — but that could be as much as 2 miles and could involve stairs. cobblestone, steep climbs, and multiple times where the bag needs to be picked up and put down. I also like knowing that I am not reliant on cabs or Uber when I exit the train once I get home because I can always walk if I have to, even though it’s a mile and a half, much of which is a steep uphill climb. FWIW, I can always check bags for free, so this is not about that.After doing this for 9 years, I’ve got it nearly perfected but I have to admit that it did take a lot of up front time, trouble and money. I’m still fine-tuning and there is always the constant need to replenish. I totally get why most people who aren’t moving around on regional planes and trains from city to city, who aren’t worried about inflaming their sciatica again by lifting a heavy bag repeatedly or tearing a rotator cuff getting it down from a bin or rack, wouldn’t see the point to all this obsession with packing light.
*Side bar: One of the traveling jobs involved bringing a complete audio/video presentation plus several items from the product line. I worked for a speaker manufacturer and this was in the 1970's when speakers were enormous and very heavy. My boss and I traveled with 22 anvil cases. They barely fit in the huge station wagons we rented. We always checked these 22 anvil cases (plus our own bags) at the curb. Hard to believe nowadays, I know, but back then, you could just give $20 to a skycap (most folks still called them redcaps back then) and the whole lot would disappear like magic curbside. Nothing was ever lost, stolen or damaged (though damaging an anvil case is not an easy feat).
I do think you have brought up a relevant point when you say, "I’ve got it nearly perfected but I have to admit that it did take a lot of up front time, trouble and money." I think that is one of the real objections people have but don't want to admit to.
Jun 4, 2018, 9:31 am
#160
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,884
I would love to see some of the nay-sayers attempting to travel in Europe by train with two 32kg. bags the airline allows them to check for free dalehill. They would quickly learn there are other factors to consider as you indicate.
I do think you have brought up a relevant point when you say, "I’ve got it nearly perfected but I have to admit that it did take a lot of up front time, trouble and money." I think that is one of the real objections people have but don't want to admit to.
I do think you have brought up a relevant point when you say, "I’ve got it nearly perfected but I have to admit that it did take a lot of up front time, trouble and money." I think that is one of the real objections people have but don't want to admit to.
Well, *this* is awkward.... I think I must have been using the word "done" incorrectly for my whole life.
Jun 4, 2018, 9:55 am
#161
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Canada, USA, Europe
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 31,452
No problem. But did I say anything about taking a train in Europe with two 32kg suitcases? Oh, that's right, I didn't. You did. I get the impression you're not really reading what people are writing but simply advancing your own cause.
Jun 4, 2018, 10:20 am
#162
Moderator: Delta SkyMiles, Luxury Hotels, TravelBuzz! and Italy
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 26,543
Reminder from moderator
12.2 Avoid Getting Personal
If you have a difference of opinion with another member, challenge the idea — NOT the person
I have deleted posts which have violated this rule. I see there are more posts in which posters are challenging each other and not "the idea."
All future posts which violate this rule will be deleted and the violators will be subject to disciplinary action.
Obscure2k
TravelBuzz Moderator
If you have a difference of opinion with another member, challenge the idea — NOT the person
I have deleted posts which have violated this rule. I see there are more posts in which posters are challenging each other and not "the idea."
All future posts which violate this rule will be deleted and the violators will be subject to disciplinary action.
Obscure2k
TravelBuzz Moderator
Jun 4, 2018, 11:05 am
#163
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: SFO/TPA
Programs: DL PM
Posts: 199
Not necessarily here on this thread or elsewhere on FT (I haven't read the majority of it all) but quite often anywhere on the internet or in magazines where you see advice on traveling light, there can be a sort of Rick Steves reverse snobbery thing going on that is terribly off-putting. Like anything more than a backpack is a fail and succumbing to a wheeled carry-on reveals a serious character flaw.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to have your stuff with you when you travel and being perfectly fine with taking cabs and tipping skycaps and bellhops, eschewing complicated train travel with multiple connections, etc. We've got friends who always check big bags and they think we're nuts as they watch the bellhop wheeling their bags to them while they wait for their cab while we set off on foot for the subway or train station schlepping our clattering rollaboards behind us. There is nothing wrong with not wanting to do laundry in a hotel sink every other night wanting space in a suitcase for souvenirs.
The point is, as long as a traveler is happy with how they have chosen to travel, then that method is the right choice for them. Heavy, checked bags, lightweight carry-ons, whatever. People are different. If I had to spend a week on a ginormous cruise ship in the Caribbean, I'd probably throw myself off the bow by Day 5. Obviously millions of people don't agree with me on that. Unless it's "travel such that you do not negatively impact other people", there is no right or wrong way to travel.
Jun 4, 2018, 12:51 pm
#164
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: YVR
Programs: AC SE 2MM; UA MP Premier Silver; Marriott Bonvoy LT Titanium Elite; Radisson; Avis PC
Posts: 35,255
Jun 4, 2018, 12:53 pm
#165
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: YVR
Programs: AC SE 2MM; UA MP Premier Silver; Marriott Bonvoy LT Titanium Elite; Radisson; Avis PC
Posts: 35,255
