And how does pack weight effect that time?
I have been trying to get an estimate of the time it would take to get from one location to another in the park.  A big part of that is the time to do portages.  How much difference in time difference is there between crossing with a pack and the return trip. So to find out how long a portage would take I timed my self while walking my dog.  I wore my GPS and found that the rout I take is 2.69 miles.  The course crosses a couple of ravines and has 2 large hills to clime. About half of the rout is un trail woods. It is easy walking woods but not like a path or trail. I started with no pack and then added a pack and progressively added weight.  I changed packs in the middle of the test because I thought the other pack carried better.  
Pk WT Lb.       Mi      Time Min            
0                 2.69      55            11/14/09
24                 2.69      59            11/15/09
45                 2.69      74      Raining& stopped 2 times to adjust
                                               BluePack      11/26/09
45                2.69      77      Wet but dryer than yesterday. Green pack fits better But Compresses chest      11/27/09
57                2.69      76      Better adjusted pack Dryer than last time      11/29/09


Although a heavy pack slows me down it is not as much as I would have thought.
MagicPaddler

the real variables are portage conditions, water levels, beaver activity....

too many variables to accuratly predict.  you might as well just say 10 min/50  rods....in the end, it would be a lot easier

Man I wish I had some peoples free time.

Is there a prize for fastest portage time?? I thought this was a vacation...

Old Salt wrote on Nov 30^th, 2009 at 1:02am:

Is there a prize for fastest portage time?? I thought this was a vacation...

OS,

Try telling that to my son ,Mr Evinrude. We should be more like S2 and take pictures on the portages.


Magic

The average person walks 3 MPH unloaded. Including load and unload time, over the years, my observations have noted that easier portages seem to work out to 2 MPH, average portages about 1.5 MPH and ugly portages (Fern to Olifaunt at days end in 80 degree weather:)) 1 MPH or less. In my travels, the majority of groups that I have seen double portage so the length of the portage must be multiplied by three. Using 320 rods as one mile one must do the math from there. BUSHWACKING though is an entirely different story. All bets are off and all calculations out the window.......as you and KF already know. You and KF both have my respect ;)

Comrade WR

Magic,
I am sure pack weight has an effect, but I agree that trail conditions are a big factor too.  You have to slow down when you need to pick your way through boulder strewn paths or in shin deep water soaked "wet spots".  The number of portages per day, especially when unpacking and packing a kayak in between several, also slows down progress.
You must have a big adventure in mind for 2010?  ;)  
IC

wrote on Nov 29^th, 2009 at 4:52pm:

And how does pack weight effect that time? I have been trying to get an estimate of the time it would take to get from one location to another in the park.  A big part of that is the time to do portages.  How much difference in time difference is there between crossing with a pack and the return trip. So to find out how long a portage would take I timed my self while walking my dog.  I wore my GPS and found that the rout I take is 2.69 miles.  The course crosses a couple of ravines and has 2 large hills to clime. About half of the rout is un trail woods. It is easy walking woods but not like a path or trail. I started with no pack and then added a pack and progressively added weight.  I changed packs in the middle of the test because I thought the other pack carried better.   Pk WT Lb.       Mi      Time Min             0                 2.69      55            11/14/09 24                 2.69      59            11/15/09 45                 2.69      74      Raining& stopped 2 times to adjust                                                BluePack      11/26/09 45                2.69      77      Wet but dryer than yesterday. Green pack fits better But Compresses chest      11/27/09 57                2.69      76      Better adjusted pack Dryer than last time      11/29/09 Although a heavy pack slows me down it is not as much as I would have thought. MagicPaddler

1) Too much free time...
2) Overthinkin'...
3) Let us know how this translates in real time on your trip...
4) Don't forget your stopwatch!
5) With the time you save, you could save on your car insurance...

RE: Is there a prize for fastest portage time?? I thought this was a vacation...

Being tall, I take long strides. It's more comfortable. And sometimes, toward the end of a loonnnnng travel day, when I'm feeling the pack weight and can't wait to get to a camp to set up and settle down, I get into a zone where my pace quickens even faster.

A few years back, about halfway across one of the Twin Agonies, I was in such a zone, when traveling companion "Smashdancer" up ahead heard me coming up behind him. So he started walking faster. And so I did ... and then he did ... and then I did. Pretty soon, we were practically sprinting despite our weariness, trying to beat the other.  

We kept it up until the end. With the rocks and the mud and the heavy packs, it was probably one of the stupidest things we've ever done. But we ended the portage laughing our fool heads off, and we couldn't stop laughing on the whole trip back for the canoes. The others deemed us idiots.

So, should a "fastest portage time" list exist, I submit that time for inclusion. It should make the top 50 or so.

(But then we also have one of the slowest, fighting the waist-deep bogs and deadfalls on the Sauvage and Bon Homme portages in the north.)

-- kypaddler

"Although a heavy pack slows me down it is not as much as I would have thought."

think again though, about the cumulative affect of that heavy pack - you only carried your pack once on your test- now double that for each portage, and then throw in a big fudge factor for the 10th portage of the day, maybe for the third day in a row.  Though I agree with taking one heavy load for the first of two trips, and the lighter load for the second trip.

Double tripping the portages, I guess I use a 1 mph rate for the one way distance, more or less.  I'm a fast walker and can do the return trip for load #2 at better than  3 mph - a fast pace for a woods trail, and probably for the most part, can keep to a 3mph pace while carrying the gear (note that those are light loads though)

But I don't just use the 1 mph rate -- what I do is assume 10 min unloading, and 10 min re-loading - that includes moving the canoe to shore and tieing, and setting it back in the water to laod again.  No it doesn't always take that long, but over the long haul, it averages out - that gives me some time to take pics, or do whatever.  So I plan a minimum of 20 minutes, even for a simple 10 rod portage (regardless of the fact that it won't take that long) - then I add the 1 mph rate for the distance, more or less.  That way, if I take time to saw some deadfall out of the trail, or can't find the start of the portage, or the water is too low, or there are new beaver ponds, or the portage landing is really crappy and takes twice as long as normal to deal with, I have some extra time built in.  For me, over the 8 or 10 portages I'm likely to be doing in a day, it does average out pretty closely to what I've planned.  

About the same as using 3mph for paddling - it averages out over a long day.  And I rarely finish my day early, normally I'll be about on schedule or I'll br running behind due to headwinds, or difficult portage conditions.

I do what you are thinking of, that is, I plan an itinerary for each day so I know how to get from point A to point B in 3 days travel.  Then I fine tune to adjust - maybe for getting to a certain spot on day 3, I'll have to make day 2 longer than originally planned - maybe I'll have to get up an hour earlier, and or travel a lot later, but at least I have a plan that will get me where I want to be, more or less when I want to get there.  That works about the same for a solo trip or tendem or group trip, though group trips will definitely be slower.


edit: if that didn't make sense - for a one mile portage, I'd use 1 hour, plus the 10+ 10 minutes load unload time for a total of 1 1/2 hours.

Hmm, this might help you out MP.  Might need to take a lady friend along to work it all out.   ;D

Our group of seven really tackled this portage. The three guys did it naked. We were in a groove and wanted to do all of our portages in one trip. The ladies doubled up with packs. We packed fairly light that trip.

  (You need to Login or Register

qp

QPassage wrote on Nov 30^th, 2009 at 4:20pm:

Hmm, this might help you out MP.  Might need to take a lady friend along to work it all out.   ;D Our group of seven really tackled this portage. The three guys did it naked. We were in a groove and wanted to do all of our portages in one trip. The ladies doubled up with packs. We packed fairly light that trip.   (You need to Login or Register qp

THAT might explain who lost the "herb" and pipe on the other post ::)

Getting back to the original question, my only additional input is that theory and reality are in two totally different universes kind of like virtual vs reality. Each trip I take I learn to plan more for the unexpected. Enjoy next years trip MP. Maybe our theories can be discussed further at Canoe Copia while we wait for the reality of next year's trip to come to pass

WR

What I am trying to do is to find what works best for me.  I already know I do not like carrying more than 60 LB.  Adjustment of the pack can not only make it more comfortable but also make it take less time to cross a portage.  My  rout is 2.69 miles which is longer than a single trip across a portage.  I am trying to simulate a long double portage maybe near the end of the day. I have some other changes to test but I do not think I will see how comfortable it is to do naked ( a lot of multifora rose! Ouch).
Well it keeps me in shape anyhow.
Magicpaddler

MP

I would base it on my walking time on a fairly level wooded (not Path) walk.
So at 2.69 miles that =  170438.4 inches.  My stride is 27 inches, divide that into the 170438.4 = 6312.5333 steps.  Now for the grade factor I would cut my stride by .33 ( less 8.91 inches) for grades 5% to 10% that would make my stride at 18.09 inches Any grade over 10%  I would cut it by .66 ( less 17.82 inches), that would be 9.18 inches per step.  At a 5-10% grade you’ll still be walking pretty much in a straight line. Over 10% going uphill or down I suspect you will be making much shorter steps or walking from side to side.  I figure my steps usually 1 per second so at a level grade it would take me about 1.7534815 hours to walk it.
Now take into account the grade changes from typo maps.  Figure the percentages of different grades and you should be pretty close.   This is a figure I use hiking in the Gorge and the only things that really throw it into a default are mud, water, pictures, and snack breaks.   Don’t take a camera or snacks and you’ve already cut that default by 50%. ;)

qp

QPassage wrote on Dec 1^st, 2009 at 1:58am:

MP I would base it on my walking time on a fairly level wooded (not Path) walk. So at 2.69 miles that =  170438.4 inches.  My stride is 27 inches, divide that into the 170438.4 = 6312.5333 steps.  Now for the grade factor I would cut my stride by .33 ( less 8.91 inches) for grades 5% to 10% that would make my stride at 18.09 inches Any grade over 10%  I would cut it by .66 ( less 17.82 inches), that would be 9.18 inches per step.  At a 5-10% grade you’ll still be walking pretty much in a straight line. Over 10% going uphill or down I suspect you will be making much shorter steps or walking from side to side.  I figure my steps usually 1 per second so at a level grade it would take me about 1.7534815 hours to walk it. Now take into account the grade changes from typo maps.  Figure the percentages of different grades and you should be pretty close.   This is a figure I use hiking in the Gorge and the only things that really throw it into a default are mud, water, pictures, and snack breaks.   Don’t take a camera or snacks and you’ve already cut that default by 50%. ;) qp

:-? :-? :-? :-? :-?
See, it ain't rocket science!! :o Just do the math... ;D

How long does it take to do a portage?

To figure it precisely, I check my watch when I step out of the canoe upon arrival at the portage.  I check my watch again when I paddle away from the other end.  

End Time - Start Time = Elapsed Time  ;)  It's over when it's over and not before.

Seriously, though, I just don't give it that much thought, especially on portages I've never travelled.  There's too many potential variables.

Mad_Mat's system seems like a good rule of thumb to me if you're goal is just to make sure you aren't planning your days too aggressively.

This turns out to be way too complex for me. I figure, long portages take longer than short portages. Of course, if I've been across a trail before, I have a pretty good idea. But things change. Consider, for example, the change from the south side of Kashashapiwi after the beaver dam got removed. Before I got there, I knew the dam was gone and could take that into account. But suppose you get somewhere and did not know of a change in the trail? Yet, I guess science can be applied to whatever.

Tim

Yikes!  We just generally plan on doing 10-15 miles a day and if the winds are favorable and the portages easy we're done early and if not we're done late or we reconsider....  

I used to be able to do...not sure it is still relevant 'cuz I am slowing down...one McKenzie map east/west per day, or north/south in a day and a half.  ;)
Not surprised Magic is getting this all worked out...he IS an analytical type scientist by trade.  He also can charge through a bushwack like a bull moose while the rest of us are pussy-footin' around the tough spots  ;D

 This is very entertaining! I'm not sure you can "calculate" travel or paddle time other than in a very general way? Too many variables, at least in my experience.
 
Weight is a reasonable "doable", as well as physical conditioning for the trip. Efficient portaging techniques helps as well.

 I'm not sure planning using a "known" route that you use frequently will translate to the varying portage conditions you encounter on a trip?
 
Your body adapts to the load it's put under over time. it becomes more "efficient" at doing the same task repeatedly. Even a shorter route with lots of up/downs, boot sucking mud, or slick rocks will tire you faster than your longer familiar training route that doesn't feature those obstacles.

 I plan on "underestimating" my travel time, figuring you can always push on if your up too it and the conditions are favorable. I'd rather add a unexpected lake or layover day, than have to push hard to get out for a scheduled pick-up or depart time.

I go on what my body is telling me. I like an early start, before 7 am at least. I take a short lunch unless the winds are against me and then I might take a longer break and paddle later. Generally by 4 pm, I'm in campsite mode. I'll paddle later or take a hard portage late, especially if it puts me on a nice lake I have a layover day planned.

You can calculate/figure all you want, but we all know Murphy's Law will have a say in our best figured plans ;) Worse case you go from Murphy's to FUBAR, in which case you call for the MARINES( JIMBO) on your little SPOT gizmo :-[

I look forward too the day when I can travel when I feel like it, layover whenever I want, and come out when I run out of food.
 
Unfortunately in today's economy THAT day is getting pushed farther and farther down the road for me :'(
 
I'm sure MP will get it all worked out too his satisfaction before his trip.
It will be interesting too read his trip report and see how close theory and reality are :question
 
Hopefully he won't be disappointed, and we'll be enlightened an/or amused ;)
 

Thanks QP I have got all of that down.

My estimations have been known too not be to far off.  On a trip recently I estimated arriving on McKenzie late in the afternoon of the first day in the park. We actually got there early afternoon ….. the next day. Oh well.

Yes I enjoy a good bushwhack and have fond memories of them.
MagicPaddler

I put the same gear in a third back pack that I have and did the same rout.  This is a old exterior frame pack.  I found it to be much more comfortable than either of my canoe packs.  I have a cold now  which effects my breathing but could breathe better because the pack did not compress my chest like the canoe packs do. In spite of my cold I finished the loop in less time than with either of the other packs and it was easier.  Both of the canoe packs put some pressure on my butt and I think that causes my right hip to hurt.  The frame pack does not do this.  I will try it again with this pack and see if my hip still does well.  
MagicPaddler

MP
I have always been a frame pack guy.  My old Camp Trails has made many trips into the Q.  I also have an internal frame pack and I to like the comfort of how it fits on my back while portaging.  Only issue I've had with the external pack is it will scratch the canoe and it is harder to get in and out of the canoe.  What I really like about frame packs are the compartments, saves digging for those little things when you need them.  Food is an issue in these packs it is harder to pack in smaller areas.  But, I usually pack freeze dried and smaller type foods from the grocery.  
I did find this year on a river trip I took, that if you take a freeze dried pouch and poke a hole in it, then put it in a ziplock freezer vac bag it saves a ton of space.  We would put everything in one bag for that meal then vac it down.  
Take a look at this site   (You need to Login or Register they have monthly deals and the hamburger is fantastic with those hamburger helper meals.

qp

wrote on Dec 6^th, 2009 at 5:55pm:

...old exterior frame pack.  I found it to be much more comfortable than either of my canoe packs.  I have a cold now  which effects my breathing but could breathe better because the pack did not compress my chest like the canoe packs do.

I know that feeling. Do they all have hip belts? Weight distribution equally top heavy?

All of the packs do have hip belts.  The most expensive, newest and with the most adjustments is the most uncomfortable.  The weight does sag down more in the 2 non frame packs than the frame pack.  

Nothing wrong with using a frame pack if that works for you.  I always have a packframe with me for portaging the canoe.  For longer portages, I'll just lash my duffle bag to the frame (takes about 60 seconds, if that), hook the shoulder straps of my dayback on the top corners, and use that for the portage. Fitting a fram into the canoe may be an issue - but I've never really had any problems doing it.

Mad Mat raises the most critical weakness, for me, of the frame pack. If big enough to hold much gear, the external frame packs don't fit in the canoe very well. And I have several external frame packs and use them often -- for other purposes.

Tim

AA very true they don't hold as much.  The main reason I' pack freeze dried food.  I have found if you turn the external frame pack so the frame is sticking up in the canoe they load and unload much easier.  I tend to strap my pack in the canoe and have found one end of the frame usually slides under the yoke allowing me a better option for strapping it in, fewer scratches in the bottom of the canoe also.
My first trip to the Q we took rented aluminum canoes.  We were able to single portage by sitting the canoe seats on our packs and work the portages as a team.  Heavy but effective.

qp

Long before I added north country canoeing to my slate of outdoor activities, I'd given away all of my external frame packs and gone to internal frame models.  For me, they offered the advantage of being closer to your body and less likely to tip you if your center of balance is not exactly right.

It was a lucky choice for me in that the internal frame packs seem to form to the shape of a canoe more easily than an external frame.  Furthermore, since I mostly paddle solo, they more easily fit into a solo canoe hull.  Generally, my objective is to have minimal (to no) pack profile above the gunwale line.  An external frame fits in very nicely in this context.

My most recent set of pack purchases have been along the lines of an internal frame pack, but with "waterproof" exteriors.  

Yes, admittedly, I have to dig to the bottom of the pack for certain things, but then I don't have exterior pockets to snag on things while loading/unloading or portaging.

dd

QP, ah the days of aluminum canoes! Dad and I bought one about 1955 and we thought we were pretty much something special. I still have it in the garage, but it has been years since I took it out.

You are right that the best way (only way?) to stow an external frame pack in a canoe is top down and slide the top under a thwart as best you can. And the little side pockets do stow little bits that tumble to the bottom of an internal frame pack. Except, as DD notes, the various pockets, belts, rings, whatever on the outside of the packs seem to catch on things, particularly irksome if bushwhacking.

Tim

Well, people no doubt snicker at us at every portage (behind our backs, of course--we haven't noticed any blatant disrespect) because my main pack is an external frame pack.  It was purchased many years ago with my bulging disk  and my recent rotator cuff surgery in mind, and I was fitted very carefully for comfort in carrying a heavy load.  It is our main food pack.  I carry the bulk of our food inventory in this pack (freeze-dried food, dried fruits, drink mixes, most of the snack items, the lunch stuff like cheese, summer sausage and crackers, etc.) and also three nalgenes of filtered water in the side pockets, and our rain gear is on the top of the big section for easy access.  The sleeping pads are tied to the bottom.  To make it even more unwieldy-looking we now tie a couple of small camp stools to the outside of it!  I suspect I look sort of like the junk man going down the portage!   :)

When we load our canoe we don't have our packs level with the gunnels and that has always bothered me.  Our profile is a bit too high.  The big Duluth (tent) pack is in the bottom, and a large Sealine bag (duffle) is behind my seat with this frame pack leaning against it at an angle.  We aren't HIGH above the water, but a bit higher than I am comfortable with.  So we try not to venture out on big water in high winds, and we are fairly cautious about dangerous waters.

But I do like the frame pack.  It is convenient for use, the small pockets are good for the snack items, and I have never found a problem with them catching on anything, although it has been a few years since we did any bushwhacking.   ;)

Mainly I like it because it is comfortable for me on a long portage.  The hip strap makes the weight distribution easier on my back and I seem to have better balance with this type of pack.  I also portage the SeaLine bag, which is a large one, and do well with it, but I have often wished it were the kind with a hip strap.  (new purchase may be in the works on that.)

We are 64 and we probably aren't going to be purchasing a great deal of new gear for our trips at this point.  I read about what everyone SHOULD have and I think back to what we USED to have, look at what we have now (most of which is terribly out-dated and not state-of-the-art) and figure we have come a long way.  

I am just relieved that people don't snicker loudly enough that we hear them.   ;D ;D

Spartan 2, I doubt you'd get much snickering, even behind your back.

My Duluth pack is so old, it's somwhere between the development of rock and dirt. I'm not frugal, I'm cheap.

Certainly balance is a critical matter, and if you have better balance with the external frame pack that's what you should use.

My packs are not always above the gunnel, though I think that is a good idea. Depends on the wind whether I lay them down. Probably a good idea all the time.

Do you and Neil follow MSU hoops? UNC Charlotte men are 6-1 with the only loss to Duke and a 22-point victory over Louisville.

Tim

 I like the internal frame packs, but I can see why other's like the external ones. The little pockets for storing items that get swallowed in a single Duluth style pack is a nice convenience.

 I have put add on side pockets to both my main pack and food pack.
I carry my stove fuel in them, ( no fuel leaks in main bag worries) and any other item that I might need in a hurry/emergency. They hold a surprising amount of stuff, and attach too any pack that has dual side compression straps.

  (You need to Login or Register

 They don't seem too snag up on portages/bushwhacks as the main pack is narrower than my profile anyway. Same in canoe, they don't hang-up with their rounded profile.

Ancient_Angler wrote on Dec 9^th, 2009 at 12:52pm:

My Duluth pack is so old, it's somwhere between the development of rock and dirt. I'm not frugal, I'm cheap.

I like to think I'm just the opposite but sometimes I wonder.

I had a really cheap, old (international orange) frame pack (with an american flag patch sewn on the flap no less) for my first trip. It was sans frame 'cause "those things are bad." (If I still had the frame I'd probably still be using it for the newfangled RubberMaid food pack.)

The one thing I did not like about the backpack was the two compartments and all the pockets and zippers. I should replace my current (big) SealLine pack since I mostly do solo trips now but the thing I like about it most is the tent is the heaviest thing so it's on top. Once the tent is set up, I just pour the rest of the contents into the tent, open the valve on the thermarest and go look for wood. Next day, I don't even stuff my sleeping bag into it's sack. I just throw everything in, put the tent on top and sit on it to squeeze out excess air. If it's raining, that pack will just be a little heavier than usual.

db, I thought I was a minimalist! That sitting on the pack is a great idea. After dumping the tent contents in. Gotta try that.

Tim af

We carry our clothing in a transparent waterproof duffle pack (goes inside the Sealine bag) and I always sit on it to compress it before I close it up.  Great way to make a bag smaller!   :)

Yes, Tim, we follow MSU hoops.  We are going to the game with Oakland tonight.  We don't have season tickets, though.  Just lucky to have a friend who offered us a couple tickets tonight.  

We still have a Duluth pack that we bought used from Canadian Waters in 1971.  And are using the cook kit we bought (new) from them in 1973.  THAT I would sometimes like to upgrade, but probably won't.  At 65+, I don't think I'll need to trip with new stuff.  Well. . .someday, a new knee, probably.

once your out there you will see that this question is meaningless. The journey is the destination. The sooner you abandon a watch the better time you will have on the trip. If it is any comfort, in the summer you can paddle to 9:30 pm or so.

Kick back and enjoy!

Dead_Dog_Paddler wrote on Dec 11^th, 2009 at 2:53pm:

once your out there you will see that this question is meaningless. The journey is the destination. The sooner you abandon a watch the better time you will have on the trip. If it is any comfort, in the summer you can paddle to 9:30 pm or so. Kick back and enjoy!

Welcome aboard D_D_P

Once you YOU get acclimated, you'll see that in MP's mind and others with similar personalities, planning and "pondering" are the way they operate.
MP goes were few do, and to accomplish what he has, planning is an important facet.
I fall somewhere in the middle. I understand the not watching the clock comment, but I keep one handy for reference on travel days.
As for enjoyment, MP at his ripe "old" age, probably enjoys his trips more than most of us ;)
As always, different strokes for different folks.

Dead_Dog_Paddler wrote on Dec 11^th, 2009 at 2:53pm:

The sooner you abandon a watch the better time you will have on the trip.

The only time I wear a watch is on vacation because it is THE most valuable time I have to spend. It's in short supply and it's value increases every year.

I always wear my watch on solo trips as well...don't want to miss mealtime!

One of the nice thing about a GPS is it gives you data.  Here are some examples.  The 164 rod from Crooked to Argo took us 150 minutes.  This was our first day out, the third portage of the day, and we were exhausted.  There were four of us, 2 men and 2 women, out-of-shape, and two of us with bad knees.  A group passed us on that portage (3 people in one canoe) and they easily did the portage in half the time. We were double portaging and our canoes were an 18' aluminum battleship and an 18 kevlar.  The next day, we did the 126 rod portage from argo to darky in 80 minutes.

I never wear a watch.

But I confess to asking people the time, if only to gauge progress on a long travel day.

Nevertheless, to me the true measure of whether I've let myself get immersed in the wilderness on vacation, db, is not whether I monitor a societal yoke like "time," but how many days it takes for me to think about work and the problems I'll be returning to.

Smashdancer and I used to work together in a pretty stressful environment, and one trip we went six days before talking around a fire about any work issues.

That was a good trip.

-- kypaddler

I have only timed one portage. The portage from Trousers Lake to Cache Lake took us from about 8:00 am till 9:00 pm. It was quite an experience. I agree that time in not that important. We have found and setup camp in the dark many times.

kstar ...(thread diversion)....
that one took us eight, and out of Cache to the S took us six...but just for comparisson....PAW did it in a dryer year in 4 and 3 hours.