I've given this question a lot of thought, too.  

At 6'2" and about 225, I am a good deal larger than that "ideal voyageur size."  Throw a 75+ pound pack on my back & there is close to 300 lbs sitting atop two points (ie. my feet), driving them ever-deeper into the mud, swamp, bog or whatever.  While those "two points" are my size 13 boots, I kind of wish I had size 20 boots.  That would spread the load out better - kind of like snow shoes on snow - and keep me from submerging ever deeper in the muck.  

Equally dysfunctional is the effect of that amount of weight pounding through your vertebrae down to your feet as they navigate hard rock.  Your lower discs in your back, your knees, & other connective tissues take quite a beating.  KF is absolutely right, IMHO, re: emphasizing using your legs more (ie. multiple-portaging, etc.) and sporting lighter loads.  I think this is especially true as you get older; your connective tissues are not as resilient as they once were.  The days of my hauling two packs (back & front) plus a canoe on one carry across a tough portage are LONG gone!  I do not move as sprightly as I once did!

This past year was a bit atypical for me.  I was coming off of surgery for sciatica but I thought I had recovered sufficiently to do an aggressive trip.  Turns out I struggled with my back issue a LOT more than I anticipated.  It's taken me another whole year - with a heavy emphasis on back-strengthening yoga postures - to isolate & strengthen the core muscles of my lower back.  Still, there is NO guarantee that the pounding I would take on a tough trail wouldn't beat me down again.

While I THINK I am now good-to-go on another challenging trip, you never know until you get there.  

I've been working out hard two hours everyday for years.  While I could probably stand to shed even a few more pounds, I'm probably as good aerobically as I am ever going to get for my age.  In my opinion, it's the OTHER stuff that kills you... knee & back issues, blood blisters (I lost three toenails & my feet were a bloody mess by the time KF & I reached Irvine Lake last year).  

Maybe there IS some ideal body type where issues like these are less likely, no matter what your age?

Tough portaging & bushwhacking can be a real learning experience.  You watch others around you succeed & fail.  You look for more effective practices that you might be able to adopt.  Likely, this means cutting weight wherever possible (or substituting high-tech light-weight alternatives) and, then, figuring out a sensible & effective portaging routine for the party you are travelling with over the terrain you intend to travel.

We have little choice but to make the most of the body type we happened to be blessed by.  I believe larger body types CAN be as effective as "voyageur" types... especially in their youth.  I believe larger body types may be more prone to sustaining damage to discs & connective tissues, etc., over time.  I believe us larger folks can work to minimize the effects of wear & tear... but you have to be smart & deliberate about it.   I also believe "lean & mean" gets you further than "fat & mean."

A year or two ago, the BWJ published a story about a voyageur referred to  as "La Bomba" (sp?).  This fellow went around 6'6" and 300 lbs, I think.  He was renown for carrying more packs for longer distances than anybody.  It was only his demonstration of such extraordinary strength that persuaded the trading company to waive their normal rules re: height & weight.

What I can't recall is this: for how many years did Mr. La Bomba actually function so effectively?  I guess I'll have to re-read that story.  I like my heroes as much as anybody else but I gotta believe wear & tear took a heavier toll on such a big guy.

Body type is certainly important but I believe it becomes more important the older you get.

That's how I see it, anyway.


Jimbo  8-)