Trekking poles question

Posted by: asarkar

Trekking poles question - 09/10/12 08:15 PM

How many trekking poles does one need? Zero, one or two? I saw some high end poles that come in pairs and some that were sold individually.
As a beginner, I looked at several poles but the feature lists didn't mean any more to me that the writing on an Egyptian pyramid would. Could you suggest some poles please?
Posted by: lori

Re: Trekking poles question - 09/10/12 08:44 PM

You don't need trekking poles. You might benefit from them, if steep bits tend to make your knees sore, or if you learn to use them properly. (There are videos online to demonstrate proper use.)

I always use two poles and usually the Gossamer Gear Lightrek 4 poles I got 4-5 years ago. I have never regretted the expense because they have been excellent multi use items, light, durable and well worth it to me to use on steep slopes and crazy stream crossings.

I initially had a pair of Komperdell twist lock poles that failed to lock after about a year. Since I could not find any sort of customer service to get parts or advice, I went to Gossamer Gear and never looked back. The guys at Gossamer answer all my emails the same day, replaced one lower section under warranty, replaced my handles when the marmot ate them, and have earned my faith in cottage gear industry as a whole.

Twist locks are stronger than flip locks (there was an article on this in one of the backpacking magazines) and not all poles are created equal. Folks often start off with Walmart cheap poles that break and bend fairly easily, but, that might be the way to start to see if you actually want to use poles.
Posted by: Glenn Roberts

Re: Trekking poles question - 09/10/12 10:08 PM

"Zero, one, or two?"

Yes.

You don't NEED poles, but they are so handy that I've always used them. As far as features, it/they need to be reliably non-collapsible, and sturdy enough not to break when you lean on them. Oh, yeah, and they shouldn't wear a blister on your hand. Beyond that, "features" are just a matter of preference and salesmanship.

My first pole was a wooden utility handle (walking staff) that I bought for about $5 at the hardware store. It was smooth, unvarnished, and never gave me any problems. It was long enough that I could plant it downhill easily to slow my descent and take some pounding off my knees. Eventually, I drilled a hole in it, near the top, to run a guy line through when I used it as a tarp support.

My next was a Tracks Sherlock metal staff, that used button locking mechanism. It worked as well as my utility handle, until the time I took a tumble on some moss-covered rock while crossing a stream; I landed with it awkwardly caught between two rocks, and it bent.

At that point, I switched to a pair of poles based on a friend's recommendation. Since then, I've tried a number of brands and models and, for no particular reason, find I mostly use a pair of MSR Overland Carbon poles (discontinued this year.) There are various locking mechanisms, and two-section or three-section poles, but I've never really found any particular disadvantage or advantage to any of them.

I guess, if I were to offer any advice on picking poles, it would be to find the grips that felt most comfortable in your hand, and get them - you'll easily adapt to any other features they have.
Posted by: Gershon

Re: Trekking poles question - 09/11/12 07:28 AM

I prefer 2 poles. They make it a lot easier going down the steep hills. They can help keep my balance when crossing streams. They help when stepping over trees across the trail. A few times, they may have prevented a fall.

I use these Black Diamond poles because that's what the store had. They work fine. If the locking mechanism starts to loosen, just tighten the screws. It has only happened once to me in 2 years.

If you use poles and are going over rocks where the pole could get stuck I'd suggest taking the strap off your wrist. I read of a case where someone broke their wrist when they fell and the strap got stuck.

My son has gone to using only one pole and he hardly uses that one.

People used to make their own walking sticks from a branch they found in the woods. Some would make a work of art out of them and carve things into them. For that, you will need a knife and Band-Aids.

Posted by: Pika

Re: Trekking poles question - 09/11/12 08:55 AM

I use a single pole; partly as an aid to balance and partly to ease the load on my knees going up- and downhill. I originally used an ice axe for these purposes but since my climbing days are largely behind me I have settled on using a single, lighter, twist-lock Leki pole with a hand-grip similar to that of a cane. It serves me quite well. To me, the thought of trying to manage two poles in places like talus slopes and brush, and not having a free hand when needed, is a bit intimidating. YMMV.
Posted by: JPete

Re: Trekking poles question - 09/11/12 09:28 AM

asarkar,

I hiked for 40 years and two thirds or so of my first AT thru-hike without them. I thought they were an affectation. Then a young kid I'd been hiking with insisted that I had to try one of his. I played along...right into the next town and straight into the outfitter where I bought a pair of Lekis. I'm still using that pair regularly 16 years later. They're heavy and clunky by today's stanards, but they're still going strong. I wouldn't carry my pack to the corner store without them.

They are especially important going downhill with my old knees, and I'd hate to ford serious water without them. Plus, they hold up my poncho for shelter.

Best, jcp
Posted by: Blue_Ridge_Ninja

Re: Trekking poles question - 09/11/12 09:33 AM

All a matter of preference. I use only one because I like having a free hand and being able to switch. I don't hit the trail without it, even day hikes. Defintely helps with stream crossings, rough and/or steep terrain. Spend as much or as little as you like, just don't let anyone tell you that you need to spend a lot to get a decent pole(s). Keep in mind it's basically nothing more than a fancy artificial stick.
Posted by: lori

Re: Trekking poles question - 09/11/12 09:48 AM

Not really - a 4 oz pole is a huge leap from a stick.

I'll debate you all day on the difference between swinging a 13 oz shaft of aluminum or a 16 oz chunk of wood, vs. a pole so light you have to hold on to it in a windy pass or lose it. I started using some heavier aluminum poles for SAR - the weight made my forearm sore, after being spoiled so long with such light trekking poles. But, the Eastons were cheap and they held up well.
Posted by: Blue_Ridge_Ninja

Re: Trekking poles question - 09/11/12 10:10 AM

Personally, I don't think I'd want a pole so light the wind could blow it away...lol. I'm not small-statured and I'm not a gram-shaver, so for me there isn't much difference.
Posted by: lori

Re: Trekking poles question - 09/11/12 10:16 AM

Every half a pound helps. And I love how easy they are to use as shelter supports.

All kinds of things I thought did not make a difference have done just that - backpacking is a sport of subtlety.
Posted by: Glenn Roberts

Re: Trekking poles question - 09/11/12 12:48 PM

Come to think of it, Lori, I do occasionally use mine as shelter supports, sort of. My Carbon Reflex 1 tent is not freestanding, which is not normally a problem (like you, I believe freestanding is highly oversold.) But, once in while, I need to pitch it somewhere that I can't put in a stake (say, an open rock ledge.) At that point, I can use a hiking pole on each end, rigged from corner to corner, to make the tent mostly freestanding - much like Henry recommends for the Rainbow tents. Doesn't happen often, but I've done it a couple of times over the last few years.
Posted by: Gershon

Re: Trekking poles question - 09/11/12 01:05 PM

Here is something cool since you are a photographer. The top screws off the handle and it has a place to mount your camera.

I'd love to have a trekking pole with a camera inside of it so I could just point and shoot.
Posted by: DieselTwitch

Re: Trekking poles question - 09/11/12 03:23 PM

My vote is Zero.

The key for me is to walk like I drive. Don't look right at your feet. Keep your head up and look where you going to be. If you're looking down by the time you see a problem its to late!
Posted by: Gershon

Re: Trekking poles question - 09/11/12 03:34 PM

Originally Posted By DieselTwitch
My vote is Zero.


Now all 3 votes are accounted for. If anyone has a tarp tent for 2 that takes 3 or 4 poles, we can keep going higher.
Posted by: ETSU Pride

Re: Trekking poles question - 09/11/12 04:54 PM

I went backpacking with a friend from college the other week and it was the total opposite. cool I decided to take them even when I had less then 8 pounds in my pack on a dayhike, I practically ran up the freaking mountain and actually caught up with someone who started an hour ahead of me. lol. When I'm walking on flat I don't need 'em, but on steep climbs and descend I'll use them. I have a plate in my knee so it's nice to take pressure off.

Quote:
The key for me is to walk like I drive. Don't look right at your feet. Keep your head up and look where you going to be. If you're looking down by the time you see a problem its to late!


That's how I ride mountain bikes. Eyes down the trail and pick your line before you get there. grin
Posted by: lori

Re: Trekking poles question - 09/11/12 05:05 PM

You have not hiked with me!

Let's go climb a 11,000 foot pass. You might want a bandanna to keep my dust out of your nose.
Posted by: Gershon

Re: Trekking poles question - 09/11/12 05:19 PM

Originally Posted By lori
You have not hiked with me!

Let's go climb a 11,000 foot pass. You might want a bandanna to keep my dust out of your nose.


They have passes that low in California?

Seriously, when I hiked on Quandary Peak (a 14'r) I was real surprised most people didn't use trekking poles. They seemed to be moving just fine.
Posted by: wandering_daisy

Re: Trekking poles question - 09/11/12 06:47 PM

NEED depends on your age and knees. I really need trekking poles now that I am over 60, mainly for long steep downhill (such as descending 5000 feet in a day- think Grand Canyon). Also for long trips (I did a 39-day trip this summer) I was able to keep going after I lightly sprained an ankle. Trekking poles have also saved the day during stream crossings.

At any age, properly used trekking poles can make you a faster and more agile hiker, particularly off trail. The key is "properly used". Good poles are made so you can collapse them and put on your pack when you do not want them (such as 3rd class scrambling where you need to use your hands). If you decide to use poles, get good, light weight poles and get some instruction on how to use them. I believe REI gives classes. I was a hold-out for years because I did not want to carry the extra weight, but once I learned to use them properly, I find them a real bonus. A nice side effect is that my arms get a work-out too and my hands/fingers no longer swell up due to carrying a pack.
Posted by: wandering_daisy

Re: Trekking poles question - 09/11/12 06:52 PM

The altitude of a pass is not the biggest thing in difficulty- it is how many feet elevation gain per horizontal distance. I think Taboose Pass in the Sierra will compete with any Colorado pass. I used to climb in the Cascades in Washington- then moved to the Rockies - and encountered "Colorado 14'er snobbery". Everyone poo-pooed my Cascade climbs - as ONLY 9,000 feet - well that is a lot when you start at sea level! I would also say that climbing Mt Rainier is no shabby thing - either for absolute altitude or elevation gain.
Posted by: asarkar

Re: Trekking poles question - 09/11/12 07:45 PM

Originally Posted By Gershon

The top screws off the handle and it has a place to mount your camera.

I wish I could use something like that to mount my camera, I'd not be lugging a 5 lb tripod around. It might be able to support a small P&S to shoot the grandma in the yard but beyond that you need something like this

Posted by: lori

Re: Trekking poles question - 09/11/12 07:55 PM

Originally Posted By wandering_daisy
The altitude of a pass is not the biggest thing in difficulty- it is how many feet elevation gain per horizontal distance. I think Taboose Pass in the Sierra will compete with any Colorado pass. I used to climb in the Cascades in Washington- then moved to the Rockies - and encountered "Colorado 14'er snobbery". Everyone poo-pooed my Cascade climbs - as ONLY 9,000 feet - well that is a lot when you start at sea level! I would also say that climbing Mt Rainier is no shabby thing - either for absolute altitude or elevation gain.


They can poo poo 11,000 foot passes all they like. I didn't specify on trail or off, class 2 - 3, or any variety of conditions that would make it interesting.

Also, the poles have saved me from bouncing into canyon bottoms - SAR does not allow you to stay on nice graded trails, and I'd like to see someone without poles haul themselves up a near-vertical slope covered in several inches of pine needles without them.

Some of the toughest trails I've been on were well below treeline, and I was extremely happy to have poles with me, not because they are some affectation but because without them progress would not have been made in any expeditious fashion.
Posted by: Gershon

Re: Trekking poles question - 09/11/12 10:23 PM

Sorry, I seemed to have created a bit of a stir. My 11,000 foot comment was similar to carrying my brother to school in the snow banter we had awhile back.

Posted by: lori

Re: Trekking poles question - 09/11/12 11:13 PM

Originally Posted By Gershon
Sorry, I seemed to have created a bit of a stir. My 11,000 foot comment was similar to carrying my brother to school in the snow banter we had awhile back.



No worries about me - I've heard worse on SAR trainings. The SAR women call it "testosterone poisoning."
Posted by: OregonMouse

Re: Trekking poles question - 09/11/12 11:56 PM

I started using a single staff after busting up a knee, requiring extensive reconstructive surgery. At my daughter's advice, I bought a pair of trekking poles and have never looked back! They have been wonderful for my bum knee (and the other one which is not exactly 100% any more), have helped considerably with balance and have saved me from several potentially serious falls. They also hold up my tent at night. Other multiple uses are as potential splints or as a travois should my dog get hurt (only problem will be keeping him on the thing!). I even use them (with rubber tips on the ends) for exercise walking (aka Nordic walking)--they turn walking into a whole body exercise that works the body core muscles!

Lots of great stuff on trekking poles here.

Nearly all the long-distance hikers I meet (living close to the Pacific Crest trail, I meet quite a few) use them.

If you're dubious about their benefits, check thrift stores for a set of cheap ski poles of the right length and try them out for a while. Or get the inexpensive ones sold by WallyWorld.
Posted by: Merrellman78

Re: Trekking poles question - 09/17/12 08:47 AM

Im 51,have arthritis, and need the poles for steep hills..

Edited by moderator to remove response to deleted post.
Posted by: skcreidc

Re: Trekking poles question - 09/20/12 05:35 PM

Merrellman78, the people who are making disparaging comments about people who use trekking poles...Ignore them. It's complete nonsense. I'm on trail a lot and only see a very few people who need help; and most of them do not have poles. There were lots of people using them in the Dolomites and none of them seemed like problems in the making either. Use what ever works for you. My wife uses poles, I do not. Honestly, who cares.