yatsek - Mar 7, 2009 8:26 am - Voted 10/10
The 1970sHow heavy was your "sitting" bag?
(Mine were all around 2kg)
Marcsoltan - Mar 7, 2009 9:31 am - Hasn't voted
Re: The 1970sI think mine was about the same, 2 or 2.5 kgs. I have zero memory of it now.
Antonio Giani - Mar 7, 2009 10:01 am - Voted 10/10
Brrr...Freddo Marc?
Ciao Antonio
Marcsoltan - Mar 7, 2009 10:07 am - Hasn't voted
Re: Brrr...Hi Antonio,
It was really NOT too freddo. It was very windy.
Grazie Antonio, Ciao,
Marc
ArankaP - Mar 7, 2009 3:42 pm - Voted 10/10
I'm wonderingWhat would get me out from that bag.
Marcsoltan - Mar 7, 2009 8:04 pm - Hasn't voted
Re: I'm wonderingI know what got ME out of that bag. Giving up on climbing the mountain and coming back down while it was still blowing like hell.
Thanks for dropping by Aranka,
Marc
shimshali - Mar 9, 2009 9:05 am - Voted 6/10
REAL THRILLERyou seem to be a real adventureist......
I like the people who love adventure.
Marcsoltan - Mar 9, 2009 9:26 am - Hasn't voted
Re: REAL THRILLERThank you shimshali. Being adventurous is good, but being stuck in a sleeping bag for a couple nights and a day wasn't. We gave up on the idea of climbing the mountain and headed back down in unrelenting high winds.
Thanks for the visit,
Marc
AJones - Mar 13, 2009 12:18 am - Voted 10/10
great photoI love pictures from previous eras (i.e. the 70's, 80s, etc. - I 'd like to see more like this on SummitPost. Just looking at the gear of the day is interesting and quite a contrast to today's gear.
Marcsoltan - Mar 13, 2009 12:29 am - Hasn't voted
Re: great photoYou are the only person to comment on the old gear. Good eye for those kinds of details.
BTW, I have glacier glasses on because of the glacier flower being blown around all the time. I think I slept with them on.
Thanks for dropping by and the comment,
Marc
Sarah Simon - Mar 28, 2009 11:34 am - Hasn't voted
The historical perspective......is awesome.
...especally because we all know, thanks to other 70's era photos you've posted, that you've got some groovy sideburns under that hood. (Is that COTTON, by the way? LOL!)
On an analytical note, while a lot of the gear in the photo looks different than what's in use today, the hiking boots have clearly not evolved far beyond "foot-torturing waffle stompers".
Sarah
Marcsoltan - Mar 28, 2009 1:55 pm - Hasn't voted
Re: The historical perspective...Hi Sarah, Nothing gets past your eagle eyes.
Yes, I did have side burns under the hood then. Facial hair was in fashion, for people who were slave to fashion, myself included.
As to the gear, yes, everything was different, but you know, they worked just as well. You just had to carry a heavier load all the time. In my case, I used to go without a sleeping bag, except for winters.
This photo was taken in December, no snow on the ground yet, but still cold.
The hood may have been cotton, or cotton polyester blend. I can't remember.
As to the boots, Leather boots were heavy and cumbersome, but after ten blisters on your feet you would get used to the pain. Nowadays, they make plastic boots that look like leather, but weigh half as much.
The ground pads would break into little pieces when it got very cold. The ropes were heavy and not water proof. And, it keeps going from there.
Thank you for your sense of humor Sarah.
Marc
Comments
Post a Comment