This is my hands-on review of the Anker 313 Power Bank (formerly known as the Anker PowerCore Slim 10K). I tested it alongside 4 of the best lightweight battery packs over the course of 2 weeks.

After using it on my hiking trips, performing a capacity test, and comparing its specs and features to other comparable battery packs, I think the Anker 313 is a decent battery pack at a great price. It performs the simple job of charging up your phone and other portable electronics while on the trail and at camp. It can only charge one device at a time through its single USB-A port, though, and there are lighter options if you’re an ultralight backpacker.

Keep reading for my full Anker 313 Power Bank review, as well as my thoughts on how it compares to the other best portable battery packs for camping and backpacking.

Anker 313 Power Bank Review

First Impressions

Upon opening up the box, I was impressed with the Anker 313’s slim and small size. It’s approximately the same size and shape as a phone without a case, making it very portable and easy to carry around. It’ll fit in most pockets and bags without issue.

It’s pretty lightweight for a 10,000mAh battery pack. Additionally, the battery pack comes with a micro USB cable to charge it and a mesh carrying case for storage.

The pack has a button which provides an indication of how much battery life is left. With a press, you can quickly get a sense of how much battery is left.

Battery Capacity Test

I tested the usable capacity of the Anker 313 and got a result of 34.89 watt hours (Wh), which works out to 9,430mAh at 3.7V or 6,798mAh at 5V. That’s slightly less than the listed capacity of 37Wh (10,000mAh at 3.7V or 7,400mAh at 5V).

However, this amount is still significant and can charge most phones around 2 times. Additionally, this amount of battery capacity is also sufficient for charging other portable electronics — such as tablets, GoPros, and other cameras.

It’s important to note that battery capacity can vary depending on a variety of factors such as usage patterns, temperature, and age. In my test, I used a USB load tester with a steady 1A output to measure capacity. In practice, you’ll probably be charging your devices at a faster rate than 1A (most likely 2A or more), so you’ll probably get a little less usable capacity than I did.

Weight

According to the listed weight, the Anker 313 weighs 7.5 ounces. However, when I measured it using my digital scale, the weight came out to be 8.4 ounces. Despite the difference, the battery pack still provides a solid ratio of 4.15 watt hours per ounce (34.89Wh ÷ 8.4 oz).

The battery pack’s weight may seem insignificant, but for some hikers, every ounce counts. The Anker 313 is lightweight, but a battery pack with a higher ratio of watt hours to ounces — such as the premium Nitecore NB10000 — is a better option for ultralight backpackers.

Charging Output

The Anker 313 battery pack has only one output port for charging, and it’s a USB-A port. Compared to the newer USB-C ports that are becoming increasingly common, the USB-A port is a bit outdated.

The power bank does have a USB-C port, but it is only meant for input (i.e. charging the pack itself). Most new battery packs have a USB-C port for output, so this is one area where the Anker 313 lags a bit.

Having only one output port means you can only charge one device at a time. Additionally, having USB-C output ports is preferable since it is a newer technology that charges devices more quickly. While the Anker 313 battery pack falls short in these areas, it still provides a solid charging option for those who do not require multiple ports or the latest charging technology. It will still help you keep your phone and other electronics charged while backpacking.

Charging Input

The Anker 313 has two input ports: a micro USB port and a USB-C port. While having two input ports may seem useful at first glance — could you use both to charge the battery pack super quickly?? — the two inputs ports cannot be used at the same time.

The micro USB port is outdated and a cheaper and slower charging port. To use the USB-C port, you will need to buy your own USB-C cable. In my opinion, it would have been better if the battery pack had only one input port, preferably a USB-C port, as it provides faster charging capabilities.

What I Like

• It’s a good value. For its size and capacity, the Anker 313 is an affordable price from a reputable brand.
• It can charge at up to 12 watts. That’s decently fast for a standard USB-A port.
• The capacity I measured is inline with the listed capacity. When I performed a battery capacity test, I measured a total of 34.89Wh. That’s very close to this pack’s listed 37Wh capacity.

What I Don’t Like

• It has only one output port. Some battery packs let you charge 2 or more devices at a time. With the Anker 313, you can only charge one.
• The included charging cable is a micro USB cable. Micro USB doesn’t charge as fast as newer technologies, such as USB-C.
• It’s a bit heavy compared to other battery packs. This gripe is for ultralight backpackers: In terms of watt hours per ounce, this battery pack lags behind the competition a bit.

Who This Battery Pack Is for

• You want a simple and affordable battery pack. It’s lightweight and portable and it’ll charge your phone just fine. If that’s all you need, this charger is a great value.
• You don’t care about the weight of your power bank. Most people don’t, making this a great option for most people.

Who This Battery Pack Isn’t for

• You want to charge multiple devices at once. The Anker 313 can only charge one device at a time.
• You want to fully charge lots of devices. If you have 3 or more devices you need to charge fully, I’d recommend looking at larger battery packs, such as 20,000mAh sizes.
• You’re an ultralight hiker. Ultralight backpackers should look towards battery packs with better watt hours-per-ounce ratios, such as the Nitecore NB10000.

Best Anker 313 Power Bank Alternatives

• Anker 325 Power Bank. If you like Anker and their value-oriented portable chargers but need more than a 10,000mAh capacity, check out the Anker 325, a 20,000mAh pack. It has double the battery capacity and an extra output port.
• Nitecore NB10000 Power Bank. This is the best lightweight power bank for backpacking I’ve used. If you’re an ultralight backpacker, this is the charger I’d recommend.

The Bottom Line

Overall, I think the Anker 313 offers good bang for your buck. It’s an affordable and portable 10,000mAh battery pack that does the simple job of charging your devices on the go. You don’t get the fastest charging speeds or the latest USB-C input ports, though, and you can only charge one device at a time.

A few years back, Anker’s power banks used to be the go-to for ultralight backpackers. However, now they’re just mediocre for that use case and are designed more for the general consumer who just needs to charge their devices at a park or concert. Of course, if weight doesn’t matter that much to you then it’s also a good option for those scenarios as well as travel, hikes, and backpacking trips.

A small ask: If you found my Anker 313 Power Bank review helpful and are planning on getting one, please consider purchasing through one of my affiliate links. I’ll get a small commission (at no extra cost to you) which will help fund more outdoor gear reviews like this one. Thank you!

The post Anker 313 Power Bank Review appeared first on 99Boulders.

Here’s a simple list of ways to store camping chairs that keeps them clean and protects them from the elements.

Don’t overthink this! Storing camp chairs isn’t rocket science. My advice is to just pick one of these ways and be done with it.

1. Use a Camping Chair Wall Storage Rack

Storing your camping chairs on the wall using this wall storage rack will save floor space and keep them easily accessible. My advice: hang it up in your garage or shed. This one can hold up to 4 large camping chairs, and looks to be quite easy to install.

2. Store Camping Chairs in Storage Bins

This is personally how I store my camping chairs — I just throw them in my camping gear box!

I recommend labeling your storage bins or keeping a simple spreadsheet to help you know what’s in them. Trust me — from years of running an outdoor gear blog I’ve accumulated SO. MUCH. GEAR. My spreadsheet that tells me which gear is in which storage bin has been a lifesaver.

3. Put Them in an Outdoor Storage Container

Invest in an outdoor storage container specifically designed for camping gear, such as this small “deck box.” One of these containers can keep your camping chairs (mostly) protected from the elements. Don’t forget to get a good padlock for extra security!

4. Keep Camp Chairs in Your Garage

Utilize a spare corner, hanger, or storage shelf in your garage to store your camping chairs. No fancy storage bin needed, just leave it there until you need it!

If you want to protect it a bit, you can cover it with a tarp or other protective cover.

5. Hang Lightweight Camping & Backpacking Chairs on the Wall with Command Hooks

Add one more thing to the endless list of Command Hook uses — hanging camping chairs. Command Hooks are a good option if you don’t want to damage your wall.

Pay attention to the maximum weight of the size you decide to go with. Some options can hold a max of 5 pounds which is adequate for small, lightweight camping and backpacking chairs (like the green REI Flexlite Chair in my pictures), but probably not burly enough for larger camping and tailgating chairs.

6. Slide Camping Chairs Under Your Bed

If you’re tight on storage space (like I am living in a 700-square-foot house), you can just slide your camping chairs under your bed.

7. Compress Them in a Vacuum Storage Bag

Vacuum storage bags are a great way to store camping chairs when you’re short on space. These bags will compress the chairs to a fraction of their original size, allowing you to store them in a much smaller space.

Plus, you can throw in other bulky pieces of camping gear like blankets. You might be tempted to also throw in things like jackets and sleeping bags, but vacuum storing sleeping bags and jackets will compress their insulation and reduce there ability to retain warmth. For that reason, I’d avoid it for those pieces of gear.

8. Put Them in Your Backyard Storage Shed

Your backyard shed is a perfect place to keep camping chairs when they’re not needed. Heck, putting them there might even cause you to use them more if they’re closer to your backyard campfire. The shed will protect them from the elements, and putting them there will keep them from cluttering up your house or garage.

When I went to my shed, I even found a little screw to even hang my chair from. Talk about nifty.

9. Put Them in a Storage Closet

I hate to be Captain Obvious here, but there’s nothing wrong with throwing your camping chairs in a linen closet! This will keep them out of the way and protected from dust and other debris. And this means they’re indoors, which will protect them more from humidity.

10. Toss Them in Your Trunk

Lastly, why not throw your camping chair(s) in your car trunk? That way you always have them when you go to the park, to a tailgate, or on an impromptu camping trip!

5 Tips for Storing Camping Chairs

1. Clean your camping chairs before putting them in long-term storage.
2. Make sure your chairs are completely dry before storing them.
3. If using a bin, label it! Like I said, if you want to get really nerdy, you can use a spreadsheet to keep track of what’s in which box. That’s what I do to manage all the gear I buy and test for this blog.
4. When possible, store them in a dry, cool, and well-ventilated area.
5. If you’re storing your camp chairs in a storage bin, you can buy silica gel packets to absorb moisture.

How to Clean Camping Chairs Before Putting Them in Storage

When storing camping chairs long-term, one important step that many people overlook is cleaning the chairs before putting them away. Not only will this help to keep your chairs in good condition, but it will also make sure that they’re clean and ready to use the next time you go camping. And who doesn’t like a clean chair to rest their bum at camp!

Personally, I like to start by giving my camping chairs a good once-over with a vacuum cleaner to remove any loose dirt or debris. Then, if I’m feeling up for it, I mix up a mild solution of dish soap and water and use a damp cloth to wipe down all surfaces of the chairs, including the seats, arms, and legs. For tougher stains or dirt, I use an old toothbrush (that I just keep in my camping gear bin) to scrub gently in order to get into all the nooks and crannies.

It’s also a good idea to pay attention to any metal parts of the chairs, such as the frame or any hinges. These areas can often get rusty or dirty, so I like to use a toothbrush to clean them and then dry them thoroughly to prevent rust.

Once I finish cleaning, I let the chairs air dry completely before storing them away. Just keep them assembled in your living room or garage for a few hours and that should do the trick. This is especially important if you’re storing the chairs in a damp or humid area, as moisture can cause mildew or mold to form.

It can be a little tedious, but cleaning camping chairs before storing them helps them last longer. It also helps the metal parts from getting all rusted and gummed up. It may take a bit of extra time and effort, but it’s well worth it when you’re ready to use them on your next camping trip.

Camping Chair Storage FAQ

How do you store folding camp chairs in the garage?

Storing folding camp chairs in the garage is easy! I give my chairs a quick clean and then store them in a labeled bin or on a spare storage shelf. I keep them in a dry and well ventilated area of the garage to ensure they stay in good condition for my next camping trip.

How do you hang camping chairs on a wall?

You can hang camping chairs on a wall using Command Hooks or wall hangers designed specifically for that purpose.

The post How to Store Camping Chairs: 10 Ideas appeared first on 99Boulders.

Last updated: Feb 23, 2022. We want to keep this directory current. If you notice any omissions, broken links, or other errors, please leave a comment letting us know.

List Filters

This directory is looong. We recommend using the filters below to narrow down the results.

Ultralight Backpacking Gear Companies

How to Use This List

Note: If you're seeing this section instead of seeing any results, it means there weren't any companies that matched your filter parameters. Give it another go.

This directory is so large that we do not recommend anyone simply scroll through the entire thing. Your finger would get tired before you even reached the Bs.

Instead, we recommend you use the list filters at the top of the page to narrow down the results to the companies that sell the type of ultralight backpacking gear you're looking for. You can filter the results by gear, country, and company type.

Once you've trimmed down the results, you can then browse through the more manageable amount of listings. Find a company that fits your needs and visit their site to see their specific gear offerings.

Shout-outs

A special thanks to programmer extraordinaire and great friend Youssef Biaz for whipping up the JavaScript to make this directory filterable

This directory took many, many hours to put together, but it would not have been nearly as comprehensive had I not had plenty of shoulders to stand on. Here are the resources I used as starting points in my research that were particularly helpful:

• Eric the Black's Directory of Cottage Industry Backpacking Gear Companies
• Section Hiker's Backpacking Manufacturers Directory
• dummey's Ultralight Directory on GitHub
• unicode25a0's List of Cottage Industry/Bespoke Manufacturers on reddit
• Alpine Science's Backpacking Gear Company Directory
• Cottage Gear Makers by Anonymous
• Awesome Companies Mega List by Anonymous

And psst, you, reader—don't forget to comment below if you notice any errors or omissions.

The post Ultralight Backpacking Gear Companies: The Complete List (Updated 2022) appeared first on 99Boulders.

We spent 5 days drinking nothing but tablet-purified water to find out which brand of water purification tablets truly works best. Ultimately, we discovered that Katadyn Micropur MP1 is the brand to choose. It has decent flavor, combats against cryptosporidium and the smell won’t burn your nose hairs.

It was a long journey to discover that Katadyn Micropur MP1 was the right choice to go with. It started way back when I was a little girl playing the virtual Oregon Trail game.

After my 7th fatal strike with dysentery that week, I promised myself something: I would never die of dysentery again.

More importantly, I’d never let any of my family or loved ones go through that awful death again. That’s why, among other arguably more realistic reasons, I carry water purification tablets when I go backpacking.

There are lots of water purification tablets to choose from on the market, plenty more than there were in the 1800s. But which brand tastes the best? Which ones kill cryptosporidium? Which one will ensure your wheels and axles don’t snap during river crossings?

We set off to find out.

Top Pick: Katadyn Micropur MP1

I’ll be honest with you.

I really wanted to give this award to the Aquatabs, given its flavor and easy instructions.

But the top water purification tablet should kill all microorganisms, including cryptosporidium. Functionality over flavor. These tablets do that, while the Aquatabs only kill bacteria and viruses.

For that reason, the Katadyn Micropur MP1 took home our Top Pick award.

The Katadyn Micropur MP1 tablets have the best taste of all the crypto-fighting tablets and come in a durable package that is still fairly easy to open. Water purified with these tablets didn’t irritate my skin or throat at all, but know that I’ve been using tablets for a few years now. Irritation and side effects are different for every person. These tablets are also fairly cheap comparatively, which gave this option bonus value points as well.

Runner-Up: Potable Aqua Chlorine Dioxide

I consider the Potable Aqua Chorline Dioxide tablets to be your average, safe water purification tablets. They’re not too strong in smell or taste, and the packaging is fairly durable.

This brand is very similar to Katadyn, except for one small thing: water purified with one of these tablets may have given me a scratchy throat.

Admittedly, this was the first tablet that I sampled for a full day. It’s possible that my body was just getting used to adding chlorine back in the diet. However, know that the score was so close between these tables and the Katadyn Micropur MP1 tablets that that one side effect became the deciding factor in me choosing this as the Runner-Up instead of the Top Pick.

Best Taste: Potable Aqua with PA+Plus

After a few days of chugging chemicals, I was curious what this two-part powerhouse could do.

I put in the iodine tablet and let it do it’s job. Before even using the second-step tablet — whose only purpose is to neutralize the iodine after-taste and color in the water — I smelled and tasted the treated water.

It smelled like water. It even tasted like water! I was impressed that the chemical taste was nearly nonexistent.

I then put in the neutralizing tablets. I’m not sure how big of a difference they made, but I was already pleased. Water treated with these tablets was the best tasting water I drank all week, and it posed no irritation whatsoever.

Note: Potable Aqua sells their iodine tablets with or without PA+Plus. PA+Plus tablets are neutralizing tablets for use after water has been treated with Potable Aqua. They neutralize the iodine after-taste and color in the water. If you don’t want the PA+Plus tablets, you can buy just the Potable Aqua tablets.

Best Value: Aquatabs

Although Aquatabs do not combat cryptosporidium, they would probably keep my Oregon Trail family safe.

I was impressed by the bang for the buck on this one. We found them for fairly cheap online.

The taste is good, while the smell is only mildly chemical. These tablets are lightweight and don’t take too long to purify — only 40 minutes.

The only problem with the Aquatabs is that the packaging isn’t very durable. This was the only brand that didn’t pass the durability test. The tablets just crumbled into dust. But, on the other hand, the package is easy to open, something I can’t say for all tablets we tested.

Best Nose Hair Burner: Aquamira Water Purifier Tablets

The Aquamira Water Purifier Tablets — like all other crypto-combatting tablets — take four hours to purify water.

I had heard that this stuff is extremely potent so, out of curiosity, I took a big whiff of the Aquamira-treated water around the 2-hour purification mark.

Big mistake.

I coughed. I wheezed. It burned my nose hairs. It had me double checking that I got the dosage right.

After the purification process completed 2 hours later, the water no longer smelled like pure bleach, but it was still certainly the strongest smelling of the products. The flavor was decent but chemical. My lips tingled every now and then throughout the day, but that may not have been related to these tablets (I eat lots of jalapeños).

I found it interesting that the Aquamira tablets were so strong, because before this project, my favorite water purification method was the two-part Aquamira water treatment drops.

Summary

Here are the best water purification tablets:

• Katadyn Micropur MP1
• Potable Aqua Chlorine Dioxide
• Potable Aqua with PA+Plus
• Aquatabs
• Aquamira Water Purifier Tablets

How to Choose the Best Water Purification Tablets for Your Needs

Beyond looking for water purification tablets that “just work”, here are the important specs to consider before buying.

Time to Purify/Ease of Preparation

Are you somebody who always forgets to do things on a schedule? Then a 4-hour wait time probably isn’t ideal. Go with the Aquatabs or the Potable Aqua with PA+Plus. Both of these purify your water in less than an hour.

Note: Despite their convenience, neither Aquatabs nor Potable Aqua with PA+Plus combat against cryptosporidium, a protozoan known to be present in North America.
Otherwise, if you can afford to wait 4 hours for your water to purify, our Top Pick and Runner-Up are the two options we liked best.

Weight

Weight is, of course, a crucial consideration for any backpacking gear. The packages of all the brands we tested weighed less than an ounce, but some were more durable than others.

If you want your pack to be as light as possible, go with the Potable Aqua tablets. They were the lightest tablets we tested.

If you prefer a package that is more durable, the Potable Aqua Chlorine Dioxide tablets and Aquamira tablets are both extremely difficult to open without a camping knife or backpacking knife but keep your tablets intact.

Taste & Smell

How much of a chemical taste and smell can you handle in your water?

If you’re highly sensitive, we recommend you get the Potable Aqua with PA+Plus since the PA+Plus tablets neutralize the iodine after-taste and color in the water.

Alternatively, if you like a strong chemical smell that leaves you 100% confident that any living organism that once lived in your water is certainly dead, then pee-yew, Aquamira Water Purifier Tablets are right for you.

Microorganisms the Tablets Are Effective Against

All the water purification tablets we tested kill viruses and bacteria when used correctly. However, not all kill cryptosporidium.

Make sure to choose a brand that kills all the microorganisms you might encounter on your backcountry trip. We’ve indicated which of the brands we tested are effective against cryptosporidium in the table at the top of this article.

Alternatives to Water Purification Tablets

Here are two alternative ways to purify water:

• With a backpacking water filter. In our experience, this is the most popular method employed by hikers and backpackers.
• By boiling water on a camping stove or backpacking stove. It’s good to have the necessary supplies to boil water should your primary water filtration method fail. Our testers like carrying an ultralight backpacking lighter with them to light stoves. We also know some backpackers who like taking fire starting rods to help them start a fire.

How We Tested

Our testing process was three-fold.

1) Taste Test

First and foremost, we wanted to test the actual taste of the purified water. To do this, we drank water purified with each tablet. We then scored the waters on how badly they smelled of chemicals and how much the taste reminded us of water at a public pool.

2) Side-Effect Test

Secondly, we wanted to ensure that there wouldn’t be any side-effects from consistently using each brand. For five days, we exclusively drank water purified by these tablets — whether it came from streams, rivers or sketchy-looking park faucets.

Each day, we focused on a different brand and then measured how we felt throughout the day. Did anyone get a sore throat? Did anyone experience eye irritation or, at worst, chemical burns?

3) Packaging Test

Lastly, we scored each brand on its packaging. We threw each package of tablets in the bottom of backpacks and suitcases, stepped on them, you name it. If the tablet exploded into a powder, it lost points.

While durability was important here, for the next part of this test, we measured the opposite. How easy are the packages to open? Do I need a knife (because if I do, that really blows because I don’t always carry one of those) or will my teeth suffice?

Notes

No matter how well the tablet scored in taste, smell and packaging, 10 points were deducted from the final score of any tablet that is not effective against cryptosporidium. We hope that, by doing this, we can bring extra awareness to this spec, in cases where this may jeopardize your health.

All products tested are certified and meet EPA microbiological water purifying test standards. We’re not working from a lab here, so we just had to trust that if these things are on the market, they won’t kill us. Nobody died of dysentery during our research, so we call that a win.

The post 5 Best Water Purification Tablets appeared first on 99Boulders.

We bought 5 of the best backpacking lighters available and set about testing their water-resistance by soaking them in water, their wind-resistance by trying to blow them out, and their reliability by striking them until we got blisters. Our tests confirmed what backpackers have long known: the BIC Mini Lighter (commonly called the “Mini BIC”) is the best lighter for backpacking.

It is ultralight, reliable, decently water-resistant, and a great bang for your buck.

The Mini BIC’s only downside is it’s not wind-resistant. A simple windscreen can usually solve this problem though.

If you need a lighter for backpacking in extremely wet or windy conditions, we recommend the UCO Stormproof Torch. It was the most wind- and water-resistant lighter we tested.

Also, it’s important to point out the Mini BIC earned the top score in our tests by the slimmest of margins. The Clipper Mini Lighter is an excellent alternative. It isn’t as easy to find in the US, however — you’ll likely have to pick one up online or at a head shop.

Read on for our full reviews.

Top Pick: BIC Mini Lighter

Supremely affordable and available everywhere, the Mini BIC earned our Top Pick award because of its reliability, value, and ultralight weight.

When I struck the BIC 200 times, it lit a perfect 200. BIC has perfected lighting consistency.

The Mini BIC is also decently water-resistant. After performing 3 “Soak Tests” with it — submerging the lighter in water, shaking it out, and then trying to light it in 1-minute intervals — it took an average of 2 minutes before it started lighting again consistently.

(To dry it out quicker you can also run it up and down a piece of wood or your pants leg for 30 seconds.)

The BIC’s main drawback is how poorly it holds up in windy conditions. The flame is difficult to light in even a slight breeze.

It’s an easy problem to overcome though — I usually have luck with using my hand or windscreen to block the wind long enough to light my backpacking stove.

If you’re worried that you need something beefier to take into the backcountry, don’t be.

BIC lighters have been put through the ringer countless times by backpackers of all varieties. Every year plenty of AT and PCT thru-hikers complete their hikes having used only Mini BICs. And adventurer Andrew Skurka uses a BIC in his Cadillac Stove System.

Runner-Up: Clipper Mini Lighter

The Mini Clipper is another excellent backpacking lighter.

While not nearly as ubiquitous as the Mini BIC, it performed actually better in our tests.

For starters, like the Mini BIC it lit a perfect 200/200 times.

It is also slightly more wind- and water-resistant than the Mini BIC.

Where it took the BIC 2 minutes on average to start lighting consistently after having been submerged in water, it took the Clipper 1 minute. I was also able to light the Clipper more easily in a slight breeze.

You might be wondering at this point…

“If it performed better in your tests, why didn’t it get a higher score?”

Based on reports I read of backpackers who had used a Clipper for a long time, the general consensus was that a Clipper’s flint wore out quicker than a BIC’s. As such I docked it some points for being less reliable over the long-term.

In my view you still can’t go wrong if you take a Clipper on your next backpacking trip. Let price and availability be your guides if you’re undecided between the two.

Mini Clippers ship pre-filled but unlike BIC lighters they are refillable with butane. You can also purchase replacement flints and replace a used-up one yourself.

Best for Adverse Weather: UCO Stormproof Torch

Most backpackers — whether you’re a beginner or seasoned thru-hiker — don’t need this lighter.

It’s heavy, bulky, and costly relative to BICs and Clippers.

Its flame is impressive but unnecessary for all but the most adverse weather conditions.

But should you truly need a weather-resistant lighter, the UCO Stormproof Torch is your best option.

While neither truly windproof nor waterproof like UCO’s incredible stormproof matches, this lighter was the most wind- and water-resistant that we tested.

When submerged with the cap on, the inside of the lighter remained completely dry and lit immediately after shaking off the excess water. As marketed, the case is waterproof.

When submerged without the cap, it took just one minute of drying in my pants pocket before the lighter started lighting again consistently.

Its wind-resistance isn’t anything to write home about — it was pretty easy to blow out — but it was the best lighter we tested in this regard, just edging out the competition.

I do have some long-term reliability concerns with this lighter however. The more I struck it the more the flame started to sputter. If you do go with the Torch, take a back-up ignition source with you just in case.

There are two versions of this lighter: one comes with a bottle opener, the other with duct tape. I tested the duct tape version.

UST Wayfinder Lighter

The Wayfinder Lighter from UST, like the UCO Torch, is a butane lighter with piezo-electric ignition.

UST says it “performs without fail in the most adverse conditions.”

I found it to be reliably unreliable.

When I struck it 200 times, it lit just 87, the least of any lighter by far. It is marketed as “windproof” and is apparently able to withstand winds of up to 80 mph. I didn’t test it in those conditions, but I was able to blow it out by blowing air at a moderate rate.

The Wayfinder’s performance was heavily affected by being submerged in water. The inside of the lighter got wet even when the cap was on. Also, air bubbles came out of the fuel refill port, which made me wonder if water was entering the fuel chamber.

It took an average of 9 minutes of drying the lighter in my pants pocket before it lit again, and over 20 minutes before it started lighting consistently.

One of my main gripes with the Wayfinder is that there’s no way to know how much fuel is left. On backpacking trips, especially long ones, this in an important thing to know.

Overall I wasn’t impressed. The unreliability and high price point make this lighter a less than ideal choice for your next backpacking trip.

Zippo Matte Lighter

The Zippo is a classic, but it makes for a bad backpacking lighter.

The biggest drawback of this lighter is its unreliability.

Now, I don’t mean this lighter doesn’t light consistently. It does. The Zippo was the third most reliable lighter in that regard, lighting 175 out of 200 times.

In this case, I mean it’s unreliable because of the issues that stem from its fuel.

First, I had an issue with the fuel leaking. After soaking the lighter in water to test its water-resistance, the fuel started leaking on my hands, in my pants pocket, and on the outside of the lighter.

This poses two threats when out in the backcountry:

1. It increases your chances of running out of fuel
2. It poses a fire hazard should you light the lighter without realizing it’s been leaking

What’s more, the fuel evaporates slowly out of the lighter. There are numerous accounts online of people complaining about this and trying to come up with their own fixes to the problem.

This even happened to me when I took these lighters with me on an overnight backpacking trip. The Zippo had fuel in it when I left. When I returned just a day later, despite lighting it only a handful of times, it was empty.

The last thing you want on a backpacking trip is for the fuel in your lighter to leak or evaporate. As such, we don’t recommend the Zippo.

And that’s good news actually — the Zippo has the highest retail price of any of the lighters we tested, you need to buy fuel for it and refill it yourself, and it’s heavier than a backpacking lighter needs to be.

Save yourself a couple ounces and a handful of dollars: pick up a Mini BIC or Mini Clipper and be done with it.

Summary

Here are the best backpacking lighters:

• BIC Mini Lighter
• Clipper Mini Lighter
• UCO Stormproof Torch
• UST Wayfinder Lighter
• Zippo Matte Lighter

Alternative Ways to Light Your Backpacking Stove or Start a Campfire

In my experience, lighters are the most popular way backpackers light stoves and start campfires.

There are other ways, though, which we’ve also written about. Consider these other products if you’d like an alternative to lighters (click on the link to see our reviews of the top options):

• Fire starters
• Stormproof matches
• Waterproof matches

Even if you do go with a lighter, you might want to take a back-up ignition source just in case. Most backpackers I know who do this will carry one in the form of a ferro rod, magnesium fire starter, or pack of waterproof or stormproof matches.

How to Choose the Right Backpacking Lighter for Your Needs

Weight

When it comes to backpacking gear, lighter is always preferable.

The lighters we tested ranged from 0.39-3.21 oz. That isn’t terribly heavy in the grand scheme of things, but relatively speaking the heaviest lighter weighs over 8 times as much as the lightest.

Unless you want to go with our top option for adverse weather, the UCO Stormproof Torch, a lighter shouldn’t cost you more than an ounce in pack weight.

If you’ll be backpacking for an extended amount of time you might want to consider bringing a back-up lighter or, if your lighter is refillable, extra fuel.

Flint vs. Piezo-Electric Ignition

Flint lighters — like the BIC, Clipper, and Zippo — use a flint to generate sparks.

Piezo-electric lighters — like the UCO and UST — use a spring-loaded hammer to hit a piezo-electric crystal and create an electrical charge.

I found the flint lighters to be much more reliable over the long-term than the piezo-electric lighters.

Unless you need a highly weather-resistant lighter such as the UCO Stormproof Torch, I’d recommend you go with a flint lighter.

There are also battery-powered electric lighters (aka plasma lighters). These are not water-resistant and thus are less than ideal for taking into the backcountry.

Weather-Resistance

There is no perfectly windproof or waterproof backpacking lighter. However, all the lighters we tested sported some degree of weather-resistance.

Although, just because you expect to encounter adverse weather on your trip doesn’t mean that you need to bring along a highly weather-resistant lighter.

While I would generally recommend you go with a Mini BIC or Mini Clipper for the weight and cost savings, there are some situations where a highly weather-resistant lighter might be preferable — such as emergency or survival scenarios. Also, if you aren’t concerned with the extra weight and bulk it’s hard to put a price on peace of mind.

Pre-Filled vs. Empty

BICs and Clippers come pre-filled. The other three lighters we tested come empty and you must fill them with the appropriate fuel, which you also must buy.

Pre-filled lighters are less hassle and cheaper upfront. You don’t have to buy fuel or fill the lighter yourself.

Empty lighters you must buy fuel for and fill yourself. They are refillable and thus may work out to be cheaper in the long-run. The two types of fuel we used were butane for the UCO Stormproof Torch and UST Wayfinder Lighter and Zippo lighter fluid for the Zippo Matte Lighter. (The Mini Clipper can also be refilled with butane.)

Type of Fuel: Butane vs. Lighter Fluid

Backpacking lighters are generally butane lighters. The fuel they use is premium butane.

We also tested the Zippo Matte Lighter which uses Zippo Lighter Fluid.

After testing these lighters side-by-side, I personally would never take anything other than a butane lighter on the trail.

The reason?

The Zippo started leaking fuel after being submerged in water. The fuel got on my hands, on the outside of the lighter, and on my pants pocket where I had placed the lighter to dry.

How We Tested

Soak Test

For each lighter I did the following 3 times and averaged the results:

1. Submerged it in water for 5 seconds
2. Shook off excess water for 10 seconds
3. Tried to light it
4. If it didn’t light, I stuck it in my pants pocket to dry and took it out and tried to light it in 1-minute intervals, recording how long it took before each lighter started lighting consistently again

Results:

• Mini BIC: 2 minutes
• Mini Clipper: 1 minute
• UCO Stormproof Torch: immediately when submerged with cap on; 1 minute when submerged with cap off
• UST Wayfinder Lighter: 9 minutes when submerged with cap on; didn’t bother testing with cap off
• Zippo Matte Lighter: 20+ minutes when submerged with lid closed; didn’t bother testing with lid open

(H/T to this reddit thread for giving me the idea for this test, as well as the idea to test a Clipper lighter in the first place.)

Reliability Test

This was a straightforward test: I struck each lighter 200 times and recorded how many times each one lit.

Results:

• Mini BIC: 200/200
• Mini Clipper: 200/200
• UCO Stormproof Torch: 200/200
• UST Wayfinder Lighter: 87/200
• Zippo Matte Lighter: 175/200

Since I didn’t have time to test long-term durability, I then read reports of backpackers who had used these lighters for extended periods of time. If other hikers consistently reported that a lighter was unreliable over the long-term, I incorporated that into my final reliability rating.

Note: I removed the metal safety band from my Mini BIC prior to testing.

“Wind” Test

I don’t have a fan or leaf blower, but I do have lungs.

I lit each lighter and then tried to blow it out, starting by blowing lightly and getting progressively more forceful. It was an admittedly crude test.

Overall, I was disappointed in the wind-resistance of these lighters. If you’d like something that is truly windproof (and waterproof), read our reviews of the best stormproof matches. Otherwise, just be sure to bring along a windscreen to block the breeze.

The post 5 Best Backpacking Lighters appeared first on 99Boulders.

I was at a rather large house party with friends when I made an interesting discovery. We were all wearing Chacos — the climbers, runners, cyclists, river rats and backpackers.

I mentioned it out loud and we all looked fondly down at our feet. Some of us were wearing the Z1s and others were wearing the Z2s — the main difference between the two models is that the Z2s have a toe strap while the Z1s do not.

Then I made the mistake of asking Aidan what he thought of his Z2s.

Katie interjected before he could answer, “F#*! the toe strap!”

“Whoa! What? I love the toe strap!!” Travis defended.

“You can’t hike without the toe strap,” insisted Aidan.

Suddenly, the entire room erupted.

“You can, but you’ll never get those straps adjusted the way you want.” “What if I want to wear socks with my Chacos?” “Just flatten the toe loop!!” “No! Then it’s impossible to pull back up!”

I left that party with more questions than answers. How big of a difference could one toe loop really make? I set out on a mission to find out.

Z1 or Z2: Which Is Right for You?

Are you a river rat or a mountain bum? That’s mostly what it boils down to.

If you want to use your Chacos more for water activities, go with the Z1. If you want to use your Chacos more for hiking and scrambling, go with the Z2. If you just want a pair for daily wear, either will work.

For me, I own both pairs of Chacos and I use both of them pretty equally. When I hit the water, I wear my Z1s. They have firm enough traction that you don’t bust your butt on slippery river rocks (most of the time) and they are loose enough that they don’t catch too many small pebbles underneath.

When I’m going for a hike, I wear my Z2s. They hug my feet tighter due to the toe loop. They are snug and form-fitting, making the arch support more appreciated. I even feel comfortable running short distances in them.

When it comes to other adventure sports, skiers love the Z1s because there isn’t a toe loop. After a long day of skiing and after finally removing those boots, its nice to be able to keep your socks on. But, my cyclist friends like the Z2s because they are easy to throw on but snug enough to wear for quick commutes. As for climbers, many I know prefer the Z1s as a shoe for short approaches because it’s easier to take on and off at the crag.

Notes about Camping with Chacos

Because of the ease with which the Z1s come on and off, and because they are so easily worn with socks, they are my go-to camp shoe as well. In the world of car camping, these shoes are a delight. They are like awesome rubber slippers.

Our verdict: The Chaco Z1 is the best for camping

Z1 vs. Z2: Which Is Best for Hiking?

To test the Chaco Z1 sandals on the trail, we hiked the classic Mist Trail loop in Yosemite National Park. It is a 6.7 mile trail with a total elevation gain of 2,437 feet.

For the Chaco Z2s, we hiked the 5.7 mile out-and-back Engineer Mountain Trail near Durango, Colorado. The route summits the peak of Engineer Mountain at 12,968 feet and is more technical than the Mist Trail. The total elevation gain is 2,333 feet.

Hiking in the Chaco Z1s

It was a bit brisk outside so I donned a pair of hiking socks with my Z1s. Being able to do this is one of my favorite perks about these shoes.

Most of this trail being granite rock and well-packed dirt, the walking was easy and I had no problems with traction. However, more times than I’d like to admit, I stumbled over various rocks and obstacles. Even with a proper fit, I find that the fronts of the Z1s stick out further than your typical pair of sandals. It take some adjusting in your hiking form to get used to.

During this same hiking trip, my boyfriend Taylor wore his Z2s, which I believe to be more stable. He never tripped and made sure to giggle-snort when I did.

My socks were able to prevent any rubbing or blisters, despite the moderate trail length. I felt slight discomfort only during the descent of the hike. Taylor did not wear socks, nor did he receive blisters. Taylor has weird, gnarly endurance runner feet.

Hiking in the Chaco Z2s

I knew this would be a tricky climb so I threw my Salomon trail runners in my backpack just in case. That’s right, O ye of little faith. I really wasn’t certain if I could hike this entire trail in my Z2s.

However, I chose this hike in the Z2s for a reason. I knew it was a stable shoe, but I wanted to know what it could really handle. The Engineer Mountain trail is highly trafficked and hard-packed, but the final pitches of the ascent are very slick and vertical.

I did not trip once during the approach up to Engineer Mountain, despite our brisk pace and the fact that we began our hike before sunrise. The presence of the toe strap makes a significant difference in stability.

Once I reached the base of the mountain, there were difficulties. The traction on this shoe just wasn’t cutting it on the steep and slick gradient. I was rolling over the loose scree like they were marbles and working significantly harder than I normally would wearing my trail runners.

Eventually, the trail became too slick and the consequences of a fall too high. For the final pitch, I paused the Chaco experiment and threw on my pair of Salomons. Ahhhhh. 

I did throw the Z2s back on for the descent, and they performed fantastically, flexing underfoot and comfortably supporting my arch. The Chaco Z2 is the go-to hiking sandal, but I’m not interested in summiting any more mountains with them.

Our verdict: The Chaco Z2 is the best for hiking

Z1 vs. Z2: Which Is Best for Water Activities?

The river section of our testing took place on a section of the lower Animas river. The river was running at around 800-850 cfs for both days, perfect conditions for tubing.

Floating in the Chaco Z1s

I tested the Z1 sandals first and it started off pretty rough. Before tightening the straps, I lugged my tube into the river and immediately bust my butt. So much for optimized wet traction. 

From then on, however, the experience was all uphill. The shoes performed well throughout the day’s activities, loosening only a few times in the heavy current. The most impressive moment came when it was time to scout a more technical rapid. We eddied out and climbed a moderately steep ridge while lugging the tubes. The shoes performed fantastically, gripping the slick, mossy rocks better than I anticipated they would. Even without a toe strap, the shoe kept me stable over the wobbly terrain.

Occasionally, I experienced what I refer to as the Lego Effect. This describes the incredible ease with which a pebble can painfully wedge itself between your foot and your Chacos. The Lego Effect is unavoidable with both the Z1 and Z2 models, but much easier to fix with the Z1s.

The rest of the float went on without a hitch!

Floating in the Chaco Z2s

After the learning curve of floating with the Z1 Chacos, I set out on the same route with the Z2s. At the put-in, I avoided descending the slick rocks and climbed down a more sandy patch, with the straps firmly cranked down. We set off with ease and the general activity of floating was without problems.

However, the few times that we were required to scout or stop at a beach, the Lego Effect was fierce. The current would suck a pile of rocks and gravel underfoot. Since the Z2 is so form-fitting, I almost always needed to remove them to dump out the rocks. I’d rather go barefoot than battle this all day.

The nice thing about the floating with the Z2s on the river was that the straps never needed adjusting. These things were staying on my foot no matter what.

Our verdict: The Chaco Z1 is the best for tubing and other water activities

Similarities & Differences: A Closer Look

Beyond the presence or absence of the toe strap, there are very few differences between the Z1 and Z2.

Shoe Material

Both of the shoes we tested are part of the Classic Pro model, though you can now purchase the Z1 and Z2 with ChacoGrip or EcoTread (see below). Both possess a polyurethane midsole and both are part of the Yampa traction series.

What does all of this mean? Berne Broudy from Backpacker Magazine described the Pro series well as:

“A sole that bites into micro nooks and crannies underfoot—in and out of water—almost as well as a climbing shoe, and is even more durable than previous models.”

At the time that both of the tested pairs were purchased, this was the best sole available. It is made from a sticky Vibram MegaGrip rubber, which is a fancy way to say it has great traction for a sandal.

Now, Chaco has started to make their own rubber sole, the ChacoGrip. It is said to be the most optimized sole engineered to date, designed for extreme conditions and wet traction. It’s supposed to be more durable and versatile.

The EcoTread is a fairly new one as well, named for its sustainability and quality as a “lightweight rubber compound made from 25% recycled rubber content for performance that’s hard on the trail and easy on the environment.”

Foot Width & Arch Support

Both the Z1 and Z2 possess a polyurethane midsole that give each that significant arch support that you want out of a hiking shoe. Likewise, both Chacos can be custom ordered to fit a wider foot.

The Break-in Process & Finding the Perfect Fit

When you first try on a pair of Chacos, you may hate them. It takes a certain amount of patience, commitment, grunting and tugging to achieve your perfect fit. These straps do not move easily and this is intentional. This is referred to as sticking and is the reason why once you achieve your perfect fit, it will stay that way.

The quickest recommended way to get them adjusted to your perfect stickiness is to get them wet. Walk in them, sweat in them, run through a stream or two. Let the straps flex, stretch and pull.

Because of the toe strap, it does take longer to achieve the perfect fit with the Z2. However, once you do, it is more secure.

Blisters & Callouses

The first month of owning a pair of Chacos may not be very fun. There will be blisters, hot spots, and sunburns. Skin will slough off and blood blisters will pop at inconvenient times. But hey, you’ve broken in a pair of hiking boots before! Consider it a rite of passage to achieve those epic Z tan lines.

If your feet sweat a lot, they will around in these sandals. I’ve received the worst blisters on days where I hike long distance with wet or sweaty feet. But bonus – They will probably form fit to your feet a lot quicker!

Un-sticking Straps

As you could imagine, the Z2’s more complex straps are more difficult to un-stick. Here are instructions on how to un-stick your Chaco straps if they get stuck.

If you are unsuccessful in un-sticking your sandals’ straps, Chaco can do it for you. Just mail in your pair using the Repair Authorization form. Voila!  

What Other Chaco Owners Are Saying

• “I bought the Z2s since they’re more stable and better for hiking. They work great, but what I didn’t realize is that, with all the straps involved, you really have to get a good fit if you want to avoid getting blisters. I can’t walk but a couple miles in mine before I start getting hot spots.” — Alex Beale, owner and editor of 99Boulders
• “The Z2 Chacos are solid for a day on the river. The sole is sturdy enough for sections where we need to walk and the shoe doesn’t feel too heavy. I dig the strap system because it’s fairly easy to adjust once you do get them broken in. I keep my toe strap flattened down but it’s nice to have it accessible.” — Travis Crafton, recreational river rat

How We Compared

In order to truly test the Z1 and Z2 Chacos, the plan was simply to go out and do.

As a longtime Chaco wearer, I had already walked hundreds of miles in both pairs. The first trip I took my Z1s on was a 16-day sailing trip through British Columbia. The first trip I took my Z2s on was a 14-day whitewater kayaking trip on the Green River in Utah. It’s important to note that both of the shoes tested for this article had been extremely well broken in.

To test how the sandals performed for hiking, I spent two days hiking exclusively in Chacos. For the first hike, I wore only the Z1s and for the second hike I wore only the Z2s. I then compared both experiences, analyzing what differences existed in functionality, versatility, traction and comfort. Terrain included mud, sand, granite, concrete, and soft gravel.

To test how the sandals performed for water activities, I spent two separate afternoons floating on the water. I wanted to compare how well the Chacos would perform over slippery river rocks, on loose terrain and with a swift current. The flow of the Animas river where this testing was performed ranged from 800-850 cfs.

Shout-out

I’ve got to give mad love to the riotous group that started this debate. Hundreds of hours went into the “research” of these Chacos and hundreds more will be logged in the future, no doubt.

The post Field Testing the Chaco Z1 & Chaco Z2 Sandals: Which Is Right for You? appeared first on 99Boulders.

We put 10 of the best tent stakes on the market through months of experiments and real-world use. 

At the end of our tests, our top pick was the MSR Groundhog. It’s strong, durable, lightweight, and the best option if you want one stake that can do it all. 

The burly Coleman 10-in Steel Tent Stake was our top pick for car camping. You wouldn’t want to carry a set of these very far, but they were simply unmatched in their ability to keep a tent in place.

Read on for our full reviews and for tips on how to figure out what type of tent stake is right for you.

Top Pick: MSR Groundhog

The MSR Groundhog is a staple for most backpackers, and for good reason. Through all of our tests, it stood out as the most versatile of all the stakes we tested.

At 0.46 oz each, the Groundhog is plenty light for backpacking, but also strong enough for just about anything you can throw at it.

In our holding strength test, it held well over 50 lbs of force. The only stakes stronger than the Groundhog were also twice the weight (or more!).

These are durable enough to be driven into harder ground with a rock, hammer, or camping hatchet if need be. Despite months of hard use, we’ve only ever had one minor bend in one Groundhog.

Some reviewers have said that the Groundhogs tend to bend or break at the narrow neck. We’ve put the Groundhogs through a lot of use and never had an issue with this, though.

As for price, they aren’t cheap. But they won’t break the bank, either.

We think they are a solid investment, especially for backpackers who need a balance between weight and strength, or for anyone who wants one set of stakes that they can use just about anywhere.

Best for Car Camping: Coleman 10-in Steel Tent Stake

Talk about bomber! For car camping, you couldn’t ask for a stronger stake than the Coleman 10-in Steel Tent Stake.

Plus, it’s also one of the cheapest tent stakes we tested.

The Coleman held an average of just under 90 lbs in our tests, making it by far the strongest stake we tested.

In fact, during our strength test, we actually had to stop and go find some 110 lb paracord because our 3mm cordage kept breaking before this stake failed.

In our durability test, we genuinely tried to bend or break the Coleman Tent Stake, but could barely even scratch it.

You could wail on this beast all day with a rock or a hammer and it would barely feel it.

One negative is that the plastic top seems fairly weak compared to the rest of the stake. We never had issues with it breaking, but we did have it slide out of place and down the stake a couple of times

Multiple other reviewers mentioned that the plastic top broke, and we could see how a misplaced blow from a hammer could easily do just that.

Of course, no one would ever call these lightweight — if you need a set of 8, you’re looking at well over a pound!

As long as you only have to carry them 20 feet from the car to the tent, though, the Coleman 10-in Steel Tent Stake is awesome, and a great addition to anyone’s camping gear stash.

Best Snow Tent Stake: REI Co-op Snow Stake

All three of the “extreme” stakes we tested (the REI Co-op Snow Stake, the MSR Blizzard and the MSR ToughStake) were in the same ballpark when it came to strength.

So our top choice here came down to minor details:

The REI Snow Stake is the lightest and cheapest option and outperformed the MSR Blizzard just barely when buried as a “deadman” anchor.

We generally bring a few of these for key stake-out points, and have weathered some pretty epic blizzards with four REI Snow Stakes and four MSR Groundhogs.

We were curious if this could double as a regular stake in a pinch, so we tested it in the ground.

While it held very well in both hard ground and soft soil, it was very difficult to press into the ground, and bent much quicker than a regular stake would.

We don’t recommend it for regular camping. But for camping on snow, the REI Co-op Snow Stake is affordable and reliable, and is our stake of choice.

Best Ultralight Tent Stake: MSR Carbon-Core Tent Stake

The MSR Carbon-Core Tent Stake is not only the lightest stake we tested — it’s crazy light. A set of these feels like next to nothing in your hand.

Despite that, they were durable and much stronger than we expected for the weight.

We expected them to bend or break easily, but they showed hardly any signs of wear throughout our field testing and durability testing.

Of course, you pay for it — these are expensive tent stakes.

We aren’t big fans of the shape of the top. It was too easy for the cordage to slip off, and there is nothing there to really catch the tent lines.

We had to re-do our holding strength tests multiple times because the cordage kept slipping off before the stake actually came out of the ground.

As long as you take extra care to make sure that the angle of pull is perpendicular to the stake and not upwards at all, they’ll work. But we found it a little bit annoying how difficult it was to get the cordage to stay on them.

If you want the lightest tent stakes out there, and don’t mind paying a premium, these are pretty sweet. Apart from being slightly annoyed at the cordage slipping over the top of the stake if we weren’t careful, we loved them.

Reviews of the 6 Other Tent Stakes We Tested

REI Co-op Steel Stake

The REI Co-op Steel Stake is the cheapest stake we tested.

If you are looking for an inexpensive, strong, and durable set of stakes, we think this is a great option.

Just don’t plan on bringing them backpacking — each stake is a solid 2.7 ounces.

The REI Steel Stake took second place in our strength test, holding an average of 74 lbs at a 45-degree angle.

Out of all the stakes we tested, it immediately felt the toughest with its simple, solid, and heavy steel construction. Our durability test confirmed our initial impression: this stake is basically indestructible.

What we didn’t like was that it was difficult to get this stake in and out of the ground. The blunt tip didn’t drive very well through the soil and almost always required a couple of good hits from a hammer.

The top of the stake, while it held onto tent lines with no problem, offered virtually no grip to pull the stake out.

Despite those minor annoyances, as far as car camping tent stakes go, these are a close second to the Coleman 10-in Steel Stake. They’re a great choice for anyone who wants a set of cheap but incredibly strong car camping stakes.

MSR Blizzard Tent Stake

The MSR Blizzard Tent Stake makes for a super solid snow anchor, holding an average of 65 lbs of force when buried as a deadman anchor.

The main reason this didn’t win our “Best Snow Tent Stake” award is that, at less than half the cost, the REI Snow Stake outperformed this one just slightly when buried as a deadman, though the difference between the two was minimal.

At 1.12 oz, the MSR Blizzard Tent Stake is also slightly heavier than the REI Snow Stake, which weighs just an ounce.

We tried using this as a regular stake and found that, like the REI Snow Stake, it bent very easily. These definitely aren’t meant for anything other than snow (and loose sand) camping.

On the whole, this is a great snow stake that we would trust 100% through the harshest of winter conditions. We just don’t think it’s worth the premium price when compared to the REI Snow Stake.

MSR ToughStake

The MSR ToughStake is a unique design, which we were excited to try out.

It’s a steep investment, though. The ToughStake was the most expensive option we tested.

In snow, it didn’t outperform the REI or MSR Snow Stakes as significantly as we expected. It held a max of 78 lbs when buried at a 45-degree angle, to the REI Snow Stake’s 69 lbs.

That’s impressive, to be sure, but for its price and weight, we expected the ToughStake to leave the other two snow stakes completely in the dust.

We’re not sure if the slight difference in holding power in snow is enough for us to justify the weight and high cost.

We suspect that you could make up that gap fairly easily by just burying the MSR or REI stakes a little bit deeper, or piling more snow on top of them.

(In fact, an MSR Groundhog buried about 4 feet deep outperformed any of the snow stakes. It took a couple of tries to get it positioned right and we had to bury it about twice as deep, but we found that how well you bury a snow stake affects the holding power about as much or more than the actual stake itself.)

We tested the small version, and MSR also sells a larger medium version. At 5.5 ounces each, these are pretty hefty to bring backpacking.

Still, they get good reviews, and might be worth considering if you’re expecting a full-on blizzard. We suspect that with the extra surface area, they’d hold incredibly well once you got them buried and set in the snow.

While we didn’t have a chance to test the MSR ToughStake in deep sand, other reviews rate it highly for that purpose. We’d definitely consider a set of these for a windy day at the beach.

Overall, this was a fantastic stake in snow — just not great enough that we’d buy and carry a full set of them when there are cheaper and lighter snow stakes that work nearly as well.

REI Co-op Aluminum Hook Tent Stake

The REI Co-op Aluminum Hook Tent Stake did much better than we expected.

We have at least a dozen cheaper aluminum hook stakes that have been mangled and destroyed over the years, so we were pleasantly surprised that this stake held its own.

It’s the cheapest stake in our test that we’d consider bringing backpacking, weighing only 0.5 oz per stake.

It held a respectable 45 lbs in our holding strength test, putting it around the middle of the pack.

While we did manage to bend this stake slightly in our durability test, it held up better than expected. We didn’t have any issues with it during our field testing, despite driving it into some rocky soil.

If you’re looking for a cheap set of reasonably lightweight backpacking tent stakes, you could do a lot worse than the REI Co-op Aluminum Hook Tent Stake.

MSR Groundhog Mini

We liked the idea of the Groundhog Mini more than we liked the stake itself.

Initially, it seemed awesome. After all, we love the full size Groundhog, so a stake that’s smaller and lighter and still has most of the Groundhog’s holding power seemed perfect.

In practice, though, we found just the opposite.

While it is significantly smaller, the Mini is only .11 oz lighter than the full-sized Groundhog. That translates to a weight savings of 0.66 oz for a set of 6.

In our holding strength test, the Mini held barely half of the force that the full-sized Groundhog held, and was one of the weakest stakes we tested.

It’s not bad, by any means. We just don’t see much benefit of going with this one over the full-length Groundhog.

We’re all about shaving weight from our packs, but when it comes to gear as crucial as tent stakes, we’ll sacrifice less than an ounce for significantly stronger gear.

Vargo Titanium Tent Stake

We loved the light weight and slim profile of the Vargo Titanium Tent Stake.

Unfortunately, it was the least durable and weakest stake in our tests, holding only 27 lbs at its best.

One of the Vargos bent significantly in the first few days of our field testing, and another bent pretty early on in the durability tests.

Although some reviewers have said they were able to simply bend the stakes back, those of us without superhuman strength had trouble with this and were stuck with crooked stakes.

The Vargo Titanium Tent Stake’s narrow, needle-like diameter did make it easier than some of the thicker stakes to drive into hard-packed ground. If you often camp in very hard soil, this stake may be worth considering.

We were also very, very glad for the fluorescent orange coating on the head of the stake. The coating chipped very easily, but there were multiple times when these tiny stakes would have completely disappeared on us if it weren’t for that coating.

The Vargo Titanium Tent Stake was easy to use, tiny, and extremely light, and it served us well on fair-weather camping trips. It just doesn’t have enough holding power for us to rely on it in anything worse than a light breeze.

Summary

Here are the best tent stakes:

• MSR Groundhog
• Coleman 10-in Steel Tent Stake
• REI Co-op Steel Stake
• REI Co-op Snow Stake
• MSR Blizzard Tent Stake
• MSR ToughStake
• REI Co-op Aluminum Hook Tent Stake
• MSR Carbon-Core Tent Stake
• MSR Groundhog Mini
• Vargo Titanium Tent Stake

How to Choose the Best Tent Stakes for Your Needs

There is no one-size-fits-all tent stake. What’s perfect for the car camper on soft, grassy campsites is going to be useless for the backpacker who frequently sets up camp in rocky or snowy locations.

Below, we break down the different types of tent stakes, the different properties to look for, and how to figure out what’s best for you.

Types of Tent Stakes

Shepherd’s Hook: The Shepherd’s Hook is the classic tent stake. Depending on the diameter and construction, these can be quite strong.

Y-Stakes: Shaped like a “Y,” these stakes pack a lot of surface area into a fairly light weight, giving them excellent ability to grip the soil.

J-Stakes (aka V-Stakes): A lot of tents come with aluminum J-Stakes (also sometimes called V-Stakes). These are lightweight, and have a lot of the same advantages of Y-stakes, although we’ve found them to be slightly weaker.

Nail Pegs: Essentially, these are shaped like large nails that you drive into the ground. They usually have some sort of pull cord or plastic top to help you get them out of the ground.

Snow/Sand Stakes: These stakes have a much higher surface area and often have multiple holes that are meant to fill up with sand and snow and help anchor the stake down. They are specifically designed to hold in loose sand/snow conditions when most other stakes won’t, but aren’t very useful in any other condition.

Other: From spirals to screws to fabric designed to be buried under the snow, there are dozens of other varieties of tent stakes. Most are extremely specialized, though, and not too common.

Material

Aluminum is the most common material for tent stakes, especially in the backpacking world. It’s light, relatively inexpensive, and, while it does have a tendency to bend, it’s plenty strong enough when used correctly.

Steel is the material of choice for most car camping tent stakes. Steel stakes are definitely not light, but they are some of the strongest stakes out there.

Titanium and Carbon Fiber are relatively new on the market for tent stakes. While extremely light and strong, tent stakes made with these materials are also extremely expensive.

Weight

For backpackers, weight is crucial. However, having the lightest tent stakes on the trail doesn’t do you any good if they don’t actually hold your tent down, or if they turn themselves into a pretzel as soon as they touch a pebble in the soil.

Even for a full set, ultralight tent stakes will probably only save you around an ounce or less.

Our two cents: when it comes to tent stakes, campers and most backpackers shouldn’t sacrifice too much performance for the minimal weight savings.

Holding Strength

How much force a tent stake can hold, and how durable it is, is probably the most important consideration, especially if you often camp in less than ideal conditions.

To give you some idea of how strong your stakes need to be, we did some calculations.

We used a wind load calculator to determine that 40 mph winds would put somewhere from 30 to 45 lbs of pressure on a tent stake (depending on how big your tent is, how many stakes the load is distributed among, the elevation, and a number of other factors). 60mph gusts would range from 50 to nearly 100 lbs.

We’re not engineers, so these are loose estimates. But make sure whatever stakes you bring are more than strong enough to withstand any conditions you may encounter. Consult our test results below for an idea of each stake’s holding strength.

How We Tested

Holding Strength Tests in Ground & Snow

We wanted to know how many pounds of force each stake could hold, so we used a pull scale to measure the force at which each stake popped out of soft, grassy ground.

We were also curious if putting stakes into the ground at a 45-degree angle really is stronger, so we tested each stake at 45 degrees and at 90 degrees.

For the snow stakes, we tied cordage through the holes of the stakes and buried them at least 2 feet deep in moderately dense snow, in a typical stake configuration (buried at about a 45 degree angle toward the direction of pull) and as a deadman (buried horizontally).

Testing notes:

• The MSR ToughStake is not intended to be buried as a deadman anchor, so we did not test it in this way
• For each test, we took the average of three measurements. We attempted to keep the direction of pull at around 45 degrees from the ground, to simulate the direction of pull from a tent rainfly or guyline.

Durability Test

We wanted to know how easily each stake bent, so we found a spot next to a large rock and pressed the stakes in diagonally toward the rock.

Once the stake hit the rock, we continued pressing on them with the toe of our boots for around 30 seconds each. After that, we gave each one a solid 10 taps on the top with a rock.

Testing notes:

• We did not perform this test on the MSR Blizzard and REI Snow Stakes. They bent when we pressed them into the soft, slightly rocky ground where we did our strength tests.
• We also did not perform these tests on the MSR ToughStake, since it is not intended to be pressed into the ground at all

Field Testing

We replaced our usual tent stakes with these for nearly four months. From camping on snow in the Tetons to camping in sandy Southern Utah, to camping in rocky Redwood forests along the California Coast, we tested these stakes in a variety of conditions.

The post 10 Best Tent Stakes appeared first on 99Boulders.

We put six of the best solar-powered camping lanterns to the test. After over three months of experiments and real-world testing, the MPOWERD Luci Pro Outdoor 2.0 led the pack as our top pick. It was bright, long-lasting, quick to charge, and its mobile charging ability was respectable.

The Goal Zero Crush Light and the MPOWERD Luci Outdoor 2.0 were tied for runner-up. Both charged quickly, were extremely light-weight and compact, and produced pleasant light that we loved hanging out under.

Read on for our full reviews, and information about how to choose the right solar-powered lantern for your needs.

Note: If you’re looking for a regular camping lantern, check out our guide to the best camping lanterns.

Top Pick: MPOWERD Luci Pro Outdoor 2.0

The Luci was the original collapsible solar lantern, and in our opinion, it’s still the best. The MPOWERD Luci Pro Outdoor 2.0 was our top all-around pick.

This light has it all: great features, excellent ambiance and light quality, a quick-charging and efficient solar panel, and surprisingly decent mobile charging capabilities.

At 150 lumens, the Luci Pro was the brightest lantern that we tested. However, we found ourselves using its lower settings more often, especially in the tent. Its warm white LEDs put out a comfortable, diffused light with great ambiance.

We were also impressed with how quickly its solar panel charged. It would charge itself up enough to run for a few minutes just from ambient light and indirect sunlight indoors.

We also loved that its handle can unsnap, allowing for easier hanging.

While the mobile charging capabilities can’t really compare to a dedicated solar charger or portable battery pack, it still impressed us. When fully charged, the Luci Pro gave a 34% boost to a phone in 1 hour and 32 min before being completely drained.

That may not sound super impressive, but it’s twice what the other mobile charging lantern (the Suaoki) could handle. Even when completely drained, the Luci Pro could charge a phone from sunlight alone.

Its mobile charging could be a little finicky, and there were a couple of times, charging under the sun, where we couldn’t get it to register on our phone. We suspect that it was because it wasn’t drawing enough power from the weak early-winter sun at the time.

If you want to have the capability to occasionally top up your electronics throughout a trip, the Luci Pro’s charger does the trick.

The cons? It’s heaviest lantern we tested. It’s also the priciest as of this writing. But considering that you get a solar lantern and a solar charger in one, it’s not a bad deal.

Overall, we were impressed with this light, stoked on its mobile charging, and would recommend it to anyone looking for an awesome, durable, high-quality solar lantern.

Runner-up: MPOWERD Luci Outdoor 2.0

What the MPOWERD Luci Outdoor 2.0 lacked in features, it more than made up for in quality, performance, and simplicity.

Some might see the lack of any USB port as a negative, but we actually liked the simplicity of this light. A true solar lantern, it runs 100% off of the sun, and it does it well.

Its 75 lumens were more than bright enough for cooking or setting up camp, while its low setting was perfect for reading or hanging out in the tent.

Fully charged, the Luci Outdoor 2.0 lasted just over 6 hours on high in our tests, and has a claimed runtime of up to 24 hours on low.

Its three-light battery indicator tells you roughly how much charge it has. Plus its solar panel charged extremely efficiently.

In our testing, we placed each light under sunlight and artificial lights for the same amount of time, then measured how long they stayed on in high power. In both tests, the Luci Outdoor 2.0 lasted the longest out of all the solar camping lanterns while still putting out usable, bright light.

Like the Luci Pro Outdoor, our top pick, it has an adjustable strap to make it easier to hang up without a hook or carabiner, a feature which we loved.

The only cons we can come up with are that it’s a little on the heavy side, at 4.4 oz. And the snaps on its adjustable strap can be difficult to open and close.

Its light was also a slightly harsher, cooler white color than the Luci Pro. We didn’t mind the cool white LED light, but preferred the warmer tones of the Luci Pro and the Goal Zero Crush Light (reviewed below).

Those complaints are minor, though. For the price, the MPOWERD Luci Outdoor 2.0 is a bargain. No frills — just a durable, high-quality, solar-powered camp lantern. We can definitely get behind that.

Best Lightweight Solar Lantern: Goal Zero Crush Light

Weighing only 3.2 oz, the Goal Zero Crush Light was not only the lightest solar lantern that we tested, but also one of our overall favorites.

This lantern had a lot of positives. For us, the biggest selling point, other than its light weight and compactness, was the light quality.

Its warm, yellow-orange color blended right in with the campfire and never felt jarring or out of place around the campsite like the bright white LED lights often did.

This was the light we most often found ourselves reaching for to cook dinner or hang out in the tent, purely because of the warm, cozy light.

The candle-light mode, which flickers and dims the light randomly to mimic a candle, was a nifty idea. It’s pretty unconvincing, though.

After playing around with the setting for a couple of minutes, we found that we had zero reason to actually use it. Still, it does nothing to diminish the rest of the light’s awesome properties, so we’re indifferent to it.

Although the Goal Zero Crush Light had overall shorter runtimes than most of the other lights in our tests, it actually kept a good bit of power in reserve after it shut off.

Once the other lights shut off, they were completely done, drained, and unable to turn back on until they were recharged. Once the Goal Zero shut off on high power, we could turn it back on and usually get another hour or more out of it on low power.

Especially since the Crush Light doesn’t have a battery indicator to tell you when it’s getting low, it’s nice to know that it won’t just abruptly shut off and leave you completely in the dark.

Its solar panel worked remarkably well, considering that it was the smallest panel of all the lanterns in our test. The Crush Light charged up fairly quickly in direct sunlight.

There really were only a few negatives with this light. First, it could be difficult to actually crush, requiring some coaxing for all of the folds to snap into place.

Second, it lacked any kind of battery indicator, leaving you guessing as to its state of charge. It does have a light next to the USB port that turns red when it is charging (either through USB or sunlight) and green when it is fully charged.

Finally, it was the only lantern without some sort of bottom or cover. If you happened to have it hanging in your tent directly above you, the LEDs could be a little binding when you looked up.

We’d recommend this light just for the ambiance alone, as it had such a cozy, natural quality to the light.

Combined with the fact that it was the lightest and most compact light we tested, and that it performed very well in out tests, we think this is a top choice not only for backpackers, but for anyone looking for a simple solar lantern to bring a little light to your nights in the backcountry.

Reviews of the 3 Other Solar Camping Lanterns We Tested

LuminAID PackLite Nova USB

The LuminAID PackLite Nova USB had a lot of good qualities, but enough negative ones that it didn’t make it into our top picks.

Like the two MPOWERD Luci lanterns, it has a battery charge indicator and an adjustable strap to make for easier hanging.

It also lasted impressively long in our runtime test, getting beat out only by the BioLite SunLight (reviewed below).

It feels well-built and durable, and the snaps on the adjustable strap were much easier to use than the Luci’s straps.

Its solar panel didn’t impress us though. It regularly took over an hour in direct sunlight to get enough power to even turn on. To be fair, once it did build up enough power, it stayed on for a respectable amount of time.

We could excuse its slow charge time, considering that it outlasted many of the other solar lanterns when it came to runtime. Unfortunately, this lantern puts out a harsh white fluorescent light reminiscent of the flickery office lights we prefer to escape when we go backpacking. It was by far the least pleasant illumination for our tent and campsites.

If you don’t mind the harsh white of its LEDs, the LuminAID PackLite is a solid, well-constructed camping lantern. Our three award winners, though, give you a little more bang for your buck, and are overall much more enjoyable to light up your campsite with.

BioLite SunLight

The BioLite SunLight was the only non-collapsible solar lantern that we tested, and it had some of our favorite features.

The color and ambiance of the light was awesome. We loved the dimmable white light, and the ability to choose from a variety of different lights.

Its “party mode”, where it slowly cycles through different colors of light, was a fun feature when we were hanging around camp after a good dinner.

It’s extremely compact, lightweight, and lasted an incredible 13 hours and 10 minutes in our runtime test. As a rechargeable USB camping lantern, we absolutely loved it.

Unfortunately, its solar panel was one of the weakest in our test, and since this is a review of solar camping lanterns, that weighs pretty heavily.

It took three hours under full sunlight for the BioLite to even have enough power to turn on in reserve mode, a low-power mode that limits its functionality to just a dim white light.

For reference, both Luci lights and the Goal Zero light turned on within a minute, and usually within seconds, of being in sunlight.

Even after more than five hours in full sunlight, it did not have enough power to get out of reserve mode. However, when we plugged it into a USB charger for a couple of seconds and then disconnected it, it immediately turned on in full power mode and worked for over an hour.

We find it hard to imagine that the solar panel, in five hours of full sun, couldn’t generate the amount of power produced by a couple of seconds on a wall charger.

We’re not sure if we got a lemon with some weird glitch that requires a boost of USB power to get out of reserve mode, or if the solar panel is just extremely inefficient. Whatever the reason, we were disappointed.

If you plan to primarily keep the light charged via USB and use the solar panel to give it a boost every now and then, this is still a good option, and an all-around fun light to have.

We liked it, and would recommend it with the caveat that, based on our tests and experience, it is super inefficient at charging with sunlight alone.

Suaoki LED Camping Lantern

We wanted to add a budget pick into our test. The Suaoki LED Camping Lantern, with mostly good online reviews, seemed like a good bet.

Unfortunately, this was by far the poorest quality and worst performing lantern that we tested.

The cheap materials started to show wear almost immediately, with the plastic crinkling and starting to tear after the light was expanded just a few times.

The solar panel seemed to work sporadically. During our test, it charged the lantern up enough for around half an hour of runtime in 90 minutes of sunlight.

In another instance, though, the Suaoki sat in full sunlight for over three hours without building up enough power to turn on.

Although its overall runtimes look pretty good based on the numbers alone, it lost brightness very quickly. Most of its runtime was light that would barely be usable for close-up tasks like reading, let alone cooking or setting up camp.

This lantern features mobile charging capabilities, but it only gave our phone an 11% boost before it was completely drained. It also was unable to charge the phone from solar power alone.

We did like that when it was collapsed, the light was channeled into a focused flashlight beam, which was a neat feature.

This lantern — and countless duplicates — litter Amazon and are available for cheap. Even at the Suaoki’s low price, we think anyone interested in solar lanterns would be better off spending a few extra dollars for the Goal Zero Crush Light or the MPOWERD Luci Outdoor 2.0.

With its flimsy build and poor performance, and with so many better options out there in the same price range, we just don’t see any reason to recommend this light to anyone.

Summary

Here are the best solar camping lanterns:

• MPOWERD Luci Pro Outdoor 2.0
• MPOWERD Luci Outdoor 2.0
• Goal Zero Crush Light
• LuminAID PackLite Nova USB
• BioLite SunLight
• Suaoki LED Camping Lantern

How to Choose the Best Solar Camping Lantern for Your Needs

Types of Solar Lantern

Compressible: Some inflate like a balloon, some squish like an accordion, but compressible lanterns are the most common type. They can collapse down to less than half an inch thick.

Fixed: There are various types of “fixed,” i.e. non-compressible, lanterns. They range from traditional lanterns to small blocks like the BioLite SunLight.

String lights: Relatively new on the scene, solar-powered string lights are like a string of Christmas lights. They let you spread the illumination out around your campsite.

USB rechargeable: When they first came on the scene, solar lanterns were 100% solar-powered. The trend has moved toward lanterns that can be charged up either through solar panels or a USB port. Many solar lanterns that you will find are USB-rechargeable in addition to solar-powered. These lanterns can be compressible, fixed, or string lights.

Solar Charging Time

Most lights charge within a couple of hours on a wall charger. Under the sun, though, it’s a different story. If you plan on using your solar lantern primarily off the grid, then you need to know how long it will take to replenish those photons.

Most manufacturers will state how long the light takes to reach full charge in sunlight. However, that doesn’t tell the whole story.

We have found that some lights may take a long time to reach their full capacity, but within less than an hour can pick up enough charge to run on low through an evening. Other lights take hours to even charge up enough to turn on.

Light Quality

The lights we tested ranged from warm and soft to cold and harsh. All other characteristics aside, this was one of the biggest factors in how much we actually liked using these lights.

We recommend taking into consideration the quality of light that you prefer (warm or cold, diffused or sharp) and making sure the light you get suits your preferences.

Lumens

Lumens are a measure of how much light a lantern produces at its light source. The lights we tested ranged from 60 to 150 lumens.

We found that 60 lumens was more than adequate for cooking, hanging out, and doing various tasks around camp. The extra brightness is nice to have, but certainly not necessary.

Mobile Charging Capabilities

Some solar lanterns also have the ability to function as a solar charger for your mobile devices. While this is a neat feature to have, it’s important to realize that their charging capacity is very limited.

They’re great for occasionally topping up your mobile devices, but not sufficient for regular heavy use.

Solar Camping Lantern Alternatives

Not interested in any of the above options? No problem — here are some alternatives:

• Battery-powered camping lanterns
• Camping flashlights
• DIY solar lantern (made from a mason jar!)

How We Tested

Runtime Test

We gave each light a full charge and then used a timelapse camera to measure how long they lasted on their highest setting.

Solar Panel Testing

We wanted to know how efficiently the solar panels charged the lanterns. We made sure that each light was fully drained, placed them under direct sunlight for 90 minutes, then measured how long they lasted on their highest setting.

We also performed the same test under the controlled environment of artificial light (full spectrum fluorescent plant lights).

Testing notes:

• Of its 95-minute runtime after charging under sunlight, the Goal Zero Crush Light lasted 5 minutes on high and 90 minutes on reserve low lighting
• The Suaoki LED Camping Lantern emitted an extremely dim light when charged under sunlight and artificial light. Most of its runtime was light that would barely be usable for close-up tasks like reading, let alone cooking or setting up camp.
• We left the LuminAID PackLite Nova USB under artificial light for an additional 8 hrs. It lasted around 45 min.
• We also left the BioLite SunLight under artificial light for an additional 8 hrs. It still did not turn on.
• All of our testing was performed in late autumn and early winter. We suspect that under much stronger summer sunlight the lanterns would have longer runtimes relative to their time in sunlight.

Mobile Charging Test

Two of the lights had two-way USB ports, allowing for mobile charging capabilities. We wanted to know how well they could charge a phone from their internal reserves alone.

We made sure both lanterns were fully charged, and measured how much of a boost they gave a phone before the lantern was fully discharged.

Mobile charging results from full charge:

• MPOWERD Luci Pro Outdoor 2.0: 34% boost in 1 hour 32 min
• Suaoki LED Camping Lantern: 11% boost in 47 min

We also wanted to know how well these two lanterns could charge a device off of sunlight alone. After the lanterns were fully drained, we brought them out to a sunny spot.

Mobile charging results from sunlight:

• MPOWERD Luci Pro Outdoor 2.0: Almost immediately began charging our phone, although at a slower rate and occasionally losing charging capacity
• Suaoki LED Camping Lantern: Did not charge our phone at all

Field Testing

We used these solar lanterns to light up our nights for over 3 months on various camping and backpacking trips throughout the Southwest, and occasionally around home for some extra light.

We put each one through multiple charge and discharge cycles, on both USB and solar power, over the course of our testing.

The post 6 Best Solar Camping Lanterns appeared first on 99Boulders.

Much to Smokey the Bear’s chagrin, we lit a lot of stuff on fire this week. But don’t worry, it was all Leave No Trace-friendly.

We field tested 10 of the best fire starters and judged them on their ease of use, compactness, and the size and strength of their spark. We found the UST Strikeforce to be the best overall for its reliability and ease of use, though good options abound.

Read on for our full reviews. Or, if you’re interested in alternative ways to start a campfire, check out our articles on the top backpacking lighters, stormproof matches, and waterproof matches.

Top Pick: UST Strikeforce

The UST Strikeforce is the bulkiest and one of the heaviest starters we tested. So why is it our Top Pick?

Though it’s certainly not for ultralighters, the Strikeforce is incredibly easy to use and makes great use of space.

Unmatched reliability aside, the flint-based starter is housed in a durable waterproof case. The case doubles as a handy storage compartment for tinder and comes with a lanyard as well.

Though it’s flint-based, the length and width of the rod makes for lots of big, happy sparks that ensure a quick switch fire. The fires we lit with the Strikeforce were consistently instantaneous, making this a great tool for both beginners and emergency situations.

Best One-handed Starter: UST Blastmatch

“Why,” I snorted, “are these one-handed things so popular? Are people really this short on hands?”

Then I thought back to the infamous Aron Ralston, the author and firsthand experiencer of 127 Hours and shrugged. Yeah, I bet Ralston would have liked a good one-handed fire starter.

If you’d also like a good one-handed fire starter, look no further than the UST Blastmatch. It’s the best of its kind.

The Blastmatch is extremely effective, comfortable and easy to use. It does not require a hard surface to work. Just find yourself a heavy log, build your tinder and plunge right into your future fire den for a quick and easy heat machine. It also folds back onto itself for easy, waterproof storage. Handy and simple enough.

Best Sparker: Überleben Zünden

Oh, man! This baby lights up like a Christmas tree.

The Überleben is slick-looking, with its natural, handcrafted handle and ferrocerium rod. Without being a chemist, this fire starter convinced me that ferrocerium can vary widely in quality, and the ferrocerium in this rod is top notch.

Of the ten fire starters we tested, four rods claimed to be made of ferrocerium. Three didn’t light up so well. The Überleben on the other hand sent some of the longest, brightest and most consistent sparks, despite being comparative in size to the smaller Sparkforce, Bear Grylls, and Light My Fire fire starters.

The brand claimed to produce a “molten metal shower of sparks,” and it delivered.

The Überleben is also a multi-tool of sorts, coming with a bottle opener, hex wrench, map scale, ruler, and both scraper and serrated edge for sparking. Not to mention that the lanyard is long enough that you can wear it as a necklace, which is kinda fun. Of all the starters that included accessories like this, this one was my favorite.

Best Value: Survival Spark Magnesium Survival Fire Starter

The Survival Spark is a small, multi-tool of a fire starter with some extra handy gadgets to go along with it.

It lights up well and works exactly as promised — all at a fraction of the price of most of the others. With the added compass and whistle, this is a well-priced addition to any emergency bag.

The only claim that really makes me snort is that this fire starter is “windproof.”

To get a good crackle going on a magnesium starter, you must carve off a bit of the outer coating and make a pile of shavings. Magnesium shavings are obviously lighter than a feather and can blow away with the slightest waft of your hand. It is not easy to use under windy conditions, but then again no striking fire starter really is.

Reviews of the 6 Other Fire Starters We Tested

There are very few things I dislike about the UST Sparkforce, Bear Grylls, and Light My Fire fire starters. They just didn’t match up to the competition. That being said, the problems I have with the nanoSTRIKER, Sparkie, and Coghlan’s are definite dealbreakers.

UST Sparkforce

The UST Sparkforce is a mini version of our Top Pick, the Strikeforce. It’s effective and while the boxy design is far from ergonomic, you won’t be using it long enough to notice.

This is a quick strike starter, able to light fires just as fast as its big brother. Like the Strikeforce, the detachable cap can store a bit of tinder and the case itself locks up for easy pocketability.

While it doesn’t have any versatile gadgets to go along with it, at 1 oz, this would make for a simple, lightweight edition to your backpack.

Gerber Bear Grylls Fire Starter

You may expect a celebrity-endorsed product to fall short when pitted against the big dogs, but TV survivalist Bear Grylls has put his money where his mouth is with this easy to use, beginner-friendly rod and striker.

The sides have been painted with helpful distress graphics in case of emergency and the rubber handle makes it easy to hold in your hand — an ideal feature for the practicing survivalist. The rod is made of ferrocerium and produces a hearty dose of sparks when used correctly.

I’d recommend this starter for beginners or as a holiday gift for the camper who already owns everything.

Light My Fire Swedish FireSteel 2.0

One of the only fire starters to boast ergonomics as its elevating trait admittedly isn’t the most comfortable to hold.

Still, the FireSteel, with its ferrocerium rod and steel striker, is in the mid-quality range. Though I can’t attest to it, the FireSteel claims to last through 12,000 strikes. That’s 4,000 more than the Bear Grylls fire starter, which may be plausible given its longer rod.

If you’re having a hard time deciding between the Bear Grylls and the FireSteel, given their similarities in every way, including price, consider that the FireSteel may live a longer life. Plus, it comes with a whistle.

Exotac nanoSTRIKER XL

The ultimate keychain companion, the nanoSTRIKER. It’s tiny size makes it an easy addition to your pocket, for those in-a-pinch situations.

But its high price point is definitely something to guffaw at, especially since small size equates to difficult usability and a shorter lifespan. Surprisingly, despite its size, it’s not even the lightest striker we tested.

While the nanoSTRIKER is cute and ultimately does make sparks fly, unless you’re looking for a base for your car keys or a good gift for a survivalist aficionado, I don’t recommend it.

UST Sparkie

Picture the UST Blastmatch. Now remove all the unnecessary weight, gut it and make it as light as possible without entirely obliterating functionality.

You now have the UST Sparkie.

Although the Blastmatch is a much better fire starter than the Sparkie because of its size and the length of its rod. The Sparkie is a one-handed wonder that requires either a) hard surface or b) two hands.

I get the concept and I’m exceptionally impressed by the 0.8 oz weight, but the ease of use and functionality fell short on this one and I can’t recommend it. I’d much prefer a simple two piece striker.

Coghlan’s Waterproof Flint Striker

I don’t recommend this striker to anyone, unless you’re on a budget and this is the cheapest option you can find.

Technically it does work, but the Coghlan’s Flint Striker is small and difficult to wield. I had to really dig into the outer coating to even get an initial spark, with something like 20 of the first strikes not producing anything.

That being said, once it was broken in a bit, it did seem to work better. The strike takes a bit of finesse, best maneuvered more as a switch than a striking motion. Compared to all the other dummy-proof strikers, I had the hardest time with this one.

How to Choose the Best Fire Starter for Your Needs

When choosing a fire starter, consider first your skill level, how and why you intend to use it and the general specs and makeup of your various options.

Skill Level

You may be reading this article because you want to buy your very first fire starter. If so, you want something beginner friendly that you can practice on for long periods of time and that is really reliable. That’s why the Strikeforce won out in our tests. It is easy to use and effective, no matter your skill level.

Weight

If you’re a man (or woman) after my own heart and really just want to shave down weight and size, go for the small stuff. The sheer thought of the 3.7 oz Strikeforce, however reliable it may be, may make you shutter. Instead, you could opt for the nanoSTRIKER or wear the Überleben as a necklace just to shave weight off your pack.

Though if you’re really going lightweight, do you even need a striker? or will you just use the fuel from your Jetboil for an emergency light?

If emergency situations, rather than weight, are your primary concern, get something that will really perform during panic mode. That 0.8 oz striker sounds nice for now, but won’t be as easy to handle under pressure. Under these circumstances, prescribe to ‘better safe than sorry‘ and go for the reliability.

Magnesium vs. Flint vs. Ferrocerium

A quick lesson:

Ferrocerium is a pyrophoric alloy containing metals that include iron, magnesium, lanthanum and cerium. It’s a firecracker on a stick.

Comparatively, flint and steel starters will naturally send fewer and smaller sparks.

Magnesium requires a pile of shavings to really get a light, which can be difficult to near impossible in windy conditions.

Consider that of the ten starters we tested, the top four use three different materials. In short, any materials will work. Don’t get intimidated or impressed by the specs. Just because ferrocerium lights brighter doesn’t always mean that it is a higher quality starter.

A good deal of design goes into making a quality striker as well. Take into consideration the size and comfort of the handle and the length and thickness of the rod.

How We Tested

Cotton balls, alcohol, and ferrocerium make for a pyromaniac’s dream. We put these fire starters to the test with rigorous, repetitive use and carry.

Cotton Ball Test

First thing first, let’s make sure these babies actually work. What better way to ensure a flame than to dose a cotton ball with alcohol? This quick and ease way to identify how each starter handles allowed us to get a good feel for their ease of use and functionality.

Along with this, we did a preliminary gauge and comparison of the spark production. How big, bright and far do sparks fly from each strike rod?

Spark Test

As we’ve mentioned, ferrocerium is a sparkler of an alloy that produces firework-quality shavings. Magnesium creates shavings in the same way but with less spark. Flint works entirely differently.

When apt, we built up shaving piles to create and judge firecracker displays. We set the sparks to tinder and determined how various types handled our flames.

Every Day Carry (EDC) Test

I am a backpacker first, so EDC is important to me. How practical is it to lug a bulky or heavy fire starter around? Depending on your needs, probably not very.

We spent time lugging around each of the fire starters, tucking them in various bags, clipping them to keychains, living with them like we would a potential new pet.

You’d be surprised how much this can matter. You may adore that 8″ dream starter at first use, but once your thru-hiking pack is swollen with other gear and it’s the last piece to cram in, your thoughts change very quickly.

The post 10 Best Fire Starters appeared first on 99Boulders.

We tested six of the best hiking socks on the market by putting them through the ringer of nonstop wear with no wash. We hiked with, slept with, worked with and even sniffed each pair for a total of one week each.

Of them all, Darn Tough Light Hiker Micro Crew Light Cushion came out on top. It was the most durable sock we tested, and it’s moisture-managing abilities help keep sweaty feet dry. Plus, all of Darn Tough’s socks come with an unconditional lifetime guarantee.

The Smartwool PhD Outdoor Medium Crew was a close second for its versatility, and the Wigwam Hiking Outdoor Pro offers the best bang for your buck.

Read on for our full reviews.

Top Pick: Darn Tough Light Hiker Micro Crew Light Cushion

I don’t know what else you would want out of a hiking sock. Darn Tough is durable, comfortable, moisture-managing and smells like roses, sort of.

This brand has developed the perfect fabric blend for ideal versatility. Even my sweaty feet managed to stay relatively dry during high activity. The sock doesn’t wear and maintains its fit and shape over long periods of activity.

The moment I knew I loved Darn Tough Light Hiker above Smartwool, I was on a day hike on the Colorado Trail. On a stream crossing, both my socks and shoes got soaked. This was around 11 AM, but I kept them on. By the time it was ready for bed, these socks were bone dry and ready to go.

As a brand, Darn Tough is a clear winner. However, this specific sock won because of its light cushioning. Cushioning is predominantly a personal preference and many folks, especially with less sweaty feet hiking in colder climates, may find this particular sock a little thin. Luckily, Darn Tough makes its Hiker sock in a variety of thicknesses.

Women’s version: Darn Tough Light Hiker Micro Crew Light Cushion Women’s

Full review: Darn Tough Light Hiker Micro Crew Light Cushion

Runner-Up: Smartwool PhD Outdoor Medium Crew

Smartwool is one of the most well-known sock brands because of its versatility and countless different styles and specializations.

They’ve covered every section of the market and offered a variety of awesome color patterns to go along with it. Most everything they produce is great, but in this case their socks weren’t the best.

Darn Tough beats out Smartwool because of its higher durability, effectiveness in keeping its shape and superior moisture-managing ability. Still, I enjoy wearing Smartwool for high-exertion activities like trail running more than anything. There is minimal cushioning, meaning it won’t impact how my foot sits in my shoe. Plus, merino wool continuously wicks sweat away from the skin, meaning that even during high activity, your feet stay precisely the perfect temperature.

I have Smartwool socks that are over a year old that already show wear on the ankle and heel. Likewise, these things can really, really produce a stink. But who cares about that?

Women’s version: Smartwool PhD Outdoor Medium Crew Women’s

Full review: Smartwool PhD Outdoor Medium Crew

Best Value: Wigwam Hiking Outdoor Pro

One of my favorite things about a Wigwam sock is the initial snug fit on the crew cut.

However, after wearing these socks without wash for extended period, the fabric does stretch. I like the fit around your calf on the Wigwam and the material is fairly comfortable, especially given the moderate price.

When considering why a product earns ‘Best Value,’ you must consider the durability, comfort and price point. The price point is the best thing about these socks, followed by comfort. Though they are durable, when compared to other brands, they don’t always match up.

I do love Wigwams for sleeping. This is the kind of sacred pair of socks I would keep at the bottom of my sleeping bag and for use around camp.

Women’s version: Wigwam Hiking Outdoor Pro Women’s

Full review: Wigwam Hiking Outdoor Pro

Reviews of the 3 Other Hiking Socks We Tested

In a market where hundreds of different socks compete for the spotlight, when you narrow the choices down to six, it gets really nitpicky. Of the six socks we tested, all are reliable and viable choices. Here’s how the other three pairs compared.

Darn Tough Hiker Micro Crew Cushion

There are few differences between the Darn Tough Micro Crew and the Darn Tough Light Micro Crew. I’m a big fan of minimal cushioning, but that’s not to say this isn’t a fantastic sock.

Most of my hiking time is spent in southwestern Colorado, which can be warm, cool and freezing. I would use the Darn Tough Micro Crew for sleeping more than I would hiking.

Ideally, I’d carry two to three pairs of socks on a 30-day backpacking trip: Two pairs of our Top Pick, Darn Tough Light Hiker Micro Crew Light Cushion, and one pair of this sock, Darn Tough Hiker Micro Crew Cushion.

Women’s version: Darn Tough Hiker Micro Crew Cushion Women’s

Smartwool Hike Light Crew

To be honest, personal preference largely drove me to rank the Smartwool PhD Outdoor Medium Crew above this pair, the Smartwool Hike Light Crew.

It’s a very similar sock but, as you’ll notice, the greater the cushioning, the lower the score tended to be.

Some folks appreciate the extra support that comes with cushioning for long treks, but I’ve found that for my sweaty feet, the excess warmth negatively affects my overall comfort. If I were mountaineering in drastically colder conditions, that may be a different story.

Women’s version: Smartwool Hike Light Crew Women’s

Injinji Outdoor Midweight Crew NuWool

I like Injinji for its unorthodox take on the hiking sock. Toe socks, in most cases, should always be acceptable.

However, when hiking with the Injinji, the extra fabric feels incredibly weird and takes some getting used to. Mostly, its a comfortable set-up when you do but the separation between the toes makes it difficult to retain warmth when not in motion.

They were fine socks, but when compared with the competition they ended up being our least favorite.

Full review: Injinji Outdoor Midweight Crew NuWool

Summary

Here are the best hiking socks:

• Darn Tough Light Hiker Micro Crew Light Cushion
• Smartwool PhD Outdoor Medium Crew
• Darn Tough Hiker Micro Crew Cushion
• Wigwam Hiking Outdoor Pro
• Smartwool Hike Light Crew
• Injinji Outdoor Midweight Crew NuWool

How to Choose the Best Hiking Socks for Your Needs

Though there are some definite winners to show in our research, socks are, like any other article of clothing, a matter of preference. You may disagree with our rankings simply because of the thickness of a certain sock.

When choosing your go-to pair or brand, consider where you intend to hike, how long you intend to wear them and what length and thickness you prefer.

Preferred Thickness

As REI experts have attested, “a bit of cushion can protect your feet during high-impact activities like running and backpacking, but…thicker socks are warmer and can cause your feet to sweat.” It’s all about balance. If you naturally sweat more than the average person, you may want a thin to medium thickness, despite cold conditions.

Here are the most common thicknesses with the explanations of who or what each is best suited for:

• Lightweight — Trail running, mountain biking; high-exertion activities where you expect to sweat a lot
• Midweight — Hiking, cross country skiing; a more versatile thickness that can handle fairly most any condition
• Thick weight — Mountaineering, winter skiing, snowshoeing, sleeping; for those instances where you really need to keep your feet warm and cushioned

Preferred Length

All the socks we tested had a crew cut, which is ideal if you hike in boots with strong ankle support. There is a lot of debate on whether hiking shoes or trail runners are better for thru-hiking, and there isn’t a correct answer.

However, if you are on the team of trail runners, you may want an ankle length sock. Consider what style of sock you wear in your day to day and if that preference will cross over into your hiking activity.

Here are the most common length options along with the scenarios they are designed for:

• Ankle Length — trail running, mountain biking; great for hot to mild climates
• Quarter Length — trail running, mountain biking, hiking with trail runners; a versatile length great for mild to moderate climates and conditions
• Crew Length — Bushwhacking, hiking with boots, mountaineering, winter skiing, snowshoeing, sleeping; for those instances where you need extra insulation or protection on the calf.

As a rule of thumb, with the arguable exception of trail running, keep your socks at least half an inch in length above the top of your shoe or boot. This reduces friction and the chance of blisters.

Duration of Use

These socks were worn multiple days straight without wash. Though we couldn’t spend years testing the long-term durability, we were able to see which ones maintained their comfort from day one.

If you care or are looking for socks that stand the test of time without too much stink, Darn Tough has been recognized countless times for its darn toughness. Consider how long you plan to wear a pair between washes and how long you want them to last. Opt for quality over quantity.

Climate & Weather

When your feet get cold, the first things to go are the toes. This is your body’s natural way of pulling all your heat into the core and away from the extremities. How warm and how thick the fabric feels in the toes is crucial. The colder the weather, the more valuable a thick pair of socks is.

Growing up in the lower south, I rarely ever hiked in socks with more than a thin layer of cushion. In the Chihuahuan Desert, high cushioning will just equate to extra sweaty, wet feet. BUT: You’ll probably really appreciate a dense pair on your summit attempt of Mount Rainier.

In rainy or wet conditions where it can be challenging to keep dry, fabric matters. Merino wool is renowned for its moisture-managing properties, and that’s one reason Darn Tough and Smart Wool are held in such high regard.

How We Tested

You really have to put a pair of socks through the ringer before declaring true love. Something that feels comfortable for a few hours may make you so irritated by day seven that you throw them in the campfire (not that I’ve done that).

For that reason, we took a lifestyle approach to testing. AKA: devoting five days of nonstop wear, no matter the schedule, to each pair of socks, without wash. That meant working, hiking, sleeping and everything else in between.

Hike Test

A day hike is a quick way to identify everything you love or hate about your socks. Sticking your wool-bound feet in hiking shoes for long periods of time risks blisters, slippage, wear, and stink. Each pair of socks was worn for a number of day hikes and trail runs, which allowed us to identify everything wrong with each pair.

Sleep Test

The importance of the sleep test is predominantly testing moisture control. “Never go to to bed with the socks you hiked in,” is a backpacking mantra for a reason. Sweaty socks equate to freezing feet under most conditions. If the socks can’t handle moisture or don’t retain warmth, this is where you’ll most notice it.

Smell Test

And what do you do after five days of nonstop wear? You take a big ol’ whiff. I have a strong stomach and frankly think I smell like roses all the time, but even I couldn’t handle myself after this.

The post 6 Best Hiking Socks appeared first on 99Boulders.

After subjecting 5 people, including myself, to a blind taste test of 8 popular powdered milk brands, the results are clear — Carnation NonFat Dry Milk is the best tasting powdered milk out there.

We’re an outdoor gear site, so we tasted and reviewed these milks with campers and backpackers in mind. Powdered milk is a popular way to add flavor to trail food or instant camp coffee, after all.

However, whether you’re an ultralight hiker or someone who just wants to know which powdered milk tastes best, our results will help you pick the right brand for your needs.

Read on for our reviews.

Best Tasting: Carnation NonFat Dry Milk

Carnation was the clear winner in terms of taste and aftertaste, receiving more 5-star ratings than any other brand. If you’re looking for the best tasting powdered milk brand, this is it.

“Tastes the most like actual milk,” wrote one tester on her comment card. “Rich, sweet, creamy,” wrote another.

The only real downside of this brand is related to backpacking — it has the lowest calories per ounce ratio of any brand we tested.

Overall, we figured taste would be the most important attribute for someone looking for powdered milk. And if that’s the case with you, Carnation is the brand we recommend. However, if you can’t find it or you want a dairy-free option, the other award winners are good alternatives.

Runner-Up: Peak Full Cream Instant Milk Powder

Peak received the second-best rating for taste and tied for the second-best aftertaste. One tester noted it was “creamy,” while another liked its “smooth” texture. It was also one of the easiest brands to mix together.

When would you choose Peak over any of the others?

We’d only recommend it if you already have an affinity for the taste or can find it for a good deal. Its 142 calories per ounce also makes it a solid option — but not the best — in terms of caloric density.

Honorable Mention: Nido Powdered Milk

When researching for this assignment, Nido was the most frequently mentioned brand in forums and other articles on the topic. It seems to be the most popular brand among backpackers.

While Nido averaged a lukewarm 3/5 in both taste and aftertaste, its mixability was among the best and, importantly for backpackers, it has the highest calories per ounce ratio of any cow’s milk brand we tested.

For lightweight backpackers who carry a lot of powdered milk, Nido is a good option. You get decent flavor for the weight.

For non-backpackers, there isn’t any reason we’d recommend this option over Carnation.

Best Milk Alternative: Z Natural Foods Coconut Milk Powder

If you’re lactose-intolerant or don’t like consuming dairy, we recommend Z Natural Foods Coconut Milk Powder. It was the highest-rated alternative milk powder in our tests.

What’s more, this brand would have likely received better ratings had testers known beforehand it was coconut.

One tester, once I revealed that this brand was coconut, admitted that “it tastes better now that I know it’s coconut.” Other testers shared similar sentiments.

It seems our testers were expecting a flavor akin to cow’s milk and — when they didn’t taste that — they were a little grossed out and rated this brand poorly.

This brand is also one of the top options for backpackers from a weight perspective. It packs a staggering 194 calories per ounce since it is mostly fat and contains very little sugar relative to the other brands. If you’re a backpacker who’s looking for a lactose-free option, we highly recommend this stuff.

As for cons, the overall taste was still worse than our two top brands, Carnation and Peak. And this brand was the hardest to mix together.

Reviews of the Other 4 Powdered Milk Brands We Tested

The remaining brands we tested ranged from passable to unpleasant. They didn’t win any awards because they simply didn’t taste as good as the ones listed above.

As such, we don’t recommend any of them, but we’ve briefly reviewed them here for the curious.

Hoosier Hill Farm Whole Milk Powder

“Kind of tastes watery — smells like powdered milk,” wrote one tester. “Dry,” wrote another, though I forgot to ask him what he meant by that…

The Hoosier Hill Farm powdered milk was neither loved nor hated. In fact, it was almost perfectly average. All but one of its ratings for taste and aftertaste were either 2/5 or 3/5. And we rated it a middle-of-the-road 3/5 for mixability.

I can’t think of a scenario in which we’d recommend you go with this brand over any of the ones mentioned above. Bottom line: it’s not terrible, but there are better options out there.

Meyenberg Whole Powdered Goat Milk

Meyenberg’s powdered goat milk was the most intriguing option on the list for me. I love goat cheese and was excited to see if reconstituted goat milk would be as wonderfully creamy.

Overall, all our testers (including myself) weren’t thrilled with it. It scored 2.6/5 for both taste and aftertaste.

I should note, however, that this brand would have also likely received slightly higher ratings had the testers known beforehand that it was goat milk. One tester wrote down that this brand had a “very strong and distinctive flavor, kinda tastes like sour milk.” Yet when I revealed to him that it was goat milk, he said the flavor made “more sense” because he could place it better.

If you’re intrigued by the idea of powdered goat milk, then by all means go with this option. It does in fact taste like goat’s milk.

But if you’re simply in search of the best flavor or a high calorie per ounce ratio, we don’t recommend it.

Milkman Instant Lowfat Dry Milk

Our testers gave Milkman the most 1/5’s for taste and aftertaste of any brand. (The only reason that it didn’t rank dead last was because one tester, interestingly enough, rated it 5/5 for taste and 4/5 for aftertaste.)

“Really Extremely unpleasant aftertaste,” wrote one tester. “Couldn’t figure out the flavor but I didn’t like it,” noted another.

Personally, I thought the taste was awful. The aftertaste reminded me of the inside of the foil pouch the powder came in.

Look elsewhere.

Better Than Milk Vegan Soy Powder

We decided to test Better Than Milk’s powdered soy milk after seeing a couple recommendations for it in this forum thread on Backpacking Light. We figured it might make a nice dairy-free alternative.

However, this brand received the worst overall rating for taste of all the brands we tested: 2/5. It had the second-worst aftertaste, too.

“No to the soy milk!” wrote one tester who identified it by its flavor despite not knowing which brand was which. Another tester thought it “tastes like paint smells.” I thought it was passable and gave it a 3/5 for taste — but that was the highest rating of any of our testers. The consensus was that this brand did not taste good.

If you’re a vegan or someone who doesn’t drink cow’s milk, we recommend the powdered coconut milk reviewed above.

Video of Taste Test Results

How to Choose the Best Powdered Milk for Your Needs

Taste

Of course, taste will be the most important consideration for most people. We’ve accordingly indicated our ratings for each brand’s taste and aftertaste.

Mixability

It can be a minor annoyance to have to stir excessively to mix the powder and water together. This is by no means a major consideration unless it’s just a pet peeve of yours — or if you’ll be consuming your powdered milk on the trail and you don’t carry a utensil for whatever reason.

Calories per Ounce

This consideration applies to backpackers only. If you’re buying powdered milk to take into the backcountry, like any other food you take you’ll need to consider the calories per ounce ratio of your powdered milk brand.

Powdered milk in general is calorically dense, but some brands — Peak, Nido, and Z Natural Foods Coconut in particular — are a great mix of taste and caloric density.

How We Tested

This was the fun part.

To keep the results as objective as possible, I recruited 4 testers to participate in blind taste tests. I also tasted the milks myself in a semi-blind way (since I knew which milks were in the running, it was easy for me to pick out the soy, goat, and coconut milks the moment I tasted them, so my tasting wasn’t 100% blind).

The 4 testers I recruited were:

1. Kevin, 27, a very occasional car camper and backpacker
2. Max, 24, a former NOLS employee and backpacking guide and occasional car camper and backpacker
3. Ann, 63, a very occasional day hiker and car camper
4. Gardner, 24, an occasional weekend camper and backpacker

How We Conducted the Blind Taste Tests

I performed 3 of these blind taste tests — once with my family members and twice with two different friends. They were conducted in the same way:

1. First, I labeled 8 empty cups or glasses with the numbers 1 through 8.

2. Next, I prepared an 8 oz glass of each brand of powdered milk according to the instructions on the package.

3. Then I prepared some comment cards so testers could record their ratings for the taste and aftertaste of each glass of milk (on a 5-point scale) as well as any additional comments they wanted to include.

4. Then I let the testers have at it and taste the milks to their hearts’ content.

5. Once the testers had tasted all the milks and written down all their ratings and comments, I revealed which milk was which. This was an interesting part of the taste test because almost every tester mentioned how a particular brand — in particular the soy, goat, and coconut ones — tasted better after they learned what it was.

Testing Notes

These blind taste tests weren’t very scientific and shouldn’t be treated as such. They were just a fun and informal way to get a number of differing opinions.

The greatest flaw in these taste tests that I didn’t realize until too late was that I didn’t standardize the amount of powder. I followed the instructions on each brand’s package which led to discrepancies since some brand called for 2 tbsp of powder while others called for 1/3 cup.

To account for some of this I told testers to rate the taste not on the strength of flavor but instead on the quality, however mild it may be. I can’t be certain they were able to effectively do that, though.

The post 8 Best Powdered Milk Brands appeared first on 99Boulders.

After poring over dozens of spec sheets, performing discharge tests, and using five lightweight power packs for over a month, we think the Anker Astro E1 6700 is the best portable battery pack for most campers and backpackers, particularly weekend warriors.

It packs enough power to charge a phone one and a half to two times and weighs a mere 4.3 oz. It’s also the smallest battery pack we tested. Anker markets it as “candy-bar sized” which isn’t too far off.

However, for some campers and backpackers the Astro won’t be enough. Those going on longer trips or taking multiple devices should look at the Anker PowerCore II 10000.

It weighs only a couple ounces more and has enough juice to fully charge a phone 2.5-3.5 times or a larger device like an iPad mini around one and a half times.

We only tested five battery packs, yet our month of testing shed insight on the dozens of other options out there and who they’re right for. Along with our reviews, we discuss who should get a battery pack with Qualcomm Quick Charge and important considerations when buying.

Let’s dive right in.

Top Pick: Anker Astro E1 6700

Most of the campers and backpackers we know are weekend warriors, and the Astro earned our Top Pick with them in mind.

At 6700 mAh capacity (4,121 mAh based on our discharge test) and only one output port, the Astro is a rather minimalist battery pack when it comes down to it.

Yet that is what makes it great for our purposes.

At 4.3 oz, It is one of the smallest and lightest battery packs for its capacity. It holds enough juice to charge a smartphone around 1.5-2 times — a perfect amount for 2-4 days of limited phone use.

Simply put, for most weekend warriors, the Astro is an affordable battery pack that gives you everything you need to keep your devices charged and nothing more.

Its max input charging speed of 1A leaves something to be desired though. This isn’t a huge issue unless you need to charge it constantly on your trip, such as when thru-hiking. Otherwise you can just recharge it once you get home.

While the Astro is our Top Pick, it isn’t perfect for every camper and backpacker. We spend the rest of this article discussing good alternatives, especially power packs with greater capacity.

If you’re looking for the opposite — a battery pack with less capacity — check out the Anker PowerCore+ Mini 3350. It’s a 3 oz “lipstick sized” pack that can give a smartphone about a half to a full charge.

Best for More Power: Anker PowerCore II 10000

When deciding which battery packs to test, I spent some time reading relevant threads in hiker forums and subreddits.

From that I learned the PowerCore II 10000 and the first-generation PowerCore 10000 are two of the most popular battery packs among ultralight backpackers.

It turns out the popularity is warranted. If you need more power this is the pack we recommend.

But it’s not just ideal for backpacking. It’s also a great portable power source for camping trips.

On a recent weekend climbing and camping trip to Sand Rock, Alabama, five friends and I used this power pack exclusively to charge our phones and Bluetooth speakers. It had more than enough power to handle all the different devices.

Indeed, the PowerCore II has the greatest capacity of all the battery packs we tested according to our discharge test.

Here are the discharge test results of the three battery packs with a stated 10,000 mAh capacity:

• Anker PowerCore II 10000: 6,518 mAh
• Puridea S2 10000: 6,352 mAh
• RAVPower 10000: 4,878 mAh

Anker lists the pack at 6.9 oz, but when we weighed it ourselves it clocked in at 6.7 oz. Its low weight and high capacity make it the best option in terms of power per ounce (mAh/oz).

The main drawback is the lone output port. You won’t be able to charge two devices simultaneously with this pack. While testing we rarely found ourselves needing two output ports, but we know this might be important to some of you.

Since older generation battery packs are constantly being discontinued, we tested the 10000 mAh model from the newer PowerCore II generation. The 10000 mAh model from the previous PowerCore generation, the Anker PowerCore 10000, is worth a close look as long as it’s still around. It’s slightly cheaper and lighter.

Campers and backpackers who need even more power (and output ports) should look at the packs in the PowerCore and PowerCore II line with greater capacity, such as the PowerCore 13000 and PowerCore 20100. We didn’t test them but they’re well reviewed around the web.

Jackery Bolt 6000

Looking at specs alone can mislead you when it comes to the Jackery Bolt.

Here’s what I mean:

The Bolt weighs 5.57 oz and has a capacity of 6000 mAh (4,063 mAh based on our discharge test).

The Anker Astro E1 weighs 4.3 oz and has a capacity of 6700 mAh (4,121 mAh according to our discharge test). It also isn’t as bulky and retails for a little less at the time of publishing.

The Astro is the obvious choice, right? It’s lighter, smaller, cheaper, and has greater capacity.

Not so fast.

For an apples-to-apples comparison, you have to take into account the Bolt’s built-in features:

• Micro USB cable
• Lightning cable
• Flashlight

(Not to mention that the Bolt has a faster input charging speed and can charge three devices at once.)

If you brought along your own cables and light, at the very least (assuming you buy the shortest possible cables and the lightest possible flashlight or headlamp) that’s an extra 1.5-2 oz of weight.

That would make your charging ‘system’ with the Astro slightly heavier. You’d also end up spending more overall.

All this plus the fact that the Bolt with its built-in cables is just less hassle and you have a battery pack that is certainly the right choice for some.

However, the Bolt isn’t perfect and we actually don’t think it’s better than the Astro for most backpackers. While the built-in light is nice, it can’t replace a good backpacking flashlight or headlamp. It’s too dim, too limited in functionality for most purposes — like the flashlight on your phone.

Though it can charge three devices at once, assuming you’re charging devices like smartphones it doesn’t have enough capacity to provide more than a partial charge to each.

For the backpacker who only needs to charge their phone, and prefers to pack a good headlamp or flashlight, the Bolt is overbuilt.

I’ll finish by saying that towards the end of my month of using these five battery packs in daily life the Bolt became the one I used almost exclusively. It sounds minor, but not having to carry around extra cables made all the difference. If you want one battery pack that you can use on the trail and in your daily life, we recommend the Bolt.

Budget Buy: Puridea S2 10000

When deciding which battery packs to test, we combed through plenty of spec sheets and product pages, paying special attention to price, weight, and stated capacity.

The S2 stood out as a potential budget-friendly option with a stated capacity of 10,000 mAh and a competitive weight of 7.13 oz.

Like many products from these obscure brands that are only available online, the S2’s price fluctuates constantly. As long as it doesn’t creep too high the S2 is worth a look.

We want to make sure you’re aware of the drawbacks upfront. So let’s start with the negatives.

The S2 has some fake positive reviews which is never reassuring. While I’ve used it for over a month without problems, some reviewers (hopefully some of the reliable ones?) have reported that the pack has died after a couple weeks or months. Rest assured we’ll update this review if ours dies prematurely.

Caveat emptor.

With that out of the way, let’s look at the positives.

While it doesn’t look like it from the photos, the S2 is actually the second least bulky battery pack (in cubic inches) we tested, behind the Astro. It’s surprisingly slim, just under half an inch tall.

In our discharge tests we recorded an average capacity of 6,352 mAh. That was second only to the 6,518 mAh of the PowerCore II and roughly 1500 mAh greater than the RAVPower 10000.

Unlike the PowerCore II, the S2 has dual output ports so you can charge two devices at once. For a change of pace, it also has plenty of color options.

Bottom line:

Considering the price we paid and the results from our testing, we think the S2 is a good choice — but only for those on a budget.

RAVPower 10000

The only thing we liked about the RAVPower was its price.

As for dislikes, it’s the heaviest (9.14 oz) and bulkiest option on the list by quite a bit. That’s never a good title to hold in the world of camping and backpacking gear.

The results of our discharge test with the RAVPower were also uninspiring.

The RAVPower had an average capacity of 4,878 mAh. That’s more in line with the capacities of the Astro E1 6700 and Bolt 6000 than the other battery packs with stated capacities of 10,000 mAh.

The RAVPower does have two output ports, but so does the Puridea S2. In other words, we don’t see any good reason to pick this pack over any of the other options.

Summary

Here are the best portable power packs for camping and backpacking:

• Anker Astro E1 6700
• Anker PowerCore II 10000
• Jackery Bolt 6000
• Puridea S2 10000
• RAVPower 10000

What about Battery Packs with Qualcomm Quick Charge?

The ideal Quick Charge battery pack has Quick Charge input and output, but forced to choose we would pick a battery pack with just Quick Charge input over one with just Quick Charge output.

Why?

We’d rather shorten the time we spend waiting in town for our battery pack to charge than the time it takes to recharge our devices while hiking.

Here are some well-reviewed, lightweight Quick Charge battery packs to consider:

• RAVPower Slim 10000 (QC input & output; 6.8 oz)
• Anker PowerCore+ 10050 (QC input & output; 8.3 oz)
• Anker PowerCore Speed 20000 (QC input & output; 12.6 oz)

Don’t forget to pick up any related accessories. Your wall charger and charging cable also need to be Quick Charge compatible to get the benefits on the input end.

And on the output end, your devices need to be Quick Charge compatible as well, otherwise they will charge at their standard speed. This is another reason why we’d prefer just QC input over just QC output.

(Here’s the official list of Quick Charge compatible devices in case your not sure if yours is.)

Do You Actually Need a Quick Charge Set-up?

Clearly a Quick Charge set-up is the more expensive route. This begs the question:

Which campers and backpackers would benefit most from a Quick Charge set-up?

Thru-hikers.

Thru-hikers need to recharge their battery pack when in town. A Quick Charge set-up could shorten each stop in town by hours.

Weekend warriors on the other hand won’t benefit as much from Quick Charge. A single charge of a battery pack will last most of their trips. They most likely won’t be stopping in town during the trip either.

Of course, Quick Charge output can charge your devices much quicker assuming they’re Quick Charge compatible. That would benefit both thru-hikers and weekend warriors alike.

How to Choose the Right Battery Pack for Your Needs

Beyond the ever-present considerations of weight and bulk, here is what to take into account when picking out a battery pack for camping or backpacking.

Capacity

To estimate how much capacity you need, take into account the devices you’ll be taking, the number of times you’ll be charging each, and their battery capacity.

Calculate the total capacity you’ll need in mAh, then pick a battery pack with a stated capacity roughly 1.5x greater since in real-world conditions battery packs aren’t perfectly efficient.

For example, let’s say I’ll be taking my iPhone 5s and Kindle Paperwhite on a 4-day backpacking trip.

Here is the battery capacity of each:

• iPhone 5s: 1570 mAh
• Kindle Paperwhite: 1420 mAh

I estimate I’ll need to charge my phone three times and my Kindle once. That works out to the following:

(1570 mAh * 3 charges) + (1420 mAh * 1 charge) = 6,130 mAh

The batteries that performed best in our discharge test discharged on average about two-thirds of their stated capacity, so to calculate how much stated capacity I need my battery pack to have I’d do the following:

6,130 mAh * 1.5 = 9,195 mAh

In this example I’d pick a battery pack with a stated capacity of 9,000-10,000 mAh.

Number of Ports

Pick up a battery pack with enough ports to charge as many devices as you’ll need to charge at once.

Input & Output Charging Speed

This one’s straightforward:

The faster you need your devices and battery pack to charge, the faster should be your battery pack’s input and output rates.

At one end of the spectrum is 1A, the lowest we saw, which is quite slow. Quick Charge is on the other end of the spectrum and lives up to its name.

Manufacturers will list the input and output charging speeds on their product pages. Unlike capacity, these tend to accurately reflect real-world performance.

Miscellaneous Features (Beyond Quick Charge)

We didn’t view any miscellaneous battery pack features as critical. They could tip the scale for you one way or the other though.

Examples:

• Built-in cables
• Built-in flashlight
• Built-in wall charger

How We Tested

Discharge Test

We used a USB power meter and USB load tester to perform two discharge tests on each battery pack to measure capacity. Battery capacity depends on discharge speed, so we tested every battery at a constant output of 1 amp.

Here are our averaged results:

• Anker Astro E1 6700: 4,121 mAh
• Anker PowerCore II 10000: 6,518 mAh
• Jackery Bolt 6000: 4,063 mAh
• Puridea S2 10000: 6,352 mAh
• RAVPower 10000: 4,878 mAh

Because of our crude instrumentation, take these results with a grain of salt.

Important Specs & Ratios

We weighed and measured the battery packs and calculated two important ratios for each:

• mAh/oz — power per ounce
• mAh/$ — power per dollar

These value and weight efficiency ratios as well as the absolute weight were weighted heavily in our scoring.

Field Testing

We took these battery packs with us to Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forest in north Georgia and Cherokee Rock Village in northeast Alabama to test them in the field.

We planned to field test them for a week but realized quickly that capacity and the specs and ratios mentioned above were most important. What’s more, using these battery packs on the trail and at camp didn’t much alter our thoughts on them. We cut the field testing short after four days.

Usually the results from our field testing are heavily weighted in our scoring. This time they weren’t.

We also used the battery packs in daily life over the course of a month to charge everything we could — phones, Kindles, speakers, Bluetooth headphones, and so on. Each went through multiple recharge and discharge cycles.

The post 5 Best Portable Battery Packs for Camping & Backpacking appeared first on 99Boulders.