General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Below 0 run!

Started by Tatmanmj · · Last activity · 46 posts · 914 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
21 January 2005
Last activity
26 January 2005
Original author
Tatmanmj
Posts
46
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
914
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 21–40 of 46
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. "Phil M." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Leafing through rec.running, I read a message from
    [email hidden] of 23 Jan 2005:

    Quoted message said:
    Tatmanmj said:

    >> F or C?
    >
    >> rec.running isn't an american newsgroup. If F, I'm impressed, if
    >> C, rather
    >
    >> less so. ;-)

    F, not C!

    Okay, I'm impressed then. ;-)

    For other US rec.runners, do please try and remember that not everyone
    uses your archaic units.

    Archaic indeed! I remember learning the metric system in grade school (mid
    60s). At that time there was a big push to go metric. I guess the powers
    that be decided they didn't want to go through the pain of converting.
    Those people are problably long gone now. If we had converted then
    everything be much easier now.

    look they signed us onto this imperial system to begin with so why should we
    jump on metric just so they can change it on us in a couple hundred years
    again? think of all the time we wasted on the dewey decimal system. what a
    ripoff!

    Quoted message said:

    Phil M.

  2. As for the long run... yes Sunday is usually my day for 12 + miles.
    Somehow I don't think I will be able to with 2 feet of snow in New
    England today. Yep, should have done it yesterday.

    As for the metric system ...for people who work in labs... conversion
    has been a way of life from the time the French thought it up

    Len

  3. Phil M. said:


    Leafing through rec.running, I read a message from
    [email hidden] of 23 Jan 2005:

    Quoted message said:
    Tatmanmj said:

    >> F or C?
    >
    >> rec.running isn't an american newsgroup. If F, I'm impressed, if
    >> C, rather

    Actually, Tim, this is not a uk.rec newsgroup (I can
    by the majority of idioms...), so I guess you'll have
    to remember there's lots of backward yanks here 🙂

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    >> less so. ;-)

    F, not C!

    Okay, I'm impressed then. ;-)

    For other US rec.runners, do please try and remember that not everyone
    uses your archaic units.

    Yes but remember it was you English who set our
    measurement standards according to the length of
    your king's foot (which leads me to wonder which
    foot they chose, since most people have one foot
    longer than the other...) Still I know plenty of
    brits who still use fahrenheit, inches, and feet
    (British Imperial.) Neither is unscientific nor
    archaic, simply a matter of preferred prejudice
    (i.e., there's no mathematical or scientific
    logic to standard measurements; only what the
    government considers "official."😉 The fahrenheit
    scale is named for Gabriel Daniel Fahrenheit,
    German physicist who invented the mercury
    thermometer in 1714. Celsius was named after his
    _contemporary_, Anders Celsius, Swedish astronomer
    who devised the centigrade thermometer in 1742.
    Archaic, I believe, would apply to babylonian, not
    modern measures and scales.

    Using your preferred C I wouldn't be impressed by a
    -2 cold temp either, or vice versa: the abstraction
    that 30 degrees C is "hot" weather seems similarly
    absurd and illogical to me 😉 Fahrenheit is in fact
    a much more _precise_ measure of temperature
    differentiation due to it's finer scale (1 unit =
    1/180 of the difference between freezing and boiling
    points at standard pressure vs. 1 unit = 1/100 for
    the same difference using celsius.) Same goes for
    feet vs. meters.

    Having differentiated that, I think I'll wear shorts
    on my run today since it's a currently warm 53F --
    in your temp terminology that's 11.666667 degrees C.
    precisely 🙂

    Quoted message said:

    Archaic indeed! I remember learning the metric system in grade school (mid
    60s). At that time there was a big push to go metric. I guess the powers
    that be decided they didn't want to go through the pain of converting.
    Those people are problably long gone now. If we had converted then
    everything be much easier now.

    uh umm..easier than what? doing away with customary
    and practical measures like "foot"? Feet and inches
    seem as easy and logical to me as meters and centimeters.
    I mean, how logical is it to define a unit of measure
    (the meter) by measuring the distance traveled by light
    in a vacuum in 1/299,792,458ths of a second? (someone
    get my stop watch and micrometer 😉 )

    I think the ol' king's foot method is a bit less arcane
    and a bit more pragmatic...

  4. Len A. said:


    As for the long run... yes Sunday is usually my day for 12 + miles.
    Somehow I don't think I will be able to with 2 feet of snow in New
    England today. Yep, should have done it yesterday.

    Don't they plow streets in New England?

    Heck, when we get 3-4 feet I still run and
    CNN doesn't even take notice.

    Quoted message said:

    As for the metric system ...for people who work in labs... conversion
    has been a way of life from the time the French thought it up

    The french also thought up the guillotine 🙂

  5. Tom Phillips said:
    Phil M. said:
    Quoted message said:


    For other US rec.runners, do please try and remember that not
    everyone uses your archaic units.

    Yes but remember it was you English who set our
    measurement standards according to the length of
    your king's foot (which leads me to wonder which
    foot they chose, since most people have one foot
    longer than the other...) Still I know plenty of
    brits who still use fahrenheit, inches, and feet
    (British Imperial.) Neither is unscientific nor
    archaic, simply a matter of preferred prejudice

    You're rather missing my point. Rather than quibble about the relative
    merits of any particular unit, I was trying to point out that one shouldn't
    *assume* that everyone else on usenet knows what units you're using.

    All it takes is an F or a C to make things clear.

    Tim

  6. Doug Freese said:
    Quoted message said:

    Time to go out and shovel some of the last 6 inches on snow. Looking
    pretty nasty and very windy out there - I'm glad I got my long one in
    yesterday before the snow hit. I may pull a Lance today and hide under
    my blanket.

    6 inches, is that all? Well, CNN needs something to
    report 🙂 FWIW, sunny and 62 here today (um, for Tim
    that's 62F/16.6666667 _celsius_ )

    Course I suppose it all depends on what (or who)
    you have under the blanket 😉

  7. It seems to me that getting started is the hardest part (isn't it
    always?) I mean, I've put in some pretty cold runs so far this season
    and I don't think I've ever been cold once I was 10 minutes or so into
    a run. In fact, once I'm into the groove I find the cold weather
    exhilarating.

  8. Tatmanmj said:

    Not a big deal to most, I guess but I actually got out there and ran 8 miles in
    -2 weather. A major accomplishment for me because I've always been a cold
    weather wimp and since last year have, for once, been sticking to my goals.

    Starting my third week of not running and would give anything
    to get out and plod through some of the cold and snow.

    Another 3 weeks or so, till I can rejoin the living.

  9. "Tom Phillips" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

    Quoted message said:
    Phil M. said:

    Archaic indeed! I remember learning the metric system in grade school
    (mid
    60s). At that time there was a big push to go metric. I guess the powers
    that be decided they didn't want to go through the pain of converting.
    Those people are problably long gone now. If we had converted then
    everything be much easier now.

    uh umm..easier than what? doing away with customary
    and practical measures like "foot"?

    No, metric is easier because everything is based in multiples
    of ten. It's always a matter of moving a decimal around. Little
    kids understand how it works right away :

    1000 metres = 1 km
    10 mm = 1 cm
    1 km = 100,000 cm
    1 litre = 1000 ml

    However, your 'easy' system involves remembering things like:

    1 mile = 1760 yards
    1 mile = 5280 feet
    1 yard = 36 inches
    1 gallon = 128 ounces

    And that's not even getting into all these fractions of an inch
    when things get a little small! The metric sytem is simply way
    better. The problem is familiarity, not superiority. I don't blame
    you for wanting to stick with the imperial system. It takes a
    while to learn and becomes ingrained.

    cheers,
    --
    David (in Hamilton, ON)
    www.allfalldown.org
    www.absolutelyaccurate.com

  10. Tim Downie said:


    Tom Phillips said:
    Phil M. said:

    >
    > For other US rec.runners, do please try and remember that not
    > everyone uses your archaic units.

    Yes but remember it was you English who set our
    measurement standards according to the length of
    your king's foot (which leads me to wonder which
    foot they chose, since most people have one foot
    longer than the other...) Still I know plenty of
    brits who still use fahrenheit, inches, and feet
    (British Imperial.) Neither is unscientific nor
    archaic, simply a matter of preferred prejudice

    You're rather missing my point. Rather than quibble about the relative
    merits of any particular unit,

    Not quibbling. Pointing out facts.

    Quoted message said:

    I was trying to point out that one shouldn't
    *assume* that everyone else on usenet knows what units you're using.

    All it takes is an F or a C to make things clear.

    I don't think I missed your point. You asserted
    fahrenheit was archaic and of US origin, which
    is incorrect on both counts. But as everyone on
    this nsg posts in english (well, for the most part,
    anyway: some troll gibberish applies) and there's
    no "uk.rec" in the group name, one logically _assumes_
    scales, measures, and idioms common to the US...

  11. SwStudio said:


    "Tom Phillips" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

    Quoted message said:
    Phil M. said:

    Archaic indeed! I remember learning the metric system in grade school
    (mid
    60s). At that time there was a big push to go metric. I guess the powers
    that be decided they didn't want to go through the pain of converting.
    Those people are problably long gone now. If we had converted then
    everything be much easier now.

    uh umm..easier than what? doing away with customary
    and practical measures like "foot"?

    No, metric is easier because everything is based in multiples
    of ten. It's always a matter of moving a decimal around. Little
    kids understand how it works right away :

    Yes, I know how metric works. I use it everyday 🙂
    It's not easier or more pragmatic, just different.
    Like someone else said, conversion is a way of life
    and not a big deal. The only people I hear complaining
    about it are the metric-only proponents or those who
    aren't taught conversions.

    An example is topographical maps simply would be
    useless for navigating steep terrain if contours
    were in meters. A major fault of the metric system
    is it has no pragmatic measure relative to typical
    useful human reference, like feet and inches.

    I typically deal in fractions of inches and fractions
    of meters. Same difference...

    Quoted message said:

    1000 metres = 1 km
    10 mm = 1 cm
    1 km = 100,000 cm
    1 litre = 1000 ml

    However, your 'easy' system involves remembering things like:

    1 mile = 1760 yards
    1 mile = 5280 feet
    1 yard = 36 inches
    1 gallon = 128 ounces

    And that's not even getting into all these fractions of an inch
    when things get a little small! The metric sytem is simply way
    better. The problem is familiarity, not superiority. I don't blame
    you for wanting to stick with the imperial system. It takes a
    while to learn and becomes ingrained.

    cheers,
    --
    David (in Hamilton, ON)
    www.allfalldown.org
    www.absolutelyaccurate.com

  12. "Tom Phillips" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Tim Downie said:


    Tom Phillips said:

    "Phil M." wrote:
    >>
    >> For other US rec.runners, do please try and remember that not
    >> everyone uses your archaic units.

    Yes but remember it was you English who set our
    measurement standards according to the length of
    your king's foot (which leads me to wonder which
    foot they chose, since most people have one foot
    longer than the other...) Still I know plenty of
    brits who still use fahrenheit, inches, and feet
    (British Imperial.) Neither is unscientific nor
    archaic, simply a matter of preferred prejudice

    You're rather missing my point. Rather than quibble about the relative
    merits of any particular unit,

    Not quibbling. Pointing out facts.

    Quoted message said:

    I was trying to point out that one shouldn't
    *assume* that everyone else on usenet knows what units you're using.

    All it takes is an F or a C to make things clear.

    I don't think I missed your point. You asserted
    fahrenheit was archaic and of US origin, which
    is incorrect on both counts. But as everyone on
    this nsg posts in english (well, for the most part,
    anyway: some troll gibberish applies) and there's

    as the dutch would say "Engeland is bevolkt met licht betaalde mensen"

    Quoted message said:

    no "uk.rec" in the group name, one logically _assumes_
    scales, measures, and idioms common to the US...

  13. Tom Phillips said:
    Tim Downie said:


    Tom Phillips wrote:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    All it takes is an F or a C to make things clear.

    I don't think I missed your point. You asserted
    fahrenheit was archaic and of US origin, which
    is incorrect on both counts.

    Okay, I'm not going to argue about that. In fact, I'm personally more
    comfortable with fahrenheit for ambient temperature measurement (as are a
    lot of brits). I should perhaps have added a smiley as that was the spirit
    with which the comment was made.

    Quoted message said:

    But as everyone on
    this nsg posts in english (well, for the most part,
    anyway: some troll gibberish applies) and there's
    no "uk.rec" in the group name, one logically _assumes_
    scales, measures, and idioms common to the US...

    Now that I will argue with. That is an incredibly arrogant US-centric
    assumption. Quite breathtaking really. I never assume that the group should
    pander to a UK viewpoint and nor should US posters assume that the whole
    world accepts that rec.running is really us.rec.running.

    Tim

  14. "Tim Downie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Tom Phillips said:
    Tim Downie said:


    Tom Phillips wrote:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    All it takes is an F or a C to make things clear.

    I don't think I missed your point. You asserted
    fahrenheit was archaic and of US origin, which
    is incorrect on both counts.

    Okay, I'm not going to argue about that. In fact, I'm personally more
    comfortable with fahrenheit for ambient temperature measurement (as are a
    lot of brits). I should perhaps have added a smiley as that was the
    spirit with which the comment was made.

    Quoted message said:

    But as everyone on
    this nsg posts in english (well, for the most part,
    anyway: some troll gibberish applies) and there's
    no "uk.rec" in the group name, one logically _assumes_
    scales, measures, and idioms common to the US...

    Now that I will argue with. That is an incredibly arrogant US-centric
    assumption. Quite breathtaking really. I never assume that the group
    should pander to a UK viewpoint and nor should US posters assume that the
    whole world accepts that rec.running is really us.rec.running.

    now you've lost me. if it isnt specifically some OTHER country then it MUST
    be the USofA....right? as the great USofA group, Queen, once sang, "WE ARE
    THE CHAMPIONS OF THE WORLD". The sooner that is accepted the quicker we'll
    get along better. as our fearless leader, George F'ing "W" Bush might point
    out here...we'll have multiple-partisanshipmanship here as soon as you start
    not disagreeing with us...

    Quoted message said:

    Tim

  15. Tim Downie said:


    Tom Phillips said:
    Tim Downie said:


    Tom Phillips wrote:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    All it takes is an F or a C to make things clear.

    I don't think I missed your point. You asserted
    fahrenheit was archaic and of US origin, which
    is incorrect on both counts.

    Okay, I'm not going to argue about that. In fact, I'm personally more
    comfortable with fahrenheit for ambient temperature measurement (as are a
    lot of brits). I should perhaps have added a smiley as that was the spirit
    with which the comment was made.

    I assumed your F proficiency as such; most discussion
    here is tongue in cheek.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    But as everyone on
    this nsg posts in english (well, for the most part,
    anyway: some troll gibberish applies) and there's
    no "uk.rec" in the group name, one logically _assumes_
    scales, measures, and idioms common to the US...

    Now that I will argue with. That is an incredibly arrogant US-centric
    assumption.

    Somewhat overstated, I think. Much of the world
    speaks/learns english. This is not arrognace, simply
    a fact. In fact, if one wants to talk arrogance (and
    why the world speaks english), one only needs mention
    the British Empire 🙂 So when posting to an english
    speaking nsg one likely assumes the associated customary
    meanings and measures, same as I would if posting to
    french or arab nsg (whatever measures arab runners use,
    that is...) And as you pointed out, most British also
    use fahrenheit.

    I've been posting/reading here on off for a few years.
    In my experience there are fewer posters of international
    origin (via headers) than US. Could be wrong, but those
    that aren't still don't seem to suffer from self
    translation...

    Quoted message said:

    Quite breathtaking really. I never assume that the group should
    pander to a UK viewpoint and nor should US posters assume that the whole
    world accepts that rec.running is really us.rec.running.

    Perhaps what's breathtaking (a British idiom, I assume,
    you use for extensiveness in the scope of my comments)
    is the _assumption_ that rec.running is so internationally
    ignorant of anything outside of metric and celsius one
    one needs to always differentiate. Mostly I do, but that's
    becasue I routinely use both systems. But if I said it was
    65 degrees when I ran today, you can be sure it doesn't
    refer to 65C 🙂

  16. "Tom Phillips" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Somewhat overstated, I think. Much of the world
    speaks/learns english. This is not arrognace, simply
    a fact. In fact, if one wants to talk arrogance (and
    why the world speaks english), one only needs mention
    the British Empire 🙂 So when posting to an english
    speaking nsg one likely assumes the associated customary
    meanings and measures, same as I would if posting to
    french or arab nsg (whatever measures arab runners use,

    checkpoints? Land mines?

    Quoted message said:

    that is...) And as you pointed out, most British also
    use fahrenheit.

  17. Tom Phillips said:
    Tim Downie said:
    Quoted message said:

    But as everyone on
    this nsg posts in english (well, for the most part,
    anyway: some troll gibberish applies) and there's
    no "uk.rec" in the group name, one logically _assumes_
    scales, measures, and idioms common to the US...

    Now that I will argue with. That is an incredibly arrogant
    US-centric assumption.

    Somewhat overstated, I think. Much of the world
    speaks/learns english.

    True

    Quoted message said:

    This is not arrognace, simply
    a fact. In fact, if one wants to talk arrogance (and
    why the world speaks english), one only needs mention
    the British Empire 🙂 So when posting to an english
    speaking nsg one likely assumes the associated customary
    meanings and measures, same as I would if posting to
    french or arab nsg (whatever measures arab runners use,
    that is...) And as you pointed out, most British also
    use fahrenheit.

    *Also* use fahrenheit. We don't assume however that any quoted temperature
    is automatically fahrenheit if the units aren't stated.

    Quoted message said:


    I've been posting/reading here on off for a few years.
    In my experience there are fewer posters of international
    origin (via headers) than US.

    True but that doesn't make it a US group and posters shouldn't assume that
    readers will automatically know what units the poster is using. Most of the
    time it doesn't matter, the context or the magnitude makes it clear.
    However when talking about temperatures at the lower end of the
    Fahrenheit/Celsius scale it *does* matter as it can be much more ambiguous.

    At -40 I'll let you off however. ;-)

    Quoted message said:

    Could be wrong, but those
    that aren't still don't seem to suffer from self
    translation...

    Quoted message said:

    Quite breathtaking really. I never assume that the group should
    pander to a UK viewpoint and nor should US posters assume that the
    whole world accepts that rec.running is really us.rec.running.

    Perhaps what's breathtaking (a British idiom, I assume,
    you use for extensiveness in the scope of my comments)
    is the _assumption_ that rec.running is so internationally
    ignorant of anything outside of metric and Celsius one
    one needs to always differentiate. Mostly I do, but that's
    becasue I routinely use both systems. But if I said it was
    65 degrees when I ran today, you can be sure it doesn't
    refer to 65C 🙂

    As a mention above, usually context or magnitude make clarification
    unnecessary but *not always*.

    When I went running yesterday, it was -4. Unless you know where I live you
    can't put that in context. I wouldn't think of mentioning the temperature
    without giving you the units to put it in context. Because I recognise that
    this is a *world* group, I won't make assumptions about your knowledge of
    where I live or what units I'm using so as a courtesy I'll tell you that it
    was -4C.

    Is it so hard for Americans to extend the same courtesy to the rest of the
    world?

    Tim

  18. Tim Downie said:


    Tom Phillips said:


    And as you pointed out, most British also
    use fahrenheit.

    *Also* use fahrenheit. We don't assume however that any quoted temperature
    is automatically fahrenheit if the units aren't stated.

    All US weather temps are also reported in
    both F and C.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    I've been posting/reading here on off for a few years.
    In my experience there are fewer posters of international
    origin (via headers) than US.

    True but that doesn't make it a US group and posters shouldn't assume that
    readers will automatically know what units the poster is using. Most of the
    time it doesn't matter, the context or the magnitude makes it clear.
    However when talking about temperatures at the lower end of the
    Fahrenheit/Celsius scale it *does* matter as it can be much more ambiguous.

    At -40 I'll let you off however. ;-)

    C or F? ;^) (yes I know they're equal)

    Quoted message said:

    As a mention above, usually context or magnitude make clarification
    unnecessary but *not always*.

    When I went running yesterday, it was -4. Unless you know where I live you
    can't put that in context.

    But your header says yahoo.co.uk...

    Quoted message said:

    I wouldn't think of mentioning the temperature
    without giving you the units to put it in context. Because I recognise that
    this is a *world* group, I won't make assumptions about your knowledge of
    where I live or what units I'm using so as a courtesy I'll tell you that it
    was -4C.

    Is it so hard for Americans to extend the same courtesy to the rest of the
    world?

    I think you already asked the OP.

  19. Doug Freese said:

    "SwStudio" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    "Dave Hamilton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    I usually wusse out at zero but shouldn't .. describe what layers you
    use for sub zero .. what about high winds and windchill? My problems
    gloves and neck

    Well, there's a few people on here that have a lot of knowledge
    with that sort of stuff. I don't consider myself a cold-weather
    running expert and don't really follow the science too much -
    I've noticed a few things that work for me.

    Dot probably the onbe that can address the cold better than most.

    Right - in a t-shirt 🙁

    Oh, you said "cold", I thought you said "Alaska winter". 😉
    (While I did run in a short-sleeve t-shirt for about 15-20 min today,
    long sleeves would've been better, but it was t-shirt or lt weight
    stretch fleece. I had already hiked for a little over an hour up/down
    part of Lazy Mtn, during which I was sure all skin was covered in case
    of wipe out on extended slopes in the snow. I'm taking poles with me
    next time. Afterward, I was down running on some flat trails at base and
    decided the layer had to go. It was about 30+F.)

    To answer the question seriously.
    Everyone's different and it probably depends on cold adaptation. I
    always wear a short-sleeve synthetic t-shirt as bottommost layer.
    I may use a powerdry (REI) (or similar synthetic) long-sleeve shirt down
    to freezing or thereabouts. I've got a light weight stretch-fleece that
    I use down to 0F. If there's any breeze or if it's dark (no warming
    solar radiation), I may use long sleeve base layer underneath. That's as
    cold as I've been able to test since I've had these new layers, but when
    it gets to maybe -10F or colder, I may need to add another layer or use
    a heavier one (Sporthill catalyst) - or whatever 2nd insulating layer
    you may have. I think that may take me down to -20F, probably lower with
    a shell - but I haven't had a chance to test.

    Legs use sporthill xc pants, usually with powerdry base layer
    (valhalla). Subzero F or winds, I may use a slightly heavier synthetic
    tights (sierra designs). I have windpants that I take for emergencies,
    but I rarely use them initially since they've been too warm, even with a
    wind blowing. I'm most likely to use them when snowshoe running in fresh
    snow because the snow kicks up my back - or some adventure where I may
    end up in the snow - face plant or sliding down hillside.

    General tips:
    Use synthetics, wool, or silk (I don't have much experience with silk) -
    not cotton.
    If you layer, try to have your outer layers larger so they don't bind.
    Stretchy fabrics allow more motion so you don't get the Michelin man
    look / feeling. This usually isn't stretchy like tights, but just enough
    stretch to allow motion around joints.
    Be sure not to layer too tightly or this will restrict circulation.

    Some people like clothes that have mesh on back or windproof / resistant
    only on front or more breathable fabrics on under arms. Where I am, it's
    not unusual to have 20 mph or stronger winds - from multiple directions,
    as I follow a twisty trail or go out/back or the wind direction changes.
    I really hate those leakages, but they're fine on a calm day.

    I prefer to use breathable base / insulating layers and a separate
    windshell that is windproof (pertex is one such lightweight fabric that
    I'm testing now - shell is 3.5 oz advertised). This gives me more
    options than a single combined garment for about the same weight. I
    generally don't use gore-tex cuz it's too bulky and a real pain if I
    have to peel it. My outer shell (water resistant, at best, I think, but
    not tested) is windproof. Test in store by holding single layer of
    fabric to your mouth and trying to blow through it from outside in.
    (REI salesperson taught me this trick - you'll quickly see the
    difference between windproof and windresistant materials.)

    I like decent hoods on my shells that come up around chin, preferably up
    higher, so I can seal myself in during some of the windier days (been
    known to use goggles on the 50mph days with debris flying through air).
    I rarely wear hoods, but find them life-savers when conditions are right.

    Pockets are another issue for personal preference, whether you need to
    hold snacks, peeled layers (hat, mittens), light, maps, etc.

    Headgear - neoprene earband, synthetic watch cap, or balaclava -
    sometimes pulling balaclava over mouth when subzero F. You lose about
    40% of heat through head and neck - easy place to add/subtract layers
    for temperature regulation. That's why I like the hoods to seal in the
    heat if needed.

    Things that may affect what works for you (besides basic physiology and
    effort levels): temperature, wind, humidity, dark/light. You'd be
    surprised how warm a blazing sun on fresh, bright snow can make a day
    feel, even if it's near 10F / -12C. Similarly when the sun drops below
    the horizon, it feels much chillier (faster than it affects air
    temperature). Temperature is only part of the story.

    I've just tried to provide some suggestions. Everyone really is
    different (read Armstrong's chapter on cold in his book Performing in
    Extreme Environments if you don't believe me), and there really isn't
    one solution that works for all - or even the same person under
    seemingly similar conditions on different day. You'll have to experiment
    and see what works for you.

    While there's some nice techie gear out there, there's no real need to
    start with that until you know what you need. I tend to buy from outdoor
    stores since that gear is usually designed for people out in the cold
    for many hours, possibly in remote locations, which resembles my needs.

    I've gotten some of my starting layers on closeouts at
    www.campmor.com (duofold has worked well)
    www.sierratradingpost.com (high quality gear with substantial closeout
    sales if you can find what you want - I started with duofold and rei,
    then watched here and elsewhere for improvements)
    www.rei.com
    http://www.mec.ca/index.html (I haven't bought anything here, but many
    here have)

    I've even gotten gear at Wal-Mart, although it's usually summer gear.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    The wind issue is always cancelled out for me if the last layer
    is a good windproof shell. Wear glasses to stop the watering
    eyes.

    I happen to use Gortex

    I've worked my way down from Gortex jacket weighing close to a couple
    pounds to a 3.5 oz shell. Doesn't have the warmth of Goretex, but I'm
    finding I prefer insulation and shell separate. Doesn't have all the
    goodies (fuller hood, more pockets) of my 11 oz shell, but it seems to
    be earning it's place in my collection.

    cuz I have it but yup a good shell to block the

    Quoted message said:

    wind. I also layer my face with Vaseline.

    I'll use vaseline many days, but I've found days when I need more than
    that. I started out the other night with vaseline and a shell with hood.
    I hadn't gone about 100 m when I decided to head back to car and get
    balaclava. I used that off and on over mouth the entire run - just too
    cool around face without it. Thermometer said about 0F, but other
    thermometers were closer to -10F and it felt calm. I've run several
    daytime runs at 0F with out balaclava. Not sure if humidity or what.

    Quoted message said:


    Quoted message said:

    For neck, wear a scarf. I have a nice technical fabric one but
    I'm sure any old scarf would do, really.

    I also carry a scarf but not to keep my neck warm but to cover my chin
    if needed. I didn't need it yesterday.


    balaclava, although I've used scarf in past

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    For hands, get the mittens with the little removable finger-tip
    part. You know, the kind that folds back when your fingers
    get too hot or sweaty. You can regulate body temp pretty
    well through venting in this manner.

    I have a pair of big bulky mittens with a wind breaker surface and I
    have not had cold hands ever since I got them.

    I just use my child-size snow mittens 😉

    Actually, I found a couple pairs of reasonably priced ($15, $10, iirc)
    windproof mittens this fall - adult size, both men's and women's - in
    local outdoor stores. But it hasn't been cold yet to use them. (I have
    no idea how to judge mitten sizes so am only comfortable trying them on
    to be sure I can get in them and they're not too bulky.)

    Quoted message said:


    Time to go out and shovel some of the last 6 inches on snow. Looking
    pretty nasty and very windy out there - I'm glad I got my long one in
    yesterday before the snow hit. I may pull a Lance today and hide under
    my blanket.

    Geez, what a waste of good snow 😉

    Dot

    --
    "You try to slow down and enjoy it. You try to look at the scenery. But
    your brain can kind of go blank. All you want to do is tell your feet to
    keep working."
    -Cedar Petrosius, women's winner 2004 Matanuska Peak Challenge (14mi,
    9000ft up and down)

  20. "Ignoramus18155" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

    Quoted message said:
    Dot dot.h@#duh?att.net said:

    Use synthetics, wool, or silk (I don't have much experience with silk) -
    not cotton.

    I am curious, why not cotton. Thanks.

    Cotton retains moisture. It gets cold and heavy.

    cheers,
    --
    David (in Hamilton, ON)
    www.allfalldown.org
    www.absolutelyaccurate.com

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.