WALKING POLES

peter dixon 2 wrote (see)

With out a doupt PACER POLES all the way..a lot better than all the rest

An assertion that could certainly do with some justification...

I've got Pacer Poles as well, and they are nice to use, but I'd only say they're different, not better.

Potential points that make them NOT "a lot better than all the rest":

- only available with twistlocks, no options for flicklock-type adjustments

- heavier than a lot of other poles these days, even the carbon Pacers

- the unique handle design means they may not be the best thing for supporting a shelter if you want that function. The handles also make them bulkier to pack - possibly an issue if packing them inside luggage for travelling.

- if you learn to use 'standard' poles properly, i.e. getting power and support from the straps rather than just the grips, then I'm not convinced that Pacers offer any great improvement in performance.

I'm not against Pacers, I like them,but I just don't think there's a case that they're so much better than anything else. Perhaps Peter could provide it?

Matt C wrote (see)

- the unique handle design means they may not be the best thing for supporting a shelter if you want that function.

that was my first thought when I looked at the photos of the Pacer poles.

Is there a buyer's guide, to help figure what features will suit personal needs, and review site anyone recommends for a poles newbie?

You use a different technique with pacer poles.

Only if you do.  But not if you don't.  Much as two people using identical grip and strap setups can use entirely different techniques: it's the function of what the user chooses as much as the pole, but the pole may influence the choice.

Pacers IM(limited)E make it easier to lean weight on the heel of your hand without resorting to prior practice, but if you're leaning on the strap of a conventional pole there is no particular reason for the overall technique to differ: place pole, load pole through heel of hand rather than the fingers, use light grasp of fingers to move pole on, repeat as necessary.

You only need at most an extra 10-15 cm to come downhill if you can be bothered to adjust them

Aside from avoding the faff, not bothering encourages you to get your weight forward on to thighs over bent knees which is, at least for me, a much better way to treat your knees.  And if you're using poles to save knees then encouraging a weight-forward posture with knees bent all the times means reducing jarring impacts.  It also reduces the tendency to slip on to one's backside.

Pete.

knees... the cheapest and low-tech method to reduce wear on them is lower body mass because that reduces wear all the time not just when walking in the hills with yer sticks. The tricky bit, because I've done this in the past, is to NOT lose strength at the same time.

Thanks for confirming for descending you tend to not extend the stick much / at all.

FYI this review site seems to have a lot verbage contained in the reviews and probably learn additional stuff apart from about, ....errr..., poles.

I'm leaning (pun?) towards these but waiting to confirm from Tarptent the range of pole height to match my Notch. Two reasons for these in particular is it is harder for them to accidentally compress, and when not used they are shorter to be stuffed side of my pack with nothing poking out above/below as I don't see me using them on uphills, just flats and downhills so stowing a concern.I looked at a lot of weights and a typical range is 430g-500g and only way to get significantly lighter is for a solid pole, but I not looked at all poles. Does the OP intend to pack these (for travelling or during the walk) ? If not then a solid pole has some good reasons, less accidental chance of compressing (although I've owned one telescopic pole from when I broke my foot and it never did accidentally compress) and lighter/simpler.