Our GPT Two Person Gear List (4.4kg/9.7lb each)

The Greater Patagonian Trail is a real challenge for ultralight hiking. There is little information about ultralight attempts online and there is a high likelihood of encountering extreme winds, persistent rain, and even snow storms (in summer). On top of this, the route is remote; the border police you encounter are more likely to think you are smuggling drugs from Argentina into Chile rather than hiking. The GPT involves extended periods of off track navigation and can include long stretches of pushing through thick scrub (10D materials beware!). You have to navigate digitally as you can’t buy physical maps for most of the walk. The GPT is an unofficial route where hikers are not normally found, and activating an EPIRB could mean a rescue days away.

Therefore, on this trip we skewed heavily towards safety, durability and reliability. We were pretty happy with our gear choices, but it’s safe to say we learnt a lot from this trip. You can find our analysis of our gear choices at the bottom of the gear list.

Total weight in list: 10651g/375.70oz
Worn weight (Maddie): 1021g/36.01oz
Worn weight (Tom): 896g/31.61oz
Individual base weight (half total base weight): 4367g/154.04oz

Sleeping

Kitchen

First Aid

Consumables

Electronics

Clothes carried (Maddie)

Clothes carried (Tom)

Miscellaneous

Clothes worn (Maddie)

Clothes worn (Tom)

Gear analysis

It’s fair to say that a lot of the ultralight gear we used was near the end of its life after the GPT. This is one of the unfortunate aspects of ultralight hiking, where gear is often designed to be solid for 3-6 months of use. Durability beyond this lifespan is often traded against to reduce weight. For us, this is a trade off we are usually happy to make as we enjoy carrying light packs, love trying out new gear, and are fortunate enough to be able to replace potentially expensive ultralight gear as needed. Below, we highlight what we thought did and didn’t survive the hash conditions of the GPT so well.

What worked well

Electronics:

One of the biggest successes on the GPT was our electronic setup. To recharge our devices, we took a 10050mAh powerbank coupled with a USB battery charger (which served as a backup powerbank by discharging the 18650 batteries in our head torches). Due to the remote nature of the walk, and the fact that we didn’t always know when we would be able to recharge, we were glad that we had the backup option to charge our devices using our head torch batteries. Our main power bank only ran flat once. We were glad that we didn’t have to worry about conserving power in tricky nav sections, and always had a few days buffer in case poor weather slowed our progress.

3mm foam:

In terms of our sleep system, this was the first time we used 3mm EVA foam to protect our inflatable mat from punctures. The foam successfully protected the bottom of our mat, albeit it was a bit fiddly to set up. The foam also helped prevent the mat from sliding around on the tent floor, something that was noticeable when we struggled to find a flat spot to pitch the tent. We also enjoyed the foam doubling as sit pads during the day (although we had to be careful not to tear a hole in them as they were quite thin!). Next time, we would consider taking only foam mats instead of an inflatable mat with foam underneath, provided the foam mats were warm enough for the conditions.

Pack volume:

Our 50-55L pack volumes were the perfect size for us (we normally use 40L packs). They provided enough volume for some of the longer food carries, but were also able to be compressed as we ate through our food supplies.

Alloy poles:

For this trip we opted to take alloy poles instead of carbon poles. Alloy poles have the disadvantage of being less stiff and heavier. However, alloy poles are incredibly hard to snap, and are still useable even if you bend them. Maddie managed to bend one of her poles but it remained functional for the remainder of the trip.

Hiking pants:

Taking hiking pants over wind pants proved to be a good option for the GPT. Despite our experience with wind gear being surprisingly durable, we enjoyed using hiking pants for the overgrown trails and off track walking. We also think that taking either wind pants or hiking pants is important for sun protection as there are long stretches of track on the GPT without any shade cover (e.g. walking along volcano fields).

Navigation:

For the GPT, we took two iPhone SEs (1st gen) with GPX files uploaded into Gaia GPS for our navigation. In the incredibly detailed 1200 page GPT Hiker’s Manual, Jan strongly recommends using a handheld GPS as your primary navigation device, and taking a phone as a backup. As we were both taking our phones already, we thought we would save some weight and not take a handheld GPS. We had already spent lots of time navigating exclusively with our phones and we were happy that we had a system that worked.

In the end, our navigation system worked well, but it wasn’t perfect either. As Jan rightly points out in the hiker’s manual, smartphone touchscreens don’t work very well in the wet and we certainly had a couple of frustrating moments trying to use our screen in the rain. It’s easy enough with a wet phone to look at the map to check you are on track (as the map updates with your location automatically). However, trying to do anything complicated, such as looking at upcoming route choices, quickly becomes tricky. Although a wet phone is not a new problem for hikers, the stakes are significantly higher on the GPT given how much you are relying on your phone for navigation. We ended up hiking mostly northern sections of the GPT and didn’t get much rain. If hiking further south where rain is more common, I could certainly see the value in a handheld GPS.

Another benefit of using a handheld GPS (specifically a Garmin), is that you get to use the IMG map files meticulously created by Jan. These have the benefit of displaying each route type and waypoint exactly as Jan intended. This is important for an exploratory track like the GPT where it is incredibly useful to be able to quickly distinguish between different levels of track quality and the contents of waypoints (e.g. water, camp spots, food resupply etc). When using a smartphone app, we couldn’t figure out a way to distinguish between different types of tracks and waypoints without having to set it all up manually (this would take a very very long time). We certainly underestimated the usefulness of this prior to our departure (see the Primary Navigation Device section of the GPT Hiker’s Manual for a visual comparison between using a smartphone and handheld GPS for navigation).

Another option could be to use the mapping software on a Garmin smartwatch (like Tom did on the AAWT FKT). As before, we specifically mention Garmin watches as they correctly render the IMG map files created by Jan. We suspect this will become a useful option as smartwatches continue to become more powerful (and they have physical buttons like a handheld GPS).

Ultimately, using our phones still worked very well and we didn’t have any issues. We found utilising satellite imagery particularly useful to help determine where the GPX files intended for us to go.

Water purification:

We chose to use aquatabs to purify our water for the GPT, and did not take a water filter. This worked well for us and we never had any issues with water purification. Aside from walking through occasional farmland, nearly all water sources on the GPT are pristine. As such, we didn’t feel the need to treat for cryptosporidium (which aquatabs don’t work against). Given the abundance of water on the GPT, a water filter could be a good option to reduce the amount of water you carry, but we don’t think a filter is strictly necessary.

Google translate:

Despite committing to learning some Spanish before our trip (thanks Duolingo), we were unsurprisingly quite out of our depth when it came to conversing with the locals in South America. As such, we heavily relied upon translation apps such as Google Translate. Downloading the Spanish translation offline worked surprisingly well. Whilst not being the most efficient form of communication, it proved essential for helping us ask locals for bus timetables, or simply to explain to the police what we were doing.

A word of caution: we certainly feel like we missed out on the cultural side of the GPT because we had pretty shocking Spanish. We were always able to get what we needed, but missed out on one of the most important and unique aspects of the GPT. We would spend a lot more time and effort to have a higher level of Spanish if/when we return such that we could have meaningful interactions with the locals whose land the GPT passes through.

Shoes:

We needed to buy new shoes in Santiago before starting the GPT as we had worn our current shoes down hiking in Peru. Tom was fortunate to find a pair of Nike Pegasus 36 Trail in his size, whilst Maddie was only able to find some Nike Terra Kiger 5 in her size (she would have preferred some Pegasus Trail shoes instead). Despite them both being less than ideal colours (a mix of brown and black), they proved to be durable enough and provided sufficient grip on technical terrain. They also dried quickly after the many river crossing on the GPT. Whilst they both lasted the whole trip, by the end the tread was almost completely worn down and the shoes had holes on the sides. It would have been ideal to replace the shoes halfway through the trip, however, it was never convenient to find a Nike store during a resupply in town.

What didn’t work well

As with almost every trip, there are a few things you could have done better. Below, we discuss the gear choices we made that we would likely change if revisiting the GPT.

Insulation:

For the GPT, our main form of insulation was our down jackets (Tom has a GooseFeet Gear Down Jacket and Maddie took a Nunatak Skaha). Whilst we felt the down jackets provided a good level of warmth for when we were stopped at camp, we found that we missed having an active layer. Our rain jackets didn’t breathe well enough to fill this gap and we often needed something slightly warmer whilst walking in inclement weather (when our down jackets were safely packed away).

The GPT was a good learning experience for us in terms of layering, where we now prioritise having a more modular system that can work in a broader range of temperatures (and in the wet), despite not having the same overall warmth. Because of this, next time we would choose to swap the down jacket for a synthetic jacket and a wind jacket. We think the synthetic jacket is a good choice because, although the GPT doesn’t dip below 0°C often, it’s possible to spend a lot of time between 0-5°C where we aren’t quite warm enough with just a rain jacket.

Gloves:

Whilst we were very grateful for the the warmth our possum gloves provided on this trek, they were certainly not durable enough to last the entire trip. By the end, they both had holes around the fingers and thumbs at high friction points between our hands and our trekking poles. We attempted to sew the holes up once they appeared, however, it didn’t provide a long term solution and they generally reappeared a few days later. As such, the gloves were much less effective towards the end of the trip. It could have been a good idea to replace the gloves half way through the trek, however, it would likely have been quite difficult to find a suitable replacement due to the remote nature of the track. Starting with a more durable option that provides the same amount of warmth would be a good alternative. Montbell make good fleece gloves but they aren’t as warm as possum. On the other ‘hand’, other gloves with the same level of warmth tend to be much heavier.

Perhaps more of an issue with our gloves was that they were not touch screen compatible. This was problematic when we had to navigate off track sections in cold and/or wet weather. Next time, we would choose to take a set of gloves that are conductive so that we don’t have to remove them to use our phones (Zpacks make conductive possum gloves that we use now).

Waterproof gloves:

One of the biggest fails for our gear on the GPT were our waterproof gloves. Simply put, they did not work. Whilst the gloves undoubtedly provided an additional layer of insulation that helped shield our hands from the wind and rain, they were not remotely effective at keeping our hands dry in wet weather. This is because the models that we took (Borah Gear eVent mitts for Tom and MLD eVent Rain Mitts for Maddie) require seam sealing at home, something that we didn’t do a very good job of despite our best efforts. Next time, we would take a set of rain gloves that come pre seam taped (e.g. Zpacks), or opt for a set of plastic kitchen gloves that are 100% water proof.

Sleeping mat:

Our choice to take a two person sleeping mat had both benefits and draw backs. At that time, there were limited options for an ultralight two person sleeping mat. In the end, we opted to take an Exped Synmat HL DUO. The mat proved useful for adding warmth to our sleep system by removing the draft between two single person mats (important for us when using a twin quilt). However, the mat itself was not very durable and we found it finicky to set up. We somehow got a puncture on the top of the mat the first night of the GPT, and had a baffle blow out at some point along the trip. Additionally, the inflation sack for the mat was fiddly, and it was always challenging to inflate the mat inside the tent due to the limited space. When the tent fly was wet on the inside (as it often is from condensation), it was always a challenge to inflate the mat without accidentally hitting the walls of the tent. We thought this wouldn’t be an issue with a double walled shelter, but it was still a problem for us. Additionally, only one person could sit inside the tent whilst inflating the mat, meaning the other person had to wait outside (sometimes in the rain). This is perhaps more of a criticism towards a two person inflatable mat in general, as opposed to a problem specific to this product.

Tent:

For this trip we decided to take a Tarptent StratoSpire Li over the Zpacks Duplex (our usual three season tent). We made this decision based on wanting a tent that could handle high winds and snow (this tent was used as part of a broader trip to South America). Whilst the tent performed exceptionally well in high winds, we had many problems with the tent.

We found it was hard to pitch if not on completely flat ground. As such, we often had difficulty getting a taut pitch. The other problem with pitching on uneven ground is that you need to adjust all of the tensioning between the fly and inner, otherwise the inner sags or sticks to the fly.

On a similar note, we found that the PitchLoc corners significantly reduce the flexibility of where you can pitch your tent. The problem is that the tent pegs have to be staked directly to the PitchLoc corner, meaning you are in trouble if you can’t get your peg in the ground at that one spot (the cord isn’t long enough to use a rock). Therefore, you need to make sure you can peg in your PitchLoc corners before setting up the tent, which can become a guessing game trying to find a spot where both PitchLoc corners can be pegged down given the complicated shape of the tent.

We also had many significant and ongoing issues with sewing coming undone and cords, straps, zips, and clips breaking. As just one example, the clips between the fly and inner would often come undone between packing up and setting the tent up again. It became a joke for us guessing what part of the tent would break next, and a chore fixing things when they broke. We definitely were using the tent in high winds and snow, however, we also feel that was its intended use. We feel many of the issues stem from inadequately reinforced sewing and reflects that the SS Li is a complicated tent with lots of adjustable components.

We also started having issues with the main zipper towards the end of the walk. Although the zipper had been used a lot, we think the problem was exacerbated by placing the zipper on a high-stress corner of the tent. We found that, to get a taut pitch, the zipper had to be placed under significant tension. If we wanted to undo the zipper after a drum tight pitch, we had to loosen the guy lines and then retighten them after doing the zipper back up (otherwise there was too much strain on the zipper). We think that placing the zipper away from a main guyline tieout would significantly reduce the strain on the zipper (like on the X-Mid).

Finally, the carbon struts on the tent made packing the tent more challenging as it did not fit horizontally into our packs as we normally prefer. It’s not a deal breaker but it’s another artifact of a complicated design.

Having since looked at the Tarptent website, it seems that some changes have been made that would remedy problems we’ve had (we got our StratoSpire Li as soon as it was released). There is no doubt the tent has a clever design and is exceptionally strong in snow and wind for its weight. However, we have had too many issues to confidently recommend it and almost feel like we received a pre-production version (on the other hand, we love our Tarptent Protrail). Despite this, Tarptent have been very patient and helpful sending many spare parts to us in Australia.

We think either the X-Mid 2 or X-Mid Pro 2 would likely be simpler and more reliable if looking for a tent that is stronger than the Duplex. We haven’t used the X-Mid but we look forward to trying it.

Phone:

On the GPT, we took two iPhone SEs (1st gen), which we chose based on their battery efficiency and light weight. However, looking back we realised that it would have been more useful to bring a larger, heavier phone. Given the lack of track information, and subsequently the amount of time we had to spend researching the next section of track, it would have been much nicer and easier if we had a bigger screen to work with. Additionally, the camera quality wasn’t great and we regret not taking a phone with better a camera and multiple lenses (e.g. wide, ultra-wide, zoom).

Gaiters:

Not taking lightweight trail gaiters was certainly a mistake, one we will not make again! There are decent stretches of track on the GPT that traverse volcanic areas, and as such we found that we frequently got loose stones, dirt, and ash in our shoes (meaning we had to spend a lot of time emptying them!). More importantly perhaps, we think that gaiters would have vastly increased the lifetime of our socks and reduced issues with blisters.

Quilt:

Whilst our two person quilt was generally a big success, there were some aspects that were less than ideal. The first problem was that we opted to not use a draft pillow as we didn’t think it would be very useful and would get in the way. However, we found that lots of warm air was lost without one and we have been much warmer in subsequent trips since attaching it.

Additionally, we had a few clips on the quilt snap when we tried tightening them. This was fixable in the field with sewing and some superglue, but was slightly annoying. We understand the design has since been changed and improved.

Conclusion

If there is some part of our gear that you are unsure about, or wonder why we chose X instead of Y, drop us an email! The GPT is an interesting challenge for ultralight hiking as it pushes beyond the scope of a typical 3 season gear list used for more popular hikes.