Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why your outdoorsy friend suddenly has a gummy bear power bank

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 327 posts

Re: Why your outdoorsy friend suddenly has a gummy bear power bank

#161

Post by schiffern »

ashdksnndck wrote: post #127
trenchpilgrim wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You put them under your sleeping bag and they make your sleep way warmer than if your sleeping bag is directly on the tent floor. https://www.nemoequipment.com/collections/sleeping-pads

That the purpose of the sleeping pad is characterized as thermal performance and not comfort is proof that I am not capable of the ultralight mindset.

"Something to sleep under, something to sleep on, and something to sleep in. Plus cordage."

Very different philosophy behind this kit (durability and flexibility), but here's a good intro.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kin_bjAYk0Q

EDIT: I forgot he also has a more "ultralight" full backpack kit:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFj_ULMjcNQ

Re: Why your outdoorsy friend suddenly has a gummy bear power bank

#162

Post by coin »

Mistletoe wrote: post #12
Retr0id wrote: post #7

Has anyone actually measured the true capacity?

https://www.reddit.com/r/Ultralight/comments/1li5rxw/20000ma... Looks like a guy there measured it and it is 14.7 which is more than I thought it would be. > So at a nominal 3.7 volts that’s around 14700mAh, which is around 73-74% efficiency. That’s fairly standard. If you perform the same tests with other batteries rated at 20k mAh, you’ll generally see a similar usable capacity. I was thinking of getting the Haribo…

> 20k mAh

Or just write it as 20 Ah (not you, the reddit poster). I suspect people have no concept of SI prefixes. They know that k = one thousand but are unaware that milli is one thousandth.

Re: Why your outdoorsy friend suddenly has a gummy bear power bank

#163

Post by dghlsakjg »

jeffbee wrote: post #141
addaon wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm down to around 10 lb base load. And then I hike in the desert where I carry 5 - 7 liters of water (11 - 15 lbs). And food. Saving a pound here and there is totally worth it, but there's a large part of the country where prudent hiking means the majority of your weight is water.

If saving here and there is worth it, why would a hiker carry a 300g battery? Imagine the savings from leaving that boat anchor at home along with whatever obviously non-essential gadget wants to be recharged.

The battery allows you to bring a weight-saving device; your phone.

It can - within reason - replace maps, guidebooks, emergency satellite beacons, a camera, a secondary flashlight, etc.

You can, if you want, go out with your pockets stuffed with high calorie emergency rations and no pack at all. The weight savings will be tremendous, but at a certain point the tradeoff for weight over comfort and utility becomes too silly.

Re: Why your outdoorsy friend suddenly has a gummy bear power bank

#164

Post by dreadnip »

Zanni wrote: post #2

Why your [ultra-light hiker] friend suddenly has [the world's lightest] power bank. I remember Colin Fletcher, years ago, writing in The Complete Walker about trimming the borders off his paper maps to save weight, which seemed like an insane over-optimization to me. But then, I'm not an ultralight hiker. I am impressed folks are getting their loads down to 10 pounds though.

I’ve met people on trail with 5-6 pound baseweights. Crazy world out there.

Re: Why your outdoorsy friend suddenly has a gummy bear power bank

#165

Post by procinct »

hinkley wrote: post #125
exabrial wrote: post #80

> Ultralight culture seems a little nuts to the uninitiated. I prefer "Durable, but as light as possible", not the other way around. Most ultralight gear breaks after a few uses or when it is mishandled in anything-less-than-perfect conditions, which, happens a lot outside.

The max weight is a bunch of bullshit on the ultralight gear. Last time I moved I showed up the day before my stuff did, I slept on a camp cot I had bought for which I was 90% of the max weight. I used it on a carpeted floor for one night, it bent in two places. If I’d put the damned thing across a root it would have looked like a pretzel the next morning.

I’m not sure I understand the point…

I don’t think many (if any) backpackers are taking a camp cot with them? I imagine most are using an inflatable sleep pad or a foam sleep mat.

Re: Why your outdoorsy friend suddenly has a gummy bear power bank

#166

Post by bobsmooth »

exabrial wrote: post #80

> Ultralight culture seems a little nuts to the uninitiated. I prefer "Durable, but as light as possible", not the other way around. Most ultralight gear breaks after a few uses or when it is mishandled in anything-less-than-perfect conditions, which, happens a lot outside.

I think people that do long distance hiking are a little nuts but to each their own.

Re: Why your outdoorsy friend suddenly has a gummy bear power bank

#167

Post by GuB-42 »

daemonologist wrote: post #158
daveguy wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because 20ah for a 5v battery is ~357 Wh/kg which is more than the highest density lipo as of 2024 []. Do you honestly think they are putting the most cutting edge lipo technology in a gummy bear branded battery pack? I agree with your GP, it is unlikely. Maybe at least consider the density vs SOTA before you accuse someone of being a nihilist. [] https://www.cei.washington.edu/research/energy-storage/lithi...

I assume they're using Ah at the cell level (3.7v nominal), and then maybe rounding up slightly. (This is the absurdity of using Ah to measure the capacity of consumer-oriented power banks. They usually output 5v over USB A or a variable voltage over PD, but measure current at the cell level. Of course this fact or the precise voltage is rarely stated anywhere.)

It actually is, when you read GGP's link [1]

20000 mAh (3.85V/77Wh)

Which is consistent with what the latest mass produced batteries can do.

[1] https://www.makuake.com/project/haribo_dcglobal/

Re: Why your outdoorsy friend suddenly has a gummy bear power bank

#168

Post by mc3301 »

NoiseBert69 wrote: post #4

You can learn a lot from the ultra light dudes. I replaced all my travel electronics to be powerable from USB-C. This saved me from a lot cables and adapters. Even re-soldered the cable of my electric shaver to use a USB-C PD adapter PCB. As long it's somehow close to the standardized voltages (5/9/12/18/etc.) there will be no problems.

I'm not trying to be gatekeepy or anything, but in 2009 (not so long ago), I did an "ultralight" 40-day on-and-off-road motorcycle trip without any electronics. A few years before that, I did a 10 week "backpacker without a backpack" trip with no electronics. This is still very possible.

The weight savings, the "escape from electronics" bonus... It's not nothing.

Re: Why your outdoorsy friend suddenly has a gummy bear power bank

#169

Post by prawn »

jeffbee wrote: post #141
addaon wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm down to around 10 lb base load. And then I hike in the desert where I carry 5 - 7 liters of water (11 - 15 lbs). And food. Saving a pound here and there is totally worth it, but there's a large part of the country where prudent hiking means the majority of your weight is water.

If saving here and there is worth it, why would a hiker carry a 300g battery? Imagine the savings from leaving that boat anchor at home along with whatever obviously non-essential gadget wants to be recharged.

Others have already mentioned it, but once you move from pure survival to adventure/experience, carrying a way to take photos, map/GPS, read, maybe message your partner from a mountain-top, etc is part of that.

Re: Why your outdoorsy friend suddenly has a gummy bear power bank

#170

Post by nwallin »

coin wrote: post #159
mbesto wrote: post #124

This is a very poorly researched article. A few things worth considering: - 20,000 mAh is the rated capacity. Anyone who has tested 18650 batteries (which are the cells typically used in these battery packs) knows the rated capacity != tested capacity. - Watthours is more important than amp hours - Tested watt hours as typical loads is more important than amp hours - It's very normal to see tested capacity to be roug…

> Watthours is more important than amp hours I'd go a step further and say that amp hours is meaning less since voltage is not specified. The only valid battery capacity unit of measure is watt hours. While most battery packs use a single 3.7 lithium ion battery, Apple's first gen MagSafe battery pack used two internal batteries in series, throwing off everyone's amp hours only comparison.

> The only valid battery capacity unit of measure is watt hours.

I would also accept Joules. But yes, the unit should be a unit of energy.

Post reply on HN