Experiences, Not Things: The Ultimate Last-Minute Gifts

>

We all know that it’s experiences, not material things, that make us happy. This week, it’s probably also a good thing that experiences don’t need to be shipped. Here are three legitimately amazing outdoor experiences you can give anyone, regardless of their experience level. 

BlnWQzhDd1T

Backpacking is the fundamental outdoor adventure and the one with the lowest barrier to entry. But if you don’t already have all of it, obtaining the gear you need all at once get’s really expensive, really fast. Adding to the challenge, the quality of that gear is hugely important to your overall experience—take stuff that’s too heavy or isn’t comfortable, and the trip will turn into a sufferfest. And light, comfortable gear tends to be pricey. 

If you’re an experienced backpacker and want to give someone the ability to join you on a trip, or if both of you are going for the first time (or for the first time in a long time), then renting gear is probably the easiest and cheapest solution. Camp Crate can ship you a comprehensive kit containing every single thing you need (tent, sleeping bag, sleeping pad, backpack, camping stove, water filter, headlamp), or whichever item from that list you might need to fill in a gap in your gear collection. I’ve used these kits to outfit some of my group trips and can report that the gear arrives in good condition and is well-chosen. It’s the stuff I’d recommend you’d buy. 

If it really is your first time, then Camp Crate can help even more by delivering an entirely turn-key trip, including food, permits, local transportation, and maps, and can even reserve your backcountry campsites for you. They offer this service at destinations across the country, from Yosemite to the Smokey Mountains. If you’ve ever wanted to enjoy a true wilderness experience, these trips will be the easiest way to get there. 

How to Make It Special: Hiking up a mountain with weight on your back can be hard. Aside from using quality gear, the secret for making the experience enjoyable is to bring the right attitude. Be a good backpacking buddy by remaining positive and encouraging, even if it rains. 

Bpp_uDuAJ_o

Standing atop a challenging peak is the ultimate outdoor achievement. Climbing big mountains is challenging—and can be dangerous—but the reward matches the effort. Climbing big mountains can also expensive, so a guided trip to a new peak is something even very experienced outdoorsy types will appreciate. 

Is there a mountain looming above your hometown? One you’ve heard someone talk about forever or just a summit you know they haven’t climbed? Washington offers two incredible—and also incredibly accessible—peaks. Mount Baker is a great choice for beginners or those with limited time, while Rainier can be as challenging as you want to make it, depending on the route you chose, but it takes at least another day to climb. Start with one of those. 

How to Make It Special: Guided trips are all about the quality of the guides. Legendary mountaineer Craig Van Hoy can take you up anything from Baker ($800) to Everest ($70,000) and anything in between. And he’ll keep you safe and entertained throughout. Just getting to climb with him should be considered an achievement. 

BkXlzBPhn0P

Need something with a little lower barrier to entry, for someone a little older, your entire family, or just someone who likes being more mellow? Well, you don’t need to make that any less epic. Bring them to Montana and take them on a multi-day river trip in paradise. 

You can make that literal. Floating the Yellowstone River through Paradise Valley or hitting any of the other rivers in southwest Montana is the trip of a lifetime for anyone who enjoys fly fishing. And it’s a trip you can do self-guided and at a reasonable price. 

Hatch Adventures will rent you a camper-equipped Jeep Wrangler or Toyota Tacoma for $95 per day, and a four-person fishing raft you tow behind it for $165 per day. Split that cost four ways, and a three-day weekend comes out to less than $200 a person. Flying into Bozeman is cheap and easy, and you won’t be paying for accommodations, since you can either camp in the vehicle, or on river islands you use the raft to access. Non-resident fishing license are $25 a day. 

How to Make It Special: Hatch Adventures can help you plan routes and destinations. Call them up, describe the type of trip you’d like to have, and listen to their advice. Camping out of a raft is as easy as camping out of a truck and you’ll have both. So bring good food, some booze, and just enjoy yourself. Download the On X app before you visit, as it’ll help you navigate the borders between public and private land so you can find those good campsites. 

What Alex Honnold Is Reading Right Now

>

When you buy something using the retail links in our stories, we earn an affiliate commission that helps pay for our work. Read more about Outside’s affiliate policy.

Alex Honnold didn’t scale El Capitan with a wandering mind. The feats of this prolific free soloist call for incredible focus and an all-consuming approach to training and preparation that might leave you wondering whether Honnold has a mind for anything but climbing. But he’s is actually an avid reader. Here are four books that he highly recommends.

“I just started reading this book. I almost didn’t put it in my travel bag because it’s so heavy, but I think it will be worth the read. I also really enjoyed Sapiens by the same author.”

Buy Now


“This book was given to me by Dory Trimble, executive director of the Honnold Foundation, who wanted to educate me about social justice. A super-heavy read, but it definitely changed the way I see the entire criminal-justice system. I would consider this a must-read for anybody.”

Buy Now


“This was also given to me by Dory—and it was given to her at an event by the author, who hoped to help educate me on solar. Fittingly, I’d been struggling with the solar system on my van, and this textbook helped me better understand the whole system.”

Buy Now


“I got this book from Scott and lagged on reading it for a while because I felt I already knew how it ended. But when I finally sat down and read it, I really enjoyed his entire journey. I found it surprisingly inspiring.”

Buy Now

Don’t Be Too Excited by Zinke’s Potential Departure

>

What could be worse than a laughably incompetent Secretary of the Interior who’s transparent in his desire to sell off our nation’s public lands to extraction industries? Well, how about someone with the experience and expertise to actually pull that feat off? Meet David Bernhardt, Zinke’s deputy and the man who will take over the Department of the Interior if Zinke is fired or resigns, as is rumored. 

If Zinke is a swamp monster, then Bernhardt is the bigger, meaner swamp monster who shows up just when the heroes of this bad movie thought they’d won. Before accepting his current job as Deputy Secretary of the Interior, Bernhardt worked as a lobbyist for the oil, gas, and agriculture industries—industries that he’s now in a position to help regulate. Except he’s big on putting a “de” in front of that word. 

Take his actions to benefit one former client, the Westlands Water District (WWD). In 2015, Bernhardt helped that organization reach a deal with the federal government that turned the WWD into the largest and most powerful agricultural water provider in the country. The deal guaranteed its access to California’s fresh water resources in perpetuity. One of Bernhardt's first actions upon assuming office was to take the lead on an initiative to divert fresh water from northern California down into the Central Valley, in benefit of WWD. When California objected, Zinke and Bernhardt’s agency threatened to sue. (This fracas may be what was behind President Trump’s bizarre claim that California was pumping water that should be used for firefighting out to sea.) 

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1026524292396273664

That this incredible conflict of interest was allowed to happen isn’t actually the main concern here. It’s Bernhardt’s ability to pull off all of the above without making mainstream headlines and without his name becoming widely known to the public. I spoke to a Democratic Congressional staffer who asked to remain anonymous last month. They described Zinke’s corruption as “penny grifting,” but warned that Bernhardt could be a “puppet master.” 

This isn’t Bernhardt’s first tour at the DOI. He first joined the agency as Deputy Chief of Staff in 2001, and was subsequently appointed Solicitor during George W Bush’s second term. While there, he helped open up Yellowstone National Park to snowmobiles and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for oil and gas. 

And he has ambitions beyond just California’s water rights. In August, he penned an op-ed for the Washington Post arguing to reduce protections provided by the Endangered Species Act. The scariest part of it is how well argued it is. You’d be forgiven for thinking Bernhardt has a point, until you realize his argument is drawn from talking points put together by the far-right, anti-public lands Heritage Foundation. Bernhardt wants to reduce the power of the Endangered Species Act in order to limit its burden on extraction industries. Heck, he gave a speech stating that to the Heritage Foundation in September. 

Bernhardt’s links to industry have remained so strong during his tenure as Deputy Secretary that he’s actually drawn complaints from ethics watchdogs that he’s illegally continued his lobby activities while serving as a government official. According to a Campaign for Accountability complaint, he submitted a draft executive order about water rights in California to WWD for edits. The organization also alleges that he continued his work advising WWD well into 2017. 

The complaint concludes with a request for investigation: “Based on the available evidence, it appears that Mr. Bernhardt may have [violated ethics rules] by failing to maintain his lobbying registration as required by the LDA. As a result, Campaign for Accountability respectfully requests that your office promptly initiate an investigation into this matter.” 

With Democrats taking control of the house, we’re getting a new chairperson of the House Natural Resources Committee, Raul Grijalva, who is eager to exercise oversight of the DOI. It’s easy to see scandal-plagued, gaff-prone Zinke being checked by that oversight. The concern with Bernhardt is that we’re actually going to face a villain who know’s what he’s doing. 

How One Gym Uses Exercise to Fight Addiction

>

It was late 2016, andWhitney Mielke was nearly two years sober. Despite this accomplishment, she still couldn’t dispel the internal voice that told her she wasn’t good enough. Being uncomfortable in her own skin was a familiar sensation. It’s part of what led her to develop an eating disorder and start regularly getting black-out drunk as a teenager. And it’s not like she felt she could share these problems with others. “It was always a big secret,” says Mielke, now 33. 

Through her addiction and years of recovery, Mielke had lost the strength, discipline, and love of physical activity sheonce had as a high school athleteon the soccer, volleyball, and track teams. Even after reachingsobriety, she was intimidated by gyms, too scared to even walk in the front door. But her then boyfriend, Mike,wouldn’t stop talking about the Phoenix, a downtown Denver workout space for people recovering from various addictions, where he was taking CrossFit classes. The nonprofit was founded in 2006 by 33-year-oldtriathlete and climberScott Strode after experiencing firsthand how sports and adventure outings assisted in his own recovery from drug and alcohol addiction. The Phoenix offers a variety of workout classes and hosts outdoor group activitieslike bike rides and hikes. It’s all free—the only requirement is that participants have been sober for at least 48 hours. 

Soon Mielke gave in to Mike’s pestering and tagged along with him to her first CrossFit session. “I wanted to have the courage to try things,” she says. Like every class at the gym, hers began with an icebreaker, where people said their names and shared a fact about themselves with the group. The exercise signaled to Mielke that this wasn’t a typical workout class. “I immediately felt like the judgment ofwhat I could do was dropped. Me being there was enough,” she says. She looked around and saw that people were joking and laughing—even the large tattooed men that towered over her. They all seemed genuinely interested in who she was. Knowing that everyone was sober also made Mielke more comfortable; she already had something in common with the group. “I’ve always set these really unreasonable expectations for myself and then beat myself up when I don’t achieve them. To have somebody really proud of me for showing up and trying, that was a big deal for me,” she says. “That gave me the motivation to keep trying.”

It wasn’t long before she was attending classes three times a week, arriving early and staying late to chat with others. “It was like we were talking about the past but doing something in the present, and there’s something about it that shook me. I was able to separate who I am from who I’d always thought I was,” says Mielke. Now she’s helping others. Four months ago, she joined the Phoenix staff full-time as a manager, using her skills as a licensed clinical social worker. “One of the things I was looking for in my life were ways to find more joy,” she says. “This became a really big source of joy.”

The benefits of exercise on physical and mental health have been well chronicled. But recently, researchers have begun exploring the ideathat exercise could be a boon for individuals struggling with and recovering from substance-use disorders (SUDs). According to the 2016 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, more than 20 million Americans ages 12 or older are dealing with SUDs, and close to four million received substance-use treatment that year. Solving this public-health issue is not just about helping people get clean, though; it’s also about finding effective ways of convincing them to stay clean—40 to 60 percent of those in drug-addiction treatment relapse. “[Some] of the things that influence relapse rates in individuals who undergo addiction treatment is depression and mood and lack of coping strategies,” says Ana Abrantes, associate director of behavioral medicine and addictions research at Butler Hospital in Rhode Island. Exercise, in conjunction with SUD treatment, could help counteract those issues.

This field of study is still fairly new. The earliest research on exercise and addiction dates back to the 1970s, but the first National Institute on Drug Abuse–funded studies looking at the relationship between the two didn’tlaunchuntil the early 2000s. And most of the studies that have been conducted are too small to make wide-ranging conclusions. But there is early evidence that exercise could be an effective, adjunct addiction intervention. It’s been shown to reduce cravings for alcohol and cigarettes, lower stress levels, and assuage anxiety, which is common among those experiencing withdrawal. “When people start moving, they start to feel more confident. They feel a sense of mastery,” says Doug Jowdy, a Denver-based counseling and sports psychologist who has been sober and in recovery for more than 20 years. He says that so long as it’s done properly and people don’t push themselves too hard too quickly, “exercise is one of the most powerful interventions.” 

Part of that power comes from exercise’s neurological influence, restoring connections thrown off by substance use. Drugs and alcohol flood the reward pathway of the brain with dopamine; over time the brain remembers the good feeling and craves it. Conversely, heavy drinking can lead to significant drops in dopamine levels, causing people to drink more to boost their moods. But two recent rat-based studies out of the University at Buffalo’s Clinical and Research Institute on Addictions showed that animals tasked with running on a treadmill five days a week restored their dopamine levels, and aerobic exercise prevented stress-induced cocaine relapses. “[Through exercise] the brain’s neurochemistry is impacted in a way that’s consistent with how you would go about trying to treat addiction,” says Panayotis Thanos, the senior research scientist who led the studies.

While findings on animals don’t always translate to humans, according to researchers, the results are promising enough to encourage further study. There are still plenty of unanswered questions, including how much and which type of exercise is best. “There’s a long way to go when it comes to using movement in a therapeutic way,” Jowdy says. Abrantes, who’s been studying the connection between exercise and addiction for 16 years, agrees. “I really do think it’s a valuable part of recovery. I just don’t know if we’ve figured out exactly how to do it,” she says. “I feel confident saying that acute bouts of physical activity improve your mood and decrease your cravings. Whether that leads to long-term sustained abstinence, I don’t know.” 

Meanwhile, the Phoenix is growing. Since its founding in Colorado, its programs have expanded to 20 communities in 13 states, reaching more than 26,000 people. Other recovery-and-exercise-focused organizations have popped up as well, such as Salt Lake City’s Fit To Recover, Nevada’s Black Iron Gym, and the Boston-based NamaStay Sober. 

At one of the Phoenix’s kettlebell training classes in downtown Denver in September, 12 people warmed up on exercise bikes and rowers in a large brick-walled room. There to teach was Mike, who is now married to Whitney and a graduate of the workforce development program that helps clients pursue personal-training or CrossFit-teaching certifications. Hegathered the group together and started walking them through kettlebell basics. A wall behind him highlighted the month’s sobriety anniversaries, which ranged from a couple of months to a few years. 

In talking with members, the nonprofit’s staff and trainers have found that the workouts and outdoor excursions offer a safe social outlet, boostself-confidence, hold people accountable, and reduce feelings of isolation and hopelessness that often accompany the recovery process. “People aren’t here for fitness goals. They’re here for recovery support,” says Dana Smith, the Phoenix’s director of programs and partnerships in Colorado. She’s been sober for more than nine years.

That support system is key. According to the Phoenix’smember surveys, 86percent of its active members are still sober after six months of participation, and two-thirds of those who have relapsed pointed to the Phoenix as helping them return to sobriety. The peer-to-peer program—almost all of the gym’s coaches and staffers are in long-term recovery themselves—isn’t meant to be a replacement for drug-treatment programs, but the nonprofit does serve as an outlet for individuals trying to maintain a sober lifestyle. Beyond the classes and adventure activities, the organization also hosts sober holiday parties and barbecues.

As Smith observed the class, she rattled off some of the misconceptionsthat follow and hinder drug and alcohol users as they attempt to start a new life: Sobriety sucks. Recovery is isolating. People who are overdosing can’t be helped. “None of those things are true,” she says. “Recovery is this fun and rewarding and fulfilling and hopeful place to be.” The Phoenix, she believes, is proof. “The stigma is those images we see on the news of despair and overdosing and the opioid crisis. Some of those things are happening and are real, but this is happening, too,” she says, as the participants transitioned into a set of kettlebell swings. “This is what recovery looks like.”

The Gear That Propelled Colin O'Brady Across Antarctica

>

When you buy something using the retail links in our stories, we earn an affiliate commission that helps pay for our work. Read more about Outside’s affiliate policy.

Endurance athlete Colin O’Brady spent 54 days on the ice of Antarctica, completing the first unsupported solo traverse of the continent on December 26. “One of the biggest things I was aware of was that I would need to make it across Antarctica with only what I started out with,” he says. O’Brady looked for gear that was durable and streamlined, since he’d have minimal support on the ice. Here are key pieces that saw him through the 932-mile trip.

Named after the famous polar explorer Roald Amundsen, these skis are specifically tailored to hauling a sled long distances across snow. “They’re pretty skinny by a downhill standard but still havea good metal edge on them,” O’Brady says. But he also wanted something thicker than traditional nordic skis, since he was wearing extra thick boots to shield his feet from the cold. And O’Brady had previous experience with the lightweight Amundsens. “After skiing across Greenland on these, I trust them.”


O’Brady had two pairs of skins on his expedition, one long and one short. For more grip, “I used the long skins on the steeper uphill days or when the conditions were icy,” he says. “I used the short skins on the polar plateau and downhill for more of a glide.” O’Brady had to choose which set he’d use at the beginning of each day and stick with it. “I couldn’t unglue and reglue them during the expedition because of the minus-75-degree weather. It was just so cold that when I’d take the glue off, they’d quickly freeze. I could do it in my tent and warm them over my stove to get a good adhesive.”


Like the skis, these boots were designed for long outings in frigid temperatures. They come with integrated gaiters (made of Kevlar-reinforced Cordura) and extra insulation in the soles. Alfa recommends buying them two sizes bigger than usual, so you have room for a compatible beefy liner. “My feet were never cold ever,” O’Brady says. “No complaints.”


“The Magnum had a little more width and hung over the skis but was comfortable and stable,” O’Brady says. And he chose manual bindings because the simpler design means they’re easier to fixif something goes wrong, and he’d have no backup while traveling alone.


O’Brady opted for these aluminum poles over carbon because despite the increased weight, they’re hardier and he didn’t want to risk breaking them. “I took some bad falls just tripping over stuff, but they never bent or broke,” he says. And he modified them to suit the needs his expedition, swapping in the burly leg loops of a climbing harness for the straps and wrapping bike bar tape below the grips, so he could choke up on the poles without touching the cold metal. He also had to perform some impromptu maintenance on the baskets. “The leather wore through in two spots and broke, so I had to fix the baskets with paracord.”


“I bought it secondhand off a friend of mine who had done a South Pole trip a few years ago,” O’Brady says. “I had a couple of minor problems. On day one, I broke the strap on the outside that secures the load. I was probably just torquing on it too hard.”Otherwise, the sled held up great. “The Kevlar base and the runners were really smooth.”


“I had never used them prior to this expedition, but I was pleased,” O’Brady says of the microfiber jacket and bibs, which he wore every day of the expedition. “Norwegians know a thing or two about life in the polar regions. The jacket and pants were loose enough so nothing was rubbing. Most people go with Gore-Tex, but Antarctica was so dry that I didn’t need that. They’re not waterproof but windproof and breathed really well. I also added fur to the hood to block the wind.”


“I’ve used a few different face masks over time, but the Scott mask performed really well,” O’Brady says. “It’s designed for motocross and has a full plastic face mask on it. That accumulated a bit of ice and snow over the day from condensation from my breath. But the proof is in the pudding: I didn’t get any major fogging.”


Hilleberg is known for its bomber stable tents. To save time and hassle when setting up and breaking down the Keron 3 each day, O’Brady taped all the junctures of the tent poles save for the middle ones, so he’d only have to click the middles together and lift the poles to erect the shelter. “That way the poles could stay set up in the tent,” he says. “In 50-mile-per-hour winds, that makes a huge difference.” He also chose the three-person version for the extra room. “I paid the penalty with a little more weight, but it was my only home for 54 days. It was nice to have a little more space. Some days I’d bring my skis and skins in with me. In pretty harsh winds and conditions, I had no problems with the tent the entire time.”


O’Brady used the same sleeping bag when he summitted Everest a few years ago. It has a waterproof shell, which came in handy when he’d dry his gear in his tent and water would drip onto the Ghost. And it’s packed with 800-fill down. “I didn’t wear socks every night, just light base layers, and I was never cold,” O’Brady says.


Drinking five to six liters of water a day, O’Brady needed an efficient stove to melt snow and keep himself hydrated, not to mention cook food like his AlpineAire instant meals. The XGK-EX is fast—capable of boiling one liter of water in less than three minutes. “It’s a great workhorse,” he says.


Boasting 19 tools, among them screwdrivers, serrated and straight knives, and a can opener, “this Leatherman gives me all sorts of options to screw things in, file things down, and cut,” O’Brady says. “Knife, scissors, that kind of stuff always comes in handy.”


“This is my all-around favorite piece of gear,” O’Brady says. “It’s not too heavy, and the battery life lasts forever. I was able to keep the tracking on all day long. The texting ability on it is amazing. That kept me connected to the world when I was resting in my tent.” He kept the InReach juiced with an X-Dragon 20W Sun Power solar panel($58).

Why Carbon Fiber Bikes Are Failing

The high-tech material has been used to build frames and components for decades, but as bikes age, catastrophic failures are leading to lawsuits

Facebook Icon

Twitter Icon

sms

email

Janet Kowal had a personal connection to the Register’s Annual Great Bicycle Ride Across Iowa (RAGBRAI). Even though she’s now living outside Chicago, working for the Village of Burr Ridge town hall, Kowal has Iowa in her blood. The 2013 route would take her through her hometown of Des Moines and skirt the University of Iowa, where she graduated in 1987. Kowal bought a new-to-her 2007 Giant OCR C1 road bike for the event and, to be cautious, took it to her local bike shop for a full-service tune-up.

Not long into the ride, however, Kowal’s bike shattered beneath her. For no apparent reason—she’d neither hit an obstacle nor encountered a pothole—the front fork snapped in half as if it had exploded from within. Kowal was sent crashing into the pavement, helmet first. She fractured her spine and clavicle, suffered a concussion, and tore ligaments in her left thumb.

After missing weeks of work and racking up medical bills for surgeries on her hand, Kowal sued in 2013. She went after the shop that sold her the bike, the one that serviced it, and then Giant itself. The lawsuit, filed in Cook County, Illinois, claims that a manufacturing defect in the fork’s carbon fiber caused it to fail.

Taiwan-based Giant quickly tried to bow out. The company argued in court filings that there’s an entirely independent Giant in the United States in charge of distribution to authorized retailers. While Giant of Taiwan made the bike, it can’t be held liable, the company claimed, because it doesn’t do business in Illinois, and the U.S.-based Giant shares no negligence either because it didn’t make the bike.

The company’s argument wasn’t new. It has been made in hundreds of similar lawsuits involving foreign-made bikes. In many of them, the logic has been enough to sway judges to throw out lawsuits or convince bike owners to settle. But the judge in Kowal’s case said the lawsuit could go forward against both Giant of Taiwan and its U.S.-based cousin. Giant appealed; in September, the Illinois Appellate Court agreed to let the lawsuit continue—the first time an appellate court has weighed in on such a case.

“This is an area of law that has been in flux in recent years,” says Ken Hoffman, Kowal’s Chicago-based attorney. “The bike manufacturers are like nesting dolls. They set up layers and layers of companies to try to protect themselves, but finally they are being held liable.”

There’s already a cottage industry of people who specialize in lawsuits resulting from bike accidents, including a growing cadre of attorneys and forensic experts who specialize in carbon fiber. Now that use of the material, once reserved for high-end bikes, has become widespread in the bike industry, reports of accidents and mysterious failures are on the rise. Kowal’s case signals that bike manufacturers—even overseas brands—may now be held accountable. The result could be a dramatic spike in the number of lawsuits brought against makers of carbon-fiber bike parts.


“There’s an old saying in bike manufacturing: It can be lightweight, durable, or cheap—pick two. A lot of these carbon-fiber components are lightweight and cheap, but they are not durable.” says Luke Elrath, an engineer who once designed kids’ bikes for Trek and now works as a bicycle-accident expert for Robson Forensic in Philadelphia. Soon after joining the firm in 2012, Elrath began noticing an uptick in calls from lawyers looking for his analysis of carbon-fiber bicycle components that had failed under their clients. After researching how the carbon components in these cases were made, Elrath now believes many of the accidents occurred because of faulty design and construction.

Elrath is one of several experts in carbon-fiber bike accidents. Their names are circulated among members of Bike Law, a network of independent lawyers and firms that use a website and listserv to share stories on carbon-fiber failures. Attorney James B. Reed is a New York state representative of Bike Law and has handled two lawsuits where clients suffered catastrophic injuries when carbon-fiber components failed below them. He has heard about numerous others from people on the Bike Law listserv.

Reed and other experts in carbon fiber agree that any material can fail. Wrecks happen from faulty aluminum, steel, and even rock-hard titanium. The difference with carbon fiber is that it can be difficult to detect signs of damage that might signal imminent failure. Cracks and dents in other materials are typically easy to see, but fissures in carbon fiber often hide beneath the paint. What’s worse is that when carbon fiber fails, it fails spectacularly. While other materials might simply buckle or bend, carbon fiber can shatter into pieces, sending riders flying into the road or trail. And this kind of catastrophic destruction can happen to any part of a bike made with the material.

“I’ve seen accidents from a whole range of carbon-fiber components—handlebars, forks, seatposts, entire frames,” Reed says. “As a lawyer, the question is, ‘What’s the cause of the failure?’”

That’s a question Philip W. Coats, an attorney in San Diego, set out to answer when he represented a client whose front fork shattered. Coats obtained documents from the Chinese manufacturer (a settlement agreement forbids him from naming the company). Using a Mandarin translator, he found that the factory had no standards on how carbon fiber is produced. No rules restricted how thick it should be or how much impact it needed to absorb in a collision, Coats said.

It’s not that all carbon fiber is dangerous. When made well, carbon fiber can be tougher than steel and quite safe. But when made incorrectly, carbon-fiber components can easily break. The parts are built by layering fibrous carbon that’s bound together with resin. If the manufacturer skimps on the resin or simply applies it unevenly, gaps can form, making it susceptible to cracks. Those fissures can spread from an innocuous collision, like the impact of a bike lock or simply from landing hard coming off a curb. Over days or sometimes years, the fracture spreads until, in many cases, the material shatters. Time is often the crucial element.

Steven Sweat, a bicycle-accident attorney in Los Angeles, says he has worked on numerous carbon-fiber cases, more and more in recent years as the components age. “There are problems with manufacturing, but we’re also just testing the limits of how long carbon can last,” Sweat says.

What’s more, even if a carbon-fiber component is well made and has never suffered a routine ding or collision, accidents can occur due to poor maintenance. Unlike with other materials, if you overtighten carbon-fiber parts, they’re likely to shatter down the road. Often, owner’s manuals offer little guidance on how to maintain the material, leaving it to bike owners or mechanics to develop their own standards.

Roman F. Beck, a bicycle-accident forensic expert in San Diego, worries that the growing inventory of older secondhand bikes will become a ticking time bomb, especially now that the material has become pervasive in bike manufacturing. He cites even top-of-the-line mountain bike makers known for premium quality. “As good as [many] frames are, what happens when someone rides five or ten or 20 years from now?” Beck says. “Mountain bikes take a lot of punishment, but nobody knows how long these frames will last in that environment.”

And because no one tracks how often carbon-fiber bike components fail, Beck says there’s no way to determine how widespread the problem has become.


First used in aircraft dating back to the 1960s, carbon fiber made its way to bike parts in the 1970s, as manufacturers discovered its vast potential for cutting weight. French bike builder Look produced a carbon-fiber frame in 1986, and it gained widespread attention when Greg LeMond won the Tour de France with it. A few years later, however, the world’s first mass-produced carbon-fiber frame, the Trek 5000, suffered so many problems following its 1989 release that the company discontinued the model after a year.

But Trek didn’t give up. Learning from its errors, the company released a new carbon-fiber bike in 1992 using its “Optimum Compaction, Low Void” technology and has been using the material ever since. Other bike manufacturers soon figured out their own carbon-fiber processes; in the 1990s, they began selling parts and entire bikes made from the material, mostly at exorbitant costs and for use in professional racing.

By the mid-2000s, carbon fiber became widespread in the industry, not just in race bikes but in everything from commuters to mountain bikes. Components like front forks and handlebars built from the material can now be bought for under $100 and entire bikes for less than $2,000.

Since then, there have been several recalls related to the material. In 2009, for instance, Mavic recalled its R-SYS carbon-fiber wheel rims after reports that they were shattering. In 2010, the bicycle magazine VeloNews reported that several racers riding on Trek Madone 6-Series bikes suffered crashes after the failure of carbon-fiber steerer tubes, the part that connects the frame to the handlebars. In response, Trek said the problem came from installation and compatibility issues. The company didn’t recall the bike but worked with the Consumer Product Safety Commission on a consumer alert.

Matt Shriver, Trek’s Belgium-based technical director, says manufacturing can’t always be to blame for carbon-fiber accidents. In the eight years that he’s worked with Trek’s race team, Shriver says he hasn’t seen one failure in a carbon-fiber frame that could be blamed on the way it was built. In a widely reported crash in February involving a Trek Domane carbon-fiber frame that split in half, Shriver says Trek’s engineering department sent him a link to an article, asking if the cause could be a manufacturing defect. “I looked into it, and it turns out a guy fell on the frame during the crash,” Shriver says. “That’s the kind of impact that could cause any material to break.”

Like other manufacturers, Trek maintains that its carbon-fiber components and bikes are safe. The company’s warranty, however, extends only to the primary user. Shriver says that buyers looking into secondhand parts and frames should make sure they were serviced correctly. To examine the quality of used carbon-fiber bikes, some mechanics have begun conducting the “white glove test,” which involves wiping carbon-fiber parts with a cotton glove—if the glove snags along the way, it could signal that the carbon has been damaged. Others tap carbon-fiber frames with a coin, listening for a change in pitch that might signal a crack.

Yet even those approaches don’t ensure buyers that they’re getting a used bike without hidden damage. Elrath, the bike-accident expert, says the most effective way to inspect carbon fiber is to send it to one of a couple companies in the country that can conduct an ultrasonic scan—a checkup that often costs $350 and might lead to repairs that could run upwards of $1,000. Not the kind of fees, in other words, that most buyers in the market for a used bike are likely willing to pay.


It’s important to note that some of the experts on carbon fiber-related accidents I spoke with haven’t concluded that the material is patently unsafe. Instead, they say the consequences of shoddy manufacturing and wear and tear underscore the importance of buying from a reputable manufacturer and assuring the bike is inspected regularly by someone trained to maintain carbon components. Even after the lawsuits he’s seen, attorney James Reed, the New York Bike Law representative, still rides two carbon-fiber bikes, a Trek Madone road bike and a Giant mountain bike.

Andrew Juskaitis, Giant’s U.S.-based global product marketing manager, couldn’t talk about the specifics of the Kowal case but told me that when bikes and components fail due to manufacturing defects, the company stands by them and will offer replacements. Carbon-fiber components have sometimes failed, Juskaitis conceded, but he said that’s simply the reality of bike building. “Like any material, carbon fiber has a fatigue rate, just like steel or aluminum or titanium or anything,” he said. “No maintenance can keep a frame from fatiguing eventually.” In cases where Giant’s manufacturing is responsible, Juskaitis says the company will negotiate “to make things right.”

For Kowal, whose Giant front fork broke beneath her in the ride across Iowa, settlement negotiations are underway. If they can’t reach a settlement, the next step will be a “destructive test” of Kowal’s bike, which has been kept in storage. The exam, according to attorney Hoffman, will involve hiring a forensic expert to analyze the fork’s material to see if it was too thin or manufactured with defective gaps.

If Kowal’s lawsuit goes to trial and she wins against Giant of Taiwan, the victory won’t necessarily set a precedent for other cases, especially outside Illinois. But no matter how the case ends, the appeals court ruling in Kowal’s favor may embolden other attorneys to go after foreign bike manufacturers and the U.S.-based companies they set up to distribute, using the same arguments Kowal made in her case.

The question now is just how many others will be hurt by carbon-fiber bike components failing, Elrath says. An avid cyclist, he rides a carbon-fiber bike—but it’s one he built himself, adding additional material at high-stress junctions. He knows others were built with far lower standards.

“It’s completely reasonable for someone who wants a lightweight bike to look at carbon fiber, but they need to understand the risks,” Elrath says. “Absolutely this is getting ignored.”

The 5 Best Exercises with TRX Bands

>

TRX bands offer one of the most efficient full-body workouts around, whether you’re new to the gym or a dedicated lifter. “Suspension training with the TRX bands hits every single muscle group that you would on a machine or with free weights, with the plus of having to balance, which uses more of your core and stabilizer muscles,” says Doug Lawder, owner of Railyard Fitness in Santa Fe, New Mexico, and a TRX-certified trainer. “Even if you lift weights all the time, a TRX workout will feel different and challenging.”

The TRX system is completely customizable to different fitness levels and allows for endless progression. Lawder suggests mixing up sets and repetitions to challenge your muscles in new ways, like creating high-intensity interval circuits with the moves below. However you choose to shape your workout, Lawder emphasizes the importance of maintaining a “power up” position: shoulders pulled back and down, core tight, and spine upright. If your gym isn’t equipped with a TRX system, setting up your own is simple—all you need is a sturdy doorframe, tree, or crossbar to hang it from. (The most basic at-home system costs around $140.) Here, Lawder takes us through the five exercises he recommends for TRX novices.

Targets four different muscle groups—the lower body, core, back, and biceps—and adds an element of cardio.

Plant your feet shoulder-width apart, keeping your weight in your heels. Grip the handles with your palms facing inward and lean back. Inhale as you bend your knees into a low squat, then exhale while pushing up through your legs and squeezing your core. When you’ve almost reached the top of your squat, pull up with the arms, completing a row.

Uses the same muscle groups as the squat row, with added emphasis on the biceps.

Follow the same form as the squat row, except keep your elbows high and your palms facing upward. As you stand up, curl your biceps in, ending with your hands on either side of your ears.

Builds strength in the chest and triceps, with extra isolation of the abs.

Begin in a high plank, keeping your hands slightly wider than shoulder width with the bands in front of your arms. Keep your hands light on the handles to transfer energy from your forearms to your chest. Bend your elbows to a 90-degree angle, lowering your body toward the floor. Push back up through your chest, keeping your core tight and being careful not to collapse in the lower back. Lawder recommends going no lower than 90 degrees to protect the shoulders from injury.

Isolates your triceps while adding strength and stability to the core.

Set your feet shoulder-width apart and grip the handles with your knuckles facing toward you. Begin with your hands about chest height, arms outstretched. Slowly bend your elbows and lower your body forward, maintaining a straight back. Exhale as you extend out, engaging your core.

Improves flexibility in the hamstrings and calves.

: With your feet wide apart on the floor and a light grip on the handles, slide your hips backward while reaching forward with your hands, elongating the spine. Take a big inhale, then, with an exhale, push your chest toward the floor, keeping your back flat. Remember to stay heavy on your heels and light on the toes to get a deep stretch in the hamstrings.

 

What You Should and Shouldn’t Eat Before a Run

Eating for endurance can be tricky, but it doesn’t have to be

Whether you’re a neighborhood jogger or an ultramarathoner, fueling right will help you get the most out of every mile. Eating well before you run can prevent sudden fatigue mid-workout (aka hypoglycemia, or bonking) and can have a direct impact on your performance. “What you eat will help you through the run by either building your glycogen stores for a workout later or boosting blood sugar for a workout in the short term,” says nutritionist Amy Shapiro, founder of Real Nutrition NYC. As you start to increase your mileage, your body requires extra fuel—and eating right gets even more important.

Foods to Avoid Before a Run

Foods high in fat, fiber, and protein are best avoided right before you hit the pavement or trail. “Too much fat or protein before a run can cause cramping or tiredness, as your body will be spending energy on digestion instead of running,” Shapiro explains. High-fiber foods can also lead to GI distress and cramping because they are hard to fully digest, so they move through your system rapidly. Some runners swear by a caffeine boost, but be careful not to overdo it on coffee or tea for all the same reasons you wouldn’t want to overdo it at the office—elevated heart rate, stomachaches, and frequent bathroom trips. These foods could be rough for digestion before a run:

  • Legumes
  • Broccoli, artichokes, or other high-fiber veggies
  • Apples, pears, or other high-fiber fruits
  • Cheese, red meat, bacon, or other high-fiber foods
  • Caffeine (in large amounts)
  • Spicy foods

Foods to Eat Before a Run

The ideal pre-run snack is easy to digest and provides instant fuel, Shapiro says. Foods higher in carbohydrate content are best, because carbs break down into glucose, the body’s main source of energy during a run. Glucose circulates in the bloodstream, where it can be used for immediate energy, or it gets stored as readily accessible glycogen in the muscles and liver. A little bit of protein and fat can provide some staying power, but the majority of your pre-run fuel should be carbs. Shapiro encourages opting for real foods when possible, rather than sticking to bars and energy gels. Her go-to snacks:

  • Banana and almond butter
  • Turkey and cheese on whole-wheat bread
  • Oatmeal and berries
  • Cheese stick and carrots
  • Toast with 1/4 avocado or one to two tablespoons of nut butter

When to Eat

The ideal pre-run meal is generally 300 to 400 calories, consumed around two hours before you hit the road, Shapiro says. Even if you’re going long, you’re better off fueling mid-run than loading up too much beforehand. If you’ve eaten a larger meal, you may need to wait up to four hours before running to prevent stomach discomfort, although 30 minutes is usually enough after a light snack, she says.

Exactly how much you ought to consume varies slightly based on your body and your workout, of course. For an easy run of less than an hour, aim for 15 grams of carbs. “Most people can get through a three-mile run without food beforehand,” Shapiro says. “But it might be easier to get through the three miles if you have a small carbohydrate snack, such as a piece of fruit.” If you’re doing a longer or more intense workout, go for 30 grams of carbs. Before a marathon, you’re looking at something between 50 and 75 grams. For runs longer than 75 minutes, you’ll also need to think about bringing along some mid-run fuel, because your glycogen stores will be depleted. Shapiro advises 30 to 60 grams of carbs for every additional hour you’ll be out, as well as added electrolytes and extra fluids.

Here’s What It Takes to Hike the John Muir Trail

A survey of backpackers’ tactics on the 220-mile high-country route offers insights on what works and what doesn’t

A few months ago, I summed up the lessons from a study of mountain hikers in the Austrian Alps. In a nutshell, people tend to fall when they’re descending, even in good weather and good trail conditions, and especially when they’re male. That’s useful to know (even if some of those risk factors are unchangeable), but it’s mostly applicable to day-hikers. Strap on a big pack, set out for a week or more, and everything changes.
 
A new paper in the journal Wilderness & Environmental Medicine takes a look at this other end of the spectrum. Over the last few years, a retired San Francisco lawyer named John Ladd has run an annual online survey of people who hike the John Muir Trail, a famous route through the Sierra Nevadas that typically takes about three weeks to complete (through the fastest known time is two days, 19 hours, and 26 minutes, set last year by François D’Haene).
 
In 2014, 771 people filled out the survey, all of whom planned a trip of at least five days along the trail—a pretty reasonable sample from the total of roughly 3,500 permits issued that year. A group of researchers led by Susanne Spano of the University of California San Francisco Fresno analyzed the data to look for patterns and insights.
 
Some basic data: 30 of the hikers had to leave the trail earlier than planned. Four required emergency evacuations, three by helicopter: one person with stress fractures in both feet, one who had a serious fall, and one who had a severe stomach bug and couldn’t keep any fluids down. On that note, the incidence of diarrhea was just 17 percent, far below estimates for the Appalachian Trail (68 percent in 1988; 56 percent in 1997). That’s likely because the water is a lot cleaner high in the Sierra Nevadas than along the Appalachian Trail, but may also reflect increased use of lightweight water filters. (Yes, as Wes Siler argued earlier this year, you really should filter your water.)
 
Overall, the top health problems reported were blisters (57 percent), sleep problems (57 percent), pack strap pain (46 percent), knee/ankle pain (44 percent), and back/hip pain (43 percent). Another 37 percent reported altitude sickness. Given that the trail is almost entirely above 8,000 feet, and finishes at 14,505 feet at the summit of Mount Whitney, altitude issues are not surprising, and also likely contributed to the sleep problems. That’s a very good reason to hike north-to-south, as most people do, so that you gradually adjust to the altitude.
 
The interesting part is looking at which factors predicted success along the trail. For instance, two-thirds of people who reported getting more than four hours a week of vigorous exercise in the month before their hike rated the route as between “somewhat difficult” and “not at all difficult.” In contrast, half of those who got less than that amount of pre-trip exercise rated it as between “fairly difficult” and “felt like a death march.” So getting more exercise affected how hard the trip felt—but, perhaps surprisingly, a separate analysis found that it didn’t predict risk of injury or evacuation. Instead, a much stronger predictor of injury or evacuation was BMI. One month of pre-trip workouts, in other words, isn’t enough.
 
Another key factor—and one that’s more easily modifiable—is how much weight you haul on your back. As our interactive backpacking calculator demonstrates, the load you carry (as a fraction of your overall weight) has a strong influence on how much energy you burn. It also affects things like pack-strap pain, as well as balance and gait that may contribute to the risk of falls. Sure enough, increasing “base pack weight” was significantly linked to less distance covered per day (the average in the study was about 12 miles), and to increased likelihood of illness or injury.
 
This base pack weight metric is a little confusing for me, though. It’s defined as the weight of your pack and equipment, not including any food or water. The average in the study was 22.4 pounds; a “traditional” backpacking set-up is defined as having a base weight of between 20 and 30 pounds, while less is lightweight and more is heavy. For me, though, the weight of food and water is generally the defining limitation in my trips.
 
The last backpacking trip where I had a really reliable estimate of my pack weight was along the South Coast Track in Tasmania, since they weighed your pack carefully before allowing you onto the single-engine Cessna that takes you to the far end of the trail. I had to empty out my water bottles and shove some food in my pockets to hit the 60-pound limit for our 10-day trip. But I have no idea what my base weight was, so I’m not sure how to compare here. The John Muir Trail has a bunch of possible resupply points along the route, so I’m not sure whether the typical hiker was carrying 30, or 50, or 70 pounds. It would be interesting to know.
 
There is one other detail that I was happy to see. The average age of those who completed the survey was 43, which I’m pleased to now proclaim as the Prime Backpacking Age. (I’ll turn 43 later this year.) Better yet, even though older hikers covered a bit less ground per day, they were slightly less likely to get ill or injured. Youth is nice, of course, but hard-earned wisdom has its perks too.


My new book, Endure: Mind, Body, and the Curiously Elastic Limits of Human Performance, with a foreword by Malcolm Gladwell, is now available. For more, join me on Twitter and Facebook, and sign up for the Sweat Science email newsletter.

The Orbea Gain Is the Future of E-Bikes

Basque bike manufacturer Orbea could show the way forward for the pedal-assist market with its new e-roadie, the Gain

Electric bikes have become one of the most contentious subjects in cycling in recent years. Many cyclists resist the spread of e-bikes, concerned that they could cause conflict with other trail users and lead to closures, as well as fears that motors on bikes could fuel the growing crisis over inactivity.

Despite those reservations, the industry has thrown its weight behind pedal-assist bikes, and rightly so, as demand is booming. In 2017, the U.S. market grew to 263,000 units, a 25 percent gain from the previous year. Some estimate global sales could increase by as much as 60 percent in the next seven years.

The growth of the e-bike market came into clear focus at Impact Sun Valley, a conference last month in Idaho exploring developing technologies in pedal-assist bikes and the range of issues they present. For three days, a group of industry veterans, advocates, influencers, and journalists (including myself) descended on Ketchum to look at the latest products, discuss how land-use conflicts between e-bikers and other users can be mitigated, and ride some of the newest bikes on the market.

(Courtesy CrankTank)

Compared with some of the early iterations I’ve tried, which felt as clunky and ponderous as Sherman tanks, today’s models are lighter and nimbler, have improved ranges, and feel more and more like everyday bicycles. On the dirt side, we rode the new BMC Trailfox AMP (from $7,500), a 27.5+ model with 150 millimeters of travel running on the Shimano STEPS E-8000 drive unit. We also tried the second generation of the Specialized Turbo Levo FSR 6Fattie (from $4,600), which is mostly unchanged from the debut except for an improved Brose motor with a claimed 15 percent increase in power and efficiency, as well as a higher-volume battery for 25 percent more range. Both of these bikes are startlingly capable, and the ride quality resembles their analog counterparts more than ever. But they feel more evolutionary than revolutionary.

The bike that truly stood out was the Orbea Gain Carbon (from $4,400), which the Basque manufacturer launched in Idaho. Thanks to a small hub-drive motor and a battery that’s completely concealed in the down tube, the Gain Carbon is pretty much unidentifiable as an e-bike. You charge via a tiny port in the bottom bracket and toggle among four power settings—no assist, eco (about 100 extra watts), sport (around 150), and boost (200-ish)—using an LED button on the top tube behind the stem. That’s a far smaller assist than many current e-bikes deliver, which means the motor is a true aid, akin to a tailwind, as opposed to the kind of powerhouse of sudden bursts common on more powerful bikes.

The M20i model that I rode matched the carbon frame to an Ultegra Di2 group set, including hydraulic disc brakes, carbon cockpit bits from FSA, and Mavic Cosmic Pro Carbon wheels with 28c tires—all the parts you’d expect on a high-end road bike. Orbea claims the bike will get up to 60 miles on a charge, depending on the power setting and terrain, but I spent half my test ride with the motor off and was pleased that it didn’t feel too heavy and overwhelming, as most e-bikes do without juice. (It weighs 24.9 pounds, which is close to performance weight.)

(Courtesy CrankTank)

In my opinion, this makes the Gain the most cutting-edge concept in e-bikes right now: it’s the closest thing I’ve seen to a single bike that can be ridden enjoyably with or without electric assist. While much e-bike development has become an arms race, with manufacturers chasing bigger, faster, more powerful machines, Orbea’s work toward lighter, smaller, and more inconspicuous e-bikes—in terms of both looks and assistance—is a model more companies should pursue. By becoming less conspicuous, more refined, and easier for the layman to handle, bikes like this could help shake the stigma surrounding pedal-assist and increase its appeal to more people than ever.

Of course, models like the Gain, as well as the soon-to-be-released Focus Paralane and Bianchi Aria e-Road bike, are like gasoline on the fire for some roadies, who disapprove of pedal-assist in performance machines. There are fears that such bikes will lead to a rise in motorized doping, though I suspect at least part of the objection also has to do with egos and the fear of getting beat.

I think those objections are misguided. As long as people aren’t trying to cheat in competition, cyclists should be able to benefit from the technology if they want to, no matter whether they ride road or trails. And even for dedicated cyclists, e-bikes have tangible benefits. In Ketchum, I covered a ten-mile loop with 1,700 feet of elevation in a little over half the time it took me previously on an unassisted bike. I still pedaled hard the whole way, maxed my heart rate, and was pretty wiped at the finish. The promise of quicker workouts—or better ones because the e-assist lets you get to more choice terrain quicker—is one that many won’t ignore. For me that day, the faster ride simply meant I could squeeze in another lap and really cement the burn in my legs.

I’m not arguing there aren’t potential downsides to the growth of e-biking in the U.S. At the conference, as I watched once devout e-bike naysayers get excited about the new pedal-assist whips, I realized that because e-bikes are becoming so much fun to ride, the day could soon arrive when they completely supplant pedal bikes, much the way digital cameras have made film virtually obsolete. The sheer ease and pleasure of pedal-assist bikes make them hard to resist, and despite a recent study showing that you can get just as fit on an e-bike as on a non-electric, I’d hate to see our society’s addiction to convenience turn people away from the physical rewards of human-powered pedaling.

For the moment, there’s still plenty to sort through: categorizing the bikes to define where they can be ridden; how the categories hold up as technologies change; rule enforcement, including what to do if riders take e-bikes on non-motorized trails; and response from other user groups, such as motorcyclists. “To me, we have a piece of technology that can get more people out there and enjoying our public lands, and that’s good,” says John Kurtz, the outdoor recreation planner for the BLM in the Ketchum area. “But there are a lot of considerations.”

Those issues will eventually be resolved, and, like it or not, e-bikes will be part of the market moving forward. We can’t make them go away any more than we can turn our backs on electric cars or digital cameras. And we should be glad about that, especially with new concepts such as the Gain, which have the potential to maximize the technology while still easing the transition and conflicts over adoption. Pedal-assist technology will get more of the population out on bikes—road, gravel, mountain, commuter or otherwise—and that means healthier people, fewer cars on the road, and a bigger constituency to fight for our rights as cyclists. Who cares if some of those people ride on e-bikes and others don’t?