Why Eric Larsen Is Skiing to the South Pole Alone

>

Draw a line across a blank sheet of paper and you’ll have a map of Eric Larsen’s route to the South Pole. On November 23, the 47-year-old from Crested Butte, Colorado, set out from the Hercules Inlet on the edge of the continent and began to ski more or less in the same direction, solo, unsupported (no outside resupplies), and unassisted (no aid from sled dogs or a kite), for 700 miles. “It’s really just a conveyer belt of white,” he told Outside before leaving. “It can be a pretty big mind-fuck.”

Larsen would know. He has been to the South Pole so many times he couldn’t remember if it had been four or five when we spoke on the phone (we checked; he’s successfully reached the South Pole four times). To most people, reaching 90 degrees south would seem like a once-in-a-lifetime deal, with the severe cold (down to minus 30 degrees Fahrenheit in the austral summer), sensory deprivation, and suffering it requires. So why is he going back yet again? 

On a personal level, his expeditions are about being creative and unique, he says—a way to push our boundaries of knowledge.That was easy to define in the Age of Exploration, but when few firsts ascents or blanks on the map remain, how can a polar explorer still discover the unknown? “We can try to find the few corners remaining where no one has been,” he says, “or we look at traditional adventures and find new ways to make them more compelling and, quite honestly, just more difficult.”

In other words, style is everything. Take the example of rock climbing. In 1958 when Warren Harding, George Whitmore, and Wayne Merry made the first ascent of El Capitan in Yosemite after a 12-day push, it was a ground-breaking achievement. No one had done it before. But as climbing progressed, getting to the top by any means necessary—such as using aid for upward progress, fixed ropes, or siege tactics—was no longer a challenge or admired. Enter the free climbing revolution, in-a-day ascents, speed climbing, onsight attempts (sending on the first go with no prior knowledge of the route), and solo climbing, culminating, for now, with Tommy Caldwell and Kevin Jorgeson’s first ascent of the Dawn Wall and Alex Honnold’s epic free solo of Freerider. Once most logical routes on El Cap had been climbed, the way to push the sport further was to repeat the same in better style.

Polar exploration is no different. In December 1911, a Norwegian team led by Roald Amundsen became the first expedition to reach the geographic South Pole. Since then, only around 300 people have skied from the coast all the way to the South Pole, by various routes. Larsen has done it twice already, once on the Messner Route and once on the Hercules Route (he’s also guided two "Last Degree" trips where he skied or fat biked from 89th to 90th parallel), but never alone or for speed. In 2011 the Norwegian Christian Eide took polar exploration to the next level when he set the solo, unsupported, and unassisted speed record on the Hercules Route at 24 days, 1 hour, and 13 minutes. Before Eide, simply getting to the South Pole under human power was the challenge, and typically required 50 to 60 days.

Concurrently this season, Colin O’Brady, a 33-year-old American, and Louis Rudd, a 49-year-old Brit, are separately attempting to complete the first solo, unsupported, and unassisted crossing of Antarctica—a 921-mile journey from the Hercules Inlet of the Ronne Ice Shelf to the South Pole (a similar route to Larsen’s) and then on to the Ross Ice Shelf on the other side of the continent.

“Unfortunately for adventure travel, we don’t have a rating system like climbing has, so putting on these other parameters is part of that leading edge,” Larsen says. He hopes to break Eide’s speed record on the Hercules Route, with a goal of 22 days, and will also travel solo, unsupported, and unassisted. But “the margins are pretty slim,” he says, “and you can go from status quo to total shitshow in a matter of seconds.” Any small problem, like a blister on the foot or a sore knee, can have a huge impact, especially when it comes to speed.

Larsen calls polar travel “death by 1,000 cuts.” With modern satellite phones and rescue a call away, his life is never in imminent danger—in fact, he dislikes hyperbolic statements like “death defying”—but every day, he’s losing a bit more energy than he can gain back. He compares it to a game of chess and says, “You’re trying to make your initial moves carefully so that when the expedition is the hardest near the end you have enough resources both physically and mentally to be able to push through.”

The key to success, as he sees it, has less to do with speed and strength than a strict schedule, efficiency, and the ability to slide one foot in front of the other over and over again for 14 to 16 hours per day. Larsen plans to ski in hour-long intervals with quick breaks in between to rest or force down some calories. When the day’s over—although the sun never sets during the Antarctic summer—he’ll pitch camp, melt snow, eat dinner, and go to sleep as quickly as possible. Then he’ll wake up to do it all over again. “It’s total Groundhog Day,” he says. “I’m doing one thing for three and a half weeks straight, nothing else, with no other stimuli.”

On the surface, it might look like he’s just determined to break a speed record, but Larsen’s motive goes much deeper than that. “For these big solo missions, you’re not necessarily pushing the limits of a place, you’re pushing the limits of yourself in that place,” he says. “To me, that’s the leading edge of adventure. That’s why I do it.”

So far, the South Pole is playing hard to get. Since leaving the Hercules Inlet, daily whiteout conditions, soft snow, and sastrugi (elongated snow drifts) have slowed Larsen’s progress and have made navigation a literal pain in the neck, since he must constantly look down to check his compass. “Normally, I don’t complain about the weather—especially in Antarctica. You get what you get,” he posted to his blog on day five, November 29. “But now, so much of my speed is directly connected to the weather and Antarctica isn’t giving me any breaks. Five and a half of the last six days have been whiteouts.”

But on December 5, the clouds began to lift somewhat. “For the first time in the last ten days I was able to ski at a normal pace,” he wrote. “Good night from Antarctica pleas [sic] sit in a chair for me!” 

The 2019 Ford F-150 Raptor Is the Best Version Yet

>

Ford did not need to make the Raptor any better. Since the launch of the first-generation truck way back in 2009, it has competed in a class of one—the only high-performance off-road pickup. So it’s a testament to the special place this special vehicle occupies in Ford’s imagination that the company decided to add two key driver-aid technologies to it for 2019. 

The first is something Ford has dubbed Live Valve Technology, which adds continuously adaptive adjustment to the compression-damping valve in the truck’s shocks. Basically, the Raptor’s computers monitor parameters like throttle, brake, and steering inputs, as well as the truck’s degree of yaw, relative wheel speeds, and suspension position, adjusting the rate at which the suspension compresses accordingly. This is designed to increase both on-road handling and off-road control and comfort. 

The second technology is Trail Control, which Ford is billing as “cruise control for low-speed, rugged terrain.” It can be set in half-mile-per-hour increments of up to 20 miles per hour and frees the driver to focus only on steering by totally taking over braking and acceleration through challenging off-road obstacles. If you’ve ever used electronic hill-descent control, it works kind of like that, only now it’ll take you uphill, too. 

Other changes to the truck are minimal. There’s more prominent Ford lettering on the tailgate, a much tackier optional sticker package, and the addition of optional front seats designed by Recaro (a high-end orthopedic seat maker), which are pretty comfy. Fitted with the same 450-horsepower, 510-pound-foot, twin-turbocharged V6 and the same incredible 10-speed automatic transmission, as well as the widened track, unique body, and expensive Fox 3.0 internal bypass shocks, this very much remains the same second-generation Raptor that I hammered through the desert in with Robert Young Pelton a couple of years back. Just now it’s a little easier to drive. 

Taking over control of the shocks’ rate of compression enables Ford to do some neat things. Through on-road corners, the Raptor’s outside shocks now stiffen, helping it more strongly resist a body roll. In the air, the shocks can detect that you’re jumping. This prompts them to dial up compression damping to max, preventing them from bottoming out during hard landings. These adjustments are taking place constantly and subtly as you drive and also respond to much more mundane conditions like simple bumps. You won’t notice that the adjustments are taking place, but you’ll likely note that you may be cornering a little bit flatter than before or that a section of pesky washboard feels a little bit smoother. 

Live Valve also adds another parameter that the Raptor’s Terrain Management System can control. With the TMS, drivers are able to tell the truck the kind of driving they’re doing, and it then takes control of the four-wheel-drive system, locking rear differential, throttle response, transmission shift programming, and the traction and stability-control systems to suit. All that helps give the truck an impressively diverse array of capabilities and makes controlling the wide array of systems incredibly simple for the driver. The Raptor remains as impressively luxurious on the highway as it does phenomenally fast off-road. 

That the truck is so good everywhere is also possibly its biggest flaw. Car journalists attending the launch event in Utah complained that they couldn’t feel a difference in the revised truck’s suspension, but I also watched those same journalists repeatedly stick the landings on their first-ever vehicle jumps without effort or drama. And they were able to complete a full day of driving through technical off-road terrain without feeling jostled, uncomfortable, or wary. 

The unflappable confidence that the Raptor grants even inexperienced off-roaders combines problematically with its immense turn of speed. Off-road, conditions change rapidly and are the product of nature’s chaos rather than the intentional safety of a road or track. Learning to identify the types of obstacles a vehicle can handle, and the correct way to address all of them, will only ever be the product of considerable experience, but compared to other vehicles, the Raptor asks its drivers to identify and address those obstacles at 100 mph rather than ten, with predictably severe results. Ford includes the cost of its high-performance off-road driving school in Utah with the purchase of all new Raptors—and buyers should consider attendance to be mandatory. 

That dilemma also leads us to Trail Control. Jumps and slides and whatnot look good in photos, but off-road driving is primarily an exercise in managing traction. To climb over a large rock, for instance, you need to accelerate over it from a dead stop with enough force to drive your wheels up and over the rock but with enough control that you don’t just spin those wheels. Four-wheel drive and locking diffs help there, but managing traction in truly challenging circumstances can still be a case for using the brake and throttle pedals simultaneously, all while trying to see stuff that’s going on where your vision is blocked by the vehicle, and steering accordingly. If that sounds like rubbing your tummy while patting your head—and wearing a blindfold—you’re not wrong. And that’s what Trail Control helps handle. You simply dial in a safe speed, then you’re free to focus on steering while throttling and braking are handled for you. Trail Control will maintain that speed up or downhill (or even on level terrain), and it’s able to find more traction than you ever could, by individually applying the brakes across all four wheels to limit wheelspin. 

In action, Trail Control can feel alien. As with all autonomous driver aids, decision-making is handled by an entity other than yourself, and can leave you feeling a bit like a back-seat driver, second-guessing someone else’s choices. In particular I found the Trail Control’s stop-start approach to be divergent from my own preference of simply throttling over whatever’s in the way, but I can’t argue that the vehicle’s choices are safer than my own and probably also more effective. This feature will likely be much more useful for people tackling difficult trails for the first time, and it should provide a measurable increase in both safety and ability in those conditions. It can also take the guesswork out of getting unstuck, which should be another major confidence booster for people venturing way out there for the first time. 

Together, Live Valve and Trail Control probably don’t add any extra speed to the super truck—and that speed sells the Raptor. But by offering drivers a solid dose of control and confidence, Ford has actually done a really good job at making the Raptor a friendlier vehicle that will be more accessible to a wider range of drivers. 

What You Need to Protect Your Winter Gear

>

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.

Keep your winter arsenal safe at home and on the road.

Skis propped against a garage wall take up space and inevitably clatter to the ground. Keep yours organized with this simple-but-pretty red oak rack, which bolts to the wall and holds up to eight pairs of skis (or four snowboards) on horizontal arms.

Buy Now


Get your whip to the trail with this hitch-mount rack. It fits rubber up to 4.8 inches wide and flips down with the push of a foot pedal for easy loading. We love the integrated bike stand that pops out of the rack.

Rack Kit


This slim rack fits up to four pairs of skis or two snowboards laid bottom to bottom, is compatible with almost every roof bar out there, and features large release buttons that allow you to open and close it easily, even with gloved hands.

Buy Now


Here’s one for the family that skis together. Load the Force XT with four pairs of planks and you’ll still have enough room inside for four of Thule’s 60-liter GoPack duffel bags ($200 for a set of four). Nifty attachment claws click to tell you when they’re sufficiently tight on your roof bars.

Buy Now


In addition to room for two pairs of skis, this padded roller bag has two removable interior pouches—one lined with a polyethylene tarp material for wet boots and the other made of mesh for stinky clothes. The Boundary’s end handle straps onto all of Dakine’s roller suitcases for easy transport.

Buy Now


The all-aluminum Explorer comes with built-in rails for mounting roof racks, can handle 300 pounds of equipment, and will take a beating without showing signs of wear. Hinged doors on the back and sides mean you can access gear from any angle.

Buy Now

How to Watch the FIS Alpine Skiing World Cup Online

>

This year’s FIS World Cup season has already been full of surprises: Lindsey Vonn announced in a video that she will delay her retirement after an injury forced her to miss her favorite stop, Canada’s Lake Louise. The postponement buys her extra time to break Ingemar Stenmark’s record of 86 World Cup wins. Meanwhile, 23-year-old phenom Mikaela Shiffrin recently moved up to fourth on the all-time-wins list. She also became the first skier to win races in all six World Cup disciplines, after notching her first-ever victory in the super-G. Shiffrin is the favorite to win the overall title—which would be her third in a row—and is aiming to earn her fourth-straight slalom title. 

The race is much tighter on the men’s side, with Austria’s Max Franz and Vincent Kriechmayr and Switzerland’s Mauro Caviezel all vying for the top spot. Franz took home surprising back-to-back wins at Lake Louise and Beaver Creek, while the seven-time World Cup overall champ, Austria’s Marcel Hirscher, who has been called the best skier in the world, has had a bit of a slow start. But there’s plenty of life left in this season, with the World Championships in February and near-weekly races until mid-March.

Here’s how to tune into the action.

Most events will be streamed live on NBCsports.com, the NBC Sports app, and the Olympic Channel’s website and app, with all Olympic Channel events also available on NBC Sports platforms. Certain special competitions, like the night slalom in Semmering, Austria, will air exclusively on NBC Sports Gold’s Snow Pass, a stand-alone streaming service that offers live and on-demand coverage of all World Cup events without a cable subscription. To watch events on NBC Sports and the Olympic Channel platforms, you’ll need to log in using your cable provider.

You can watch the events online at the same time they air on television, or tune in later for full event replays on the NBC Sports website. Below is a full schedule of live events (all Eastern Standard Time).

Friday, December 14

6 A.M. Men’s Super-G (NBC, Olympic)

Saturday, December 15

6 A.M. Men’s Downhill (NBC, Olympic)

*On December 3, FIS announced that the scheduled women’s events for December 14–15 would be canceled due to poor snow conditions in Val d’Isère, France. Check out its website for updated information on a replacement event. 

Sunday, December 16

5 A.M. Women’s Super-G (NBC, Olympic)
7 A.M. Men’s Giant Slalom (NBC, Olympic)

Monday, December 17

12 P.M. Men’s Parallel Grand Slalom (NBC, Olympic)

Friday, December 21

7:30 A.M. Women’s Giant Slalom (NBC, Olympic)

Saturday, December 22

7:30 A.M. Women’s Slalom (NBC, Olympic)
11 A.M. Men’s Slalom (NBC, Olympic)

Friday, December 28

4:30 A.M. Women’s Giant Slalom (Snow Pass)
5:30 A.M. Men’s Downhill (NBC, Olympic)

Saturday, December 29

4:30 A.M. Women’s Slalom (Snow Pass)
5:30 A.M. Men’s Super-G (NBC, Olympic)

Saturday, January 5

10 A.M. Women’s Slalom (NBC, Olympic)

Sunday, January 6

9:30 A.M. Men’s Slalom (NBC, Olympic)

12 P.M. Women’s Slalom (Snow Pass)

Saturday, January 12

5:45 A.M. Women’s Downhill (Snow Pass)
7:30 A.M. Men’s Giant Slalom (NBC, Olympic)

Sunday, January 13

5:30 A.M. Women’s Super-G (Snow Pass)
7:30 A.M. Men’s Slalom (NBC, Olympic)

7 A.M. Women’s Giant Slalom (NBC, Olympic)

Thursday, January 18

8 A.M. Men’s Combined (NBC, Olympic)

Friday, January 19

4:30 A.M. Women’s Downhill (NBC, Olympic)
6:30 A.M. Men’s Downhill (NBC, Olympic)

Saturday, January 20

5 A.M. Women’s Super-G (NBC, Olympic)
7 A.M. Men’s Slalom (NBC, Olympic)

ü

Friday, January 25

5:30 A.M. Men’s Super-G (Snow Pass)

Saturday, January 26

4 A.M. Women’s Downhill (NBC, Olympic)
5:30 A.M. Men’s Downhill (Snow Pass)

Sunday, January 27

4:30 A.M. Men’s Slalom (Snow Pass)
5:30 A.M. Women’s Super-G (NBC, Olympic)

ü

Monday, January 28

4 P.M. Men’s Downhill (NBC)

Tuesday January 29

11:45 A.M. Men’s Slalom (Snow Pass)

Friday, February 1

7 A.M. Women’s Giant Slalom (NBC, Olympic)

Saturday, February 2

5:30 A.M. Men’s Downhill (NBC, Olympic)
7 A.M. Women’s Slalom (NBC, Olympic)

Sunday February 3

7:30 A.M. Men’s Giant Slalom (NBC, Olympic)

Å

Tuesday, February 5

6:30 A.M. Women’s Super-G (NBC)

Wednesday, February 6

6:30 A.M. Men’s Super-G (NBC)

Thursday, February 7

5 A.M. Women’s Combined Downhill (NBC)

Friday, February 8

10 A.M. Women’s Combined Slalom

Saturday, February 9

6:30 A.M. Men’s Downhill (NBC, Olympic)

Sunday, February 10

6:30 A.M. Women’s Downhill (NBC, Olympic)

Monday, February 11

5 A.M. Men’s Combined Downhill (NBC)
8:30 A.M. Men’s Combined Slalom (NBC)

Tuesday, February 12

10 A.M. Team Event (NBC)

Thursday, February 14

8 A.M. Women’s Giant Slalom (NBC, Olympic)
10:30 A.M. Women’s Giant Slalom (NBC)

Friday, February 15

5 A.M. Women’s Slalom (NBC, Olympic)
8 A.M. Men’s Giant Slalom (NBC, Olympic)

Sunday, February 16

5 A.M. Men’s Slalom (NBC, Olympic)
7 A.M. Women’s Slalom (NBC)

Monday, February 17

7 A.M. Men’s Slalom (NBC)
8 A.M. Men’s Slalom (NBC)

Friday, February 22

7 A.M. Men’s Combined (NBC, Olympic)

Saturday, February 23

4:30 A.M. Women’s Downhill (NBC, Olympic)

Monday, February 24

6:30 A.M. Men’s Giant Slalom (NBC, Olympic)
7:30 A.M. Women’s Combined (NBC, Olympic)

Saturday, March 2

2:30 A.M. Women’s Downhill (NBC, Olympic)
4 A.M. Men’s Downhill (NBC, Olympic)

Sunday, March 3

2:30 A.M. Women’s Super-G (NBC, Olympic)
5 A.M. Men’s Super-G (NBC, Olympic)

Friday, March 8

7:30 A.M. Women’s Giant Slalom (NBC, Olympic)

Saturday, March 9

6:30 A.M. Men’s Giant Slalom (NBC, Olympic)
7:30 A.M. Women’s Slalom (NBC, Olympic)

Sunday, March 10

7:30 A.M. Men’s Slalom

Wednesday, March 13

5:30 A.M. Men’s Downhill (NBC, Olympic)
7 A.M. Women’s Downhill (NBC,Olympic)

Thursday, March 14

5:30 A.M. Women’s Super-G (NBC, Olympic)
7 A.M. Men’s Super-G (NBC, Olympic)

Friday, March 15

7 A.M. Team Event (NBC, Olympic)

Saturday, March 16

7 A.M. Men’s Giant Slalom (NBC, Olympic)
8 A.M. Women’s Slalom (NBC, Olympic)

Sunday, March 17

7 A.M. Women’s Super-G (NBC, Olympic)
8 A.M. Men’s Slalom (NBC, Olympic)

Shalane Flanagan Is Too Competitive to Retire

After becoming the first American woman to win the New York Marathon in 40 years, Flanagan is coming back to defend her title

It’s official: Shalane Flanagan will return to New York City this November to defend her marathon title. The announcement came last week via a New York Times article by Lindsay Crouse, in which Flanagan put her affection for the world’s largest marathon in terms that would make Nicholas Sparks go weak in the knees. “When I think about running New York, I get a feeling of ecstasy; my stomach turns,” Flanagan told the Times. “It’s like if you’re dating someone and it goes well and you want more.”

From a fitness perspective, Flanagan’s announcement shouldn’t come as a big surprise. Not only is she the reigning NYC Marathon champion, but, just last month, Flanagan helped pace her Bowerman Track Club teammate Shelby Houlihan to a new American record in the 5,000-meters. Clearly, the 37-year-old matriarch of American distance running has still got it. 

Nevertheless, racing another New York City Marathon isn’t an obvious choice at this stage in her career. As Crouse notes in her article, Flanagan doesn’t have anything left to prove as an athlete, and has a coaching job waiting for her at Nike when she decides to retire. The company also already named an executive parking spot at its headquarters after her. (That’s more than most of us can claim, but when you consider that Michael Johnson got a 400-meter track and statue, Flanagan surely deserves something a little more prestigious than a few square feet of cement.) Furthermore, unless she sets a new course record in November, or pulls off an improbable come-from-behind victory, it will be nearly impossible for Flanagan to top last year’s performance, in which she became the first American woman to win NYC in 40 years. It would have been the perfect swan song, as Flanagan herself has acknowledged. 

“I can think of no better way to end a career and my story, than with a major win,” Flanagan said before last year’s race. 

So why try to do it again?

There might be some financial incentive. While Flanagan took home $125,000 in prize money for winning last year’s NYC marathon ($100,000 for being the first overall finisher and $25,000 for being the first American), it’s near certain that she would have received ample appearance money in addition to the official race purse. Appearance fees are notoriously hush-hush in the elite road-racing world, but it’s possible that the New York Road Runners offered Flanagan more than her winnings from last year just to show up in 2018. Flanagan is probably the most prominent American marathoner at the moment—how many other runners can you name who have appeared in a Super Bowl beer commercial?—and there have been reports in the past of star runners receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars in appearance fees. For example, a 2010 Times article (which mentions how adamantly Mary Wittenberg, the erstwhile NYC Marathon race director, wooed Flanagan to make her marathon debut in New York that year) cites “several agents” who claimed that “a small cadre of superstars” could receive $400,000. 

For a distance runner on the verge of retirement, anything in that neighborhood is a pretty sweet plum. 

Which isn’t to suggest that money is the reason Flanagan will try to defend her title in New York. She is, after all, one of the most competitive athletes that this sport has ever seen. Take your pick: Two-time NCAA cross-country champ. Four-time Olympian. Olympic silver medalist. Former American-record holder in two separate events (5,000 and 10,000-meters). The list goes on.

And yet, two recent races that didn’t quite go her way are perhaps just as exemplary of Flanagan’s limitless drive. She was clearly disappointed with her Boston Marathon showing in April. It’s the race that she’s wanted to win more than any other, but on Patriots Day, frigid, wet weather laid waste to the elite fields and resulted in 19 professional DNFs. But despite entering a state of near delirium, Flanagan never dropped out, and finished a respectable seventh. Conditions-wise, Boston 2018 was the exact opposite of the 2016 Olympic Trials Marathon, which went down as the hottest iteration of the race to date. That day in Los Angeles, Flanagan also struggled, this time with dehydration so severe that during the last few miles of the race she was unable to see straight. Flanagan willed herself to the finish, holding on to the third and final spot on the U.S. Olympic team. She collapsed immediately after crossing the line and was subsequently administered an IV.

Anyone wondering how Flanagan can still be motivated to once again put in the absurd amount of training required for NYC needs only to watch the last few miles of that Trials Marathon. This is an athlete who will never quit—until it's on her terms.

GoLite Is Turning Empty Bottles into Jackets 

>

In May, we wrote about the revival of the famed ultralight backpacking company GoLite. The brand, which Taiwan-based holding company EGI Ltd. bought in 2015, has pivoted to focus on the active-lifestyle market, pursuing category leaders like Outdoor Voices and Lululemon. 

At Winter Outdoor Retailer, we got the first look at GoLite’s new line of products. Most interesting is the ReGreen Windshell ($100), which is made completely from recycled bottles and combines technical innovation with the brand’s sustainability focus. The inspiration behind the jacket happened after GoLite partnered with the Taiwanese recycling plant Tzu Chi. Officials at the plant told GoLite that green bottles (think of those used by Mountain Dew and Sprite) often aren’t recycled; because they’re already green, they can’t be dyed and therefore aren’t of interest to manufacturers who want to color the resulting fabric whatever shade they like. To get around that, GoLite skips the dying process altogether, instead harnessing the bottles’ green coloring, leading to a more eco-friendly, cheaper product. Twenty bottles go into each ReGreen Windshell, which weighs just 1.6 ounces.

We’ll be putting the jacket through its paces before the spring 2019 launch to see if the green hype is real. If anything, we like the color.

Stop Tossing Your Banana Peel on the Trail

>

Pop quiz: You’re biking with a friend, zipping along a semi-rural road, when your buddy pulls a banana from his jersey, peels it with his teeth, and flings the skin into the ditch. What do you say?

a. “Dude! That’s littering.”
b. “Dude! What the fuck?”
c. Nothing, because I don’t want to make waves.
d. Nothing, because I don’t see the problem.

A lot of people, I think, would opt for C or D. Well, I’m here to make a case for A. Or, if you don’t shy from strong language, B. The old hikers’ maxim “Take nothing but pictures, leave nothing but footprints” doesn’t make an exception for food scraps—and it shouldn’t.

“But it’s just a banana peel,” I imagine some of you saying. “It’s organic, it’ll decompose!” That’s a common justification for tossing banana peels, apple cores, and so on out a car window or along a trail. The hypothetical cyclist from our quiz would almost certainly reach for that defense.

It’s true, technically, that apple cores and banana peels are natural. But natural litter is still litter. And this stuff doesn’t disappear nearly as fast as you might think. (Incidentally, I have a friend who swears it’s OK to dispose of his gum by spitting it out on the ground, because—wait for it—“it will decompose.” This friend is wrong. And gross.)

Some folks seem to assume that fruits and vegetables left outside will shrivel, turn black, and disintegrate in a matter of hours, like a time-lapse video from middle school biology. In fact, an apple core can take two months to decompose; a banana skin or orange peel, two years, leaving plenty of time for animals who shouldn’t eat it to come along and eat it. Plus, while nature does its thing, that trash—and let’s not mince words, that’s what it is—is an eyesore. It’s also a visual cue to other passers-by that tossing their own trash isn’t a big deal. In other words: Litter begets litter.

The next time you witness such casual tossage, then, ask the perpetrator: Would you be cool with a stranger flinging a “natural” banana peel into your front yard? No? Why, then, do you think it’s acceptable to chuck one in the woods? Probably he’ll say, “Because the woods are huge and I don’t live there and, well…” OK. He’ll be right.

But, dammit, he’ll also be missing the larger point—forest for the trees, as it were—which is that outdoor spaces constitute a sort of yard that belongs to all of us. Can’t we all agree to do our parts to keep it free of garbage? Even the kind that, eventually, will rot? Are we really so lazy that we can’t hang on to a lousy apple core until we find a trash can or compost bin? Isn’t it just as easy to tuck that banana peel back into the jersey pocket whence it came?

These are the questions I would encourage all of us to keep in mind.

By the way: That hypothetical cyclist? I know where he’s coming from. Back when I was a dedicated roadie, I regularly discarded banana peels along the side of rural roads, using the old “it’ll decompose” excuse. Gradually, I wised up—and my little corner of the world got a little bit cleaner, a little bit more pleasant.

Naturally.

A Tempered Analysis of Rivian's New Electric Trucks

>

Americans love buying trucks. Americans love the idea of electric vehicles. So when a new startup enlisted the aid of Rihanna and stepped into the spotlight Sunday night with a new range of electric trucks, people got really excited.

I think it’s time to cut through all that glitz and glamour and take a look at what’s really going on here. 

Rivian is a new company based in Detroit that was founded by 35-year-old R.J. Scaringe soon after he received his PhD in mechanical engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Reportedly, it’s raised about $500 million, mostly from Saudi conglomerate Abdul Latif Jameel and Japanese mega-corp Sumitomo. Rivian has operated in stealth mode since 2009, with little to no recognition or press until this week. 

That changed as soon as the company unveiled two concept vehicles. The R1T pickup truck and R1S SUV both appear to be based on the same chassis, which integrates the batteries and four electric motors into a modular “skateboard” capable of underpinning different types of bodies. 

Both models are supposed to be available in a range of battery capacities and performance specifications. Rivian says the basic R1T will cost $69,000, and be equipped with a 105 kWh battery that will give it a range of 230 miles. That truck is capable of accelerating from zero to 60 miles per hour in an impressive 4.9 seconds. Versions equipped with 300- and 400-mile ranges will follow and up-spec models could drop that 0-60 time to as low as 3.2 seconds. Rivian has not announced pricing for versions beyond the base model.

The R1S SUV will start at $72,500 for the 230-mile version and boast similar performance numbers. Rivian says it hopes to begin deliveries of both vehicles in “late 2020,” but neither model is yet in production and it’s not clear what changes will be made to these concepts before a final production spec is achieved. Rivian is now accepting $1,000 deposits. 

Both vehicles feature airy, spacious interiors with simple, screen-based dashboards that are very reminiscent of Tesla. The R1T, in particular, is full of clever design details intended to catch the eye of outdoorsy types—whom the company is explicitly marketing to. There's a transverse ski pass-through between the bed and cab, an integrated air compressor in the bed, and, most exciting of all, a front trunk, or “frunk” as Jalopnik has dubbed the storage compartment. Rivian has dubbed the four-motor setup “quad drive,” but offers no details about how it might work. 

Earlier this year, Rivian spent $16 million to purchase a mothballed Mitsubishi factory in Illinois and has negotiated a $50 million package of taxpayer-backed subsidies with that state. Rivian has not detailed who its suppliers will be or what level of manufacture or assembly it will perform in its plant, but Sumitomo supplies materials to Panasonic for the batteries that company makes for Tesla, so it seems logical that Panasonic may also supply those for Rivian. 

The company says it currently employs 600 people across its Detroit HQ, and its R&D facilities in California, Michigan, and the United Kingdom. It does not yet list any employees at the Illinois factory. 

Described soberly like this, does Rivian remind you of another company? Tesla also uses mid-size initial investments to develop really exciting new vehicle concepts, uses those concepts to drum up a lot of publicity, negotiates heavy subsidies, then uses customer deposits to demonstrate demand, wrapping all that up as a pitch for enough additional money to actually start producing a new model. Five-hundred million may sound like an awful lot of money to you and I, but it costs between $1 billion and $6 billion for an established automaker with existing facilities, processes, suppliers, and know-how to bring a new vehicle to market.

Not only is Rivian a startup, but it’s making some very big claims about the performance and innovation of its new trucks. Turning those promises into a reality that you can put in your garage is going to be an enormous challenge. Tesla has been producing cars for 10 years and has yet to totally figure out things like quality control and profitability. "Tesla is very much the exception, and not the rule," says Patrick George, the editor-in-chief of car enthusiast website Jalopnik.com. He points to the recent high-profile failure of electric car startup Faraday Future and suggests that the auto industry is currently very skeptical of new businesses following in its footsteps. 

Well, it depends on what you mean by first. Various concept cars over the years could have been described as both electric and pickups, despite their whacky styling. In 2016, Chevy produced a real, working prototype hydrogen fuel cell Colorado for the military. Hydrogen fuel cells generate electricity, powering electric motors. Another American startup called Workhorse has working prototypes of a battery-electric conversions of existing full-size trucks, targeted at commercial and government fleet use. Bollinger appears to be in a very similar position to Rivian. The big difference between all of the above and the R1T appears to be Rihanna. 

Why haven’t the big automakers made an electric truck yet? Well, pickups are their most profitable vehicles. Not only do they sell in large volume, but they also have huge profit margins. As long as fuel remains cheap, Americans will continue to throw all their disposable income at them, so Ford, GM, Fiat Chrysler et al are invested in protecting those profits. Toyota doesn't import the much-more-capable Hilux into the U.S. because that vehicle would have a much lower margin and eat into sales of the much more profitable Tacoma and Tundra. So why would they spend a couple billion dollars to sell a less profitable electric alternative? 

"Automakers don't want to mess with their bread and butter," says George. He suggests that putting together the range and ruggedness mainstream truck buyers expect is a difficult hurdle for any hypothetical electric truck to overcome. "I hate to sound like a Ford ad," he continues, "But truck buyers expect their trucks to be built tough."

Math is also a problem for a hypothetical future pickup truck. The batteries in the most advanced electric consumer vehicle on the planet—the Tesla Model 3—are revolutionary because they cost just $190 per kilowatt-hour. Assuming Rivian is able to match that price (which is unlikely), the base R1T will have $20,000 in batteries onboard. And that $20,000 in batteries only gets it a 230-mile range. Will American consumers accept a $69,000 truck that can only go 230 miles? That appears to be a gamble Rivian is willing to make, but it’s not one major automakers are taking.

Having said that, it’s an absolute certainty that each has calculated what the necessary battery cost must be in order to create adequate return on investment. And you can safely bet that every one of them will have an electric pickup (in addition to many other vehicles) in showrooms as soon as they’re convinced they can make money selling them. Will that be before or after the first Rivian R1T is delivered? Your guess is as good as mine. 

And it's also almost assured that there will be plenty of other electric SUVs around before the R1S goes on-sale. "2019 will be the year of the electric SUV," says George. He cites the new Jaguar I-Pace as an example and suggests a more off-road oriented version of that vehicle, wearing a Land Rover badge, will soon be available, along with similar vehicles from all the other upmarket European brands. 

Because the layout of electric vehicles isn’t predetermined by the fixed locations of major mechanical components, designers of them are free to optimize the location of the big, heavy parts. One of the reasons Teslas handle so well is because, like the Rivian concepts, they house their batteries under the floor of the cabin, lowering the center of gravity as far as possible. Those volatile batteries need to be protected from crashes, debris, and the elements, so the resulting armor also doubles as both chassis, and skidplate. 

Extend the merits of that skateboard powertrain/chassis to off-roading. Rivian claims the R1T will have up to 14.2 inches of ground clearance. Keeping the center of gravity below the floor will help keep it stable and safe over really challenging obstacles. Like other electric vehicles, those batteries are sealed, so they can go underwater. Rivian therefor is able to claim an impressive 3.2 foot maximum wading depth. 

Powering each wheel through its own electric motor, the Rivians will also forego traditional four-wheel drive. This is actually the most promising thing about them, so hear me out. On an internal combustion engine truck, 4WD locks the speed of the front and rear driveshafts together. Without driveshafts or even axle differentials, a four-motor electric like this one can choose to replicate the function of locking differentials, or even go further, and actively portion power to the wheels with the most traction. This could massively boost such a vehicle’s ability to make the most of low-traction situations, and elevate the performance of such a vehicle to a whole new level.

Will the Rivian be the first vehicle to do that? No mention is made of how the vehicles plan to handle traction off-road. That’s disappointing, because it can and should be the major selling point of any electric vehicle with even the faintest off-road ambitions. It’s much more important than gear storage, wading depth, or even outright performance. It’s concerning that the features Rivian is putting its messaging emphasis behind are reminiscent of the stuff you’ll find on concept cars that never end up seeing the light of day. 

An automaker with considerably more experience with electric motors understands this. Toyota went through the effort of installing such an independent motor torque vectoring system in its new Prius and is able to communicate that fact to buyers. Why isn’t Rivian doing the same? 

I sound like a real Debbie Downer, huh? I hate that I have to, because, like you, I’d really like to drive an electric truck. I’d especially like to drive one that’s made in America, is face-melting fast, can store my skis in a neat tunnel, and which takes full advantage of all the benefits of an electric powertrain to offer unprecedented off-road performance. But Rivian is not currently offering that vehicle: it’s offering images of two concept cars no one has driven and a list of vague promises about their performance and the company’s ability to execute on said promises. 

The wider picture of what’s going on behind this is that battery electric vehicles accounted for just 0.6 percent of U.S. car sales last year, but that number is predicted to grow to 20 percent by 2030. China, with its government-dictated push for electric vehicles, offers an even greater opportunity. There are a couple of major business opportunities as the biggest change the car industry has ever seen occurs. Companies invested in providing batteries and their materials want to push the expansion of EV sales as hard as possible (hence the Sumitomo investment), and when the major automakers are finally forced to stop relying totally on profits generated by gas guzzlers, they’re going to go shopping for intellectual property and expertise around EVs. That’s going to create a seller’s market for startups which generate a lot of both. Helping those startups along is an awful lot of good will from a public hoping for a brighter future and financial handouts from governments trying to bring investment in that future to their states and countries. Oh, and I forgot to mention a booming defense industry that’s worried about unstable oil supplies and that is forced by law to buy American. 

It looks like Rivian has the pieces in place to find success in that environment. It’s just not clear if that success will actually involve putting the R1T or R1S you see here in your driveway. 

Missing American Hiker Found Dead in Mexico

>

More than three weeks after Patrick Braxton-Andrew was last seen alive, his body has been found in northern Mexico. On November 15, Javier Corral, the governor of Chihuahua, reported on his Facebook page that the 34-year-old Braxton-Andrew was killed by a drug dealer named José Noriel Portilo Gil, in the tiny city of Urique, in Chihuahua. Another Facebook page, set up by a family friend to help search for Braxton-Andrew, confirmed the news with a poston the same day: “Based on information provided by the Chihuahua State authorities, it is with great sadness that we announce that Patrick died on October 28 at the hands of a criminal organization that operates in the area where he was traveling.” On November 17, another post on the same pagestated that his body had been recovered and would be brought back to the U.S.

Braxton-Andrew, a Spanish teacher at Woodlawn School in Mooresville, North Carolina, was an avid traveler who sought out hidden places, his father, Gary, told Outside last week. He was drawn to Urique for the opportunity to hike the empty trails of Copper Canyon National Park, a remote wilderness of deep, twisting ravines that draws only the occasional adventurer. Braxton-Andrew was last heard from on October 28, the same day he was reportedly killed, when he mentioned heading out on one last hike to his family. News outlets reported that he never returned, but evidence, such as his camera and most of his belongings left behind in his hotel room, seemed to suggest that he had finished his trek and headed back to Urique before he died.

The region surrounding Urique is one of the most dangerous in Mexico. Mexican news media reports that Portilo Gil, known also as “El Chueco,” or “the crooked one,” is a ranking member of the powerful Sinaloa drug cartel, the group formerly headed by suspected drug lord Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán.

A poston the Facebook page dedicated to Braxton-Andrew’s search said they would work to find justice, and another said that he died doing what he loved—traveling and meeting people. “We will always remember Patrick and his joy for life,” the post read. “We love you PBA.”

Outdoor Enthusiasts: These Are Your Winter Tires

>

When it comes to winter driving, we’ve already established that tires matter more than AWD or 4WD, or lack thereof. And we learned that studs are an outdated technology that is longer relevant for the vast majority of conditions we face here in North America.

But when it comes to tires, which will work best for you this winter? If you drive a 4×4 and go off-road, I think I have the answer: the Cooper Discoverer A/TW is the only tire available that is fitted with both an off-road carcass and a true winter compound. 

After work yesterday, I threw the dogs in the back of my old 4Runner and headed to a popular trailhead that sits seven miles up a rough dirt road. This being November in Montana, that road was covered by about eight inches of fresh snow. I slowed down, engaged four-wheel drive, and proceeded up the path without issue. 

While hiking the dogs, it began snowing. And when I eventually got down off the mountain and back to the paved road, that was covered by about two inches of fresh snow. So I left four-wheel drive engaged and drove the twelve miles back to town. Traffic there was moving a lot slower than usual, which I credited to what little rush hour we get here in Bozeman. It wasn’t until I watched the truck in front of me nearly spin out trying to accelerate slowly away from a stoplight that I realized the roads were covered in sheet ice. On the way home, I watched as other drivers skidded into each other, failed to negotiate a roundabout, and generally created chaos. 

I navigated without incident one tricky downhill descent to a stop sign, which was covered in the tell-tale dashed skid marks anti-lock brakes create, exposing the slick ice under a thin layer of fresh snow. I corrected a brief slow-motion slide as I turned left. Just after I’d straightened up, a flash of lights in my rearview mirror caught my attention, and I saw a full-size pickup skid through the stop sign, then do a 360 in the middle of the intersection.

Pedestrians on the sidewalks were dropping like flies, as they too skidded on the slick ice. 

In these most-challenging of winter conditions, I had to drive slowly and carefully, but I didn’t experience the trouble navigating stops, starts, or corners that I saw nearly every other driver struggle with. And that’s because I was on tires fitted with a rubber compound that remains pliable at low temperatures. They also have a micro-porous construction that wicks away the thin layer of water created by the weight of your tires passing over ice. It's those two factors combined that enable modern studless winter tires to find grip even on bare ice. And this winter, you should be on true winter-compound tires, too—even if you drive a truck. 

Doing that has traditionally been a problem. Most people who use their trucks to support outdoor activities run all-terrain tires like the BF Goodrich K02. While tires like those are fantastic on dirt, rocks, and even on wet roads, their rubber compound isn't optimized for cold conditions. Many drivers fail to understand that, largely due to the confusing three-peak mountain snowflake symbol displayed prominently on the sidewall of many all-terrains. That symbol is awarded by the U.S. Tire Manufacturer’s Association to any tire that demonstrates acceleration on snow that’s 10 percent greater than a reference all-season tire.

You can probably spot the trouble there: A 10-percent improvement isn’t great. Plus, that reference tire is now decades old and wasn’t exactly a good snow tire to begin with. That makes the three-peak mountain snowflake essentially meaningless. 

I ran all this past Woody Rogers, Tire Rack’s head of tire testing. Since he’s doing the testing fo the largest online tire retailer in the country, he has experience driving on virtually everything out there. His job is to deliver objective buying advice to consumers. “Those A/TWs are unique,” he told me, going on to explain that they were developed for drivers in northern Canada, where many need a tire that’s capable both off-road and in winter weather. “There are not a whole lot of drivers in the Lower 48 who have that requirement,” he continued, but I beg to disagree. 

Because all-season tires aren’t able to operate optimally below about 45 degrees, proper protocol is to swap those out for true winter tires in the fall and take them off in the spring or early summer. Not only are you exposed to weeks of snow-free driving on either side of winter (dictating a tire that, if used off-road, can grip rocks and mud, and strongly withstand punctures), but if you want to drive off-road through deep snow, you also need a tire that can be aired down to significantly lower tire pressures than you can use on-road. And, of course, a tire that can deal with the unpredictable conditions that define winter driving. Who’s to say that you won’t encounter bare rocks or unfrozen mud pits just because it’s January? 

To create a tire capable of handling all that, Cooper took the carcass from its popular A/T3 all-terrain and equipped it with true winter compound rubber. It then modified the A/T3’s tread pattern to include deeper, wider voids, more siping (the squigly lines), and a unique jagged edge for the tread blocks, which helps the A/TW better retain loose snow. While a winter tire needs to be exceptionally good at clearing water and slush, the best grip in snow is achieved when a tire’s tread actually fills up and hangs onto snow, providing snow-on-snow grip. 

Of course, moving the needle in the direction of winter performance does come with trade-offs. Rogers tells me that, compared to normal all-terrains, the A/TWs can’t handle as heavy of loads and will wear extremely quickly in hot weather. So, I’ll pull them off next May and replace them with a summer alternative. Until then, no matter what surface I’m driving on—bare highways, rocky trails, deep snow, or as my experience last night demonstrates, bare ice—my tires are able to handle it safely. Can yours? 

Buy Now