Arch's Kits

[Arch]

Thanks for the work and the insight. My only comment is that you for sure have made educated choices driven by experience but as someone who has lived and worked long term in both the old school Military and civilian versions of cold/wet weather gear I can 100% say I prefer the appropriate civilian versions for the weight reduction, packability, function and in many cases hard use wear. I can't tell you how many Military goretex parkas I went thru and f--ked up real good but I can tell you I have been treating a Marmot Alpinist goretex parka poorly for just over a decade now with no complaints.

The cost of the items may or may not figure into the equation as the Mil version may or may not cost more than the civ version depending on your shopping/research skills and interest in running down good functional gear. If camo is a concern, many items come in good subdued colors or (as one example) the Patagonia MARS line of clothing are civilian models manufactured in Military colors.

I am not in anyway dissing (is that a word?) your gear or choices only pointing out to anyone who wanders by and bothers to read your excellent post that there are many (in my mind anyway) superior options to old school Military cold/wet gear and I urge people to investigate the different options, make their own choices (and then go bang on their gear often and repeatedly to make sure it works for them).

RLTW

I completely agree that some of the premium civilian wet/cold weather clothing are reputably superior to anything made by the lowest bidder for the military.

However, I purchased my entire set of Brand New In The Bag USGI ECWCS for $75. I bought two sets for this price, and have been testing one of them for over a year now.

I do not abuse my gear, but the "used" set has been: camping; hiking; shooting; and even to some rainy political rallies without so much as a single droplet of water getting through. There are no visible signs of wear or damage anywhere on them.

My only compliant is the weight. I suspect I could save a few ounces by utilizing a civilian version.

Since I don't abuse my gear, I guess it could be argued that my "testing" isn't a realistic representation of the conditions a person would face in the PAW. However, I'd counter that since replacement gear wouldn't be an internet click away, most people will treat their gear BETTER during such conditions.

The same applies to my BHI SOF Ruck. Is a brand new MultiCam Kifaru EMR superior? Most likely. However, in spite of what you read on the internet - neither the USGI ECWCS nor any of the Blackhawk gear I have listed has lived up their to internet conjecture about them.

My testing has yielded that my gear is up to the challenge.

[Necrodamus]

While there is always something better, there is a point where good is "good enough".
At that point it is advantagious to spend wisely on another piece of gear.
If you have the available cash then by all means do the best you can.
I will be doing my best with what I have. If I cant afford a piece, often I will opt for GI surplus.
There are a lot of gear that fits to a degree of 90-99% that last little bit of spec isnt with the double or so price tag it carries.

Just my 2 cents worth.

[Blackdog]

Thanks for the work and the insight. My only comment is that you for sure have made educated choices driven by experience but as someone who has lived and worked long term in both the old school Military and civilian versions of cold/wet weather gear I can 100% say I prefer the appropriate civilian versions for the weight reduction, packability, function and in many cases hard use wear. I can't tell you how many Military goretex parkas I went thru and f--ked up real good but I can tell you I have been treating a Marmot Alpinist goretex parka poorly for just over a decade now with no complaints.

The cost of the items may or may not figure into the equation as the Mil version may or may not cost more than the civ version depending on your shopping/research skills and interest in running down good functional gear. If camo is a concern, many items come in good subdued colors or (as one example) the Patagonia MARS line of clothing are civilian models manufactured in Military colors.

I am not in anyway dissing (is that a word?) your gear or choices only pointing out to anyone who wanders by and bothers to read your excellent post that there are many (in my mind anyway) superior options to old school Military cold/wet gear and I urge people to investigate the different options, make their own choices (and then go bang on their gear often and repeatedly to make sure it works for them).

RLTW

I completely agree that some of the premium civilian wet/cold weather clothing are reputably superior to anything made by the lowest bidder for the military.

However, I purchased my entire set of Brand New In The Bag USGI ECWCS for $75. I bought two sets for this price, and have been testing one of them for over a year now.

I do not abuse my gear, but the "used" set has been: camping; hiking; shooting; and even to some rainy political rallies without so much as a single droplet of water getting through. There are no visible signs of wear or damage anywhere on them.

My only compliant is the weight. I suspect I could save a few ounces by utilizing a civilian version.

Since I don't abuse my gear, I guess it could be argued that my "testing" isn't a realistic representation of the conditions a person would face in the PAW. However, I'd counter that since replacement gear wouldn't be an internet click away, most people will treat their gear BETTER during such conditions.

The same applies to my BHI SOF Ruck. Is a brand new MultiCam Kifaru EMR superior? Most likely. However, in spite of what you read on the internet - neither the USGI ECWCS nor any of the Blackhawk gear I have listed has lived up their to internet conjecture about them.

My testing has yielded that my gear is up to the challenge.

Don't get me wrong, I totally get the point of getting surplus Mil gear and a lot of it is pretty darned good (and got me thru some pretty tough times), sometimes you can snag a real deal on it and sometimes you have to pay a premium just for the tactical coolness of it. I just see people blindly following along, and it would be easy to blindly follow your excellent list without looking at any other possable solutions or doing any independent thinking.

There is also an underlying belief from a lot of folks that Mil Spec gear is magic in some way and that only Mil Spec gear is tough enough, and that just ain't so. Each and every piece of civilian gear is not tougher than nails, but that tougher than nails civilian gear is out there for sure and sometimes a real live bargain.

Ever since I passed the half century mark, cutting ounces and staying warm and dry has become more important to me as I still like to beat the bush, sleep on the mountains and cover rough miles whenever I am not trapped paying the bills and I am assuming that in a SHTF world those ounces would also count if I had to move far and (sort of) fast on my old spindly legs.

[Arch]

Don't get me wrong, I totally get the point of getting surplus Mil gear and a lot of it is pretty darned good (and got me thru some pretty tough times), sometimes you can snag a real deal on it and sometimes you have to pay a premium just for the tactical coolness of it. I just see people blindly following along, and it would be easy to blindly follow your excellent list without looking at any other possable solutions or doing any independent thinking.

There is also an underlying belief from a lot of folks that Mil Spec gear is magic in some way and that only Mil Spec gear is tough enough, and that just ain't so. Each and every piece of civilian gear is not tougher than nails, but that tougher than nails civilian gear is out there for sure and sometimes a real live bargain.

Ever since I passed the half century mark, cutting ounces and staying warm and dry has become more important to me as I still like to beat the bush, sleep on the mountains and cover rough miles whenever I am not trapped paying the bills and I am assuming that in a SHTF world those ounces would also count if I had to move far and (sort of) fast on my old spindly legs.

I wholeheartedly agree that some mil-spec gear isn't want it once was. The nylon ALICE gear of yester-year will out live all of us. However, I think there are better options than current issue MOLLE equipment. The price difference between USGI MOLLE and some better options is not enormous. Its small enough that the up-charge can be justified.

However, I've found that some USGI gear is still 100% functional and durable....even if its not the lightest; coolest; most internet picture friendly item available.

Seemingly everyone is giving away their USGI Woodland BDU's, because "MultiCam" is the "cool thing to have". I've actually tested Woodland vs MultiCam many times, and even have posts going back to this time last year on ZS. After much testing I determined that while MC is definitely the "most tacticool" product available - for me - good ole USGI Surplus Woodland BDU's work very very well in my AO.

I'm fortunate enough to have both Woodland & MultiCam DESPITE being repeatedly told by the MultiCam cult that it was superior and that I didn't need my "outdated and inferior" Woodland. I even had people blantantly argue that pictures I posted were designed to fault MC...when I was hoping that everyone would jump into that thread and say "man, MC seriously out performed WD". Why did I want everyone to say this? I wanted to be reassured that I hadn't wasted money on an internet hyped product. As it turns out, for 99% of my uses, WD was superior.

I think people rely too heavily on equipment, and not skill in their survival mindset.

Example given - has anyone heard of a USGI soldier dying from hypothermia due to using USGI ECWCS? I haven't either.

I'm not arguing that your gear selection is wrong, or even that its not POTENTIALLY better. I'm saying that I feel that my gear is EQUALLY qualified and less expensive; more readily available; and is camouflage (a big bonus to me).

ETA:

You're restating the purpose of this post when you say people should NOT blindly follow my list. In fact, I only posted the list to illustrate that I don't blindly follow internet hype.

The introduction before the list is the important aspect of this thread. It explains the WHY and HOW of gear selection.

I hope my thread introduction conveyed the idea that people need to let their anticipated mission drive their gear selection while relying more heavily on EXPERIENCE than INTERNET CONJECTURE and a balanced selection criteria (weight vs durability; etc). Maybe I didn't state that clearly enough?

[Mags]

Preach brother preach! Loud and clear if they read it.

[Blackdog]

I apologize if I ruffled your feathers in any way because I really like your set up and explanation. Had a guy quit so been stuck indoors at the office for far to long while waiting on word on how my best friends brain surgery went and I let some rounds never intended for you stray off target.

You said

"I think people rely too heavily on equipment, and not skill in their survival mindset."

I couldn't agree with you more.

[Arch]

I apologize if I ruffled your feathers in any way because I really like your set up and explanation. Had a guy quit so been stuck indoors at the office for far to long while waiting on word on how my best friends brain surgery went and I let some rounds never intended for you stray off target.

You said

"I think people rely too heavily on equipment, and not skill in their survival mindset."

I couldn't agree with you more.

Blackdog,

No worries or ruffled feathers .

I feel that if a person doesn't defend their position with conviction - they're not very secure in that position.

Hope your friend's recovery is expedient.

[sdkidaho]

PREFACE - READ THIS FIRST!

Not that I took that statement to heart, but this is the first post I've read on this forum. Great information, thank you for compiling this (even 2 years ago) and sharing it. Information from those who don't appear to be fanatics is greatly appreciated.

Darby

[joekaveh]

PREFACE - READ THIS FIRST!

Not that I took that statement to heart, but this is the first post I've read on this forum. Great information, thank you for compiling this (even 2 years ago) and sharing it. Information from those who don't appear to be fanatics is greatly appreciated.

Darby

Sadly, I don't think Arch posts on ZS anymore ;/

[MidnightRunner]

massive thread necro...

[Hachiman]

massive thread necro...

Still a good kit post though!!

[shoggoth80]

Arch,
I can find no fault in your train of thought. I personally like the philosophy of KISS. I find this applies to many more things than just gear preps, but it applies extremely well towards it.
I think that multi-use, and weight vs. durability, and calculation of expected should be THE driving force behind preps. A piece of gear that serves 10 purposes, and is unbreakable is great, but means squat if you can't transport it. I know that is exaggeration for the sake of the point, but it is what it is.

Better to have thread necro than a whole new thread right?