Oct 25, 2011 at 12:18 pm #1281105
I am comparing a few bags and have some questions on length as it seems there are some differences. Anyone who has shopped recently and compared lengths, I would appreciate hearing of their experience.
I am 6 ft 1/2 in, 195 lbs.
I fit great in a Mountain Hardwear Phantom reg. – as the length of the bag is 78 inches. But it says it fits up to 6'. Most regular bags say they fit up to 6', but don't list complete finished length. Are most regular bags 72", or a few inches longer? I would have to move up to a long version in a Western Mountaineering, it seems.
I am also looking at a Marmot and Feathered Friends. I am going to try to find a dealer for each for my next step.Oct 25, 2011 at 12:44 pm #1794882
I just finished agonizing over a new sleeping bag for winter and ended up with Western Mountaineering Alpinlite 20 Long. I am 6 feet 2 inches and weigh 200 lbs. This bag is 6 feet 6 inches and has plenty of room for me. I wanted it that way because I want to be able to wear my base and down insulating layers while sleeping when it gets really cold (like White Mountain cold). I like having a little extra room at the bottom of the bag for my boots and other things I don't want to freeze.
I should add that I've paired the bag with a Mammut Pump Light sleeping mat and Western Mountaineering Flash pants and jacket. The mat is only 6 feet long, but it seems a reasonable compromise.
I'm going to give the bag a try in southern New Hampshire this weekend. It probably won't be cold enough for the down, but we'll see…
Good luck with your search!Oct 25, 2011 at 1:24 pm #1794894
I've never found a bag that would fit when I was the exact same lenght (supposedly) as the bag. Get a long, use the extra space to have warm clothes in the morning. Or unfrozen boots.Oct 25, 2011 at 1:49 pm #1794902
I am also 6' 1/2" and weigh 170. Currently I have 2 western mountaineering bags and they are both long. I have tried a regular length and it would work in a pinch, but my feet would touch the bottom. There was no extra room in the length. I have also had a marmot bag and experienced the same thing.Oct 25, 2011 at 1:54 pm #1794907
@rustybLocale: Rocky Mountains
Same experience here. If you buy a WM bag, you need a long at 6'.Oct 25, 2011 at 3:06 pm #1794944
@green1Locale: Alberta, Canada
I'm 6'2" 180 lbs, I have a Western Mountaineering long, my previous bag was a Cascade Designs regular.
My old bag I could sleep in, but my feet were always pressed up against the bottom, and often cold as a result, my new bag is perfect, I can stretch out and still have room.
At 6'2" I've pretty much given up on anything but long/tall sizes for basically everything. If it isn't designed for tall I know it'll never be quite right.Oct 26, 2011 at 3:56 am #1795122
@lushyLocale: Lake Mungo, Mutawintji NPs
I am the same height as you. I strongly recommend that you go for the long version. If you choose a WM bag that means the 6'6" model.
Yes there is a modest weight penalty, but it is so much more comfortable being able to stretch out completely than having your feet constantly squashed up against the bottom of the bag.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.