May 26, 2005 at 8:28 am #1216190
@nathanmLocale: Bay Area
(moved from the g-spot quilt forum)
Folks who have made their own quilts: what material (other than insulation) did you use? I’m looking at sewing a primaloft quilt as the cheapest way to cut a pound from my pack. Looking around, I see some DIYers just use 1.1 oz uncoated ripstop, but I don’t see as much of that in commercial bags. Maybe other options should include also “micro filament” taffeta http://www.owfinc.com/Fabrics/NylonWoven/taffeta.asp, or others?May 26, 2005 at 10:45 am #1337633
thru-hiker is a nice source for DIY materials including PL, PG-3D and 0.8, 1.1 & 1.9 oz nylon with DWROct 4, 2005 at 3:17 pm #1342392
I made a quilt with 1″ polarguard. The lining was 0.8oz DWR ripstop and the outside was 1.1 teflon DWR. All from Thu-Hiker. The 1.1 is very water resistant. My thought was if it was synthetic and very DWR I could get a way with a very small tarp for mid summer weekend trips.Oct 4, 2005 at 5:24 pm #1342396
I too am making a 3D quilt. I’m just going off ray’s designs in his book. I’m using 1.5″ – 2″ polarguard and a full shell of olive green 0.8oz. One side has a Super WR coating on it the other the DWR. I believe my quilt will come out weighing around 18oz. However I am still on the lookout for even lighter fabrics such as silk and the like. I havn’t found a source for them yet. I would suggest using 3D over Prima, I cant remember where I read it but it mentioned that the loft retention isn’t as great with prima compared to 3D.Oct 4, 2005 at 6:45 pm #1342400
i have a pretty good idea about the answer i`ll get on this, but i gotta ask anyway. i wonder how far the 100% poly quilters insulation sheets from walmart fall behind the more specialized insulations mentioned here. thanks…slowhikeOct 5, 2005 at 12:50 pm #1342438
@bugbombLocale: South Texas
I, too, would be very eager to hear some thoughts on this subject. I’m a big fan of super-cheap gear – it’s fun to see what can be made out of nothing!Oct 9, 2005 at 8:32 pm #1342633
Cheapo continuous filiament polyester (the kind you see in integral bats or rolls) is a lot like the first generation Polarguard (from 30 years ago), continuous filiaments of polyester bonded into a mat with resin. It is much stiffer (less compressible) and much heavier than modern Polarguard products. I realize these are relative statements; I cannot give you quantitative values. The best thing to do to satisfy yourself as to the difference is to order a small amount of 3D and/or the very good no-name continuous polyester sold by Outdoor Wilderness Fabrics and compare them to the Walmart or JoAnne’s insulation.
One thing that will not be obvious in a side by side comparison is what happens when you quilt the good stuff: It poofs over the quilting threads to virtually eliminate cold spots. (This is not true of Thinsulate, by the way.)
Unfortunately, the good stuff is expensive, even from OWF. However, I wouldn’t even think of using Walmart’s or JoAnne’s after having experimented with it.Oct 9, 2005 at 11:06 pm #1342641
check out Fanatic Fringe. click on their “Sleep Gear” link.
they list weights (can’t compare precisely since one quilt has a higher temp rating) for their three quilts. this can give you some idea of weight at least. compressibility is another matter. i’ve read that too compressible is NOT good. i think Ray J (i could be wrong here; i tried to find where i read it, but was unsuccessful – hence no link to it), prefers 3D over Delta – even though Delta is lighter. wherever i read it, some months ago, the point was that the info came from a Polarguard salesman (in a letter – to Ray J???). the letter indicated that “percentage return to full loft” (quotes mine) after compressing was less with Delta than with 3D. hence, even though it’s lighter, after compressing it takes longer to return to full loft and in the long run looses some loft a bit quicker than 3D. hope this info helps.Oct 10, 2005 at 12:35 am #1342645
@oiboyroiLocale: South West US
Hey Paul, I found the article you are referring to on Ray Jardine’s website.
-Roy-Oct 10, 2005 at 1:13 am #1342647
many thanks. i appreciate you taking the time and effort to try to find it. thanks for the link. take care, pjOct 10, 2005 at 2:17 am #1342650
@bfornshellLocale: Southern Texas
From what I have read Delta is warmer when wet than 3D. Ray’s spin convently doesn’t talk about that aspect of the two different products. I buy Delta products because they will keep me warmer if /or when I get them wet.Oct 10, 2005 at 2:49 am #1342651
Marmot says this of Polarguard 3D: “Smaller denier fibers create smaller air pockets and greater thermal efficiency.”
Then they say this about Delta: “The slightly larger fiber also creates more loft.” I think fans of Primaloft would also say that its thermal efficiency offsets its lower loft per oz.
Polarguard says that 3D “has a finer denier that makes it softer, more compressible and drapeable.” I think drapeability could be an advangage in a quilt or sleeping bag (but they don’t quantify it so who knows how big a difference there is).
Also, I haven’t been able to find exactly how much bigger the delta fibers are than the 3D fibers, but the pictures on the Polarguard site make them look way bigger.
The lack of independent comparison and the inability to make an apples to apples comparison at a sleeping bag dealer really gave me a headache while I was recently shopping for a sleeping bag. All I could really compare at my local dealers was Delta vs. down. I think BPL could really provide a service to its members by performing a controlled experiment comparing these insulations.Oct 10, 2005 at 2:55 am #1342652
thanks for weighing in here. what you read on the subject, did it mention why? what i’m thinking (if i understood the Link Roy provided us) is that if the primary difference is “Delta has a 37% hollow void and 3D has a 20% void”.
then do we have two different physical phenomenon at work here? what i mean is, obviously the water can’t penetrate the “hollow void” [sidebar question: this means the fibers are “hollow”, right? if not then my whole train of thought is barking up the wrong tree, and i can’t see why Delta would be warmer when wet than 3D.], but the Delta insulation being more compressible, as water penetrates the fabric and flows through the insulation, does it adhere (as in adhesion) to the 3D & Delta fibers? if so, Delta being more compressible, might this not mitigate somewhat against the benefit of the additional hollow void volume (assuming 3D retains more inter-fiber air spaces since it’s less compressible)? i guess if both were thoroughly saturated, then the only air left is inside of the fibers – in this case, Delta would seem to be warmer.
am i making any sense here? do i even understand the nature of the problem? can you shed any light on my confusion?Oct 10, 2005 at 3:04 am #1342653
dbl-post. hit the F5 ‘Refresh’ key.
some people never learn!!! “johnson, you idiot!”Oct 10, 2005 at 3:28 am #1342654
the info from marmot seems to point towards 3D as being superior for insulating – at least when dry. reading just the quote from marmot, isn’t it reasonable to conclude that of the total percentage of trapped air, a greater pct. is inter-fiber as compared to intra-fiber (“hollow void”)?
good idea. 2nd the motion on BPL testing of 3D and Delta. isn’t BPL using Delta in its Cocoons and perhaps in upcoming(?) quilts/bags?
went to the “marmot” link after posting the above info. seems to me that the marmot site is not specifically comparing 3D to Delta in its respective statments of the qualities and characteristics of each fiber. hence the first paragraph of this original, unedited post should be ignored. still 2nd the motion on BPL testing of 3D and Delta.Nov 29, 2005 at 5:44 pm #1346176
that would be great, to see BPL.com test some of the most poupular synthetics. i also think it would be good if they included at least one of the less expensive insulations for those who are on a tight budget. just how far behind do they fall? i used fairfield brand poly-fill, extra-loft batting from walmart w/ what seemed to be very good results. the king/queen size (110″x110″) weighs 2 lbs & 7 ozs. of course i didn`t use all of that, but i used a double layer of it to insulate a new (& successfull!) experiment, an insulated winter hammock. the above mentioned insulation seemed to be the most dense & lofty of all they had to offer at walmart. i think it was about $12.00 …slowhikeNov 30, 2005 at 2:53 pm #1346228
How did your insulated hammock work out. I am still trying to figure out how to pleat the underblanket to keep it from compressing when the main hammock stretches under load. I’ve redone it a couple of times, and I’m not quite satisfied with it. Any ideas?Nov 30, 2005 at 6:30 pm #1346252
vick… to see a more complete description, go to <email@example.com> & search for winter hammock. but basicly what i did was start by “loading” the hammock, that is, to lay pads (including 1/2 pads cross-ways) then adding pillows, blankets, even a footstool, to strech it & simulate a person laying in it. then i closepinned a length of synthtic insulation (a little longer than the hammock) on each side, so they hung down toward the floor. then i brought them together in the center (bottom) & sewed them down the center from end to end. it looked a little like a canoe. then i added a very light weight shell w/ DWR finish. i`m working on details to fine tune & make the next one a little easyer to make. the rather crude prototype (w/ walmart insulation) weighs less than 3 lbs & kept me toasty warm at 22f w/ an expead DAM 7 & ray way (alpine upgrade) quilt w/ degrees to spare. no concerns about air gaps like w/ an under quilt & one less layer of fabric. …slowhikeDec 1, 2005 at 9:25 pm #1346337
@mikeyLocale: new england
hey guys, just curious about thru-hiker.com’s 1.1 oz teflon dwr, anyone have any comments on how effective at repelling water this is? how long does it take before it wets out from dripping? any comments on the teflons dwr duarability? think it would make a decent bivy top?
thanks for anything ;)
mike!Dec 2, 2005 at 6:21 am #1346347
I don’t have any techspecs on the thru-hiker teflon dwr, but I made a top quilt with it – on the outside. Spills, dew, and light drips bead and run off. Holding the bag against a cold surface results in some wetting – mostly from internal condensation, I think.
For a bivy top, it probably depends on your anticipated use. Remember that you can get mist-through even with silpreg. So the teflon dwr may not give adequate protection when exposed to direct rainfall. If your goal is protection from incidental drips, no problem.Feb 28, 2006 at 11:21 pm #1351591
@nathanmLocale: Bay Area
didn’t get around to making the quilt last year, but i’m thinking i’ll have time in a few weeks.
thru-hiker currently sells primaloft in 1.2″ thickness. i’m thinking of using a single layer of that for a quick-n-easy summer quilt, realistically to be used in the California coastal range (when I can bicycle to the trailhead on a long weekend).
using the ‘ray-way’ calculation, that should be good only to (100 – 40*1.2) 52 degrees. temperature being subjective, etc., would i freeze using that + hat + mid-weight capilene for a sleep system?Mar 2, 2006 at 7:05 am #1351683
Hope this helps:
Comfort Rating in Degrees Fahrenheit vs. Respective Loft Height in inches
From: Western Mountaineering
(Sleeping Bag Loft divided by two)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.