Brooks-Range Mojave Down Jacket

[Andrew Manies]

Stephen,

How did you like the Mojave in the end?

Any particular strengths/weaknesses?

Cheers,
Andrew

[Stephen M]

Hi Andrew,

I have not used in anger yet as it did not arrive in time for my last trip.

It is very well constructed and as good as quality as any of the other high end kit I have.

To be honest I am slightly disappointed with the loft as its only half the thickness of my Gooses
Feet Parka which has the same amount of down in it (800vs900 fp though) but the Goooses Feet Parka is like a mutant :-)

I will post some pics in a bit.

[Richard Nisley]

I have one to clo test but won't get to it until I finish a couple of other very big projects (months off).

Based on my initial manual inspection, I will be VERY surprised if the clo value tests anywhere close to what 9oz of 800 fill should.

The loft is anemic compared to other 800 fill parkas with 9 oz. of fill but, low loft can be offset by increased down density. Unfortunately even the down density appears sub-par.

[Stephen M]

I have the same I impressions Richard.

I have taken some photos comparing the loft with other parkas.

The blue Parka has 250g down, the black one has 310g.

[Serge Giachetti]

I bought one & also thought it seemed distictly underfilled. Packs up smaller than my rab infinity even though its cut about a size bigger and suppodly has about 2.5 oz more down. Its a nice jacket, but I don't beli eve the spec. I also like my infinity a better (besides the reg down) so I returned the mojave. Also curiou to see how these different types of hydrophic down fair against eachother (downtek vs encapsil etc)

[Stephen M]

I would definitely class it as 3 season Hoody, it does have zippered pockets and all that so that's what adds the weight.

If it was 80g lighter it would be a great item.

[Stephen M]

I have sent an email to the company it was bought from voicing my concerns about the loft.

Will let you all know the outcome.

[Andrew Manies]

Stephen and Richard,

Thanks for your insights. I too could not reconcile the apparent lack of loft with the reported 9 oz of down. Interestingly (or not), the jacket has received a mostly positive review at OutdoorGearLab.com, with a "warmth" rating higher than the Rab Infinity. Perhaps this is more a result of box baffles rather than increased down content, though.

Cheers,
A

[Stephen M]

Hi Andrew?

Its only box baffled in the body and not in arms and hood.

Not to knock outdoorgearlab but I find there reviews not as "scientific" as Richards or Bpls.

[Richard Nisley]

The construction is all sewn-through except for the front of the torso is box-baffled (1/2 the body area).

[Stephen M]

Thanks Richard.

[Stephen M]

I just had a look and the back of the baffles mush be mesh lined as there is a "loose" fabric panel on both sides of the front.

This photo shows what I mean.

[Tjaard Breeuwer]

Stephen,
Is that perhaps the pocket?

[Stephen M]

Hi Tjarrd,

My apologies I missed your question, its definitely not a pocket.

I was waiting for the weather to warm up a bit to try it out, I was on an overnighter last night
and found it slightly chilly in the back and warms at about 25f due to the stitch through construction
In those areas, putting a wind shirt over it did help a bit. It is definitely a 3 season piece.

Cheers,

[Dustin Short]

So a 9oz fill weight pseudo box-wall jacket is chilly at 25f?! My MB UL Parka with a wind shirt can get me to around freezing, and layering two of those would be the same weight as the Mojave but with only 5oz of down and at least as warm if nor warmer than 25f. Looking at the pictures it also looks even less lofty than my MHW Hooded Phantom with 6ish oz of 800fp down.

I mean many 20F quilts are made with only 11oz of down spread over a much larger surface area instead of just a torso, so what gives?

Has anyone figured out where the discrepancy comes in?

[Jim Sweeney]

Great discussion. I was vaguely interested in this jacket, but no more. The solid fabric panel in the interior seems very suspect. It essentially means that there's a double layer of something there; even if the hidden layer is mesh, it's got to "consume" some of the jacket's available weight. And the fact that the jacket is perceived to be cold at 25 deg., though it has 9 oz of 800 fill down, is boggling.

[Stephen M]

Guys,

Just some things to note.

1. Its box wall only in the front, the rest is stitch through.

2. I was wearing a Mec T1 hoodie and a cap 2 equivalent base layers with a lightweight beanie under it, normally in winter I would have a nano puff or equivalent under a down jacket but as it was 1 night trip I did not bother.
3. I feel the cold when stopped.

I would put the Mojave in same warmth class as my old Montbell Alpine light Parka.

I do like it but its a 3 season piece.

[Jim Sweeney]

Realize box-baffling is only supposed to be in the front of the torso, but what's with the fabric panel? That means that, if the front of the torso really is box wall, and not just sewn-through with a fabric panel behind it, there's a torso-front's equivalent of unneeded fabric. And we can't get around that by saying it's probably mesh, because mesh is sometimes heavier than the newer light fabrics, I think.

[Stephen M]

I am thinking the same with the fabric panel, half of one could be put down to the pockets but not a full one.

When I was buying this I put a crap load of research in to it, I spoke with the owner of company I bought it from (Climbhigh.com) and he reckoned it was a decent parka.

I did get a very good discount on it.

[Dustin Short]

Stephen, that's the point though. The Alpine Light Parka has around 4.5 oz of down, half what is claimed in a Mojave. Other jackets that are in the 9oz of 800+fp range are the Rab Neutrino variants, the MB Permafrost, and the MHW Nilas (the nilas has a bit less down but most similar construction).

9oz of down is a serious claim. That amount, box walled or not, is basically what you need to climb at high altitudes outside of Asia, such as Denali, Aconcagua, Volcanoes…

Now I fully understand that people should try their gear before going on expeditions, but to sell your jacket as being in a warmth class as other jackets that will keep you alive in very cold environments is negligent.

While Outdoorgearlab isn't the best technical review site, their review puts it in the same category as the the MB Frostsmoke, only warmer. The frostmoke has a measly 3.5oz of down so this corresponds well with the Alpine Light comparison (and visual loft inspection looks similar).

It's really hard to find any true reviews of the jacket aside from some rehashing of talking points. Gearjunkie.com has one that says the mojave is not as warm as the alpini (which again has less down and no box-baffling) which defies all logic and known insulation science.

I'm having a hard time believing the specs and that's a shame. I want to believe that it's a typo but I'm thinking it's more intentional to justify the $100 price hike for water resistant down.

[Stephen M]

Hi Dustin,

I forgot to mention that I asked the place I bought it from to contact Brooks Range
and they confirmed it has 9oz.

Have you seen the reviews on Trailspace?
http://www.trailspace.com/gear/brooks-range/mojave-jacket/

[Stephen M]

Dustin,

I got rid of the alpine light last year due to the lack of hem drawcord so was unable to directly compare them.
I just compared it to my wife's stitch through parka with 210g and the Mojave is definitely less lofty than it, I will call Brooks Range tomorrow.

[Stephen M]

All,

I just got off the phone with the Mojaves Designer at Brooks Range.

He has confirmed it has 9oz of down in it, he has offered to replace or refund the jacket. He mentioned I am the only person to have any issues with it and that it has been used for belay on cold weather climbing trip.

What do folk think?

[Stuart .]

Sounds to me like yours is out of spec. I'd suggest taking them up on the exchange offer, and if that one is no different for you, get a refund. There's always a risk of being the early adopter of a first generation technology. But they are offering you a couple of different ways out to mitigate your risk.

[Stephen M]

Cheers Stuart,

I think you are right about sending it back.

[Author]

Posts