In Part 1 of this series we discussed airmats in general, outlining the properties we thought important, how we could measure some of them and assess others, and, finally, we listed all the mats being tested in a table. To recapitulate, our criteria for inclusion were that they must weigh less than 400 grams (14 oz) for summer use and 800 grams (28 oz) for winter use. We also looked at what benefit might be had from combining a very light airmat with a very light foam mat. There turned out to be a surprising range of airmats meeting our criteria (see that photo there!).
We have assessed the mats both in the laboratory and in the field for the following properties. In this case 'we' includes not just us authors, but also our wives - whom we thank for their assistance.
We have a Summary near the end of this article which covers the full range of points we found, without focusing on actual models. It is followed by a table of measured performance results.
Points of Interest
- R-value - if the bed you are lying on is cold, not much else matters. In this case, cold is cold. We find novices complaining regularly about being cold while using a very good quilt or bag due to this problem. However, we found that the R-value depended on the thickness of the airmat, so we have measured every mat at a wide range of thicknesses, from fully inflated to 'hips nearly touching the ground.'
- Dimensions - length, width, and thickness. Some mats were supplied full-length, while other were 3/4-length, 2/3-length, or even shorter. This complicated things slightly, but not badly.
- Weight - a high priority at Backpacking Light: see our criteria as listed above.
- Stability - allied to comfort, but it includes things like the slipperiness of the mat under you and the shape of the tubes making up the airmat. Some mats can leave you rolling off the sides too easily; others feature larger tubes at the edges to prevent this.
- Ease of inflation - some mats self-inflate, while other require sustained blowing from an exhausted walker whose head starts to spin. A recent development has been air mats with down or synthetic insulation with in-built lightweight pumps. The pump means you are not blowing moisture into the down inside (or making your head spin).
- Outline - the shape of the mat. Typically, some mats are rectangular while others are tapered or mummy-shaped. We have two distinct needs here: the mummy shaped and tapered mats are fractionally lighter, but they are a real pain for couples as the mats can leave big gaps between the sleepers.
- Packed volume - a rather low priority item as it is weight, not volume, which really matters on your back. Also, we found that packed volume varies significantly, depending on how much effort was put into squeezing all the air out.
- Noise - not normally of concern to solo sleepers who can tolerate their own noises, but definitely of concern to couples when one wriggles more than the other. Some mats were more noisy than others ...
Laboratory Assessment
We discuss some measured properties here; the rest are more subjective and will be discussed in the mini-reviews of each mat. The full data set is at the end of this article; in between we discuss different ways of looking at the data.
ARTICLE OUTLINE
- Introduction
- Points of Interest
- Laboratory Assessment
- R-value and Tested Thickness
- Caution!
- Further Caveats about the Testing
- Effect of Adding Internal Insulation
- Effect of Compression on Filled Air Mats
- Comparative R-values
- Slipperiness
- Dimensions
- Weight
- Field Testing
- Summary, and Opinions
- Self-Inflating Foam Mats
- Plain Air Core Inflated Mats
- Synthetic Insulated Air Core Mats
- Structurally Insulated Air Core Mats
- Down-filled Airmats (DAMs)
- Foam Overlay
- Air Pumps
- Surface Friction
- Future Trends (We Hope)
- The Mats Tested
# WORDS: 8150
# PHOTOS: 3
# TECHNICAL GRAPHS: 8
Member Exclusive
A Premium or Unlimited Membership* is required to view the rest of this article.
* A Basic Membership is required to view Member Q&A events

Discussion
Become a member to post in the forums.
Companion forum thread to:
Lightweight Inflatable Sleeping Mats – State of the Market Report 2011 Part 2: Test Results and Mini-Reviews
Readers: I am FRIED after reading this and all the mini-reviews very closely. If you see a typo, error, or (God forbid) broken link, please PM me the details so that I can fix it. Tomorrow. After the airmats currently floating in my vision have faded into distant memory.
Mine was donated by a local forum member.
This is my video on the Instaflator :
http://www.youtube.com/user/francodarioli?feature=mhee#p/u/7/hMUP-H2RNko
The above was voted, by me, as the best Instaflator video of the day.
Franco
Thank you BPL staff. The effort that you folks put in is much appreciated.
30+ years ago I purchased Stephenson sleeping bag with the DAM. I was very skeptical about the "inflating the pad with the sack" idea, and was pleasantly surprised when it worked, and worked well. There is a "knack" to capturing a full sack of air, but if you can do that, you can inflate the pad very quickly and easily.
I currently use a very similar approach with an Exped Dry sack that is fitted with one of those cheap air mattress type valves at the bottom (same as Stephenson). It is fairly large and I find that I can inflate most air mattresses with just 2 bags of air, 3 at most. I have been frustrated when using this process for the 1st time in a long time, or when in cramped quarters where I can't fill the bag with air easily, but I still find it to be a better alternative than blowing moist, micro organism filled air in by mouth. Have you ever seen the inside of an old air mat that has been blown into for years . . . gross!
It takes a little practice, but you can easily use your pack liner to inflate an air mattress which eliminates a separate piece of gear like the instaflator. My Kookabay 48" pad takes less than three bagsfull of air. Super easy once you get the hang of it.
This is a great review. I particularly like the format of the links to the mini-reviews. It might have been a good idea to include in the main body of the article the packed size.
Great article Roger
I'm going to have to go back and digest this some more when I have some more time.
Thank you all for the excellent article!
As an aside, my go to winter pad is a KookaBay DAM that is 60" x 21" x 3.5" R6 mummy shape pad that is 14.9 oz. It is comparable in comfort and warmth to my Exped DownMat 7 Pump, but lighter and longer.
Hi all
Thanks for all the nice comments.
Sorry I could not be part of the Forum discussion: Sue and I were in Europe for 2 months, doing the Via Alpina from Trieste to Oberstdorf. We have only just got back.
re inflation and the Instaflator: hum … interesting! In parallel I note that some of the latest mats hitting the market have built-in pumps. Especially for winter use I think we will see more of the pumps.
Cheers
As someone who has experienced punctures in the field with ThermaRest and others, and found them very hard to repair, this is a significant issue for me (so I now use 2 regular blown foam mats – KISS). This can happen when packed due to something sharp in your pack or falling over etc. Could you include puncture resistance and field repairability as test factors in future reviews? Very comprehensive otherwise – many thanks.
Hi Simon
> puncture resistance and field repairability
Yeah, good idea, but tricky. My experience is limited: the way I pack gear and use gear has not led to many punctures over the years.
I did test the repair kit for the BPL review of the NeoAir mat some time ago and found that the repair patch worked very well, but that was at home taking my time. It used heat to set the adhesive: a pot of boiling water used as an iron.
I have also patched the knit fabric surface of my old TaR Deluxe with PU adhesive, which was more tricky owing to the porous fabric surface. I had to rub the adhesive right into the fabric. But that repair has also withstood the test of time (like 10 years?).
I suspect that the results might be very dependent on the situation, with 'in the middle of a howling storm' being less easy to get right.
Anyhow, we will keep it in mind. Thanks.
Cheers
The graph in the mini-review of the Synmat UL7 is wrong; it shows a maximum inflation of only 45mm. This mat will inflate to 70mm and even deflated somewhat for comfort should still be above 45mm. Not sure if this is just a typographical error, although if not an additional 10-15mm of inflation might yield a higher Rmax.
Hi Scott
The data table in part 2 shows the thickness as 70 mm, per the web site.
However, when you lie on the mat is is not that thick unless you inflate really hard, and inflating really hard makes it rather uncomfortable. So the numbers for the Synmat in the graph only go up to about 45 mm, but these are very realistic numbers.
It may be that the graphs for some of the other mats should not display data at peak thickness, just to be consistent. After all, they are never at peak thickness in the field. Mea Culpa.
EDIT: OOPS! the data table in the mini-review shows 35 mm thickness – that is WRONG! I will ask addie to correct it asap. I cannot check my original copy at present as a series of disk crashes (lightning) has temporarily rendered 15-20 years of files inaccessible. Designs, photos, track logs, BPL files, etc. Sigh.
For what it is worth – we have one Synmat UL7. Well, my wife Sue has it. I am seriously considering BUYING a second one for myself.
Cheers
'For what it is worth – we have one Synmat UL7'
That's me sorted then!!
Any estimate of the Prolite Plus insulating value vs. Prolite? They're rather cheap right now!
Spec is R2.2 on the Prolite and R3.8 on Prolite +
Published SPECIFICATIONS for Regular:
Dimensions: 51 x 183 cm. / 20 x 72 in. (both same)
Weight: PL= 460 g / 1 lb PL+= 680 g / 1 lb 8 oz.
Thickness: PL= 2.5 cm. / 1 in. PL+= 3.8 cm. / 1.5 in.
R-value: PL= 2.2 PL+= 3.8
Fabric: 70d Nylon with Grip Dots (both same)
In the BPL Prolite test the findings were approx R2.4 with the pad at its spec. 25mm thickness. It dropped to R2.2 (Thermarest spec) at 20 mm thickness. I'm wondering if the PL+ would similarly retain spec. R-value with light compression?
Any more my legs want to be level and cushioned equally with the rest of my body- so I'm thinking of going to a full-length pad. For winter I have been using either a 1.5" nominal REI self-inflator or my trusty Thermarest LE (2"nominal) on top of a ridge rest- but they're each 4' long and my hips and knees don't like the dropoff when side-sleeping.
Not tested, sorry.
Cheers
R- value. That's not all.
Become a member to post in the forums.