I’m ashamed of you, BPL’ers

Unusual way to start a conversation.

Less than stellar review by outdoor gear lab but I'm not sure I agree with their criticisms. I'll take a look at this the next time I'm at the Arc' store.

http://www.outdoorgearlab.com/Down-Jacket-Reviews/Arcteryx-Cerium-SL

Edit: For example…

"Durability
This jacket is a testament to how hard it must be to manufacture a jacket that is simultaneously ultra-light and durable. How durable is durable enough depends on what you are doing. The jacket might endure a day at the mall better than the average climber, but for half of its recommended uses: rock, alpine and ice climbing the jacket is simply not durable enough. The jacket accrued several tears from normal wear and one major tear from brushing against the teeth of an ice screw that resulted in an experience analogous to having a pigeon explode in your hands."

This criticism doesn't concern me as this isn't the jacket (or the EX light) I would use this jacket under those conditions. I just want something to wear around camp early in the morning or late at night so at 6.5 oz (more for XXL for me), this would be fine.

Wanted to get attention – it's a worthy topic, IMO. ;)

I agree on the durability, Ian. Was just on a camping trip and a tiny spark totally obliterated one arm of my MH Ghost Whisperer down shell. Was pretty stupid, but a good lesson to take care of this stuff more. Exlight, Cerium SL and Ghost are all likely the same durability. Just need to be careful and know what it's meant for.

Above said, I also disagree with the review you linked. Can't discount a jacket for thin fabric, that's the whole intent. Still, with durability on par for all, I can't find any pluses for Exlight and Ghost over Cerium.

Favorite line of the review: This jacket is so stylish it should come with a hair gel dispenser.

That's funny!

I can't find fault with the review. I think their criticisms are valid for how they used the jacket – and some folks are looking for a jacket to use that way.

I wouldn't use it that way, so the criticisms don't necessarily apply to me. That's different.

I guess I should have phrased it "their criticisms are not valid for me."

I'm not their target audience and I'm fine with the limitations of this jacket. I (like many of us I suppose) make compromises for weight all the time.

Hell, I think this is lighter than my thermal base layer top.

"I'm fine with the limitations of this jacket."

I've got the slightly heavier Cerium LT hoody. Like it a lot.

Pockets?

I want to say Max has talked about it. Or maybe it was some other Arteryx jacket.

Doesn't the "fantastic cut" come down to personal fit? And asides from absolute fill weight, isn't that the next most crucial factor?

So the whole what's-the-best puffy question seems an awful lot like what's-the-best-trail runner (albeit that feet are more weird than torsos, but still…)

For me, i know i had to rule out a lot of popular candidates that didn't fit well (ghost whisperer, Patagonia). Didn't get around to trying that one.

I'm guessing the Ex Light is more popular due to it being cheap in comparison. I don't know if the Arcteryx is $100 more of a jacket, but it's definitely sharp on paper.

P.S. – Outdoor Gear Labs reviews suck.

Ryan

…but maybe it's Dead Bird's penchant for their very high prices (much of which, I'm aware, required to support Canadian social programs).

>"Pockets?"

I'll go out on a limb and guess those zippers on each side indicate two pockets.

Watching their video indicates pretty long zippers.

But the review was pretty minimal to not discuss that obvious detail – pockets? How useable are they? Any inside pockets? Even though the review has a "Features" section, they don't mention the presence or absence of pockets. They spend all their words ragging on the collar.

The company website is similarly silent about pockets. They use their words to spout PHB*-speak like, "Minimalist design for maximum performance, built to the highest levels of craftsmanship, with innovations for increased range of comfort and conditions" which all says nothing.

*PHB = Pointy-haired Boss, a Dilbert reference.

Or, from another popular-culture meme:

Discussion of Pockets? We ain't got no discussion of pockets! We don't need no discussion of pockets! I don't have to show you any stinkin' pockets!

to illustrate David's "point":

Personally, not enough down fill for $350 Samolians or so, though it looks pretty.

The pockets are pretty huge. I use them as hand warmers, similar to exlight. Each pocket fits the hand fully with plenty of spare room for down and layers around the hand. Was not cold in the snow. Since the pockets almost touch, you can still get extra warmth from hand proximity. I like this setup over the kangaroo pouch because the wind drafts don't go through the individual pockets, cooling you in return.

However, I think what's more important than pockets is the bungie on bottom and extra butt collar on the Cerium. The exlight is not warm enough because it lets a LOT of heat out on the bottom. That's it Achilles heel. If Montbell adds a bungie and extra baffle for the bottom it would be more solid. But that would put the exlight at more than 2oz over Cerium SL, while I suspect the dead bird will still be warmer.

…and Demosthenes is ashamed of you Gary.

Gary says, "At 5.35oz medium, with more down than Montbell ExLight… this jacket IS way warmer than Exlight and Ghost Whisperer – just compared both at home."

The Arc'teryx web site lists this jacket at 850 fill, 8.6 oz (M), and $325 but, doesn't list the fill amount. The Backcountry.com site lists this jacket at 850 fill, 8.6 oz (M), 3 oz of down, and $325. Assuming that the specifications are correct, the Iclo for this jacket is 2.22 Iclo and the thermo-neutral camp chores temperature is 35F. The thermal efficiency is the warmth/weight or Iclo/oz, or 2.20/8.6 = .256.

The Montbell web site lists the Ex Light at 900 fill, 5.6 oz (M), 1.8 oz of down, and $199. The Iclo for this jacket is 1.62 Iclo and the thermo-neutral camp chores temperature is 41F. The thermal efficiency is the warmth/weight or Iclo/oz or 1.62/5.6 = .289.

Thermal efficiency allows you to compare the warmth/weight between jackets with different specifications. The EX Light is ~12% more thermal efficient. This is as you would expect because although the fabrics are the same denier, the EX Light down fill power is higher, and the Arcteryx uses the less thermally efficient synthetic for a portion of its total. For 3 season mountain environments in CA and MT the MB EX Light warmth is adequate for me.

2.22 Iclo – 1.62 Iclo = .6 clo which is approximately the minimum difference in jackets that can be perceived outside of using lab equipment. Natick Labs says, "A difference of 0.5 clo is perceived by the wearer." See: Rapacz, D.T., Evaluation of Multiple Layer Structures of Polyester Fiberfill Batting as the Insulative Filling Material for the Extreme Cold Sleeping Bag, Natick TR&ED Report No. 108,March 1982

If you need ~1.2 oz more down than the Montbell EX Light, with thermal efficiency similar to the Arc’teryx Cerium SL, there are MANY good options. They include the Patagonia UL Down Jacket, Western Mountaineering Flash jacket, the Marmot Quasar, Feathered Friends Daybreak Jacket, Mountain Hardwear Nitrous, Westcomb Chilko Down Sweater, etc.

Nothing is easier than self-deceit. For what each man wishes, that he also believes to be true.
– Demosthenes'

I have never warmed to the look of the thin baffled puffies. My instincts also say that so many seams at such small intervals equals poor thermal efficiency – too many potential "cold lines". I notice we are not seeing thin-baffled sleeping bags or quilts…yet.

Richard – you're looking at Cerium LT, not SL. LT is 3oz heavier. I reweighed the jacket again – 6.3oz, not 5.3, my mistake in writing. Arcteryx, similar to Patagonia, never lists fill weights. I talked to Prolite gear who reviewed the jacket and they said the fill weight is around 3.1oz which makes the ratio 2.03, quite a bit better than Montbell, and that's without all the bells and whistles.

When bells and whistles are added we get:

Synthetic fill – underarms, shoulder and around hands. Synthetic keeps it warmer when wet and considering the parts that usually get wet are synthetic, it'll be that much warmer still.

Tighter neck which in Prolite's heat sensing test of the LT gave the best heat retention of all jackets tested. I assume the same with SL.

The cinch on bottom – big heat retention.

Longer hemline on back.

Plus, a person doesn't look like an ogre in it.

@Brian You may be right about the smaller baffles. However, when I bend my elbow in the cold in Exlight, it gets cold. When I bend it in Cerium, it stays warm. I suspect the tighter baffles keep down in its place more and don't let it bunch up too much. Maybe I'm wrong about this, but it definitely seems warmer.

Besides me, I think that Prolite also confused the two Arc'teryx Cerium models. The fill weight for the Arc'teryx Cerium SL Down is not 3 oz but, 1.8 oz.

See:http://www.backcountry.com/arcteryx-cerium-sl-down-jacket-mens?ti=U2VhcmNoIFJlc3VsdHM6QXJjJ3Rlcnl4IENlcml1bToxOjI6QXJjJ3Rlcnl4IENlcml1bQ&skid=ARC003Z-CBCOP-S

That yields a thermal efficiency of 1.59 Iclo/6.3 oz = .252

Ouch. Thanks Richard, good find. That's a big miss by Prolite…

I reweighed my exlight size L = 6.1oz. The fit for the L is about the same as Arcteryx M, just a tad more roomy. I'm guessing that's because exlight is made in Japan where average size is smaller. Americans are huge! ;)

If we say that exlight in L is about the same fit as Cerium SL in M then the the thermal efficiency ratios are:

Exlight 1.8lclo/6.1 = .295

Cerium SL 1.8lclo/6.3 = .285

Essentially the same. However, with the synthetic insulation in places, the mathematic ratio is probably a tad better for exlight. In actual practice, however, when walking or in rain, the ratio will likely swing towards the Cerium SL, especially with the tighter neck, lower hem, bottom cincher and had warmer pockets. Overall, I think Cerium will be more flexible and adaptable outside.

What do you think, Richard?

I picked up a Cerium LT hoody on the gearswap for $160 and
I don't know why but it feels warmer than many of jackets mentioned.
It may be it has more down in the arms than other jackets
but I did notice I felt warmer wearing it, it's padded in all the right
places. I would normally not care about the warmth of my arms, I'd want
my torso warm but I have to say it's a fine jacket.

Even so most trips I take my Helios and use the Cerium when I walk my dog
unless it's a summer trip.

Where's Eric Chan? He's the BPL Dead Bird rep.

My Montbell Ex-light was getting a bit battered (still have it) so I bought a PHD in their annual sale; that is quite some jacket at 230g in an L.

I'm a big Arc fan but have yet to come across any of their down offerings in UK shops (not that I've been looking)…

A bit of trolling ken? =P

One thing no one has pointed out …

With a jacket that light i expect to be able to compress it repeatedly till it begs for mercy over and over again for hours and even days at a time

After all whats the point of a UL down sweater unless you compress it to as small as possible to save space, not just weight

How long the coreloft lasts under such repeated compression is unknown

Ultimately theres tons of reputable down UL sweaters out there that dont use synth and plenty of extreme athletes use em just fine

As to dead bird …. Never buy em unless they are 30%+ off minimum

;)

not at all eric, yr the one who seems to keep up their offerings whats hawt whats not with puffays