Debunking the Myth: Quilts AREN’T as Comfortable as a Sleeping Bag

[te – wa]

its designed as an underquilt, with benefits. It can and will function in 4 separate and unique ways. (well, sorta unique being that the Mitylite also opens completely)
you mean make a head hole yourself? I guess you could, but its hard to make the flap close over itself as tight as you might need. The no sniveller has this feature built in… for those (like me) that dont want to resurrect trig II in order for it to work! I think you could also use a very wide bag as a total cocoon, like the PeaPod and the Large Jack's quilts, but that means you have to sleep straighter (more of a banana position too) and it would be a pretty tight fit. It would work in a pinch… the article from BPL about the No Sniveller sums it up: http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/jacks_r_better_no_sniveller_quilt_spotlite_review.html
to stop the nauseating swing motion I added latex tensioners to my tarp which allows for less swing, think of it as "brakes" for a hammock. The Hennessy line also has guy-outs directly attached for controlling the swing. Just curious, are there trees where you live? I dont remember seeing many trees there the possums havent already gotten to. (both islands)
fwiw, i purchased the Hudson quilt long before I converted to a hammock. it works great on the ground too. i never had a problem with "drafts" since at 48" wide it covers my narrow booty! :)

[Lynn Tramper]

I guess I would need to actually see what you are talking about. Words just aren't getting it across to me. Why wouldn't a full zip rectangular bag work as both a top bag and underquilt combined???

It's true that no one else is making commercially available serape openings in their quilts OR rectangular bags, but it wouldn't be very hard to do. That is a feature unique to no snivellers, not quilts in general. Other than that as far as I can tell, it's really just a quilt with optional omnitape attachments etc…

Anyway, there are some places around here with a lot of trees, but they tend to only be at lower elevations and more on the west coast. I'm more of an alpine kind of person if I have an option. Besides, hammocks (and many other things) make me motion sick even just getting into and out of them. Even sleeping with someone else in my bed can make me sick if they move around too much. But if I had access to a hammock, I would take some anti-nausea meds and have a try with it as it's really hard to understand the special needs of hammockers if you haven't been there done that. Of course, as a back sleeper it would have to be a Hennessy style A-Sym type hammock.

Last night just for a change I slept under our "double" quilt. 66 inches wide. I slept (as I always do) with the fan on, even though it's the middle of winter as I'm a warm sleeper. Well I wasn't warm last night!! I just could stop the drafts from coming under the edges of the quilt. Every time I moved it seemed to displace part of my carefully tucked edge, letting in just enough cold air to be a nuisance. I don't know why I have problems like this, but it's truly enough to make me happy to carry a bag with a zipper.

[Lynn Tramper]

OK, I just looked up what an "underquilt" is, so have a better grasp of what you are talking about. So do you carry two quilts instead of a quilt plus a mat? That would be pretty limiting on multi-day hikes around here, as one night you might be amongst trees, the next night on the tops. But it obviously works where you like to camp.

Even if I found a hammock to be the best thing since sliced bread (even if I have to take anti-nausea meds), I mostly hike with my partner, and we like to share our shelter, both for warmth and for weight savings. So I'll never be a candidate for hammock conversion.

[te – wa]

right-o
i only mentioned hammocks because I wanted to think inside a bigger box. One could start an entirely new argument for those who stand whilst they sleep… lol.

I guess the burrito wrap style bag would have to be fairly large at pro'lly 72" to wrap around a hammock and user without compressing the down. So, yes Alison I do have to carry 2 quilts, one is >13oz and the other is 1/2 length @ >9oz combined with a leg length ccf pad @ 2oz.
Ok, Im going off topic so all I can say is that I agree with the mummy crowd on one important point.. having a bag for one intended purpose and having multiple bags for different applications seems to be the norm, and quite reasonably so. If you find a Mitylite is the best thing ever, you are most likely right. Ol' honest Abe Lincoln said something like "two men can differ opinions and both be right". (but I can still wear my quilt as a Superhero cape to the joy and laughter of my kids*) :)

*thanks, Jeff

[Pamela Wyant]

For me at least, it is much easier to ventilate a quilt than a sleeping bag. Perhaps I am not as practiced, or perhaps its just that if I wake up too hot I want to cool off immediately; but I find it takes longer than I like to unfasten the Velcro over the zipper, loosen the hood cordlocks, locate the zipper pull, and pull the zipper down (sometimes getting stuck, depending on the bag). With the quilt, I just kick or throw it off & begin cooling off immediately. With a sleeping bag, I sometimes find I am sweating before I can get it open. Of course, that provides a cooling process of its own, but one that can lead to a chill before morning from damp clothes or bag.

[ROBERT TANGEN]

Allison Miller: “Top bags are the least flexible sleep system, but also the lightest.” Really? Why then does the Western Mountaineering SummerLite weigh 1 and 1/2 ounces less than the Rab top bag?
Manufacturer Model Temp Rating (°F) Single Layer Loft (in) Weight of Down (oz) Fill Power Total Weight (oz) Cost
Western Mountaineering SummerLite 32 2 10 850+ 19 $300
Marmot Hydrogen 30 ?* 10 850 21 $309
Montbell Super Stretch Down Hugger #3 30 ?* 10 800 23 $270
Feathered Friends Merlin 30 2 11.5 800+ 23 $314
Rab Top Bag AR 30 1.75 7 850+ 20.5 $200

[David Wills]

Because it is poorly designed with regards to weight. The WM POD 30 weighed 16 oz when they made it, and cost about $280, 3 ounces less than the summerlite and 4.5 oz less the the Rab.

[ROBERT TANGEN]

Why then is Nunatak’s 20* bag 1 oz lighter than its 20* top bag?
The NUNATAK Catabatic SL is a regular mummy style sleeping bag, with the underside insulation replaced by a single ultralight layer of fabric. 20*, total weight, quantum, small = 20 oz, medium = 22 oz, large = 24 oz.
The Alpinist is NUNATAK’S version of the ordinary mummy sleeping bag. 20*, total weight, quantum, small = 19 oz, medium = 21 oz, large = 23 oz.

[John S.]

I think the definitions are not straight. The catabatic is a top bag and arc series and golite ultra are quilts. I realize the first RAB top bag has mesh on the bottom and may have been meant as an overbag.

Mummy bag- fully enclosed, with or without hood, down on bottom.

Top bag- fully enclosed, with or without hood, only fabric (no down) on bottom.

Quilt bag- open on bottom, with or without straps, usually without hood.

[David Wills]

Comparing apples to apples with Nunatak-
Catabac SL- 20* Topbag with hood, 22 oz, 12 oz down, no drafts, 2.5" baffles/loft
Alpinist Mummy Bag- 20*, hood 21 oz, 11.5 oz down (top and bottom), no drafts, 2.5" baffles/loft
Acr Alpinist- 20* quilt, no hood, 20 oz, 11 oz down, possible drafts, 2.5" baffles/loft

Catabac- 32* topbag, no hood, 14 oz, 8 oz down, no drafts, 2" baffles/loft
Sub Alpinist- 35* mummy, hood 14 oz, 5.5 oz down, no drafts,.75" baffles
Acr ghost- 32* quilt, no hood, 14 oz, 8 oz down, drafts, 2" baffles/loft- 46" shoulder girth! thats tiny for a quilt
Acr Specialist- 32* quilt, no hood, 16oz, 8oz down, drafts, 1.75" baffles/loft, 55" shoulder girth

Robert, you will want to look deeper into things than 2 sets of numbers. as we all know, there are near infinite variables when it comes to the warmth of a bag, and defining temperature ratings. You may want to consider the amount of down in each bag/quilt and where is is distributed. Eg. the catabac sl has 12 oz of down in on top and in the hood, with 2" baffles. the alpinist mummy bag has 11.5 oz of down distributed all the way around the sleeper. the baffles are the same height, but any down under the sleeper will reduce the loft above the sleeper, where it matters. The catabac SL would be slightly warmer despite them having the same 20* rating
It doesn't seem to me the 20* Arc Alpinist can be as warm as the 20* Catabac SL due to there being 1 oz less down that is distributed over a larger area (hood of SL included), and that is lacks a hood and will have some draft issues. That being said, it is 2 oz lighter.

The closest comparison in here is between the Catabac and the Arc Ghost. Both are rated to 32*, have 8 oz of down, weigh 14 oz, and have 2" baffles. To keep the same specs as the Catabac, the quilt has to have circumferences of 34" at the foot, 43" at the waist, and 46" at the shoulder. Having made 6 quilts, these measurements are too small for a normal sized person (thus the Arc Specialist with 55" shoulder width). My smallest having 40-44-48 measurements was way too small for me (6'1-2, 180 lbs). My main point here is that ratings, even from the same reputable company will have some margin of error, and you have to look deeper into design and features if you want to pinpoint total warmth. Do you think a mummy bag with 5.5oz of down and .75" baffles is only 3* cooler than a quilt or topbag with 8 oz of down and 2" baffles?

[Lynn Tramper]

They are all different designs. The Catabac SL is 62" x 59" x 34", much like my POD. It would fit me fine. The Alpinist is 61" x 50" x 38"..too narrow in the hips for this old gal. The Arc Alpinist in a size medium is shorter than either of the above, and only fits to 5'10" instead of 6', and was WAY too narrow for my hips at 45".

So it's not really apples to apples at all, and seems to be another factor to add in to the "decision matrix" of choosing a sleep system.

[ROBERT TANGEN]

I don't disagree with the previous few posts, I just have a slight (very slight) objection to using phrases like such and such a system is "the lightest." That's like saying such and such a starlet is "the prettiest." The number of variables exceeds Newton's gravitaional constant divided by Einstein's cosmological constant, added to Avogadro’s number and multiplied by the number of suns in the local galactic cluster.

[Lynn Tramper]

Perhaps you would prefer we use the term "best" instead ;) Then we could add in other parameters such as colour, fabric feel, country of manufacture, politics and religion of the manufacturer, cost etc…and make this the most complicated gear decision ever.

Or would you prefer "lightest design for the same materials used, volume and dimensions being insulated, comfort and flexibility aside"?? At least then we could rule out top bags made out of cuban fibre or ultrasheer silk and insulated with 1200 fill power hand-collected hungarian eiderdown! As long as we can nail down definitions as a reference point we can continue to discuss lightest gear.

Without using the terms "light, lighter, lightest" we are not left with much to discuss at BPL…

[George Matthews]

Dear RT,

I did your calculation:
The number of variables exceeds Newton's gravitaional constant divided by Einstein's cosmological constant, added to Avogadro’s number and multiplied by the number of suns in the local galactic cluster and my screen became extremely bright and now there is a loud ringing in my ears.

Please supply the antidote forumla asap!

[Lynn Tramper]

"and multiplied by the number of suns in the local galactic cluster "

I think he means that to him "light" and "lighter" are more appropriately defined as the light that shines out of a galactic cluster???? Since "lightest" doesn't fit in with this definition, it is not an appropriate term to use. After all, who could really judge what is the "lightest" galactic cluster in the universe?

[mark henley]

You forgot to divide by the mass of an electron …..

[Michael Davis]

As I previously posted in this thread, I like quilts for mild weather and mummy bags for cold winter conditions. Also, I toss and turn and always sleep on my side.

This has me thinking about the "hybrid" system such as Big Agnes' or WesternMountianeering's Pod types. I'm particularly considering cold winter weather the idea of combining that type system with a separate down hood which is available from a couple of cottage industry suppliers.

Us side sleepers have a real problem with a Pod system that has an attached hood as our ear can't breathe through the face hole. :-)

However, with a separate hood, that problem is solved. The hoodless Pod would have to have something similar to a down collar around the neck to cut out drafts (caused by my turning) on these cold winter nights. The fact that the down on top is attached to the pad pocket, seals out drafts from the sides.

If the neck area can be protected, this sounds to me like it could be the optimum system for really cold conditions: down on top, insulating pads underneath, ability to turn & side sleep. I'd have to figure out where to put a zipper on this thing because I hate zipperless bags.

Hmmm. You all have me thinking…

[Roger Caffin]

> Us side sleepers have a real problem with a Pod system that has an attached hood as our ear can't breathe through the face hole. :-)
Another myth.
I sleep with the quilt pulled over my head – at home, and in the tent. Breathing is no problem.

[Michael Davis]

Roger,

Do you find that breathing under a down quilt, wets and somewhat colapses the down near your head?

[Roger Caffin]

> Do you find that breathing under a down quilt, wets and somewhat colapses the down near your head?
I've been doing it for some years now, in all four seasons including winter (in the snow), and so far I have not seen this happen. Part of the reason may be that most of the air trickles out sideways rather than going *through* two layers of Pertex. It would make sense for this to happen.

One thing to always remember in cold conditions is to avoid getting too hot and sweaty. OK, sleeping just warm enough is tricky, but it does cut down perspiration.

Snow conditions – down to -10 C at least. Frost conditions down to -7 C (and I have a recorded temperature profile to back that claim!). Frost on the inside of the tent – you bet!

In fact, using a shelter which can keep the surface of your sleeping bag above 0C is a very smart move, although there are many times when this is not possible. The key is often a double-skin tent with the inner tent closed up fairly well. Well, sometimes it works. The times when I have had lots of wet condensation on the inside of the tent were obviously above freezing anyhow.

Cheers

[Chris Townsend]

I've had exactly the same experience as Roger over several decades of winter camping in temperatures down to -25C. In sub zero temperatures I sleep with my face inside my down sleeping bag. I've never had problems with my breath dampening the down and I've sometime slept like this every night for three weeks at a time. Like Roger when I've had problems with dampness (and they've only ever been minor) it's been in very damp above freezing temperatures when I don't have my face in the bag.

[David Olsen]

I tend to agree and sleep with my face inside the bags to
the point I am warm enough to breath out the opening. Moist
air holds more heat than dry air.

I have noticed more moisture in the top 1.5 ft. of my bag
in more common conditions around freezing when sleeping
in the open. Fortunately, when sleeping under the stars
it means it will be sunny in the morning and I can dry
the bag out before stuffing.

Weeks of winter weather has dampened my sleeping bag
unless I use a VBL, or a hot water bottle, or have
good weather to air dry. Even synthetic bags take on
a clammy feeling when stuffed in the morning.

A bivysack will often move the condensation
to the inside of the bivy rather than inside the insulation
of the sleeping bag. This is even faster to dry.
In very cold conditions I like a down inner, synthetic outer, with either a tent or bivy over that.

[ROBERT TANGEN]

George: Actually, I meant to say that the number of variables exceeds the number of electron neutrinos in the observable universe, multiplied by the number of muon neutrinos and added to the number of tau neutrinos, all divided by the Planck length (1.6 × 10 to the minus 35 meters), always ignoring units, of course, since we are looking for a unit-less number.

[te – wa]

so, whats the square root of infinity?

[Roger Caffin]

> so, whats the square root of infinity?
Infinity

[Author]

Posts