Nov 7, 2005 at 4:10 am #1217091
which jacket is warmer?Nov 7, 2005 at 8:09 am #1344520
@richard295Locale: San Francisco Bay Area
The Thermawrap parka uses 80g/m2 (2.6 oz/yd2) polyester filament insulation and the Micro Puff uses 2.6 oz/yd2 polyester filament insulation. They should be about equal in warmth with .6″ of loft.Nov 7, 2005 at 9:12 am #1344526
The Micropuff in the field is quite the warmer of the 2 jackets. I’ve used both and own the micropuff.
A BPL field test of lightweight synthetic insulated jackets came to the same conclusions. Not all synthetic insulation is created equal.
See (if a premium member)—Nov 7, 2005 at 9:48 am #1344532
the thermawrap parka is very different in warmth compared to the jacket.
the jacket uses 50g/m2 excelloft
the parka uses 80g/m2
so the parka has a thicker loft and is the same as the micro puff
info from mont bell on the parka:
The heaviest and warmest of the Thermawrap jackets, the parka features a hood and more insulation to keep you warm in the worst conditions. Only slightly heavier than the basic jacket, but far warmer.Nov 7, 2005 at 9:54 am #1344534
If warmth is your only concern, then the micro-puff is your ticket.
However, the MontBell scored higher in the useability dept according to BPL. Its more useable because it can be worn in a broader range of conditions, especially when combined with other layers.
Also, according to BPL, the Thermawrap insulation is 1.8oz/yd where as the Micropuff is 2.6oz/yd.
In the 1.8oz/yd group, it blew away its primaloft competetion in the areas of Loft to Weight Performance, value, and “average score” (except for the MEC which threw the curve with its $60 price point)
Edit: didnt see that the original post was compairing the Montbell PARKA.
If your compairing the Micropuff Jacket, with the MontBell parka (both hooded with equal loft) Id give the nod to the MontBell. Given its performance of the lighter jacket in the BPL review, and given that it weighs almost 8 oz lighter than the MicroPuff jacket. The MontBell also costs less.Nov 7, 2005 at 10:00 am #1344537
@gungadinLocale: Pittsburgh, PA
The half-zip of the pullover would trap more air in than the Thermawrap Parka, although the Parka has a hood which is nice. I chose the Micropuff over it and found it to be very warm and great against wind. It is also lighter than what Patagonia says. My scale says more like eleven ounces not 12.5 so you would save some weight over the Montbell. The MP jacket is a lot heavier, though.Nov 7, 2005 at 10:01 am #1344538
my bad on mistaking parka for jacket— what becomes of a quick skim.
I have not used the new Montbell Parka — but on a g. for g. basis–I believe that Polarguard Delta is more efficient than Exoloft ( excelloft ?). I believe that in part this is due to the need for less stabilization of the Delta insulation compared to Montbell’s or others out there in use.Nov 7, 2005 at 1:07 pm #1344554
Quote: I believe that in part this is due to the need for less stabilization of the Delta insulation……
Dunno how you can say that, given that the Micropuff jacket is *heavily* quilted (it looks like the Michelin Man under the outer “floating” shell.Nov 7, 2005 at 1:11 pm #1344555
Quilting is not used in the BMW Cocoon Pullover( which I also have). The Patagonia’s quilting, I think is a case of overkill. Still amazingly warm for it’s 11.25 oz.(L) weight, regardless.
Perhaps Delta is more efficient due to the nature of the fiber architecture, instead.
And yes, getting back to the original poster— the Montbell Parka is probably the warmer of the two by dint of the hood, alone.Nov 7, 2005 at 5:20 pm #1344581
Im not sure that Delta IS more effecient. Ive felt far warmer in my excelloft bag vs any polarguard bag of similar insulation weight.
The Micropuff jacket has a hood as well, and weighs 20.5oz.Nov 7, 2005 at 6:00 pm #1344585
Joe– jackets and parkas and pullovers have been bandied about on this thread, in a careless manner ( including by me)—you are right about the micropuff parka weight and hood, I was referring to my micropuff pullover. On the balance, I would say advantage Patagonia when it comes to comparing the jacket vs. Montbell’s parka in the catagory of warmth.
It would be interesting to compare, side by side, a Montbell exceloft bag w/ an equivalent polarguard delta bag– perhaps by cut and total weight rather than by temp. rating. Sounds like a future BPL project.
I suspect, that in the sleeping bag dept. that Delta has not been taken advantage above in terms of design as Montbell has with it’s proprietary fill. I look forward to BMW’s upcoming delta bags to rectify this somewhat.Nov 7, 2005 at 6:06 pm #1344586
My 2004 L Patagonia Micro Puff Jacket weighs 17.4 oz. I believe the 2005 Model is heavier.
RichNov 7, 2005 at 6:10 pm #1344587
lets get afew things straight here
• 15 denier Ballistic Airlight nylon shell and lining (windproof
• Exceloft synthetic insulation (80g / m2 )(2.7 oz)
Weight: 12.7 oz.
Shell: 1.3-oz., 20 x 20 denier triple ripstop polyester with a Deluge® DWR (durable water repellent) finish; Lining: 1-oz. 20 x 20 mini-ripstop nylon with Deluge DWR finish;
Insulation: 2.7-oz. Polarguard Delta
581 g. (20.5 oz.)
thermawrap is lighter
thermawrap is cheaper
both have hand warmer pockets
both have full zipper
BOTH HAVE HOOD
micro puff has a durable water repellent (DWR) coatingNov 7, 2005 at 6:24 pm #1344589
Very good, Ryan. And thanks for the smaller image sizes.:-)>
Richard–it’s true, that was a better vintage.Nov 7, 2005 at 6:43 pm #1344591
the older thermawrap Jacket was lighter than the 2006 version as well.
2005 Jacket 7.9oz
2006 Jacket 8.8oz
all three are avalible on sale at argear.comNov 7, 2005 at 6:57 pm #1344592
Just because a synthetic fiber fill is the same weight per ounce doesn’t mean it is as warm, rebound from compression as well, be as warm when wet, have the same life expectancy, etc. Until we have tests we will not know if the Montbell Thermawrap Excel loft fill jacket is as warm as the Patagonia Polarguard Delt Micro Puff Jacket. No question however which product is lighter. Also with the new outer fabric of the Patagonia Jacket it is supposed to be tougher than last years model.
RichNov 7, 2005 at 7:02 pm #1344595
I never said if one was warmer or not, I was just comparing similarities and differences of the two jackets
but on the mont bell website it says thet exceloft will only reatin 1% of its weight in water.
makes decisions like these harderNov 7, 2005 at 7:09 pm #1344597
The small amount of water absorbed by Primaloft is part of the argument for this insulation and why the Armed Services uses it. However, according to the tests by BPL last year they indicated that though Polarguard Delta did in fact absorb more water than Primaloft, Polarguard Delta appeared to maintain more warmth than Primaloft. I am not sure if BPL could make that comment last year due to the light insulation weight of the Excel Loft used in the Montbell products.
RichNov 7, 2005 at 7:25 pm #1344601
I am no expert on this kind of stuff, both polarguard delta and exceloft have their advantages, but me personally would go with the mont bell for the weight and money savings and just be careful not to get it wet (witch I would do any way.)Nov 8, 2005 at 8:53 am #1344625
Actually, what I would be FAR ,ore interested in were a long term BPL study that compaired insulations by weight.
Ill grant that PGDelta might be warmer new from the factory, but my research of raw insulation puts its long term durability in serious question.Nov 8, 2005 at 9:09 am #1344628
I tried to ask for some thing similar to this but I guess it has already been done? your inputNov 8, 2005 at 9:11 am #1344629
and your research consists of….?Nov 8, 2005 at 9:12 am #1344630
what do you mean? my research????Nov 8, 2005 at 9:29 am #1344632
Ryan, is your name JR ? Read header—I was being laconic. I was apparently writing while you had just posted.
Joe Robbins indicated he had done some research on insulations and I wanted to find out what it was.Nov 8, 2005 at 9:37 am #1344634
I went out, and bought several types of insulation. Comfort Fil 7, PG Classic, PG HV, PG3D, PG Delta, Primaloft and Primaloft sport. All were the same weight.
I built a plexiglass box and put the insulation inside the box. I measured its thickness as a base. Then over the next few weeks I soaked, compressed, put in the dryer, and otherwise abused it. After each test, I would put it back in the box and check its loft.
I lost my documentation (I recently bought a new house and moved, I havent been able to find my notes) but one thing I recall is that for the weight, PG Delta was thicker initially, but was very fast to lose loft.
I wasnt able to test Exceloft since I couldnt get enough insulation without ripping part a new sleeping bag, but I was able to do some smaller scale tests with it… It showed similar loft recovery to PG Classic (probably due to the solid core fibers) but was much lighter (probably due to the hollow core fibers). It has also held up in the field significantly better than expected. for the small amount of raw insulation I was able to test, it also showed less water retention than expected. (I expected 3%, as claimed by MontBell when I got the sample. I got an average reading of 2% water retention by weight.)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.