Topic
Micro Puff Jacket vs.U.L.Thermawrap Parka
Forum Posting
A Membership is required to post in the forums. Login or become a member to post in the member forums!
Home › Forums › Gear Forums › Gear (General) › Micro Puff Jacket vs.U.L.Thermawrap Parka
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
Nov 10, 2005 at 6:10 pm #1344882
“it’s considered to be one of the most durable insulations on the market relative to its ability to retain and recover its loft in response to compression”
Who says? By what criteria?
Further, what constitutes “over compression”?
Nov 10, 2005 at 9:07 pm #1344905Joe–Ryan or whoever writes product copy for BPL says. You would have to ask them. I just quoted their spiel for the Cocoon Pullover.
Nov 10, 2005 at 10:37 pm #1344914I understand that, but the question still stands.
Nov 11, 2005 at 7:18 am #1344929According to ACYE over at thru-hiker.com, Delta will no longer be manufactured. Checkout his message board for his statement.
Nov 11, 2005 at 8:36 am #1344933Interesting information Tony. If its true, it would definatly confirm a few things for me.
Nov 11, 2005 at 8:54 am #1344934For those who are not into counting every last ounce the MEC Northern Lite jacket probably offers the best bang for the buck. It uses the best Primaloft insulation with a good face fabric impregnated with DWR.
Best is… $110 CDN and no production shortages.
Good luck.
Nov 11, 2005 at 9:23 am #1344938I guess that Ryan J. should be asked about both.
Paging Dr. Ryan…The thru-hiker message is dodgy. Whom or What is the mystery source? You see these kinds of rumours about everything, everyday. 9 times out of
10… what do they amount to?But, if true, what synthetic insulation options would BMW/BPL turn to for the Cocoon series products?
Including the future Arc Cocoon quilt/topbag?Nov 11, 2005 at 9:57 am #1344940” Whom or What is the mystery source?”
Probably the same mystery source Ray J got his info from… :)
“what synthetic insulation options would BMW/BPL turn to for the Cocoon series products?”
Given my choice, Id hope for exceloft. More likely, 3D would be a best bet. If your willing to take Ray J calculations to heart (http://www.ray-way.com/quilt/delta.shtml) your only talking about a very tiny weight increase. I know some people will shed a tear or two over such a minimal weight increase (Ray claims a fraction of an ounce for the total weight), but it will pay for itself in the durability of the insulation. And for the “gram weenies”, they wont be looking at anything other than down.
Nov 11, 2005 at 10:09 am #1344942delta gone? maybe replaced with a new insulation – ‘epsilon’, or 4D ???
Nov 11, 2005 at 10:19 am #1344944I hope that at some point Ryan Jordan will speak to these questions.That is, Durability and Delta’s future.
If we assume Delta is kaput—
Exceloft is a proprietary product, so don’t hold your breath, Joe. I doubt that 3D will be seen as a replacement, by many (especially as Delta was promoted as a superior product by it’s producer–it would be a business blunder). If Delta goes, I would assume that eventually a sucessor product will be developed by Polarguard (if it hasn’t already).Finally, Joe, we “gram weenies”,that you seemingly disparage, can not always turn to down for insulated clothing and bags.You know (I think) and I know that there are conditions for which down is not appropriate.
Nov 11, 2005 at 10:27 am #1344945Oh for the love of…. You take things too personally Kevin.
Firstly, “gram weenie” isnt exactly… oh forget it. Yes Kevin, Im disparaging you. Whatever.
Yes I know Exceloft is proprietary. thats why I said “given my choice” not “I hope”.
Lots of products are promoted as “superior” and turn out not to be. People who can get past names and logos will see quality where quality exists.
As for down, It can be used in ALOT of places. Those places where it cant be used youll find that conditions will prompt you to choose things primarily on function with weight being secondary, or you just wont go out. That IS why your choosing to use a synthetic insulation right? Because function supercedes weight….
Nov 11, 2005 at 10:39 am #1344946The North Face is programed to replace Delta late in 2006 with a Primaloft product. I don’t know anything about Primaloft or what different kinds they have. The person I talked to said it would be lighter than Delta and they didn’t know anything about Delta going away.
Delta has been on the market a long time and my hope is that Polarguard has Delta 2 ready to replace it and the necessary people who would like to know that – do and have the replacement.
Nov 11, 2005 at 12:11 pm #1344951Question from an ignorant newbie – were RJ’s figures describing Delta’s advantages based on a comparable weight of insulation, or based on comparable loft? I can see how if it was based on comparable loft, the less dense insulation (Delta) might not fare as well in terms of durability under repeated compression as some have said. But if RJ’s info is based on a comparable weight, then I can certainly imagine that Delta offers some real advantages in terms of insulating ability and compressibility per weight.
Nov 11, 2005 at 12:39 pm #1344955Ben, Im not sure how he came to his numbers. It does look like he is argueing about weight. Most likely compairing a sheet of (for example) .75in 3D against a sheet of .75in Delta…. which by default would be comparing loft.
Nov 11, 2005 at 12:56 pm #1344957Ben, Im not sure how he came to his numbers. It does look like he is argueing about weight. Most likely compairing a sheet of (for example) .75in 3D against a sheet of .75in Delta…. which by default would be comparing loft.
Nov 11, 2005 at 1:01 pm #1344958Joe–it’s not that I take anything that has been said on this thread personally. Yes, perhaps,I came off a bit strong. I felt that the term “gram weenie” as you used it was rather direspectful to or dismissive of a group of people to which weight is an important consideration. Granted, all things can be taken to excess, including lightening up our packs– to the point of absurdity. Ideally, weight is one of any number of considerations. Yes, function can and does trump weight. I don’t think anyone in the UL community wants to use functionally impaired gear.
The contents of my gear closet would show one that I prefer down where applicable. Ironically, I feel that synthetic Insulation in UL clothing retains it’s loft better in use than comparable weight down garments because the very small fill amounts of down are so sensitive to moisture and migration.
The result being flat,functionless insulation and coldspots, respectively.For example, BMW’s Cocoon Pullover or Montbell’s
Thermawrap Jackets vs. Montbell’s UL Down Inner jacket or even a Western Mtneering Flight. This observation is based on my personal experience of using them all in similar circumstances.
The sum conclusion being that the synthetic option may outperform the down option and even be of comparable weight .Nov 11, 2005 at 2:05 pm #1344963“. I felt that the term “gram weenie” as you used it was rather direspectful to or dismissive of a group of people to which weight is an important consideration.”
I think everyone on this site considers weight an important aspect in gear choice. Ya know.. with the whole backpacking LIGHT thing going on and all. However, as you yourself said, sometimes it gets taken to the point of absurdity. Sorry, but I think worrying about an ounce or two on a sleeping bag is absurd. Especially when your talking about a synthetic sleeping bag. Even the most weight sensitive cant tell the difference between a pack that weighs 7lbs, and one that weighs 7lbs 1oz. Its just too minute a difference. Now if that hurt your feelings, it wasnt my intention. I appologize if thats the case.
Can we move back to the topic now?
Nov 11, 2005 at 2:25 pm #1344965Back on topic (is that current or original?)— what is needed is more hard data or at least personal experience accounts concerning Delta dying prematurely and how it stacks up to other synthetic insulations.
I’ve mentioned durability of a lightweight jacket w/Delta used hard but taken care of well over close to a year’s time. What about other people’s
experiences?Nov 12, 2005 at 6:13 am #1344990sorry to throw exceloft back into the mix, I really havent been keeping up with this forum, but on the tag of my exceloft bag it says the following
High Loft < > Superior Warmth
Soft < > Comforatable
Washable < > Fast drying
Non-allergenic < > Oderless
Durable < > RefluffableExceloft is a conjugated Hollow Micro-Fiber
With Complex 3-D Crimp ProcessingI noticed the “3-D” and thought this may have similar properties to polarguard 3D
is this why it is called 3D?
Nov 12, 2005 at 9:30 am #1344991Ryan F–only a magnifying glass might yield the answer to your question. It’s possible that the profiles of both fibers are similar. You can visit the Polarguard website for more details on their product.
Exceloft differs from the Polarguard products, first and foremost, (as far as I know) by being a chopped fiber insulation (an attribute in a general sort of way is shared with Primaloft, for example) as opposed to the continuous filament approach Polarguard takes.There are many nuances to each approach.
Weighing through the often suspect claims of the manufacturers of various synthetic insulations has long been a sport practiced by the more credible reviewers.
Nov 12, 2005 at 10:07 am #1344992Exceloft is not chopped staple.
Nov 12, 2005 at 10:10 am #1344993Also, its primary departure from other continuous filaments is that it interweaves solid core thread with hollow core fibers.
With polarguard you either have solid core (classic) or hollow core (HV, 3D, Delta)
Exceloft splits the difference.
Nov 12, 2005 at 10:29 am #1344995Mr.Robbins– not only had Montbell told me in the past that Exceloft was “a non-continuous fiber” insulation (yes, with it’s unique take on combining multiple fiber/thread diameters) but in BPL’s review of lightweight synthetic high loft jackets, and I quote, “Montbell Exceloft is a non-continuous (cut staple) insulation that uses multiple diameters of polyester threads to provide structure and insulation.”
Really, this is almost besides the point. Let’s talk performance, claims of performance, or even lies about performance.
Nov 12, 2005 at 12:36 pm #1345001I have two pieces of Delta that are 5 yards long by how ever wide it is and I might cut a small piece and weight it if that would answer any questions. It is 3/4″ thick and is really virgin stuff. I have a few pictures that I took of it also someplace and could take a few more pictures if that would answer any questions. I have been saving this stuff for over a year so I don’t really want to mess it up with compression tests etc.
Nov 12, 2005 at 2:37 pm #1345003Mr Davidson,
In standing inside MontBells flagship store in Boulder, I was told by their sleeping bag specialist that Exceloft was continous filament. Also, the small peice I was able to test did not appear to be cut staple in any way.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Forum Posting
A Membership is required to post in the forums. Login or become a member to post in the member forums!
Our Community Posts are Moderated
Backpacking Light community posts are moderated and here to foster helpful and positive discussions about lightweight backpacking. Please be mindful of our values and boundaries and review our Community Guidelines prior to posting.
Get the Newsletter
Gear Research & Discovery Tools
- Browse our curated Gear Shop
- See the latest Gear Deals and Sales
- Our Recommendations
- Search for Gear on Sale with the Gear Finder
- Used Gear Swap
- Member Gear Reviews and BPL Gear Review Articles
- Browse by Gear Type or Brand.