Thermarest Ridge Rest SOLAR

I'm ordering one on Friday. I figured i could always use another regular Ridge Rest if it was not as warm as stated.If it's as warm as it's supposed to be i will likely buy another to cut down to use as my dogs winter pad and use the scraps as a winter sit pad for me.

–Bigfoot

Sid,
I was thinking the same thing. I don't like all the extra involved in a DAM. I've ordered my RRsolar and am going to give it a try once the weather is right. I'll post photos and first impressions once it arrives.

I don't get it…it allegedly increases the R-value by 0.9 (from 2.6 to 3.5), yet they claim a mere 14% increase in warmth. Which is it? 14% increase doesn't sound exceptional. Or maybe I don't understand R-values. Is an increase in R-value of 30% really only 14% warmer?

You need to compare it to the previous "deluxe" ridgerest with the same weight and an R of 3.1 hence the +.4 = +13%.

Matt – looking forward to your review.

"You need to compare it to the previous "deluxe" ridgerest with the same weight and an R of 3.1 hence the +.4 = +13%."

Ahhh, that's a bit misleading. They claim there is no weight gain, and then claim the R-value goes from 2.6 to 3.5. Obviously there is some weight gain to get that increase in R-value…

I believe what Thermarest is claiming is that the reflective coating provides a 14% increase in warmth with no added weight, which is correct. The reason the RR Solar is heavier than the regular RR is because the RR solar thicker, not because the coating adds weight. The RR solar is actually a RR deluxe. They are both 0.75" thick, whereas the regular RR is 0.625" thick. Essentially, Thermarest has simply added a reflective coating to the RR Deluxe to boost R-value at no weight gain and given it a new name. Hopefully down the road they offer a solar version of the regular Ridgerest so we can get the 0.4 R-value increase on that mattress too, at no additional weight.

Even better would be if Thermarest offered a new RidgeRest Solar UL, which used the reflective coating idea to give you the same R-value as the regular Ridgerest but in a thinner, lighter package. I bet a 0.5" solar Ridgerest would have about the same R-value as the current 0.625 Ridgerest but it would be lighter. By offering the 0.5" RidgeRest Solar UL you could get similar warmth and comfort for a few ounces less.

To avoid confusion it probably should have been called the RidgeRest Deluxe Solar.
The one discussed here is the 2cm thick version . Same specs (weight and size) as the previous (DeLuxe) version but warmer.
So theoretically the standard version with the Solar coating would go up from 2.6 to 2.9 but retain the same weight and size.
Franco

I just noticed that Andrew Skurka is currently using the Ridge Rest Solar on his AK-YT expedition as his winter pad. If it can keep Skurka warm in those conditions, I would say it should definitely be warm enough for my needs. I think I'm going to go ahead and make the purchase, it's not very expensive anyway.

-Sid

That made me notice that he has his full length prototype listed at 15.9oz. That would make it 3oz lighter than advertised. Can anyone that has one verify this?

I'm a Ridgerest user only in winter when I use it under a Thermarest Trail Pro for expected sub-zero conditions.

BUT, I am soon going to replace my 12 year old Thermarest LITE W/A PROLITE regular if they will make it with a reflective layer on the inner side of the bottom skin. Makes sense to me B/C there's a lot of area there W/O any foam. The reflective inner coating on the bottom would cut down on convective heat loss.

Cascade Designs are you LISTENING???

The normal RR is 1.5cm thick with a quoted R of 2.6. The RR Solar is 2cm thick with a quoted R of 3.5.

If we assume the reflective coating does nothing, what would we expect the R value of the RR Solar to be? 2.6 * 2cm / 1.5cm = 3.47, rounded to 3.5. So the R-value of the RR solar appears to be entirely due to the increased thickness (relative to the normal RR). It doesn't look like the reflective coating adds anything significant at all.

"The normal RR is 1.5cm thick with a quoted R of 2.6. The RR Solar is 2cm thick with a quoted R of 3.5.

If we assume the reflective coating does nothing, what would we expect the R value of the RR Solar to be? 2.6 * 2cm / 1.5cm = 3.47, rounded to 3.5. So the R-value of the RR solar appears to be entirely due to the increased thickness (relative to the normal RR). It doesn't look like the reflective coating adds anything significant at all."

The published R-value for the RidgeRest Deluxe is 3.1, and since this is basically a modified Deluxe the reflective layer does seem to be doing something.

Does anyone have an update on these pads? Are they as warm as advertised? Are they, as in Skurka's prototype, lighter than spec?

I suspect Andrew Skurka probably trimmed his Ridgerest, as he has stated in the past that he does, and that is the likely explenation as to why it weighs less than the manufacturer's spec's.

You might be right, but my Ridgerest and Z-Lite were both under the manufacturer's spec. I was curious if this was a trend or if I was just lucky.

I thought I would ressurect this thread from the dead. I'm not sure if this has already been mentioned.

Cascade Designs has released a new pad with the same reflective coating as the Ridge Rest Solar, but in a lighter package. We've established that the Ridge Rest Solar is just the Ridge Rest Deluxe with the reflective coating. The new Ridge Rest SOLite is the Ridge Rest with the reflective coating. It is a bit thinner, thus, has a lower R value (2.8). The one thing that is a bit confusing to me is the weight listed in the specs on their website. The size regular Ridge Rest Solar and the size regular Ridge Rest SOLite are listed to have the same weight at 19 oz. Being that they have the same dimensions, I don't see how they can possibly weigh the same when the Ridge Rest Solar is 2 cm and the Ridge Rest SOLite is 1.5 cm. Seems to me the Ridge Rest SOLite should be a bit lighter. Is this just a mistake on the website?

-Sid

I looked them over and they should be comfy enough for a CCF pad, but the full length one makes a pretty fat roll. Expect to store it outside your pack. At least you can flop them down anywhere and not worry about punctures.

I wish they would pull this off with a Z-Lite.

My full length Ridgerest Solar is 17.3oz for what it is worth.

***I suspect Andrew Skurka probably trimmed his Ridgerest, as he has stated in the past that he does, and that is the likely explenation as to why it weighs less than the manufacturer's spec's.***

The regular size SOLAR is a fairly fat roll. I took a knife to mine cutting it down to about 50"or so and it becomes a more reasonable size allowing it to attach a bit more easily to the pack. Using the a simple math formula taking the wt. of the manufactured length the trimmed roll comes in between 12 and 13 ozs.

"My full length Ridgerest Solar is 17.3oz for what it is worth." -Bradford Rogers

Wow, not often do you see products from mainstream manufacturers having a LOWER weight than what is stated on their websites. 17.3 oz for full length is not bad at all considering how high the R Value is. I think I will e-mail Cascade Designs directly to find out what the real weight of the Ridge Rest SOLite is. I'll let you guys know if I find out anything.

-Sid

Sid for what it is worth my regular Ridgerest is 12.75oz while the specs are 14oz. I do agree that it is rare to see that, both the self inflating mats I owned from them were +/- .1oz.

I trim mine down to fit inside the sleeping bag. I had to experiment some to get something that fit correctly but now that it is done is works wonderfully without goofing up how my bag works. You lay right on the Z-rest so if you are naked you stick but I sleep in long underwear anyway.

My trimmed version is 5.8oz and it adds tremendously to the sleeping system (I use a self-inflator under) when needed in colder seasons.