Feb 27, 2013 at 6:33 pm #1299786
As a precursor, I am a fan of BA products. But I am extremely DISSAPOINTED with their marketing of this product. Can't say anything about the product itself as I was so disgusted while at my local gear shop I plopped the xtra mula on the counter for the NeoAir Xlite. I have been sleeping on a 20" x 72" BA insulated air core for a year now and have been extremely happy with the pad. The craftmanship, comfort etc….. I have slept many a good night with this and my WM Alpinlite. I am a cold sleeper and the insulation is a must have even in the warmer edges of the shoulder seasons. A friend of mine told me he was going to buy his son an inflatable to upgrade him from the wal mart blue foam (kudos to my friend). My scheme went into play, I offered to sell him my BA pad and I would quickly use this money to offset the expense of the new lighter Q core SL. So, the deal was made. I went to my local shop so I could look, touch, feel and lay on it before purchase. I did my research! Specifically the pad is advertised to be 20" wide. As everyone can see by the attached PIC. This pad is certainly not 20". I mean I could understand a difference of 1/2" or even 3/4". But C'mon BA. It is clearly short by 3". I am a homebuilder and commercial builder. I have been reading a tape measure for many years! How can you sell a product and specify it's dimensions this far off! Can't be an accident! I beleive in trust but verify but BA has lost even this basic level of trust from this GEAR Junkie. Even though this is a rather lengthy post that could have been more succinct, I wanted to tell my story. To all BPL fans out there, before you consider this piece of equipment take a look at the pic below! and buyer beware!Feb 27, 2013 at 6:39 pm #1959500
Do you think they measured it before they blew it up?Feb 27, 2013 at 6:54 pm #1959504
I'm wondering about the deflated size too. Kinda like the tent makers some years back giving so many different weights except for what we wanted to know.
Other wise, how did the pad stack up?
DuaneFeb 27, 2013 at 7:04 pm #1959507
The pic does show the Q core blown up and the std. air core deflated. You guys will have to trust me but you can verify. The two pads on top of each other when deflated are not much different. When I laid on the pad my shoulders were easily overhanging the pad. I am a 5'10", weigh 195lbs and fairly muscular. I did forget to mention this, when rolling over to my side, the weight of my hips displaces the air completely out of this region of the pad and my hips fell completely to the hard ground. I sat on the edge of the pad as I would when sitting out of the front of my tent and the pad displaces and I am sitting on hard ground.Feb 27, 2013 at 7:09 pm #1959515
Ew. Way to go, BA.
Did you contact them?Feb 27, 2013 at 7:13 pm #1959516
No point, I doubled down at the table and went with the xlite. Besides, the market will ferret this out. It always does. Just doing my part with letting everyone see it with the their own eyes.Feb 27, 2013 at 7:16 pm #1959519
Maybe they have some serious quality control issues going on. I have the petite size, 3.5x20x66 and deflated it measures around 22 1/2", inflated it's right around 20". One thing that irritated me about it is that they spec the 72" at weighing 16oz. My 66" weighs in at 17.1oz on my scale. I have to say though, I find the pad extremely comfortable and I really like it. I've only used it two nights so far but I used it's heavier big brother(non SL Q-Core) on quite a few trips. I wish it weighed about 2oz less, but I can live with it.Feb 27, 2013 at 7:16 pm #1959520
@eagleriverdeeLocale: Eagle River, Alaska
That is disappointing. I had developed an interest in this pad but 20" is narrow enough. I had actually been thinking of going with the std. Q core in the 25" width despite the weight penalty. I definitely am not going to try sleeping on a 16" wide mat.Feb 27, 2013 at 7:21 pm #1959523
CB, looking at how the tape curves around, I'd call that 18" tops.Feb 27, 2013 at 8:01 pm #1959544
I'm a NeoAir fan…but FWIW…an XLite L (25" W) I got recently, is not 25"…whereas my All Season LW (25" W) is 25". I was a little disappointed, as I like the wider pads…but…I got over it.
-Mark in St. LouisFeb 27, 2013 at 8:25 pm #1959555
@m-lLocale: W-Never Eat Soggy (W)affles
I posted this in the other thread, but I agree, it is so narrow.Feb 27, 2013 at 8:30 pm #1959557
I sent mine back as well, way too narrow. Not happy with the false weight specs either.Feb 27, 2013 at 8:55 pm #1959561
@m-lLocale: W-Never Eat Soggy (W)affles
They could have used lighter fabrics too. It's pretty heavy duty, I wonder if its the same as the regular IAC.Feb 28, 2013 at 5:39 am #1959616
The difference between a 20" pad and 25" wide pad is night and day. Well worth the weight difference in weight.Feb 28, 2013 at 6:07 am #1959623
I'm really bummed to read this, and I will check it out the next time I'm down near our REI. If the pad is narrower than the 20" BA I already use, it's absolutely no good for me. Heck, if the 25" would fit in my BA bag sleeve, I'd use one and happily carry the weight for even more solid sleep.
After laying on the Q-Core in Kittridge Sports after a week on my Air-Core, I have been lusting for a lighter version, ever since. THAT pad was downright nice.Feb 28, 2013 at 6:25 am #1959626
Agreed on being really disappointed. I'm with Dena in that since I moved to a quilt I seem to want a wider pad (my arms just want to fall off all the time…), so going even more narrow than 20 is not at all appealing.
I guess I'll stick with exped for now. Boo.Feb 28, 2013 at 7:55 am #1959655
As long as your knuckles don't drag the ground, you should be fine.:)
I guess we will have to adjust our views and go with a wider, heavier BA pad for the comfort we want.
DuaneFeb 28, 2013 at 9:16 am #1959697
It seems I have really spurned some great debate. Our comfort in the backcountry and the ability for a good nights sleep is really important to me and to a great many, especially at my age (42). I wanted to make sure by reposting that I enumerated my beef a bit more succinctly instead of the lengthy original post. I was quite happy with the look, feel, touch and quality of the pad. I am sure it performs as good and maybe better than my original BA insulated air core. The weight of the pad while achieving an R-5 is awesome. My complaint is that BA advertises its original BA insulated air core at a width of 20". Now they advertise the new Q Core SL as being 20". I was expecting the pad to be the same width as the earlier. So many of us order items online and we do this on the faith that manufacturers are giving us correct information (albeit with some acceptable variation as we are accustomed to). The two products share a lineage and an expectation that they are the same was my expectation. If I had ordered this online and awaited it's arrival and encountered this, I would not have been dissappointed. I would have extremely angry. My aim with this thread was not to thwart another's purchase of this product but simply to educate. If your body type allows for this narrow of a pad than you are in luck and will be the happy owner of SUL pad with a four season R value. Otherwise, I expect and hope to have a great experience with my new Xlite pad (25).Feb 28, 2013 at 10:17 am #1959722
James, last weekend I measured my small, NeoAir to set a base figure. I thought I could live with the BA being a little smaller, this may not be acceptable. I'll have to do a retake this weekend. Thank you for the heads up. With my spending my income tax refund on all cuben gear already, bike maintenance, glasses, motorcycle camping gear, I can wait now to get a newer and lighter mattress for snow camping. Snow camping will be over in a few more months, I can use what I have already. Besides, maybe some reviews will come in or a upgraded mattress will become available.
DuaneFeb 28, 2013 at 1:16 pm #1959774
I've been doing a lot of debating about pads lately too, but ultimately I think I'm with you on sticking the the Exped pad. It's a total winner is many regards.
KJFeb 28, 2013 at 1:38 pm #1959779
I never measured it but when I laid on the pad on my back, both shoulders were hanging off the edge of the pad. I'm tall but not that wide!!! Back to te drawing board. The neo's are just too noisy!Feb 28, 2013 at 7:33 pm #1959925
"looking at how the tape curves around, I'd call that 18" tops."
Yup – it looks like it goes from 1.5" to 19" = 17.5" effective width.
I don't have the answers, but the sleeping pad market is ripe for good innovation. Thermarest has been innovating with insulating for less weight (ie. NeoAir Xtherm in particular), but few makers seem to be trying very hard to make things more comfortable at the same weights.Feb 28, 2013 at 7:35 pm #1959928
Ok all you engineer types…how much of a size/weight penalty would there really have been if they just made the darned thing 20" wide??Feb 28, 2013 at 8:09 pm #1959942
>Ok all you engineer types…how much of a size/weight penalty would there really have been if they just made the darned thing 20" wide??
Not enough of a weight penalty to not justify the status quo in comfort!Feb 28, 2013 at 8:12 pm #1959945
17.5" x 66" = 1155 in^2
17.1oz / 1155 in^2 = 0.0148 oz/in^2
20" x 66" = 1320 in^2
1320 in^2 x 0.0148 oz/in^2 = 19.54oz
So, about 2.5oz more for the extra 2.5" wide – you might even go so far as to say that for every extra inch of width, you could add an ounce of weight (to the 66" long version).
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.