Any word on the new Sea to Summit pads?

Just a summary (all regular sizes):
– Ultralight at 12,5 oz. and R = 0,7
– Ultralight Insulated at 15,5 oz. and R = 2,5
– Comfortlight at 16,2 oz. and R = 1
– Comfortlight Insulated at 20,5 oz. and R = 3,5
– Comfort Plus at 21 oz. and R = 1,5
– Comfort Plus Insulated at 25,6 oz. and R = 5

Ultralight's 2" and Comfort's 2,5" thick.

This comparison contains a review that seems less than positive:

http://indefinitelywild.gizmodo.com/outdoor-sleeping-pad-comparison-data-1659782011

Maybe packed size is good and they are quiet. 66'' for R=3.3 at 14.5 oz seems like a pretty good shoulder season pad.

I emailed Sea to Summit for some info on these pads. The rep said they would be available in early February at REI, etc.

Also, I mentioned some R-value discrepancies I found on their website. The rep was very helpful clearing it up. Initially, S2S calculated R-values very conservatively, and those numbers appear in some of the images. However, EMPA laboratories in Switzerland calculated higher R-values when these pads were independently tested. For example, the UL insulated pad has an "actual" R-value of 3.3 (vs 2.5), and the Comfort Light insulated has 4.4 (vs 3.5). I'm surprised to see that the discrepancies are still on the website. On the other hand, it is nice to know they have independent testing done on their products.

I am definitely interested in these pads. I've never found the NeoAirs to be comfortable, and I've had two new SynMat UL7's spring leaks on me…can't trust 'em anymore (they were very comfy to me while they were inflated, though). I like their inflation/quick deflation system too. Looking forward to trying one out as soon as I can, probably the Comfort Light Insulated.

Or so says my local dealer in Nebraska. The pads are listed as being Award Winning, anyone want to dig up and post a link?

Here's the page with links to all the positive reviews: http://www.seatosummit.com.au/latest-news/sea-to-summit-new-sleeping-mats-creating-a-buzz/

Just remember, unlike EN testing, there is no standard methodology or governance for R-value testing. So saying it was "independently tested" really means nothing from a credibility standpoint. Unless of course, the same independent lab has tested and benchmarked other product as well for comparison…

From the stats available, I just don't see these as all that innovative. Maybe I'm missing something?

My Synmat UL MW is 19oz, 3" thick, 25" wide, with decent warmth. I used mine every night on the JMT with no issues, so it sounds like the S2S would be somewhat LESS of everything that I'm used to… maybe more durable fabric?

Seems to me they're really trading on the comfort aspect of it — the pockets are supposed to make it feel less "pool-floaty" and more bedlike. Also the dual chambers are supposed to let you get a firm base and a softer upper.

Curious to see what they feel like IRL.

Looking at the specs, one virtue of the line is so, so many variables of thickness, warmth, and size, compared to say NeoAirs or Static Vs.

If the basic design is sufficiently comfortable you could really dial in the exact amount of each that you need.

The UltraLight Insulated Mat looks pretty nice. R 3.3, 15.5oz, and 21.5 inches wide.

It'll be interesting to see how comfortable they really are for (especially for side sleepers). That extra bit of width couldn't hurt.

In that test, it was written that it was for side sleepers highly uncomfortable.

yeah, i see that now. i think the biggest thing for side sleeping is thickness…

I've tried a few of them in local stores. My impression was that they seem good but hardly revolutionary. The ultralights are light but thin and you sink onto the ground if you are a side sleeper. The double layer comfort mats are quite comfy but also no lighter than an Exped mat of similar thickness and comfort. The insulated versions are equally heavy and bulky as Expeds if not more so. The NeoAirs are still the lightest and warmest mats, and the Expeds still win for comfort, IMO.