Primaloft Silver and Gold now available @ RBTR

[WV]

I've used Primaloft without sewn-through quilting for the most part. I did make a top quilt with two layers of Primaloft, and I sewed the top layer to the top cover - 1 seam down the middle lengthwise. I sewed the bottom layer crosswise to the bottom cover, spacing the seams 24" apart. It doesn't seem to shift, and there are no sewn-through thin spots. I've done the same with Climashield. Nowadays, my construction methods are entirely different: I make up shaped insulating layers out of triangles that vary from 12" to 18" on a side. Before assembling the triangles to make the insulating layer I fasten Primaloft to each one, sewing around the edges. The insulating layer is sewn to the hammock around the edges only.

[Tr1ppler]

To avoid the sewn through quilting effecting loft could one sew baffled channels and slide a piece of Primaloft into the channel that was cut to size? You would then be able to take advantage of the higher CLO?

[Yojimbo]

I've noticed that some sleeping bags that I have are sewn with the same criss cross pattern as described by WV. this seems a good way to tie down the PS while maintaining an even loft.

[Just Bill]

I've used Primaloft without sewn-through quilting for the most part. I did make a top quilt with two layers of Primaloft, and I sewed the top layer to the top cover - 1 seam down the middle lengthwise. I sewed the bottom layer crosswise to the bottom cover, spacing the seams 24" apart. It doesn't seem to shift, and there are no sewn-through thin spots. I've done the same with Climashield. Nowadays, my construction methods are entirely different: I make up shaped insulating layers out of triangles that vary from 12" to 18" on a side. Before assembling the triangles to make the insulating layer I fasten Primaloft to each one, sewing around the edges. The insulating layer is sewn to the hammock around the edges only.

Kyle,

This post (and more) is what I am looking to hear. I suspect the degradation is overblown, or at least in the case of patagonia and a lifetime warranty, better safe than sorry.
Regarding a lighter layer of gold...

That would make a ton of sense if what WV posted works well enough for MYOG. If a 1.5/2oz. Layer (with scrim) was available you could get a quilt built with offset quilting that would beat Apex. If 24" o.c. Quilting worked I would start at 24" off the top shell and 12" off the bottom shell with one light layer per side. I would go horizontal on both layers. My concern with the 3 or 4 oz available is using it in a single layer application and the resulting sewn thru quilt. splitting that layer with offset quilting 24" oc would alleviate my issues.

Unless I really expected to be wet I wouldn't mess with a double layer synthetic much, at 20 degrees I'm switching to down, so making that 3 or 4 oz. primaloft two layers would be a winner for me.

Unless you really killed it on the apex, I'd continue to get it from AYCE. Unless you can get the next gen after Apex...

If you were doing baffles, you might as well go down... The best thing for myog about synthetic is easy project.

On the black product... Likely a car camping or heavy hauler use where cost is a factor, but wouldn't be interested personally.

[BillyBob58]

This is GREAT info BB and JB!! Having a rough guideline of degC/clo for different applications is very useful. I'm definitely going to compile some of this and put it on the website as a reference for people to use.

The original 40-50 degC I mentioned was for a commercially available sleeping bag. I later found out that when the final prototype was tested, they ended up having to back off the insulation because the original estimates were too conservative (i.e. bag turned out to be warmer than anticipated). That seems to jive with everything you guys are saying.

What about having something lighter, say a 1-2 oz/yd2 gold that would allow more fine tuning of the temp rating? Another option would seem to be the Black line that has a clo of around 0.65 I believe. It's also a lot cheaper.

Thx Rip! BTW, I see that "C" after your deg. Don't know if you meant "F" or not, but just to be clear/just in case, when I report on that 1 time I used a 2.5 oz layer of CS XP(rated CLO .82 per 1 OSY, total CLO 2.5 oz*.82 per oz= 2.05) under me and was warm enough mid to hi 40s with no other layers than cotton jeans and T shirt, I mean mid 40sF.
Bill

[ripstopbytheroll]

Thx Rip! BTW, I see that "C" after your deg. Don't know if you meant "F" or not, but just to be clear/just in case, when I report on that 1 time I used a 2.5 oz layer of CS XP(rated CLO .82 per 1 OSY, total CLO 2.5 oz*.82 per oz= 2.05) under me and was warm enough mid to hi 40s with no other layers than cotton jeans and T shirt, I mean mid 40sF.
Bill

Ha, yes I definitely meant "F" and not "C". Just a spill over from engineering where we deal in Celsius. I design high-power amplifiers that generate a LOT of heat and there the relevant term is thermal resistance (degC/W) for a given material. In that case we're trying to get the heat out though, not keep it in.

[turbo1889]

After some internet searches I found this, where it is claimed that 800fp down can be considered as CLO = 1.62 for comparisons to synthetic insulation

Based on that would it be correct that choosing between Primaloft and 800fp down as sold on your site can be simplified as a trade off of:

"For the same amount of warmth: Half the cost for twice the weight OR twice the cost for half the weight."

That is what the numbers look like to me comparing prices and weight to achieve the same theoretical amount of warmth (CLO) on your website. The primaloft silver of course being a little cheaper and a little heavier and the primaloft gold being a little more expensive and a little lighter for the same CLO but both coming close to that twice for half trade-off between weight and insulation cost for the same amount of warmth.

[BillyBob58]

After some internet searches I found this, where it is claimed that 800fp down can be considered as CLO = 1.62 for comparisons to synthetic insulation

Based on that would it be correct that choosing between Primaloft and 800fp down as sold on your site can be simplified as a trade off of:

"For the same amount of warmth: Half the cost for twice the weight OR twice the cost for half the weight."

That is what the numbers look like to me comparing prices and weight to achieve the same theoretical amount of warmth (CLO) on your website. The primaloft silver of course being a little cheaper and a little heavier and the primaloft gold being a little more expensive and a little lighter for the same CLO but both coming close to that twice for half trade-off between weight and insulation cost for the same amount of warmth.

Well, I can see where you would think that based on those numbers maybe, but in real life- or at least based on my experience and others I have read about here, no way Jose! (Excuse my Spanish )

Twice the weight of down for same amount of warmth? Personally, and this is just IMHO and I realize I could have something way wrong, but it is debatable to me if 800 FP down- especially with the lighter quilts meant for above 40F or so- is warmer AT ALL for the weight. There, I said it and I'm glad!

Now I realize that cries of blasphemy are going up across the land. But I think I have already posted my logic ( or maybe lack thereof?) earlier in this thread, but if I have not I have done so more than once in other threads. And no one has chimed in to point out what error I am making.

Quick summary of previous post: I have been warm in the mid-hi 40s in a Climashield XP Yeti with a total of 2.5 oz CS beneath me. Some other folks have reported similar results. I don't think there exists an UQ rated 40-50 that has as little as 2.5 oz of 800 or even 900 FP down in it. If there is, please correct my error and point it out to me. And whatever the amount of down, you must add some small amount of weight for baffles unless it is a sewn through quilt. I do know of one 40-45 rated full length UQ that has 6 oz of 800+ down, so maybe at most cut that in half for a Yeti sized? Which would give you 3 oz of down. I know of another 40F rated short UQ that has 4 oz of 850 down, plus baffles. Then there are the well thought of and well reviewed AHE KAQs, where a 14 oz 3/4 UQ (40X54 800 FP down) has about the same temp rating as the slightly larger (42X58 CS) that weighs about 20 oz(but I think mine is 18 oz) Actually, the CS model is rated 25F and the down rated 30F, but same ballpark)

So, whether CS or down, the warmth to weight seems to me to be in the same ballpark. I don't see any huge differences, certainly not twice as warm. At best slightly warmer for the weight, if any.

But, here is what down definitely is: about 2+ times as thick for the weight. However, thicker does not always mean warmer when comparing different materials. The previously mentioned KAQ CS models are my best guess ~ 1.4" thick/loft. The KAQ down model is more like 3" thick. About the same temp rating. And these CS KAQ ratings have been proven quite conservative by many users here. So for most folks they are going to be even warmer than rated. But most any down will always be thicker for the weight. So they are certainly going to look warmer.

Also, while being much thicker for the weight, it will pack down significantly smaller, which can be a big plus for some folks.

[Just Bill]

Yar, a confussing topic to be sure.
Try this-CLO vs Down.pdf

Keep in mind- I'm a ground dweller, but the info is basically the same. In my limited experience thus far, wind chill or "real feel" temp is a better number to use for UQ's. TQ's should work the same as on the ground.

There is more to this than CLO or loft- but this compares the two a bit more apples to apples.
Down is based upon loft- which has nothing to do with area (yards), only weight and fill power
Synthetics are based upon CLO- which is based upon ounces per square yard.
So this chart puts the two together based upon temps.
Loft does not equate to CLO! But loft and CLO can be compared by expected temps.
I included a warm sleeper and cold sleeper temp rating. Keep in mind- these temps assume you have on a base layer.
Finally- you can boil down the various fills to the ounces per yard needed.
Ounces of fill per sy yard is the only thing that matters, IMO.

WHY?
Because of construction.
Synthetic fills do not require baffles. Baffles add weight.
A typical full size quilt requires 5 yards of fabric to make the shells- regardless of fill- you need the shell- so still apples to apples.
A DOWN quilt requires baffle material, roughly 2 yards per quilt.
A SYNTHETIC requires no baffle material- no weight penalty.

Say you build an Argon .67 quilt.
In down- you need to add (.67x2 x1.05) 1.4 ounces of baffle material to the weight of the down. In synthetic you need zero.
So if you look at the green comparison- a 40/50 degree quilt needs 2.16 oz of down OR 2.5 oz of Apex. PER SQ YD.
The quilt takes 2.5 yards of fill-
Apex- 2.5yards*2.5oz= 6.25 oz
900 Fill- 2.5yards*2.16oz=5.4 oz + 1.4 ounces of baffles= 6.8 oz.
This number DOES NOT include "overstuff" which is typically at 25% for down. 25% overstuff would add 1.35 ounces.

This reason alone is why synthetic is "better" at about 35/45 degrees.
Something else critical, especially in low temp (30*F or higher) is to look at the baffle heights. 1.5" of baffle in 900 fill down means lots of cold spots, even with overstuff. To solve this you either have to do a sewn through quilt or decrease (add more material) the baffle distance. If you look at a typical down puffy you will notice that the chambers are more like little cylinders than rectangular baffles.
At temps above freezing- moisture is an issue as well- but that's a different discussion.

Point being-
You will see that at the green, orange, and yellow highlighted temps- you'll reach the point where down starts to beat synthetic for each fill.
The exception for you hangers that I can see- Down does a better job conforming to the geometry needed for an UQ. More accurately- you don't need a perfect fit in a down quilt to achieve the desired rating- so Down is more "hanger friendly" in an UQ in my opinion- although if you have to add in an UQ protector to your down because it's exposed- you should consider the weight of that as part of the UQ system weight- and again re-evaluate if the total system makes sense.

Same issue if you are adding heavier shell materials to protect your down. Synthetics not only work when wet, but require little or no protection (I.E.- a stray bush snagging you UQ will not cause a feather explosion, just require a stitch or two to patch)

My opinion- I would rather spend my ounces and grams on insulation, not material to make the insulation work or protect it from failure. So I would stay synthetic well into the 30's or 20's before considering down. Today's synthetics are much more packable than even 5-10 years ago.

This all also assumes cost is no object- material and construction costs are much higher in down- although I can see how some complex geometry UQ's could be relatively expensive to make compared to a TQ. But bottom line, material costs can easily double, construction time can quadruple with down.

Down does allow for infinite adjustment via fill weight. Synthetic comes in batts or sheets of a fixed size- so when Apex 2.5 isn't enough, you have to double it to 5 ounces per yard. Down can be micro adjusted to the gram.

What still isn't clear- how far you can push the Primaloft outside spec and still hit the expected ratings. Even with that unknown, Climashield Apex is still a winner in my book. There are other "flavors" but I personally am not a fan of the High Loft variety and trust the Apex 2.5.

There are many other pros and cons- to debate for sure- but on warmth per weight at least the math is there.

[BillyBob58]

Hey Just Bill,
Super helpful post overall! Love the math, and good research! You are right, the math is there, and real world experience seems to back it up. But I do have questions or a different opinion on a couple of items.

............................................

This reason alone is why synthetic is "better" at about 35/45 degrees.
Something else critical, especially in low temp (30*F or higher) is to look at the baffle heights. 1.5" of baffle in 900 fill down means lots of cold spots, even with overstuff. To solve this you either have to do a sewn through quilt or decrease (add more material) the baffle distance. If you look at a typical down puffy you will notice that the chambers are more like little cylinders than rectangular baffles.
At temps above freezing- moisture is an issue as well- but that's a different discussion.

Not quite understanding your point about a 1.5" baffle = lot's of cold spots. Seems to me with any size baffle the degree of cold spots would be determined by how much down is put into a baffle. Can you elaborate?

The exception for you hangers that I can see- Down does a better job conforming to the geometry needed for an UQ. More accurately- you don't need a perfect fit in a down quilt to achieve the desired rating- so Down is more "hanger friendly" in an UQ in my opinion- although if you have to add in an UQ protector to your down because it's exposed- you should consider the weight of that as part of the UQ system weight- and again re-evaluate if the total system makes sense.

My thinking has been sort of the opposite, though I am open to other theories. At least when using a sheet of CS in my differential cut Yeti. This allows me to pull the inner shell nice and snug against my back. Which causes it to form a nice "U" shape around my shoulders and side staying in good, gap free contact. Thus I have been just fine down into the 40s with a 2.5 oz layer, and not even wearing warm layers to help. I have read of other folks doing good with a 2.5 oz layer at these temps with an UQ. But, when I have researched outside this site about 2.5 oz quilts, seems like the people were reporting only being OK into the 50s for the most part with a 2.5 osy CS TQ. This made me wonder if a down TQ might layer down on top of me, contacting all areas and filling nooks and crannies so to speak, better than a somewhat stiffer sheet of CS. Which in a TQ is only being pulled against me by gravity, as opposed to me pulling it tight against my back with my UQ suspension. Any thoughts on that? (that is all just wild guess work on my part)
Bill