Help on Lite Loft Bag
stor...@?*frontiernet.net
Hi
I have a slumberjack Thinsulate Lite Loft 20d bag that is about 5 years
old. I am finding that I am now cold in it at 35d (in a tent) and I am
usually a very warm sleeper. I have heard that Synths lose much
effectiveness after a few years, but was hoping Lite Loft would be
different. This bag never lofted a lot, not like my down bags, but I
always thought it was indicative of Lite Loft's features. Anyone have
any tips for rejuvinating a lite loft bag or should I write it off and
face the prosepct of a new bag? I have taken good care of the bag -
always stored it loosely and aired it out after each use...
thanks,
Rick
--
***NOTICE***
Sorry for the inconvenience - Please remove the * from my e-mail address
It's there to discourage Spammers (Whom we love to hate !!!)
Rick Story
Bill Salmon
storyman@?*frontiernet.net wrote:
> I have a slumberjack Thinsulate Lite Loft 20d bag that is about 5 years
> old. I am finding that I am now cold in it at 35d (in a tent) and I am
> usually a very warm sleeper. I have heard that Synths lose much
> effectiveness after a few years, but was hoping Lite Loft would be
> different. This bag never lofted a lot, not like my down bags, but I
> always thought it was indicative of Lite Loft's features. Anyone have
> any tips for rejuvinating a lite loft bag or should I write it off and
> face the prosepct of a new bag? I have taken good care of the bag -
> always stored it loosely and aired it out after each use...
Sorry, I'm afraid you'll have to give up on that bag, but you CAN get
Slumberjack or 3M (the makers of LiteLoft) to replace the bag. Despite
3M's frequent denials and often-advertised guarantee of longevity,
LiteLoft bags lose up to half their original lofts in as little as 9
months. In this regard, it is even poorer than Polarguard HV, which
doesn't retain its loft near as long as the original Polarguard. (It's
too early for much data on Polarguard 3D.)
Many of us were stung by LiteLoft when it first came out, and have
resumed using down. A properly cared-for, high quality down bag can be
counted on to last 20 years. In the long run, it's more economical than
buying six or more synthetic bags during the same period.
Bill Salmon
> ***NOTICE***
> Sorry for the inconvenience - Please remove the * from my e-mail address
> It's there to discourage Spammers (Whom we love to hate !!!)
> Rick Story
--
To send email, just remove the "FUBAR" from my return address.
SRE
On Sun, 04 May 1997 22:09:31 -0700, Bill Salmon <bsa...@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:
> Many of us were stung by LiteLoft when it first came out, and have
>resumed using down. A properly cared-for, high quality down bag can be
>counted on to last 20 years. In the long run, it's more economical than
>buying six or more synthetic bags during the same period.
Who's buying 6 bags? 3M guarantees it, so when it wears out you get a new
bag. Free. I don't see a problem with this system as long as 3M does not
back down on their warranty.
I'm on my second one and loving it. Sierra Designs sent it to me no
questions asked, never had to deal with 3M (they did that for me).
In the summer or three-season bag range, down is much too likely to get wet
and be of no use. I routinely get in my Lite Loft bag with wet feet, and I
sometimes bring wet clothes into the bag so they'll dry off overnight. By
the time the temps really drop outside, the clothes are dry and you are
warm the whole night. Don't do that with a down bag.
Michael L. Margolis
: I have a slumberjack Thinsulate Lite Loft 20d bag that is about 5 years
: usually a very warm sleeper. I have heard that Synths lose much
: effectiveness after a few years, but was hoping Lite Loft would be
: different. This bag never lofted a lot, not like my down bags, but I
: always thought it was indicative of Lite Loft's features. Anyone have
: any tips for rejuvinating a lite loft bag or should I write it off and
: face the prosepct of a new bag? I have taken good care of the bag -
: always stored it loosely and aired it out after each use...
I'm pretty sure that 3M has "sleep warm" guarantee (or something like
that), which basically says that "If your LiteLoft(tm) bag looses it's
warmth (not volume!) , 3M will replace it free of charge". So basically
if you think that over time your LiteLoft bag became colder (not less
lofter!), you can get a replacement". Check if this statement is true
for your bag.
: thanks,
: Rick
Mike
Paul Weiss
In article <5kja46$1d...@node2.frontiernet.net>, storyman@?*frontiernet.net
wrote:
> Hi
>
> I have a slumberjack Thinsulate Lite Loft 20d bag that is about 5 years
> old. I am finding that I am now cold in it at 35d (in a tent) and I am
> usually a very warm sleeper. I have heard that Synths lose much
> effectiveness after a few years, but was hoping Lite Loft would be
> different. This bag never lofted a lot, not like my down bags, but I
> always thought it was indicative of Lite Loft's features. Anyone have
> any tips for rejuvinating a lite loft bag or should I write it off and
> face the prosepct of a new bag? I have taken good care of the bag -
> always stored it loosely and aired it out after each use...
> thanks,
Based on a significant amount of customer feedback, it's been our
experience that 3M has significantly over-rated the capabilities of
Thinsulate Lite Loft. We have taken to selling a bag with an original
manufacturer's rating of 20 degrees, for example, (as suggested by 3M),
with the warning that it is probably not effective for any better than 25
to 30 degrees for a person with a warm metabolism or 30 to 35 degrees
for someone that sleeps cold. We've also discovered that they lose what
warmth they had at a faster rate than Hollofil or Polarguard HV bags with
similar ratings.
In short, I think you've probably got a good quality, very light and
compressible summer bag on your hands now but you'd better head out to
shop for a new 3-season bag! Consider spending some more on a good quality
down bag which will have a life of up to 20 years. Some brands which come
to mind include the North Face, Marmot, Feathered Friends, Mountain
Hardwear, and Integral Designs. At Backwater Trails, we're especially high
on Mountain Hardwear and Integral Designs.
--
Cheers,
Paul Weiss
Backwater Trails: http://www.netaccess.on.ca/~cpweiss/BWT/BWT.html
E-mail: cpw...@netaccess.on.ca
Personal Home Page: http://www.netaccess.on.ca/~cpweiss/
Quote:"The surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that it has never tried to contact us."
"Does anal retentive have a hyphen?"
Bill Salmon
SRE wrote:
> ... 3M guarantees [LiteLoft], so when it wears out you get a new
> bag. Free. I don't see a problem with this system as long as 3M does not
> back down on their warranty.
>
> I'm on my second one and loving it. Sierra Designs sent it to me no
> questions asked, never had to deal with 3M (they did that for me).
>
> In the summer or three-season bag range, down is much too likely to get wet
> and be of no use. I routinely get in my Lite Loft bag with wet feet, and I
> sometimes bring wet clothes into the bag so they'll dry off overnight. By
> the time the temps really drop outside, the clothes are dry and you are
> warm the whole night. Don't do that with a down bag.
It's a moot point, because you'll notice that this year LiteLoft is
being phased out by virtually all sleeping-bag makers, to be replaced by
Polarguard 3D. Although the industry is not talking openly about the
problems they've had with LiteLoft, they are moving away from it. Now
only time will tell about Polarguard 3D.
It's a shame about LiteLoft. It stuffed well and felt good -- almost
like down.
Bill
Mongo
I had a Sierra Designs Northernlite (liteloft) sleeping bag that lost
it's loft after about 2 years of moderate use and gentle care. Sierra
Designs cheerfully replaced the bag with a Polarguard 3D bag (they gave
me the option of either liteloft or 3D for the replacement bag). What
you should do is call or write Slumberjack and tell them your liteloft
bag has gone flat and that you are extremely dissatisfied, and think
liteloft is a defective product. I would be willing to bet that they
would replace it for free. (I believe that 3M guarantees liteloft and
will replace the bag for the manufacturer.) In my opinion, it will
probably be easier to deal with Slumberjack than 3M..... Good luck.
storyman@?*frontiernet.net wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I have a slumberjack Thinsulate Lite Loft 20d bag that is about 5 years
> old. I am finding that I am now cold in it at 35d (in a tent) and I am
> usually a very warm sleeper. I have heard that Synths lose much
> effectiveness after a few years, but was hoping Lite Loft would be
> different. This bag never lofted a lot, not like my down bags, but I
> always thought it was indicative of Lite Loft's features. Anyone have
> any tips for rejuvinating a lite loft bag or should I write it off and
> face the prosepct of a new bag? I have taken good care of the bag -
> always stored it loosely and aired it out after each use...
> thanks,
> Rick
> --
Hugh Callaghan TOK
: It's a moot point, because you'll notice that this year LiteLoft is
: being phased out by virtually all sleeping-bag makers, to be replaced by
: Polarguard 3D. Although the industry is not talking openly about the
: problems they've had with LiteLoft, they are moving away from it. Now
: only time will tell about Polarguard 3D.
What about PrimaLoft and PrimaLoft 2? They're used in (at least) some
of the Integral Designs bags ... it's supposed to be a synthetic down
of pretty high quality. I'd be interested in hearing anyone's verdict
on its performance. I was thinking of getting a synthetic bag for ages
but never found one that was just right.
What happens to a down bag that gets wet though? OK, it loses its loft
and warmth if you try and sleep in it, but does it affect it after you
dry it out again? I mean, is a down bag permanently ruined if it gets
wet?
Thanks for any info,
Hugh
Bill Salmon
Hugh Callaghan TOK wrote:
> What happens to a down bag that gets wet though? OK, it loses its loft
> and warmth if you try and sleep in it, but does it affect it after you
> dry it out again? I mean, is a down bag permanently ruined if it gets
> wet?
No. Down bags, when gently dried and fluffed, return to their original
loft. (After all, they are best cleaned by washing them with a gentle
soap.)
Once upon a time, when I was a callow youth, I did manage to get a down
bag wet enough to lose half of its loft. I was camped on wet snow one
March for four days in a more or less constant drizzle, and I cooked in
the tent, with relatively little ventilation. _Everything_ was dripping,
and my bag got pretty damp by the end of the third day.
However, since that time I have camped many times under conditions
just as bad, but without cooking inside the tent with the doors closed.
And I have never again had a down bag absorb significant moisture or
lose any measurable loft.
One final note about down. For years I have wondered about the claims
of Paul Petzold and of the synthetic-bag manufacturers that down
hungrily absorbs the moisture given off by the human body during sleep.
Three years ago, I stopped wondering and started measuring. Ever since
then, on some 20 camping trips during wet and frigid conditions, I have
weighed my down bag before I got into it at night and again in the
morning when I woke up. I have never yet been able to observe a
measurable weight gain from moisture. (My scale is readable to +/- 0.5
oz.) Even when I was camping in four days of 100% humidity and nearly
constant rain, I have not been able to measure a gain in weight in my
down bag. Although I used to believe the theory that down is prone to
this problem, I no longer do.
It _is_ true that when the ambiant temperature is well below zero
Fahrenheit, the outer layers of insulation in a winter sleeping bag will
be below freezing, and that water vapor given off by the human body will
condense and freeze in the outer layers of the bag. But this is true no
matter whether the insulation is down or a synthetic. The solution in
this situation is to use a vapor-barrier liner inside the bag.
Peter Clinch
Hugh Callaghan TOK wrote:
>
> What happens to a down bag that gets wet though? OK, it loses its loft
> and warmth if you try and sleep in it, but does it affect it after you
> dry it out again? I mean, is a down bag permanently ruined if it gets
> wet?
No, it's fine, or you could never wash them... Check out
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/downcare.htm for some details on how
to look after down.
It should be noted that wet down is probably more liable to be damaged
than dry down, so be even more careful with a wet bag than a dry one.
Absolutely *don't* wring water out of it, but squeeze it.
Though it's true that wet down is pretty bloody hopeless, this seems to
have implied the popular myth that it's Quite All Right to get synthetic
bags wet, which it isn't. A wet synthetic bag will insulate less, weigh
and bulk more and be, well, *wet* to sleep in compared to a dry one, so
in reality it's just as important to keep a synthetic bag dry as a down
one. Though the consequences aren't as bad as with down if you fail,
they're still bad and you still don't want it to happen.
I've started using a welded neoprene canoe dry bad in lieu of the
original stuffsac to carry mine around in 'orrible weather: it'll keep
it dry if I drop my pack in a river, and I don't think this is excessive
for *any* sleeping bag in wet conditions, though good neoprene liners
with taped seams should be sufficient. There are doomsayers about who
say you can't use down bags in (pick a location, often New England), but
I use mine happily in Scotland, not known for its arid climate, and the
awesomely wet backcountry of New Zealand is home to Macpac's down bags.
Proper care with packing, especially combined with modern coatings for
the shells (dryloft, drilite etc) to keep water out, mean you can use a
down bag almost anywhere.
Pete (8 thigh deep fast river crossings and 5 hours rain on Sunday, so I
know all about *wet* right now!).
--
Peter Clinch Dundee University & Teaching Hospitals
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 3637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.c...@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
Peter Clinch
SRE wrote:
>
> On Sun, 04 May 1997 22:09:31 -0700, Bill Salmon <bsa...@worldnet.att.net>
> wrote:
> > Many of us were stung by LiteLoft when it first came out, and have
> >resumed using down. A properly cared-for, high quality down bag can be
> >counted on to last 20 years. In the long run, it's more economical than
> >buying six or more synthetic bags during the same period.
The economies are less relevant to many than the performance aspect.
Down bags weigh less and bulk less than synthetic equivalents.
> Who's buying 6 bags? 3M guarantees it, so when it wears out you get a new
> bag. Free. I don't see a problem with this system as long as 3M does not
> back down on their warranty.
if it wears out prematurely, yes. If it wears out after a reasonable
period (about 5 years for a synthetic) I doubt you'll get another, so
you'll be buying 2 or 3 rather than 6, and even a succession of free
bags is far from perfect, as it has to be useless before you can send it
back and that means staying off the camping or getting cold.
> In the summer or three-season bag range, down is much too likely to get wet
> and be of no use.
So I'm frequently told. However, my down bag is conspicuously dry and
lofting all through the year in Scotland, which is not a dry place.
Check the rainfall charts if you don't believe me...
> I routinely get in my Lite Loft bag with wet feet, and I
> sometimes bring wet clothes into the bag so they'll dry off overnight. By
> the time the temps really drop outside, the clothes are dry and you are
> warm the whole night. Don't do that with a down bag.
Then you routinely compromise its performance. Synthetics degrade when
wet, period. The point of the insulation, synthetic or natural, is to
keep air still. It cannot do this as well if it's wet. You are better
off keeping *any* sleeping bag dry, and it's easy to do so with a little
care. *Why* get in with wet feet, when it takes a few seconds to dry
them and be more comfortable from the start? Anything wet enough to be
a problem to a down bag if popped into a stuffsac first isn't going to
dry out anyway, so what's the big deal here?
There's a lot of FUD about down, but keeping it dry is really not nearly
as big an issue as a lot of people make out. Synthetics are absolutely
a valid alternative, but don't buy them purely becuase you think that
"down is much too likely to get wet and be of no use", 'cause it ain't
so if you take sensible precautions. Just the same precautions, btw,
you should take with a synthetic bag as they work better when they're
dry. If your bag routinely gets wet you're probably doing something
wrong with the packing or sleeping arrangements.
Pete.
david mann
Peter Clinch dusted off his Scottish keyboard and opined:
: with taped seams should be sufficient. There are doomsayers about who
: say you can't use down bags in (pick a location, often New England), but
: I use mine happily in Scotland, not known for its arid climate, and the
: awesomely wet backcountry of New Zealand is home to Macpac's down bags.
I'm a doomsayer (on other topics) and I live and backpack
(are the 2 equivalant?) in NewEngland.
I wouldn't suggest synthetic bags in NewEngland for most pursposes.
Here in NewEngland, it is pretty hard to get to a place where
you can't just pick up your stuff and walk to the road by
morning. There are exceptions, of course. Bad winter weather
in the Presis (most everyone I know carries down in the winter)
and being stuck off trail by high water (been there, done that).
But as a rule, your life is probably not on the line due to
bag choice here.
In Freedom of the Hill, the Mountaineers define climbing
exposure as the ramifactions of a fall, not the likelihood.
I would suggest the same is true when talking about what
kind of insulation to choose for a bag. Instead of focusing
in on the the chance of getting it wet, ask what are the
ramifactions. For weekend trips where I'm never more than
20 miles from a road by trail (still reasonably short)
the ramifications are not so bad. A night's lost sleep.
But, if your are in the middle of a large western wilderness
area, say the middle of the Wind River range, and if
you are litterally days from the nearest road... well
then the ramifacations of a wet bag could be very serious.
In those cases, synthetics make alot of sense to me.
Dave Mann | "It is impossible, or not easy, to do
| noble acts without the proper equipment."
dam...@lynx.neu.edu | Aristotle, <<Politics>>, 1323a-b, trans Jowett
David Hinds
Peter Clinch (p.j.c...@dundee.ac.uk) wrote:
: > I routinely get in my Lite Loft bag with wet feet, and I
: > sometimes bring wet clothes into the bag so they'll dry off overnight. By
: > the time the temps really drop outside, the clothes are dry and you are
: > warm the whole night. Don't do that with a down bag.
: Then you routinely compromise its performance. Synthetics degrade when
: wet, period. The point of the insulation, synthetic or natural, is to
: keep air still. It cannot do this as well if it's wet. You are better
: off keeping *any* sleeping bag dry, and it's easy to do so with a little
: care. *Why* get in with wet feet, when it takes a few seconds to dry
: them and be more comfortable from the start? Anything wet enough to be
: a problem to a down bag if popped into a stuffsac first isn't going to
: dry out anyway, so what's the big deal here?
Agreed. I'm currently shopping for a down bag. I've been using a
synthetic bag for the past six years or so. I've read all the dire
warnings about wet down... but I've never, ever gotten my synthetic
bag even damp, and I don't expect a down bag to be any different. And
yes, I have camped in the rain a number of times. Including a week of
almost constant rain in Redwood National Park.
Climbing into any sleeping bag with wet feet and wet clothing sounds
awfully uncomfortable.
-- Dave Hinds
Hal Murray
> No. Down bags, when gently dried and fluffed, return to their original
> loft. (After all, they are best cleaned by washing them with a gentle
> soap.)
Correct, but it misses a critical point. You can't fluff them in the
field. If your down bag gets wet (as compared to damp) you have a wet
blanket rather than a sleeping bag until you get back to civilization.
Markus Bjorksten
Dave Mann >
> ask what are the ramifactions [of a wet sleeping bag]. [..]
> But, if your are in the middle of a large western wilderness
> area, say the middle of the Wind River range, and if
> you are litterally days from the nearest road... well
> then the ramifacations of a wet bag could be very serious.
> In those cases, synthetics make alot of sense to me.
I have no idea what 'Wind River range' is of course, but...
If one is below the treeline, or can get there within a reasonable
time, one should not be in very serious trouble without a sleeping
bag. After all, people have managed in the past using only wool
blankets sleeping by fires in the winter cold. A properly built
log fire can keep a bivouac warm throughout the night. A not
so good fire needs wood to be added during the night, but this
will just make resting less efficient. If the weather allows,
one might be able to dry a drenched sleeping bag by the fire.
(Especially the log fires are high impact technics which should
nowadays be only for emergencies). Above the treeline a snow
cave could make the difference.
Even if one can only sleep for short periods of time before waking
up by the discomfort due to the cold, this is better than nothing.
Military studies have shown that soldiers remain on the average
operational for about 6 days with 2h of sleep per night, while only
about 48 hours with no sleep.
As far as I can see, the biggest risk of suddenly soaking a
sleeping bag in winter is to fall through thin (river) ice.
Packing the bag waterproofly is a sensible precaution.
What comes to down vs synthetic, there are not many (any?) synthetic
bags realisticly rated at -40C (-40F) or colder.
Markus.Bjorksten@<delete this>hut.fi
Tonja Peterson
> : I have a slumberjack Thinsulate Lite Loft 20d bag that is about 5 years
> : old. I am finding that I am now cold in it at 35d...
Hi Rick - That's amazing that your Lite Loft bag has lasted *that* long!
Lite Loft has the reputation of having a very short life--about 90-120
days--and once the loft is gone, so has the temperature rating. You can
try sending it back, but my advice is to buy a Wiggy's Sleeping Bag.
They're affordable, long-lasting, durable, made in Colorado, and they have
a lifetime guarantee on their Lamilite insulation. They're the only bags
on the market that carry a lifetime guarantee on the loft--no questions
asked. You won't find any *big* ads in Backpacker, but you will find the
Wiggy's review. Simply the best.
Tonja
--
Tonja Peterson
http://snacattack.com
Gear For Wild Environments!
SRE
On 6 May 1997 19:08:50 GMT, dam...@lynx.dac.neu.edu (david mann) wrote:
>I would suggest the same is true when talking about what
>kind of insulation to choose for a bag. Instead of focusing
>in on the the chance of getting it wet, ask what are the
>ramifactions. For weekend trips where I'm never more than
>20 miles from a road by trail (still reasonably short)
>the ramifications are not so bad. A night's lost sleep.
Listen and die. Stoopid advice. Did anyone reading this ever twist an
ankle? How about coming back to camp in the dark when it's raining? Ever
tried packing out cross country in a snowstorm?
You should NOT count on hiking out to save your life. I've got a trip
report from a guy who killed two people with that advice. He lived, but two
others he convinced to try outrunning a storm did not. That was summer in
the Sierra Nevada, not a particularly threatening place MOST OF THE TIME.
SRE
On Tue, 06 May 1997 11:40:42 +0100, Peter Clinch <p.j.c...@dundee.ac.uk>
wrote:
>> I routinely get in my Lite Loft bag with wet feet, and I
>> sometimes bring wet clothes into the bag so they'll dry off overnight. By
>> the time the temps really drop outside, the clothes are dry and you are
>> warm the whole night. Don't do that with a down bag.
>
>Then you routinely compromise its performance. Synthetics degrade when
>wet, period. The point of the insulation, synthetic or natural, is to
>keep air still. It cannot do this as well if it's wet.
It doesn't get wet. The moisture from my clothes goes thru it, or seems to,
because Lite Loft just won't absorb water. I think the spec is 2% - and it
won't lose ANY loft even if you put it in a steam bath.
> *Why* get in with wet feet, when it takes a few seconds to dry
>them and be more comfortable from the start? Anything wet enough to be
>a problem to a down bag if popped into a stuffsac first isn't going to
>dry out anyway, so what's the big deal here?
First, you can't always dry stuff off. Let's say it's raining and you're
getting back to camp right at dark. You're above treeline. There's no
campfire. You have a bivy bag and not a tent. Shall I go on?
Second, STUFF DOES DRY OUT OVERNIGHT. You say it won't but it does for me.
It dries equally well in a down bag, of course, but then the escaping vapor
is absorbed by the down and you lose loft.
>There's a lot of FUD about down, but keeping it dry is really not nearly
>as big an issue as a lot of people make out.
When I lived in Alaska, we did the Eklutna Traverse (back in the 70s) and
spent several nights in whiteout conditions (clouds touching the glacier
surface). All three of our down bags went flat. We were in a HUT at the
time, not even a tent, so there was no condensation, no snow, no wet
clothes... the down simply soaked up the humidity.
Overnight? No problem. A week? Can be a problem.
Jon Christian Rost
In article <33701965...@10.0.2.1> eck...@netcom.com (SRE) writes:
>On 6 May 1997 19:08:50 GMT, dam...@lynx.dac.neu.edu (david mann) wrote:
>>I would suggest the same is true when talking about what
>>kind of insulation to choose for a bag. Instead of focusing
>>in on the the chance of getting it wet, ask what are the
>>ramifactions. For weekend trips where I'm never more than
>>20 miles from a road by trail (still reasonably short)
>>the ramifications are not so bad. A night's lost sleep.
>Listen and die. Stoopid advice. Did anyone reading this ever twist an
>You should NOT count on hiking out to save your life.
First, I don't think Dave is saying that hiking out is the ONLY option in
the case of a ruined sleeping bag. But it's a reasonable Plan A. Hopefully,
people have sense and a deep enough bag of tricks to deal with this kind of
problem in multiple ways. And know enough to realize when they're in a
situation that is causing their options to shrink too fast.
Secondly, I think that in the backcountry we routinely place ourselves in
situations where we could die if evacuation is impossible and extra help is
unavailable. There's no amount of gear we can carry and no amount of
medical knowledge we can have that will remove this possibility.
>I've got a trip
>report from a guy who killed two people with that advice. He lived, but two
>others he convinced to try outrunning a storm did not. That was summer in
>the Sierra Nevada, not a particularly threatening place MOST OF THE TIME.
Is this public, Steve? Is it true that their ONLY mistake was trying to hike
out before the storm hit? (I'm not interested in casting blame; I lead
beginners into possibly dangerous dangerous situations, and I feel reading
about and thinking about accidents now will give me a better sense of what to
do in a similar situation.)
Followups to r.b
Chris
jcr...@mit.edu Cambridge, MA
maohai huang
Markus Bjorksten (*@*.*) wrote:
: What comes to down vs synthetic, there are not many (any?) synthetic
: bags realisticly rated at -40C (-40F) or colder.
Will Steger had Slumberjack custom made sleeping bags for his
trans-Antarctica dog-sledging expedition. the temp was way below -40 in
some periods of the trip. i htink if weight and bulk are not an issue, there
is no problem for synthetic bags to reach -40. Wiggy's has a -40 bag
in the catalog. maybe i should ask one for testing next time when i go
down South.
- mh
Eugene Miya
Yeah we were issued the Slumberjack bags: overkill. Very comfortable.
I considered spending an "evening" sleeping in a crevasse because it
would be cooler. I doubt the BFC or FSTP (field safety and training)
would have liked that idea. But they were cooler (-20F) then tents or
Jamesways.
Custom, Markus, custom: you can almost always contract. The trick comes
with measurements and warrentees.
SRE
>In article <33701965...@10.0.2.1> eck...@netcom.com (SRE) writes:
>>I've got a trip
>>report from a guy who killed two people with that advice. He lived, but two
>>others he convinced to try outrunning a storm did not. That was summer in
>>the Sierra Nevada, not a particularly threatening place MOST OF THE TIME.
On 7 May 1997 14:34:06 GMT, jcr...@athena.mit.edu (Jon Christian Rost)
wrote:
>Is this public, Steve? Is it true that their ONLY mistake was trying to hike
>out before the storm hit? (I'm not interested in casting blame; I lead
>beginners into possibly dangerous dangerous situations, and I feel reading
>about and thinking about accidents now will give me a better sense of what to
>do in a similar situation.)
No, unfortunately, it's not public. The handwritten letter was given to me
on the condition that I not publish it while the author is still alive.
It's written as an expanded version of a report filed with a Sheriff's
office.
Basically, a lone hiker who was used to going light bumped into a couple
while he was on his way out after realizing the weather was more than his
gear could support. The couple was heading downhill, hoping to get to a
warmer place. Both parties had wet sleeping bags and no tent (or the tent
had been lost to the storm). "Downhill" was, unfortunately, deeper into the
mountains. He convinced them to hike out over a pass. The couple both died
of hypothermia in the attempt, although one might have survived if willing
to abandon the other.
Their mistake was trying to hike out. If they had squatted and made
shelter, they would have lived assuming their bags were not down. Even
without a tent that would stay up, a synthetic bag would probably have
provided enough warmth to keep them alive. Instead, they climbed up into a
snow storm because the only way out was up.
Donald B. Hynek
In article <5kjfl9$2...@dailyplanet.wam.umd.edu>, marg...@wam.umd.edu
(Michael L. Margolis) wrote:
> : I have a slumberjack Thinsulate Lite Loft 20d bag that is about 5 years
> : old. I am finding that I am now cold in it at 35d (in a tent) and I am
> : usually a very warm sleeper. I have heard that Synths lose much
SNIP
> warmth (not volume!) , 3M will replace it free of charge". So basically
> if you think that over time your LiteLoft bag became colder (not less
> lofter!), you can get a replacement". Check if this statement is true
> for your bag.
>
> : thanks,
> : Rick
> Mike
As a former employee of REI and two other climbing shops, and a user of
lots of different gear, I can assure you that LiteLoft is a superior
material IF you don't use it too much--it has a significant tendency to
lose loft/warmth more rapidly than other synthetics.
I started investigating Lite Loft when a relative canoed for 94 days from
Ely, MN to Lake Winnipeg, amnd found his lite Loft bag flat as a pancake
at the end of the 3 months. He was not pleased, but Sierra Designs did
replace the bag, no questions asked.
Turns out that Lite Loft is a more brittle and fragile fiber, and breaks
down more rapidly (as I was told in store training sessions by several
company reps about their Lite Loft products.) It's a very comfy material,
and lighter than most synthetics, and more humidity resistant than down.
But it ain't perfect. Buy from a reputable company, and know what you
buy....
Don
Climbing Central
Hugh Grierson
In article <33701965...@10.0.2.1>, eck...@netcom.com (SRE) wrote:
>Listen and die. Stoopid advice. Did anyone reading this ever twist an
>ankle?
Now you mention it, last weekend my climbing partner just walked the 10
miles or down the Matukituki valley after spraining his ankle below Bevan
Col. Codiene is your friend.
-H
Peter Clinch
SRE wrote:
>
> On 6 May 1997 19:08:50 GMT, dam...@lynx.dac.neu.edu (david mann) wrote:
> >I would suggest the same is true when talking about what
> >kind of insulation to choose for a bag. Instead of focusing
> >in on the the chance of getting it wet, ask what are the
> >ramifactions. For weekend trips where I'm never more than
> >20 miles from a road by trail (still reasonably short)
> >the ramifications are not so bad. A night's lost sleep.
>
> tried packing out cross country in a snowstorm?
>
Woa! when did he say hike out? You are unlikely to die in all but the
most extreme conditions if you bivvy out in a decent survival bag. If
this was not the case, Himalayan and Alpine mountaineers would be
considerably rarer than they are... On the one occaision I've had a wet
down bag (using them since around 1980, though probably earlier) I was
indeed a bit miserable, but a couple of my friends spent the same night
in plastic bags on a small ledge in a blizzard. They got bloody cold,
yes, but not worse because they knew to stay put. Since then I've
acquired a waterproof shelled bag and take more precautions with
packing: I'd have been warm as toast in a dry bag if I'd had my current
kit.
You cannot pack for all eventualities and emergencies. If you try, your
chances of needing emergency equipment are made considerably greater by
the weight of your emergency equipment... What if the extra bulk and
weight of a synthetic take up space that could have been taken by some
other piece of lifesaving equipment? There are far too many
successfully using down in Very Nasty Places to say it's life
threatening: just as reasonable precautions can stop most preventable
slips and falls, reasonable precautions keep down dry. If this wasn't
the case, people wouldn't use it. Period.
david mann
: On 6 May 1997 19:08:50 GMT, dam...@lynx.dac.neu.edu (david mann) wrote:
: >For weekend trips where I'm never more than
: >20 miles from a road by trail (still reasonably short)
: >the ramifications are not so bad. A night's lost sleep.
SRE (eck...@netcom.com) wrote:
: Listen and die. Stoopid advice. Did anyone reading this ever twist an
Well, yeh, OK. All gear choices could life and death consequences.
This one of the realities of backcountry travel. Things happen.
If we follow your warnings to their logical end, we should
1) never day hike without a bag and shelter and
2) never take anything but a synthetic bag unless it can be
guaranteed not to get wet.
Now, I generally (but not always) take a bag on day trips
above treeline in the winter in the Whites. In these conditions,
a twisted ankle could be deadly. But in the fall, I don't
bother. Lots of factors. Higher chance of surviving the night
with the clothes in my pack, higher amount of hiker traffic,
most NE trails are really front country ect....
In fact, it would be interesting to here more about your
TR (which you nicely summarized below...)
SRE (eck...@netcom.com) wrote:
: Basically, a lone hiker who was used to going light bumped into a couple
: while he was on his way out after realizing the weather was more than his
: gear could support. The couple was heading downhill, hoping to get to a
: warmer place. Both parties had wet sleeping bags and no tent (or the tent
: had been lost to the storm). "Downhill" was, unfortunately, deeper into the
: mountains. He convinced them to hike out over a pass. The couple both died
: of hypothermia in the attempt, although one might have survived if willing
: to abandon the other.
This does not describe most NewEngland hiking, even when off trail.
Other than injury, about the only things that could keep a person
from getting to a road over night up here is snow or high water.
The "100 Mile Wilderness" is a notable exception.
The people in the example you cited would have done well to
heed the Mountaineer's warning. Real risk has to do with the
ramifacations, not the likelihood, of things going wrong.
Hiking on the back side of a mountain pass is honest to
goodness, no kidding backcountry exposure regardless of
the prevailing weather patterns and regardless of the
proximity to roads and civilization. It is very sad but
they underestimated the ramifacations. (I know how sad it
is from having to bury a close friend who made the same mistake.)
Having said all of that, I repeat what said earlier.
In NewEngland, the ramifactions of a wet bag are not
likely to be deadly (for 3 season hiking, on trail).
david mann
NOTE: follow-ups trimmed to r.b
Peter Clinch (p.j.c...@dundee.ac.uk) wrote:
: Woa! when did he say hike out? You are unlikely to die in all but the
: most extreme conditions if you bivvy out in a decent survival bag. If
Oops. Did I forget to be clear?
Yes, yes! Hike out! Speed is safety and all of that...
Now, before the napalm gets called in on my location,
let me emphasize that this is hightly localized advice
I'm giving here applicaple only to my neck of the woods
under certain conditions. I've said it before and I
repeat it... In almost all parts of NewEngland during
spring to fall, you can easily hike out to a road at
night. There are portions of Maine where this is not
true of course, snow and high water may foil you.
But these caveats aside, I stand by my brave Sir
Robyn advice.
I should note that it has been written (in some obscure
AMC reference) that all but one of NewHampshire's 4000 footers
can be climbed as a day hike from the road... in the dead
of winter, no less.
: You cannot pack for all eventualities and emergencies. If you try, your
: chances of needing emergency equipment are made considerably greater by
: the weight of your emergency equipment... What if the extra bulk and
Yup.
Hugh Grierson
Peter Clinch (p.j.c...@dundee.ac.uk) wrote:
: You cannot pack for all eventualities and emergencies. If you try, your
: chances of needing emergency equipment are made considerably greater by
: the weight of your emergency equipment... What if the extra bulk and
Which begs the question: given the choice between carrying a stove and a
sleeping bag as emergency gear, which do you choose?
Naturally it depends on the location to a large degree, but personally, for
alpine climbing, I'd rather have the stove.
Markus Bjorksten
Dave Mann >
> let me emphasize that this is hightly localized advice
> I'm giving here applicaple only to my neck of the woods
> under certain conditions.
Exactly.
Universal advice tends to be either trivial or bogus. "The Ten
Essentials" is my pet peeve in this respect. "Stay put if lost"
is another good one relevant to the present thread.
In an emergency, "Hike out" may be excellent or disasterious advice. Or
neither. It depends. "Stop and think first" seems perhaps universally
quite good, and it is not as trivial as one might think. Otoh, it is
not a good idea when, say, some drunken hunter starts shooting at you.
Markus.Bjorksten@<delete this>hut.fi
Peter Clinch
SRE wrote:
> It doesn't get wet. The moisture from my clothes goes thru it, or seems to,
> because Lite Loft just won't absorb water. I think the spec is 2% - and it
> won't lose ANY loft even if you put it in a steam bath.
Not the problem. still air is a better insulator than water, and if
your wet feet soak the bottom of the bag (quite different to gradual
vapour passage), you're compromising performance.
> First, you can't always dry stuff off. Let's say it's raining and you're
> getting back to camp right at dark. You're above treeline. There's no
> campfire. You have a bivy bag and not a tent. Shall I go on?
Two seconds to wipe your feet dry (or at least drier) on a bit of
midlayer.
> Second, STUFF DOES DRY OUT OVERNIGHT. You say it won't but it does for me.
> It dries equally well in a down bag, of course, but then the escaping vapor
> is absorbed by the down and you lose loft.
I guess it depends on your definition of "dries out". "Gets drier",
yes, but in most cases if you go to sleep in a sopping wet bit of kit it
will still be damp the next morning. Having tried the options
available, I prefer a comfortable night and then get things drier when
I'm active next day and producing a lot more heat. Personal preference,
I'll grant you, rather than A Better Way.
> When I lived in Alaska, we did the Eklutna Traverse (back in the 70s) and
> spent several nights in whiteout conditions (clouds touching the glacier
> surface). All three of our down bags went flat. We were in a HUT at the
> time, not even a tent, so there was no condensation, no snow, no wet
> clothes... the down simply soaked up the humidity.
You say it does, but it won't for me ;-) Maybe geese haven't evolved a
lot since the 70s, but it's certainly true that modern shell fabrics
make a *huge* difference to the bags available 20+ years ago in terms of
a bag's ability to eat water. Older shell fabrics will soak up a lot
from the atmosphere, modern ones hardly anything at all, and being in a
baffle made of a damp material will get the filling much wetter than a
dry one. I often stop in bothies that are at cloud level (frequently
zero feet over here), and also full of lots of other people with very
wet clothes drying out causing reams of condensation all around the
place (even set off a smoke alarm once, the air was so wet). My bag
stubbornly refuses to go flat...
Our mileages have certainly varied on this issue, others may find the
same...
jeffrey trust
Peter Clinch (p.j.c...@dundee.ac.uk) wrote:
> still air is a better insulator than water, and if
It is? News to me.
--
Jeffrey Trust (jeffre...@csun.edu). Dept. of Geological Sciences,
California State University, Northridge (for which I don't speak).
"The winds will blow their own freshness into you, and the storms their
energy, while cares will drop off like autumn leaves." -John Muir
http://geology.csun.edu/jeff/
Hugh Grierson
In article <5kspuk$c...@chaos.dac.neu.edu>, dam...@lynx.dac.neu.edu (david mann) wrote:
>The people in the example you cited would have done well to
>heed the Mountaineer's warning. Real risk has to do with the
>ramifacations, not the likelihood, of things going wrong.
I would describe it as the product of the two. Of course this requires that
a finite cost be associated with death.
-H
Peter Clinch
jeffrey trust wrote:
>
> Peter Clinch (p.j.c...@dundee.ac.uk) wrote:
>
> > still air is a better insulator than water, and if
>
> It is? News to me.
Try an experiment. Put on a wool pullover when it's cold. The pullover
insulates you by trapping air in the weave. Now dip the pullover in
water at current air temperature so the holes are full of water, rather
than still air. Put the pullover back on.
Now, do you feel warmer with the water or the air acting as insulator?
Note that I didn't say "air", but "still air". It has to be static to
be of much use as an insulator, and stopping air moving around is what
most lightweight insulators do: wool, down, hollow fibre, fleece etc.
Struan Gray
jeffrey trust, hbge...@huey.csun.edu writes:
>> still air is a better insulator than water, and if
>
>It is? News to me.
Air Water
Thermal conductivity @ R.T. 0.06 0.6 W/Km
Sp. Heat Capacity @ R.T. 1 4.2 J/gC
Heat of vaporisation @ R.T. 0 2450 J/g
Oh, and capilliary effects make it harder to keep water stationary.
What am I missing?
Struan
Henry
Struan Gray <strua...@sljus.lu.se> wrote:
Black body radiation? Water coming out of my sleeping bag is pretty black
by the end of a season, but however dirty I make the air it may not be
odorless, but it is still colourless.
--
Henry Lickorish
ETH-Zurich
he...@erdw.ethz.ch
jeffrey trust
> >> still air is a better insulator than water, and if
> >
> >It is? News to me.
> Air Water
>
> Thermal conductivity @ R.T. 0.06 0.6 W/Km
> Sp. Heat Capacity @ R.T. 1 4.2 J/gC
Yeah... was thinking of heat capacity, not conductivity... oops.
Harder to warm (or cool) water than air.
Jeffrey
Joe Ehrlich
Steve Susswein wrote:
>
> Does anyone know how to contact 3M for warranty claims on lite-loft?
You don't contact 3M for warranty claims, you contact the manufacturer
of the bag.
They will replace it for you. And do so cheerfully, since they want
their customers to be happy.
(3M doesn't have a stash of sleeping bags on their shelves waiting to be
sent out to consumers. Duh.)
Steve Susswein
Struan Gray
Henry, he...@erdw.ethz.ch writes:
> however dirty I make the air it may not be
> odorless, but it is still colourless.
Until you strike a match, whereupon blue and yellow tend
to dance before your eyes. Still, you do get some of the heat
back, albeit briefly.
Struan
jeffrey trust
Peter Clinch (p.j.c...@dundee.ac.uk) wrote:
> jeffrey trust wrote:
> >
> > Peter Clinch (p.j.c...@dundee.ac.uk) wrote:
> >
> >
> > It is? News to me.
> Try an experiment. Put on a wool pullover when it's cold. The pullover
> insulates you by trapping air in the weave. Now dip the pullover in
> water at current air temperature so the holes are full of water, rather
> than still air. Put the pullover back on.
See my other post (admitting my wonderful error)...
however part of the reason water seems cooler is due to evaporation.
Of course, the other reason is that it's a better conductor (worse
insulator).
Struan Gray
jeffrey trust, hbge...@huey.csun.edu writes:
> Yeah... was thinking of heat capacity, not conductivity
> Harder to warm (or cool) water than air.
Just to put the last nail in the coffin: this of course means you
lose more heat before the temperatures equalise.
There's a serious danger of someone mentioning hot water freezing
fastest here (or the Ti pot insurgency raising it's nasty head) so
I'll put in a pre-emptive strike by asking if anyone has a reference
for the 'how the natives make ice in the desert' technique? I was
pretty sure it was in one of my "With Rod and Gun Through Nagbogistan"
by Col. P.B. Hearty-Blighter (DSC, CVO, Late the Life Guards) books but
can't seem to find the relevant cove. Any ideas?
Struan
david mann
Markus Bjorksten (*@*.*) wrote:
: In an emergency, "Hike out" may be excellent or disasterious advice. Or
: neither. It depends. "Stop and think first" seems perhaps universally
: quite good, and it is not as trivial as one might think. Otoh, it is
: not a good idea when, say, some drunken hunter starts shooting at you.
Which describes perfectly why the military emphasizes
training instead of education.
Pete Hickey
In article <5ladcs$57k$1...@news.lth.se>,
Struan Gray <strua...@sljus.lu.se> wrote:
>
> There's a serious danger of someone mentioning hot water freezing
>fastest here (or the Ti pot insurgency raising it's nasty head) so
Yeah, someone just did...
--
The following address is not valid: junk...@mudhead.uottawa.ca
It is there as an experiment to see if email spammers scan content
as well as headers.
--
Pete Hickey | | VEIWIT
Communication Services | Pe...@mudhead.uottawa.CA | Makers of transparent
University of Ottawa | | mirrors for
Ottawa,Ont. Canada K1N 6N5| (613) 562-5800x1008 | dyslexics.
Steve Susswein
Joe Ehrlich wrote:
>
> Steve Susswein wrote:
> >
> > Does anyone know how to contact 3M for warranty claims on lite-loft?
>
> of the bag.
>
> sent out to consumers. Duh.)
That would be great, if I'd actually bought a sleeping bag. But I
didn't. I bought the lite-loft insulation itself, and made my own
sleeping bag, which just like the store bought ones quickly lost it's
loft. I want to contact 3M to see if their warranty will also apply to
the insulation itself.
Steve
Markus Bjorksten
Me > :
> : "Stop and think first" seems perhaps universally quite good,
> : not a good idea when, say, some drunken hunter starts shooting
> : at you.
Dave Mann >
> Which describes perfectly why the military emphasizes
> training instead of education.
Sure.
Incidentally, I was thinking about a mnemonic taken from a
Swedish military survival manual. It seems reasonable advice for
avoiding hasty decisions when upset because of a difficult
situation like, say, realizing that one might be forced to
bivouac. Or, in particular, when simply realizing being lost.
S Stop
T Think
O Observe
P Plan
Markus.Bjorksten@<delete this>hut.fi
John Richardson
> : >For weekend trips where I'm never more than
> : >20 miles from a road by trail (still reasonably short)
> : >the ramifications are not so bad. A night's lost sleep.
>
I agree with Dave on this one. There is being prepared and
being overprepared. I'd rather save the 5+lbs on my back, since that
extra weight might make me more tired and apt to slip.
In the NH Whites, it's pretty likely that you can walk
out of anywhere with a sprained ankle. It depends what sort
of shape you are in. Of course, you might have to leave your pack.
The question is, will the injury you have allow you to walk and
if hypothermia is setting in, will you have the presence of mind to
figure out which way is out?
I'll have to ask Dave where he got more than 20 miles from a road!
I want to visit! :)
People do die from exposure in the Whites. On all solo trips,
even summer ones, I take a spaceblanket tarp and enough clothes so
I don't think I'll die overnight. I even take that tarp to
Monadnock!
from http://www.lexicomm.com/whites/deaths.html
103. August 24, 1986:
McDonald Barr, 52,
Brookline, Mass.,
died of hypothermia in a summer snowstorm on Mt.
Madison.
To add fuel to the fire: I have two down bags. The summer one has that
Gore dryloft stuff though.
--
[I am not a Digital spokesperson]
John Richardson jric...@zko.dec.com
Digital Equipment Corporation (603) 881-0168
Nashua, NH