Is there an advantage to a Climashiels UQ in damp or humid conitions?

[BillyBob58]

I think I started a thread on this subject a few years back. I don't think I got much agreement with my theory. So I though I would try again.

First let it be known that I use both down and synthetic(Climashield or CS) PeaPods, TQs and UQs. And clothing! Along with my down UQs, I have a classic UQ: the original WB Yeti, when he made them with old style CS, XP and Combat, before Apex's supposed advantages. That thing is an absolute champ, really hard to beat, except it is a bit bulky for it's weight. When Cannibal used to be on here a lot, he was the original tester of this quilt, before WB switched to down. I remember he took it to well below zero. He got it wet a couple of times on his AT thru hike, and did not get hypothermia. How many here can remember a picture from his 1st test in his dad's backyard in Denver at Christmas? Using his dad's old synthetic bag as TQ during a snow storm somewhere in the low single digits if mem serves? WITH NO TARP? The mossy netting weighed down with snow, and you could see in the picture that the drifted snow was touching his UQ in at least 1 spot. Yet, in that ~ 20 oz short UQ and old bag, he stayed warm. Now that was a test under ridiculous conditions!

But I digress. I am not asking about the age old debate as to whether or not synthetic has some advantage if it gets wet. I think it does, but others disagree with me. Also, I am not asking about the commonly available treated down, which might possibly wipe out any advantages in wet weather that synthetics may or may not have. Nope, I am only asking about the traditional down, and only in UQs. ( I have treated down TQs, but don't yet have a treated down UQ).

OK, here is the scenario for testing/comparison: picture a baffle filled to the brim with down, underneath a dif cut shell designed to be pulled snugly up against the back, which will put the down snugly against the same back, separated only by the thickness of the UQ's inner shell and the hammock's fabric. (no over stuff yet, just the exact amount of down needed to fill a baffle, and maybe however much the shell allows the down to loft higher than the baffle, as in a 2" baffle in a quilt rated at 2.5"loft. And no DWR yet, for sake of discussion)

Now spritz a little water over the side of the UQ that would contact the back, to simulate sweat and/or condensation taking place inside the down, or maybe a soaking fog night. I would expect that down to decrease some small amount in loft. what about Y'all? Spray a little more on it, and some more loss of loft. Spray enough and most of the loft will be gone until it dries out again.

Now if this is happening in a TQ, if there is a 10% decrease in loft I would expect a decrease of about 10% in the warmth. But I may never notice it if the temps are say 10F above the TQs rating. I won't notice it, and as long as there is no additional condensation, my body or hot water bottle heat might even start drying out the down, increasing loft.

But what if it is an UQ? Will the decrease in loft then allow a gap to develop, where the down inside the baffle- no matter how tightly the shell is snugged against your body- can not loft enough to contact your back? Such a possibility would of course be one reason for adding the weight of various amounts of overstuff. Hoping to overcome the effect of dampness and loss of loft. But if moisture keeps on condensing in there, at some point even this added down is overcome so that you might still end up with a gap.

But how would this work with a sheet of Climashield sewn arond he edges to the inner shell of the UQ? First off, these do not loft upwards trying to fill up a baffle chamber enough to contact the back. They are sewn into contact with the inner shell, and when unpacked and hung under the hammock, they hang and loft away from that shell, by gravity's pull. They are unlikely to loose any noticeable loft if damp or even somewhat wet. But even if they do, it should not keep the insulation from staying in contact with our the shell layer that contacts our hammock and backs. Because, that sheet of insulation is sewn to the quilts inner shell. Even a lot of water is unlikely to break that contact, and will instead drain away towards the outer shell. Any loft decrease(if any) will- seems to me- tend to shrink the sheet of CS towards my back, with the inner layer remaining in contact even if thickness is actually decreased. Just the opposite of what would happen in a wet, down filled baffles which depends on dry down in order to be able to loft up towards the back.

If any of the above is correct, that(i.e. always in contact with your back even if wet) seems to me- like VBs- to be a potential advantage on longer trips where there is little time for drying out, where you might even have to stuff an UQ full of last nights accumulated vapor. What do Y'all think, am I missing something?

[TxAggie]

I was a full bore synthetic fan until I tried down, now I can’t imagine going back.

That being said, my previous experience with synthetics was with Army Gear, which is insanely overbuilt, bulky, and HEAVY!
Living in the Mid-Atlantic, humidity can be an issue, and Apex and other new synthetics have come a long way, so I’m interested in what the responses will be here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BillyBob58]

I was a full bore synthetic fan until I tried down, now I can’t imagine going back.

That being said, my previous experience with synthetics was with Army Gear, which is insanely overbuilt, bulky, and HEAVY!
Living in the Mid-Atlantic, humidity can be an issue, and Apex and other new synthetics have come a long way, so I’m interested in what the responses will be here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks for the comments! The AHE Jarbidge CS 52" long, 25F (conservatively rated) UQ is only 20 oz, really not much different in weight than a similarly rated and sized down UQ, and oz or 2 heavier at most. But it will of course be bulkier, so some extra pack room will still be needed.

But what I'm hoping to get some opinions from folks on is, even if coming from a never synthetic type person, or the opposite, is: is there at least a potential advantage in- particularly if damp or wet- not requiring the insulation to loft up to the top of a baffle in order to solidly contact the shell layer that contacts the hammock that contacts the back? But rather, having a sheet of insulation, that is sewn solidly in contact with the layer that is pulled snugly into the back? and also, as far as I can tell(but can't prove) will remain in contact with your back even if soaked, as the liquid drains towards the ground, is there maybe an advantage to that?

Or, especially considering some of the mystery cold backs we hear about, is this something that could reasonably even happen? IOW, is it reasonable to think that our damp down might not loft up quite enough to actually reach the top of the baffle and touch our backs? I think it is clear (to me anyway) that if the down is pretty wet, and say 50-60% or so of the loft is lost, this will happen. Then, if that does happen, it seems to me that will be even much worse than if it happens on top. If it happens on top, and you lose say 1/2 of the loft, then you still have 1/2 of the loft resting on top of you. You will still have about 1/2 the warmth(depending on how wet, of course). But if it happens below, you have not only the loft reduced by 1/2, but if it was 3" loft to start with, you might now have about 1 1/2 inches of empty gap between your back and the reduced loft. And we all know how devastatingly cold any gap can be. A 1/4" gap can be a problem.

I actually easily believe this could be the result with significant dampness, at least with untreated down. But what I'm wondering is if it happens enough with use, say multiday trips in clouds and rain and high humidity, plenty cold enough for some condensation to occur also, is this happening at least a little bit more than we might realize? And even if it does, even if our decreased loft drops away from contact with our backs a little bit more often than we might realize, would a solid sheet of CS be any better in avoiding such a situation? Tis is all just theory with me, I have no proof that it ever happens. But it does make some sense to me.

[OlTrailDog]

I would think that the elastic nature of the down UQ suspension would continue to lift the UQ upward toward your back. I am a late convert to down. I have experienced several completely disastrous circumstances with wet down and didn't enjoy the party at all. I worked in the back country which meant confronting all conditions. Synthetics were king under those circumstances.

However, when I play I can me more judicious about weather conditions and have adopted down in order to reduce weight, but chiefly the less bulk in a smaller back pack. Probably going to get a spanking by inclement elements one of these days. I have not adopted the treated down because I presently have insufficient desire to replace my top quality down gear. I have a AHD apex 3/4 quilt for a WBRR, that I now use with a Hammocktent 90* Alpha, Beta, and Gamma UL. It is light weight, more bulky than my HG 3/4 Pheonix down, but exudes that synthetic assurance come what may.

Hope in a circuitous way that partly answers your query.

[gunner76]

I own and use both and they both have their pros and cons.

I own a 1S, 3S ( I own two of these ) and 4S Jarbidge UQs. I did take the 1S UQ and a 1S Clamashield TQ while section hiking the AT a few years back. Rain was not an issue. My only issue was that the UQ and TQ did not pack as small as down would so I carried them in a trash compactor bag inside a compression bag strapped to the outside of my pack. Worked fine. I now take down while backpacking not that down is better per say but because it compress smaller and takes up less pack space.

I usually use my synthetic TQs and UQs while car camping where size is not much of an issue. I also loan these out at group hangs when someone needs to borrow some gear.

I have not had an issue with my down or synthetic quilts getting wet so I can not comment on that issue.

I will recommend that if you are starting off with hammocks to go the synthetic route to save some $$$ until you decide that hammock camping is for you.

[BillyBob58]

I would think that the elastic nature of the down UQ suspension would continue to lift the UQ upward toward your back. I am a late convert to down. I have experienced several completely disastrous circumstances with wet down and didn't enjoy the party at all. I worked in the back country which meant confronting all conditions. Synthetics were king under those circumstances.

However, when I play I can me more judicious about weather conditions and have adopted down in order to reduce weight, but chiefly the less bulk in a smaller back pack. Probably going to get a spanking by inclement elements one of these days. I have not adopted the treated down because I presently have insufficient desire to replace my top quality down gear. I have a AHD apex 3/4 quilt for a WBRR, that I now use with a Hammocktent 90* Alpha, Beta, and Gamma UL. It is light weight, more bulky than my HG 3/4 Pheonix down, but exudes that synthetic assurance come what may.

Hope in a circuitous way that partly answers your query.

I think you are correct that the UQs suspension will continue to lift the UQ into your back, and if it didn't for some reason you could just tighten it, for the most part.

But, that won't help should the down fail to loft up enough to fill the baffle and contact my back. At least not with our usually differential cut UQs, where theoretically no matter how tight you pull the inner shell against your back, the outer shell and baffles remain mostly loose, and can not be pulled up. So the baffles and outer shell will still hang their normal distance below the inner shell, and need almost fully lofting down to fill them up and rise into contact with my back, without any gap. Any reduction of loft past a certain point(20%?) will - or I think it will - result in a gap. Which will almost certainly magnify any effect of decreased loft.

It just dawned on me that this might be an advantage of the older style UQs, ot the TQs that can also serve as UQs, that have no dif cut. You could indeed pull those up enough to close the gap, though doing so without going too far might prove tricky. Related: I don't think my AHE Jarbidge has a dif cut, but I might be wrong.

That is real interesting about your negative experiences with wet down, and how you worked in the back country where synthetics were king. It was a similar situation for me where I was given a strong bias towards synthetics under certain circumstances. For me, it was not work, but a 30 day NOLS mountaineering course where I did not come out of the Wyoming wilderness areas for 30 straight days(except for a couple of days where we crossed the wilderness boundary long enough to find a food cache in the national forest. They would not allow down or cotton on those courses. Probably because there were plenty of young folks on that trip, many who ha never been in the woods before. But also because they believed that, sooner or later over 30 days of vigorous hiking and climbing, every one was going to get wet, along with most of their insulation.

And sure enough, on day 26 of 30, I finally got wet hiking all day in a blowing snow storm on 6/27/87. As did many others(all?). I actually saw one person slip and slide down a embankment to land backpack down in a small, icy creek, where she floundered like an upside down turtle until we managed to help her up. But, I think the main issue was sweat, doing steep climbs under heavy packs under a poncho. Anyway, seemed like most every thing I had was wet or damp. Including my worn out bag with totally inadequate loft for those conditions. And I was certainly cold, but I don't know how much of that was due to that flat bag. I was colder than most even though we all had supposedly similar equipment. But, by morning everything had mostly dried out and I was getting warmer. I just wish I had remembered my past experience with VB socks and the knowledge of VB theory I already had. I had plenty of non-breathable rain gear, and it would have kept me a lot warmer without doubt, worn under my insulation. But, though I was wanting to use my own down bag, that night I was glad they did not allow me to do so. Not because it was my own, but because it was down. Those instructors lived in the mountains, taking groups out every month, and I believe they knew what kept their students alive so many miles from a trailhead.

[OlTrailDog]

I think you are correct that the UQs suspension will continue to lift the UQ into your back, and if it didn't for some reason you could just tighten it, for the most part.

... For me, it was not work, but a 30 day NOLS mountaineering course where I did not come out of the Wyoming wilderness areas for 30 straight days(except for a couple of days where we crossed the wilderness boundary long enough to find a food cache in the national forest. They would not allow down or cotton on those courses. Probably because there were plenty of young folks on that trip, many who ha never been in the woods before. But also because they believed that, sooner or later over 30 days of vigorous hiking and climbing, every one was going to get wet, along with most of their insulation.

And sure enough, on day 26 of 30, I finally got wet hiking all day in a blowing snow storm on 6/27/87. As did many others(all?). ... Those instructors lived in the mountains, taking groups out every month, and I believe they knew what kept their students alive so many miles from a trailhead.

Very well could have been the wilderness area where I was the Wilderness Manager/Outfitter Guide permit administrator at for a decade. Before that I was up on the north end in the Absoraka-Beartooths for thirteen seasons. Before that, several connected wildernesses in The Bob/Missions/Great Bear/Scapegoat area starting shortly after high school. Before that, a similar stint as you mention right out of high school at Colorado Outward Bound in the Maroon Bells/Marble/Capital Peak area of Colorado for 26 days.

I was incredibly fortunate to spend the vast majority of my career working and playing in these ecosystems. But working also meant working in inclement weather from spring through late fall. As well as the bugs, dust, heat, and recalcitrant stock on occasion. Work didn't mean hiking or riding to and fro, but packing gear, materials, camps by stock, chopping trees, sawing trees with a crosscut, building bridges, digging ditches, and loving life in the mountains. After that it was time to play. As the trail foreman and later as the Wilderness Manager, I was responsible for the horses, mules, and work mates under my supervision as we also had the good fortune to have lived in the mountains.

NOLS was one of the numerous permittees I worked with as part of the permit administration part of the job. I actually had more outfitter hunting camps/permits than any other district in the US. My work philosophy was two fold: 1) keep up with me and I have no complaints (or out do me as an old dog) and 2) How can I manage the remotest wilderness in the lower 48 and the permittees who work there if I am not intimately familiar with the terrain and similar challenges they face in inclement conditions as well as the beautiful.

I hope I don't come across as braggadocios, but rather I am so thankful to God for the opportunities I have been blessed with. As well as the incredibly painful episodes in life's journey that I've had to meet as well.

[richtorfla]

Being down here in Florida; I bought Syn because of humidity. Plus its value. I was worried about the down clumping and not get warmth.The guys I camp with all used down. They didn't have a problem with humid conditions. And that convinced me down is good for Fla. too. I have bought some down gear to cut on bulk in the pack and I haven't experienced any major issues. Do have to hang the top quilt over the ridgeline to air it out when there is real damp conditions. I think with the advancement of the fabrics they are using to make quilts with a better DWR rating makes down viable. I use both like Gunner. Wife was complaining about the amount of quilts I have. So bottom line; is when I have the room in the pack and its gonna be real humid, I usually bring the syn. i have been using a light down quilt from Sams (Eddie Bauer) for my top to make room. Good topic and I liked to see what others say. It is amazing how the humidity makes you feel colder at lower temps.

[kitsapcowboy]

I live in an environment that can get wet and/or humid during most of the year, and I still like and use some synthetic quilts -- especially for warmer weather, which keeps the relative weight and bulk penalty low -- because...

1) I don't have to baby them
2) I never have to "migrate" anything
3) I don't worry if it ever gets a little wet
4) I can DIY several of them for the same money and time spent making one good down quilt

(My down quilts are among my most prized hammock gear, but for the investment I just feel better paying George at Loco Libre Gear a little more to build a perfect one for me.)

[BillyBob58]

Very well could have been the wilderness area where I was the Wilderness Manager/Outfitter Guide permit administrator at for a decade. Before that I was up on the north end in the Absoraka-Beartooths for thirteen seasons. Before that, several connected wildernesses in The Bob/Missions/Great Bear/Scapegoat area starting shortly after high school. Before that, a similar stint as you mention right out of high school at Colorado Outward Bound in the Maroon Bells/Marble/Capital Peak area of Colorado for 26 days.

I was incredibly fortunate to spend the vast majority of my career working and playing in these ecosystems. But working also meant working in inclement weather from spring through late fall. As well as the bugs, dust, heat, and recalcitrant stock on occasion. Work didn't mean hiking or riding to and fro, but packing gear, materials, camps by stock, chopping trees, sawing trees with a crosscut, building bridges, digging ditches, and loving life in the mountains. After that it was time to play. As the trail foreman and later as the Wilderness Manager, I was responsible for the horses, mules, and work mates under my supervision as we also had the good fortune to have lived in the mountains.

NOLS was one of the numerous permittees I worked with as part of the permit administration part of the job. I actually had more outfitter hunting camps/permits than any other district in the US. My work philosophy was two fold: 1) keep up with me and I have no complaints (or out do me as an old dog) and 2) How can I manage the remotest wilderness in the lower 48 and the permittees who work there if I am not intimately familiar with the terrain and similar challenges they face in inclement conditions as well as the beautiful.

I hope I don't come across as braggadocios, but rather I am so thankful to God for the opportunities I have been blessed with. As well as the incredibly painful episodes in life's journey that I've had to meet as well.

Wow, Oltraildog, what a career! Indeed you are blessed! Did you ever deal with search and rescue?