View Full Version : When do you need a 48" wide UQ?
Wondering when you would realize that you need a wide UQ?
This triggers my curiosity because this week-end I was using (actually pushing) my 40F Phoenix underquilt and realized that:
1) When my feet were on the diagonal, they were pushing up (forcing up) slightly the UQ on the left side of the hammock leaving my shoulder barely covered on the other side
2) When I was pushing up the shoulder side (right side) of the UQ to get my shoulders well covered, then it would slide under my feet.
It is not a length problem because the UQ was staying in place longitudinally with the end of the UQ right under my upper shoulder but rather a width problem in that you raise it one side, it dips on the other.
Does this means that I need a slightly wider UQ?
I know that LLG makes some wide 48" underquilt. So I would like to ask what was your reason for switching to a wide UQ?
Minos
georgecarr
11-28-2017, 20:12
We had someone eamail me recently with this problem and it turns out they had the quilt backwards. There is a head and foot end and I believe HG quilts are the same. I personally use a standard width, and we only offer a wide option because there were a number of requests. Another thought - are you staggering your quilt, ie using the secondary to pull the shoulder side and foot side on a diagonal? That may help.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AJ8qJQ-zHc
We had someone eamail me recently with this problem and it turns out they had the quilt backwards. There is a head and foot end and I believe HG quilts are the same. I personally use a standard width, and we only offer a wide option because there were a number of requests. Another thought - are you staggering your quilt, ie using the secondary to pull the shoulder side and foot side on a diagonal? That may help.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AJ8qJQ-zHc
Yep I do use the staggering. However staggering would affect mostly a length problem i.e. not going high enough for the head/shoulder/neck or far enough for the feet/calf I presume. In my case, the quilt was always where it should be longitudinally i.e. ending right below the top of my shoulder. My issue is that I would wake up at night with the UQ sometime either 5"-8" below my arm on the side of the hammock's side or 5"-8" above my arms on the side of the hammock's side. A bit as if it were unstable and always wishing to pop up either one side or the other.
The quilt was definitely upside up and headside 'head'.
What was the typical reasons for your customers to go Wide? What did they experienced before that warranted going Wide with their new LLG quilt?
georgecarr
11-28-2017, 20:29
In all honestly we rarely sell a wide quilt. There was a spurt last year where we were getting a lot of requests for a wide option. The only answers I've ever gotten were that they've used a quilt that wide before or they wanted to try one. I recently received a request for a 55" wide quilt, but did not accept it. There is a point where if you go too wide the extra width will create gaps.
My suggestion is to try changing the suspension angle with something like Dutchware ridgeline quilt hooks. That might be a help to you. In my opinion extra width probably won't help you. More than likely the suspension is getting under you while you sleep and the quilt is following the suspension. Changing the angle could help.
Triangle Thingies (https://www.arrowhead-equipment.com/store/p317/Triangle_Thingies.html)
157784157786
dakotaross
11-28-2017, 20:51
I find the AHE triangle thingies to work well for having extra pull on the head and foot sides on each end. Otherwise, what seems to happen is that the quilt wants to pull to one side or the other depending on my movement, just as the OP described.
With that thought in mind, when are we going to see a trapezoidal shape UQ designed to be Head left/feet right, or vv? I presume there is a technical issue with that, but just thinking it would reduce unused insulation on the opposite sides?
hutzelbein
11-29-2017, 10:03
What was the typical reasons for your customers to go Wide? What did they experienced before that warranted going Wide with their new LLG quilt?
I have used standard width underquilts as well as wide underquilts (up to 55"). If I would still use underquilts with shock cord suspension, I would definitely prefer wide. The main reason for this choice is that I have always had problems with the underquilt forcing me to lie more inline than I wanted. I sleep very cold, and once temperature drops to about 60° or lower, I feel every tiny air bubble between underquilt and me i.e. the hammock. I have only been able to use a 20° underquilt at around 32° by pulling the suspension extremely tight. As soon as you do that, the shock cords put a lot of pressure on head and feet (I have only used full-length underquilts). I can't tell you how much I hated that.
More width means that the shock cords or rather the pressure is further away from head and feet. One day I'll build an underquilt that is 60" wide, but isn't insulated everywhere. I have always found that the insulation in the opposite corners is just wasted. And I think that with a wide underquilt, the insulation doesn't need go up to the shock cord channels either. But that's just speculation. Also, if "the views" are important to you, very wide underquilts are not for you, because they come up way higher.
I have used standard width underquilts as well as wide underquilts (up to 55"). If I would still use underquilts with shock cord suspension, I would definitely prefer wide. The main reason for this choice is that I have always had problems with the underquilt forcing me to lie more inline than I wanted. I sleep very cold, and once temperature drops to about 60° or lower, I feel every tiny air bubble between underquilt and me i.e. the hammock. I have only been able to use a 20° underquilt at around 32° by pulling the suspension extremely tight. As soon as you do that, the shock cords put a lot of pressure on head and feet (I have only used full-length underquilts). I can't tell you how much I hated that.
More width means that the shock cords or rather the pressure is further away from head and feet. One day I'll build an underquilt that is 60" wide, but isn't insulated everywhere. I have always found that the insulation in the opposite corners is just wasted. And I think that with a wide underquilt, the insulation doesn't need go up to the shock cord channels either. But that's just speculation. Also, if "the views" are important to you, very wide underquilts are not for you, because they come up way higher.
Thanks for sharing your experience!
I have a standard width HG UQ and have often wished I had gone wide. Just one (maybe two) extra row/panel. I have very broad shoulders/back and sometimes dont feel like I get that 'wrapped in downy goodness' feeling when its cold. I have often wondered how a wide quilt would serve me. Someday...
brutalguyracing
12-02-2017, 09:10
Yep I do use the staggering. However staggering would affect mostly a length problem i.e. not going high enough for the head/shoulder/neck or far enough for the feet/calf I presume. In my case, the quilt was always where it should be longitudinally i.e. ending right below the top of my shoulder. My issue is that I would wake up at night with the UQ sometime either 5"-8" below my arm on the side of the hammock's side or 5"-8" above my arms on the side of the hammock's side. A bit as if it were unstable and always wishing to pop up either one side or the other.
The quilt was definitely upside up and headside 'head'.
What was the typical reasons for your customers to go Wide? What did they experienced before that warranted going Wide with their new LLG quilt?I love my wide quilt
I think it is one extra baffle and it has made a huge difference in my hanging experience
Although I am 275 6'
I was tired of my shoulder always popping out
Problem solved
And many many nights enjoyed trouble free
Good luck
I have also used something like this
Mainly to secure my quilts in my hammock for windy days
But may also be of use to snug your quilt up
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171202/36d54646220d9e97f85b0a59f71bf916.jpg
Sent from my E6810 using Tapatalk
drsolarmolar
12-03-2017, 12:45
So would a longer length standard width underquilt accomplish what a shorter but wider one does?
So would a longer length standard width underquilt accomplish what a shorter but wider one does?
I think you would choose a wide quilt if you had especially broad shoulders and you would choose a long under quilt if you were taller and wanted full body coverage as opposed to just covering your core. Wide doesn't make up for length and length doesn't make up for width.
I personally ordered a normal width under quilt and found it's more than enough coverage for my wide gathered end hammock. Any wider and I feel like it would negatively impact the performance of the whole experience by possibly adding gaps and unnecessarily blocking my view within the hammock.
Edit: To give you an idea of my shoulder width I wear a size 40 or 42 coat.
arczeneb
12-03-2017, 21:44
Bridge hammock 44 or 48 wide which fits best? The 48" fits best a nice coverage.
Singingcrowsings
12-04-2017, 14:49
I like the extra width for when I lay on my side.
georgecarr
12-04-2017, 15:57
Bridge hammock 44 or 48 wide which fits best? The 48" fits best a nice coverage.
Actually a bridge is much narrower than a 44" quilt in the center.
One of the reasons I greatly prefer my Ridgerunner bridge hammock is because of improved underquilt coverage. In the bridge, the quilt seems so much more underneath you. And it's easy to attach. In a gathered-end hammock, with all the diagonal lay and banana shaped posture, the underquilt insulation seems much more inefficient.
Now some of you may find a bridge hammock less comfortable, and that is a different and important issue. But for me, I found the Ridgerunner to be not only more efficient as far as the underquilt went, I found it much more comfortable.
And for those that say the Ridgerunner requires heavy spreader bars ---- I use my hiking poles instead. I'm a backpacker gram weenie, and the only objection to the RR is the weight issue, but with the hiking pole option, it's all good.
AZsteelman
12-04-2017, 23:14
I had mine made at 50” since I’m a wide guy! I got tired of always having to pull the UQ up to cover my shoulder. Problem solved!
bartdelatte
12-06-2017, 17:34
I recently got a 55 in wide UQ. I have broad shoulders and I sleep with my dog next to me. I always found that i was constantly pulling the UQ over my shoulder with the standard width.