Mt. Washington 4 vs. Old Rag Mtn __As An UQ__

[mychal]

I like my Mt. Washington 4, and I have a bunch of kids (4, I think), who like to camp with me. I need another warm UQ for this winter for us. The ORM is on sale right now, and it can be used as an UQ.

Is there any downside to getting the ORM, knowing that I'd primarily be using it as an UQ, vs. the Mt. Washington 4? Even though the Mt. Washington 4 is a great UQ for me (it's in the shop right now getting a new front bumper because I tore it open on my last camping trip), of the two things I like least (no full channel suspension and not as wide as I'd like), the ORM seems to address one of those things (48" wide).

What are y'all's thoughts?

And while I'm at it, has anybody added a side channel ("primary") suspension to a Mt. Washington?

Gracias.

[Fireboy]

I don't have the Mt Washington, but I do have the ORM. I have used it as a under and top quilt. It really works well for both. I personally don't think it's a trade off at all.

[BillyBob58]

The MWs are differentially cut. Which means, most especially when you are using as an UQ, you don't have to worry about pulling it too snug against you. To avoid any cold gaps under you, it's good to have an UQ plenty snug against you. But with no dif cut, it is easy to pull it a little too tight and compress the down too much and end up cold. This was not an uncommon complaint to see in the days before dif cut. You definitely need to pay closer attention to a just right adjustment if the UQ has no dif cut.

When it comes to the full perimeter suspension, I don't know how much advantage that would be on a full length UQ. Whereas with my short Yeti UQ, I need to be able to have it adjust exactly from shoulders to thighs, my MWs seem to always have me covered. But, YMMV. I see you want the sale price, plus there is a price advantage to the ORM to start with, and it can be used top or bottom. But if you think you might prefer the MW for use as an UQ, I wonder if they might be coming up on sale soon?

[mychal]

The MWs are differentially cut. Which means, most especially when you are using as an UQ, you dom't have to worry about pulling it too snug against you. To avoid any cold gaps under you, it's good to have an UQ plenty snug against you. But with no dif cut, it is easy to pull it a little too tight and compress the down to much and end up cold. This was not an uncommon complaint to see in the days before dif cut. You definitely need to pay closer attention to a just right adjustment with no dif cut.

When it comes to the full perimeter suspension, I don't know how much advantage that would be on a full length UQ. Whereas with my short Yeti UQ, I need to be able to have it adjust exactly from shoulders to thighs, my MWs seem to always have me covered. But, YMMV. I see you want the sale price, plus there is a price advantage to the ORM to start with, and it can be used top or bottom. But if you think you might prefer the MW for use as an UQ, I wonder if they might be coming up on sale soon?

Great point about the differential cut. That also puts a tick in the "peace of mind" column for me. Just one less fiddle to worry about where we're out there.

For me, the primary/full perimeter/side channel suspension is important because that is the easiest way to ensure that the quilt is pulled up high enough to get that snug fit to the hammock. I've noticed that with my Jarbidges and the Mt. Washington 4, there are some positions I sleep in (I change positions about 37 times on any given night) where no matter how hard the 4 corners are tightened, the deep center of the UQ can droop a bit. I think this is because, when only the 4 corners accept the UQ tension, sometimes my body changes the pressure points on the UQ so that some parts of the UQ are fairly taught, but other parts are not. I'm thinking of tying a shock cord from the two mid-point tie-outs, across the top of my RL, and including a cord lock on each side, so I can tighten it as needed.

Anyway, I like my MW4, even though it doesn't have the side channel suspension, so it's obviously not a deal-breaker for me. Just a point I consider.

[BillyBob58]

I have always used a bit of added shock cord running from the mid-point tie outs and then side to side using any UQs on my bridge hammocks to overcome what seems to be a tendency to be too wide in the top middle edge with bridge hammocks. Or I might drape it over the ridge line if I have one. The very best quilt fit I have found is with a torso sized JRB MW3 UQ on a bridge hammock, and running the shock cord catercorner on the foot end. This gets me a good snug fit every where, sides and ends. Like this, looking towards the foot ens MW3 short on a WBRR bridge:

Or on a JRB UL bridge:



I have not run into that droop in the middle even when end suspension is plenty snug with the MW's end suspension. This is a problem I have to be careful with using the full perimeter suspension of my torso sized Yeti. No matter how tight you pull it, the quilt can still travel- both ends towards the middle, ending up sagging in the middle from what is called the accordion effect. This only happens to me(so far) with full perimeter type suspensions. But there are minor mods to overcome that problem. I think you can see how this might easily happen just looking at this pic:

You can see how easy it would be for both the head end and foot end to migrate towards the middle during the night.

Have you tried any of the Dutch hooks or other stuff he sells for keeping UQs snug in the middle and to prevent them from slipping off your shoulder? I have not,but I hear they work great and plan to get some if I can just get round to it. My original round to it seems to be broke.