OK, we all know how I go on and on about how the PeaPod beats every other approach for sheer efficiency and near guaranteed warmth, mostly do to being the most draft free approach. But it is not for every one. Some might find it too confining. Depending on the hammock, to reach it's temp rating on top, it will need some form of added insulation to fill the "gap". It won't work on all hammocks, etc. And I also think the HHSS has at least some of the pod's advantages, more or less.
But more and more I am a ( JRB or GrizzBridge) bridge fan. Mostly just due to comfort. Every time I lay down in it and immediately have no leg or side comfort issues, 100% of the time, I wonder why I continue fooling with anything else? ( I know there are some reasons or I would have completely switched long ago, still....). Plus, another reason is how the MW4 functions on the BMBH. I think that, along with the PeaPod ( and for me at warmer temps the HHSS) it is maybe the most bombproof of the UQ/hammock systems out there.
No, you say? Then I will ask a question I have asked before re: the PeaPod: have you ever seen a thread here where somebody used an MW UQ on a BMBH within the temp specs(or even a bit beyond) and had a cold butt or back? Where someone was dealing with gaps on the ends or too tight= compression or it sagged or moved during the night? I never have seen such a thread, just as I also have never experienced such a problem.
As far as I can tell, if you hang it exactly per JRB directions, there is no gap under me head to toe. True, it is not "closed" on the ends like a pod, but it does seem to come up around the bottom/top edges of the BMBH a bit, and hugs the hammock so closely on the bottom and lower sides, head to foot, that I just can't detect any cold areas no matter what. So, having used both a bunch, I rate the MW4/BMBH right there very close to the pod for preventing drafts under you, with no hassle. ( and the ease of augmenting with a pad is a whole other benefit)
But for this thread, I want to ask users of both hammock types about TQs and drafts. That is, IMO, where the pod approach is king of the hill. But, lately I'm thinking that the BMBH's lack of shoulder room so oft complained about might actually be an advantage with quilts. ( for me anymore the whole shoulder thing is a bit of a non-issue, but that is a dif thread).
I'm not sure yet if I am imagining it, but I think it might be easier for me to get the sides tucked and "sealed" with my TQ this hammock than others. And thus more draft free. It seems to be the shape of the hammock. No matter how I lay in it, the sides of the hammock are close enough that I always have a pretty easy time of getting plenty of "tuck" around me, even with my 21 oz TQ, and keeping it there. And it helps that the MWUQ is wrapped all the way around and above where I am trying to tuck the quilt, and it is NOT going to move during the night, and I can not move off of it's insulation. It is attached to loops on the hammock and can not move.
For example, using another of my fav torso length UQs and this same TQ in a non-bridge hammock, it just seem harder to get things tucked in head to toe and then keep it that way. As I lay on the diagonal, I have to get the UQ situated perfectly on my left shoulder, and try to get the TQ well tucked around my shoulders and neck. While trying to get one perfect, often the other seems to get out of adjustment. And of course any movement by me while asleep can undo all of that. The TQ is tucked tightly at the left shoulder, but things are much looser in the torso and leg area. It just seems easier for things to "open" up along some spot(there is more "room" at the sides), causing a cold air entry point.
So folks who use a BMBH and other hammock types as well, have you noticed anything like this? Or is it all in my head? Could it be that the narrow disadvantage of this type hammock can be an advantage with TQ use? I am not sure about this yet, but recently I have been noticing that this seems to be the case. I may be wrong.