One last thing i was wondering about is whether a down sleeping bag would be better then synthetic ? From what I think i know they are stuffed feathers and you can't get them wet at all. But is the benefit just they are warmer and pack smaller ?
Check out homesickstev's suggested links (I'm also a happy Alpkit customer), which has a good guide to choosing a sleeping bag. Its true that down likes water even less than synthetic, but no sleeping bag works
well when wet. The idea that down just turns to porriage, while synthetic keeps you super toasty is something that gets repeated again and again, but probably isn't true for most people. Of course your going to keep your bag dry with drybags, etc, no matter what its made of.
Kristin Hostetter is the long time Gear editor of
Backpacker magazine, and her reply to the question 'down v synthetic' was:
The deal is pretty simple actually. Do you wanna save money? Buy a synthetic. Do you wanna save weight? Go with down. - See more at:
http://www.backpacker.com/gear/experts/ask-kristin/down-vs-synthetic/#sthash.HXXID0YY.dpuf
I like the advice Peter Cinch gave some years back on OM:
I don't know why, but from a lot of anecdotal evidence over many years I've heard that ratings on down bags are a lot more conservative than ratings on synthetics. In other words, people complaining they froze in synthetics rated for the job while those in similarly rated down didn't. Note the "anecdotal" in there, and I've never done a proper study, but I've heard enough to give it the benefit of the doubt at least.
And as regards packing size, stated packing sizes for down are easily achieved by a Real Person (TM) and a normal stuffsac, while for synthetics ISTM that you need to be two separate gorillas with special tools.
Further (anecdotal) evidence is that I've heard a lot of people switch from synthetic to down and come away much happier, and pretty much nobody who's expressed happiness the other way.
The real arguments for synthetic IMHO are lower capital cost (if you don't have the money then better value over 10 years is a moot point) and much easier cleaning. Yes, they do work better wet, but they still don't work very well when wet and will still be hideously icky, so whatever bag you get you just don't get it wet. The other ace for synthetics is if you're allergic to down.
Down bags generally cost a lot more and dont handle damp as well, hence some of the reasons why the military use synthetic bags. On the other hand, down bags last longer, are warmer for the weight, and pack down much smaller. These days they also often have some sort of tretment which makes them more moisture resistant. I've got an old Snugpak bag, but my next bag will be down if I can afford it - its just much more efficent. Having said that, if I could get a killer deal on a MH Lamina O, then I might go with that, because their weight is very good for a synthetic.
Its up to you - just buy the best you can afford, that will work for you (buy cheap, buy twice). A rubbish sleeping bag is just torture when your freezing in it and you've got 6 hours to go before daylight, plus another two nights in the blessed thing. Decent sleeping mat can also make a lot of difference. Go into a decent store after some research and try them out. Same goes for tents. If there is a tent show, go and see what they are like - its much better than guessing from a photo and a little drawing.
Whatever you do, don't think that the extreme temp quoted on a bags discription is a 'real' figure - its often included on dodgy bags as something that the bag could go down to, but Alpkit explain it as:
Please note the extreme rating is the temperature at which the average woman can remain for six hours without risk of DEATH from hypothermia - but can still sustain cold injuries - under EN13537 conditions.
That does not sound like fun!
