So, is Wiggy's just plain "wiggy?" OK, somewhat provocative question, but seriously Jerry in his newsletters goes on and on about his Lamilite insulation.

So, QUESTIONS:
If you have personally used a Wiggy's bag:
1. What was the bag's temperature rating?
2. Did it measure up to that rating?
3. Have you slept in a wet Wiggy's bag and did it still keep you warm?
4. If you've used a Wiggy's bag over 5 years old, is it still measuring up to it's temperature rating?

COMMENTS:
The one thing that I can't get past is the weight of a Wiggy's bag. They seem to be about double what my warmer* down bags weigh. My down bags meet their temperature rating and last well so there's not really much advantage to Lamilite except that Lamilite appears to work well when wet (which IS a big advantage). I guess that's the trade off: Down is 1/3 to 1/2 the weight than a Wiggy's bag for a given temperature rating, but if it gets wet, you're screwed.

*Examples:
1. A Wiggy's Desert +40F bag (40oz) weighs 2.11 times more than my warmer Western Mountaineering Summerlite +32F bag (19oz).
2. A Wiggy's Ultralight +20F bag (56oz) weighs 1.81 times more than my warmer Mountain Hardware Phantom 15 +15F bag (31oz).

I am always amused when somebody boasts their Mountaingoat LTD MK IV dayglo fuschia, 5th generation Go Texas( rolls up into a ball you can fit into the pocket of the other clothing you didn't bring because of wieght) has lasted 5 years. Invariably these garments have ben used at best a few dozen times while my Filson one tonne wool cruiser jacket is pushing 30 years of near daily use. I bought my first Wiggy on the advise of the late Chris Janowskie, who did in fact submerge a bag into water and climb inside. Chris lived in Alaska. I never figured out what all the fuss was over an ounce here and there in my gear. If it gets to heavy I just reduce the bottles of Champagne in my BOB. There is a grainy, black and white photo of Klondikers climbing the Chilkoot Trail.I've climbed that pass, in wonder at people who lugged the required TONNES of food and supplies to the top.I bet they would have loved a Wiggies. Can they wear out? Of course they will, eventually. But by the time one does, most of Jerry's detractors have gone out of business.

Hmm. Not quite the direct response to my questions that I had hoped for, but thank you.

By the way, my dad's old down bag ca. late 50's/early 60's is still going strong. Dad used it pretty dang regular, particularly after he retired. He and now I have gotten about 45+ years out of it. Meets my criteria for longevity.

I've never slept in one but I've followed several threads on these bags on 2 hunting sites (Kifaru and 24hourcampfire in the backpack hunting area). I was needing a bag and was going to purchase a Wiggy but I watched Jerry act like such an [censored] on those sites that he was banished from both of them.

In general, they tend to be regarded as good synthetic bags that are heavy for their temperature rating. Those who love them really love them. Those that don't seem to have more of an issue with Jerry than with the bags.

I ended up with a Big Agnes down bag and I really like it. I understand that the Western Mountaineering bags are probably one of the best bags going right now. Of course if you get a down bag wet, you are pretty much screwed.

If you really want to get a feel for the passion about this issue, at least among backpack hunters, visit the 24hourcampfire site. The current thread on Wiggys bags has over 400 posts and a lot of it is somewhat nasty. Search either site as they tend to have Wiggys threads erupt every so often (and I use the word erupt on purpose).

Chris, I don't mean to hijack this thread but thanks to your post, I got some fun reading about the Klondike Gold Rush history. It's fascinating.

During this Klondike Gold Rush it became apparent that most prospectors were not going to survive the arduous terrain and demanding weather (The Klondike Gold Rush killed many people. 1 million planned to try and find gold. 100,000 actually set out to do so. By the time people reached Dawson City 60,000 people had died. Of the 40,000 at Dawson City only 4,000 found gold) so the Canadian Mounted Police of the time required one ton of gear (enough to supply a prospector for one year)

Here is a suggested list:

150 lb. bacon
400 lb. flour
25 lb. rolled oats
125 lb. beans
10 lb. tea
10 lb. coffee
25 lb. sugar
25 lb. dried potatoes
2 lb. dried onions
15 lb. salt
1 lb. pepper
75 lb. dried fruits
8 lb. baking powder
2 lb. soda
1/2 lb. evaporated vinegar
12 oz. compressed soup
1 can mustard
1 tin matches (for four men)
Stove for four men
Gold pan for each
Set granite buckets
Large bucket
Knife, fork, spoon, cup, and plate
Frying pan
Coffee and teapot
Scythe stone
Two picks and one shovel
One whipsaw
Pack strap
Two axes for four men and one extra handle
Six 8 inch files and two taper files for the party
Draw knife, brace and bits, jack plane, and hammer for party
200 feet three-eights-inch rope
8 lb. of pitch and 5 lb. of oakum for four men
Nails, five lbs. each of 6,8,10 and 12 penny, for four men
Tent, 10 x 12 feet for four men
Canvas for wrapping
Two oil blankets to each boat
5 yards of mosquito netting for each man
3 suits of heavy underwear
1 heavy mackinaw coat
2 pairs heavy machinaw trousers
1 heavy rubber-lined coat
1 doz heavy wool socks
1/2 doz heavy wool mittens
2 heavy overshirts
2 pairs heavy snagproof rubber boots
2 pairs shoes
4 pairs blankets (for two men)
4 towels
2 pairs overalls
1 suit oil clothing
Several changes of summer clothing
Small assortment of medicines

http://www.nps.gov/klgo/historyculture/tonofgoods.htm

We bought a batch of the "ultralight" bags to use for Pacific
Crest Outward Bound about 10 or 12 years ago. The worked comparably
in warmth, weight, and durability to the 20 degree, $60, slumberjack synthetic bags also used at the time. By the end of the summer with daily use and monthly laundering they had lost roughly 1/3 of their loft and students were getting cold at below freezing temps.

This is the law of the Yukon, and ever she makes it plain:
"Send not your foolish and feeble; send me your strong and your sane --
Strong for the red rage of battle; sane for I harry them sore;
Send me men girt for the combat, men who are grit to the core;
Swift as the panther in triumph, fierce as the bear in defeat,
Sired of a bulldog parent, steeled in the furnace heat.
Send me the best of your breeding, lend me your chosen ones;
Them will I take to my bosom, them will I call my sons;
Them will I gild with my treasure, them will I glut with my meat;
But the others -- the misfits, the failures -- I trample under my feet.
Dissolute, damned and despairful, crippled and palsied and slain,
Ye would send me the spawn of your gutters -- Go! take back your spawn again.
--Robert Service, the first stanza of The Law of the Yukon

Hi Hikin_Jim

I haven't owned a Wiggy's bag, but they appear to be top quality synthetic sleeping bags similar to other high end bags such as the Snugpak range and the like. The Lamilite insulation claims on the Wiggy's website are very similar to the claims for the performance of the Softie Premier insulation which Snugpak uses, so I guess the claims about it being somewhat unique can be taken with a pinch of salt.

The Western Mountaineering Summerlite seems to be at the top end performance, even for a down bag. Very nice and very expensive and a really nice bit of kit and should last a long time if looked after.

No matter what anyone says 'sleeping in a wet sleeping bag' is not recommended whether it is a synthetic or down. A truely misarable way to spend the night. So some simple precautions are all that are required.

Don't let your down bag get wet.

Don't breathe into your down bag.

Don't attempt to sleep in damp or wet clothing.

Over time a synthetic bag will slowly loose its insulation qualities, some at a faster rate than others. With a good down bag I would expect the lifetime to be 2-3 times longer than even the very best synthetic bags. Therefore I think there are many advantages to a down bag even with the initial higher purchase price. But the end user needs be slightly more skillful using a downbag than with a synthetic to ensure they maximise its qualities and guard against is downsides. (no pun intended)

The synthetic bag I own is a Snugpak Special Forces 1, which can incidentally be zipped into a Special Forces 2 and still allows the user keep the quick centre pull zipper operation. This gives a flexible arragement covering a wider range of working temperatures. It also has a re-inforced foot box which is designed to allow the user to keep his or her boots on during the night.

http://www.snugpak.com/30_codegreen/31_07_specialforces1.htm

What I do like about the Wiggy's bag range is that they offer a high quality rectangular shaped bag rather than the now standard mummy shape. Its sometimes nice to have the option if bags weight is not critical for use in moderate/cool temperatures.

Exactly. We should all still be wearing bearskins & racoon hats in the wilds. All this newfangeld gadgetry is worthless and a waste of resources. Anyone who carries less than 50% of their bodyweight on the trail is a moron, disconnected with what's important about the outdoors, and probably displays loose morals. If only we embraced 50-year old technology to the exclusion of modern "advances", everything in the world would be better and the stars would align more precisely.

Oh wait, I'm responding to a Luddite post on the Internet. How ironic: using perhaps the finest example of modern technology to rail against... modern technology.

I can't answer your questions, because his attitude turned me off long ago. The laddy doth protest too much, methinks. I do know far too much about insulation, though, from many hours of stab-me-in-the-eye-please training.

Lamilite is one of the earlier continuous fibers, much like the original Polarguard, which you can still get in lower-end bags like Slumberjack. Polarguard has moved on to hollow extruded fibers--first Delta and then 3D, which seem to give equal warmth for less weight. None of them bounce back like down, which is why down lasts for decades and synthetics slowly compress under heavy use (or simply being stuffed in a sack and not used). Wiggy's keeps the old tech and prints new advertising.

It's not terrible stuff, but it's heavy. I've made my own views clear on here. To be honest I do own two fiber bags, but I see their use as very limited. I'll take a fiber bag kayaking/canoeing on short trips, or backpacking in the rainiest weeks of spring in the Smokies, when it comes down like it's getting paid. That's about it. I also have one that I've cut in half to use in winter for my dogs, because they never take off their wet clothes before they go to bed. :-] Since I used to work in a gear shop, I picked up all of these for very little money.

If you feel the need to have a synthetic bag, there are other companies that try to keep weight in mind. Sierra Designs is one, and it has been in business for two decades longer than W's and is still going strong.

I don't want to hijack the thread, either, but weight of pack is a real survival issue. As Chouinard (the founder of Patagonia and a proponent of ultralight climbing) says, "If you have bivy gear, you will bivy." His point is that every piece of gear carried limits your range of travel, and there is a tipping point at which you are more likely to stay put rather than walk out. With a light pack, I can walk a lot of miles every day if I have to without jettisoning anything, so I'm closer to the car/cabin/escape from situation with my full kit. If a situation has no escape, then yes, heavier bombproof gear is preferable, but in my location I probably can't walk two days in any direction without hitting a road, so I prefer mobility.

I think that if Wiggy's really was the best, their bags would be carried by most long-distance hikers. Those are pretty much the only folks in modern society who spend months outdoors and cover thousands of miles without a vehicle. They are awfully good at ferreting out the best gear. I've met hundreds on the AT and at get-togethers like Trail Days, and I haven't seen a Wiggy's bag yet that I remember.



Jaywalke

jawalke,

You have to be kidding me! "most long-distance hikers. Those are pretty much the only folks in modern society who spend months outdoors and cover thousands of miles without a vehicle."

Sorry, but there are LOTS of others, even if they do use a vehicle when they get the chance. I bought my Wiggy's bag(s) after a weekend with two Marines - who brought their Wiggy's bags even though both had more expensive down bags at home. Several collegues have used them in the Antarctic (and no, they did not carry them). Some of us do not have the ability to baby our gear the way a down bag needs it -- especially a super light one. I had a Holubar down bag (700 fill) that I got in the 60's. It was great in the Rockies where I could keep it dry and was a little lighter than the synthetic bags and would pack much smaller. No net baffles, super lite fabric, etc. It lasted about 30 years. In SE Alaska, I quickly got a synthetic bag. I have seen several of the new, high quality, super light down bags die within a year of hard use. The down is great, but the fabric must be taken care of.

Wiggy's is a good bag IMHO, if you are not fixated on a super light pack and are in wet weather much of the time. In the Rockies and having the time to care for a down bag (and the money to buy them repetedly if you use the light ones hard) they are great.

Respectfully,

Jerry

Sleeping system components are tools. Different users like different tools. All users can explain and justify their tool choices, otherwise they would choose different tools.

Few users have the resources or inclination to conduct scientifically valid tests before or after they choose a given tool. Each of our experiences, observations, and those anecdotally related by others about sleep system components almost certainly do not amount to statistically valid data.

So what! We choose based on imperfect information because that is usually the practical, if not only, choice that we have to navigate the world. We do the best we can, like checking out our experience with others we believe we can trust to be reasonably honest – even folks on the ETS forum!

Wiggy’s or not Wiggy’s, that’s the question? The answer is clear: sometimes for some people.

For a largely fair weather distance-per-day-critical Appalachian Trail trip with an every-ounce-is-critical group a Wiggy’s bag makes little sense. For a largely foul weather distance-is-handled-by-vehicle trip, or other situations where wear-and-tear, not carrying, is most relevant [ like when you are at your survival retreat], a Wiggy’s bag makes more sense.

Is a Wiggy’s bag the best in the world for some conditions? As always, it depends upon who you ask and what the criteria is for judging “best”.

Let’s just enjoy the discussion.

For what it’s worth, my car kit includes a Wiggy’s bag. My bugout bag does not usually include a sleeping bag; only heat sheets and bivys. My recreational pack includes a down bag for fair weather and, yep, a Wiggy’s for foul. If I find and can afford something better, I’ll use it. – and I’m guessing you will., too!

Jerry:

That last phrase of yours sort of negates the argument. If they use vehicles, they aren't the people I'm talking about. Vehicles (even sleds and canoes) make packweight a lesser or a moot point. Who are these lots of others who travel thousands of miles on foot, carrying everything? I honestly tried to think of some, but all the outdoor jobs I can come up with are based, at least, around vehicular travel: timber cruisers, surveyors, etc., even if that vehicluar travel is one big load-in/out to and from a base camp. Even some hunting trips are done with pack animals.

So, who carries all their gear every day and goes border-to-border (CDT, PCT). Illegal aliens? Homeless people? :-]

That's actually what worries me. I've read a lot of posts on various forums that say Wiggy's bags don't stand up all that well over time in terms of loft. There seems to be two schools of thought about Wiggy's bags:
1. Love 'em
2. Hate 'em

That's the conventional wisdom. Like I posted earlier, my dad's old circa 1960 Tempco Quilters down bag is still a good warm bag. It's patched, and the little cloth tabs around where you could snap in a hood or something are in some cases, completely worn through, but the loft is still pretty darn good.

Jerry Wigutou of Wiggys says that Lamelite really holds up well, but on the other hand there are a lot of posts to the contrary out on the 'net -- but there are also a lot of posts of extremely satisfied long term users of Wiggys bags. What's a poor boy to do?

Lol!

Jim,

My wife and I both have Wiggy's 0-degree bags (4 lbs). She got her's last year, and I have had mine for a couple years now. I haven't used it enough to confidently give you a good evaluation, but so far we are both pleased with our bags. We also have the baby-bunting for our 6 month old who will be trying it out this year.

I am wondering what kind of pad you use under your down bags? Do you use a 2" pad? Less? More? How much does it weigh? I have slept with a 3/4" Thermarest with no temperature issues, and I tend to get cold when I sleep. I'm sure I could sleep with no pad at all if I was really weight concerned. We also have some lighter North Face bags that pack smaller but we always seem to get cold in them.

My biggest issue with them is that they don't pack small enough to fit in a typical internal frame pack. I just use a smaller pack and strap it on the bottom, but it's less than ideal. I haven't experienced any loft loss issues, and I keep mine compressed (because the manual says you can). I haven't washed mine 100 times yet though either. The bags have a lifetime warranty though so if you have a problem just send it back.

It seems to me, if you are happy with your down bags (and you seem to be), why are you even looking at Wiggy's bags? They aren't for everyone purposes.

Greg

Yeah, his attitude does scare me a bit. I hesitate to buy because I've heard he really lashes out at anyone who has an experience different that what he portrays on his website.


That's why I have been looking into something like wiggy's. It also seems that his vacuum packed bags really work as advertised, they would be an excellent option for my winter car survival kit.


Absolutely, and I think that's a point that is often missed. Having all the best equipment doesn't necessarily make one better off. Weight leads to tired. Tired can lead to mistakes, injuries, and accidents. Also, if because your slowed by excess weight you don't make it out of an exposed high altitude area to your more sheltered camp area before dark, again you can be put into a dangerous situation; I know this one from first hand experience. The trick is to find that happy medium between well equipped and over burdened vs. under equppied and foolishly going unprepared.

There's a funny divide in the outdoors world. If you look at a Cabela's catalog vs. an REI catalog you'll see the difference. Hunters and the like appear to want more durable, heavier gear and don't seem to be quite as concerned with bulk. Hikers, Backpackers, and the like want compact, light weight gear and are willing to take a hit on durability to get it. Maybe that's because the Cabela's types use more vehicles and base camps? Also, I would think that the hunting crowd would be travelling fewer actual miles on foot and doing more beating through brush and other hard uses than the hiking crowd. The hikers on the other hand carry everything on their backs the whole time and want to make miles to be able to get to good water sources and good campsites while still being able to enjoy the walk. Nothing spoils a good hike like a miserably heavy backpack. That's kind of the divide I see in the outdoors world. One set is probably attracted to Wiggys and the other set has never even heard of them.

Thank you! That is the best, most sensible "tie it all together and make sense out of it" statement that I've seen about the down vs. synthetic debate that I've ever seen. To Wiggy's or not to Wiggy's? Tell me the scenario, and then I'll answer.

Synthetics in hard use or foul weather scenarios make all the sense in the world. I've kept my old 1970's Alpine Products Polarguard bag, dirty and de-lofted as it is, just to have a "beater bag" that I can use as a loaner or do whatever without having to baby it or worry about it getting abused or stolen. It's original -15F rating is probably now about a +45F rating, but for a sleep over for the nephews or summer use it's great.

Greg, I'm a side sleeper, so I like to have a fair amount of padding. I normally sleep with a Thermarest Prolite 4 because it's a little thicker (1.5" thick). I bet most people would be just fine with a Prolite 3 (1.0" thick). In the winter when I'm snow camping I put a Ridgerest (0.625" thick, also made by Thermarest) underneath my Prolite 4 for a total of 2.125" of insulation. Very warm, and very comfortable. Dad used to sleep with just the short Ridgerest. If I'm hammock camping, I'll normally just use a short Ridgerest.

Weights
Prolite 4 Regular - 24 ounces
Prolite 4 Short - 17 ounces
Prolite 3 Regular - 20 ounces
Prolite 3 Short - 13 ounces
Ridgerest Regular - 14 ounces
Ridgerest Short - 9 ounces




That's why I traded in my old synthetic bag for a down bag. When they started coming out with the way more comfortable (IMHO) internal frame packs, I switched to down so I could pack it inside the pack instead of having it flopping below the back which is uncomfortable in my experience.


A good point, actually. I'm looking at them for wet weather use. I think they'd be good for someplace like the Olympic National Forest in Washington. I could also use them here in the mountains of California in spring when everything is slushy. They'd also be great in inclement wx.

Having now "done my homework" both here on this forum and on other websites and forums, I'm pretty much concluding that Wiggy's bags are probably not the best choice for my immediate needs but I'd seriously consider them in extreme cold wx situations where weight and bulk weren't a big issues.

One interesting feature on nearly all sleeping bags is occupancy. Unless they feature a zip together mating of zippers, capacity is one. We all get to climb into our very own, grownup, luddite or techno freak cocooon of happiness and drift of to the dreamtime with didgereedoos lulling us to sleep. What some people don't understand is the forum rules cannot be ripped off and discarded like a mattress tag.Wierd things might happen never mentioned in outdoor books about bear attacks and killer storms. Luddite administrators might just take a Fallkniven, or, God Forbid a firehardened speartip and hit the ban button.

Well, the guys that I hike/camp/backpack with appreciate that separation. Seriously though, now that I'm getting married (2.5 weeks), the mateable issue is on my mind for the first time. Definitely a good design feature of a Wiggy's bag, particularly since my wife to be is 4'11", 90# (right after Thanksgiving supper) and sleeps cold. Hmm. Well, maybe Wiggys just went back on my list of things that would meet some of my immediate needs after all. lol. Good input. Thanks for that, Chris.

My sleeping bags evolved after a freezing night on a field trip to Anza-Borrega in one of those cheap car bags. I went out with my very next G.I. bill payment and looked at bags at my local, and vry knowledgeable dealer. He had top of the line down bags and I could choose either cobalt blue or scarlett red, very popular colours. As an aside, he mentioned having two four season rated bags I could have for $40 LESS than the regular bags, with the caveat they came in this peagreen colour and were discontinued for that reason.I bought the bag, a Berkeley made Trailwize.I slept warm for 20 odd years in it until body oils, repeated compression and time took their toll. I recycled it one spring by cutting the bag open and watching numerous greatfull little birdies make off with prime goosedown nesting material. My next bag, for horseback packing was, and is a canvas role up affair with a Hudson's Bay blanket and sewn in pad.My hiking bag is a Wiggys. Again, everybody gets to crawl into a very personal choice at day's end and live with it. And yes, mimicking Chris Janowslie I in fact did submerge my Wiggys and crawl into it. Hte bag will in fact dry out.

Jim, I just wanted to throw 2 bits in as well. I have a Western Mountaineering Bristlecone MF and a new untested MicroNight Bivy from OR, but the Bristlecone can zip 2 bags together or lay flat like a blanket. I know it's down but it's very versatile. It all depends on what you want. I have a North Face synthetic bag and the WM and I've slept soaking wet in the North Face at 35 degrees and was extremely cold but doable, the mountaineer wouldn't fair in the rain but for the weight and warmth out of the WM bag out weighs my NF bag any day. But it's all in what your mission parameter is, I don't think you can go wrong with either bag, the Wiggy or the WM. The Wiggy bag is really expensive as well and both have lifetime guarantee. When I tried the Bristlecone, due to my size it was a perfect bag for me, roomy, extremely warm, use it as a blanket in warm weather, join it up to another bag for a his/her bag, or unzip the foot box to let my feet air out while I'm buried deep in down. Extremely comfortable and allows you to adjust your temp levels to reduce moisture levels. Just don't add rain storm. Anyway, I think the Wiggy bag will be a good choice for you for wet environments but I just wanted to let you know there are other manufactures with the add a bag zippers.


http://www.westernmountaineering.com/ind...mp;ContentId=40
http://www.outdoorresearch.com/site/micronight_bivy.html

I have to jump in here and say that in really cold weather, such as climbing Mt. McKinley in Denali NP in Alaska, the most common bag used is the North Face Darkstar synthetic bag. It is rated to 40 below, which is a common temp above 17,000 ft on Denali. The climb takes from 3 to 4 weeks and of course tha bag is used every night.
I have never known a climber or a hardcore backpacker to use a Wiggy's bag, most have never heard of them.
I surely cannot say that Wiggy's makes a bad product, their bags are probably fine for someone that is not concerned with extra weight, such as vehicle camper or even a short trip backpacker.
If I were buying a bag that I had to carry on my back, it would be a North Face, Marmot, Alps Mountaineering, Mountain Hardwear or even a Kelty or REI. It would not be a Wiggy's. If I want a car camping bag, I dig up the US Army synthetic bag buried in the closet somewhere.
Take that as a personal choice, and not pleasing to everyone's opinions. Keep an open mind and decide yourself, you have to live with your choice. Cheers!

Or die with it. (hopefully not)

Seriously though, guys thanks very much for all the input. That's the great thing about this forum, it really does make you think and shows the old saying "two heads (or more in this case) are better than one" is true. I've used sleeping bags, both synthetic and down, since the 60's with my dad, with the scouts, in the Army, and now on my own as an adult, but I don't think I could have put together all the perspectives and pointers put forth here in this thread. As I say, thanks.

Interested to hear you have a Big Agnes. Are there gaps between the bag and the mat. I've heard it described as being like a draft?
The Sock

I just tire of the curmudgeonly sarcasm you put out. Perspectives other than yours get hosed with passive-aggressive prose (as quoted above) as if you're the only guy around who really knows what works & what doesn't. Others out here have had a tad bit of experience over the years, but then again you're the Moderator God so just to keep you happy I'll throw a few bricks into my lightweight pack.

I hear you, and I won't comment on your posts in the future.

No. I've been quite happy with the setup. I use a Big Agnes Insulated Air Core pad and have not experienced any of what you describe.

I've not had the bag that long. I used it last summer on a 6 day backpacking trip into the Wind River Mountains in western Wyoming. Slept with the bag mostly unzipp because I was warm.

Last fall used it on a backpack elk hunt in central Utah. It snowed on us and temperatures were into the teens I'd guess. I slept just fine. The guy I was with woke up twice shivering violently and had to move around and add clothing each time to stay warm. Not sure what bag he had but it was more of a summer bag.

The surest way to make money in the gold rush was to sell to the miners. One chap bought a load of kittens to trade. People thought he was mad. In fact miners were lonely men. He could name his price. Good bit of lateral thinking on the what to have as trade goods theme! :-)
The Sock

I agree. If you want to start banning people of being tired of your self adulation, put me on that list.

How could something as heavy and bulky as a wiggy bag NOT be warm?!? Everyone says that they are not "hiking" when they are using theirs so they aren't worried about all that wt and bulk. Aren't there other quality bags that are just as warm only with much less wt and bulk? Why is wiggys better than those ones?

I'm not picking on the wiggy bag or mr wiggy, heck there are a lot of nuts in the outdoor industry, just consider ray jardine. It doesn't mean their ideas or products are bad.

But a heavy bulky bag that's expensive to boot - I don't understand the appeal. Maybe if I actually seen one to compare I would. And I can understand going to any lengths to be warm in very cold artic conditions. I don't see the appeal of a heavy lightweight bag at all though.

To sort of hijack the thread, I just got my first down bag, a summer bag, the montbell UL SS #5 (35-40 degrees)and cannot see myself using my synthetic bag in anything but some kind of dire conditions where I did not have control over my shelter. I don't know what that would be off the bat, I have never gotten wet in any of my tents and more often than not it rains when I am camping or hiking. I actaully like to lay in a tent in the rain. I like rain period! We've had this insufferable drought for over 5 years, I think last year was the worst I have seen, and it finally seems to be raining like it used to. I got so exited I pitched my tents in the yard and hung out in them. It was awesome! I did my BA seedhouse once then the next weekend my HS tarptent double rainbow. My neighbors think I'm crazy but I know that it's really them.

The WM bags are supposed to be the mack daddy of down bags. If I ever excape from the east coast to somewhere where I could actually enjoy true wilderness I think I would like one of those. I have never met or heard of anyone that has been dissapointed in their WM bag.

I like my montbell so much that I turned my heat down some and opened my bedroom window so I could snuggle with it! I have tried it at 38 degrees in the yard to about 65 in the house. Over 65 it gets too warm, 60 is good though.

Maybe my neighbors are right.

Glockaroo and Sodak, In case you haven't noticed, there is a wide range of opinions and writing styles on the forum. Nobody gets banned for an opinion, experience or ideas. We all have our share. If you don't like my style take it up with Doug. I am sure you would both make fine forum administrators and willing to volunteer the same hours I have over the years. Do talk this over with your significant others, cats and prospective employers and get back to me in 24 hours. until then I still believe you thin skinned heros would find an arctic rated Wiggy bag just about right for this summer.

gitarmac,

"Everyone says that they are not "hiking" when they are using theirs so they aren't worried about all that wt and bulk."

I think you (and others) are not understanding our comments. Even though I may be inserted and extracted by helicopter, I may walk 10 to 15 miles on a typical day, all of it with a pack (including my Wiggy's bag). Although I am not "hiking" the effect is the same. The Marines I described in an earlier post have the same situation. They may use vehicles "when they can" but they still do a LOT of walking (maybe 1500 miles per year or more) with that same full pack on their back. In the Middle East, no, but in training they walk extra. We were on a weekend (3 day) "hike" but they brought their Wiggy's bags instead of the lightweight down ones they all owned.

A Wiggy's bag I now own (a Superlite) is not that much heavier than the Holubar down bag I bought in the 60's. That was a rugged bag too. The new super light bags do not use the same weight of fabric (many use mesh for the baffles) - much lighter, but also much easier to damage.

The rain is not the only source of moisture. Sometimes it is enough though. I have seen storms blow water through the zippers of good tents. After a few weeks in a bag you need to dry it out. Most campers I know will spend a day in camp once a week or so to dry everything out if the weather is damp all the time. I do not always have the time to do that. I don't know where you use your bag, but when I lived in the Rockies, I was not concerned about staying dry either (and I do love to hike in the rain). Yes my bag got wet once or twice and I spent a cold night. But it was not often and the bag would dry the next day. In SE Alaska I have seen weeks where you would not be able to dry a down bag without prodigeous efforts, and possibly not then if you did not have the right equipment (a normal tent and stove probably would not make it).

We must all consider OUR situations and plan for them. Is the synthetic bag for everyone everywhere? Of course not, just like the down bag. If I had only one bag to do everything with (my wife would be happy:-) it would be my Wiggy's FTRSS would be it. If I have the choice (thankfully I do) I have other bags for situations where they might be better.

Respectfully,

Jerry

Yeah, that's why I say there are instances where I would use my sythetic bag. Unfortunatly I am not lucky enough to get out for anything but a few days, it's not terribly cold and I don't have to worry about wetting my down bag out. I doubt my montbell will ever be in much danger. I don't plan on living here forever so who knows, I might be a wiggy sleeper some day. There was a time when I thought I would never have a down bag!

Here's an interesting article on the down bags.

http://www.backpacking.net/gear-reviews/sleeping-bag-review/sleeping-bag-review.html#water


WATER RESISTANCE

Although none of these bags are intended to be weather proof, they all are afforded a generous application of Durable Water Repellent (DWR) treatment to protect the down insulation from getting wet and becoming dysfunctional. The following tests were performed to observe how each bag performed, in relation to the other bags. The goal was to (1) examine how each bag's shell material responded to persistently applied water and (2) examine how each bag responded to water persistently applied to its always vulnerable seams.

We first created a little crater in at least two places on each bag and filled with eight to ten ounces of water. We let the water remain for at least 1/2 hour. After removing the water, we visually checked for wetout of the shell material, dampness/wetness of the down and dampness/wetness on the inside of the bag. The second test was similar except the puddles of water were positioned directly over the seams.

All bags passed the first test with relatively similar results. All bags failed the second test, with relatively similar results.

* Nunatak - Great DWR -- BUT water seeps thru seams.
* Marmot - excellent DWR, very water repellent, water beads up & rolls off -- BUT water seeps thru seams.
* Big Agnes - excellent DWR, very water repellent, water beads up & rolls off -- BUT water seeps thru seams.
* Western - very good DWR, water resistant, water does not soak thru but does dampen shell -- water seeps thru seams
* Moonstone - very good DWR, water resistant, water does not soak thru but does dampen shell -- water seeps thru seams
* Mountainsmith - very good DWR, water resistant, water does not soak thru but does dampen shell -- water seeps thru seams
* Exped - good coat of DWR, water resistant, water does not soak thru but does dampen shell -- water seeps thru seams

TEST #1 RANKINGS (shell material):

1. Nunatak Alpinist (like a duck's back)
2. Marmot bags (nicely beads up)
2. Big Agnes bags (nicely beads up)
3. Moonstone Lucid 800 (shell slightly damp)
3. Western Mountaineering bags (shell slightly damp)
3. Mountainsmith Bags (shell slightly damp)
4. Exped Hummingbird (shell damp)

TEST #2 RANKINGS (seams):

1. Moonstone Lucid 800 (took longer to soak thru seams, but end result the same - very wet inside bag)
2. Nunatak Alpinist (very wet inside of bag)
2. Marmot bags (very wet inside of bag)
2. Big Agnes bags (very wet inside of bag)
2. Western Mountaineering bags (very wet inside of bag)
2. Exped Hummingbird (very wet inside of bag)

Incidentally, I also included the Western Mountaineering Apache Super Microfiber in this water test. As you know, the microfiber material is windproof and highly water resistant. Well, just so you know, the seams on these highly water resistant bags (be it microfiber, dryloft, or equivalents) will allow water seepage into the bag the same as the bags which rely solely on a DWR coating. The only advantage to the microfiber or dryloft type fabrics is that they will afford longer-term durability and offer water resistance after their DWR coating wears off. Don't presume, then, that a very expensive dryloft bag will provide the functionality of a waterproof bivy sack. You might indeed, get very wet and become very disappointed.

More info

http://www.alaskamountaineering.com/Info.cfm?id=6&d=41&c=0&s=0

There are a few tricks to help save your trip if your down bag does become wet out in the hills. Most times, your down bag becomes damp from your body vapor and clothes or just one specific area actually gets wet from a food spill, snow drug into your tent, wet boot, etc. The more heat inside the bag the faster the down will dry. Placing several water bottles filled with hot water inside your damp down bag will generate more heat and help dry the down faster. If your down bag becomes quite damp, like after a five day storm, turning the bag inside out while placing hot bottles of water inside will allow moisture to pass through bag faster due to the open nylon weave, especially helpful if your bag has a water-proof shell. If a specific area gets wet, place a water bottle filled with hot water under the wet area. Wet down clumps so breaking up the down clumps in very wet areas will spread out the down to allow the down to dry faster. Place clothing on top of the bag or wet area to boost the thermal will also speed up the drying process. Most users understand to dry a wet bag, lay it in the sun on top of a tent but an erected tent in the sun can get blistering hot inside. Turning your bag inside out and placing it inside a tent in the sun can almost get to an at home clothes dryer temperature. This trick also works for any damp gear.

Never store your sleeping bag completely stuff inside its stuff sack. This will compress the fibers of both down and synthetic damaging the fibers. The best way to store any sleeping bag is laying completely flat or hanging in a well ventilated cool and dark area. But most of us do not have the means to accomplish this especially when owning several bags so the next best way is inside a large cotton bag. Never store a wet or even a one night used sleeping bag in any container and this is tripled for down. Once home after your trip, hang or lay your bag completely open for several days. For a thick down bag it may take up to a week for the insulation and internal areas to completely dry. We rotate our bags around during the drying time to help air reach all areas of the bag. Some prescribe washing your down sleeping bag at home and there are even special soaps and rinses on the market for down bags. But we do not feel this way for high end down bags. Down sleeping bags cost a small fortune and down contains its own oil that helps protect itself in the wilderness when it was attached to the bird and improper washing can remove this oil. Down absorbs an incredible amount of water and washing a down bag in your bath tub fills the down with pounds of water. Trying to re-position the bag inside the tub and then removing the wet bag can stress the internal seams and they can rip, and you won’t even know it happened. Using a commercial machine causes untold stress on the seams with all that water weight soaked into the down. Manufactures will not warrant a bag washed at home. AMH recommends and uses a reputable down care specialist.

If you must wash your down bag at home there a few tricks. Turn your down bag inside out then re-stuff it back into its stuff sack. Fill a bath tub with warm water and add down specific soap. Place your down bag inside the water while it is still inside its stuff sack. Gently pull your down bag out of its stuff sack and let the bag fill with water. Ensure you keep the bag as flat as possible. Use your hands to squeeze the soapy water throughout your bag. Severely dirty bags made require several fresh soapy water washings. Once satisfied, drain the soapy water and refill the tub with clean water. Squeeze the clean water several times through your bag with your hands. Rinsing three, four or even five times may not be sufficient. Then squeeze as much water out of your bag before trying to remove it out from the tub. Gently roll your wet bag up and support its weight by your arms underneath the whole rolled bag as you remove it from the tub. Its best if you can place your wet down bag into a washer on spin cycle to spin out as much water as possible. Gently place your bag into a drier and dry for up to six hours on low to medium heat. Placing clean tennis balls in with your bag during drying will help break up the wet clumps. Once you think your down bag is dry, run your hands over the entire bag searching for clumps of down, which means the bag is not dry. Once you think your down bag is dry and you find no clumps, let you bag hang or lay flat for several days to ensure all moisture is removed.

Synthetic bags are much easier to wash at home and your standard washing machine with a large capacity works OK but a commercial tumble washer is preferred. Zip the bag completely up and turn it inside out so the soap and water can easily get through-out the fill. Use a sleeping bag specific wash or a mild soap and rinse the bag at least three times. Hang dry for twenty-four hours and you are done. Do not use bleach. Stain and dirt-busting detergents can be used on tuff stains. Once a synthetic bag has been through the spin cycle you will understand why synthetic fill rules the wet alpine world.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On my own note I have both bags and each has it's place but my preference is down by far. When I git caught in a 2 day rain storm in my synthetic bag, it was completely soaked but maintained a little heat but if the temps were colder it would be severe hypothermia, so in my opinion either bag would had been useless once soaked, just the synthetic would be quicker to dry if I had a fire going or a sunny day.

One of Backpacker Magazines Editors Choices 2003.

Backpacker Magazine – April 2003

Mountain Hardwear Spectre SL
Problem: A wet down bag really sucks. Solution: a waterproof down bag. Next problem?

by:

The paradox of down is legendary: We love the light, fluffy, compressible warmth, but hate the soggy, wilted-lettuce misery of wet feathers. So when Mountain Hardwear rolled out a down bag and told us it was waterproof, we were excited-and skeptical.

The first stormy night our equipment editor spent in the Spectre, a steady downpour pounded the bag. He admits, "It felt unnatural, like pitching a tent in your living room. But soon enough I realized the inside of the bag was staying warm and dry, and I went happily to sleep with the pitter-patter of rain closer than ever before."

How does the Spectre work? The shell is made with Conduit (Mountain Hardwear's proprietary waterproof/breathable fabric), the seams are welded, and a storm flap protects the zipper. The most significant innovation is the welding, or gluing, technology that seals the seams and makes the Spectre the first watertight bag that really works and has a reasonable price tag.

But don't throw out your tent just yet. The Spectre isn't really intended for use alone in the rain (water will enter through the hood), but rather as the ideal sack for tarps, single-wall shelters, and snow caves, where wind-blown moisture and condensation are your big concerns.

The Spectre easily shed drizzly weather in the Smokies, and it puffed up reasonably well even after we stuffed it wet. All testers agreed the bag's 25°F rating is conservative, thanks to plenty of 800-fill-power down, a snug-fitting hood, heat-trapping draft collar, and a comfortably efficient cut. (Need more warmth? Try the 10°F Banshee SL.) Our only complaints: The membrane left us slightly clammy in moderate temps.

Weight: 2 lbs. 12 oz.
Price: $350

Contact: Mountain Hardwear, (800) 953-8375 ; www.mountainhardwear.com.


The Sock

Is it possible to waterproof the down itself? Nikwax shows feathers with water beading on them, on its 'down proof' liquid.
Anyone know how well this works? And if anyone applies it professionally for the ten thumbed among us?
The Sock

Since only I am posting to this thread, it looks like I'm talking to myself. But that's never stopped me before! :-)

Ok waterproof bag, nikwax proofing. Here's a third solution:
A waterproof breathable bivi bag.
For 110 pounds (which normally translates to 110 dollars) you can get a goretex upper and waterbloc base bag, that weighs only a pound. Made b yTerra Nova. Don't know if that makes exist in the states; but you'll have equivalent bags.
Handy for when you don't hav the room or are too exhausted to erect a tent. Or just want to look at the stars.
The Sock

110.00 GBP = 217.619 USD


For currency conversions: www.xe.com

My mistake; I should have explained by 'translates' i mean what it costs in dollars not the exchange rate. You want to pay over 2 dollars a litre for petrol; come here!
What we can buy for a pound here, usually costs a dollar in the US.
The Sock

>110.00 GBP = 217.619 USD

I think the bivy so far is the best I've found so far for protecting down. I'm experimenting with a OR MicroNight Bivy and I'm thinking it's not completely waterproof from the comments from many people from different forums, The consensus says that it can take some light water but not a full storm and recommend a tarp or poncho over top. It's a very compact and light bivy and it definitely makes the temp rating increase (probably by 10 degrees) but I haven't field tested it yet but I look forward to see how it handles in a hard cold rainstorm.

http://www.outdoorresearch.com/site/micronight_bivy.html

It all depends on WHY someone wants a waterproof bag.
If it's to camp without a tent, then you do need a tent substitute.
If it's because you are afraid your sleeping bag will get wet inside your tent. Then a bivouac or poncho would be of no help. But really, if you keep your bag inside a waterproof sac, only open it inside the tent and don't wear wet clothes in it and why should it get wet? If it does you need a better tent not a waterproof sleeping bag.
The Sock

Hi falcon5000,

How about a tough and robust, 5F, -15C rated down sleeping bag with built in water proof base with integral stuff sac and weighs in at 2.1 Kg. (similar performance to the Wiggy's bags in terms of weight and temperature rating but 1/3 the price, new ones can be had for around £40 $80)


The good old British Army 58 Pattern sleeping bag (first produced in 1958)

http://www.dubora.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=12&products_id=566

Combined this with an 800 gram British Army Goretex Bivi and a 700 gram Alpkit Airic self inflating pad and you have a very effective sleep system weighing around 3.6Kg 8lbs which is waterproof and usable down to temperatures below -15C for around £100 $200).

Am_Fear_Liath_Mor,

Thanks for the offer Am_Fear_Liath_Mor, but I'm happy with my WM bag, I was just looking for a field tested light weight bivy that could handle severe rain. I got the bag that I love with the capabilities it has, I just want something that would protect the bag from the rain in a hard storm in the event of a tent failure.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TheSock,

"It all depends on WHY someone wants a waterproof bag."

I use a water proof bag for everything from river crossings, canoeing, put my bag on a boat or what have you. And when I'm not using the bag to hold a sleeping bag, I use it diving as well with emergency equipment on board.


"If it's to camp without a tent, then you do need a tent substitute."

I have a old north face tent breach water through after camping in 38 degree weather and raining 24 hours a day for several days. The tent did great as long as it could but the continuing rain started to flood the bottom of the tent and soaked my synthetic bag at the time, also dripping from the ceiling as well. With the rain and cold it took days for that bag to completely dry and if it was down it would be worse. I gave the tent great credit for what it went through and I had scotch guarded and seam sealed the heck out of it (both before and after). I just wanted something so if I have another breach I would have a second line of defense. In hind site, I should have dug a trench around the tent, so a lot of the flooding was poor preparation on my part (and I was on higher ground, just not high enough).

"If it's because you are afraid your sleeping bag will get wet inside your tent. Then a bivouac or poncho would be of no help. But really, if you keep your bag inside a waterproof sac, only open it inside the tent and don't wear wet clothes in it and why should it get wet? If it does you need a better tent not a waterproof sleeping bag.
The Sock "

The light weight bivy I will be experimenting with, a few people had said it could not take a rain storm for a long time on the top of the fabric for long storms but light rain was ok. They mentioned a tarp or poncho would be better if used to divert most of the rain off the top. The whole idea of the bivy for me is a emergency shelter and a secondary line of defense if I had a tent failure.

Looks like a good system, particularly for hard use and for wetter conditions. I'm generally in the dry American Southwest and trying to keep the weight down. My latest "brain flash" is:
Bag: 18 oz WM Summerlite 32
Pad: 14 oz Ridgerest Short + 28" Ridgerest (1.25" thick)
Bivy: 24 oz Aurora Bivy
_____
56 oz (3.5 lbs)

With this scheme, I cut down about 4.5 to 5 lbs from the 8 lbs or so sleep system you describe above. For a pad, I'd use two Ridgerest Short closed cell pads, one of which would be cut down to only 28" and placed under the non-modified Ridgerest. This would give me extra padding in the crucial areas. This configuration would be good down to about 32F/0C, although I'd probably want to switch to a Ridgerest Regular as I approached 0C which would add another 5 ounces.

However, I can substitute a full length Thermarest Prolite 4 and use a Mtn Hardwear 15F/-9C bag as follows:
Bag: 31 oz Phantom 15
Pad: 24 oz Prolite 4 Regular (1.5" thick)
Bivy: 24 oz Aurora Bivy
_____
79 oz (~5 lbs)
This set up still saves me about three pounds over the Pattern 58 set up. Not saying the Pattern 58 is a bad idea! I'm just always looking for ways to save weight so I can keep my pack light enough that I can still be agile. Too heavy gear can actually make one less safe if it contributes to a knee injury, a fall, or the like.

I'm late to the thread, but here's my $0.02. I owned a Wiggy's overbag, I believe was rated to 35*. The bag was well made, the temperature rating was within reason and by sheer luck the zippers mated to my REI polarguard bag. I was able to nest the two bags together for winter use just as if I had a second Wiggy's bag. The overbag did what I wanted it to do, that is, keep me warm in the summer and extend the range of my REI bag in the winter. I never got the bag wet.

Along the way I discovered ebay, took a chance on a down bag and never looked back. I sold the REI and Wiggy's bags on ebay and now have several down bags of various temperature ratings from 20 to minus 20. All my down bags are from ebay and at least 25 years old and in great shape and very well made.

The insulation in Wiggy's bags seems to be durable, I think it's basically old school polarguard. The newer polarguard seems to have sacrificed some durability for weight savings, depending upon your point of view the trade off may be worth it.

For me, down is more comfortable to sleep in, packs smaller and weighs less. In spite of the cold when wet issue, I have not slept in a wet sleeping bag, down or synthetic, in over 30 years.

In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with Wiggy's products. Compared to other synthetics they are heavy for their temperature rating, but for example they do use a number 10 tooth zipper and few other companies do that anymore.

There is no free lunch here, everything is a tradeoff of warmth, weight, cost, quality, you have to choose which criteria you are most intested in maximizing. If you choose Wiggy's the quality is fine, but you'll have to balance out the remaining variables as they pertain to your needs.

Just had delivered today a new unissued 28 year old 58 Pattern Sleeping bag. Here are some of my initial impressions.



First impressions are that its huge, quite bulky and somewhat heavy compared to the very lightest down bags rated at the same temperature. It has a NSN stock number 8465-99-120-8198 and is manufactured by C.Q.C Ltd.

The specification is similar to the one described here at http://www.cqc.co.uk/militarysleepingbagcqc11.asp but is lighter at 2.3 Kg than the 2.7Kg specification on the manufacturers website (2.1 Kg in the first post was over optimistic) because it uses down/feathers mix instead of synthetic polyester filling now specified.

Considering the age of the bag, it seemed to loft back to a thick insulation layer after a shake out. It really shows just how durable down is and how well it keeps its insulation qualities with age.

The 58 Pattern bag is huge, much wider than conventional bags being at least 5-6 inches wider at the shoulder. It is a semi-rectangular shape rather than being a full mummy shape. Some of the ultalightweight bags can be a little restrictive in terms of comfort because of their shape and sizing. It also appears to be much more robust due to the outer fabrics used. The base of the bag uses a waterproof, impermeable polyurethane coated nylon with the top of the bag being manufactured using a simple Nylon taffeta.

I would have to say that the bag doesn't have the same luxurious silky softness feel to it in terms of the quality of the materials Snugpak uses for their softie range but it is perfectly acceptable. The quality of the down doesn't appear be top notch quality 700 or 800 fill down but would be around the 500-600 fill power in terms of loft i.e. entry level basic down/feather mix.

The base of the bag has a very generous fill of down/feathers. The bag has possibly been designed to be used without a pad (or at least with a lightweight NATO Sleep Mat http://www.surplusandadventure.com/shopscr3028.html ). This would of course reduce the temperature range the bag can be used.
A separate ground sheet wouldn't be required as the bag has already a waterproof base. The bag has the ability to be used in conjunction with a just a Basha or Poncho to keep the rain off. A bivvy would certainly also increase the bags weather protection, but this would have to be a MVP type considering the bags water impermeable base construction.

The bag comes equipped with toggles and loops at the top, middle and bottom of the bag. This helps to allow the bag to folded and therefore helps with packing the bag into its attached waterproof bag at the head. This alows reasonably quick packing. The 58 sleeping bag does not have compression straps and this makes the bag appear quite bulky once packed up. I would say it was about the same size of an equivalent 2 Kg synthetic bag when stuffed. A compression bag would probably reduce the size to about half its current size.

The 58 Pattern sleeping bag should make a good bag to store in the back of a vehicle for emergencies. Its certainly not the lightest or the most compact sleeping bag but then again there are still only a few synthetics which can match its performance in terms of bulk, temperature rating and weight. Oh its really cheap as well so I'm going to use some of that Nikwax Down proof on it as an experiment to see how well it holds up in damp and wet conditions.