I guess there is a big difference between 600 fill down and 875 or 900 fill down. Try your comparison with 600 fill down.
Another factor to consider is size of bags. If I look at things right, looks like the Ultralight is a smaller bag all the war around.
Finally, compare prices. Is it worth spending $300 to reduce your pack weight by a pound or so?
Peaks
go SYNTHETIC!
again…its a personal preference…
my preference; after having a nightmare-of-a-time experience with a down sleep bag that got wet on the 1st night on the trail…(it never did totally dry out til home)
is GO SYNTHETIC.
i got a WILD BILL 2.0 from www.CAMPMOR.com for $99
its a 20degree mummy bag & has a roomy foot box & fits me well (i’m 6ft tall)…never had any trouble with it.
jaybird
JAYBIRD
Hi Peaks,
Okay, for our mutual information, here’s the information I could find on North Face 600-fill bags and a few others. (I’m putting this into a table; I don’t know if it is going to be legible or not. Weights are written in the form pounds-ounces.)
| Bag | Fill | Total Wt | Fill Wt | Other Wt |
| NF Blue Kazoo | 600+ down | 3-0 | 1-7 | 1-9 |
| NF Cat's Meow | PG Delta | 2-13 | 1-10 | 1-3 |
| WM Ultralite | 850 down | 1-11 | 0-14 | 0-12 |
| FF Swallow | 750 down | 2-1 | 1-0 | 1-1 |
The numbers are sort of all over the place. I’m not sure how much I trust the temperature ratings and manufacturer-claimed weights anyway.
I see that you’re right about the difference in bag size. For example, the Western Mountaineering bag has 3" less around the shoulders than the North Face one. This has to be a factor, but I don’t think it is too big. For example, the “long” WM bag is 6" longer, but only 1 oz heavier. (It is still smaller around than the NF bag, though.)
I also agree with you regarding price/performance tradeoff. In my first post (waaaay up there), I suggest that the pound you can save by switching from synthetic to down should be the LAST pound you cut. If you haven’t made all the cheap weight savings first (lighter pack, tarp, light stove, etc.), then it doesn’t make sense to shell out $350 for a down bag, vs. $175 for a synthetic!
Eric
couple more things about the WM Ultra. I’m a big guy. I’m 6’2 and weighed 195 when I started at springer. The WM is cut a little small, that is one of the reasons it is so light. With that being said I never had a space issue. The small cut helps it become a warmer bag. My main intention when buying this bag was to stay warm. I started 3/1.
Yes the ratings are usually not accurate. I did find this bag to be accurate. It’s generally said that WM bags are rated conservatively and i’d agree.
I’m not trying to sell this bag. It may not be the right one for you, or what your looking for.
If your main intentions are staying warm in very cold temps and going lightweight this is an outstanding bag.
A-Train
I used a Western Mountaineering Ultralight Long with a two ounce over fill and was always toasty warm and the bag never lost loft due to condensation. I slept under a 9x8 tarp untill Glasgow Va. I then slept in a Hennessy Hammock ultralight backpacker for the remainder of the trip. It rained a lot on the @003 nobos that left in early/mid march, A little caution and the bag was dry and I was toasty! One of the pricest pieces of gear but WORTH IT. Don’t skimp on the bag it is as bad as wearing bad shoes!
Yo-YO
My Cat’s Meow long (3lbs) with PolarGuard Delta got wet many times on my thru hike. Twice when I went for an unanticipated swim in a river. Repeatedly during the endless rain of May and June 03 (The Misty air at times dewed up everything in the shelters including the bags). The
number one reason it got wet was a very wet shivering hiker
crawling into it when everything he owned was perpetually
wet for weeks. There were quite a few nights I shivered, but my previous down bag with its fancy “water resistant”
(I hate that term!) coating and high price tag let me down
(no pun intended) every time it got wet (forget shivering, I
was hypothermic, it was useless). In all fairness this model was purchased over a decade ago. Maybe things have improved with down bags being “water resistant”, but if all
my other “water resistant” and “water proof” clothes and gear is any indication, I’m betting the shells will let water through. I will keep using the synthetic fills, but I think everyone has got to find out for themselves. It seems everyone has had different experiences and there probably is no right or wrong answer. Moose Munch is right
about wearing the clothes. It adds many degrees of warmth
to a bags ratings.
Rick The Lone Wolf
I always had dry silk long johns to put on. I made sure I took the time to check the ziplocks(double bagged) and replace them when ever they were wearing and I didn’t use a pack cover , I used sil nylon stuff sacks thourghly seam sealed and a sil nylon pack liner also thourghly seam sealed. The bag never got wet and and I always had a dry set of cloths to wear. Lots of rain in 2003 and I was really happy with the down bag.
Yo-YO
I used a down bag during the rainest season in the AT history. I had no problems. I liked it because it compressed very well. It did get damp and stunk to high heavens but it washed well. I started with a 20 degree then switched to a 40 degree. I suguest a 20 for the white mountains. I kept my stuff-sac and dry clothes in a plastic bag. then doubled that bag to put under my feet to try to protect the bag (I had a 3/4 length pad). But now you have to consider if you are using a tent, tarp, or bivy. In a bivy you should use synthetic, because you will get wet. I had a mountain hard wear that I loved. Western mountainering makes a really awesome bag too, but a little more pricey.
Buttercup