I recently purchased a NeoAir XLite and took it on an overnight trip two weeks ago. When I unrolled it this evening to get some measurements for the pad's widths, I notice that something had rubbed off on the inside material. As I held it up to the light, it looks as if the aluminized coating on the internal baffles has rubbed off significantly, primarily at the edges, but some in the middle as well. The wear appears to run down the length of the mattress.

I have emailed Cascade Designs customer service, seeing as how it is a Sunday night, and they won't be available for a phone call. I'll let y'all know what kind of follow-up I get.

Have any other XLite owners experienced anything like this? When the mattress was inflated, I couldn't see the problem, but when I deflated it and held it up to the light, this is what I saw:

Edited by GlacierRambler on 04/29/2012 20:21:45 MDT.

Is there a right way to pack them? As in, rolled, folded...

I packed mine exactly as it came--folded into thirds and rolled up. That's how it's designed to fit into the included stuff sack.

So what's flaking off is the reflective layer, I'd guess? Which means it's not really going to insulate well, if at all, if more flakes off. That sucks.

Edited by tekhna on 04/29/2012 22:53:19 MDT.

I wonder if this is happening to many original NeoAirs, but we can't see through them.

Seems like Cascade Designs has had MANY bumps with these XLites.

We got these in at work when they first came out and the display model isn't wearing off like that but the reflective baffle is tearing all along the edges. The longest tear is about an inch but there are more and more each day. The mylar on the inside is just too fragile. I would guess that by next year they will be using something less noisy and fragile inside but with a lower r value. Customers hate the crinkleness of the pad and are concerned about how transparent and fragile it is. On that note, the women's model is significantly more transparent than the standard. It looks extremely delicate.

Historically, both of these issues (tearing of the film and loss of the aluminum coating) have been major problems for manufacturers who have attempted to use radiant barriers. I can't find it now, but there are several older accounts online of customers observing that the radiant barrier film inside their sleeping bag, sleeping bag liner, or jacket gets transparent patches over time.

It would be interesting to do an R-value test of new and old neoair pads. Maybe Roger or someone else who has access to the instruments can be convinced to tackle it.

"Customers hate the crinkleness of the pad and are concerned about how transparent and fragile it is."

You're probably right, because the XTherm seems to be a lot more robust than I had expected, based on feedback from earlier models. I've only used it in the field for one night so far, but I was surprised that it was quite a bit less crinkly-sounding than I expected, once I pumped it up to where it was reasonably firm.

It seems as though Cascade Designs has been listening to the feedback.

I really wanted to pull the trigger on the Womens Xlite.

It should be interesting to see how this all progresses. Keep us updated.

I just wish that they would bring back the original NeoAirs...

I slept on my women's xlite this past weekend for the first time. The crinkliness did not bother me at all (maybe because I use an air pillow?), and it felt very comfortable. I do think the slick surface would not feel good if I were to sleep on it under a quilt, without shirt and pants. That, combined with this problem with the reflective film, has me wondering if I should look at the all season (which of course would still have the aluminum wear problem) or prolite.

Edited by dkramalc on 04/30/2012 17:24:54 MDT.

I will definitely keep you all updated. If I don't hear from Cascade Designs by tomorrow, I will probably give them a call.

I am really curious to see if any other XLite owners have observed the same phenomenon. Even though this is from an early batch (I got the pad in February), it feels similarly robust to the older versions NeoAir, and when I took it out a couple of weeks ago, it gave me no worries--well, until now.

If this is a more or less isolated incident, I might be willing to give the XLite another shot. Otherwise, I may need to go the Prolite route.

My worry with the All Season or Trekker is that I won't be able to see whether or not the coating lasts.

Am I right that the original NeoAir baffles weren't aluminized? I think I remember seeing that on a video about cutting them shorter.

Edited by GlacierRambler on 04/30/2012 14:18:49 MDT.

I have an XLite large. I just held it in front of a lamp and learned that I also have this problem with the aluminum shield being patchy, especially towards the edges. I have used it only on one night until now. Cannot verify whether this is the result of use or simply an element of its design (although the second explanation does not seem very convincing to me).

Still remains a great sleep, especially for a side sleeper like me. I have no problem with the noise as I sleep with earplugs. The potential reduction of the R-value is - if the wearing off remains within limits - not a major issue for me as I use the XLite on top of a lightweight foam matt (redundancy when I have/against punctures + structure for my backpack).

I would be interested if this also occurs with the Xtherm. I don't have one but would like to know whether it is transparent enough to make the same assessment with the XTherm. I would not be surprised that the design on the inside of the Xtherm is virtually the same as with the XLite. The outside clearly differs with more durable materials.

Clayton, keep us posted with feedback you (might) receive from Cascade Designs. Always interesting to verify how customer oriented these producers of lightweight equipment are.

Wim

I'm worried this is happening in my original NeoAir, and I just can't see it due to thicker material. The same basic principle and set of materials are at work in both pads. I make my decisions about conditions and my safety in them based on how much insulation value my gear provides, and if a critical piece like my pad is degrading without my knowledge, that's a potentially serious problem. It's possible there's no problem at all with the original NeoAir, but I'm concerned.

just picked up an xlite and will keep an eye on this issue going forward


to the poster who said they depend on the pad for their safety, etc, sounds like you may really want to carry a foam pad as well-if you are placing that much reliance on your inflatable sleeping pad's r-value to the .2-.6 amount you may want some redundancy.

Ben, just curious what is making you think that this is happening in your original NeoAir?

I don't really care if the pads are see through or not, although I am not so sure that many "insulated" air pads have been see-through up to this point (although I could be wrong on this).

What upsets me about the "X" pads though is that they are literally cutting corners to save weight, although I know that not everyone will share this preference. Me though, I like having a full rectangular cut, and at 13.8 oz for my regular size original NeoAir, it is well worth it! For the added comfort, I am fine carrying an extra 2 oz. Sleep is something that I "need" to enjoy while out, so I require a comfortable pad, and pillow. That's just me.

I agree with you though, in the cold, a pad is a critical piece of gear. However, I use a ccf pad as my pack frame, so I have back-up just as well.

Oh yeah...I also contacted TAR recently (asking why would they want to quit making the original Neo's) and it seems like it took them a few days to get back to me...

Edited by Stick on 04/30/2012 15:36:47 MDT.

Chad, I don't think it is, I just don't know though--it's the same tech in the pads, from what I understand, so why wouldn't it be happening in the older pads? Unless the mylar or the process is different.

>> What upsets me about the "X" pads though is that they are literally cutting corners to save weight, although I know that not everyone will share this preference. Me though, I like having a full rectangular cut...

I agree. I feel the same way. It is especially nice to have a big rectangle when sleeping next to someone and sharing the same bag. I wish they offered the new versions in new trimmed version and traditional rectangular. As it is they offer a bunch of different versions, so I'm not sure if they will.

I spoke with a manager at one of my local gear shops today and he told me, that Cascade had told him, that they had halted the manufacturing of the Xlite’s for a short time to make a fix on the design of the pad. What the "fix" was he did not know, but the rep told him that all of the pads that have been coming out since the beginning of April should be okay. This rep apparently will be back in the store next week so I'm going to stop back in to see what kind of info the manager can get.

We also started discussing the difference in R-Value between the men’s and women’s style and what kind of adjustment they made to give the women’s pad a warmer value. I’ll twiddle my thumbs until then.

Thanks. I would be very interested in what you find out. I'm seriously not sure whether or not to give another Xlite a try.

Ross, when they emailed me back, it didn't sound too likely that this was an option. It sounds like they are leaving the All Season and the Trekker in rectangular shape, and the "X" pads are mummy cut... In my opinion, they should have cut the Trekker and kept the original... Anyway, here is a write up I did on it, including the response email I got:

http://sticksblog.com/2012/04/07/fare-the-well-original-neoair/

As of right now, he informed me that if the original NeoAirs were to fail, then they will replace it with an XLite... :(

(Glad to hear that I am not the only one that will miss the rectangular cut pads...)

Edited by Stick on 04/30/2012 18:07:47 MDT.

I believe that condensation may be the culprit to the reflective stuff pealing/degrading. I took X-Lite up twice this winter and found that the vapor from my breath caused moisture to condense inside which seemed to affect the area near the valve. Also, my pad was tightly positioned against one of the sidewalls of the tent which caused condensation to form on that side. Sense then, about 3 inches of that reflective layer has not been reflective on that side along the entire length.

Matthew, I'll admit that condensation was my first thought concerning the loss of the aluminization. But, here are a few of things that make me think differently:

1. The pad clearly lost the coating in the middle, where I saw no condensation developing the few times I've blown it up (no more than 4-5 times since I purchased the pad).

2. The loss around the valve can just as easily be explained by the extra handling that area of the pad receives during the inflation/deflation and adjustment processes.

3. The delamination is pretty extreme along the edges as well, not consistent with what I saw to be the (very minor but visible) condensation when examining the pad after a night's sleep in the cold.

Of course, you could be right. That still doesn't make the issue any less pertinent. Clearly the pad is meant to include the possibility that people will blow it up by mouth. If it can't handle minor condensation from breath over 1 or 2 nights total (not just in a row), that is a serious issue.

Sorry if I missed this if it was already stated but is this going to be covered via the warranty? I just bought one at the end of March from MEC.

mec will take care of you should something happen regardless

Well, I heard back from Cascade Designs, and they have offered to replace the pad for me .

I figure that I'll stick with the XLite for now. I will keep an eye out for this problem, and should the pad degrade on a trip, it's May and I won't need the higher R-value until the fall.

The rep didn't say much else, so I will try to follow up with some questions.

I have already heard back from the rep that responded to my customer service query. I had a response in my inbox in less than 20 minutes.

He has not heard of any kind of production stoppage to correct any problems on the pad, and in fact said that they were behind on filling their orders (I think most of us here already realized that). He also made it clear that Cascade Designs would take care of this problem, sending me as many replacement pads as necessary until they had the issue resolved. My pad is the first that has been brought to his attention with this specific problem, so it is probably too early to say how CD will address it.

Anyway, I am extremely pleased with the customer service response, and I think I'm comfortable sticking with a replacement XLite for the time being. I'll probably pick up a Ridgerest for the interim, something I'll want for winter camping regardless.

They had initial quality issues with the original NeoAir - mostly leaks and delamination of baffles. I am not surprised that they are having potential issues with this new pad as well. It takes them a while to work the kinks out but I dislike them using the general public as a trial group.

On a long trip with quality issues, customer service is irrelevant.

On the other hand Cascade Designs is really pushing the UL envelope for a comfortable sleep pad. So even if they are using us as Beta testers their new technology they have brought in should be commended. At some point use from a small number of testers will only catch so many of the problems. They need to be field tested in large numbers to really find any systemic issues.

Using the general public for that and providing a good warrenty is a good way for us to get the product in our hands a year earlier.

We should have a plan to not die if any piece of equipment fails. For example in winter you should have a plan to survive if your sleeping pad fails or else you shouldn't carry an inflatable pad. Same with any component of gear.

The best way to have beta testers is to give them the goods for free and not charge over $150 for failure. We obviously have a different definition of 'acceptable liability.'

|On a long trip with quality issues, customer service is irrelevant.

I agree but by the statistics of activity by the general public long trips are not the majority, but practically the exception when it comes to outdoor pursuits. Secondly the onus is really on the user to thoroughly test their gear before a serious endeavor, both subjective (footwear fit) and objective (sleeping pad durability).

Using the general public as a trial group seems like the best way to tweak any designs. At that point they've already honed the product to the point that they aren't getting some absurdly high failure rate.. ie, the product will work for the majority of people.

Cascade Designs doesn't force anyone to be beta testers, that is your choice. Same goes with the first year of a new model car..

all air mats have issues at some point or another ... just look at the POE fun ...

you dont want the possibiity of a failure? ... get a ridgerest or another foamy ... which is why many mountaineers use em ...

"The best way to have beta testers is to give them the goods for free and not charge over $150 for failure. We obviously have a different definition of 'acceptable liability.'"

I think you're missing something here, though. Cascade Designs is having trouble keeping up with demand, but they're not getting overwhelmed with returns. REI would be discouraging people from buying Neoair pads if they were getting a lot of returns on them, but they aren't.

Their defect rate might be higher than we'd like, but so far it's nowhere near to high enough to fit into your definition of a beta test.

That said, if there were a lot of failures in their pads, I'd agree with you, but they'd also be in a world of financial hurt if they were standing behind a poorly QA'd product.

No - not missing anything. There are two parts to the equation: supply and demand. You say that they are having trouble keeping up with demand but we obviously have no idea how many they initially produced so saying the items are in high demand isn't really true (not to mention the local MEC has a ton of them for sale).

"but they're not getting overwhelmed with returns. REI would be discouraging people from buying Neoair pads if they were getting a lot of returns on them, but they aren't."

Do you work for REI or MSR / Cascade Designs? How could you possibly know this?

"That said, if there were a lot of failures in their pads, I'd agree with you, but they'd also be in a world of financial hurt if they were standing behind a poorly QA'd product."

Confused by this. Again, without knowing how many they have produced thus far and since it has only been a couple of months on the market, I can't see how you could possibly make this statement. Give the users some time. On these forums alone there have been some failures, including leaks after a use or two. I also don't think that one product line would bury the company from a financial perspective.

FWIW, there were a LOT of posted failures of the original NeoAir before they got control of their QC.

do you have numbers for neo-air returns etc?
your relative 'a lot of posts' in the forum is a pretty unsolid number. So 50 people here? Is that uniform failure, representative of broad population? etc

the primary thing is you never, ever, have to 'beta test' for this company, so I don't really see what the problem is. people buy cars the first year they come out.

Edited by water- on 05/01/2012 16:19:08 MDT.

" Secondly the onus is really on the user to thoroughly test their gear before a serious endeavor, both subjective (footwear fit) and objective (sleeping pad durability)."

I really disagree with this, Matt. The pads are very expensive and suggest long term quality regardless if you are a weekend warrior or a week long trekker. Using the term 'serious endeavor' is a misnomer in this case because there are failures when using the pads the first night. Should we expect failures only with 'serious endeavors?'

If the product has been tested to do it's intended job, then failure will not occur when used in the manner that the product was intended for. What constitutes failure in this case? Failure when testing in a controlled environment in, say, one's backyard? Or failure on day 5 into a 10 day trip 200 miles from civilization after it was 'thoroughly tested' in the backyard?

I also don't like your first year of a new model car analogy. I have never had a new car completely fail after driving it for a day. I have never been stranded. And I have never had a failure that meant I could not get it fixed the same or next day. A sleeping pad is a different animal.

"do you have numbers for neo-air returns etc?
your relative 'a lot of posts' in the forum is a pretty unsolid number. So 50 people here? Is that uniform failure, representative of broad population? etc"

This was my point in my previous post. We don't HAVE THE NUMBERS.

Stop with the car analogy - it is really quite wrong.

Sorry I will never agree with premise that the cost of something correlates to durability or quality as a product. Surely a full blown failure on night 1 with a new product is unacceptable. I only suggest one test their gear as best they can prior to a trip where the failure of it could be disastrous. Thus it is in one's interest to test an item in real-usage conditions as best as possible in time frame/setting with lower consequences and have a backup (foam pad?) in case of failure. per your example, if you are on a 10 day trip and have managed to find a location 200 miles from civilization (other than alaska or NWT let me know where..) the onus is on you for due diligence of your gear, and a backyard test is probably a low bar to test one's system.

BD debuted stainless steel crampons recently and there has been some serious hubub about the front point failure. If I was planning a greater range expedition or a seriously challenging route in my backyard, I'd be really hesitant to use them. If I was going up the south side of Mt. Hood as a usual thing for me, I'd be fine to use them.

As for the first year car analogy, I ended up with a first year dodge neon (no direct choice of my own) and let me tell you, many, many times was I left stranded, and many times requiring repairs that took longer than a day to complete. No it didnt die the first day off the lot but it didn't have longevity or reliability either. The mechanic I had generally didn't speak well of the car and indicated I wasn't alone in my problems. This was something that cost many thousands of dollars, not hundred or two hundred dollar piece of plastic intended for camping.

At the end of the day if you see thermarest/CD behaving in that they use full-paying customers as fullon beta testers, they have every right to do this with or without their warranty as you have ever choice in the world to spend the money or not on the newest model that comes out. Which is more likely, that they do really crappy QC and totally let the end users beta test and work from that, or that they try to get to some level of success (70, 80, 90, 95%?) and then move from then? Sometimes the perfect is the enemy of the good. The later sounds much more plausible.

i guess thats all i have to say. to complain about what a company does when the company is generally speaking positive and attempting to push the envelope for light weight/performance, especially with the wonderful warranty they have, doesn't seem like they are hanging someone out to dry.

apologies for the thread drift. I'll keep an eye on my xlite this spring/summer and see if I notice any durability issues.

Edited by water- on 05/01/2012 16:41:14 MDT.

"No - not missing anything. There are two parts to the equation: supply and demand. You say that they are having trouble keeping up with demand but we obviously have no idea how many they initially produced so saying the items are in high demand isn't really true (not to mention the local MEC has a ton of them for sale). "

You're missing a lot, apparently.

"Do you work for REI or MSR / Cascade Designs? How could you possibly know this?"

I have something called "ears" and I talk to folks. One reason I like REI is that their staff are pretty open about this sort of thing -- they're not paid on commission, so they have an incentive to sell customers the right thing to keep returns down. Some of their reps have told me that when they have products with high return rates, they stop selling them.

"Confused by this. Again, without knowing how many they have produced thus far and since it has only been a couple of months on the market, I can't see how you could possibly make this statement."

Various models of Neoairs have been on the market for a couple of years now, and I've run into quite a few people who love them on the trails.

"Give the users some time. On these forums alone there have been some failures, including leaks after a use or two. I also don't think that one product line would bury the company from a financial perspective."

Hyperbole isn't a good debating tactic. Neither is putting words in someone else's mouth.

"FWIW, there were a LOT of posted failures of the original NeoAir before they got control of their QC."

I know. And it's pretty obvious that they've put quite a bit of effort into fixing that mistake, whatever the cause.

I've no idea how many or if beta testing - but I've had a couple failures of the XLites this spring. Eventually, one of their quality control engineers talked to me, and said that the problems I had, along with other folks problems with keeping air in the pad, had led them to halt distribution and review and improve their testing prior to shipment. They do "test" each pad before shipping, and that process hopefully is better now than at first. He did not detail what they will be doing differently.

"You're missing a lot, apparently."

Well, what you learn in first year economics is to not generalize about supply and demand without understanding the concepts. I am missing as much as you because you do not have any figures to support your claim.

Edited by FamilyGuy on 05/01/2012 18:18:47 MDT.

"As for the first year car analogy, I ended up with a first year dodge neon (no direct choice of my own) and let me tell you, many, many times was I left stranded, and many times requiring repairs that took longer than a day to complete."

Sorry to hear about that. However, the Neon in comparison to the 'class' is relatively inexpensive. For example, a Honda Civic is more money but would likely not have these problems and is promoted as such. It costs more but there are benefits with ownership, one of which is reliability.

With respect to the NeoAir, this is one very expensive pad in comparison to the class and is promoted as providing benefits over other, much cheaper offerings. When it works, the pad is great. However, these failures that we keep hearing about suggest poor QC by the company. Honda simply would not offer such a car to the market as the Neon and I would expect Cascade Designs to do the same with respect to their pads. Honda would do its testing beforehand.

I perfer to have the product 1 year sooner and deal with issues then wait until the product is perfect. Others may have a different opinion and therefore choose not to be an early adopter.

One other thing might be that this pealing of the reflectix may be a single pad issue or a bad batch pf reflectix neither of which would have shown up in an extended beta. They seem to have dealt with the leaking pad problem by improving QC.

For me this is an acceptable response and buisness plan.

David and Greg, I'm kind of in the middle between the two of you. I originally tried to purchase the old NeoAir (in the infamous Backwoods.com sale in January), but because of a shipping mix-up, Backwoods replaced the pads that never arrived with the new XLites because they no longer had the old ones in stock. I knew going in that there could be issues, but I figured I could trust Cascade Designs customer service.

That said, I would prefer some of these issues to be resolved sooner. My pad might have a bad batch of aluminization on the baffles, but better beta testing might have discovered that issue (it's not like I've actually used the pad very much). I knew the risks ahead of time, and I chose to deal with the possible fallout, which I am now. I still wish the initial quality was better, even if I know that CD will figure out--eventually.

"Well, what you learn in first year economics is to not generalize about supply and demand without understanding the concepts. I am missing as much as you because you do not have any figures to support your claim."

Clearly then, you need to do a lot of reviewing.

"Clearly then, you need to do a lot of reviewing."

I have a Masters in Economics. But since you are being deliberately beligerant and antagonistic about concepts that may excape you, maybe you should just stick with taking pictures.

"I have a Masters in Economics. But since you are being deliberately beligerant and antagonistic about concepts that may excape you, maybe you should just stick with taking pictures."

I guess I shouldn't have expected any better. Oh well, it's not my loss.

This is nonsense. You are not "beta testers" you are consumers. You do not have the metrics to perform beta testing on these products.

Just because the reflective surface is peeling off a bit doesn't mean the pad isn't meeting the advertised "R" parameters or that CD isn't aware of this happening. That's something that you as a consumer have assumed to be an issue and because customer service is excellent at CD, they give you a new pad to keep you happy, it's not an admission of a problem.

A leaky pad is obviously a problem and we as consumers can evaluate that but until you have the equipment to measure "R" value loss, making the assumption that the pad is failing may be a false assumption. It may be that the "R" value is increased by only .5% by coating the baffles with a reflective coating. If you are only losing 10% of the coating then the R value is not impacted significantly. My point is that you don't know the design parameters so how do you know it's a failure.

I think the poor design decision was that Cascade Designs made the pad transparent. If they had made the pad solid you wouldn't perceive a problem until you started to get cold when you believed the pad should be sufficient to keep you warm.

I remember hearing the same kind of complaint about the Montbell stretch bags. Montbell used a translucent material that allowed you to see the distribution of the down. If the down didn't appear to be packed into the tubes, many users thought they were under-filled. It's easy to shift the down around in these bags and many people like to be able to do that (I do) so is this a design feature or a flaw? Mine has tested accurate to it's rating but I can see thin spots in the down distribution and occasionally shake the bag to redistribute the down. Do I think other sleeping bags suffer from this problem as well... of course, but you just can't see it happen.

Don't assume you know the design parameters, you don't.

"I have a Masters in Economics. But since you are being deliberately beligerant and antagonistic about concepts that may excape you, maybe you should just stick with taking pictures."

Geez David.

Ryan

People have been so intolerant and hostile lately on so many threads.I try to avoid all the fighting but it has been difficult.

Ryan - yes, that was harsh.

However, when trying to discuss and debate and receiving direct responses like:

"I guess I shouldn't have expected any better"

"Clearly then, you need to do a lot of reviewing."

"You're missing a lot, apparently."

"I have something called "ears" and I talk to folks."

"Hyperbole isn't a good debating tactic. Neither is putting words in someone else's mouth."

I take it as antagonistic.

Regardless, I have provided my perspective and this will be all that I say about the matter on this thread.

Most of those comments you quoted were in response to some pretty hefty salvos you launched yourself. Either way, I do appreciate you taking the high road on your last post. Some of these threads are really wearing on me lately.

Ryan

@Ryan - I need a hike!

I'm a Division Manager in charge of 49 people!! That is very important!! That is very important!! You don't talk to me like that!! People are scared of me!!
I drive a Dodge Stratus!! I can do 100 push-ups in twenty minutes!!

http://www.hulu.com/watch/3526/saturday-night-live-family-dinner

again whether the item costs a lot or not isn't necessarily an accurate way to judge the quality. Nobody is twisting anyone's arm to buy their items, especially the very newest things when they first come out. Lastly they have superb warranty that covers any issues. If you don't like that is how they operate take your business elsewhere.

Well said!

"I drive a Dodge Stratus!!"

Didn't learn the first time or just a sucker for punishment.

boring...*yawn.

Jeff, I am sure there are some things you could sell in Gear Swap.

did a loop in mill ck wilderness, ochoco mnts Oregont his weekend. Sunday morning I look at my pad in the sunlight and the aluminized content was worn off/degraded greatly around the perimeter of the pad more or less from top to bottom. Seemed to coincide with where any moisture condensed on the edges where it was closer to cold air?

will contact cascade designs. All Neo-Air pads may look just like this...we just have no idea if so

For what it's worth, CD has already sent me a replacement. It's supposed to arrive tomorrow, which would make it right at 2 weeks from mailing the old mattress off to getting a new one. I'll post more when I get back into town and can check it out.

Matt-I'm curious. When did you purchase yours?

bought it from cabelas april 14th..took a dang month to use!

I'm wonder a few things if you heard anything from CD..

1) Does it really impact performance at all? Around the edges I'm thinking, minimally if anything.

2) After say...50 uses, I wonder if the edges clearly lose their alu mojo but then it is done, or eventually will a majority of the pads aluminum film deteriorate?

3) Is it not suppose to happen? Was there a bad batch of the adhesive/bonding process? or some temperature level tweak that in the manufacturing process that was determined?

cheers. slept wonderfully.. i normally wake up due to limbs falling asleep under me..(stomach sleeper).. i barely woke up once.

I am wondering if how it is rolled could damage the edges?

There is another case over at Whiteblaze.

I will look into it more. Thing is when I looked at home brand new, didnt see that at all. Then rolled it the way it came to me and took it to camp. unrolled, blew up, slept. Next AM look at it in the sunlight and its very apparent. Seemed like it was related to where condensation was in the pad and like the water itself almost delaminated the alu film. but i guess it could be from that first time I rolled it (w/o any visible moisture inside)

Perhaps the combination of moisture and rolling the pad before the baffles are 'dry.' The aluminum baffles may get wet and stick to each other when the pad is rolled up. Then when unrolled, they pull apart and / or delaminate.

?

Looking forward to what CD says. Thanks,

David, I think you are on the right track. I've destroyed the reflective coating on more than one space blanket that way (moisture on reflective surface and rolling the blanket for storage). Perhaps with these pads we are best off inflating them like we would a downmat (ie, with pump, etc.) to prevent moisture from entering the pad.

That does sound plausible. I've been planning on ordering an instaflator for a while now, and I may go ahead and do it now.

Edited by GlacierRambler on 05/14/2012 15:36:31 MDT.

Actually, that would be a great way to compare your experiences.

Well, I have received my replacement mattress from Cascade Designs (it actually came a week ago Tuesday, but I've been out of town). After looking it over briefly, everything seems to be good. I have a trip planned this weekend and an Instaflator on order, so I will try to report any findings when I get back.

Also, I weighed the new mattress, and it came out to 11.80 oz (334 g), that's 0.55 oz lighter than the damaged one I sent in.

I had the original Size Large NeoAir. I went through three models that would leak on me throughout the night. It was a slow leak, but I would have to blow it up in the middle of the night to obtain the firmness I find preferable.

I was at REI just browsing when I noticed that EXPED had finally made a SynMat UL LW model. I had been hoping for this for a long time. I immediately grabbed it and was going to trade it in for my leaking NeoAir... the third one, when I noticed that the NeoAir XLite had also been released.

I tested both on the floor at REI. The EXPED was more comfortable for me, but the weight savings with the XLite were very tempting. A sales associate walked up to me and started discussing the pads. She said to get the EXPED as the XLite pads were having a lot of issues and that they were seeing a lot of returns.

Just my personal experience I thought I would share.

I brought my new Neo Air Xlite women’s pad along with an instaflator I ordered online on an overnight trip recently. I received my instaflator the same day as the trip so I didn’t get a chance to try it out until I was rolling out my pad at camp. It seemed as though the instaflator had some walls that melted together so when I went to blow it up, they popped open which put holes in the plastic. I remedied the situation with a few pieces of duct tape, but I still saw some light moisture inside the Xlite when I woke up the next morning anyway.

I asked for a replacement from Leslies (Instaflator Manufacturer) and they said no problem. A couple days later I receive an email from Leslies stating my order had been cancelled. After waiting on the phone forever and leaving several messages, I finally got in touch with someone on the phone who told me they discontinued internet sales of the Instaflator and only sell them in stores now (There are no stores in my state).

I asked for my money back, seeing as how the charge was still on my debit card which they said they would refund. I still have yet to see the charge removed and it has been about a week.

I threw away the huge plastic tube from the old duct-taped-instaflator when they told me they’d replace it, so now I’m left with nothing. I was thinking of starting an MYOG project involving some sort of desiccant in the clear tubing that I kept from Leslie’s, but I think I’m just going to say screw it and blow it up with my own two lungs.

I’m already starting to see some of the “aluminized” baffles around the ends flaking a bit. I bought the Xlite from REI on purpose so I could return it if I did indeed run into this issue. Besides the possibility of the aluminized baffles wearing and possibly degrading the 3.9 R-Value, I’ve been loving the pad so far.

Edited by timdcy on 06/15/2012 12:57:41 MDT.

I'm surprised by this forum, but I'm bored so I'm going to enter the ring anyway.

First about the pads. Has no one ever used a space blanket? The instant you unroll one the aluminum starts flaking off the mylar. After just a few crumpling and flattening sessions the entire sheet has see-through spots. The neoairs use the same thing (although probably cheaply sourced from china) so of course you'll have the same problem. The stuff is pretty dang fragile so it shouldn't have come as a surprise to most that the neo-air was going to have issues.

For single sheet performance degradation, it will be linked directly the amount of flaking. So if 50% of the aluminum flakes off, well then the sheet will only reflect 50% of the IR radiation. Now they use multiple sheets, each with +90% reflectivity. With the somewhat locally uniform distribution of flakes (ie they're small flakes even spread out over a thin spot) it will probably be a while before you notice that 0.7 difference in R-value. So you'll see thinning of the aluminum layers the highest wear regions. The edges, along any repeated fold lines, and the center where your torso and hips make contact will be first to go, but again the alum layer is so fragile that regardless that you'll get minor delamination virtually every time you hear the baffles crinkle.



David...stick with economics and not product development or engineering. Although given the current global economic climate I'm not sure so many trust the "dismal" science anymore. I can't believe you want examples where cost does not equal quality. Lets start with automobiles. Landrover, high priced SUVs (both their current luxury oriented brand and historically) with a reputation of not working. In specific their electrical systems are generally shoddy (as with most other English origin autos...ask the British hosts of Top Gear). How about computers? Sony Vaios were notorious for being overpriced and underpowered among the IT industry, or even MS Windows was extraordinarily crappy for decades and expensive. Intel Pentium 4s were expensive and underperformed compared to AMD at the time. Clothes? TNF after it sold out to the yuppies and grew fat for the general American populace (along with half of Patagonia's product line, Mountain Hardwear, Columbia, etc) or any other company that shipped production to China and skimped on QC and customer service in search of higher short term profits. How about Goretex vs eVent or even DriDucks and Tyvek. How about expensive, heavy, poorly performing backpacking gear sold to the general population as necessary vs any of the affordable and light gear made by cottage industry (or even GoLite, although it is in a weird transition right now).

I agree that CD should have been more thorough with their testing (especially the leak issues) but buying bleeding edge technology is ALWAYS risky and expensive to the consumer. It's new and doesn't have economies of scale yet (you should understand this, but don't for some reason). Early adopters tend to finance investment into scaling production so that new technology becomes cheaper and more ubiquitous. It's the same business model that brought us gasoline vehicles (and slowly various form of hybrids and electric vehicles ala Tesla), computers smaller than a house and embedded in EVERYTHING, air travel, soon to be space travel, plastics, metals, and pretty much everything. There are other methods of course, such as subsidizing new technology to promote adoption and consumption of higher margin consumables (console gaming systems), but that's only necessary when the product is just a gateway to a far more lucrative industry. This is all very basic stuff that you shouldn't need a masters in anything to understand.

Hi Dustin, I am bored so I will answer your post... ;-)

What makes you think that what you have seen with a space blanket applies here? Did Cascade Designs say, "using decades-old space blanket technology we are coming out with the X-Lite"?

"David...stick with economics and not product development or engineering."

Dustin, do you have one? Maybe you should get one and then comment. Of course we don't plan on sleeping on automobiles or whatever you decided to wrench the thread off to. Are cars inflatable?

TNF, DriDucks,space, and console games. Yes! X-Box! Dude, I am in...

Raymond, reread the thread. I stuck with automobiles because those were the original examples given by other posters, David included. In particular I quote David:

"I also don't like your first year of a new model car analogy. I have never had a new car completely fail after driving it for a day. I have never been stranded. And I have never had a failure that meant I could not get it fixed the same or next day. A sleeping pad is a different animal."

Losing the radiant barrier isn't a complete failure of the pad. Also he's using personal anecdotal evidence to support his generalized complaint towards CD while also bemoaning others who are doing the same (by not supplying appropriate numbers).

As for space blankets and neoairs, they use a thin film aluminized radiant barrier. Yes they were developed decades ago, also there were few applications for them below orbit until recently so the technology has been stagnant. If it looks like a space blanket, it sounds like space blanket, it delaminates like a space blanket, it must be a duck. Or maybe I'll just quote from one of Cascade Designs patent applications "and/or integration of a thermally reflective film or coating into the matrix and/or enveloping panels of an inflatable body to provide enhanced thermal radiation mitigation mean." Dude, it's decades old space blanket technology, just in a novel application (and "space" is a registered trademarked regarding the technology so they can't use it for marketing without a contract and most likely paying royalties).

I attacked the use of a degree as supporting evidence for his argument. A lot of college graduates seem to think because they spent time jumping through hoops and drinking kool-aid it makes them more qualified in a debate, but a debate only cares about the strength of your evidence. Ol' G-Dub was a Yale graduate afterall.

Raymond, how does my possession or lack of possession alter the validity of my statements? Your claim is simply an adhominem attack against me and therefore irrelevant to the argument.

I'm not going to wade into the personal attacks. (Seriously--haven't we been through enough with them already?) But I would like to address your comment about expecting the aluminization to wear off.

When I spoke to Cascade Designs, they were quite surprised by this and clearly did not expect it wear off. Maybe they should have, but I'll leave that up to their R&D department and which technology they used. Space blankets might be old, but adhesive or coatings to preserve their aluminization could be quite new. Honestly, I don't know and I don't care. I'm not an engineer. I prefer the Shakespeare that I teach my students. If it turns out that the pad loses its R-value and goes back to regular NeoAir values no matter what CD does to prevent it--then I'll reconsider my choice of pad. Maybe I'll just keep it, maybe I won't. I'll decide then.

I can say this: the aluminization on my wife's XLite Women's is substantially thicker. More baffles are coated, and the coating is more robust. Perhaps this accounts for the fact that it is 1.5 oz over the advertised weight. Maybe this is a preventative that CD is using after some feedback. Maybe not. I'll keep an eye out and report something when I know more from these two pads. So far, so good.

Clayton, that's interesting about the Women's version using a thicker coating. I would like to trust their R&D department too but the company has a history of issues with quality control. Not sure if their R&D is weak or if there is some disconnect between the labs and the actual manufacturing plants. The latter would be my bet if they were manufactured in Asia but sadly this is a Made In America product (which opens up a whole 'nother set of discussion points about cost and quality of products based on location of manufacture that may temper some of the economist's rhetoric).


As for the technology, they use vapor deposition to aluminize materials. They basically "spray on" the aluminum. You're right though that materials and techniques could have improved but we're still dealing with a material that is very light, very thin and very flexible. This combined with attaching a metal to a plastic basically makes the entire manufacturing problem fairly difficult to improve. Most of the improvement from my understanding has been in speed, cost and consistency of aluminization (ie uniform and smaller thicknesses) not so much in strength of bond since until recently it hasn't been that much of a design constraint.

Personally I'm still not entirely sold that the aluminum even does that much. From what I've gathered they use more baffles in the Xlites than the original neoair (5 vs 3) and it seems to make more sense that the smaller baffles cause less convection and therefore provide more of the warmth gain in the new version. I'm not sure the aluminum alone can take credit for the ~20% performance gain. So for those worried, I think a worst case scenario is you'll lose maybe 10% warmth in laboratory conditions and probably less in real world since radiation losses are so minimal compared to conduction and convection. You are paying more though for the fancier materials. Of course though CD has been very good in supporting their products and that's rare in a company, design foibles aside,

"Raymond, how does my possession or lack of possession alter the validity of my statements? Your claim is simply an adhominem attack against me and therefore irrelevant to the argument."

Hey Dustin,

I am not attacking you, I responded to you. The fact that you don't own the pad you are talking about (and therefor can't really opine on with any accuracy) is what I have a problem with.

This is a gear forum. The best posts on gear forums come from people that own the gear they are talking about.

I own the pad. I stayed away from the original NeoAir for over a year as I was pis... unhappy at the expense. Then I tried it and was blown away. I used it and was impressed. Maybe you need to use it. (And it is not just the film/radiant barrier.)

Degrees? I won't go there any more than I would religion or politics. And I only have one of those three. ;-)

I don't consider anything Dustin has said as a personal attack. I mean, he used Land Rover and 'bleeding edge technology' in the same argument so that should tell you something. No one...I mean NO ONE buys a new Land Rover because of technology (despite what you say about the electrical issues on early models, Ford definitely cleaned up the marque before they sold it in 2008 and Top Gear continues to put Land Rover at the top of their recommended list so what does that tell you?).

I am not clear on the commentary about hybrids. People don't buy economy based hybrids as the next step the evolution of the car. They buy them because of gas prices. The price of gas has driven the technology but apparently even the early adopters wouldn't do it again:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamespoulos/2012/04/24/more-people-are-buying-hybrid-cars/

"I can't believe you want examples where cost does not equal quality."

Okay, now you are just being silly. Where did I say that?

Raymond, you did attack me. Just saying you didn't doesn't make it so. If you had an issue with me not owning the gear why didn't you say that instead of asking about my education or where I came up with the space blanket deduction? Also again I'm not sure how ownership of a product makes you an expert on the product's technology. Researching the technology online and the company published patent details is actually far more accurate than just sleeping on a pad.

I also find that most consumers buy based off marketing and not an actual knowledge of the product. Everyone does this. Look at your first backpacking purchases compared to what you buy now. We all have those items of gear we bought off the hype and now think "what a waste of money, I should gear swap that!" So I disagree with you that the best knowledge comes from people that own the gear. That unreasonably skews the data towards those with the financial means to buy gear instead of those that understand the technology behind the gear being made.

If you read my last post I said in real world experience most people will not notice the difference because enough design changes had been implemented between the two products to add warmth, instead of just relying on a gimmicky white wash (in other words the aluminum is there to drive sales, but the extra baffles actually contribute to the improved performance). Both the original and the xlite use radiant barrier technology, the only real difference in design is smaller baffles/more layers. There are plenty of reports and posts on this site by people that have tested the Neo-Airs that have similar conclusions that the radiant barrier provides minimal benefit in a real world situation where your sleeping movements, even breathing, cause more heat loss through convection inside any inflatable pad, than IR radiation.

I don't think it's a bad product at all. I do give you credit on your WAG that I don't own one, you're right. The only reasons I don't have one however are cost, I have an inflatable already, I live in region where inflatables are dumb (the thorny desert), and I sleep fine on CCFs for now. I was just critical of the use of space blanket type material for the baffles as being more marketing hype than beneficial.

I'm not sure where you're drawing a lot of your conclusions from other than various prejudices, but that's your issue not mine.

Hey guys, lets relax a bit and simply discuss. With the MIA of much of BPL staff, it will be up to the collective membership to keep discussions as civil as possible. Too many smart people on these threads with good perspective and a lot of backcountry experience.

: )

David, I quote you...again: "The pads are very expensive and suggest long term quality" and then when people contradicted this statement you proceeded to cherry pick minor inconsistencies or supposed inappropriateness of analogies instead of addressing their main points (like you are with my post). This leads the reader to assume you stand by the concept that expensive suggests quality.

I made several arguments against your claims, not just one. The bit about landrover was cost being equated to quality, not bleeding edge technology, that was a later paragraph about economics of business models (another major point you conveniently ignored). As for Top Gear, they're are British and biased, but they still rip on the landrover for not working. They just like it's styling (usually) and the comfort. Also was this the same ford (aka Fix Or Repair Daily, and I tend to like their cars!) that Jeremy complains about because his GT broke down almost instantly. As for anecdotal evidence which seems de rigueur in this thread, I've got a buddy who had a transmission, brake, DSC, HDC fault and lowered suspension all attributed to a faulty brake switch. Looks like they've cleaned up a lot.

Finally for the hybrids and EVs, I was specifically referring to Tesla motors where Elon Musk has repeatedly stated that he came out with a high priced roadster first to fund the R&D for EVs. Then once the technology matured enough he could offer fully electric vehicles at prices comparable to current luxury sedans (specifically he wanted the Tesla sedan to compete with the BMW M5). I in no way was talking about why people buy cars (economics is woefully poor at PREDICTING consumer behavior), I was talking about the model businesses use to fund new technology or product advances.

No matter though, I'm sure you'll just skim this post too and cherry pick a few statements to contest while failing to comprehend the core of my arguments. It's like parasites feeding on the dead skin of a whale and thinking they are actually killing the behemoth.

The pads are expensive and given CD long term market presence, it would suggest long term quality. Their cheap pads are long term durable. I would expect that with their more expensive pads. Much like an Acura RL is more expensive than a Honda Accord and at least as durable long term.

To be frank, I am not sure anyone understands what you are trying to say? That CD did not have to test thoroughly before going to market? That their aluminized baffles is marketing hype (you actually state this)? That Land Rover's are unreliable? That brand loyalty is a function of stupidity? That even if the pads do lose some R-value, 20% is reasonable? Or that we will all be driving hybrids one day (which is a function of gasoline prices)?

Here is where your anecdote about Land Rover hits the dumper: No one buys a Land Rover because it durable and its history shows this. They buy it for status. When one buys a NeoAir, they are looking for it to be durable and keep them warm based on the history of the company. Functional performance. Not status.

Yawn.

Thanks for confirming my suspicions! The first paragraph shows that you don't understand that performance and durability are inversely related in product design. Also an Acura RL is by no means pushing the envelope of automotive technology. Maybe an NSX (dated but sexy car still!) but that wouldn't support your argument.

Your entire second paragraph is putting words into my mouth and illustrating that you didn't even bother to read my posts. You're just blatantly making stuff up in a desperate attempt to ignore the own holes in your statements.

You're still harping on landrover and make the false assumption that people buy NeoAirs for durability. On this site usually weight and performance (ie warmth) are the major factors for sleeping pads, with cost on a sliding scale depending on financial standing. There is also a modicum of status involved in buying a neoair, it is the latest and greatest pad with new technology. So anyone who owns one right now falls into the innovators or early adopters segment of the technology adoption lifecycle (read "Crossing the Chasm" or "Diffusion of Innovations").

For those worried about losing performance due to aluminum delamination I hope my claim that the radiant barrier is hype, from this site's own gear reviews puts you a bit at ease:
http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/thermarest_neoair_review.html

Or Brad Groves post after talking with CD here where even the company claims only 25% of r-value is from the radiant barrier:
http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/forums/thread_display.html?forum_thread_id=31879&skip_to_post=271889

The major differences between the Xlite and the Original are shape and an increase in the number of internal baffles. More baffles means smaller air spaces, means less air circulation, means less convective heat loss, means better r-value.

David, don't speak for the entire readership of this site. Just because you can't follow my logic doesn't mean the rest are incapable. You have repeatedly said you don't understand things in this thread and many people have tried to help you, and then you just continue to claim they are wrong or unintelligible without adding anything constructive to the discourse. I'm seeing a pattern in you. Have fun with that.

I will ignore the personal taunts because it shows that those who do not agree with you get under your skin quickly, which makes you change the subject and your train of thought such that you can't back it up.

But let me summarize your thoughts:

-new technology is funded by early adopters. Even though this technology has been around for years we are still in an early adopter stage which will continue until CD gets it right. We have no time frame on this and must be patient because the market MUST bear this cost for companies that lack R&D cash flow (hey - read these books). Like Telsa who have funded most of their early cash flow from external investors and not purchasers of their cars (lets ignore that). And like CD who have more than enough cash flow generated from regular operations to make sure a durable product is available for sale (lets ignore that as well).

-People buy NeoAirs for status so as to have the latest and greatest and ignore durability because durability is "inversely related to performance in product design." Is this false advertising then? Should CD indicate on their packaging that the product is not durable? Oh yes, no worries because early adopters are happy to pay for crap. So a well design product that is high on performance (how is that defined here?) will be less durable? This is fascinating. Delusional, but fascinating.

-that Land Rover is a good example of early adopters buying an advanced SUV that has high technology and is not durable even though the Land Rover is not an advanced automobile and used old technology for years and still proved durability challenged. Got it. Excellent analogy....

-my example of the Acura RL being more expensive than a Honda Accord but yet more technologically advanced than the Accord with higher performance and higher quality (durability) is not a good example. A good example would be an NSX that stopped production in 2005. It used a motor with less horsepower than the RL, with worse fuel economy despite weighing about 800 lbs less, did not have the most advance AWD system available, and lacked the safety features. In 1991 when the NSX came out is was ahead of the pack. Not so much in 2005 and the reason why it does not exist today (wait for 2014). But the Accord v.s. RL example is not relevant. How about the Accord v.s. TL SH-AWD?

Well, this is my last post on the matter. What is funny to me is that you actually support many of my thoughts - that the NeoAir aluminized baffles are mostly hype, that CD should have done more testing ("I agree that CD should have been more thorough with their testing (especially the leak issues)", and that the technology has been around for a long time ("it's decades old space blanket technology").

"Although given the current global economic climate I'm not sure so many trust the "dismal" [economics] science anymore" The reason the global economy is in the dumpster is because of a focus on material purchases and asset over valuation. Greed. The economy is driven by consumers in the US, while the science of economics tries to keep it all in tact. Economics identifies human behaviour; it doesn't define it. When consumerism creates situations where manufacturing is pushed away from the US to cheaper climes to support the consumerism, the eventual result is a loss of jobs, a squeezing of the middle class, etc. Economic policy (the science) tries to remedy the situation. But if human behaviour doesn't change, economics can't help. In the midst of this current economic meltdown, people continue to buy, buy, and buy the latest and greatest. The early adopters being the most guilty party.

See how I did that?

Edited by FamilyGuy on 06/16/2012 10:24:29 MDT.

Ure/Short wonder if you two can take this nonsense to PM so we don't have to read this banter? :)

Getting back on track, has anyone using these TAR products actually noticed a difference, or are you just reacting to something you can see? Think about the inside of all the other pads (down mats, synthetic fills, etc.)...do you think everything looks perfect within these mats, or is it just that you can't SEE it that makes it better. Down definitely moves, synthetic fill definitely gets torn and baffles definitely do not stay intact, but bottom line is the pads still work fine and these are just minor things we don't notice.

I am a believer in using a good product from a reputable company, and having it made in the USA doesn't hurt.

I have noticed no degradation in my TAR mats (have the Neoair, Xlite and Xtherm), and while I do like other products at first, I have had serious issues with Exped and BA (blown baffles, leaks) and attribute the poor workmanship to China mfg IMO.

PS FWIW I have a Land Rover Discovery, original owner, use it for what it is made for (town and country, and off road all the time) and love it. I have NEVER had an issue with it (over 100,000 miles now), and thank god I did not listen to the Interweb when making a decision. Sometimes you need to go with what you know, and not be persuaded by a few squeaky wheels! :)

I suppose that business logic makes sense, but I question some assumptions.

Who buys a balloon for durability ?

Edited by redmonk on 06/16/2012 11:55:37 MDT.

Thanks for editing that post - it was degrading.

Well, it happened again. Here were the conditions:

It rained constantly all day and all night last night. I inflated my XLite with an instaflator, but obviously conditions were quite humid. (Prior to last night, the pad had been inflated once by mouth but stayed upstairs, and I never observed any condensation before rolling it up yesterday morning.) I woke up this morning, and as I was deflating my pad, I could see a lot of condensation inside. I laid everything flat and took a good look at the aluminized coating before rolling it up, and it looked pristine.

Then, as I folded it in thirds, I actually saw the aluminization wearing off on the edges where the majority of the condensation was. I got home and took this picture.



Before that, two weeks ago, I took my wife's XLite Women's out in similar conditions (to check out the higher R-value); though, it rained far less when we set up camp, and I didn't see much condensation. Seeing this pad, I decided to check it as well, and it has just a hair of delamination at the top.

Conclusions: (1) It's not as bad as last time (maybe the instaflator helped?). But I'm sure repeated use in wet conditions will continue the degradation. The wet season is about to end around here, but it will be back by the end of September, and it is something I can count on. Condensation will likely be present with any pad I use (all minimal and manageable), and the XLite appears to have issues with that.

(2) Damn if the pad isn't comfortable! I sleep really well on a NeoAir--and the horizontal baffles really cradle my body well. The collapse of the sidewall actually works better with my broad shoulders (too broad for the large, actually) than any other pad I've slept on.

(3) It's not clear how much the coating actually helps. I don't like watching the pad fall apart before my eyes, but that may not impact its performance much. Given the tests BPL did on the earlier generation NeoAir in the Sleeping Pad State of the Market, the R-value may come from the baffles alone, and I can reasonably expect the stated R-value without an aluminum coating.

What's not clear is what I should do about this going forward. To keep the pad that clearly has some issues or search for a different solution? Any thoughts?

Well, Clayton,

That sure is disappointing, if not surprising. Sure seems to dislike humidity.

If you don't think the aluminum helps then I say keep your comfy pad. I love my (original) Neo's comfort too. Great pad.

Let us know what you decide to do. At this point I don't see the manufacturer fixing the issue soon.

Todd

> you don't understand that performance and durability are inversely related in product design.

Funny - I always equated performance and durability myself. I mean, look at the Mars Rover.... Design life 3-6 months, current life 8 years.

Or an early model Landrover Defender (Aluminium body etc) - an incredible vehicle. Btw, I suspect some may be confusing LandRover with RangeRover.

Cheers

I got my XLite small a few days ago but I have not used it yet and I am now considering sending it back after reading this thread. I still have my original Neoair I can use.

Yeah, most mylar films will do that with or without moisture, silver or gold. I suspect it is more of a problem with the manufacturing process/material chosen and beyond the control of Thermarest. I have and old (I mean 7-8 year old) space blanket I use as a ground sheet that shows the same de-silvering. I don't care, it still works. I was reading an article a couple weeks ago about durability of camp gear. Mostly the article stated durability was limited to about 60 days of use time. Generally about 3-4 years for most casual campers. But, I don't remember the name of the author.

60 days is a year or less for me, these days, so, I don't use a NeoAir generally. I reserve it for Hard Surface camping (lean-too, mountain granite, etc.)

Anyway, I have other issues with Neoairs (leaks, balloning) so I don't really care what happens inside to the inside film, as long as it stays attached. For all three season use, it's fine. A little loss of the IR value is minor in comparison to the rest of the pad. I think there was <5% loss of R value for IR IFF the entire pad looses its complete covering. Your bag, the outer layers, and any clothing will act as a shield long before the pad comes into play. Soo, offhand, I doubt there is any difference. Maybe with Rogers test system (With the heat on the outside) it might show a little. But this isn't really important to three season camping. I would suggest there is no cause to worry, call in for an RMA/Return when you have a little time and ship it back. This is clearly a material defect, albeit one they can do little about.

For a few ounces more you can have a nice, reliable Thermarest Prolite mattress. And it mostly inflates itself. Imagine that in a camp at 9,000 ft.!

Eric, I've been thinking about that a lot--when my first pad showed this problem and now again.

Here's where I am at with my current pad situation:

NeoAir (size regular) - 11.80 oz
NeoAir stuff sack - 0.55 oz (for abrasion protection)
1/8" Foam Pad - 2.45 oz (to protect the NeoAir from punctures)
Instaflator - 1.02 oz (to reduce condensation in the NeoAir--also, easy inflation)

That totals up to 15.82 oz with a decent amount of fiddle factor (nothing to worry about, but not a simple system). Conceivably, if I give up the aluminum coating to condensation, I can leave the instaflator--dropping the system to three parts (with the 1/8" pad as multi-use as a sit pad or back panel pad). That leaves me at 14.8 oz for an R-value of 3.2 that will drop to an estimated 2.75 over time (estimated--though, the SOTM on pads might argue for better).

Or, the Women's Prolite registers in at 16 oz for an R-value of 2.8 with considerably better durability. It could be folded up and used as a sit pad or backpanel pad with far fewer worries of deflation. The R-value would be functionally the same, the weight slightly higher (1.2 oz more), the durability greater, and the fiddle factor decreased. It would also be less comfortable, but that could be addressed by conditioning (I used to sleep on an old 1.25" TAR before the NeoAir).

Edited by GlacierRambler on 06/20/2012 11:57:44 MDT.

Hi, whats the latest on this issue?
I purchased a Allseason yesterday, considering exchanging for the XLite, but after reading this, im concerned

No change to my knowledge. Now that hiking is over for me for the next few months, I finally RA'ed the pad to Cascade Designs.

Before I sent it, I did check the pad one more time, and the delamination of the film appeared to be in more or less the same place it was in the picture. I got little to no condensation in the pad after that June trip--the rains stopped and we stayed dry though September. So condensation appears to be the primary cause.

It's enough for me to justify the 1 oz for the instaflator and to stop worrying. I am sticking with the NeoAir line.

Edited by GlacierRambler on 12/15/2012 12:11:23 MST.