This looks great, besides the Downtek, it also stands on it's merits for fill-to-weight ration at 56%!

I wonder about the fill though, the little video shot at Snowshoe nationals shows a rather underfilled looking jacket, yet it claims 9 oz of down, that's a LOT of down. For comparison my old box baffled Alpine light has only 6 oz in a M, yet is super high lofting, or look at the jackets in the recent shootout.

Shell: Pertex Quantum Ripstop
Lining: 20d Nylon
Insulation: 800+ Goose Down
DownTek technology
Fill Weight: 9oz medium
Total weight: 16oz medium
Baffled chest construction
Attached hood
Zipper chin guard
Low bulk cuffs
Rise Free arm construction

Edited by Tjaard on 09/27/2012 19:21:02 MDT.

http://www.outdoorgearlab.com/Down-Jacket-Reviews/Brooks-Range-Mojave-Jacket

lists the medium weight at 1.4 lb? It is therorectically possbile to build a jacket with those specs for just slightly more than 16 oz. It will be interesting to have a forum member weigh one.

From Brooks Range, per email:

"Yes, the medium jacket weights 16oz and yes we have 9oz of down. We put 220g in our Alpni jackets and this jacket has more.

Were able to save weight because we’re using Pertex Quantum fabric. The Quantum fabric is lighter than most other companies shell / lining fabrics. Were also not using a lot of fleece to line pocket and collars like other brands do.

Thanks

Jeff Blakely "

Awesome cusotmer service btw, response on my question late at night!

Edited by Tjaard on 10/01/2012 11:59:44 MDT.

My size Small just arrived – I will not have a chance to wear it in truly cold weather for awhile, but sure seems like the perfect jacket!
Weight is 14.1 ounces, with proportions that match up very nicely with the sizing chart. (I have a Medium in the Alpini, since I was told that ran a little short, and that by contrast the Mojave is a little bigger. This matches up with their relative fits, as my Medium Alpini is larger than my Mojave Small, but more like a half-size differential.)
Hood is designed very well to fit over a helmet, yet still able to snug down for helmet-less use around camp or inside a sleeping bag. Weight is even more impressive given that the features include a full-length zipper, two outside zippered pockets with fleece lining, an inside zippered storage pocket, velcro cuff adjusters, bungee hood tighteners, and a velcro tab at the back of the hood. (Just remember that you need to supply your own stuff sack.)
The relative warmths of jackets are always difficult to quantify, but it clearly has an exceedingly high fill weight as a percentage of total garment weight, and with the water-resistant down, it’s pretty much off the charts in comparison to synthetic fill jackets.

does the jacket have a down-filled draft tube protecting the zipper?

Berghaus has some interesting water resistant down jackets as well:

http://www.mtnhaus.com/ilam-down-jacket/ (more like a 3 season jacket)

http://www.mtnhaus.com/ilam-down-jacket/ (warmer)

they also have some "scientific" data to support their claims, the graph under design & development at http://www.mtnhaus.com/mount-asgard-hybrid/ is quite interesting. According to Berghaus their treated down keeps 80% of its clo value when exposed to water. Regular down losses 50% during the same test.


I just wonder how long the dwr abilities will last and how synthetics deal under the same conditions.


Would be great to see some direct comparison between synthetic and the new down stuff in regards to insulation properties. Does this new down really beat synthetics in prolonged wet conditions? is someone listening at bpl :)

Hi Jonathan,

You are the first Bpl member I know of to get their hands on one of these.

If you could post some pictures and measure loft it well be great, also does the shell seem fragile.

Cheers,

Stephen

Material, comparable to my various other lightweight insulation. So obviously not a bushwhacking outer layer! But seems like it will keep the down in, the wind out, and be reasonably durable for its intended applications.

Loft, I was about to ask how to measure it, but of course Google took me here:
http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/00094.html
[Scroll down to: About Measuring Down Loft]
I put a level across A & D, then measured the distance to the table.
I didn't put much time into this, since having done lots of work measuring initial acquisition range in my avalanche reviews, I sensed that down this road lay absolute madness.
And I doubt my measurements are directly comparable to those made by others.
Nevertheless, the numbers I got for all my down jackets:
7.8cm Brooks-Range Alpini (which has also struck me as amazingly puffy)
6.7cm Brooks-Range Mojave (does seem a little bit less puffy)
5.6cm decade-old Sierra Designs jacket (600 or 650 fill)
4.3cm wife's TNF knee-length around-town jacket
about the same for my brother's two-decade-old CB jacket (500 fill?), since I just love wearing old junk around town (while everyone else shows off the latest backcountry fashions that they never use much in the backcountry!)

One of the two waist adjusters (which I forgot to mention in my review):


Draft tube (as per request):


One of the two zippered pockets:


Cuff with velcro adjustment:


Hood, twisted about so as to see both types of adjustments:

Edited by jshefftz1 on 10/09/2012 18:46:12 MDT.

Thank you for the information. Would you mind telling us something about the length? A measurement from the base of the hood to the hem would be most helpful, but any info would be appreciated.

Cheers Jonathan,

I get about 63 to 64cm, for both the size Medium Alpini and size Small Mojave, measured from the base of the hood in the back, to the hem.
They also feel the same length when worn. I'm 5'8" and it comes down to my crotch.

So I'm confused, Brooks put more dow into the Mojave than the Alpini, yet the Alpini still has higher loft?

Does anyone else know if downtek fill power is measured before or after the waterproofing treatment? That's about the only thing I could account for a less puffy jacket....assuming there isn't outright completely incorrect specs on fill weight.

Hi Jonathan,

You know you are going to have to wet out the two jackets and see which dries quicker
;-)

Edited by stephenm on 10/10/2012 16:02:55 MDT.

I knew someone was going to bring that up...

You know you want to Jonathan ;-)

BR confirms that fill power is measured *after* the water-resistance treatment.

BR also explains that the Mojave has a higher *average* loft than the Alpini. Essentially, I've been measuring just the peaks, not the averages of the peaks and valleys.
Note that the span of the stitches on the Alpini is ~9.5cm, but only ~7cm on the Mojave. And the Alpini is sewn through, whereas Mojave is baffled in the chest.

Somewhat related question -- Rab Neutrino Endurance:
http://us.rab.uk.com/products/mens-clothing/down_1/neutrino-endurance-jacket.html
... is "Stitch-through baffle construction" -- but isn't that mutually exclusive?

Is the draft tube down filled? Also do both front and back of the pockets have down.

Cheers,

Yes, draft tube is lightly filled (presumably with down).
The pockets are positioned behind all the insulation, right up against the interior lining.
So yes on front of pockets having down, no on back of pockets.

Cheers,

My Gooses Feet Parka has the exact same specs, I must measure the loft.

I presume these figures are for double layer loft, I measured my Gooses Feet Parka which weighs 16oz (9oz 900fp box wall, M90 outer) and the double layer loft is 15cm.

I measured according to here:
http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/00094.html
[Scroll down to: About Measuring Down Loft]
More specifically, I put a level across A & D, then measured the distance to the table.
But I measured in only one place, and reported in cm.
Translating into inches, I see that my measurements fo the two BR jackets are on the low end of those reviewed at that link. However, the weights of the two BR jackets are also on the low end of those reviewed at that link.
Moreover, I noticed this statement at that link:
"All of the jackets increased 10% to 20% in loft over the week of observation."
And then the issue of trying to average out the peaks and valleys...so basically, I don't think these measurements are very meaningful across relatively small ranges.