Travis, what length is that? REI lists regular length at 16oz, and long at 17oz. Also, what are your initial thoughts on the pad? Really considering getting one of these.
Cant believe Travis recieved one already, 17.2oz, I was hoping it would be around 16oz.
that is the regular length. i have not even inflated it yet but am planning on returning it. i have the synmat and downmat already and was hoping this would replace one or both of them. however, my downmat ul is only 17.5 oz, is not mummy shaped and has a higher r value. mu hiking partner brings her exped drybag pump anyway. i really dont like the fact that there arent any really great options to inflate the BA.
Does anyone have the weight for the regular shape yet? Without the repair kit.
I laid on a demo SL and it was nice. They had two regular size SL no LW.Tigard had none and Next Adventure had none.
Travis, did you end up keeping your mummy version, and have you inflated it yet?
Can anyone share a picture of how small this packs to? I am far more concerned with packed volume right now rather than weight...and I'd like to know how this compares to the exped size-wise when rolled up.Most BA pads are awfully large when packed...
20" x 66" x 3.5" - Orange 3.5" x 8.5"20" x 72" x 3.5" - Orange 3.5" x 9"20" x 78" x 3.5" - Orange 3.5" x 9.5"25" x 78" x 3.5" - Orange 4.5" x 10"20" x 78" x 3.25" mummy - Orange 3.5" x 10"20" x 72" x 3.25" mummy - Orange 3" x 9"
Take this for what its worth, its the 78 inch square model, 20.7oz for the pad itself, the patch kit and stuff sack weigh 1 ounce.http://www.rokslide.com/forums/showthread.php?5339-BA-Q-Core-SL-versus-Exped-UL7
Initial impression only really. And does he use enough slop on the bottom of the pad? A whole ounce, yikes.Will have to wait for more info on the R value.
I got the petite (66x20), rectangle shape. I am a side sleeper and generally roll around a lot so I didnt go with the mummy version.it weighs 16.9 oz, and ill probably put it in a cuben stuff sack that weighs next to nothing. So im probably looking at 17 ounces.
15 breaths to inflate, also the fabric is pretty robust compared to my old Exped UL7.
I really wanted to like this pad. Maybe it's just me but the pad feels narrow. I feel like I'm fighting to get comfortable. The thicker sides make it worse too. Ill give it another shot but it seems like my exped ul7 was much wider.
I saw one at REI in Berkeley and yeah, it seems really narrow.
Edited by book on 02/24/2013 10:10:04 MST.
Is it more narrow than the q core non SL version?
Im 5'11" 185, 42" chest...doesnt feel "too narrow" for me to sleep comfortably on it. Very comfortable overall.However, it weighs 17.2 oz on my scale. another .8 oz for the stuff sack/repair kit. Disappointing but I'll probably keep it.
I take that back.. I tried actually sleeping on it. For side sleeping it is just fine. But when I lay on my back, my arms and shoulders really hang over the side. I dont know if the non-mummy is any wider in the torso area. I dont think it is. I don't think i'll be keeping this after all.
I returned my rectangle sl and got the exped ul7. The exped feels several inches wider. I can lay on my back with my arms resting on the pad, and side sleep without my legs falling off. If I had to guess the exped feels 2 inches wider on each side. At least!
I thought about trying the regular q-core sl instead of the mummy. But I think the exped synmat ul 7 is going to be my choice.
You must login to post.
MEMBERSHIP IS REQUIRED TO POST: You must be a Forum, Annual or Lifetime Member to post messages in the backpackinglight.com forums.
SUBSCRIBE NOW »