Cycling UK Forum

update for anyone interested.

I bought one - from the nice folk at Snugpak themselves - was cycling that way so popped in.

It's very good.

Snugpak (as I may have said upthread) are honest enough to say that it doesn't add any thermal degrees to the sleeping experience (tho I did use it, well layered, at temps down to 0 and 3 degrees)

Comes in its own handy tough bag - like many Snugpak things.

Nice on the skin.

Being light and slinky easy to get in and out of (since it was cold I used it inside a thermal liner and then an aged sleeping bag) .

Tough.

Recommended.

I missed this thread back when it was alive, but some comments.

Anything will add some degree of warmth in much the same way that a cotton T is a smidge warmer than no cotton T. In general, expect a liner made of X to add the same sort of warmth as PJs made of the same stuff. That could be verging on nothing, but it will be finite. On a hot summer night a liner can be a bag in itself, making just enough difference between nothing and something.

Note that silk liners come in numerous different weights. The thinnest ones are pretty delicate, but heavier ones (which are also a bit warmer, but of course weigh and bulk more) are far more robust. My usual Weapon of Choice is a JagBags liner from https://www.terrevistatrails.com/, that bit chunkier than my old Rab silk one(which is coming apart at the seams) without being hugely heavier. I also have a heavier one which a friend picked up in Kathmandu (went in to a shop, handed them an ME cotton liner and said "two of those in your heavy silk please", one for him, one for me).

I do have a Rab Pertex one which I use rather than silk if I know I'll be filthy (e.g. some combination of excessive mud, salt, suncream, sweat and little chance to wash it off) as it's much easier to wash.

Used to have a cotton one, but the Pertex or silk are just as comfy and lighter/less bulky, so I gave it away.

I tend to worry less about liners with synthetic bags as they're so much easier to wash.

Pete.

Sweep wrote: ↑30 Dec 2021, 6:41pm
Snugpak (as I may have said upthread) are honest enough to say that it doesn't add any thermal degrees to the sleeping experience (tho I did use it, well layered, at temps down to 0 and 3 degrees)

AIUI, the honest answer is usually "yes, they do" (add warmth). I hear or read both on a regular basis. For example:

https://www.rei.com/learn/expert-advice ... iners.html

AFAIAC, my cotton one does add warmth and I rely on it in this respect, a silk one perhaps not.

I do find it strange that there is this element of confusion amongst the retailers/manufacturers around liners. I take pjclinch's points on another thread about liners being a stand-alone product but I still think that they should be integrated in some way with the sleeping bag. After all, full-length and foot zips are part of the heating/cooling system of a bag, down bags cannot easily be washed, bags have hoods so should liners and so on. I don't see how a liner can be an after-thought - it's a part of making a sleeping bag work effectively.

As others have posted in the past, a better system is actually two thinner bags rather than one thick one. One of these thinner bags could be an internal one and easily washed thus obviating the need for a liner.

I wonder if some people (not the OP) plan a Himalayan hiking trip, buy their 1200 gms of down Ladakh bag and don't think much about that summer trip to Scotland.

I recently replaced my old synthetic (not Paratex, some sort of nylon) liner with a silk one. Both add some warmth but the silk one is warmer while also being more breathable (the nylon wasn't really breathable at all) and feeling nicer against the skin. Bonus, it is also lighter and packs smaller!

horizon wrote: ↑31 Dec 2021, 1:32pm I do find it strange that there is this element of confusion amongst the retailers/manufacturers around liners.

It's a general case, I think, that retailers (even good specialists) will have a tendency to pass on Received Wisdom that they've been vouchsafed, even if it turns out not to be entirely true. This is just folk trying to be helpful combined with an awful lot of "this is the way these things work" cultures within hobbies, which are largely driven by marketing departments and to some degree gear junkies like me and a tendency in our culture to want All The Right Gear. But sleeping bag liners are a relatively recent thing in the mass market and lots of people don't use them/like them so know they can get by without them.

horizon wrote: ↑31 Dec 2021, 1:32pm I take pjclinch's points on another thread about liners being a stand-alone product but I still think that they should be integrated in some way with the sleeping bag. After all, full-length and foot zips are part of the heating/cooling system of a bag, down bags cannot easily be washed, bags have hoods so should liners and so on. I don't see how a liner can be an after-thought - it's a part of making a sleeping bag work effectively.

I think that's a bit of a stretch. Lots of bags have no zips at all, and while keeping a bag clean is a good idea a clean body will take quite a bit of time to get one dirty, especially if it's only used for the odd weekend, and PJs do much the same (aside from head, hands and feet). A liner is absolutely not an essential component of a sleep system, and I know that because I did without for years and know plenty of other folk who've done without them for years. Why do I bother? I think in large part because I'm a sad gear junkie and it fits my personal feeling of how best to do it, but that's very subjective and probably highly rationalised.

horizon wrote: ↑31 Dec 2021, 1:32pmAs others have posted in the past, a better system is actually two thinner bags rather than one thick one. One of these thinner bags could be an internal one and easily washed thus obviating the need for a liner.

You need to be careful about terms like "better"...
It would be a valid option, and I've seen a few examples, but objectively better? Nah... One obvious fly in the ointment is you need double the shell material, and in terms of thermal importance the shell does a fraction of the work of the insulation: it's to hold the insulation in place, so doubling the quantity of shell is a very wasteful way to take on the insulation/weight and maximising that is a lot of what bag design is about. As noted above, all you need to do to obviate the need for a liner is decide not to bother with one: they are not essential components of a "sleep system", but optional extras that may or may not appeal.

horizon wrote: ↑31 Dec 2021, 1:32pmI wonder if some people (not the OP) plan a Himalayan hiking trip, buy their 1200 gms of down Ladakh bag and don't think much about that summer trip to Scotland.

I used to have an ME Iceline, which I bought after a -20 night in Glencoe in a 3 season bag where I got very cold. The Iceline was an over-reaction and far too hot, the only night I ever got the zip done up all the way for a whole night it was -26 outside the tent. I sold it to a friend who uses it year round: she just sleeps very cold. Before I sold it I lent it to another friend who always slept cold, and was happy in it when I was feeling a bit warm in my Dewline with less than a third of the down!

But just like warm coats and very warm coats, it makes some sense for some folk to have more than one. I have an ME Dewline for summer and a Lightline for colder. It's done a night in a snow cave cold enough to freeze a bottle of juice solid so I know that's as hot as I'll ever likely need, but my friends who used the Iceline in summer would freeze!

Pete.

A built in liner sounds horrid. I get tangled up in the damn things and any zips never match the main one. If it doesn't detach you still have to wash the whole pit and if it come loose see my first sentence. Fail to see the issue. Just wash the bag occasionally, Down is easy enough and if you are spending every night in it, it may need a wash once a year. You do wear clothing don't you?
Double bags were a thing but are bulky compared to a box construction thing.

But sleeping bag liners are a relatively recent thing

I'm wondering why that is (I never used one in the past). Here are my guesses:

1. Down sleeping bags have become much more expensive.
2. Washing one in the past (with no synthetic option) meant by hand. Now you can throw a synthetic in the washing machine so washing by hand by comparison seems a major faff.
3. Marketing?

mattsccm wrote: ↑1 Jan 2022, 10:02pm A built in liner sounds horrid. I get tangled up in the damn things and any zips never match the main one. If it doesn't detach you still have to wash the whole pit and if it come loose see my first sentence. Fail to see the issue. Just wash the bag occasionally, Down is easy enough and if you are spending every night in it, it may need a wash once a year. You do wear clothing don't you?
Double bags were a thing but are bulky compared to a box construction thing.

are these liners you are getting tangled in cotton/ I have tangled in a couple of those, spectacularly so with an ex army thing which at first sight looked good. Never with my silk or paratex liner.
I converted to liners after using a bag without for a while. Pre cycle camping (car camping) so i was not dirty when getting in. Nor very sweaty at all. The bag soon felt far less comfortable, similar to how old bedding feels. It was a synthetic bag, but cleaning and properly drying even a synthetic bag is a serious fag which I personally would rather avoid.

What are we calling "recent"? Liners were definitely in mass-market use 25 years ago. I wouldn't call that recent.

Bmblbzzz wrote: ↑2 Jan 2022, 11:47am What are we calling "recent"? Liners were definitely in mass-market use 25 years ago. I wouldn't call that recent.

Poor choice of words on my part. I mean at the point where they are to a significant degree a "Given" (at least as an option) and people know what they're for. As Horizon notes and we generally see, there still exists some confusion as to what they're for...

Pete.

horizon wrote: ↑1 Jan 2022, 10:15pm

But sleeping bag liners are a relatively recent thing

I'm wondering why that is (I never used one in the past). Here are my guesses:

1. Down sleeping bags have become much more expensive.

Not really. I bought my ME Lightline in the late 90's when the RRP was £230 (I remember that as I got mine for £150 which was very much a "tell all your friends" bargain). Plugging that in to an inflation calculator it comes up with that being a bit over £400 now, and looking at the ME range I can get something about as good (a bit less down but better quality) for the same money.

horizon wrote: ↑1 Jan 2022, 10:15pm2. Washing one in the past (with no synthetic option) meant by hand. Now you can throw a synthetic in the washing machine so washing by hand by comparison seems a major faff.

Synthetic was the standard option when I was small (in the 70s). They were easy to wash then, they're easy to wash now (they're also one hell of a lot better now, but that's not really the issue).

horizon wrote: ↑1 Jan 2022, 10:15pm3. Marketing?

Marketing and the market it serves feed back on one another. I would say people are a lot more aware of them because they exist in ranges and catalogues with explanations as to what they're for, and there is a culture in outdoor gear these days of getting a bit too obsessed with gear ("Hello, my name is Pete, and I am a gear junkie"). The market provides what there is demand for, and marketing tells us what is there and why one might want it which in itself creates some demand. There is far more tendency these days (or at least ISTM) to go out and just "buy a hobby" by getting All The Gear: I don't really know why that's the case, but I'm pretty sure it is the case, and there is also a tendency to risk aversion, including for the state of one's lovely new gear... So we see the people who have to buy a Hilleberg tent for pretty benign camping because "they're the best", and have to buy an official Hille footprint because they can, and "they're the best", and because they're terrified to damage their very expensive tent even though a lot of the money they paid went on making sure the tent could take their usage in its stride.

A lot of the gear we use, whether it's the bikes or the tents or the sleeping bags or the clothes etc., is designed and made for more serious stuff than a lot of us need. Sleeping 100+ nights a year in a bag after sweaty days where you're relying on it far from civilisation will create a different degree of need to be paranoid about keeping it clean to a few weekends here and there in the UK. That doesn't mean it's stupid to take care to keep it clean in the latter situation, but the sky won't fall in there if one relaxes the discipline a little bit: worst case is sending it off to be cleaned.

Pete.

I think to an extent this gear obsession, which definitely does exist almost as a substitute for activity in some cases, is partly because nowadays we have (mostly) much more surplus money than in even the 90s let alone the 70s.Greater access to credit almost certainly plays a role in this too, especially in the last 20 years or so.

Bmblbzzz wrote: ↑2 Jan 2022, 1:25pm I think to an extent this gear obsession, which definitely does exist almost as a substitute for activity in some cases, is partly because nowadays we have (mostly) much more surplus money than in even the 90s let alone the 70s.Greater access to credit almost certainly plays a role in this too, especially in the last 20 years or so.

Aye, also the above has fed back to more people making stuff for that market so there is a wider choice of better stuff. You'd only wear outdoorsy stuff in the 70s if you were engaging in a hobby, these days strolling around town in a down jacket or serious waterproof is entirely normal.
I did my first Munro in the early 80s, and aside from my boots everything I wore was cotton, and pretty standard stuff (the loop-stitch socks (red, of course!) were hiking-specific, but my breeks had been made from an old pair of cords by my mum). I'd probably get told off by self-righteous guardians of H&S for wandering up a hill dressed like that today, because Cotton Kills!

Pete.

Fashion plays its fickle and unpredictable role there too, of course. And you're right about more stuff being available. I was reading a while ago the history of one company, IIRC it was Mountain Equipement; seems that a lot of what are now sizable companies started off in the 70s or 80s as a couple of enthusiasts with a sewing machine making gear for themselves and their mates. But if it results in more people Getting Out There and having a good time doing so, then it seems like a good thing.

Yes, more people having more fun is good, and it's easier to have fun !and harder to have a real shocker) with good gear.

A lot of big firms did get going by way of cottage industries, and it's notable that more specialised stuff still comes from that sort of outfit (ultralight packs and tents, for example). The likes of ME, Rab, Rohan etc. seemed to start when the (then) new synthetic fabrics allowed approaches that traditional outdoor wear in cotton and tweed didn't allow. Nobody was making it, so they made it themselves... There's quite an interesting piece in the back of the new Hilleberg catalogue by Renate Hilleberg on how they had to make it up as they went along because there was no model for what they were doing... See https://docs.hilleberg.net/Hilleberg202 ... ok-EN.pdf

Pete.