Hacker News Reader

Comment by baudehlo | Hacker News Reader

I'm afraid there's already a matress that does this. It's from exped, I own one and it's awesome, and better implemented than this because you're only inflating a small pump sack, and can use it to build pressure in the mattress.

Here's a video: http://www.exped.com/exped/web/exped_homepage_na.nsf/b43popu...

View on HN

That looks much slower, more complicated, and more expensive.

It is more expensive but only because it has an R value of 8.0 (the Kickstarter one has an R value of 1.0, which means it's not going to give you any protection from the cold ground whatsoever - even a self-inflating pad gives you more protection than that). You'd be amazed how much difference higher R values make on the quality of rest you get while camping.

Is it slower? Maybe, but I inflate mine in two or three inflations of the bag, and that takes me around 60 seconds - it's really not a long time in the big scheme of things - it takes a lot longer to get the tent erected (although that's down to about 5 minutes now). The problem is you can't inflate a high R-value pad without pressure - the reason his inflates so fast is there is no insulation, no down, no pockets, so the air can just go right in. But then so does the cold.

Anyway all I was saying is this isn't a new technique - there's a mattress you can buy today from any MEC/REI that uses this technique.

Whereas your first comment came off as a bit pithy, this was a really informative one. Thank you for the lesson on r-value and its importance. Not an avid camper, but I sometimes do overnights in the cold and today I learned something important about air pad insulation. Thanks again.

Per REI's page on the topic, here's what they have to say about R-value: "Insulation is measured according to its capacity to resist (that's the "R") heat flow. The higher a pad's R-value, the better you can expect it to insulate you from cold surfaces. The R-values shown on REI.com product pages are provided by the manufacturers and range from 1.0 (minimally insulated) to 9.5 (well insulated). Thicker pads generally offer higher R-values."

Source: http://www.rei.com/learn/expert-advice/right-sleeping-pad.ht...

Thanks. As much as I hate to be "that guy", I think it's also important that people don't invest in a product on kickstarter that isn't going to match expectations, or isn't the "brand new innovation" that they say it is.

Just for further info: I camp a fair bit in Ontario. In September when the days are still hitting the high 20's (80's in Fahrenheit), the ground can still be cold enough that I had to trade up from an R-value 3 sleeping pad to this product. It's much comfier, very light and compact, and inflates really quickly. If you want to get into camping, being comfy at night is so important, I urge you not to skimp on your sleeping pad.

I looks like a wool blanket could help (R value around 4) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wool_insulation

The problem is that adds to your weight. Not important if you're car camping, but important for hiking.

I'll toss out another warning to those thinking of using this for back packing. I've seen baffles come apart on MEC sleeping pads with a similar design - it's a big enough problem that they acknowledged on their website for their first gen pads. I'd be leery of trusting a brand-new product from a team with limited experience in producing camping gear. It's not as simple as finding a factory in China to produce gear.

An additional constraint is that you don't want any moisture from your breath to get inside an exped down pad as it will reduce the insulation ... their system works really well but it is targeted at winter/high mountain use.

Seriously, this is totally different.

Exped has a separate sack that you squeeze pump multiple times over. While the OP was just "blow air in" style big opening.

Looks to be about a ten fold difference in effort and time.

Just look at the two videos - can you say with a straight face that they're doing the same thing?

I wish you had shared this sooner before I made my purchase :) I noticed the R value of the kickstarter pad. But at 3+ inches it has to be above R:1. My guess is they haven't tested it so just to be safe they have put an R value of 1. Just look at other bags or pad at similar thickness and their R value should at least be in 3-4 range.

You need a lot of interior baffling or insulating material stuffed inside an air mattress to get the R value up to 3 or 4. In a big open tube you get convection, which speeds up heat transfer.

Note that the original NeoAir, which is about the same thickness, is only R 2.5, but that's with a lot more interior baffles plus reflective coating on the inside. The exped mats are filled with down or synthetic insulation.

If you mean Kickstarter, then you didn't purchase; you simply made a pledge to back the project. You can always cancel your pledge.

I was wondering the whole time whether the kickstarter mattress could handle higher pressures using their technique.

I agree that the exped is better as an insulated ultralight camping pad. The Windcatcher is better for the context of "pad I keep in my backpack around town." The inflation method is simpler and faster, though not by much. It doesn't take much to take you out of the realm of "instant" however.

This would be great for airports, conferences, and maybe even coworking. Not every work/meeting space is civilized enough to recognize the utility of siestas.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com