Stone Glacier vs Western Mountaineering Sleeping Bags

hikenhunt

WKR
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
423
Location
WA
I've used two WM bags and have been thoroughly impressed with both. I don't have any reason to look at other brands.
 

C.payne

WKR
Joined
Feb 13, 2020
Messages
315
Location
BC Canada
I don’t want to hijack this thread but I have wanted to purchase a new bag and both the WM and SG are at the top of my list.
My question to the WM guys: I’m sold on everything about a WM except for that they don’t use Hydrophobic down. How do you guys find using them in wetter climates? Or. I use a solo tarp/tent and deal with a fair bit of condensation. Do you guys find they “wet” out bad or do they have a good enough DWR to keep the moisture from getting to the down with in realistic use.
 

kopecsean

FNG
Joined
Apr 3, 2018
Messages
97
I have had my Kodiak for 13 years and never had an issue I have had to sycamore for 3 years now and have never had an issue

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 

C.payne

WKR
Joined
Feb 13, 2020
Messages
315
Location
BC Canada
I have had my Kodiak for 13 years and never had an issue I have had to sycamore for 3 years now and have never had an issue

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Thanks for the input. I live up in BC and should probably run a synthetic to be on the safe side but would love to save some weight and space in my pack if possible.
 

kopecsean

FNG
Joined
Apr 3, 2018
Messages
97
I Have had amazing results with both my bags in Western mountaineering and their customer service is completely too notch. I sent my Kodiak back it back to them to do an additional 5゚ of down and they did it at no charge. Made in the Western United States

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 

sneaky

"DADDY"
Joined
Feb 1, 2014
Messages
10,063
Location
ID
Hydrophobic coatings are a marketing crutch. How many geese are flying around with coated feathers? That coating adds weight, and eventually wears off leaving you right back to where you started. If you're that concerned with moisture get one with a Windstopper shell. WM microfiber material is highly water resistant on its own merits. I have never once worried about my non treated down in my Kodiak, or my MF shell material. In your environment the GWS might be a better option, but lots of guys in Alaska still use the MF bags with great results.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 

C.payne

WKR
Joined
Feb 13, 2020
Messages
315
Location
BC Canada
@sneaky
Thanks for your input. I do agree with you and as much as I try not to get sucked in with all the marketing hype sometimes it still happens! Lol
If I hunted with someone who had one and I was able to see it perform in the conditions we hunt in I’m sure I wouldn’t even question it.
 
OP
eaglebowhunter
Joined
Jul 18, 2018
Messages
586
Location
Oklahoma
Came home today! Can’t wait to get this in the mountains! Thanks again all!

fb375db8c20e525c023cb9bd31063920.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

TNHunter

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Jan 3, 2015
Messages
194
Location
Nashville, TN
I own 2 Western mountaineering bags and they are the best bags I've ever seen. Kodiak and the sycamore.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Agree with kopecsean.. I’ve got the Kodiak and it’s excellent. Can’t go wrong with Western Moutaineering.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Joined
Sep 7, 2016
Messages
1,810
Location
El Dorado HIlls
In my experience as a Badger sleeper, I'll bet if you if the Badger was comfortable and a good fit, the 32 inch shoulder width of the SG bag would be tight and cold. I used a number of good quality bags over the years and never got the temp rating out of them. While shivering one early morning, I realized that the inside and outside of the bag were touching all the way around the shoulders. No insulation there. I bought the Badger and never looked back.


that 32" is the across dimension. The circumference is 64". Western Mountaineering measures in circumference.
 

sneaky

"DADDY"
Joined
Feb 1, 2014
Messages
10,063
Location
ID
that 32" is the across dimension. The circumference is 64". Western Mountaineering measures in circumference.
Yeah, but are they stating internal flat dimension or across the whole bag? You would lose baffle height if it's the external measurement. At least WM clarifies it's their internal dimension.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 
Joined
Sep 7, 2016
Messages
1,810
Location
El Dorado HIlls
Yeah, but are they stating internal flat dimension or across the whole bag? You would lose baffle height if it's the external measurement. At least WM clarifies it's their internal dimension.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

I confirmed with Stone Glacier via a phone call that flat dimension is internal.
 
Joined
Sep 7, 2016
Messages
1,810
Location
El Dorado HIlls
Hydrophobic coatings are a marketing crutch. How many geese are flying around with coated feathers? That coating adds weight, and eventually wears off leaving you right back to where you started. If you're that concerned with moisture get one with a Windstopper shell. WM microfiber material is highly water resistant on its own merits. I have never once worried about my non treated down in my Kodiak, or my MF shell material. In your environment the GWS might be a better option, but lots of guys in Alaska still use the MF bags with great results.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
I have never had any issues with my WM bag going flat due to moisture, but recently John Barklow stated that untreated down has no place in mountain hunting. Seemed like a bold statement but he had far more experience than I. He said treated down has shown to be perform better in wet conditions.
 

Formidilosus

Super Moderator
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
8,240
WM bags are the standard for a reason. However, SG bags are excellent bags. The Hydrophobic down that at least SG is not a “marketing crutch” as you can get in soaking wet and use the bag to cook dry. The bags remain perfectly functional.
 

prm

WKR
Joined
Mar 31, 2017
Messages
2,178
Location
No. VA
For anyone that’s used an SG bag, does it seem a bit roomier than a WM? SG is apparently using a flat measurement across at the shoulders/hips/foot box, and others use a circumference. For the SG they advertise an internal measurement of 32/24/18, while WM uses internal circumference (girth) of 65"/56"/39" for a 6’ Badger. Since bags are not circles, and I don’t know what the vertical dimension they use is, it’s hard to accurately compare. You cannot simply double the flat measurement.
I have an older REI Magma 10 deg. I’d like to replace with something that has a bit more shoulder and hip room.
 

whaack

WKR
Joined
Dec 17, 2015
Messages
688
Location
Midwest - IL
I returned my SG after one week elk hunting a bought a WM. I wasn’t impressed with the durability. Warmth was just fine


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

prm

WKR
Joined
Mar 31, 2017
Messages
2,178
Location
No. VA
I returned my SG after one week elk hunting a bought a WM. I wasn’t impressed with the durability. Warmth was just fine


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Any difference in internal size?
 
Top