I am getting back into backpacking after several years off from being a scout. I remember that when we used to go camping that we all ended up carrying heavy and not very practical gear for the task at hand, I'm revamping all my gear to avoid this. I've managed to secure a good used bag so far, and i'm now trying to decide about what to do with my sleeping arrangements. I have a 40 liter backpack, and would like to pack as light as possible, but i'm also a college student who needs to save money as well. I don't mind buying used gear, or cheap gear as long as it's decent and won't let me down when I need it. I stumbled across this backpack the other day while at Walmart , it really impressed me by how small and light it was, and the fact that it is down is also comforting. I'm looking for something preferably 3 season and less than a $100. I thought about going with a bag like the walmart one and then adding a real nice liner to it, that way i could use through most of the year. I also saw some real nice columbia bag's, but i'm not sure how much I could compress them to fit into my pack. Any guidance on how to remedy my problems would be very helpful, and if i'm tackling this from the wrong perspective and focusing on the wrong things, please let me know.(BTW I live in east TN, near the AT, I hope this will help you determine the climate I'm in)

That bag came up here in a conversation not long ago. The general consensus is that it's probably a good deal for an inexpensive bag, but the temp rating needs some user review.

It's likely that bag will keep you comfortable to the low 40s, but not 32º, so a bag liner is a good way to add some warmth when you need it.

Look for deals on a Kelty Light Year Down 20º too. I have one and I live in the Ozarks, so it's pretty much the same conditions you'll be using it in. That bag is comfortable in the low 30ºs, compresses pretty small, and is fairly light. I've heard you can find them for as low as $80. I paid $130 for mine, which is pretty much the standard online price, though the retail price is higher.

If you do get the WalMart Duck Down bag let us know how it works for you. I'd love to hear about it.

thanks, I wasn't expecting the ozark bag to follow the ratings, as it doesn't have a EN rating. I've searched around some more, and was wondering if anyone knows anything about this bag . It's only $20 more, and I have some coupons that could make it cheaper than the ozark. I'm just curious about the weight, and compressed size. Does anyone have any input on this bag?

It looks to weigh in at 2 lbs 6 oz. I'd probably go with the WalMart down bag myself, for the money we're talking here.

Just remember: cheap, warm, light--pick two. You will never get all three together.

Also, the high quality down (800+fill) lasts a lot longer. While the up-front cost is a lot more (like $400), the cost per year of useful life (if the bag is propoerly cared for) is the same or less than the cheap bag. Of course this assumes you have the up-front $$$! Otherwise, start saving your pennies. These cheap bags, especially synthetic fill, will need to be replaced in a few years. The inexpensive down will probably last a few years longer if treated carefully.

While most Marmot bags do have an EN13537 rating, the one you list does not. Probably left over from before they started using the rating.

I've seen bad reviews of WalMart bags, but don't know if this is one of them. I wouldn't buy it. I would buy a used name brand bag. By example, I bought a used Marmot bag a few months ago off of Craigslist. I paid about half of retail for a high quality bag in like new condition. Mine came with both the stuff sack and the storage sack and the owner even still had the hang tag. A call to Marmot got me the catalog pages and some more info on the bag.

Here is the bottom line - I have a high quality bag from a well-known manufacturer with great customer service. If anything goes wrong with it, or I damage it, I know who to call and where to send it for repair. I would put the chances of that happening with a WalMart bag at zero.

Try not to buy junk. We've all done it, at least I presume we all have at some point. Sooner or later, usually sooner, you will be disappointed. For my money, good quality used gear beats cheap new gear any day of the week.

I won't spend less than $200 on a bag, unless I am getting it on a really steeply discounted sale someplace like Sierra Trading Post AND, it is a reliable brand that makes quality bags.

If it costs less than $100 full retail, it's not going to be a good enough bag. It'll stuff to the size of your backpack, be much heavier than it has to be, and likely not as warm as advertised to boot.

A 800 fp quilt that cost $240 has been reliable for me into the 20s for the past five years and counting. It packs to the size of a cantaloupe. It weighs 22 oz. I really could not imagine buying a Walmart bag - I'd need to go back to an 80 liter pack from the 40 liter I have been carrying.

It's worth it to have something that will last you years, if you're planning on backpacking more than a few years. If you have a Marmot, Western Mountaineering, or other top brand - you can also resell it for a good amount. I couldn't give away the cheap junk bag I started with.

As with many other things, you get what you pay for. (Including this website: the free advice is sometimes worth every penny! )

It has been often and truly said that with sleeping bags, you can only pick two attributes: light, cheap, or good.

Before wasting the money at WalMart, look at REI. On the regular REI site, a quick check shows about a dozen bags that would be better than what you're looking at, at less than $150; the REI Outlet tab turned up another 20 bags for less than $150; there was also a Mountain Hardwear UltraLamina for $160. And that's just one vendor; Campmor, Backcountry Gear, and others offer similar sales. (I think Backcountry Gear just started a sale this morning.)

(Your Walmart bag doesn't specify what kind of down it is: my guess is duck down, with a healthy serving of duck feathers. Also, mistrust any bag that has, as one of its main selling points, "Can also be used in the house for sleepovers.")

Yep, right here.

I can say without any reservation that the first part of that is not always true. An expensive Rolex is not necessarily a better watch than a $20 Timex. A Lamborghini is not necessarily a better car than a Ford Fusion.

Being someone who doesn't drive expensive cars or wear watches, and who's been camping and backpacking with cheap gear most all their life, I'm glad I didn't wait until I could afford an expensive down bag to go backpacking.

My first "sleeping bag" was an old blanket, then I moved up to a $15 bag with a cotton shell and synthetic insulation, and over many years I lugged that old bag many, many, miles and slept many nights in it and all of them were great. Looking back, I don't think sleeping in a bag made of gold fleece filled with the down from the breasts of a brood of infant Phoenix could have made them better. (Do they still sell those? They were sure heavy.)



When do we get to finally say that's not true anymore?

In any case, it's a broad statement that does not define any of the qualifications and we have to remember that products do have a tendency to get better and cheaper.

My current bag (Kelty Lightyear Down 20º) is what I consider cheap, warm and light, and I think that's a pretty accurate statement because I defined the qualifications for me personally.

I'm not sure, but the same might be said for that Wal-Mart bag. There's no reason I know of to dismiss that bag yet. The reviews I've seen were all positive.

My advice remains this; Don't wait until you can afford to buy the highest quality gear. Get gear you feel comfortable enough with to get out there, and go.

If you're going with all new gear, even if it was the highest rated gear, you'd still want to go on several shake out trips to get to know the gear. You should do that with any new gear.

That Wal-Mart bag and a Coleman fleece bag liner will likely keep you warm down to around 32-40º (inside a tent) and be fairly light and affordable. That's a pretty nice place to start off. It's a lot better than my first few bags. If you take reasonable care of it, it will probably last you long enough to find a bag you like better, even if that takes a few years.

Of course, the above estimate of the value of my advice here is certainly accurate, but I would venture to say that my experience with cheap gear may exceed the average member's here, so I'm still comfortable charging what I do for it

(Deleted - this was a placeholder post until I could respond more fully)

I think there is a direct correlation between the age of the backpacker and the cost of the gear.

When I was 15, I sure didn't care about things like cushion and warmth - I could sleep anywhere. These days I can feel a pebble under a four inch air mattress, and get cold if I think about night time...

The newbies under 30 showing up on some of my trips will have those self inflating thermarests, the ones over 45 will show up once with a thermarest (maybe) and next time, they email me before the trip asking what I use, and can they borrow something....

People who are cold with the bag they have go through all kinds of liners, heat packs, and other add ins - sometimes they cave in and go for a better bag. Sometimes they never go backpacking again.

It's cheaper to get something that works the first time, but it's hard to know what works, or not, until you go. Rent stuff.

I think we're saying pretty much the same thing - the words just got in the way. Definition of terms seemed to be missing from my post.

I didn't mean my post as a slam of inexpensive gear; I did mean to slam cheap (shoddy) gear. I really do think that, in most things, you get what you pay for. You need to be sure, however, that you need what you get. That Rolex watch may well last longer than your Timex - but if all you need to do is tell time, the Timex is what you need. (When I worked construction and in a warehouse in college, I used the cheapest watch I could find because it was always getting banged around - and rewarded myself with a Timex when I graduated; it served me well the whole time I was in the Air Force. Later, I needed a day-and-date function, so I spent a little more. The last watch I bought cost maybe $150 - of course, I can also use it to check email and make phone calls, so that may not be a completely valid example.

Moving the example to camping gear, I spent the first twenty years of my hiking life using inexpensive gear - which I quickly upgraded to when my first set of cheap gear lasted about two trips. My $25 American Camper e-frame pack lost a weld on its third weekend; the packbag had already busted a zipper the previous trip. The infamous 3/8 inch blue foam pad ($3) never was warm. And so on. But that cheap gear did teach me a lot, quickly, about what to look for. I upgraded to inexpensive gear: a Camp Trails pack, and a Christmas wish for a Thermarest self-inflater (when they first came out, with the metal valve.) I envied the guys with the North Face packs and sleeping bags (again, the original North Face, not the reincarnation) - that was the expensive stuff I couldn't afford, but lusted after. The inexpensive gear worked fine for a lot of years. I use better stuff now, but that's partly because the mortgage is paid, the kids are self-supporting, and I don't indulge myself with other vices (like boats or motorcycles.) Does that gear make the trips more fun? No; I've never taken a trip I haven't fully enjoyed - nor have I ever gotten soaked or frozen (a function of knowledge and experience, not just gear quality.). Playing with the better gear is fun, but that's a different fun than the hiking and sleeping outdoors.

"Light, cheap, and warm - pick two" is still true - and again, not always a function of cost. I don't consider the bag you describe to be cheap. Inexpensive, yes, but not shoddy. There are a number of good brands that are reasonably inexpensive (Kelty, REI, And Campmor's house brands all leap to mind.) Warm is a function of loft, be it down, synthetic, or foam (remember the open-cell foam bags that were briefly popular in the 80's?) Which brings us to light - which is also a relative term. My pound and a half down bag may be lighter than your two and a half pound bag (am I close?) - but, again, they're both light enough not to be burdensome. (My first bag, which lasted until the glorious Christmas of 1987, when everyone went together to surprise me with a North Face Cat's Meow, was the Coleman Peak 1 Gray Fox, at just over 3 pounds.) I never minded carrying the heavier bag. I did mind carrying the cheap, hoodless, rectangular piece of no-name junk I got the local Ayr Way that was heavy, cold, and jammed the zipper relentlessly.

But, when comparing a broad range of bags, "light, inexpensive, warm - you can have two" is a good shorthand way to make the cost/benefit analysis, in a rough-and-ready kind of way, to reach the balance that works for you. ("light enough, warm enough, inexpensive enough - you can have all three.") I also think "light, cheap, and warm" is a mantra most applicable to those trying to move toward ultralight gear. And, as I've said before, even though I fit into the "go light" mentality, I don't expect others to; it's one way to go backpacking, but certainly not the only valid way.

And, usually, if you can't (or don't want to) buy the lightest stuff available, you can still get a light pack just by refining your style and definition of "necessity" to minimize the number of things you're taking. Back in the old days, when we were all using inexpensive gear, my pack would consistently be five or ten pounds lighter than my buddies' packs simply because I didn't carry two liters of water when the creeks were only two miles apart, and I developed a menu that required me to take only one pot instead of the two pots, a fry pan, plate, and bowl they were all carrying. I found it easier to keep track of my single spoon than to carry a backup spoon.

Regarding WalMart gear: I took a drive to my local WalMart this evening, and couldn't find the bag mentioned in the post. The bags I did find were cheap: not a hood in sight, probably fine for sleepovers, Scout summer camp, and car camping in July, but not suitable for backpacking. The same with the tents, and I couldn't even find a framed pack (internal or external.) I have seen halfway decent packs and passibly adequate tents (if it doesn't actually rain) at a WalMart in southeastern Ohio. Is it possible that Walmarts that serve areas where there are more trails carry a better variety and quality of camping gear than stores in other areas?

To summarize, I agree fully with your advice about not letting gear quality keep you from getting out there. I think you can find decent quality, inexpensive, not-overly-heavy gear that will let you make those early trips. We all make the compromises we need to; my set of choices might mean I carry a thirty pound pack while you carry only twenty five - but if we go on a trip together, we'll both have a ball.

Tyler

Dicks sells a 15 degree Marmot bag for about $100.

The only reason I don't own one is that it is a regular and I need a long bag at 6'2".

It is what I intend to buy my kids as they extend seasons, and what I recommended to the newly promoting Webelos in our Cub Pack. Most of us have a budget that won't allow for $300-$500 sleeping bags.

I have not/not had an opportunity to field test this bag - take my intention for what its worth.

However, if I had the spare money (I have lots of kids... there isn't such a thing) a high end bag would be on the top of my wish list to replace my $100 REI Mojave 15. But, as Glen said, I learned a lot from that $100 purchase.

Sincerely

Steadman

Great post Glenn.

And yeah, you're right, my sleeping bag wasn't really "Cheap". It fairer to say it is comparably inexpensive when compared to high end bags.

I'd say it's about as good a deal as I could find for 600 fill weight down, but I really would love to test one of those WalMart bags out.

Like I've said before, I do admire high quality gear, and items of all kinds. I will never buy a Rolex or Lamborghini but I can certainly appreciate the craftsmanship and design. But I also admire low cost gear that is designed to perform well. There are some great products out there in that range, you just have to sift through more chaff to find them.

If that Wal-Mart bag fits that bill it could be a great bag for Scouts and beginning and infrequent backpackers.

Maybe I can help here. I bought 4 of the 0 degree Walmart mummy bags because I needed them THEN.

I have slept in them in low 30s temperatures, and they are indeed warm (if you remember to not leave them in the stuff sack, otherwise they can be a little lumpy). The nylon inner lining forces us to sleep in full cover and socks, but I suppose I could add a fleece liner for comfort.

My main objection to these bags in their weight. They are too heavy IMO for a kid under 14.

I think a couple of people posted that a nice, light, cold weather bag will run you $300.

If your going to invest your money for long term go Down! Buy off season to get the best value. http://www.campmor.com/ has great deals. You should be able to get a good bag around $100. I use Kelty Lightyear Bags and they have been great.