1949 sleeping bag

[Barryeye]

Gentleman. Having bit of a clear out. Found my old sleeping bag. It is a U.S. military down filled bag. I assume from the label Korean War vintage. I think they were referred to as Mummy bags. As a Cub Scout leader I used this bag for years with no complaints. It is in good condition with just a few well done repairs. My camping days are over and frankly it was far too warm for a New Zealand summer but perfect for winter. Problem is what do I do with this 60 year old bag? I can’t display it with my military rifles, knives and bayonets but it is a part of history.
Do people collect such items? Are these bags common? Still a lot of life left in it but modern bags are better and lighter.
‘

[m1ashooter]

You bet people collect them. Check this forum out. If its USGI its collected by someone.

http://www.usmilitariaforum.com

[Barryeye]

Thanks M1ashooter. I'll do that but I've got a feeling that there will be a lot more of those bags out there then collectors. Also remember I am in New Zealand.

[snakehunter]

Gentleman. Having bit of a clear out. Found my old sleeping bag. It is a U.S. military down filled bag. I assume from the label Korean War vintage. I think they were referred to as Mummy bags. As a Cub Scout leader I used this bag for years with no complaints. It is in good condition with just a few well done repairs. My camping days are over and frankly it was far too warm for a New Zealand summer but perfect for winter. Problem is what do I do with this 60 year old bag? I can’t display it with my military rifles, knives and bayonets but it is a part of history.
Do people collect such items? Are these bags common? Still a lot of life left in it but modern bags are better and lighter.
‘

I have one and use it.

[Maury Krupp]

I doubt your bag is 60 years old.

The "M-1949" is just the year the design was adopted. The bags were made through the 1960s or '70s at least.

Filled with a mix of down and chicken feathers, they're not likely to be anything any camper would want today. Even a Boy Scout troop probably wouldn't want it.

Maybe find a re-enactor group and sell it for whatever you can get?

Maury

[Barryeye]

You could well be right. I think I'll hock it off on a local auction sight. There is just no place for it in my collection but I don't have the heart to dump it. In its day it served me well.

[5MadFarmers]

Based on the DSA number I'd say 1963 but I'm not an expert on those.

The 1949 sleeping bag normally had the 1945 outer case. They were made into the 1970s. Replaced by the two bag system but I'm murky on that. Intermediate Cold and Extreme Cold? I think that's it. I think the 1949 started as a two bag system also - inner and outer. Which would make sense as it replaced the two bag system - Mountain/Arctic (circa 1943) (via the M-1945). Which replaced the two bag M-1942.

1942: 2
1943: 2 (mountain/arctic)
1945: 2 (inner/outer)
1949: 2 (inner/outer)

Yeah, something like that. All had an additional outer cover with them and the 1942-1945 also had a carrying thing. So 4 total items if one doesn't count the optional liner. So let's make that 5 items. Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition.

[5MadFarmers]

http://5madfarmers.com/bimages/fgi/bags_sleeping/m1949-2f.jpg

I guess I remembered right. The inner bag alone is "Mountain" while putting it inside the outer bag makes it "Arctic." Using the Arctic bag alone is apparently verboten.

[Barryeye]

Thank you 5Madfarmers. I've now placed it on a local auction site and it has one bid already. Thanks to the kind people on this forum I should be able to answer any questions I get.

[pcox]

You guys are bringing back old memories. It got so cold in our barracks at Fort Wainwright that I sometimes slept in my arctic sleeping bag on top of my bunk. My feet are still cold.

[thorin6]

I guess I remembered right. The inner bag alone is "Mountain" while putting it inside the outer bag makes it "Arctic." Using the Arctic bag alone is apparently verboten.

Not quite right; when I went through Ranger School in the October/November time frame many years ago, we only carried the outer bag (too much weight for the inner bag). Of course, I only used it once, as apparently sleeping was a verboten activity activity then.

[5MadFarmers]

So you had the outer (arctic) alone. I wonder why you just didn't have the inner (mountain)? They both were protected by the M-1945 cover as either/both can go inside of it. Interesting.

[thorin6]

It may be that I misunderstood the combinations. Here is a link to an explaination:
http://olive-drab.com/od_soldiers_gear_sleeping_bag.php
Reading that, plus 5MadFarmers' combintations, makes me understand that we only carried the M1945 cover in Ranger School because of the weight and space limitations; in 25 years I was only issued the inner bag plus the cover. I could have used both in Korea up on the DMZ when we slept in tents; the Siberian high pushed temperatures down to 5 to 10 degress below zero (wind chill down to 15-20 below).
As an aside, I picked up a M1949 mountain bag and M1945 cover dated in the early 1950s (Korean War vintage), and I also have a 1945 dated blanket style mummy sleeping bag (World War II Infantry Sleeping Bag) with the same vintage M1945 cover. Still haven't seen the artic cover anywhere.

[5MadFarmers]

It may be that I misunderstood the combinations. Here is a link to an explaination:
http://olive-drab.com/od_soldiers_gear_sleeping_bag.php

Great Moogly Boogly. He misses much and is incorrect on much. The order:
Bag, Sleeping
Bag, Sleeping, M-1940 (and iterations)
Bag, Sleeping, M-1942
Bag, Sleeping, Mountain
Bag, Sleeping, Arctic
Bag, Sleeping, Wool
Bag, Sleeping, Mountain, M-1945
Bag, Sleeping, Arctic, M-1945

That's not accounting associated covers and carriers. I'm missing the first one (bag, sleeping) but have examples of the rest.

====

Tag for 1940:
http://5madfarmers.com/bimages/fgi/bags_sleeping/1940-3f.jpg

That's kind of an interesting system. Has an inner bag of wool which isn't terribly different from the one they introduced later.

http://5madfarmers.com/bimages/fgi/bags_sleeping/m1942-1f.jpg

1942 inner and outer. Carrier almost out of photo on left.

====

http://5madfarmers.com/bimages/fgi/bags_sleeping/m1942-5f.jpg

Another. The M-1942s all have interesting colored interior bags. This one is yellow while the last was salmon.

====

http://5madfarmers.com/bimages/fgi/bags_sleeping/ma-1f.jpg

Mountain, Arctic, case and carrier. Case was also used for the wool bags.

====

http://5madfarmers.com/bimages/fgi/bags_sleeping/m1945-1f.jpg

M-1945. M-1949 isn't terribly different. This on introduced the M-1945 case (not pictured).

====

http://5madfarmers.com/bimages/fgi/bags_sleeping/m1945-2f.jpg

M-1945 label.


http://5madfarmers.com/bimages/fgi/bags_sleeping/m1949-2f.jpg

M-1949 label.

Almost identical.

Thus ends the bags.

[Johnny P]

The strangest bag of all was a survival bag for air crews. It came in a green plastic/fiberglass case with a bolt right through the middle, and taped edges of the case. I finally gave in to curiosity and opened it. As the nut on the bolt was loosened the plastic case started swelling, and out comes a basic down mummy bag. The bag has no zipper, and only a drawstring at the top. Of course it has numerous holes where the bolt was put through the middle of the box to hold it all together. Probably good down to slightly below freezing, but much better than nothing.

[5MadFarmers]

The oddity I found in the bags is the M-1942. Two sizes with the stock numbers listed in the QM catalog. Strangely the stock number on the bags (3 examples seen) is 10 higher (-280 instead of -270). That stock number (-280) is an evacuation bag (viewed one).

They were confused.

[Johnny P]

I had one of the evacuation/casualty bags, and it was super insulated with down. Don't know if my son still has it or not.

[BlitzKrieg]

I slept many a cold miserable night in that model bag. It was barely adequate and my feet always were cold in it.
Weight was too much and forget it if your luck ran out and it got wet.

It was made cheap and half great on its best day. I slept in the KW versions, right up to the late 70s era versions: all unsat but its all we had
in the infantry.

I don't miss it. It needs to sent back to North Koreans who devised it to make my life miserable.

[joem]

Had one of those in my bunker (RVN) 68-69. Didn't really need a bag that heavy.

[Maury Krupp]

...It was made cheap and half great on its best day...
Man, you got that right.

Uncle Sugar wouldn't spring for 100% down so he mixed in crushed chicken feathers :icon_rolleyes:

Couldn't afford to put in a proper inside flap for the zipper either. Nothing like rolling over and hitting that ice cold metal zipper at two in the morning :eek:

Or trying to pull it up just a tiny bit more to keep in what little warmth you managed to generate only to have the whole zip come undone thanks to the "quick release" feature :bootyshake:

Better than nothing but even by 1960-70s standards for sleeping bags it was a real POS.

Maury

[thorin6]

When I deployed for Desert Shield/Storm, I ditched the bag (I, too, remember Korea in the winter time), and took two poncho lines, had one sewed up and a velcro opening added, and bought a gortex bivy from Campmore (not sure they're in business any more). I added a sheet also sewn up (not all the way) and layered the entire set up as the temps dropped below freezing (yes, it gets cold in the desert at night). If it really got cold I'd just put on my wool knit cap and wrap my field jacket around my feet. I was never cold sleeping, and the entire set up was light. Now I find that the Army uses the same system (with different components, of course, and skipping the field jacket around the feet!).

[dave]

We had them in Korea ( lived in tents--AF) no blanket just the bag.

[Silver80]

I hear you.....that's what we did in Korea in the '50s.except we were in tents.