Rab Ascent 300 Review: the Bag People Mean by "Alpine Trek 300"
300 g of hydrophobic 650-fill down, 840 g on the scales, and a 1°C limit. It is a good three-season bag that was never a bargain — but it is now discontinued at around half price, which changes the answer.
First, the name
Rab does not make an "Alpine Trek 300." An earlier version of this page reviewed one. It does not exist, and we would rather say so than quietly delete the page. The name looks like two things run together: Alpinetrek is a UK retailer that sells Rab, and 300 is a Rab fill weight — the grams of down in the bag.
Rab's actual Alpine range is named by temperature (0°C, −6°C, −12°C, −18°C) and has never used 300/500/700 numbering. The bag with 300 g of down that people are usually looking for is the Rab Ascent 300, and that is what this page reviews. Its current replacement is the Ascent Down Sleeping Bag (0°C) at £300 — Rab has renamed the whole line by temperature, which is where a lot of the confusion starts.
Where the reviews line up
Three sources, and none of them is a magazine test of this exact bag, because no UK magazine has tested it. What we have is BBC Countryfile Magazine giving 5/5 to the Ascent 500 — the sibling with 200 g more down and the same construction — Alpinetrek's listing and its single customer review, and one Feefo verified buyer who returned his.
They agree on what the bag is. The construction is properly done for the money: generous down-filled shoulder and zip baffles, a three-quarter YKK zip with an anti-snag cover that the magazine singles out as really effective, a 3D hood, and PFC-free hydrophobic down that is RDS certified for sourcing. The magazine's own family map puts the 300 at a 1°C limit, which independently backs up the retailer figures.
They agree on the two criticisms too, and both matter. It is middleweight, not ultralight — 840 g packing to 30 × 18 cm, which the magazine says of the 500 would not put it in the ultralight category. And it is expensive for its temperature rating: that was the magazine's blunt verdict at £270, and the Ascent 300's £220 RRP had the same problem.
Which is why the discount changes everything. At £110 clearance this is a lot of down bag. At £220 it never was. And the one negative review on file is worth reading before you buy: a verified buyer returned his because he could see too much light through the baffles.
The three reviews this summary is built from
- BBC Countryfile MagazineFi Darby, Oct 2023, 5/5 — but of the Ascent 500, the sibling model.
- AlpinetrekThe fullest UK spec sheet, plus a five-star review from exactly one customer.
- FeefoOne verified buyer, June 2024. He returned the bag. No star average is published.
Specification at a glance
The temperature rows differ between retailers, which looks like a mid-life spec revision rather than one of them being wrong. Both generations are shown.
| Spec | Figure | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| Full name | Rab Ascent 300 Down Sleeping Bag (1°C) | Not "Alpine Trek 300", which does not exist |
| Comfort | 5°C current spec; 6°C and 6.5°C on older listings | Generational difference |
| Limit | 0–1.5°C depending on generation | Countryfile's range map independently puts the 300 at 1°C |
| Extreme | −12°C to −15°C | Survival only, never a planning figure |
| Standard | EN 13537:2012 | Tested, not marketing |
| Fill | 300 g European duck down, 650 fill power, 80/20 down to feather, RDS certified | Mid-grade down at a modest fill weight |
| Water resistance | Nikwax fluorocarbon-free hydrophobic finish on the down; PFC-free DWR on the shell | PFC-free throughout |
| Shell and lining | 30D recycled Pertex Quantum outer; 20D recycled nylon lining | Recycled fabrics both sides |
| Construction | Trapezoidal box wall baffles, differential cut, wide mummy shape | Box walls rather than stitch-through — the right construction for down |
| Zip | YKK three-quarter length with down-filled baffle, anti-snag insert and internal guard; two-way venting at the foot | Left-zip version also sold |
| Weight | 840 g regular, 895 g long | Middleweight for the warmth, not ultralight |
| Packed size | 30 × 18 cm current; 34 × 22 cm on older stock | Compression bag and cotton storage sack both included |
| Sizes | Regular to 185 cm user height; Long to 200 cm | 215 cm internal length |
| Warranty | Limited lifetime | Rab's standard |
| Price and availability | £220 RRP; seen at £110 on clearance. Most UK retailers now show it unavailable | Successor: Ascent Down (0°C) at £300 |
BBC Countryfile Magazine
This is the only genuine UK magazine test of any Ascent bag, and it is a test of the 500, not the 300. We are not going to pretend otherwise. What makes it worth leading with is that it explicitly maps the family — from the 300 at a 1°C limit up to the 1100 at −25°C — which independently corroborates the figure the retailers give for the bag on this page, and the construction it describes is shared across the range.
Darby records the 500 at comfort 1°C and limit −5°C under EN 13537, with 500 g of 650 fill power hydrophobic duck down, RDS certified. The details that transfer to the 300 are the ones that separate a good down bag from a cheap one: generous down-filled shoulder and zip baffles to stop draughts finding their way in, a three-quarter YKK zip with what she calls a really effective anti-snag cover, and a PFC-free hydrophobic treatment on the down. Her two criticisms are the reason this page is not simply a recommendation. On bulk — 1,025 g packing to 35 × 20 cm — she notes it is more than some others and would not fit the ultralight category. On price she is blunter: expensive for its temperature ratings at £270. Both apply to the 300, which is similarly middleweight and carried a similarly ambitious £220 RRP.
Watch: Rab Ascent Sleeping Bag Review
A UK creator reviewing the Ascent range. No model number in the title, so treat it as a look at the range rather than a test of the 300.
Watch on YouTube ↗Alpinetrek
One review is not a rating, and we are presenting it as one person's opinion rather than dressing it up as an aggregate. Christina gives five stars and lists three strengths — lightweight, easily compressed, price against performance — and recommends the bag for travel, trekking and camping. She raises no criticism, describes no cold-weather test and says nothing about durability. Useful, but a data point of one.
The listing itself is the more valuable half. It is the fullest UK-facing spec sheet for the bag: comfort 6°C, limit 1°C, extreme −12°C, 300 g of 650 cuin duck down at an 80/20 down-to-feather ratio, Responsible Down Standard certified, a Pertex Quantum polyamide shell with DWR over hydrophobic down, mummy shape, three-quarter side zip, 3D hood, valuables pocket, 840 g, and interior dimensions of 215 × 75 × 65 × 50 cm. Both a compression bag and a cotton storage sack are included — the second matters more than people realise, because storing down compressed is how you kill it. The page now carries a "no longer available" flag, which is the clearest confirmation that the model is end-of-line in the UK.
Watch: Rab Ascent 300 Sleeping Bag
The only video we verified that is specifically about the Ascent 300.
Watch on YouTube ↗Feefo
This is one review, and it is negative, and we have put it on the page for that reason. Preston is a verified purchaser and he sent the bag back. His complaint is about loft and down distribution: he reports so much light showing through the bag that he expected cold spots, and returned it, concluding it offered no advantage over cheaper alternatives at the price.
How much weight should that carry? One returned unit is not a pattern, and it may simply be a bad bag that slipped through. But it is plausible enough to flag rather than bury. At 300 g of 650 fill power in a 215 cm bag, the fill is modest and there is not much margin: some show-through at the baffle walls is normal in a bag built this way, but a lot of it suggests down that has not been evenly distributed. If you buy one — particularly a clearance unit that has been sitting compressed in a warehouse — shake it out, let it loft for a day and hold it up to a window before you take it anywhere cold. Feefo shows no rolling rating for this product, so there is no average to quote alongside him.
Watch: What's changed? Rab Sleeping Bags Review
A UK retailer explaining Rab's renaming of the sleeping bag line — the clearest explanation of why the numbered models turned into temperature names.
Watch on YouTube ↗Strengths and weak points
What holds up
- Box-wall baffle construction with a differential cut — proper down-bag engineering, not stitch-through.
- Generous down-filled shoulder and zip baffles, praised in the magazine test of the sibling.
- YKK three-quarter zip with an anti-snag cover that actually works, plus foot venting.
- Hydrophobic, PFC-free, RDS-certified down, and recycled fabrics on both shell and lining.
- 840 g with both a compression bag and a cotton storage sack in the box.
- Limited lifetime warranty, and about £110 on clearance against a £220 RRP.
What people complain about
- Expensive for its temperature rating at full price — the magazine's verdict on the sibling.
- Middleweight rather than ultralight, by the same test's reckoning.
- 650 fill power is mid-grade down; 300 g of it leaves little margin if the fill is uneven.
- One verified buyer returned his for visible light through the baffles.
- Discontinued: sizes and zip sides are pot luck, and most retailers show it unavailable.
- Retailers disagree on the temperature ratings, which makes comparison shopping harder than it should be.
Who it actually suits
Buy it if you find clearance stock at £100–£130 and you camp between spring and autumn. At that money you are getting box-wall down construction, treated down and a lifetime warranty for the price of a decent synthetic bag, and the 840 g weight is a genuine saving over the 1.5 kg synthetics in the same temperature bracket.
Look elsewhere if you want the warmest bag per pound — this was never that, at full price — or if you need something ultralight, where 700-plus fill power costs more but packs far smaller. If you cannot find clearance stock, the current Ascent Down (0°C) is the direct replacement at £300, and the same value question applies to it more sharply.
What we could not check
- No UK magazine has tested the Ascent 300 itself. We looked for Trail, LFTO, Countryfile and Advnture coverage. Countryfile has tested the Women's Ascent 500, which is what we have used and labelled.
- There is no meaningful rating anywhere. The two UK sites carrying reviews have one each. We have not turned either into an "average".
- Whether the differing temperature figures are a real spec revision or retailer error is unconfirmed by Rab. The packed size and shape also differ between listings, which points to a genuine generational change.
- The current Ascent (0°C)'s specifications — fill weight, fill power, fabrics, packed size, weight — are not published on Rab's UK page, so we cannot tell you how the replacement compares beyond its price.
- Long-term durability. Nobody we found has used this bag over several seasons and written it up.
- The old "Rab Summit Alpine 300" does exist as a long-discontinued US bag with a completely different specification. It is not this bag and not what people mean.
Sources last checked 31 August 2026. This model is end-of-line — treat every price as a clearance snapshot.