Which mattress? (merged threads)

Tim_Deegan

TiTheRev wrote: »

It does say 2.5" NASA (:rotfl:) high density mem.foam but mentions nothing about turn or not either way

2.5" is obviously the depth. As for NASA, that's because NASA originally developed memory foam.

TiTheRev

There's the thing I've learned for the day

priyas_2

Tim_Deegan wrote: »

If it's 2.5cm (1") then it is suitable for pocket sprung mattresses. However if you are going for pocket sprung with memory foam, then the main reason to get one with memory foam on both sides is to increase the life of the mattress by turning it.

Thanks for the reply. The gap between the slats is 2.5 inches not 2.5 cm. Sorry for the wrong units i used. Would a pocket sprung with memory foam on one side still be suitable for this. Many thanks Tim for your reply

TiTheRev

priyas wrote: »

Thanks for the reply. The gap between the slats is 2.5 inches not 2.5 cm. Sorry for the wrong units i used. Would a pocket sprung with memory foam on one side still be suitable for this. Many thanks Tim for your reply

Not ideal, and for two reasons. The slats may still be too far apart, and be enough for the springs in the mattress to potentially push through the mattress towards the gaps. And secondly, if you are getting a memory foam mattress it needs to be memory foam on both sides ideally, otherwise you are effectively only getting half a bed, and only half of the expected life of the bed. With the ability to turn it, it spreads the wear and will prolong it's life.

Tim_Deegan

priyas wrote: »

Thanks for the reply. The gap between the slats is 2.5 inches not 2.5 cm. Sorry for the wrong units i used. Would a pocket sprung with memory foam on one side still be suitable for this. Many thanks Tim for your reply

No, a pocket sprung mattress isn't suitable for gaps over 1" unless it also has memory foam both top and bottom to spread the weight out.

saggy470

Tim or anyone. been folowing the thread here and there and been and seen a good mattress what are your thoughts??

Its a VI spring one exclusive to JL but no doubt they do one the same spec with a different name. linky here

I must have tried 50 different beds now and this one seems very comfy, it has a nice amount of wadding or what ever its called and a relativly good spring count. one question for you I have been told that the softness rating is also dependent on the body weight. for example i was told that a medium mattress would be good for upto approx 16 stone and any heavier then they would recomend a firm????

Also would you know if there is a similar vi spring bed but with a different name????

thanks

Martin

Tim_Deegan

saggy470 wrote: »

Tim or anyone. been folowing the thread here and there and been and seen a good mattress what are your thoughts??

Its a VI spring one exclusive to JL but no doubt they do one the same spec with a different name. linky here

I must have tried 50 different beds now and this one seems very comfy, it has a nice amount of wadding or what ever its called and a relativly good spring count. one question for you I have been told that the softness rating is also dependent on the body weight. for example i was told that a medium mattress would be good for upto approx 16 stone and any heavier then they would recomend a firm????

Also would you know if there is a similar vi spring bed but with a different name????

thanks

Martin

£600 is a huge sum to pay just for the lambs wool........that's how much more you would be paying over the price of a similar quality mattress without lambs wool.

Also I notice it says "For hygiene reasons we cannot accept the return of a mattress after packaging has been opened, unless it is faulty."

zzzzzzz_2

I have just registered to say a big thank you to this thread for the help it provided.
Last night my wife and I had a brilliant sleep on our new 'Madrid' mattress supplied by Tim. Many Thanks Tim, a pleasure doing business with ya!
D. Barr

keelyann

Hi Tim

Sorry to bother you again, but we've just seen the above bed, it seemed very comfy and the divan 1600 was £1200 for a superking (online price), would you say that this is a good bed and worth paying slightly more for than some lower brands?

many thanks
keely

Tim_Deegan

keelyann wrote: »

Hi Tim

Sorry to bother you again, but we've just seen the above bed, it seemed very comfy and the divan 1600 was £1200 for a superking (online price), would you say that this is a good bed and worth paying slightly more for than some lower brands?

many thanks
keely

Not at all.

You are paying way over the top for the name if you buy Kaymed. As I said previously it is the same foam bought from Kaymed in many of the less well known brands on the market.