Clark 'Feature' Claims

[BlackGoat]

yes, what you say is true, lighter fabric is generally weaker and less durable than heavier fabric. but their claims are referring to "Hammocks made from 1.1 and 1.7 fabric ". )

Too me it just a matter of knee-jerk product differentiation due to a drop in Clark's market share. I hold little stock in their marketing data.

I think that the Clark's data in question is a testament to the fact they see they have real competition, something they didn't have as much of until the last 2-3 years.

Years past their only competition were arguably lower quality hammocks and/or hammocks that didn't have comparable features (HH with bottom entry only, or HAAB/Speer hammocks without integrated bugnets). Because of this they held a high price point and considered themselves the Cadillacs of hammocks.

The market has changed, Warbonnet and other manufacturers have provided comparable features but at a lower entry price point. They also have been able to provide lighter options and give the users more variety to tarp styles. There is also a broad awakening in the DIY community on how easily similar hammocks can be built.

I would bet that many buyers who would have normally been drawn to the Clark's have been diverted into Warbonnet hammocks or similar product offerings. I would imagine the main drivers would be cost, weight and features. Other manufacturers seem to be taking note of this movement also and are trying to keep up ie (Hennessy now offering double layer, side entry hammocks).

So my whole thought is that they trying to differentiate themselves from the competition, whether their data is accurate or not. I would think they may have actually limited prospective customers who were interested in their product by putting that info out.

Even if their data is correct and the 1.1 and 1.7 materials are not bug proof or are not as durable, I personally am not swayed. I am not looking for a hammock that is absolutely bomb proof and heavier duty. I am a rhinestone hiker, where I am happy to get out 3-4 times a year. I like a lighter hammock and at the $160-200 price point I can get a lot of hammock for my money and with a little care would expect to get 4-5 years of use, after that I am sure I will want to try out the latest/greatest thing.

BG

[Riverpirate]

Years past their only competition were arguably lower quality hammocks and/or hammocks that didn't have comparable features (HH with bottom entry only, or HAAB/Speer hammocks without integrated bugnets). Because of this they held a high price point and considered themselves the Cadillacs of hammocks.

The market has changed, Warbonnet and other manufacturers have provided comparable features but at a lower entry price point. They also have been able to provide lighter options and give the users more variety to tarp styles. There is also a broad awakening in the DIY community on how easily similar hammocks can be built.

I would bet that many buyers who would have normally been drawn to the Clark's have been diverted into Warbonnet hammocks or similar product offerings. I would imagine the main drivers would be cost, weight and features. Other manufacturers seem to be taking note of this movement also and are trying to keep up ie (Hennessy now offering double layer, side entry hammocks).



Even if their data is correct and the 1.1 and 1.7 materials are not bug proof or are not as durable, I personally am not swayed. I am not looking for a hammock that is absolutely bomb proof and heavier duty. I am a rhinestone hiker, where I am happy to get out 3-4 times a year. I like a lighter hammock and at the $160-200 price point I can get a lot of hammock for my money and with a little care would expect to get 4-5 years of use, after that I am sure I will want to try out the latest/greatest thing.

BG

Then you should be going with the Clark! Clarks Ultralite is 239 which includes a tarp. WBBB is 175 plus a tarp of 110 is 285.

The competition is not, I do not feel in the costs. Face it this site is the end all for hammock camping. Anybody looking for info on the subject eventually finds their way here. And once here what do they hear when asking about the best hammock? WBBB 9 out of 10 times. That is not a bad thing. The WBBB is a great product. Add to that Sugs great videos showing the benefits of the WBBB and who could resist? But it is not always the right one or even the less expensive one. But post like yours leads the poster to purchase one thinking so.

As I have stated previously, each hammock has it's pros and cons. But you can be misslead either by advertising or internet recommendations. Each individual should do their homework and choose what is best for them based on their needs and budget.

Now that I think about it Clark's best advertisement might have been to give one to Shug and let him make a video of it. I mean that sincerley Shug.

[tbctx]

As I have stated previously, each hammock has it's pros and cons. But you can be misslead either by advertising or internet recommendations. Each individual should do their homework and choose what is best for them based on their needs and budget.

Now that I think about it Clark's best advertisement might have been to give one to Shug and let him make a video of it. I mean that sincerley Shug.

Inclined to agree on both points, no two people are identical same goes for preferences, similar but rarely truly identical. A donation to Shug for a video probably would have done them better also and without the backlash that their method seems to have caused.

[bristolview]

From my brief exposure, the base of the Clark I used (borrowed) had a much heavier bottom layer than my Eno or others that I've used. I don't know if that translates to longer lasting or not, a person's care goes a long way.

Has anyone read the claims on Clark's patent? I haven''t seen the patent, but is that the reason nobody else has pockets to create dead air on the bottom? I used a Clark in winter, with just inflated ziplock bags in the pockets and my 3 season sleeping bag. I wasn't warm and cozy, but I didn't freeze either. When I tried the same thing in a <name removed to limit religious wars> I froze my tail off big time. So from what I saw, they worked pretty well. Has anybody read their claims? What are they?

[plaunius]

Angry Sparrow, thanks for starting this thread. It's much more of an open discussion than casting stones.

I own two Clarks but also a Speer, three ENOs and a Hennessy. I have never had a problem with biting mosquitoes in any of my hammocks from underneath but I've never slept on a bare hammock. I always have something under me, either UQ or if its really hot and I don't want a UQ, I just use a sleeping bag instead of a TQ and this aids to protect me from bites.

Personally, I see Clark's claim for mosquito proof bottom as unnecessary. Even if it were true, it isn't important in piratical use.

As far as the statement that 2oz per yard is more durable than 1.1 or 1.7, well that is pretty much a fact. It has to be more durable and I don't see anything wrong with them claiming so. I don't feel its an "apples to oranges" comparison. I fell it's a decent direct comparison and it comes at a price of weighing more so each buyer has to decide if it's worth it. Wit that said, what is the benefit to this durability? Maybe a slight bit of longevity for the hammock but I'd guess than more importantly that human factor is plays a much larger role in how long a hammock last.

For this statement, I feel Clark is making a sound point and as a stand alone statement, wouldn't be argued as much or have raised the flags their entire statement raised.

As for the stretchy banana statement. While it may be true, I sleep very different when in my Clark versus my Speer, ENO or Henn. I don't mind that at all though. I don't see laying asymmetrical in my Speer so I can have a flat lay on my side as a problem. I'm comfortable in all my hammocks as long as I pick the correct one for the weather conditions. I don't look at thinner material as being cheap as much as consensus of weight. We all sleep differently and we are all built differently. There is no single hammock that anyone can say is the best for sleeping in.

This statement I feel is the most argumentative because it implies that a 1.1 or 1.7oz hammock is cheap and that isn't true. If Clark had stated, "this thicker material allows you to be more comfortable on your side than other thinner material hammocks" I'd agree but they didn't say that and a thinner hammock doesn't limit your sleeping position, it just makes you adjust your angle.

Do I love my Clarks? Absolutely! Would I have made those statements if I were in Clark's team? No way! I think a good thing to so would be for anyone who feels strongly about this to write Clark and tell them their opinion. I'm a retail manager and I gain much more insight from handling a customer who has a concern than someone who's patting me on the back.

[Ramblinrev]

As far as the statement that 2oz per yard is more durable than 1.1 or 1.7, well that is pretty much a fact. It has to be more durable

I am not convinced this is true. As has been said there are many variables which go into the durability of fabric. Not the least of which is weave. The fiber count of fabric is not directly linked to either weight or denier. You can have 30D fabric with various threads/sq inch. You can have weights of fabric that do not reflect the denier of the thread. A loose(er) weave is going to have a lower durability than a tighter weave. It will also feel different. A perfect example of this that many people are familiar with is the bed sheet. Bed sheets with a 400 thread count are going to feel different than a 95 thread count Walmart Kids sheet. It is also going to last much longer.

2 oz/sqyd fabric is still subject to UV rays and frankly not that much heavier than 1.7. I grant you gram weenies that .3 oz makes a big difference but I would venture to say if you are going to rip a 1.7 nylon with a stone stuck in the lug of you boot you will also tear a 2 oz fabric the same way.

In short... I don't expect marketing to say only the absolute complete truth but to make comparisons based on intuition and apply those in a negative way to other products goes beyond the "We believe our 2 oz fabric makes a better, more durable hammock." Fine you can believe what you want. I have no problem with that. But doing so in order to impugn other products (even without directly naming them) is asking to be called out imo.

[gunner76]

I notice no one claiming to be from "Clark" has jumped in here to answer/clarify their statements.

[finskie]

I just looked up strength-weight ratios of fabrics, and the result brought up some interesting points. Alot of the strength or durability of a fabric has to do with the way it is assembled (as ramblinrev has stated). If you have a thick strand fabric(20microns), that has 4 strands oriented at 0* for every 1 oriented at 90* it will in turn be weaker than a lighter strand fabric (17 microns) that has 1 strand oriented at 0* for every 1 strand oriented at 90*. Basically this is a discription of a tighter weave. Also, If you have 2 materials of the same weight (say 2.0oz) and they are woven in 3 plys... If material#1 has 3 plys of strands oriented at 0* and 90*, but the other (material#2) has plys 1 and 3 @ 0* and 90* and ply 2 with strands biased @ +/- 45*... material#2 will be stronger @ the same weight as material#1. I hope this isn't more confusing Basically, I think that weight of material is not directly proportional to strength and/or durability. I could be wrong, but I know we have a couple engineers that could explain why I am wrong

[T-BACK]

Didn't Ed Speer report sleeping over some huge number (think it was at least two years) of consecutive nights in the same hammock?

Your right Cannibal.

A Speer Test Hammock
Surpasses 5,000 Hours of Use !!
Over 625 Nights
I believe it was 1.9oz nylon.

I just don't like the wording of the claims. Where are the "test to failure" results they are basing those statements on? What standards were the tests based on? If I wanted to lie flat I would just sleep on the ground. I have been performing tests mosquitos vs. hammock fabrics, bugnets, repellants, and insecticides for going on three years now and am very close to reporting my results. If Clark has found a fabric that is mosquito proof, it must be thick and very tightly woven with a high thread count per sq. inch. As body weight is applied to the fabric, the weave is stretched and opens up holes large enough for the mosquito to bite through. Their mouth sheaths are designed to separate skin cells so the mouth can slip into a capillary. Separating threads in a single fabric layer is a no brainer for them.
I say these things not because I can say that what they are claiming is untrue, but because I would like to know what they based their truth on. Did they use a mosquito box and a volunteer like I did? As this claim is potentially life threatening, it is important to have all the facts.
I am no longer in a combat zone. I do not need "bombproof" equipment. If you do not have the skills to take care of your kit then by all means get the heavy duty brand. Just remember; pack weight = the weight of your fears compounded by your lack of skill sets.

[rip waverly]

yeah- fabric weight doesn't mean much to me.
joe's video demo-ing silny vs. cuben pretty much proves that to me.

i agree in that the tone of the marketing, to me, sounds a little desperate.

i am also a follower that yes, UL gear needs more attention. i'd never toss my 23oz. mariposa pack around like my 5lb gregory triconi. i'd not treat a coleman car camp tent like my msr hubbahubba.

that said-- like most- its HYOH per ush. i do enjoy this thread though, as it raises good viewpoints on fabric, hmmk theory and manufacturing schemes.

if clark wants an unbiased reviewer... here i am. i'll gladly compare them against my experience with the skeeter beater, bmbh, wbbb, eno, grand trunk and hh....