If this is the Question
Originally Posted by
GrizzlyAdams
Thanks SmokeBait for the 2nd assessment.
Dynaglide is 50% heavier than I had previously figured. But what's half an oz per 100 ft of cord really matter…?
then
Originally Posted by
GrizzlyAdams
<snip>One less bite out of a Snickers bar.
is not the answer.
Two whoopie slings use not 100 feet, but closer to 1/4 that. The comparison is not to the magnitude of disappointment in what we thought Dynaglide weighed, but to the real difference from an established alternative, 7/64" Amsteel Blue (AB), with an average break strength of 1600lb. It is already very lightweight, something of a revolution for hanging in this hobby. It weighs 4.8 oz per 100 feet by my estimate*. So, the savings of Dynaglide over Amsteel Blue 7/64" is one 1/4th the difference in weight per 100 feet., call it 0.6 oz.
Of course, this 0.6 oz, "one less bite out of a Snickers bar", gets the user a safety margin that is substantively significant, pushing the breaking strength from a supposed 1000 lb to 1600lb (or 1400 lb ISO certified). You, Grizz, know and will acknowledge that the 600lb strength margin in this region, for common weights of hammockers, has real value to safety.
So, this isn't a joke about .6 oz, three quarters in a pocket.
The question, I think, should be:
Why was Dynaglide ever used for suspensions?
The answers are that (Whether more or less expensive depends on how you treat the hank-purchase minimum.), and Dynaglide promised to be at or above 4 digits in breaking strength.
(When I can, I'll report on whether Dynaglide with its putative break strength of 1000 lb, is with certainty different in its breaking strength from Zing-It (2.2) or Lash-It (2.2mm), made of exactly the same fiber, has exactly the same weight / length. Those cords have an average break-strength of 650lb, (and minimum BS of 570lb) and nobody, responsibly, is recommending them for hammock suspension.)
Given New England Ropes (NER) marketing of Dynaglide as a throw line, I find no reason to take any more seriously their specification of breaking strength at 1000 pounds even.Their weight specification has already been shown to wrong by 60%, well beyond a margin of copy-edit rounding error. The product description states it is made of the same Dyneema SK-75 as some other products, not a further refinement on Dyneema. There is no reason, for its market, for NER to have paid more for fiber treated for purposes other than its intended use, which would value slickness and freedom from snagging among tree branches.
*easy as it would be for folks with scales to verify weight-consciousness and trimming achievements, only Smoke Bait has joined catenary-curve-calculating Professor Hammock in coming forth with measurements.
Bookmarks