View Full Version : WWM Double?
Hey all!
So this will be my first hammock, and upon my grueling research, I have determined to go with a WWM. I lean towards the lightweight type of backpacker, so this seems to fit the bill perfectly.
My question before I place an order: Is it worth the double layer?
EDIT: So I am 6' tall and weigh 170 lbs. Should I get 56" width?
Currently, because I am building a system for the first time, I do not have a UQ. I have a great sleeping bag and pad, of which I will be trying to integrate into hammock camping (given that it makes sense). SO with that being said, do I cough up the dough and get the double layer?
Am I better off to save my pad for tent camping and do a dedicated UQ here for warmth, or does a pad offer similar benefits in that application?
Thank you in advance!
Get the widest hammock possible since you are pretty tall. It will allow you a better diagonal lay. Using a pad in a single layer is more challenging so if you plan on using a pad for while go with the double layer. It definitely helps keep the pad in place so when you move around you do not end moving the pad.
Using a pad and a sleeping pad can be very effective but I find UQ's are that much more comfortable. I say if you have the money get an UQ. Pads can make you feel clammy because they act as a vapour barrier and they can give you cold shoulders due to their limited width. A segmented pad extender (SPE) which is basically a sleeve you slide your pad into that has wings you place cut up segments of CCF padding into helps prevent cold shoulder and sides. Even with such modifications, a large number of hangers find UQ's more comfortable with the added benefit of saving space in your pack.
SilvrSurfr
02-12-2013, 01:50
I have a WWM double and it's my favorite, most comfortable hammock. I pretty much bought it as a loaner hammock for my sons (who don't have quilts and are relegated to pads). But when I tried it out myself, I found it coming on every trip.
I've been using the WWM single layer lately. It's pretty darn comfy, but not as comfy as the DL.
I have the dl but haven't slept in it. Been in the closet for months. The single layer is my fav hammock... Pads are doable but check out "shugs hammock camping for noobs videos on YouTube. They will tell you all u need to know about pads and hammocks and tarps and quilts and dutchware and snakeskins and the list goes on. He is an informative teacher of great entertainment... Welcome to the elevated perspective!
I've got the WWM DBL in a 52" width and love it. I do wish it was the 56" but I can still get a nice diagonal lay and it is a very comfortable hammock. I am now using an UQ but did use a pad with it for awhile. The dbl layer keeps them in place so there is no shifting of the pad as you sleep. Give the BIAS a shot.....you'll be glad you did.
So given my stipulations, the DL is worth it's weight and cost?
At your weight, I would get the single. I'm 6' and about 215# and I've never had any trouble with my single. That's just me.
I would get the widest one you can though. I've got the 64", but I'm not sure if that one is still available. I love my micro. It's replaced my Lite Owl as my go to hammock.
Barlutti
02-12-2013, 14:14
I am 6' and run around the same weight. Bought a 56" DL WWM and LOVE it. Had I know before hand that I was going to buy a few UQ's, I probably would have just got the single layer. At my weight and height, I get a great diagonal on this thing, but really dont need the 2nd layer. If you plan on using the pad for some time, then get the extra layer. And really, don't kid yourself, that will not be the only hammock you get I assure you ;) the guys over at BIAS, like all our cottage vendors, are great to deal with. I was in the same boat as you not that many months ago. Only you will be able to determine if you like a pad over a quilt. My 2 cents? buy the DL now, as this allows easier use of the pad. After you get some experience, and maybe get to try out a few other rigs at a group hang, then determine if a UQ is for you. either way, DL or SL and whatever width you choose, the WWM is a great hammock. I get at least one night a week out in mine :)
No matter which you get, our goal is for you to like it. I'd rather you get a single you liked than a double you didn't... So here's my short analysis...
A double costs $40 (and if you know about the process of making a double compared to a single, that's a bargain because they are more than twice as hard to make and they do take twice the material). A CCF pad costs $10. So, you're in for $50, period, for back warmth. One day, if you enjoy this hammocking thing, you will get an underquilt. When you do, you still can hang your double or you can get a single and the double with pad can be your loaner, for your wife, child, etc.
So there's the question... You have to have something. If you've only got a few outings, you can make do with a single and a squirmy pad until you get the UQ in the fall. But if you plan to be out a lot this spring and during the cooler part of the early summer before you get said underquilt, you might reconsider. $50 is cheaper than any underquilt I know of and squirmy pads in single layer hammocks thoroughly suck eggs. A double will also add to the WWM's durability, but it comes with a weight penalty.
So there you have it... if you plan to get an UQ soon, get the single and mosey over to another great cottage vendor for an underquilt when you're ready. If money's tight and the wife or significant other hates seeing charges on the bank statement for your gear, grab the double.
Man Brian....That's hardcore. You're going to put your wife on the pad while you sleep with the UQ? :)
Man Brian....That's hardcore. You're going to put your wife on the pad while you sleep with the UQ? :)
You betcha! But I would carry her pad for her. Part of the way at least. Like from the car to the trail head. Probably. Or she could take a tent...:eek:
I think for my purposes, I'm sold on the double. I will eventually upgrade to a UQ, but for now, I will rock the pad and love every second of it!
I thoroughly appreciate all of the advice and insight offered by you guys!
No matter which you get, our goal is for you to like it. I'd rather you get a single you liked than a double you didn't... So here's my short analysis...
A double costs $40 (and if you know about the process of making a double compared to a single, that's a bargain because they are more than twice as hard to make and they do take twice the material). A CCF pad costs $10. So, you're in for $50, period, for back warmth. One day, if you enjoy this hammocking thing, you will get an underquilt. When you do, you still can hang your double or you can get a single and the double with pad can be your loaner, for your wife, child, etc.
So there's the question... You have to have something. If you've only got a few outings, you can make do with a single and a squirmy pad until you get the UQ in the fall. But if you plan to be out a lot this spring and during the cooler part of the early summer before you get said underquilt, you might reconsider. $50 is cheaper than any underquilt I know of and squirmy pads in single layer hammocks thoroughly suck eggs. A double will also add to the WWM's durability, but it comes with a weight penalty.
So there you have it... if you plan to get an UQ soon, get the single and mosey over to another great cottage vendor for an underquilt when you're ready. If money's tight and the wife or significant other hates seeing charges on the bank statement for your gear, grab the double.
For the price difference, should I get a Campus Lounger double? It's hard to beat the $28 (+$28 for DL).
TheIrishmanHangeth
05-06-2013, 17:14
At your weight, I would get the single. I'm 6' and about 215# and I've never had any trouble with my single. That's just me.
I would get the widest one you can though. I've got the 64", but I'm not sure if that one is still available. I love my micro. It's replaced my Lite Owl as my go to hammock.
I noticed you said you weighed 215 caveman...with the wwm having a recommended weight limit of 200 lbs, do you find it stretches a lot or that it isn't holding up as well as a more substantial hammock designed for more weight? I'm just wondering because I weigh more so I'm curious how it has worked out for you. I would love to be able to have a hammock that light but unless BIAS is being conservative with their weight tolerances the only option(that I know of) for an ultralight hammock that could hold me is the grand trunk nano 7(which I'm still curious as to how it uses the same weight fabric as the wwm yet can hold 100 more lbs).
SilvrSurfr
05-06-2013, 17:55
I noticed you said you weighed 215 caveman...with the wwm having a recommended weight limit of 200 lbs, do you find it stretches a lot or that it isn't holding up as well as a more substantial hammock designed for more weight? I'm just wondering because I weigh more so I'm curious how it has worked out for you. I would love to be able to have a hammock that light but unless BIAS is being conservative with their weight tolerances the only option(that I know of) for an ultralight hammock that could hold me is the grand trunk nano 7(which I'm still curious as to how it uses the same weight fabric as the wwm yet can hold 100 more lbs).
Where are you getting your information that the nano 7 is the same material (1.1 oz ripstop) as the WWM? I don't see anything on their website. I would bet the nano 7 is a heavier weight fabric and the low weight of the hammock (7.4 oz) comes from the skimpy dimensions (9' x 4') rather than the weight of the fabric.
Either way, you won't be disappointed. Extraordinary lay in a BIAS.
TheIrishmanHangeth
05-06-2013, 18:44
Where are you getting your information that the nano 7 is the same material (1.1 oz ripstop) as the WWM? I don't see anything on their website. I would bet the nano 7 is a heavier weight fabric and the low weight of the hammock (7.4 oz) comes from the skimpy dimensions (9' x 4') rather than the weight of the fabric.
It has been said on multiple occasions by the guys at BIAS that they use 1.0 ripstop(sometimes classfied as 1.1 according to Brian). I can't for the life of me find a link that states that the nano 7 is 1.1 but here https://www.hammockforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=72012&highlight=nano+bias&page=2 in post #13 it's mentioned by the OP that the wwm material is actually thicker than the nano 7 material. Even comparing bone stock weights(according to what others have posted) between a nano 7 hammock body and a wwm hammock is about an ounce heavier. Which, given that it is a couple feet longer and a little wider, it would make sense that the fabrics are either the same or very similar. Could be way off on that though of course.
It has been said on multiple occasions by the guys at BIAS that they use 1.0 ripstop(sometimes classfied as 1.1 according to Brian). I can't for the life of me find a link that states that the nano 7 is 1.1 but here https://www.hammockforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=72012&highlight=nano+bias&page=2 in post #13 it's mentioned by the OP that the wwm material is actually thicker than the nano 7 material. Even comparing bone stock weights(according to what others have posted) between a nano 7 hammock body and a wwm hammock is about an ounce heavier. Which, given that it is a couple feet longer and a little wider, it would make sense that the fabrics are either the same or very similar. Could be way off on that though of course.
I don't have one, but based on what I've seen in pics and read, I'd bet you're on the mark. We based our assessments off the spec sheet. We could shave an ounce or more by going to their same specs, so my guess has to be that the fabrics are at least similar in weight. I don't imagine they're exact though.
TheIrishmanHangeth
05-06-2013, 21:51
I don't have one, but based on what I've seen in pics and read, I'd bet you're on the mark. We based our assessments off the spec sheet. We could shave an ounce or more by going to their same specs, so my guess has to be that the fabrics are at least similar in weight. I don't imagine they're exact though.
You would the person to ask about for sure Brian, assuming the fabrics are the same or very close, is there a reason you guys rate the wwm for 200 lbs vs the nano 7's 300 lbs?
I've spent somewhere around 100 nights in my micro. I've never noticed any stretch and never had to sleep on the ground. My guess is that they rate the fabric on the low end just to be safe. I'm willing to take the risk and it has paid off for me. I love my micro.
TheIrishmanHangeth
05-07-2013, 09:13
I've spent somewhere around 100 nights in my micro. I've never noticed any stretch and never had to sleep on the ground. My guess is that they rate the fabric on the low end just to be safe. I'm willing to take the risk and it has paid off for me. I love my micro.
That's what I wanted to hear! Glad things are workin good for ya caveman! I've kind of came to same conclusion as far as risk in hammocks. Since I never hang anywhere I wouldn't be willing to fall I am less concerned about some of the weight standards. At most ill have an expensive gear lesson lol.
TheIrishmanHangeth
05-07-2013, 09:24
One last question(yeah right lol)...is the weight listed on the website for the hammock include the ridgeline and chain links? Or is it just the hammock body and stuff sack?
One last question(yeah right lol)...is the weight listed on the website for the hammock include the ridgeline and chain links? Or is it just the hammock body and stuff sack?
The weights include all but the ridgeline (hammock, channel loops, sack, sack cord and cordlock). The weights were taken pre-ridgeline included. The standard fixed 9' ridgeline weighs .2 oz. Add that to the weights posted for a hammock + RL total.
Thanks!
TheIrishmanHangeth
05-09-2013, 07:43
The weights include all but the ridgeline (hammock, channel loops, sack, sack cord and cordlock). The weights were taken pre-ridgeline included. The standard fixed 9' ridgeline weighs .2 oz. Add that to the weights posted for a hammock + RL total.
Thanks!
Thanks Brian!! Appreciate the reply!
I used to own a Nano and the fabric was thicker than on my WWM. I didn't say stronger, just thicker. I didn't look to see if the GT is nylon or polyester, but I remember it as being low stretch with my 145# in it, and there is a little stretch in my newer WWM.