Double Hammock Whoopie Hooks

**kurteous** · 06-01-2015, 20:31

This was the setup my wife and I had a few weeks back in Yosemite NP with Dutch's DHWHs. There was hard rain multiple times the second night and we stayed high and dry under the superfly. The doors do not close the whole way with two hammocks underneath, but it was plenty of rain protection.

**pinballwizard** · 11-20-2015, 11:28

I've been sitting with my DWH's for some time and I finally want to make some whoopies for them (don't know why I haven't already). I've done whoopies before, and the one issue I have with them is that I find them almost always longer than I need, as well as sometimes not short enough when I need to get close to the tree. I was thinking of making shorter whoopies, or shortening the distance between the fixed eye and the part that it goes through itself (forget what that's called at the moment). In the past I've used Ian Young, the Brew Guy's method https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtJGTgpv4dc. I think that shortening the overall length is more for not wanting soooo much whoopie tail, where I don't feel it's necessary. However, the ability to make this shorter to the tree is from experience of just not being able to get close enough in certain situations. The one X factor here is these will do double duty as reg whoopies with whoopie hooks when it's just me, and DWH's when it's me and the fiance. That means that there will be a spreader bar between us, using a little line there when these are being pushed apart. That also means having up to a 16 foot tarp between us, so chance of a little longer distance between trees at times.... I'm sure there have been times that I used the whole length of my whoopies (maybe, maybe not), but more often than not, I find sooo much tail left over. I was thinking of using 10 foot pieces to start instead of 12.5.
Any thoughts on these concerns; both the overall length needed, and especially tightening up the minimal by:
1: having a little shorter bury in the fixed eye (4-5in normally)
2: starting the adjustable bury closer to the fixed eye bury (there's about 4-6 inches between end of both burys)
3: having a shorter, adjustable bury (normally 10in to start)

Thanks for any thoughts and experience you can share.

**Banjoman** · 11-20-2015, 15:08

Originally Posted by pinballwizard

I've been sitting with my DWH's for some time and I finally want to make some whoopies for them (don't know why I haven't already). I've done whoopies before, and the one issue I have with them is that I find them almost always longer than I need, as well as sometimes not short enough when I need to get close to the tree. I was thinking of making shorter whoopies, or shortening the distance between the fixed eye and the part that it goes through itself (forget what that's called at the moment). In the past I've used Ian Young, the Brew Guy's method https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtJGTgpv4dc. I think that shortening the overall length is more for not wanting soooo much whoopie tail, where I don't feel it's necessary. However, the ability to make this shorter to the tree is from experience of just not being able to get close enough in certain situations. The one X factor here is these will do double duty as reg whoopies with whoopie hooks when it's just me, and DWH's when it's me and the fiance. That means that there will be a spreader bar between us, using a little line there when these are being pushed apart. That also means having up to a 16 foot tarp between us, so chance of a little longer distance between trees at times.... I'm sure there have been times that I used the whole length of my whoopies (maybe, maybe not), but more often than not, I find sooo much tail left over. I was thinking of using 10 foot pieces to start instead of 12.5.
Any thoughts on these concerns; both the overall length needed, and especially tightening up the minimal by:
1: having a little shorter bury in the fixed eye (4-5in normally)
2: starting the adjustable bury closer to the fixed eye bury (there's about 4-6 inches between end of both burys)
3: having a shorter, adjustable bury (normally 10in to start)

Thanks for any thoughts and experience you can share.

I don't skimp on the bury lengths, but I always put my adjustable bury up next to the end of my fixed-eye bury so I can minimize the total length needed to hang between trees.

**pinballwizard** · 12-14-2015, 11:54

Just tried these last night with the spreader pole: I knew we would like them, and though I shouldn't be, I'm still surprised how much, not just me, but the fiance did as well! They really fit the bill well, and this will make hanging together under one tarp much simpler. Especially when car camping with family and friends and having limited options of 3 good trees to hang 2 under 1 tarp. Now This just got easier, faster, and more precise; all around, more efficient...
And that's where my next question is. For efficiency sake, is there any reason (I'm guessing weight or friction?) I can't hang both our rigs off of one set of huggers? If I have a big set, wrap them around the tree, and attach different whoopies to each end, would that be safe, or should I keep huggers separate?

While I'm writing that, I can see the flaw of not having a weight on the other end of the hugger while just one of us is in our hammocks, can be a safety concern... would hanging both whoopies off the same end of a hugger be foolish? This is not a must, more of simplification

**Solohammock** · 12-14-2015, 12:23

Besides the possibility of a strap failing or damage to the tree with the weight, the thing I don't like about using the same connection point for the whoopies is how much stress it puts on the spreader bar... Not that it can't handle it, just prefer to not stress gear anymore than I need too. I make sure the tree straps are set up so that the pull point comes off the side of the tree... Do that with both straps and your hammocks already end up spread apart by the width of the tree so the spreader bar doesn't have as much force trying to squish it.
At the cost of a few ounces and an extra minute to run a second strap, I will continue to use two...

**pinballwizard** · 12-14-2015, 12:26

I agree with your points. That's why my first thought was to use the opposite ends of a hugger. Figured each end would go off opposite sides of a FATTER tree.
I'm probably spending more time and energy on this solution than just carrying and setting both straps

**Solohammock** · 12-14-2015, 12:39

Right, just don't know how you would be able to load the hammocks at the same time in order to keep them from falling. And especially unloading them!

**Solohammock** · 12-14-2015, 12:51

I guess if you had a long enough strap you could do a timber hitch on the back side of the tree and load the "pull" end first, then load the "wrapped" side second.

**Dutch** · 12-14-2015, 12:52

I had a comical adventure trying one pair of huggers. It works but not nearly as well. There is more of a see saw effect and also you are putting a lot of weight on a hugger. Most huggers are rated for 1300 to 1500 pounds. Two people can easily exceed that. However if you die, at least it will be with someone you love.

**pinballwizard** · 12-14-2015, 13:03

Originally Posted by Dutch

I had a comical adventure trying one pair of huggers. It works but not nearly as well. There is more of a see saw effect and also you are putting a lot of weight on a hugger. Most huggers are rated for 1300 to 1500 pounds. Two people can easily exceed that. However if you die, at least it will be with someone you love.

That actually made me laugh out loud.

Gotta hand it to you, Dutch; your stuff is genius and simple! Amazing what adding a small hole to a whoopie hook allows you to do so perfectly!