WWM Double?

**pacecar** · 02-12-2013, 00:55

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!

**Bubba** · 02-12-2013, 01:41

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.

**Fish<><** · 02-12-2013, 09:04

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!

**2ply** · 02-12-2013, 10:07

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.

**pacecar** · 02-12-2013, 11:05

So given my stipulations, the DL is worth it's weight and cost?

**Caveman** · 02-12-2013, 13:13

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.

**TheIrishmanHangeth** · 05-06-2013, 17:14

Originally Posted by Caveman

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

Originally Posted by TheIrishmanHangeth

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.

**TheIrishmanHangeth** · 05-06-2013, 18:44

Originally Posted by SilvrSurfr

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/...no+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.