What a great thread! I have been gone for awhile and enjoyed reading every post.
It seems that many people are caught in a "camp" and using science as way to justify which is a better choice.
I find it is not so much about which is scientifically better or who is using it be it the military or vikings, it is much more about price, and weight for me.
Also, many people are talking about wet and wind. I would say both wool and syn are only insulation to me. I think having a waterproof wind proof shell is primary and the type of insulation secondary.
I truly admire the cold weather campers. My hats off.
psy-ops, when polyester fleece first appeared on the market -- oh, thirty years ago, it was expensive ( more than good surplus wool) and it "pilled up" -- formed little fuzz balls on any surface that was rubbed. (They even sold special electric shavers to spruce up your polyester.
)
Now, polyester fleece is significantly cheaper than good surplus wool and even cheaper second-hand. (Lots of it in thrift stores and worth looking at because it hardly wears at all.) Malden's method of preventing "pilling" with "Polartec" is in the public domain so even the least expensive fleece doesn't pill. (But some zippers on cheaper stuff . . . :barf
The better brands have silicon treatment to speed mositure transport and provide some water repellancy when used (?!) as an outer garment.
Yes, wool does not stop wind as well as nylon or ployester taffeta, but "boiled wool," intentionally shunk to the max before being used to make a garment, is pretty good at stopping wind. The German surplus trousers seem more dense than the Swedish troausers, but YMMV.
Insulation only? Wool was the top choice for skin layers way back, except for those who got the skratchies. Still does its thing. I just think you need to be more careful than with mositure transporting skin layers.
As for "camps," I think a lot of us use wool
and polyester fleece/batting. I know I love my German wool trousers (Got four pair at a Toledo Army/Navy when they were $7.50 ea. :thumbup
, and I use them lots in cold weather. But when northern Ohio tries to pretend that it's northern Ontario, they get left home.
I do confess that I have no problem with science. Science has often been useful for Homo Sap in separating opinion/theory/legend from reality. I also notice the experience of others. (Well, maybe not the guy who insisted that cotton was the best material for all Winter clothing.) Learning is the main reason I come here. I have learned so much from the collective experience of hundreds of members. Even good questions can lead to learning. But I have been Winter camping 1965.
needlejr, I can't find a post questioning wool for socks, but maybe I missed it. Wool seems better for socks because it absorbs moisture (up to a point) whereas polyester fleece does not. Your feet would feel clammy pretty fast with polyester fleece socks. (Mine did when I tried a pair out. Warm but wet. Just felt wrong. Maybe I'm prejudiced.) You just change your socks from time to time, an easier chore than changing your torso and legs insulation layers. (Same routine as the "shoepak" with it's thick, wool felt liners inside rubber-bottomed boots. After so long, depending on activity level, they need to be changed out.)
