LineLocs vs Hookworms and Fleaz

[kitsapcowboy]

I crunched some numbers looking at the relative component costs and weights of various tarp corner set-ups using tensioning devices and various guy lines, concentrating on the absolute weight reduction and efficiency of dollars spent for each gram saved, ignoring secondary practical particulars like bulk, subjective differences in style of operation, and intangibles. I calculated the statistics for a four-corner set-up complete with 8-foot guy lines, and I used as my benchmark the simple, inexpensive set-up to which I often default (when I'm not using Dyneema cord), which is installed LineLoc 3 tensioners with 2mm 100# test nylon utility cord (weight 0.6 grams/ft, that I buy in 100-foot hanks from SLD for 8 cents per foot). Wherever possible, I used the weight and costs from Dutch's website: I examined the costs to replace the benchmark set-up with the alternatives, as well as the difference in cost to build a rigged tarp from the ground up. Here is (approximately) what I computed...

Set-Up #1 (Benchmark) -- LineLoc 3s w/ 2mm Utility Cord lines (32 feet total)
===
Total Weight: 24.5 grams
Build Cost: $3.56
Extra Cost: $0.00 (benchmark)
Replacement Cost: $0.00 (benchmark)
Weight Saved: 0 grams (benchmark)
Cost per Gram Save (Build): $0.00/g (benchmark)
Cost per Gram Saved (Replacement): $0.00/g (benchmark)

Set-Up #2 -- LineLoc 3s w/ 1.75mm Lash-It lines (32 feet total)
===
Total Weight: 21.3 grams
Build Cost: $6.44
Extra Cost: $2.88
Replacement Cost: $5.44
Weight Saved: 3.2 grams
Cost per Gram Save (Build): $0.90/g
Cost per Gram Saved (Replacement): $1.70/g

Set-Up #3 -- LineLoc Lights w/ 2mm Utility Cord lines (32 feet total)
===
Total Weight: 23.2 grams
Build Cost: $3.76
Extra Cost: $0.20
Replacement Cost: $1.20
Weight Saved: 1.3 grams
Cost per Gram Save (Build): $0.15/g
Cost per Gram Saved (Replacement): $0.92/g

Set-Up #4 -- LineLoc Lights w/ 1.75mm Lash-It lines (32 feet total)
===
Total Weight: 20 grams
Build Cost: $6.64
Extra Cost: $3.08
Replacement Cost: $6.64
Weight Saved: 4.5 grams
Cost per Gram Save (Build): $0.68/g
Cost per Gram Saved (Replacement): $1.48/g

Set-Up #5 -- Tarpworms attached with Shock Cord to 1/2" Beastee Dees w/ 1.1mm Dutch Wire lines (32 feet total)
===
Total Weight: 16.8 grams
Build Cost: $19.40
Extra Cost: $15.84
Replacement Cost: $19.40
Weight Saved: 7.7 grams
Cost per Gram Save (Build): $2.06/g
Cost per Gram Saved (Replacement): $2.52/g

Set-Up #6 -- Tarpworms attached with Dutch Wire to 1/2" Beastee Dees w/ 1.1mm Dutch Wire lines (32 feet total)
===
Total Weight: 14 grams
Build Cost: $19.60
Extra Cost: $16.04
Replacement Cost: $19.60
Weight Saved: 10.5 grams
Cost per Gram Save (Build): $1.53/g
Cost per Gram Saved (Replacement): $1.87/g

If my math is even in the ball park, I think the interesting thing to note here in the case of a typical hex tarp set-up (4 tie-out corners), these alternative combinations of hardware and cordage saved no more than 11 grams of weight over a very basic and inexpensive "entry-level" set-up, which seems to lend support to my original idea that these more extensive high-tech rolled goods and tensioning devices are really offering you primary benefits other than pure weight savings, like strength, stretch reduction, slip resistance, convenience, and/or reduced pack size. Even on a winter tarp with 10 tie-out points, one would be hard-pressed to save a full ounce. Hardcore gram weenies might actually consider getting the best bang for their buck in weight reduction by using simple acetal D-rings (standard or Beastee Dee) and suffering through tying some knots -- perhaps a taut line hitch or slipped buntline hitch(?) -- which would slow set-up but still provide fairly easy adjustment except in adverse conditions.

My $0.02. YMMV. HYOH...

[catastrophedude]

Kitsap, you had to post that just after a put in a great big order on some more hook works and dutch wire

Thanks for taking the time to break all that down. I really think it helps to put things in perspective that what many people do is actually all down to personal preference. One exception to your cost calculations is a setup like mine. I have shock cord loops larksheaded onto the D rings of each of my tarps. I have a single set of guy lines (reflect-it with a spliced eye on one end to go around the stake, a hook worm in the middle on the line, and a locked brummel/stopper knot on the other end so the hookworm can't come off the line. This means I have one set of lines that live in my stake roll that I made and I can deploy them on any tarp I own. Even with one set of lines it appears you could outfit multiple tarps with line locs and line before any cost savings with my method would come into effect.

One downside to my setup is that because I'm lending a tarp to a friend for an upcoming trip I do need to make another set of guylines for his tarp. I purchased some of the reflective dutchwire and will use hookworms with a loop on one end tied via figure 8 knot to go over the stakes. I don't think there is going to be a huge difference between the two setups, but the gear nerd in me loves getting to tinker with a new kind of line.

[kitsapcowboy]

Kitsap, you had to post that just after a put in a great big order on some more hook works and dutch wire

No, that's cool, CD. In truth, I just bought Dutch wire and bling too!

Thanks for taking the time to break all that down. I really think it helps to put things in perspective that what many people do is actually all down to personal preference. One exception to your cost calculations is a setup like mine. I have shock cord loops larksheaded onto the D rings of each of my tarps. I have a single set of guy lines (reflect-it with a spliced eye on one end to go around the stake, a hook worm in the middle on the line, and a locked brummel/stopper knot on the other end so the hookworm can't come off the line. This means I have one set of lines that live in my stake roll that I made and I can deploy them on any tarp I own. Even with one set of lines it appears you could outfit multiple tarps with line locs and line before any cost savings with my method would come into effect.

One downside to my setup is that because I'm lending a tarp to a friend for an upcoming trip I do need to make another set of guylines for his tarp. I purchased some of the reflective dutchwire and will use hookworms with a loop on one end tied via figure 8 knot to go over the stakes. I don't think there is going to be a huge difference between the two setups, but the gear nerd in me loves getting to tinker with a new kind of line.

I agree with you that there are many, many valid variations depending upon what aspects are most important to you. I like your clever solution of having shock cord loops on all your tarps and a single set of guy lines that will work with any of them; it's very efficient and cost-effective, even if you do occasionally run into the issue you cited. I appreciate that Dutch offers the Hookworm and Silkworm variants of his Tarpworm hardware to facilitate all of these combinations. I might try some Silkworms permanently installed on the corners of my next DIY tarp.

[MikekiM]

I crunched some numbers looking at the relative component costs and weights of various tarp corner set-ups using tensioning devices and various guy lines, concentrating on the absolute weight reduction and efficiency of dollars spent for each gram saved, ignoring secondary practical particulars like bulk, subjective differences in style of operation, and intangibles. I calculated the statistics for a four-corner set-up complete with 8-foot guy lines, and I used as my benchmark the simple, inexpensive set-up to which I often default (when I'm not using Dyneema cord), which is installed LineLoc 3 tensioners with 2mm 100# test nylon utility cord (weight 0.6 grams/ft, that I buy in 100-foot hanks from SLD for 8 cents per foot). Wherever possible, I used the weight and costs from Dutch's website: I examined the costs to replace the benchmark set-up with the alternatives, as well as the difference in cost to build a rigged tarp from the ground up. Here is (approximately) what I computed...

Set-Up #1 (Benchmark) -- LineLoc 3s w/ 2mm Utility Cord lines (32 feet total)
===
Total Weight: 24.5 grams
Build Cost: $3.56
Extra Cost: $0.00 (benchmark)
Replacement Cost: $0.00 (benchmark)
Weight Saved: 0 grams (benchmark)
Cost per Gram Save (Build): $0.00/g (benchmark)
Cost per Gram Saved (Replacement): $0.00/g (benchmark)

Set-Up #2 -- LineLoc 3s w/ 1.75mm Lash-It lines (32 feet total)
===
Total Weight: 21.3 grams
Build Cost: $6.44
Extra Cost: $2.88
Replacement Cost: $5.44
Weight Saved: 3.2 grams
Cost per Gram Save (Build): $0.90/g
Cost per Gram Saved (Replacement): $1.70/g

Set-Up #3 -- LineLoc Lights w/ 2mm Utility Cord lines (32 feet total)
===
Total Weight: 23.2 grams
Build Cost: $3.76
Extra Cost: $0.20
Replacement Cost: $1.20
Weight Saved: 1.3 grams
Cost per Gram Save (Build): $0.15/g
Cost per Gram Saved (Replacement): $0.92/g

Set-Up #4 -- LineLoc Lights w/ 1.75mm Lash-It lines (32 feet total)
===
Total Weight: 20 grams
Build Cost: $6.64
Extra Cost: $3.08
Replacement Cost: $6.64
Weight Saved: 4.5 grams
Cost per Gram Save (Build): $0.68/g
Cost per Gram Saved (Replacement): $1.48/g

Set-Up #5 -- Tarpworms attached with Shock Cord to 1/2" Beastee Dees w/ 1.1mm Dutch Wire lines (32 feet total)
===
Total Weight: 16.8 grams
Build Cost: $19.40
Extra Cost: $15.84
Replacement Cost: $19.40
Weight Saved: 7.7 grams
Cost per Gram Save (Build): $2.06/g
Cost per Gram Saved (Replacement): $2.52/g

Set-Up #6 -- Tarpworms attached with Shock Cord to 1/2" Beastee Dees w/ 1.1mm Dutch Wire lines (32 feet total)
===
Total Weight: 14 grams
Build Cost: $19.60
Extra Cost: $16.04
Replacement Cost: $19.60
Weight Saved: 10.5 grams
Cost per Gram Save (Build): $1.53/g
Cost per Gram Saved (Replacement): $1.87/g

If my math is even in the ball park, I think the interesting thing to note here in the case of a typical hex tarp set-up (4 tie-out corners), these alternative combinations of hardware and cordage saved no more than 11 grams of weight over a very basic and inexpensive "entry-level" set-up, which seems to lend support to my original idea that these more extensive high-tech rolled goods and tensioning devices are really offering you primary benefits other than pure weight savings, like strength, stretch reduction, slip resistance, convenience, and/or reduced pack size. Even on a winter tarp with 10 tie-out points, one would be hard-pressed to save a full ounce. Hardcore gram weenies might actually consider getting the best bang for their buck in weight reduction by using simple acetal D-rings (standard or Beastee Dee) and suffering through tying some knots -- perhaps a taut line hitch or slipped buntline hitch(?) -- which would slow set-up but still provide fairly easy adjustment except in adverse conditions.

My $0.02. YMMV. HYOH...

Anyone got the executive summary?


Sent from somewhere east of Montauk

[TxAggie]

Anyone got the executive summary?


Sent from somewhere east of Montauk

Weight savings on hardware and newer guy lines is minimal, the biggest advantage is in strength. HYOH.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sqidmark]

Anyone got the executive summary?

Depending on your proximity to gram weenie status, you can spend a whole bunch extra and not get significant bang for your buck. In the end, it simply boils down to choosing your favorite flavor, color, methods and if you truly want to spend extra for inconsequential differences in weight.

[kitsapcowboy]

Anyone got the executive summary?

Read the bold.

[somniferous]

If my math is even in the ball park, I think the interesting thing to note here in the case of a typical hex tarp set-up (4 tie-out corners), these alternative combinations of hardware and cordage saved no more than 11 grams of weight over a very basic and inexpensive "entry-level" set-up, which seems to lend support to my original idea that these more extensive high-tech rolled goods and tensioning devices are really offering you primary benefits other than pure weight savings, like strength, stretch reduction, slip resistance, convenience, and/or reduced pack size. Even on a winter tarp with 10 tie-out points, one would be hard-pressed to save a full ounce. Hardcore gram weenies might actually consider getting the best bang for their buck in weight reduction by using simple acetal D-rings (standard or Beastee Dee) and suffering through tying some knots -- perhaps a taut line hitch or slipped buntline hitch(?) -- which would slow set-up but still provide fairly easy adjustment except in adverse conditions.

My $0.02. YMMV. HYOH...

11 grams is nothing to snuff at, it's almost 1/2 an ounce. This might not make a huge difference on a tarp that weighs 16oz or more, but when you get down to something like a cuben hex which is around 6 oz, that 11 grams is a greater percentage of the tarps total weight. Like everything in life, getting 90% of the way to UL isn't that expensive/hard, that last 10% however...

[kitsapcowboy]

11 grams is nothing to snuff at, it's almost 1/2 an ounce. This might not make a huge difference on a tarp that weighs 16oz or more, but when you get down to something like a cuben hex which is around 6 oz, that 11 grams is a greater percentage of the tarps total weight. Like everything in life, getting 90% of the way to UL isn't that expensive/hard, that last 10% however...

THE SHORT VERSION

My $0.02. YMMV. HYOH...

THE SOMEWHAT LONGER VERSION

With respect to you and the OP, the thread was started asking about the pros and cons of using Dutch bling solutions to tie out the corners of a tarp versus LineLocs, and my post was an attempt to examine the collateral effects of that choice on the aspects of absolute weight savings and net cost, stressing that either tie-out hardware option has many other aspects to consider besides weight savings.

I totally get (part of) what you are saying, and I can assure you I'm definitely familiar with gram-counter philosophy, even though I don't necessarily let it govern my hiking and camping, but to me there is still a sophistry in looking at relative weight reduction as more important than absolute weight reduction from your pack, except as a useful rubric to get you to examine each component in detail to achieve an overall target weight goal.

Speaking of sophistry, even looking at things relatively, I wouldn't say 11 grams is a half an ounce (14.175 grams); in truth, it's little more than a third. If your pack weight -- with a consumable pound of water on board, for argument's sake -- were 11 pounds you'd say you'd achieved an ultralight base weight, but if I showed you my 14.175-pound pack and made the same claim you'd surely scoff at me, as I would. If I offered you $11K for the $14K used truck for sale in your driveway, you'd tell me to get off your property...

All of that said, I appreciate that people come to this interesting hobby with different aims and perspectives. Wanting to avoid further cluttering of this thread, I hope that further discussion of gram-counting methods and ultralight philosophy continues in the many ongoing HF threads that currently explore these subjects at length.

[MikekiM]

Depending on your proximity to gram weenie status, you can spend a whole bunch extra and not get significant bang for your buck. In the end, it simply boils down to choosing your favorite flavor, color, methods and if you truly want to spend extra for inconsequential differences in weight.

Thank you.

When it comes to tarps as a whole, convenience and ease of use trump weight savings. Being able to pitch and adjust a tarp/ridgeline in the dark, wind, rain or cold is far more important for me.. HYOH and all. I've found I can set and adjust tarp worms (and wasp) with my eyes closed and hands cold. I never weighed them. They are the last remnants of hardware on my setup.