Ridgerunner with Pad & Weight Capacity

[flySAR]

I bought a Ridgerunner off the forums and I'm enjoying the comfort. Using an UQ or Pad seems equally comfortable to me though the 3" pad offers the feel of a wider hammock.
Im concerned my Exped insulated pad probably affects the weight capacity of the DL Ridgerunner. The top layer of fabric is loose so I'm assuming all of my 200lbs is being carried by the lower layer.
I don't think a thinner pad would be beneficial in offering additional width nor comfort but might try it.
Any idea how thick I can go and still get some weight bearing load on the top layer too?

[BillyBob58]

I bought a Ridgerunner off the forums and I'm enjoying the comfort. Using an UQ or Pad seems equally comfortable to me though the 3" pad offers the feel of a wider hammock.
Im concerned my Exped insulated pad probably affects the weight capacity of the DL Ridgerunner. The top layer of fabric is loose so I'm assuming all of my 200lbs is being carried by the lower layer.
I don't think a thinner pad would be beneficial in offering additional width nor comfort but might try it.
Any idea how thick I can go and still get some weight bearing load on the top layer too?

Ha! I never thought of this, and it is the opposite of the potential issue I have a thread asking about with my HammockTent90(HT90). With that hammock, the pad pocket is so deep(supposedly designed for a max 3" thick pad without raising the center of gravity, or even a quilt without compressing it) that a less thick pad does not fully lift the top layer. So when I use my 2.5" thick Neoair all season in that pad pocket, my weight is still at least partly supported by hammock's inner layer, just as it is with no pad. The designer has warned "Pads inside the pad-sleeve may not always sufficiently insulate your bottom in cold temperatures. The reason for this is that your body is not pressed as tightly against it as it would be lying directly on the pad. Therefore some cold air may circulate along baffles and the edges of the pad. Remedies for this are: Only lightly inflate the pad to make it conform better to your body, and combine it with some lofty insulation material (quilt, down jacket)." It seems obvious to me that all of the above would be worsened as the pad got thinner.

I have found my 2.5" thick Neoair to be quite warm(even if not fully inflated) with this hammock down at least to 30F even without adding a puffy jacket or quilt to fill the gaps, but I do figure I might be losing some maximum warmth, especially with my pad not being thick enough to completely fill the pad pocket. Easily fixed by adding something puffy, especially to fill the channels between baffles that might allow cold air in, since my weight is not fully compressing the pad or channels/valleys.

But this is the exact opposite of your concern. Most of my weight is still being carried by the inner layer of the hammock, with only part of it being transferred to the outer layer, and almost none transferred if I use a thinner pad.

But when using pads with my double layer WBRR or JRB bridges, your concern has never even occurred to me. But, you are correct, virtually all of your weight might be getting transferred to the outer layer. Because I have not used any pad in my bridges that do not raise the center of gravity by 1/2" to 2.5", by raising the inner layer. So when I get in, all of my weight is placed on the pad and I suppose transferred to the outer layer. There are no concerns about possible gaps or channels along the baffles since my pad is fully weighted just as if used on the ground.
But, isn't this exactly as designed? I'm thinking that outer layer is designed to take the full weight of a person on a pad. For that matter, the outer layer is often so tight even with no pad in there, it is all ready taking a good bit of our weight even without a pad. Often, double layers increase the weight rating. The only potential problem I can see is if you are heavy enough to push the limits of the double layers weight rating, or perhaps beyond the rating of a single layer. Otherwise I doubt it could be a problem, as the hammock is designed to be used with a pad, and I have never seen a problem reported.

[flySAR]

Ha! I never thought of this, and it is the opposite of the potential issue I have a thread asking about with my HammockTent90(HT90). With that hammock, the pad pocket is so deep(supposedly designed for a max 3" thick pad without raising the center of gravity, or even a quilt without compressing it) that a less thick pad does not fully lift the top layer. So when I use my 2.5" thick Neoair all season in that pad pocket, my weight is still at least partly supported by hammock's inner layer, just as it is with no pad. The designer has warned "Pads inside the pad-sleeve may not always sufficiently insulate your bottom in cold temperatures. The reason for this is that your body is not pressed as tightly against it as it would be lying directly on the pad. Therefore some cold air may circulate along baffles and the edges of the pad. Remedies for this are: Only lightly inflate the pad to make it conform better to your body, and combine it with some lofty insulation material (quilt, down jacket)." It seems obvious to me that all of the above would be worsened as the pad got thinner.

I have found my 2.5" thick Neoair to be quite warm(even if not fully inflated) with this hammock down at least to 30F even without adding a puffy jacket or quilt to fill the gaps, but I do figure I might be losing some maximum warmth, especially with my pad not being thick enough to completely fill the pad pocket. Easily fixed by adding something puffy, especially to fill the channels between baffles that might allow cold air in, since my weight is not fully compressing the pad or channels/valleys.

But this is the exact opposite of your concern. Most of my weight is still being carried by the inner layer of the hammock, with only part of it being transferred to the outer layer, and almost none transferred if I use a thinner pad.

But when using pads with my double layer WBRR or JRB bridges, your concern has never even occurred to me. But, you are correct, virtually all of your weight might be getting transferred to the outer layer. Because I have not used any pad in my bridges that do not raise the center of gravity by 1/2" to 2.5", by raising the inner layer. So when I get in, all of my weight is placed on the pad and I suppose transferred to the outer layer. There are no concerns about possible gaps or channels along the baffles since my pad is fully weighted just as if used on the ground.
But, isn't this exactly as designed? I'm thinking that outer layer is designed to take the full weight of a person on a pad. For that matter, the outer layer is often so tight even with no pad in there, it is all ready taking a good bit of our weight even without a pad. Often, double layers increase the weight rating. The only potential problem I can see is if you are heavy enough to push the limits of the double layers weight rating, or perhaps beyond the rating of a single layer. Otherwise I doubt it could be a problem, as the hammock is designed to be used with a pad, and I have never seen a problem reported.

BillyBob58, Thank you for your response, I was beginning to ponder the validity of my question.
The RR SL hammock is rated at 200lbs where as the DL is rated at 250lbs. WB notes the 250# DL rating is more of a comfort rating due to size vs weight stress on the fabric. My concern is I'm at or over (depending on wifes good cooking) the SL weight rating so I'd like to involve the top layer of fabric for added support & less stress on the lower layer. I think it would be best to default to an UQ and call it good.

[Just Bill]

I bought a Ridgerunner off the forums and I'm enjoying the comfort. Using an UQ or Pad seems equally comfortable to me though the 3" pad offers the feel of a wider hammock.
Im concerned my Exped insulated pad probably affects the weight capacity of the DL Ridgerunner. The top layer of fabric is loose so I'm assuming all of my 200lbs is being carried by the lower layer.
I don't think a thinner pad would be beneficial in offering additional width nor comfort but might try it.
Any idea how thick I can go and still get some weight bearing load on the top layer too?

Congrats- usually takes me quite some time to explain this to people

The simple answer is that so long as you are within the single layer weight rating, it's not really a concern but if you're close then understand that while you're unlikely to get a blowout failure, you may find the bridge wears out prematurely.

In truth though- for any sleeping pad you'd realistically use; what you actually have is a single layer with an integrated bed sheet.

It is physically impossible without stretch fabric to get a double layer bridge WITHOUT a differential cut to balance the load over both layers.
If you introduced a differential cut (which would need to be pad specific) then you could claim a true double layer from a structural standpoint.
While stretch mesh would allow you to accomidate different pad thicknesses (or maybe a bias cut fabric)... that stretch would negate any load bearing properties of that layer.


I cannot comment on the RR as even with a thick pad I find it barely usable. Not crap talking just being blunt.
I did a few double layer designs with my bridges to play with this concept a little and the best answer I can give you is roughly 5/8" foam seems to be the balance point.
The pad I used specifically is the 30" version of the ridgerest from thermarest.

Granted this was with MTN Hybrid 1.2 fabric (slightly stretchy at my 230lbs) so the bottom layer was able to deflect enough that it appeared there was at least some load on the top layer and things balanced out. That is purely educated observation though as there isn't really any way to determine how much load was on either layer.

I was able to put in roughly 30 nights on that combo with no signs of wear, however I wasn't really a fan of it. That said my goal was more to see if a 'budget' pad like that could be paired with a bridge well enough to avoid (or defer) the expense of an UQ. My gripe was it ended up not being as warm as I hoped it would be either... but it would get you by for most of the warmer months and down to around the 40's.

Reflectix and/or a combination of thinner CCF foams would probably take you lower.

So best I could say- 5/8" of so would balance somewhat. Maybe 2/3 bottom layer 1/3 top layer as far as loading the fabric.

ALL THAT SAID; as mentioned the only serious concern would be that 250lb person at the edge of the weight limit who is also using a pad.
I'm not trying to say anything one way or the other about the RR or suggesting you bug Brandon to get to the bottom of this as it isn't really a functional concern for MOST in the field.
For most folks the 200lb load limit on the single layer is enough on it's own and the second layer isn't really relevant to the structure.
If you have a double layer 1.1 ripstop... probably a bigger concern than a double layer of 1.6 fabric.

As mentioned, the loads are not necessarily failure ratings, but durability ones.
I test most of my stuff to a minimum of 90 days each by 10 testers with the expectation you'll get 120-150 nights average use once you clear that 90 day hump.
For most people that standard is essentially 'bomber'. 120 nights is going out one weekend a month, every month, for 5 years.
It's also roughly how many nights you'd use a product (on the trail not counting zeros) on an average long distance hike of roughly 5 months duration.

[flySAR]

Congrats- usually takes me quite some time to explain this to people

The simple answer is that so long as you are within the single layer weight rating, it's not really a concern but if you're close then understand that while you're unlikely to get a blowout failure, you may find the bridge wears out prematurely.

In truth though- for any sleeping pad you'd realistically use; what you actually have is a single layer with an integrated bed sheet.

I cannot comment on the RR as even with a thick pad I find it barely usable. Not crap talking just being blunt.
I did a few double layer designs with my bridges to play with this concept a little and the best answer I can give you is roughly 5/8" foam seems to be the balance point.
The pad I used specifically is the 30" version of the ridgerest from thermarest.

So best I could say- 5/8" of so would balance somewhat. Maybe 2/3 bottom layer 1/3 top layer as far as loading the fabric.

As mentioned, the loads are not necessarily failure ratings, but durability ones.

I test most of my stuff to a minimum of 90 days each by 10 testers with the expectation you'll get 120-150 nights average use once you clear that 90 day hump.
For most people that standard is essentially 'bomber'. 120 nights is going out one weekend a month, every month, for 5 years.
It's also roughly how many nights you'd use a product (on the trail not counting zeros) on an average long distance hike of roughly 5 months duration.

JustBill, thank you for your detailed response and thickness recommendation!
I'm interested in durability so there is less chance of a blowout in the woods so I think it's best for me to default to an UQ and call it good.

[BillyBob58]

JustBill, thank you for your detailed response and thickness recommendation!
I'm interested in durability so there is less chance of a blowout in the woods so I think it's best for me to default to an UQ and call it good.

Do you own an UQ that works on your WBRR, so that you do not need to even fool with a pad? I guess you do, but if not, while you are waiting to get it, consider this: I recently confirmed that my Neoair All Season was quite usable in my single layer JRB. It stayed under me quite well, and was very warm. I experimented with trying to roll out, since the center of gravity was raised, but that hammock has slightly deep sides so I could not easily roll out.

I can not remember if I have tried that with a my WBRR or not, i.e. a pad inside the hammock rather than down in the pad pocket. Under most conditions I still prefer my JRB UQs under the JRB single layer, but it just shows that it can be done. If that works in a WBRR, then you would maintain the full weight rating of the double layer hammock plus seems like you would maybe pick up a little durability, since your body would be contacting and rubbing on the pad rather than the hammock. One thing I have got to get around to experimenting with: CCF pads inside(maybe stacked) a Speer Segmented Pad Extender, with a single layer bridge. The wings will insulate the sides as well as an UQ, and it should stay put pretty well also.

Anyway, just a thought in case you don't yet have an UQ handy that works well with that hammock.

[TrailSlug]

JustBill, thank you for your detailed response and thickness recommendation!
I'm interested in durability so there is less chance of a blowout in the woods so I think it's best for me to default to an UQ and call it good.

That would be my recommendation as well. The two underquilts I would recommend would be the Warbonnet offerings but also check out LocoLibre quilts as well.

[TrailBlaser]

I use a 20d Ridgecreek XL UQ and like it a lot. I use an UQ protector with it as well.

[flySAR]

Thank you for the UQ tips. Right now I'm running a RSBTR Climashield UQ I sewed for a WBBB that fits good. It's a little wide & interfers with the saddle bags so I may go a different route. I also got the newest spindrift with the deal.

[Just Bill]

Before you give up completely- you can always simply put the pad in the bridge.
In the Double layer this really shouldn't change the geometry much.

Yes, much like every ground dweller you do have to actually sleep directly on the pad, but the pad doesn't squirm quite as badly as you might think with a little care.
Because of the 'double layer' issue I designed my pads to work fairly well with the pad just slapped in. I do suggest practicing at home as you might need to alter your pitch a little as it does alter the lay in the hammock a bit.