Smallest hammock end channel.

[Winnie]

I have a piece of hammock fabric that is 134” long. I want my finished hammock to be as long as possible. Does anyone have advice on how I can make the end channel use as little fabric possible to maximize finished hammock length?

[Crazytown3]

If it were me, I would still plan on at least 3" each end to make reinforced end channels. Personally, that is as little fabric as I would be comfortable using.

[bearito]

Does the width of the channel itself matter, or is it just to provide enough space for three rows of stitching? I triple stitch and I'm left with a channel less than 1" when I make an 11' hammock from 12' of fabric for a warbonnet (whipped) style hammock. I've never actually depended on the super tiny channel for load bearing, but I've been curious about channel-sewn hammocks. I guess without the space for whipping I'd have more room for a wider channel.

[leiavoia]

if you sew a small channel and whip it with a small cord into a bun, you can then hang off the bun with a continuous loop larksheaded behind it. This would be a non weight bearing channel.

[hutzelbein]

If the channels are too narrow, the fabric cannot bunch up properly. I have made that mistake with stuff sacks, and it's impossible to close them. With channel end hammocks I usually make my channels about 4,5 cm wide. So a bit under 2". This leaves most fabrics ample room to bunch up, but doesn't waste fabric.

If you want to get the most usable hammock length out of a fabric blank, don't use a whip. Whipping has many advantages, but economic fabric use is not one of them.

[Baka Dasai]

...If you want to get the most usable hammock length out of a fabric blank, don't use a whip. Whipping has many advantages, but economic fabric use is not one of them.

I'm curious why this is so. If I have a whipped end with a single row of stitches and a 1 cm channel, wouldn't that be a more economical use of fabric than a channel-end?

Or you saying that the "channel too narrow for proper fabric bunching" problem also applies to whipped ends?

[nanok]

I'm curious why this is so. If I have a whipped end with a single row of stitches and a 1 cm channel, wouldn't that be a more economical use of fabric than a channel-end?

Or you saying that the "channel too narrow for proper fabric bunching" problem also applies to whipped ends?

i think the problem is you will be losing effective length due to the whipping itself. you measure the useful length (useful in as far as "the lay" of the hammock is concerned) starting where the hammock fabric is free to spread apart, so in this case under the whipping.

there is a better way though, which it seems nobody talks about much: you can use a sheet bend or a modified sheet bend, it has the advantages of both methods (although maybe a bit less economic than the most stingy channel end), this is what i personally always use, mainly because of two reasons: i consider it both stronger and safer, and it makes it possible to easily adjust the lay of the hammock without having to re-sew the hammock, and i mean adjust in as much detail as you want. it might not look as pretty as the typical sewn channel, or the whipping, but it's dependable and easy to operate with in practice. (and of course, it doesn't require a channel at all)

other than that, keep in mind a channel which is too tight will put additional stress on the fabric and the stitches, so expect it to fail much sooner (imho not worth it: if you're going to use a channel, be generous with its size, it's the one piece of sewing on your gear which is essential for your safety. be generous.)