Some thoughts on selecting clothing for subarctic climate

[udamiano]

In cold conditions, I wouldn't advise cotton underwear next to the skin.

I've worn it well below -30degrees, as long as you don't start sweating, and use it as a backing between rougher weaves, its OK, as Martti quoted its OK as long as it used in conjunction with other layers, and especially if those layers are itchy woollen types

 

[Martti]

I came up with some basic clothing design rules that I thing will hold true for the whole boreal zone from Finland to Canada. These are again based on my new (and old) findings from the Finnish military archives dating from 1920s to 1950s. I'm directing my thinking towards them for the upcoming winter season. Not in any particular order of importance:

1) Rubber boots are always better than leather or rubber-tipped leather boots in wet and/or cold weather regardless the waxs, oilments etc. used to make the leather "waterproof".
2) The best jacket length for movement and dexterity is hip length for mid-layer. 3/4 length is preferable for an overcoat of any material be it windproof cotton, fur or nylon.
3) Cotton does not kill next to the skin if prepared properly (e.g. as flannel) and used with wool mid-layer.

4) The excess use of bare leather (and fur in some occasions but not in dry-cold) on items should be avoided in wet-cold climate as it tends to be cold and break when frozen. However it is good for some special purposes in dry-cold, e.g. covering the seams in felt skiing shoes.
5) All items must be manufactured so that they can be used without the next layer on top of them. This means having pockets in undergarments, making them windproof etc.
6) Layered clothing is good but in right amounts; in general the optimal seems to be from three to five layers of clothing. U.S. Army tried seven layers with M-1943 and found it to be too much.

 

[rik_uk3]

They look good, my lad has a pair of boots made by Kickers which look very similar.

 

[Chris the Cat]

This thread is everything that is great about BcUK for me, keep it comming Martti!
Swimming trunks or synthetic sports type pants for me under my wool long johns.
Chris.

 

[Martti]

Swimming trunks or synthetic sports type pants for me under my wool long johns.

The Finnish Defence Forces actually used knee-length (i.e. shorts) cotton/linen woven underwear under the wool trousers. This way the men could use the underwear layer as work uniform during the summer and still be decent looking! 7) A canteen is useless in Finland and will only add weight one has to carry around. The number of water sources is endless and one can also use mess kit to storage water for short periods of time.

 

[susi]

I've worn it well below -30degrees, as long as you don't start sweating, and use it as a backing between rougher weaves, its OK, as Martti quoted its OK as long as it used in conjunction with other layers, and especially if those layers are itchy woollen types

I'm replying not because I'm looking for an argument, but simply because this is an issue of outdoor comfort and potentially safety.

You are correct that cotton is fine in extreme cold as long as you don't start sweating. But if you're out in the cold wilds, there are plenty of opportunities to become sweaty. If you do sweat, then cotton soaks the moisture up like a sponge. If you can't/don't change out of your base layer, then as soon as you stop, you can start to chill, and that's not good news, I've been there.. I'm talking as someone who has a wide experience of being and working outside in extreme temps, even <-40°C, where your mobile phone no longer functions, your water bottle becomes ice, where the snot in your nose freezes into crystals which you can crunch with your fingers, where after exertion your eyelashes become heavy as they're weighed down with small balls of ice, where even your damp hankerchief becomes as stiff as a board in an inside pocket.

And to be clear, I'm talking basic cotton long johns and long sleeved vests, that you guys might pick up in Marks & Sparks, not some special prepared cotton material.

Also armies also fit their soldiers out in all sorts of kit that maybe isn't the best option. Look at some British soldiers, who go out and buy a pair of civilian boots rather than use those issued. Even the boots our boys get in the army here can be second or third hand. :-/

 

[Martti]

And to be clear, I'm talking basic cotton long johns and long sleeved vests, that you guys might pick up in Marks & Sparks, not some special prepared cotton material. Also armies also fit their soldiers out in all sorts of kit that maybe isn't the best option.

"Basic cotton long johns" could be used to describe what the Finns wore during the War, except that they were made of flannel (which was "basic" in those days). The long-range patrols were happy with them and the patrol manuals I have read recommend only taking one spare pair for winter patrols lasting up to a week. I would say that a field test of lasting for many years and 500.000 soldiers taking part of it is quite conclusive for saying that cotton is suitable for winter if used as I have described earlier. Cotton has many perks that wool does not have for field use: it is durable, easy to clean and cheap for the goverment to buy for the men.

 

[susi]

"Basic cotton long johns" could be used to describe what the Finns wore during the War, except that they were made of flannel (which was "basic" in those days). The long-range patrols were happy with them and the patrol manuals I have read recommend only taking one spare pair for winter patrols lasting up to a week. I would say that a field test of lasting for many years and 500.000 soldiers taking part of it is quite conclusive for saying that cotton is suitable for winter if used as I have described earlier. Cotton has many perks that wool does not have for field use: it is durable, easy to clean and cheap for the goverment to buy for the men.

I think your last sentence says a lot It was more about cost than performance. Finland wasn't exactly rolling in money in 1939. To begin with, the only "military uniform" that many were issued with was a Finnish army cap badge to decorate their otherwise civilian attire.

Today there are too many better options to choose from, selecting a cotton base layer is a poor decision in my opinion.

The other reason, if we are to believe the nationalistic post-war propaganda , is that today's men are not in as good shape as the brave defenders of 1939. But this was researched about 5 years ago and proved to be incorrect and based on nothing more than romantic memories of the past.

Martti, out of interest, what do you use as a base layer when it's -25°C, assuming, a) you're doing something physical where you might sweat, and b), you are outside for an extended period and don't have the opportunity to step inside anywhere if you managed to get sweaty?

 

[Martti]

Today there are too many better options to choose from, selecting a cotton base layer is a poor decision in my opinion.

I beg to disagree. Better in absolutely sense perhaps but we have to also think about factors such as price and avaibility. Several tests, including ones performed by the Finnish Defence Forces during the 1920s - 1950s show that out of natural materials, flannel (cotton & wool) outperforms other materials and weaves in terms of low thermal conductivity and comfort. Wool interlock fabric costs at least five times more than cotton flannel. Wool flannel is warmer by the weight than the cotton flannel tested but the difference in human scale is no more than few hundred grams in the final outfit. Suitable wool flannel is also hard to find.

Let me quote a report from Finnish 2nd Division's 1924/25 winter maneuvers (translation by yours truly): "During the last winter there were multiple trials to find out which was better, [cotton /Martti] flannel or [tricot] wool undergarment. No conclusive answer was reached but 2nd Division's trials showed that both could be used. However the Lapland maneuvers indicated that at least during cold weather ["pakkassäällä"] the flannel ones were better.

Other study conducted by Finnish Institute of Occupational Health's Oulu Regional Office in mid-1980s confirmed that a cotton flannel footwrap was warmer than a knitted wool sock. However tests by Finnish Defence Forces confirmed again that wool flannel is better than cotton flannel, now in footwraps.

Here are references to several interesting studies of fabric and clothing performance that I was able to find both online and in printed form:

Properties of knit underwear fabrics of various constructions
A comparative study of the protective value of certain fabrics in still and moving air
Pellikka, I. 1938. Erikoisen pakkasvaatetuksen tarpeellisuus meillä. Sotilashallinnollinen aikakauslehti 7/1938, 283-299.
Heinonen, J. 1950. Mieskohtaisessa vaatetuksessa ja varustuksessa (hiihtovälineet ml.) todetut puutteet sekä suunnitelma vaatetus- ja varustusprobleemien ratkaisemiseksi erikoisolosuhteemme huomioon ottaen. Finnish National Archive. SKK-1/431.

Martti, out of interest, what do you use as a base layer when it's -25°C, assuming, a) you're doing something physical where you might sweat, and b), you are outside for an extended period and don't have the opportunity to step inside anywhere if you managed to get sweaty?

I have used one or two pairs of knitted cotton long johns with light flannel finishing, somewhat similar what Mallory used during his Everest expedition. They have served me well down to -25°C.

 

[susi]

Ok, I don't think we're going to agree on this and I certainly don't want to divert what has been a very interesting and informative thread So I try to close my contribution:

Many decades ago, the "choices" for cold weather underwear were perhaps more limited than today, and what was considered "a good idea" then, doesn't mean it's a good idea today (remember back then people smoked "Sportsman Cigarettes", doctors regularly prescribed heroin and lightweight camping tents were made of canvas). Today there are better options, which help transfer the moisture away from the skin and towards outer layers (where it dries much quicker in extreme cold because of the low humidity).

I also wondered if I was alone in thinking that cotton is a bad choice for a base layer in cold conditions, but a quick Google showed others agree.

Finally, I'm conscious that this forum is not only a resource for the more experienced outdoors(wo)man, newcomers also turn up here for advice getting themselves kitted out. So at least for those with little or no experience of cold conditions, I stand by my original one-liner that started this debate:

In cold conditions, I wouldn't advise cotton underwear next to the skin.

Have a good weekend!

 

[treadlightly]

Gents, the debate has been entertaining and informative. Thank you.

 

[susi]

Gents, the debate has been entertaining and informative. Thank you.

Glad you enjoyed it

Behind it all, there's maybe a little "regional rivalry" and teasing from my side You see, Martti lives in our capital city, a place with high buildings, theatres, libraries, smart restaurants and people in suits and smart shoes. I live a few hundred Km north, fewer people, harsher climate and where you only have to remove your puukko when you go to bar . Think of it as someone who lives in Kielder forest, bantering with someone from living in Kensington

(Waiting for Martti to call me a juntti now! )

 

[udamiano]

I think the main point in both arguments is that 'cotton when wet' this is the main issue, yes cotton does not perform as well as other 'when' wet. As stated above I have used cotton as a base layer (next to the skin) in sub -25 temps, without any problems, but I may also point out that during this time body temperature was self-regulated with the simple expedia of adding or removing layers as and when needed, even down to base layers. As long as the base layer doesn't get saturated in sweat, it performs its function of creating a barrier between the skin and more rougher and irritating layers without a problem.
Would I use it today? then in truth the answer would be 'No' as there are more efficient and better materials; I tend to use merino for cold weather base layers today, purely because it has become finer weaver that can be worn close to the skin, and provides a less smelly option for extended periods of time.
But even with something like merino this doesn't mean you can go out and get all sweaty, and be happy in the knowledge that your safe from the cold, that is an illusion. Layer management is still a very important part of being in the wild in extreme sub temperatures, basically take it off when your warm, and put it on when your cold, it doesn't get any easier than that.

 

[Martti]

So at least for those with little or no experience of cold conditions, I stand by my original one-liner that started this debate:

Although you insist it, it still does not make it true.

You see, Martti lives in our capital city, a place with high buildings, theatres, libraries, smart restaurants and people in suits and smart shoes. I live a few hundred Km north, fewer people, harsher climate and where you only have to remove your puukko when you go to bar

Actually my roots are at the Peräpohjola ("Far North") region but also at Satakunta. Until the recent times there were e.g. reindeers and sheeps, which I helped to take care in my own way, in my extended family's possession. Helsinki is where the jobs, the schools and the money mostly are so I can only be out of the Southern Finland for some weeks at the time.

 

[Chris the Cat]

This bit REALY is interesting!
No one I know has ever mentioned cotton, in any form as being a good or safe idea in arctic winter temps NEXT TO THE SKIN.
I must admit, my experince of cotton at these temps is nil as I have always used wool ( with VERY good effect.)
More please!
( but please don't fall out over it guys, you both make for VERY interesting reading! )
My best.
Cat.

 

[Martti]

Not only the 2nd Division but many other units found cotton flannel underwear to be better than knitted wool ones: "There seems to be no disagreement among the units that flannel underwear is the best underwear during the winter time" (Jaeger Brigade in 1926); "Flannel shirts have proven to be excellent. Often too warm when used with a wool sweater. Despite of the opinions expressed that a linen shirt would be enough or that knitted wool [shirt] would be better, there is general opinion and agreement for flannel shirt. Double-napped flannel is recommended since it will better absorb the sweat and does not feel wet. Although it does dry slower [than single-napped], it does not feel cold" (General Staff in 1926).

 

[susi]

Although you insist it, it still does not make it true.

Absolutely agree Martti But we're on a forum, where we can all given an opinion, even standing firmly, but politely, by that opinion if we think it might be in someone's interest.

 

[The Cumbrian]

Having been obliged to use cotton underwear for winter fellwalking when I was a kid (I couldn't afford to buy specialist gear like base layers), I still think back with horror at those icey days out when I was knackered, but knew that I couldn't stop or I would start to freeze with the saturated cotton against my skin. Since I started work and bought my first proper base layer I've never looked back, and I never wear cotton next to the skin or as a mid later when I'm outdoors unless it's mid summer, our sat around the fire with a drink in my hand.

Research and anecdotal evidence quoted from seventy years ago is not invalid, but neither has it been stood up against modern fabrics and clothing.

Cheers, Michael.

 

[Martti]

Research and anecdotal evidence quoted from seventy years ago is not invalid, but neither has it been stood up against modern fabrics and clothing.

We could also change our skis to snowmobiles due of their superiority over skis but many of us choose not to do it. I do not feel the need of modernizing all aspects of my life and I like to follow the old ways and at the same time save some money while doing it (oil-based technical textiles are quite expensive nowadays).

 

[susi]

I had hoped to leave this thread, but...

We could also change our skis to snowmobiles due of their superiority over skis but many of us choose not to do it.

Are snowmobiles superior? They are noisy, require fuel/servicing and and cost in the thousands. Skiis cost in the low hundreds and I've never broken a pair. A more realistic comparison would be the old fashioned skiis with single cordage bindings:

Or a modern ski...

Which one are you using Martti?



Now be honest, skiis and snowmobiles are hardly comparable to a comparison between cotton underwear (low tens &#8364 and wicking alternatives (also low tens &#8364....