A conversation here and discussion about pelts has made me think and I am a bit perplexed.

A cloak made from animal skins with the fur left one. Which is warmer to wear, fur inside or outside? I think that the leather outside to repel water and fur inside to trap heat would be better. Or is leather inside and fur outside better?

I have googled various groups all around the world and I am confused, some seem to favour fur outside and others the fur inside. It may be that there is no real difference.

But I was wondering what the brains trust thinks. Given the challenge of a cold and rainy or snowy environment which is better, fur inside or out? No double layers allowed.

Skunkworks said:

A conversation here and discussion about pelts has made me think and I am a bit perplexed.

A cloak made from animal skins with the fur left one. Which is warmer to wear, fur inside or outside? I think that the leather outside to repel water and fur inside to trap heat would be better. Or is leather inside and fur outside better?

I have googled various groups all around the world and I am confused, some seem to favour fur outside and others the fur inside. It may be that there is no real difference.

But I was wondering what the brains trust thinks. Given the challenge of a cold and rainy or snowy environment which is better, fur inside or out? No double layers allowed.

fur inside I reckon, if the fur gets matted with crap it would lose its insulative properties

Skunkworks said:

A conversation here and discussion about pelts has made me think and I am a bit perplexed.

A cloak made from animal skins with the fur left one. Which is warmer to wear, fur inside or outside? I think that the leather outside to repel water and fur inside to trap heat would be better. Or is leather inside and fur outside better?

I have googled various groups all around the world and I am confused, some seem to favour fur outside and others the fur inside. It may be that there is no real difference.

But I was wondering what the brains trust thinks. Given the challenge of a cold and rainy or snowy environment which is better, fur inside or out? No double layers allowed.

Fur on the inside would be warmer for my 2 cents. The fur insulates by reducing air movment. A brisk wind would move air away from deeper down in the fur if it were on the outside. On the inside the leather is the windstoper (trademarked by Gore).

wookiemeister said:

Skunkworks said:

A conversation here and discussion about pelts has made me think and I am a bit perplexed.

A cloak made from animal skins with the fur left one. Which is warmer to wear, fur inside or outside? I think that the leather outside to repel water and fur inside to trap heat would be better. Or is leather inside and fur outside better?

I have googled various groups all around the world and I am confused, some seem to favour fur outside and others the fur inside. It may be that there is no real difference.

But I was wondering what the brains trust thinks. Given the challenge of a cold and rainy or snowy environment which is better, fur inside or out? No double layers allowed.

fur inside I reckon, if the fur gets matted with crap it would lose its insulative properties

in this case the fur creates a warm bubble of air between the body and outer layer. you’d just to make sure there was some decent air gap between the body and outerskin., pushing the fur down inside by creating a flattened fur layer would lose its effectiveness I reckon

wookiemeister said:

Skunkworks said:

A conversation here and discussion about pelts has made me think and I am a bit perplexed.

A cloak made from animal skins with the fur left one. Which is warmer to wear, fur inside or outside? I think that the leather outside to repel water and fur inside to trap heat would be better. Or is leather inside and fur outside better?

I have googled various groups all around the world and I am confused, some seem to favour fur outside and others the fur inside. It may be that there is no real difference.

But I was wondering what the brains trust thinks. Given the challenge of a cold and rainy or snowy environment which is better, fur inside or out? No double layers allowed.

fur inside I reckon, if the fur gets matted with crap it would lose its insulative properties

Tis a bit confusing, I have been googling images, eskimos seem to prefer leather out, but others like those in Russia seem to prefer fur out. Mongols are a mix.

puffer jackets are effective only as long the puffiness exists

Skunkworks said:

wookiemeister said:

Skunkworks said:

A conversation here and discussion about pelts has made me think and I am a bit perplexed.

A cloak made from animal skins with the fur left one. Which is warmer to wear, fur inside or outside? I think that the leather outside to repel water and fur inside to trap heat would be better. Or is leather inside and fur outside better?

I have googled various groups all around the world and I am confused, some seem to favour fur outside and others the fur inside. It may be that there is no real difference.

But I was wondering what the brains trust thinks. Given the challenge of a cold and rainy or snowy environment which is better, fur inside or out? No double layers allowed.

fur inside I reckon, if the fur gets matted with crap it would lose its insulative properties

Tis a bit confusing, I have been googling images, eskimos seem to prefer leather out, but others like those in Russia seem to prefer fur out. Mongols are a mix.

its easier to waterproof leather than fur

Tis a bit confusing, I have been googling images, eskimos seem to prefer leather out, but others like those in Russia seem to prefer fur out. Mongols are a mix.
—————-
I took your ‘which is better’ as being which is better at keeping you warm. Fur in would be warmer IMO, but may be uncomfortable, hence why some wear it the other way.

wookiemeister said:

Skunkworks said:

wookiemeister said:

fur inside I reckon, if the fur gets matted with crap it would lose its insulative properties

Tis a bit confusing, I have been googling images, eskimos seem to prefer leather out, but others like those in Russia seem to prefer fur out. Mongols are a mix.

its easier to waterproof leather than fur

Polar bears swim in icy waters. I think that many furs are waterproof, perhaps taking advantage of physics at the small scale.

On Game of Thrones it’s always fur out.

Polar bears swim in icy waters. I think that many furs are waterproof, perhaps taking advantage of physics at the small scale.
———————-
Living furs may excrete oils to help though.

wookiemeister said:

Skunkworks said:

wookiemeister said:

fur inside I reckon, if the fur gets matted with crap it would lose its insulative properties

Tis a bit confusing, I have been googling images, eskimos seem to prefer leather out, but others like those in Russia seem to prefer fur out. Mongols are a mix.

its easier to waterproof leather than fur

Assume the fur is of a sort that naturally sheds water or is treated to shed water. It would be a bit silly to have a fur jacket that you rely on for life and survival that fails with the first shower. And also assume it is pretty easy to waterproof leather.

morrie said:

wookiemeister said:

Skunkworks said:

Tis a bit confusing, I have been googling images, eskimos seem to prefer leather out, but others like those in Russia seem to prefer fur out. Mongols are a mix.

its easier to waterproof leather than fur

Polar bears swim in icy waters. I think that many furs are waterproof, perhaps taking advantage of physics at the small scale.

their fur would be living fur that gets groomed and has oils feeding out to the hair tips by body secretions. dead fur doesn’t have that i’d say.

Stealth said:

Polar bears swim in icy waters. I think that many furs are waterproof, perhaps taking advantage of physics at the small scale.
———————-
Living furs may excrete oils to help though.

The skin might, but the fur is not alive I think. Like hair.

morrie said:

Stealth said:

Polar bears swim in icy waters. I think that many furs are waterproof, perhaps taking advantage of physics at the small scale.
———————-
Living furs may excrete oils to help though.

The skin might, but the fur is not alive I think. Like hair.

but hair gets greasy right, unless all those shampoo adverts are wrong

morrie said:

Stealth said:

Polar bears swim in icy waters. I think that many furs are waterproof, perhaps taking advantage of physics at the small scale.
———————-
Living furs may excrete oils to help though.

The skin might, but the fur is not alive I think. Like hair.

Come on Morrie. you know that I meant ‘fur on a living beast may have oils excreted through the skin that help to waterproof it’

Stealth said:

morrie said:

Stealth said:

Polar bears swim in icy waters. I think that many furs are waterproof, perhaps taking advantage of physics at the small scale.
———————-
Living furs may excrete oils to help though.

The skin might, but the fur is not alive I think. Like hair.

Come on Morrie. you know that I meant ‘fur on a living beast may have oils excreted through the skin that help to waterproof it’

I wonder if there are any nanoscale effects that help keep it hydrophobic?

sibeen said:

On Game of Thrones it’s always fur out.

Yeah my googling of various things points to a pretty even match, albeit fur outside might denote a rank or superiority. Not talking about leopard skin embellishments, real communities that survive in cold climes. Turks as well favour fur outside.

It may have something to do with lice?

I am genuinely confused as I would expect over time, trial and error and experience would point to a warmer solution. But there may be other considerations like lice that means it is not the best solution.

morrie said:

Stealth said:

morrie said:

The skin might, but the fur is not alive I think. Like hair.

Come on Morrie. you know that I meant ‘fur on a living beast may have oils excreted through the skin that help to waterproof it’

I wonder if there are any nanoscale effects that help keep it hydrophobic?

there might be but nature seems to like exuding grease onto hair, birds for example

Skunkworks said:

sibeen said:

On Game of Thrones it’s always fur out.

Yeah my googling of various things points to a pretty even match, albeit fur outside might denote a rank or superiority. Not talking about leopard skin embellishments, real communities that survive in cold climes. Turks as well favour fur outside.

It may have something to do with lice?

I am genuinely confused as I would expect over time, trial and error and experience would point to a warmer solution. But there may be other considerations like lice that means it is not the best solution.

lice just don’t grow on you, you have to catch them from someone. you could always just turn the coat inside out for a brief period to get rid of lice at sub zero temps, they would snap freeze

wookiemeister said:

morrie said:

Stealth said:

Come on Morrie. you know that I meant ‘fur on a living beast may have oils excreted through the skin that help to waterproof it’

I wonder if there are any nanoscale effects that help keep it hydrophobic?

there might be but nature seems to like exuding grease onto hair, birds for example

Of course! Bird hair. Why didn’t I think of that.

I am genuinely confused as I would expect over time, trial and error and experience would point to a warmer solution. But there may be other considerations like lice that means it is not the best solution.
—————————
Like what I said before. Fur inside may be warmer be uncomfortable. Most people would rather be a degree or two cooler but not itchy and breaking out in a rash.

wookiemeister said:

lice just don’t grow on you, you have to catch them from someone. you could always just turn the coat inside out for a brief period to get rid of lice at sub zero temps, they would snap freeze

LOL

Stealth said:

I am genuinely confused as I would expect over time, trial and error and experience would point to a warmer solution. But there may be other considerations like lice that means it is not the best solution.
—————————
Like what I said before. Fur inside may be warmer be uncomfortable. Most people would rather be a degree or two cooler but not itchy and breaking out in a rash.

That may be right, the more of images I see, the more fur outside I see.

you can get insects hanging around you if you sleep rough near grass

you’ll start itching,

the fur possibly itches but if you put another layer inside it shouldn’t matter

morrie said:

wookiemeister said:

there might be but nature seems to like exuding grease onto hair, birds for example

Of course! Bird hair. Why didn’t I think of that.

Love your work, Morrie.

mammals guard hairs, down hairs, sebaceous (oil) glands (to limited degree), hollow hairs (less common but more effectiove insulation)

birds: uropygial glands, down, outer feathers, …

http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previous_issues/articles/2005_09_30/nodoi.12989321631044737104

answer: layering. fur against skin for inner layers. waterproofed oilskins for out layers requiring waterproofing.

species differences can dictate hair in vs out on clothing: – stiff-haired hides (stout bristles outside : i.e.: caribou. Waterproof skins: seal: Dense fur worn inside: polar bear, fox.

>>Dense fur worn inside: polar bear, fox.

Sheepskin too. (I have got my uggies on now!)

podzol said:

>>Dense fur worn inside: polar bear, fox.

Sheepskin too. (I have got my uggies on now!)

Not even cold tonight. Currently 16.5°C. Frosts won’t be back until Monday.

neomyrtus_ said:

mammals guard hairs, down hairs, sebaceous (oil) glands (to limited degree), hollow hairs (less common but more effectiove insulation)

birds: uropygial glands, down, outer feathers, …

http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previous_issues/articles/2005_09_30/nodoi.12989321631044737104

answer: layering. fur against skin for inner layers. waterproofed oilskins for out layers requiring waterproofing.

wookiemeister

right once again

wookiemeister said:

right once again

Really? Let’s have a look.

wookiemeister said:

their fur would be living fur that gets groomed and has oils feeding out to the hair tips by body secretions. dead fur doesn’t have that i’d say.

Fur / hair is essentially dead. In the case of polar bears, it’s dead, hollow guard hairs over dense down hairs (this is important to note). Oily secretions are spread over the dead hairs by wicking and grooming after being secreted from the hair follicle, as they are in other mammals. Hair/fur protruding from the epidermis consist of basically long strands of dead keratin.

wookiemeister said:

there might be but nature seems to like exuding grease onto hair, birds for example

Birds don’t have hair, but feathers, and birds have to actively preen this oil onto their feathers with their beaks, heads etc.. It doesn’t simply ooze out all over the birds. And the oils have different function in different kinds of birds, and one function is to keep the feathers strong and feather barbules interlocking. They also have down feathers which traps an insulating air layer. Most importantly, there are structural and nanoscale effects for waterproofing (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18997276), which you have clearly ignored.

And ‘nature’ doesn’t ‘seem to like’

wookiemeister said:

you can get insects hanging around you if you sleep rough near grass

what?

anyway, fur coats and down jackets tend to stop secreting oily substances one removed from the animal. It’s only residual grease, and some wools/furs are degreased to some degree (like wool).

neomyrtus_ said:

anyway, fur coats and down jackets tend to stop secreting oily substances one removed from the animal. It’s only residual grease, and some wools/furs are degreased to some degree (like wool).

I once spun a triple ply and didn’t wash the skeins.. I knitted it into a jumper that had a reasonable neck seal(roundneck) and wore it in outdoor nursery work. found it to be perfectly waterproof until she who must be seen to be believed, tossed it in the washing machine on standard hot cold wash

neomyrtus_ said:

wookiemeister said:

right once again

Really? Let’s have a look.

wookiemeister said:

their fur would be living fur that gets groomed and has oils feeding out to the hair tips by body secretions. dead fur doesn’t have that i’d say.

Fur / hair is essentially dead. In the case of polar bears, it’s dead, hollow guard hairs over dense down hairs (this is important to note). Oily secretions are spread over the dead hairs by wicking and grooming after being secreted from the hair follicle, as they are in other mammals. Hair/fur protruding from the epidermis consist of basically long strands of dead keratin.

wookiemeister said:

there might be but nature seems to like exuding grease onto hair, birds for example

Birds don’t have hair, but feathers, and birds have to actively preen this oil onto their feathers with their beaks, heads etc.. It doesn’t simply ooze out all over the birds. And the oils have different function in different kinds of birds, and one function is to keep the feathers strong and feather barbules interlocking. They also have down feathers which traps an insulating air layer. Most importantly, there are structural and nanoscale effects for waterproofing (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18997276), which you have clearly ignored.

And ‘nature’ doesn’t ‘seem to like’

wookiemeister said:

you can get insects hanging around you if you sleep rough near grass

what?

you are hair splitting and trying to deconstruct what I have said rather than understand what I have written that is understandable to any reasonable person.

nice try though but you will have to try harder.

wookiemeister said:

you are hair splitting and trying to deconstruct what I have said rather than understand what I have written that is understandable to any reasonable person.

nice try though but you will have to try harder.

hair splitting.. har har..

the problem is more about comprehensibility.

roughbarked said:

wookiemeister said:

you are hair splitting and trying to deconstruct what I have said rather than understand what I have written that is understandable to any reasonable person.

nice try though but you will have to try harder.

hair splitting.. har har..

the problem is more about comprehensibility.

I don’t believe so

no sane or reasonable human being breaks down into tiny pieces every sentence with a thorough explanation of exactly what they mean

the human mind by the time it hits teenage years is able to piece together enough from a sentence to understand its meaning without going through the agonisingly painful tooth pulling process of careful explanation – anything other is the way of madness

neo has an axe to grind about me taking Jehovah’s name in vain so I expect it from her, sometime set some bait even in a gilded cage known as “the holiday forum”

Skunkworks said:

Stealth said:

I am genuinely confused as I would expect over time, trial and error and experience would point to a warmer solution. But there may be other considerations like lice that means it is not the best solution.
—————————
Like what I said before. Fur inside may be warmer be uncomfortable. Most people would rather be a degree or two cooler but not itchy and breaking out in a rash.

That may be right, the more of images I see, the more fur outside I see.

Plus fur on the outside is more fashionable.

I agree with the person who said fur on the inside increases warm, trapped air near the skin while the leather outside provides protection from the elements.

Why would a protective barrier, say rated at 1.23

Be of any different value veiwed from the otherside…