This arrived in the post today: https://atwoodrope.com/collections/battle-cord (actually bought from knivesandtools.co.uk but thought best to post actual maker's site (I used an apostrophe - do I get hero points?)
Any one else used it?  It's a bit thicker and stiffer than paracord and claims 2650lbs breaking strain as opposed to paracord's 550lbs.  Might be usable for making handles for things or roof racks etc. Thoughts?

2650 lb-force breaking strength is 1200 kg-force, or 11.8 kN which is not bad.

That said, I get 370 kg-force out of my 3mm shoelaces on my caving boots* which are a dyneema core and polyester sheath. https://www.dinghy-rope.co.uk/3mm-dyneema-evolution-race-dyneema-rope.html

A purer (PU-coated) dyneema braided rope on the same site at 3mm gets 900 kg-force breaking strength; 4mm will allegedly get you up to 2000 kg-force breaking strength (the D12 stuff; interestingly quite a bit more than Beal rate their 5mm dyneema).


(strictly speaking only my old caving boots as I haven't put them on my new caving boots yet, but the old laces have just snapped so will need to be before I do it next...)

Not used it but I always expect aromatic polyamide based ropes and cord to smell like strawberry's. (is that apostrophe correct?)

Antwan said:

Not used it but I always expect aromatic polyamide based ropes and cord to smell like strawberry's. (is that apostrophe correct?)

Click to expand...

No

SamT said:

Antwan said:

Not used it but I always expect aromatic polyamide based ropes and cord to smell like strawberry's. (is that apostrophe correct?)

Click to expand...

No

Click to expand...

I suppose it could be considered that the original sentence included an implied possessive. In other words "...to smell like the smell that belongs to strawberries," In this case the apostrophe might be considered correct by some people.

English is a means of communication, so all that matters is whether communication has been achieved. The greengrocers' apostrophe may be "wrong" but I don't think it fails to communicate.

.

Graigwen said:

English is a means of communication, so all that matters is whether communication has been achieved. The greengrocers' apostrophe may be "wrong" but I don't think it fails to communicate.

.

Click to expand...

The problem there is that the only people who would realise that communication had not been compromised by a misplaced apostrophe are the ones who understand the purpose and correct usage of apostrophes, and of course they would always get it right anyway.

The rest wouldn't know for sure exactly what they had said.

Do us a favour, and restrict Apostrophe Wars to the relevant thread.  Please  :kiss2:

I was expecting some useful advice about cordage....

try this stuff - I use it for rigging "invisible" restraint lines in TV and film work. Invisible because it's so thin!

https://www.cortlandcompany.com/sites/default/files/downloads/media/product-data-sheets-technora-12-strand-12x12_0.pdf

not sure about it's use for caving though....

JasonC said:

Do us a favour, and restrict Apostrophe Wars to the relevant thread.  Please  :kiss2:

I was expecting some useful advice about cordage....

Click to expand...

[gmod]Quite right - please keep on topic.[/gmod]

Sorry about that JasonC.

In a poor but honest attempt to make amends I have done a bit of research.

That 5.6mm Battle Cord has a mass per unit length of 23.9g/m, a breaking load of 11.8kN and a cost of ?0.70/m (from a UK distributor).

I have looked up the performances of a few other items:
4mm Paracord
andrewmc's 5mm Race Rope (dyneema with a polyester cover)
Burt's Technora (not one I have come across before)
5mm Dyneema from Amazon
9mm SRT rope
6mm accessory cord.

In order to compare like with like (so far as is possible) I have modified the quoted mass/unit length, breaking load and cost/m to predict what these would be if the items were available in 5.6mm diameter.
This has been done simply by multiplying the quoted value by (5.6/diameter) squared.

The results look like this:

Battle Cord:                    25.8g/m                              11.8kN                        ?0.70/m
4mm Paracord:              15.1g/m                                4.9kN                        ?0.59/m
5mm Race Rope:              ?                                        12.5kN                        ?2.87/m
5mm Technora:              24g/m                                  28.7kN                          ?
5mm Dyneema:              16.3g/m                                32.6kN                        ?3.47/m
9mm SRT rope:              20.5g/m                                8.8kN                        ?0.44/m
6mm accessory cord      ?(similar to SRT rope?)        7.8kN                        ?0.73/m 

What does it mean?
I suggest the following:

The Battle Cord is indeed much stronger and denser than Paracord.

If you want strength at any price (and that will include poor shock absorbing) then Dyneema is the choice.

If pure Dyneema is available thin enough then it would be more hideable than Technora, strength for strength.

The Race Rope seems to perform poorly, but it is made of (stiff) Dyneema with a (much less stiff) polyester cover and this cover makes up a significant proportion of the bulk of the cord (it's on the outside where a given thickness contributes most to the cross-sectional area) while contributing little to the load-bearing. Presumably it's like this because Dyneema will not hold a dye and in sailing you have to be able quickly to tell one rope from another.

It should be noted that some of the information given by the suppliers (especially the diameters I think) will be approximate and any errors will be made bigger by the squaring process in the conversion to 5.6mm.
So the figures above should be taken as a guide only.
Like I said, a poor but honest attempt.