Another First World problem. Can any sock pundits help?

[slowmotion]

Never mind Brexit, the US election result or a possible nuclear war, the greatest minds of our generation should be concentrating on my sock usage.

I have a large number of pairs of synthetic socks, (polyester?..acrylic?) the type used for walking, skiing, cycling etc. They are quite thick and have a smooth side, and a loop-pile side. Which side should go next to my skin? I'm guessing that the loop-pile side will trap air better than the smooth side, so it is probably a better insulator. If that's the case, I think it would perform better if the air around it was as still as possible and protected by the thickness of the sock and then my shoes. On the other hand, the loop-pile probably soaks up sweat quite well if it's next to my skin, thus destroying some of its desirable thermal properties.

I'm worried sick about this and would be grateful for your opinions.

Thank you

 

[Pro Tour Punditry]

One good thing about insomnia is there are only 3 sleeps until Christmas

 

[slowmotion]

[QUOTE 4567003, member: 21629"]Ha, someone else also suffers from insomnia ...
If I would be you I would do this: one sock goes loop-pile side, another - smooth side. Different colours are essential. [/QUOTE]
Spookily enough, I manage this every day, but I have a problem. One leg lacks 650 mm of vein from groin to ankle (borrowed by a surgeon), so I can't really do a controlled experiment to determine the coldness of each foot. I do know that both feet were absolute frozen after the Brighton ride. Alas, I didn't make a note of my sock orientation.

 

[Hill Wimp]

If this is to turn into a valid social experiment we really need to be sure that you are taking this seriously and at least recording daily sock orientation. Otherwise htf are we supposed to analyse the results correctly.

 

[Fab Foodie]

I've just succumbed and gone and made a cup of tea to sugar-hit me back to sleep. But now apart from a fit of the giggles, I've this issue to think about.
Tsk!
Thanks.

 

[biggs682]

better than counting sheep

 

[Tin Pot]

Never mind Brexit, the US election result or a possible nuclear war, the greatest minds of our generation should be concentrating on my sock usage.

I have a large number of pairs of synthetic socks, (polyester?..acrylic?) the type used for walking, skiing, cycling etc. They are quite thick and have a smooth side, and a loop-pile side. Which side should go next to my skin? I'm guessing that the loop-pile side will trap air better than the smooth side, so it is probably a better insulator. If that's the case, I think it would perform better if the air around it was as still as possible and protected by the thickness of the sock and then my shoes. On the other hand, the loop-pile probably soaks up sweat quite well if it's next to my skin, thus destroying some of its desirable thermal properties.

I'm worried sick about this and would be grateful for your opinions.

Thank you

It's mostly English, but I can't understand it - is it American?

 

[Hill Wimp]

Well, we are all lost socks in the laundry basket of life.

I love that I must remember to use that today

 

[mjr]

Toe seam inwards. Usually seems to put loops inwards but not always.

User is correct in general, though.

 

[PaulB]

This is no joke really. There was once a time (and it's not so long ago) that you could absolutely depend on the long life of a Marks and Spencer sock. You would lose one of the pair before there was any sign of damage but not anymore. Oh no! Nowadays, M&S socks should have a use-by date on them because with even moderate wear, they'll be in holes within 18 months. And M&S socks STILL tend to be the best value out there as well! Their finest minds have clearly had obsolescence built in at the M&S sock factory so customers will return and buy them more frequently.

 

[Yellow Saddle]

You know me. I won't just accept any old answer. I would wear them one way on one foot and another on the other foot. Then I would go for a long walk and see if there really is a difference. Then, as a control, I would do a blind test. I'll get someone to fit the socks and shoes for me in the same way as above, and then go for another walk. If there is a definite difference, voila! If not, I'll repeat the experiment until I have a significant statistical bias. If the said bias doesn't manifest, I'll force the entire family and the two dogs to also do the experiment in order to get a better sample.

Report back once you've done this. Don't forget to record the temperature, terrain conditions and time-in-shoes for each leg of the experiment.

 

[Tim Hall]

You know me. I won't just accept any old answer. I would wear them one way on one foot and another on the other foot. Then I would go for a long walk and see if there really is a difference. Then, as a control, I would do a blind test. I'll get someone to fit the socks and shoes for me in the same way as above, and then go for another walk. If there is a definite difference, voila! If not, I'll repeat the experiment until I have a significant statistical bias. If the said bias doesn't manifest, I'll force the entire family and the two dogs to also do the experiment in order to get a better sample.

Report back once you've done this. Don't forget to record the temperature, terrain conditions and time-in-shoes for each leg of the experiment.

Ah, is walking a mile in another man's shoes part of the investigation process?

(FWIW, I read the subject as "Can any sock puppets help?")

 

[marknotgeorge]

I had trouble getting to sleep last night. Why didn't I come on here instead?

 

[slowmotion]

This is no joke really. There was once a time (and it's not so long ago) that you could absolutely depend on the long life of a Marks and Spencer sock. You would lose one of the pair before there was any sign of damage but not anymore. Oh no! Nowadays, M&S socks should have a use-by date on them because with even moderate wear, they'll be in holes within 18 months. And M&S socks STILL tend to be the best value out there as well! Their finest minds have clearly had obsolescence built in at the M&S sock factory so customers will return and buy them more frequently.

I would be grateful if you would desist from discussing the quality of M&S knitwear. It's not good for my blood pressure.

 

[Oxo]

This is no joke really. There was once a time (and it's not so long ago) that you could absolutely depend on the long life of a Marks and Spencer sock. You would lose one of the pair before there was any sign of damage but not anymore. Oh no! Nowadays, M&S socks should have a use-by date on them because with even moderate wear, they'll be in holes within 18 months.

I read a report recently about repairing holes in socks, but I can't remember where, darn it.