Brynje Thermo Mesh Review (Wool and Synthetic Base Layers)

I’ve been using fishnet since they arrived on the scene in the 1970s, back then cotton or cotton blends, sometimes fully synthetic.  I once found wool fishnet but it was too itchy for me.  I’ve been using Bryjne more recently and am very happy with it.  Somehow I can’t convince anyone else to try them, maybe this article will help.

Note that you can occasionally find the older kind of fishnet on eBay or Etsy much cheaper than Bryjne, but you have to compete with a sort of kinky crowd who wears fishnet at parties with nothing over it.

A quick note about getting really cold.  While waiting for food to cook in -10 degF weather and below in the evenings in the ADKs we used to run 50 feet or so and back again in deep snow.  This is pretty strenuous and it always warmed us up, at least for a while.  I never found myself shivering uncontrollably, so I can’t say if it would work in this case, but it’s worth a try.  Of course you’d have to get out of your sleeping bag, a daunting proposition when it’s really cold, but it’s better than freezing to death!

I’ve been a Brynje fan for years and have been plugging it here ad nauseam.

I do think that you get a bit more warmth-for-weight – but as you say, the key benefit is moisture management. It really comes into its own:

1. In wet cold when you might be getting damp under your rainwear
2. For active use in dry cold when sweating,  when you’re at risk of flash cooling when you stop
3. For any water-based activity in the cold when you might be in a survival situation if you get an unexpected soaking.

In these scenarios, it traps a layer of warm air against your skin, insulating you from your damp or wet outer layers. In my experience, this makes a significant difference to your comfort and safety.

It also works fine as a general base layer – so if you’re on a long hike with mixed conditions there’s no reason not to use it all the time. But the benefits are more marginal in warmer weather, though if you get very sweaty it does help to keep moisture off your skin which can reduce the risk of chafing under pack-straps etc.

To get the best out of it, I like to cap it with a fast-wicking lightweight base layer with a deep zip for dumping heat. This way it can handle a very wide temperature range without any faff.

I’ve only used the polypro version. It’s not the most comfortable against the skin, but that’s not really noticeable in use. It’s very hard-wearing and dries in a flash on the body. But get one of the darker colours – the white gets a bit grubby over time. And you might want to size up – the cut is tight.

Ideal for cold and rainy areas like the PNW, Scotland, Scandinavia or New Zealand. And for winter walking, climbing or ski-touring. Hillary wore Brinje to the top of Everest – it’s an idea that’s been proven for over half a century. It really does work. So don’t be put off by the “interesting” looks and give it a try!

Millet also has Drynamic Mesh underwear that has been available for the last 5 seasons or so I think. Synthetic but also less expensive.

Rex – for me the cooling effect you mention is actually an advantage.

Tightly capped, and you heat up fast when it’s chilly.

A little draught and you stay warm in moderate cold without overheating when you’re working hard.

Open up the over-layers and you can dump heat instantly.

So provided you have good zips on your over-layers it’s easier to fine tune your temperature without having to change layers so often.

@John

A lack of articles may mean very few have any experience with the stuff. More obscure explanations are not needed. So – write an article yourself! Include photos, weights and prices of course.

PCT hiker who was rescued when all his down gear failed in a storm and he nearly perished.
I suggest it was NOT his down gear which failed, but rather his management of that down gear. Let your down gear, or your synthetic gear for that matter, get soaking wet and you have only yourself to blame. Even if you fall in a river, your warmth gear should be suitably protected inside your pack. Only a poor workman blames his tools.

Cheers

Early this summer I wore a Polartec Delta LS top while doing a bunch of training hikes up and down a ski-hill here in Southeast Michigan in preparation for a trip out west.  The Delta fabric works reasonably well on hot, humid days, and with built-in UPF protection, I don’t have to slather on the sunblock.  What I don’t like about Polartec Delta is the somewhat  coarse knit of the fabric.  After a while it becomes quite irritating on the shoulders with a pack on.   At the end of a training session, I could take off the Delta top to change into a dry cotton T-shirt, and the skin on my shoulders would be covered with a reverse impression of the knit in the shirt.  Less than desirable.

I can’t imagine wearing any significant winter pack weight with a fishnet baselayer.  That’s where I think the new Brynje would set itself apart from the cheaper Wiggy’s stuff.  The Wool Thermo T-Shirt has solid panels on the shoulder to reduce chafing.  It’s unfortunate that Brynje didn’t carry this design element through to any long sleeved fishnet tops I see offered on their website.

The Brynje blog pitching the polypro versions: https://www.brynjeusa.com/adventure-blog/making-the-case-for-a-synthetic-mesh-base-layer/

Interesting that Schoeller makes the polypro Super Thermo fabric and that Brynje claims that they’ve successfully addressed polypro’s infamous stink factor. Andrew, did you find the Super Thermo to be more or less stinky than a typical polyester base layer?

Not sure it was mentioned in the review, but Schoeller also makes the lightweight 80/20 wool/nylon version. I would bet it’s pretty durable.

Also, Andrew, Ryan did a more technical review of mesh baselayers some years ago, where he stated that mesh baselayers were likely to result on the wearer more finely adjusting their internal temperature – due to more moisture staying on the skin and remaining sensible than if wicked away – either by slowing down or adjusting layers. Did you find this to be the case in use?

I used a Brynje t-shirt last winter in the Whites and I was very happy with its performance. I was never too hot or too cold. It seemed to make layering less fiddly–I didn’t need to adjust my layers as much as other times in the past to avoid excessive sweat or getting too cold.

Regarding the choice between Wiggy’s vs. Brynje’s, for me it was a question of material. Wiggy’s seems to be nylon and Brynje’s polypro, so I chose the latter as I have the impression that it should dry faster. But I have never used anything but synthetic Brynje so I really don’t know. From a financial, standpoint, Brynje on sale last year was $40 on Amazon. I looked at the Nordic Life link, and it’s about the same shipped to the US for a short sleeve top.

Hi Dondo,

You asked for elaboration on my comment about both Brynje and Wiggy’s fishnets having pros and cons. If you haven’t already done so, I’d start by looking at the products on the Brynje and Wiggy’s websites. Here are my subjective observations:

Brynje (I’ve only used the synthetics, not the wool versions):

• Fit very well and are soft and very comfortable.
• The openings are pretty small, and seem to get smaller with laundering.(I’m guessing bigger openings function better than smaller openings.)
• VERY EXPENSIVE, and then shipping from Europe adds even more to the total cost.

Wiggy’s (only offers synthetics):

• I find the bodies run snug. I’m not a big guy (5’6″/145 lbs), nor have a huge belly, and I buy the wiggy’s tops in Large to get the looseness I want in the torso. The downside is the arms are SUPER LONG. I’ve taken several Wiggy’s tops to the local seamstress and had the sleeves shortened. It adds a few bucks to the cost (still way cheaper than Brynje), but it makes them fit me better.
• The opening holes are larger than Brynje and don’t seem to contract from laundering. I prefer the larger openings.
• The Wiggy’s material is “harder/stiffer” than the Brynje (I think this helps create/preserve the “standoff” gap between your skin and the outer garment layer). Once you’re wearing the Wiggy’s stuff under an outer shirt, you don’t notice it, but overall I’d say I find the Brynje material is softer.

That’s about it. Both brands are great. For no particular reason, I find I tend to pull the Wiggy’s out of the drawer more often than the Brynje.

I am a big fan of wearing the fishnet tops. I own the bottoms, but frankly don’t find I think they add as much advantage as the tops. I tend to wear the fishnet bottoms under insulated ski pants, but when I’m going hiking in regular trousers I either don’t wear long bottoms or I often wear the very lightest versions of Smartwool/Icebreaker long underwear bottoms.

I hope this helps. (Oh, Wiggy’s also sells a mesh weave top they call a “second layer” that is very air-permeable and they suggest wearing it over the fishnets and under the outer shirt. I use it, and it really does add considerable warmth. If it’s warmer than about 30 degrees, I don’t use it, or I get too hot.)

Re the comment about drying time and different materials:

I’m no materials expert, but I have both the Brynje and Wiggy’s sythetics (no clue about the materials composition) and they both dry super-quick and I don’t see any noteworthy difference. If there’s any slight difference, it would be that the Brynje are softer and “spongier” than the Wiggy’s (which are a harder weave) and when actually wearing them, I seem to detect that the Brynje holds moisture and can feel damp a bit more than the Wiggy’s (I dry both in the drier, although I’m not sure you’re “supposed” to, and either one dries in a flash.).

Hi Dondo,

I’m sure you’ll enjoy your new Brynje fishnets.

That’s a bummer about Wiggy’s not shipping within CO. I don’t live in CO and I’d forgotten about this policy that started earlier this year. Wiggy’s probably explained it to you, but for the other, curious, readers, the story is: Colorado, like several of the greedy tax states that need ever-increasing revenue to fund your “Free Stuff,” has passed a law requiring online venders to track, collect, pay, and keep records, for the sales tax laws of every little taxing jurisdiction in the state, based on the shipping address of the buyer. This requirement obviously adds tremendous additional overhead for the merchant to cover the administrative record-keeping. Wiggy’s decided to just stop selling by mail order within CO. In-state buyers now either have to go to the store in Grand Junction (and simply pay the GJ local tax), or have some work-around with somebody out of state who will receive the shipment and then get it to the recipient.

It’s a scandal when our greedy laws force us to forego American made products and buy foreign goods from abroad at higher prices. Perhaps if the Brits can ever extricate themselves from the EU, the Brynje prices from Nordiclife might improve.