Just wanted to bump this and ask everyone's opinion on a name for this design?

It's single strand .
Has a bowline and a weave as core techniques to know.
Can be untied.
Suited to paracord , dyneema , cord and alike.
And it's a split pouch.


I really think this design should be added to the forums FAQ section as I think it's possibly one of the easiest and most effective designs.

Cheers guys

Usually, there is an ancestor to modern sling designs. I can easily think of several examples, but your sling I believe is unique. In case you don't know, it is already the Mersa. Maybe the Down Under 

I really encourage everyone to give it a try.
Trust me once you you get the cordage type suited to you and the Ammo to the pouch it will be well weighted and have light cords. I like this as I feel it helps with a clean release.
As for names  to my friends refer to my specific sling as my DRUID sling or my sling +1 however I don't think it reflects the construction. I think that a short name is best.
Maybe not the downunder as we already have the Aussie seatbelt sling?
Rs refers to a single strand as a noodle.?
Maybe the Mersa sling ? But I don't want to call it that myself but if the name catches then I'm ok with it I guess.

I guess that there's a way you could try to classify sling designs but there's so many variants . The easiest is by pouch. But then it gets a lot harder.
As a sling made in under 1 hour with basic principles and modern cordage i would argue that it's the best design with a single strand.

JudoP wrote on Mar 28^th, 2018 at 7:22am:


A family tree would work. One branch solid pouches broken down into material and cord attachment. Another branch split pouches...

A major difficulty with a taxonomy I've found is dealing with split vs solid when in actually it is pretty much a continuum.

1) You start with a fully solid pouch

2) You then put a small hole in the centre for nothing more than extra grip or even decoration.

3) Then that small hole can become a small slit which may affect in a subtle way how the pouch deforms and grips.

4) Then you have a significant split which allows even flat pouches to significantly deform and cup.

5) Then you have variants such as aussie pouches and rockman which have a very large 'split' component but also a significant 'solid' component.

6) Then you have a basic split pouch however the split is flat woven or leather straps

7) Then you have a braided split with flat braided cords

8) Then finally a regular split pouch with solid cord or regular braided split.

It's not easy to see where the divide should be drawn and what categories can be combined together and which forms need a separate hybrid category (if anything). If you aren't careful you can make a categorization rule which produces absurd results. E.g. a split pouch which is actually a solid pouch with a 1mm hole in it.

At present I'm thinking the most logical way to divide is to split by three categories- split, solid and hybrid.

Pouches are fully solid if there is no split or not enough of a split to meaningfully change the deformation of the pouch e.g. 1), 2).

Pouches are fully split slings if and only if the split arms are braided or single cord e.g. 7), 8).

Everything else 3)-6) inclusive would be hybrid.

This seems to be the simplest and most logical division which seems to avoid the most egregious of edge cases without resorting to very complex rules to fit our intuitive ideas. I'll continue with this as the initial split anyway then post the results in a new topic as I've definitely steered this thread way off course.

Thanks guys !! Well it's up there thanks to CA!! Hopefully it becomes a popular choice for some , and the Mersa sling it is !

Thanks ! It's a good easy design ,  I use it for all my slings.