scouts-l Mail Archive for July of 2000: Re: Cots/bunks
Bruce E. Cobern (bec@PIPELINE.COM
Sat Jul 15 2000 - 18:16:09 CDT
> From: Scouts-L Youth Group List [mailto:Scouts-L@listserv.tcu.edu]On
> Behalf Of O'Canna, Dan (CPPR-MM)
> Sent: Friday, July 14, 2000 9:17 AM
> For many years our camp has used some military surplus bunks
> with steel frames and a suspension of wire mesh and coil
> springs. Perhaps since the camp opened in the early 60's.
> Even mil-spec items will wear out sooner or later. With
> the kind of use/abuse Scouts dish out it is a wonder it wasn't
> sooner, I suppose. An unsuccessful attempt to find similar
> new items was made, so now the goal is to find a different
> style of bunk or cot that will hold up to Scout camp use.
My guess is that it is the springs on these bunks that are no longer
usable. My experience is that the frames are virtually indestructible.
The problem is the springs "wear out" and replacements are difficult or
impossible to find. The suggestion which I made to the camp where I will
be starting tomorrow, and which they did not accept, was to continue to use
the FRAMES. You do this by bolting a plywood sheet onto the top of the
frame. The result is a bunk that will last essentially forever. I think
that is far superior to canvas folding cots, which is what the camp we
attend went to. The canvas rips or gets cut, the end spreader bars
disappear, the canvas stretches and sags, the frames break, or they get
stolen. They find they have to make annual replacements of a percentage of
Another problem is that the folding canvas cots are lower to the ground
than the metal bunks. Some troops, including ours, have the Scouts arrive
in camp with foot lockers (or the current Rubbermaid style equivalent).
That is because we go for two weeks. The foot lockers (most of them) would
nicely slide under the metal bunks. They do not fit under the canvas cots,
both because they are lower, and because of the middle set of legs. This
leave much less available floor space in the tent.
Bruce E. Cobern