>>2849597I believe there's been a miscommunication due to my shitty English. Cotton does have wicking behavior in the technical sense, because it absorbs water and spreads that moisture through the fabric. I understand what you mean there, and you're right about how the fibers behave. Your reasoning falls within lab-sense while mine's from practical Scandinavian outdoor usage. The difference shows up in how the two materials handle moisture after it has moved. Cotton holds onto the water it absorbs, so it stays wet for a long time while providing no insulation, which leads to feeling cold, heavy, and damp in outdoor conditions that I can not afford. People in my country has always gone for wool, or certain synthetics (some with inner-mesh, especially the military), but what type of synthetics are not always easy for there are so many it is maddening. Synthetics don't absorb water into the fibers as much like you said, so moisture stays on the surface and can move outward and evaporate much more quickly, and this why synthetic fabrics usually feel dryer.
I think we’re mostly using the word "wick" in different ways. In the lab-sense cotton wicks very well, but in real-world outdoor use, synthetics and wool tend to manage moisture more effectively without the downside of lost insulation and longer drying time. For base layers, cotton would lead to illness and at worst death up her in the north. But its effectiveness for windproofing and cold outer shells is amazing if the weight could be ignored, ex: gaiters, waxed cotton canvas shelters, windproof anoraks, etc (I use them all).
Since the topic was originally about which would be preferably to buy for winter, the loss of majority of its insulation and how long the moisture linger and that it would be used for a long time (hence wool's anti-bacterial properties). Wool or a wool+synthetic blend would be more applicable for serious outdoor usage.
