Walking Forum

Main Boards => Gear => Topic started by: Litehiker on 20:09:38, 10/03/19

Title: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: Litehiker on 20:09:38, 10/03/19
DISCLAIMER: This is a rant.


1.)  I eschew ANY backpacking tent that requires the inner tent and poles be set up before attaching the fly. The result of doing this during a rainstorm is to get the inner tent soaked. And naturally dismantling these tents in a storm results in the same problem. Seems the designer and fabricators of these tents have never backpacked in inclement weather - or (say it ain't so) EVER backpacked.


Yes so many backpacking ("wild camping"?) tents, especially US companies' tents, are made that outdated way. Thankfully more tents are coming one the market that permits the inner tent to be pre-attached to the underside of the fly before the oles go on or off.


2.)  Many "wedge" shaped tents (mistakenly called "dome" tents) have absolutely no way of preventing rain or snow from falling in on the floor the instant the door is opened. WHY in the name of all that is sane do the designers of these tents think that is OK? Aaaarrrrgghhh!
And even worse these wedge tents are usually called "mountaineering" tents yet there Xd pole design is not good in a heavy windstorm. You do not see Hilleberg "wedge" tents, and for good reasons.




Any other rants you folks have about idiotic tent designs?


Eric B.
Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: gunwharfman on 21:17:55, 10/03/19
I have a tent as you describe in Item One. If its raining when I want to pitch, I just pitch the outer first and then pitch the inner. Never been wet yet, just a few drops here and there. I've never personally found it to be a real handicap, a bit of a wiggle maybe but thats all. I know its designed to be pitched inner first, then outer, but then again how many times in the past few years has it rained, just as I want to pitch, can't rember that many personally. The beauty of my inner tent is that on a hot day, if I want a snooze in the afternoon, I just pitch it and have a nap. I can still look around (its mesh) and it keeps the bugs out! Sometimes the best sleep of the day!

Sorry, not sure what a 'wedge' tent is?
Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: Litehiker on 06:02:53, 11/03/19
gwm,


Help me hear. I'm puzzled as to what type of tent you have that you can accomplish this.

->How can you pitch your tent with poles and fly unless the fly has pole attachment points or pole sleeves?
->How does your inner tent attach to the fly or poles?


Eric B.
Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: alan de enfield on 08:16:07, 11/03/19
gwm,


Help me hear. I'm puzzled as to what type of tent you have that you can accomplish this.

->How can you pitch your tent with poles and fly unless the fly has pole attachment points or pole sleeves?
->How does your inner tent attach to the fly or poles?


Eric B.



I have a MSR Hubba Hubba Clone and you can pitch it :


Tent only
Flysheet only
Tent first then add Fly sheet
Flysheet first then add Tent


(https://i.postimg.cc/LgT0QVQb/A6.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/LgT0QVQb)
Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: astaman on 08:52:24, 11/03/19
If you are likely to pitch your tent in the rain a lot avoid inner pitch first tents and buy one that pitches outer first or both at the same time. If you are likely to be camping in a hot dry place where you want the tent as a basic bug proof shelter without the fly sheet buy an inner pitch first tent. Inner pitch first tents are designed to meet this need among others and are not simply outdated. And, as has been said, there are models that will do both. There isn't really a problem here.


I don't understand your comment about dome shaped tents being wedge shaped. Tents come in a range of structures, eg. a-frame or ridge, geodesic, semi-geodesic, dome, tunnel and ones, such as the Vango Helium series that are wedge shaped and so on. Whether the snow blows in through the door has more to with how you pitch the tent relative to the wind rather than with the specific design of the tent I would have thought. Most tents marketed as mountain tents fit to be used in the snow tend to be geodesic designs because of their high integral strength. Wedge shaped tents like the one mentioned above tend to have being light weight and having a small pack size as their key criteria.
Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: fernman on 08:59:24, 11/03/19
Is there a lightweight tent where you can unzip the flysheet in the morning and get out without the wet material (from condensdation inside and often from rain outside) hanging there so you  get wet hair, face and clothes as you push past it?


The inner of my Zephyros unzips all the way round the top, leaving the material laying along the edge of the groundsheet. There are two plastic toggles (similar principle to those on a duffel coat) and elastic eyes to hold it in place, except that it is a bit of a fiddle to try and roll the material up and far quicker and easier to just bunch it up.
However, I found on my first trip with this tent that the toggles are ideally placed for you to kneel on - ouch! - when you are faffing about in the porch, so one of my first 'mods' was to cut them off.
Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: vghikers on 10:29:21, 11/03/19
Quote
I eschew ANY backpacking tent that requires the inner tent and poles be set up before attaching the fly. The result of doing this during a rainstorm is to get the inner tent soaked. And naturally dismantling these tents in a storm results in the same problem. Seems the designer and fabricators of these tents have never backpacked in inclement weather - or (say it ain't so) EVER backpacked.

Really?. This is shallow thinking and usually trotted out by people stuck in the 1980s. I insist on exactly the opposite.

We've always used inner-first pitching tents on our joint trips and never any problem at all. It's fairly easy to lay the fly down first and spread out the inner beneath it and thread the poles in, no problem with a wet inner even in heavy rain. Same in reverse when depitching.

Wet inners are not always about rain: in complete contrast on my Wolds Way backpack for instance, I used a Lasercomp that pitches inner and outer together. On this trip there wasn't a single drop of rain and the days were quite warm, however it was very humid with much condensation at night.
When pitching on the second and subsequent nights, the whole thing was a sopping wet pile of nylon and, when pitched, there was standing water in the bathtub groundsheet that I had to mop out with my ZAP towel.



Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: Owen on 10:34:12, 11/03/19
Every tent I've had over the last twenty odd years has gone up inner and outer together. I only split them to air them before putting away at the end of the trip.


What  drives me nuts is the ground sheet that are so flimsy (just so they can advertise the tent as "lightweight"), that you need to use a footprint. Footprint's weigh and cost extra, their just a con. Why can't they put a ground sheet on that's up to the job in the first place and be honest about the weight.
Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: vghikers on 10:41:00, 11/03/19
Quote
Is there a lightweight tent where you can unzip the flysheet in the morning and get out without the wet material (from condensdation inside and often from rain outside) hanging there so you  get wet hair, face and clothes as you push past it?

I don't know of one offhand, but it happens on every tent we've ever used and we don't regard it as a problem - the effect is very slight. Maybe the annoyance depends on exactly how you get out: we turn around and emerge backwards, the wet fly just licks our backs briefly.

Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: gunwharfman on 10:42:35, 11/03/19
I have a Zepyros One as well. I tend to use it in the colder months.

My other tent is a Marmot Pulsar 1P. To pitch the outer first is easy, I bought their footprint, every pole slots in exactly where it needs to go, then whoosh, on goes the outer, in speed terms Marmot have helped by the 'instant' securing clips they use. I know my tent so well I'm sure I do it blindfold! Before I bought the foot print I used to use a couple of pre-measured strings with loops in the end, which worked almost as well.

In my experience of my tent, if its raining in the morning, its easier to keep dry whilst dismantling than my Zepyros is. At least I can stay under a dry cover whilst I pack my gear. Due to the smaller internal space and sit up space in my Zepyros, packing my rucksac inside my tent is very difficult for me, I'm 74 and no longer that flexible a person. So in my case I find that with the Zepyrose I have to be in the rain most of the time when getting organised.

Personally I wouldn't say that my Zepyros is any easier to pitch in the rain either, just a bit different. The problem you pose is not something that I am personally bothered about when deciding on what tent to buy.
Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: vghikers on 10:54:22, 11/03/19
Quote
What  drives me nuts is the ground sheet that are so flimsy (just so they can advertise the tent as "lightweight"), that you need to use a footprint. Footprint's weigh and cost extra, their just a con. Why can't they put a ground sheet on that's up to the job in the first place and be honest about the weight.

Agreed, I guess the idea is that a footprint can more easily be replaced than the groundsheet (but not more cheaply: a proprietary footprint is typically about the same price as a groundsheet replacement). Also of note is that the footprint is usually just as thin as the groundsheet it fits under, not exactly confidence boosting.
We are involved in all this at the moment: the tent design we like most has an extremely thin groundsheet, we'll probably get it replaced rather than buy a footprint.
Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: gunwharfman on 11:17:07, 11/03/19
I always carry a groundsheet, I would not want to damage my footprint, as you write, too expensive!
Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: fernman on 11:48:09, 11/03/19
we turn around and emerge backwards

...and get wet knees.

I guess the idea is that a footprint can more easily be replaced than the groundsheet (but not more cheaply: a proprietary footprint is typically about the same price as a groundsheet replacement). Also of note is that the footprint is usually just as thin as the groundsheet it fits under, not exactly confidence boosting.
We are involved in all this at the moment: the tent design we like most has an extremely thin groundsheet, we'll probably get it replaced rather than buy a footprint.

Gelert groundsheet, 1.8 x 1.2 m (6 x 4 ft), 250g, and £5 when I bought it in 2014  ^-^
Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: vghikers on 12:25:53, 11/03/19
Quote
...and get wet knees.
?
Knees never touch the floor (and if they did, it would be just inside the groundsheet)  :)

Quote
Gelert groundsheet, 1.8 x 1.2 m (6 x 4 ft), 250g, and £5 when I bought it in 2014 
Yes, there are cheap ones at the bottom end, I was referring to proprietary ones for expensive ultralights like Big Agnes etc.
Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: fernman on 13:33:43, 11/03/19
?
Knees never touch the floor (and if they did, it would be just inside the groundsheet)

You are clearly fitter than me then  :)   If I exited backwards it would be more of a shuffle.
Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: tonyk on 14:48:26, 11/03/19
 Never really worried about the inner tent getting a bit damp as once the stove is going it soon dries out.
Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: fernman on 17:41:34, 11/03/19
Never really worried about the inner tent getting a bit damp as once the stove is going it soon dries out.

(http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/w492-EVCHQo/hqdefault.jpg)
Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: alan de enfield on 18:06:35, 11/03/19
(http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/w492-EVCHQo/hqdefault.jpg)



Yup - that'll dry it off - an with all the additional ventilation, no need to worry about Carbon Monoxide either.
Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: Litehiker on 19:10:50, 11/03/19
ferryman, Excellent "illustration" of how to dry a tent with a stove.  O0


Regarding wedge tents - These are tents that have only one pole configuration, namely a big X. Open the fly door and in comes the rain. It could be blowing from the tent's rear and the floor would still get instantly wet. I know, I owned likely the first wedge tent in the late '70s, a Jansport 2 person wedge. In my tenting ignorance I never considered this problem until it happened. Without a proper fly for protection in the form of strut supported fly you have a failed design.

 
Owen has it right. The best tents for rainy conditions can be set up with the inner tent already attached  
 















Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: tonyk on 19:33:26, 11/03/19
(http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/w492-EVCHQo/hqdefault.jpg)
I have actually seen that happen on a camp site at Reeth.The owner of the tent was using an old paraffin stove that tended to have unpredictable flare ups with disasterous consequences.
Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: Owen on 20:09:08, 11/03/19


Regarding wedge tents - These are tents that have only one pole configuration, namely a big X.



I think what your talking about is what is known as a "Mid" over here, short for pyramid tent.




Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: Litehiker on 20:43:28, 11/03/19
owen,


No, I'm referring to a tent that is truly wedge shaped and the X'd poles form a "dome" shape when viewed from the side and a wedge shape viewed from the front.


The only 'mids I'd consider would use two poles, one on each side. A center pole drives me nuts. Been there, done that and absolutely don't like it. But I saw a really nice nylon single wall 'mid for 4 people with two support poles and even a wood stove inside with a long chimney pipe and good spark arrester. They guys were hunting elk and had it set up at the trailhead parking area. They used horses to get back into the good elk areas.


Eric B.
BTW, what the he!! time is it in Old Blighty now? 4: 44 AM?
Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: Owen on 21:08:53, 11/03/19
20.45



Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: jimbob on 21:30:50, 11/03/19
But I saw a really nice nylon single wall 'mid for 4 people with two support poles and even a wood stove inside with a long chimney pipe and good spark arrester. They guys were hunting elk and had it set up at the trailhead parking area. They used horses to get back into the good elk areas.
We limeys know this type of tent well enough, just the sort of thing we walkers would carry on one hip to balance a decent hip flask on the other whilst heading up Pen-y-Ghent. 

Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: Owen on 21:37:25, 11/03/19
owen,


No, I'm referring to a tent that is truly wedge shaped and the X'd poles form a "dome" shape when viewed from the side and a wedge shape viewed from the front.




Something like this?



(https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/921/tO7Avo.jpg) (https://imageshack.com/i/pltO7Avoj)
(https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/923/tBCo1k.jpg) (https://imageshack.com/i/pntBCo1kj)
Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: gunwharfman on 13:36:35, 12/03/19
If we assume for the moment that tent designs are 'outdated' what then are the tent designs that not outdated? Does such a tent exist?
Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: Litehiker on 19:58:37, 12/03/19
Owen,

That is exactly what I call a "wedge" tent. Howsomever this tent has a fly that actually covers the entrance. And as I mentioned, it uses struts to hold the "awning" out. Thus I feel this design has brought the tent "up to date". BTW, Tent Police are watching...


gunny,

It depends upon the intended use of the tent.
A beach cabana shade structure of canvas is fine. Or a northwoods canvas "hot tent" for use with a tent stove is fine, so long as you have a pulk or snowmobile to haul its weight and bulk. Otherwise a canvas tent for backpacking ("wild camping") is outdated.

Any tent whose design has been greatly improved upon by other similar designs is outdated to one extent or another. (IMHO, of course.)


God forbid we should be caught carrying an outdated tent!   ::)


Eric B.
Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: Owen on 21:13:59, 12/03/19
Owen,

That is exactly what I call a "wedge" tent. Howsomever this tent has a fly that actually covers the entrance. And as I mentioned, it uses struts to hold the "awning" out. Thus I feel this design has brought the tent "up to date". BTW, Tent Police are watching...


Eric B.


That's actually a single skin gore-tex tent, worked really well in the cold dry air of the high Andes unless in Britain.   
Title: Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
Post by: dave_p on 11:45:40, 13/03/19
All tents are something of a compromise aren't they.  Different people want different things - lightness, space, big door, high walls, wind resistance, rain resistance, small pack size, single wall, twin wall, freestanding etc etc.


I have an older all in one pitch which is fine.  It's a little heavy though and not freestanding.


I also wanted a freestanding tent with a big weight reduction and good liveable space.  The tent I recently bought is officially inner pitch first, although it is possible to pitch with the fly first if you have a separate footprint and use the fast-fly configuration.  It's awkward put doable if the weather is really bad.  My tent goes up really quick so there's not much time for the inside to get wet, but if it does, I always carry a microfibre cloth for drying it anyway - it's useful when condensation builds up on still dewy nights.


I understood all this when I bought the tent and am happy with the arrangement.  I couldn't find an outer pitch tent which provided all the other features I wanted.