Author Topic: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS  (Read 748 times)

Litehiker

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 80
SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
« 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 tents, especially US companies' tents, are made that outdated way.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.

gunwharfman

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2338
Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
« Reply #1 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?

Litehiker

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 80
Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
« Reply #2 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.

alan de enfield

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 476
Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
« Reply #3 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




astaman

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 88
Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
« Reply #4 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.

fernman

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2051
Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
« Reply #5 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.

vghikers

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 628
Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
« Reply #6 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.




Owen

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 980
Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
« Reply #7 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.

vghikers

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 628
Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
« Reply #8 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.


gunwharfman

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2338
Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
« Reply #9 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.

vghikers

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 628
Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
« Reply #10 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.

gunwharfman

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2338
Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
« Reply #11 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!

fernman

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2051
Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
« Reply #12 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  ^-^

vghikers

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 628
Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
« Reply #13 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.

fernman

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2051
Re: SOME OUTDATED BASIC TENT DESIGNS
« Reply #14 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.