Articles (2020)

Introduction

The Grand Shelters Icebox Igloo Building Tool is an alternative approach to building an igloo. Instead of the traditional method of packing snow, cutting blocks, carrying them, shaping them, and assembling them, the Icebox’s slip form and pivot rod allow you to build blocks in place which is a lot faster and dryer. Although the Icebox takes care of the igloo engineering for you, there’s still a lot of technique to master, as explained in its 20-page instruction book and video. In this review we describe how the tool works, assess how easy it is to use, and reveal how snow conditions affect its ease of use.

What’s Good

• Compact and easy to attach to a pack
• Weighs only 5 pounds, about the same as a tent
• Packable, especially for group trips
• Faster (and dryer) than conventional igloo-building methods
• Relatively easy to use with packable snow
• Builds a perfect igloo that is very strong

What’s Not so Good

• Requires skill development
• Challenging to use with sugar snow
• Pivot stake loosens and moves

Specifications

Performance

Out of the box, the Icebox comes in a compact flat package measuring 24 inches x 14 inches x 3 inches. All of the components fit neatly inside the two halves of the block-molding form, and the unit is secured with two nylon straps. It’s concave on one side and easily attaches to the front of a backpack. With a packed weight of about 5 pounds (depending on which components you take), the Icebox is fairly lightweight (about the same weight as a 2-person tent) and very packable.

Compared to conventional igloo building methods – where you cut snow blocks, carry them to the igloo, and shape them to fit – the Icebox follows a completely different approach. It uses the basic concept of a cement form to construct the blocks in place. The main components are a center stake, a pivot rod, and a slip form at the end of the pivot rod which is packed with snow to create the snow blocks. The center stake and pivot rod serve to create a perfect dome-shaped igloo. With the slip form, the wall of the igloo is built by creating inclined blocks in place while advancing in a spiral. The result is a perfect igloo which is structurally a very strong shape. The cross-section is actually a catenary curve where the pressure pushing in is equalized by the pressure pushing down.

The igloo-building crew consists of a form handler inside the igloo and a shoveler on the outside. Because of these logistics, the minimum crew is two people; it’s simply not practical for one person to do both jobs. If more than two people are available, the other people can work in by trading jobs, building a ramp around the igloo (to stand on when the top is closed in), or fetching snow.

To get the spiral started, you need to build three partial blocks to create a ramp (see photo below). Also it’s critical that the first layer be set at the correct inward angle. With each successive layer, five to eight in all, the length of the pivot rod is adjusted to place the slip form in exactly the right place and inward angle. The walls curve sharply inward at the top of the igloo, so the process changes to the person inside using only one side of the slip form to support the advancing wall being packed by a person on the outside.

If you are following us so far, you are probably thinking “Hey, this is a piece of cake, let’s get one and have some fun building igloos with family, scout troop, or friends.” Well, there’s more that you need to know. The bottom line is this: the Icebox Tool takes care of the engineering part of igloo building, but there’s still a lot of technique involved that you need to master.

Here are a few technique factoids to illustrate the point:

• You need to pack a solid platform for the igloo and let it set up
• The center stake must be solidly planted so it doesn’t come loose
• You need to learn the pivot rod settings to build the size igloo you want
• You must set the first layer at the correct angle
• Packing snow in the slip form requires skill and finesse (you need to pack snow to snow and expand the form a bit so it stays in place)
• Releasing and moving the slip form requires skill so you don’t fracture the block you just completed
• Transitioning from one layer to the next requires some finesse with adjusting the pivot rod length
• Closing in the top requires a long reach and packing skills

We could go on in great length about all the nuances involved in mastering the technique, but we will spare you the details in this review. Fortunately, Grand Shelters is very straightforward about the steep learning curve, and provides lots of information on their website (including the user manual) to help you decide whether or not you want to purchase the tool. When you receive the Icebox Tool, it comes with a 20-page instruction manual plus a video to walk you through the learning process. We recommend reading the manual and watching the video several times, then building a smaller first igloo near home, then reading the manual and watching the video again, then advancing to building a larger igloo in the backcountry.

Last, and definitely not least, the type of snow makes a big difference with how easy it is to build an igloo using the Icebox tool. After building six igloos under different conditions we found the Icebox relatively easy to use with any snow that will form a snowball (new, wet or older snow), moderately easy to use with fresh powder snow, and challenging to use for sugar snow and depth hoar. The secret to using the latter types is pounding it repeatedly with your shovel before you load it into the slip form. Basically you are doing the same thing that an avalanche does with it – “warming” it up so it sets up well after it is packed in the form. Once you master that technique you will find that the Icebox tool will make an igloo with any type of snow. With sugar snow and depth hoar, it just takes more time and energy to do it.

Assessment

The Grand Shelters Icebox Igloo Building Tool makes igloo building more do-able and fun for the average person. It handles the engineering aspects for you (which some people would argue is part of the challenge and fun), but leaves plenty of technique for you to master. Bottom line, it takes some determination and effort to master the technique, but once you become skilled, igloo building is a wonderful winter activity in snow country. Using the tool with any type of packable snow is relatively easy, however sugar snow is challenging but do-able.

One issue you are probably wondering about is whether the Icebox Igloo Building Tool can be relied upon as the only option for backcountry shelter. The short answer is that it depends on your expertise and travel plans. On the one hand it would be very risky to embark on a winter camping trip and depend on the Icebox to build an igloo shelter each night. But on the other hand you can build your own backcountry “hut” in advance and later camp in it, and it is entirely conceivable that you could build your own hut system. Other users may build an igloo in their backyard as a family activity, build one in the backcountry for a warming hut, or engage in recreational igloo building with friends.

The Icebox tool is made of high impact ABS plastic and aluminum tubing. It is the same plastic used for car parts and luggage, which means it’s extremely durable but not unbreakable. It is certainly possible to bend the pivot rod or break one of the plastic attachments, but with proper use the Icebox should last a lifetime.

What’s Unique

With the Grand Shelters Icebox Igloo Building Tool you use a slip form and pivot rod to build snow blocks sequentially in place, which is a lot easier and dryer compared to the conventional method of cutting blocks with a snow saw, carrying them, and fitting them.

Recommendations for Improvement

The Icebox is well designed and constructed. In many ways it’s a specialty tool that needs to be accepted on its own terms. However, a few tweaks here and there would help make it more user-friendly:

• Re-write sections of the user manual to provide clearer instructions. The current narrative requires several reads to understand the process.
• Provide a sturdier center stake that is less likely to loosen
• Revise the design of the slip form at the U-bar end so it doesn’t slip down (with the present design, the form handler has to hold the form so it doesn’t slip down)
• Provide a card summarizing the pivot rod settings that can be taken to the field, and/or improve the list imprinted on the slip form so it’s more easily understood
• Simplify the strap system that secures the collapsed Icebox tool – possibly by putting arrows on the form to indicate the direction the straps are inserted.

Introduction

The Big Agnes Seedhouse SL3 is among the lightest double wall, three-person tents on the market. It offers excellent views with the fly removed, full rain protection, and thoughtful design features. But how is the sizing for three adults?

What’s Good

• Lightweight for a three-person double wall tent at just over 4 pounds
• Good separation between inner tent and fly
• Center pole greatly increases usable space
• Quick and easy set up
• Three well-placed interior pockets
• Fantastic bug-free views with the fly removed

What’s Not So Good

• Sized more like a 2.5 person tent
• Lack of a vent leads to condensation inside the fly
• Small vestibule
• Rainfly storm flap snags in the zipper and is easily damaged

Specifications

Performance

The Big Agnes Seedhouse SL3 is the larger version of the Big Agnes Seedhouse SL2. It is a double wall tent with a full mesh inner tent and a lightweight silnylon rainfly. Like the SL2, the SL3 features a single shock-corded ridge pole with dual hubs. In addition, the SL3 includes a second pole that crosses the middle for increased usable space and separation between the inner and outer tents.

At 4 pounds 2.9 ounces (trail weight), the Big Agnes Seedhouse SL3 is one of the lightest double wall, three-person tents on the market. However, at only 36 square feet of floor space, it is tight for a three-person tent. Fitting three full-size adults in the SL3 requires that one person be facing the rear of the tent and that full-length sleeping pads overlap at some point. The vestibule is also too small to store three packs and still be able to enter and exit the tent. With this in mind, I would call the Big Agnes SL3 a “2.5-person tent”; it would be fine for a family of three that includes a young child and is very comfortable for two adults and gear.

Setting up the SL3 is very quick and can easily be done in just a few minutes. The main pole is deployed first and inserted into grommets at the corners of the inner tent and then attached with plastic clips. The middle pole is then attached to mid-point grommets and attached with plastic clips. The two poles do not connect at their intersection. On its own, the inner tent is freestanding and requires no stakes.

The rainfly is pitched by attaching six snapping buckles at the base of the tent and then adjusting for equal tension. Two stakes at the front and one at the rear are all that are needed for a minimal setup with the fly. There are a total of six stakeout points on the inner tent and eleven on the fly for a grand total of seventeen.

The inner tent of the SL3 is made entirely of 20 denier nylon mesh with a 7.5 inch high bathtub floor. With the rainfly off, this tent offers complete 360 degree views, one of the best views I’ve ever seen in a tent. This was especially nice during nights with heavy bug pressure; after using mainly single wall tents for quite a while, the expansive views while hiding from mosquitoes was a wonderful change. While the mesh of the inner tent gives the impression of being fragile, no damage occurred during field testing.

Internal storage of the Big Agnes tent is excellent. There is a wide pocket above the door and another pocket on either side of the door. The use of mesh makes it very easy to see individual items and there is plenty of room for cameras, headlamps, sunglasses, etc. Despite stuffing the pockets, we never experienced any snags or tears in the mesh fabric.

The silnylon rainfly and generous bathtub floor offer full rain protection during downpours. While I didn’t experience snow loading with this tent, when we reviewed the Seedhouse SL2, it held up nicely to several inches of snow. With the middle pole in addition to the ridge pole, I would expect that the SL3 would have similar, if not better results than the SL2.

When camping in moderate winds at the treeline, the SL3 showed solid wind stability. By using the guylines that are midway up the fly, the tent experiences very little side to side movement. However, the rainfly does not attach to the poles at these points so the fly pulls away from the tent structure. While this is common in three-season tents, attachment points like this help a great deal with wind stability. Further, the middle and ridgeline poles do not attach at their intersection, instead they “float” independently of each other. In heavy winds, it would be nice to have the option of locking those together (although it would be very easy with a Velcro strap). With its generous guyouts, steeply-sloped front and rear, and good pole structure, the SL3 handles moderate winds very well. With some modifications (Velcro strap at the intersection and sewn-in Velcro attachments at the upper guyout points), it would be able to handle very high winds.

Headroom in the SL3 is very good – especially in the middle of the tent. I’m 6 feet 1 inch tall and I have plenty of room to sit up and stretch out, even with another hiker in the tent. The door area is much lower however, and requires bending over to enter the tent. With the rainfly attached, entry into the tent is even harder. A larger entryway or a second door would be a welcome addition, especially in a three-person tent.

With the mesh inner tent and good separation between the inner and outer tents, I never experienced condensation inside the inner tent during field testing. However, I experienced quite a bit of condensation on the inside of the rainfly. This is due to restricted airflow.

The best ventilation systems in tents tend to use a “high/low” system of venting in which air flows from a lower vent through a vent up high, creating a chimney effect. While an overhang at the rear of the SL3 allows for the low part of that system, the lack of an upper vent traps air under the fly. While this is not a huge problem due to the double wall design (and the ability to carry the rainfly separately from the inner tent), a high vent on the rainfly would significantly increase airflow, ventilation, and condensation resistance.

While I didn’t experience any durability problems with the inner tent, the rainfly was damaged by an overzealous hiker. The storm flap of the rainfly tends to get caught in the zipper. This is definitely annoying and makes it difficult to quickly close the rainfly. With practice, though it isn’t too hard to separate the two when zipping. One night, however, a hiking buddy experienced this problem and forced the stuck zipper along, tearing the fly. While this was obviously hiker error, I took this as an opportunity to look at Big Agnes’ customer service. They were wonderful and had a completely new fly out to me within a week. While you shouldn’t experience a similar problem, it is nice to know that Big Agnes stands behind their products with integrity.

Assessment

The Big Agnes Seedhouse SL3 is an excellent double wall tent. However, the small door, small vestibule, and limited interior space make it pretty cramped for three adults. But if you think of it as a 2.5 person tent (two adults plus gear), it quickly moves to the head of its class. This is a great tent for a family of three or two hikers looking for extra room.

What’s Unique

The full mesh inner tent makes for excellent views during heavy bug pressure.

Recommendations for Improvement

The biggest improvement to the Big Agnes Seedhouse SL3 would be a name change to the SL2.5. To be a great three-person tent it would need:

• Several more inches of width
• A larger door (or a second one)
• A larger vestibule

Beyond that, my recommendations are minor:

• For increased wind stability, pole attachments at the upper guyline attachments and a connection at the pole junction would be nice, but are probably beyond the scope of this three-season tent.
• A reinforcement of the storm flap on the rainfly would also be nice – if only to avoid damage caused by heavy-handed hikers.
• An upper vent on the fly would really help with ventilation.

Introduction

The Tarptent Rainshadow 2 is the bigger brother to the Squall 2 which won the 2005 Backpacking Light Lightitude award for Best Single Wall Shelter. This three-person Tarptent shares all of the features of the Squall 2 and offers excellent living space for three adult hikers for just over 2 ½ pounds. The floored version (tested) features a floating bathtub floor that keeps the sleeping area dry while taking tension off the fabric. The doorway can be set up with single or dual poles, the dual pole pitch giving better entrance access and wind stability. How does this XL-sized Tarptent stand up to rough weather conditions?

What’s Good

• At 2 pounds 9.8 ounces, it’s very light for a three-person floored shelter with full rain and bug protection
• Realistic space for three full-size adults (unlike some three-person tents!)
• Front strut increases headroom and usable space
• Floating bathtub floor protects from splashing rain and is more durable than tensioned floors because of added puncture resistance
• Dual trekking pole setup opens entryway and increases wind stability
• Beak-style vestibule offers good protection while still allowing airflow
• Door and beak are easily rolled up for full ventilation and views
• New guyline adjusters are simple, lightweight, and easy to use

What’s Not So Good

• Less wind stability when set up with a single pole
• Front vent is not very functional
• Condensation issues in still, high humidity conditions

Specifications

Performance

The Tarptents have been a favorite among ultralight backpackers for years. The Tarptent Squall 2 won the Backpacking Light Lightitude Award for Best Single Wall Shelter in 2005, and for good reason. It has several important updates that increase its comfort and usability while maintaining much of the simplicity and aesthetics of the original Squall. The Tarptent Rainshadow 2 is the bigger brother to the Squall 2.

The Tarptent Rainshadow 2 is a single wall tent that is constructed of silicone-impregnated ripstop nylon. It uses a single hooped pole in the rear, a short horizontal strut pole at the front, and the option of one or two poles or trekking poles for front support. The tent features dual catenary ridgelines and sets up with four stakes (with the option of using two more with side guyouts). It provides full perimeter bug netting for complete bug protection and a front door that opens in an inverted “T” and stows away with Velcro tabs.

Included with the shelter are the tent body with attached floor, silnylon tent stuff sack, rear hoop pole and front strut (both Easton 7075 aluminum), four stakes, and a silnylon stake pouch. Single or dual front poles are available for those that don’t use trekking poles.

With some practice, setting up the Rainshadow 2 is possible in just a few minutes. The rear pole easily slides into a rear sleeve and is held in place by a grommet on each side. After staking the rear, the front pole is inserted into a grommet and erected with a single guyline. Corner guylines are staked and tensioned. Finally the rear hoop is repositioned to even out the sidewall tension by moving it back slightly. Unlike earlier Tarptents which required restaking for tension adjustments, all Tarptents now have guyline adjusters at the front guyline attachments that make proper tensioning (and nighttime adjustments) very easy.

At just over 2 ½ pounds, the Rainshadow 2 provides comfortable living space for three large adults. The flat top and dual ridgelines caused by the front strut increase headroom dramatically and the more vertical sidewalls add to the usable space. While it’s pushing it to say that three adults can sit up comfortably, it is roomy enough for two to sit up side by side. With the floating floor design it is easy to increase the front height of the tent using extendable trekking poles, further increasing headroom and usable space.

Some “three-person tents” would be more accurately titled “two-and-a-half person tents,” but that is not the case for the Tarptent Rainshadow 2. With a total covered area of 54.5 square feet and a floor area of 39.7 square feet, the Rainshadow 2 proved to be a comfortable living space for three when I shared the tent with two other full-size guys during an extended mountain bike tour.

Two inside pockets provide storage for small items and in clear conditions, the mesh area alongside the tent outside of the bathtub floor provides tons of extra storage.

The dual ridgelines make a difference in wind stability when compared to the original Tarptent Rainshadow. When using only one pole for front support, the strut allows more side to side sway during moderate winds. Due to the larger tent body, this is more of an issue with the Rainshadow 2 than the Squall 2. Using two poles in the front increases wind stability dramatically. I definitely prefer two poles, especially when camping above the tree line. While this is not a shelter for high winds, the Rainshadow can definitely handle moderate winds by using two front poles, staking it lower to the ground, and using the side guyout points.

Using a single pole also places pressure on the top point of the vestibule fabric. This is unavoidable when using a single pole or trekking pole and induces extra wear on that point, resulting in some fabric stretching and, over time, may cause durability issues. A redesign or extra reinforcement is needed in this area for use with a single pole. This issue is easily eliminated by using dual poles for front support.

Like the Squall 2, the floating bathtub floor of the Rainshadow 2 is a huge improvement over previous Tarptent floor designs. The floor is attached at the corners with elastic cords that give the protection of a bathtub floor while adding no tension to the main tent body. The result is a floor that stays drier in splashing rain and stays cleaner in dusty conditions than in previous models. The design has adjustable tension, works perfectly, and is brilliant in its simplicity.

For those that prefer floorless shelters, a floorless model is still available that has bug netting that tucks underneath a groundsheet and saves 8 ounces. However, those that live in rainy environments should seriously consider the floored model because it addresses a major problem with earlier Squalls and floorless models – splashing rain.

In rainy conditions, the Rainshadow 2 provides full protection for all three hikers, even during total downpours. In these conditions, though, the small 8.7 square foot beak-style vestibule gets a bit small for storing three sets of gear and some items will have to be pulled inside. The vestibule is easily pitched by releasing Velcro tabs on the sides, attaching them together with Velcro at the center, and affixing the bungee loop to the adjustable guyline clip. Getting the center Velcro lined up properly is somewhat challenging, especially from inside the shelter.

Ventilation in the Rainshadow 2 is very good for a single wall tent. In conditions with even a slight breeze, the full perimeter mesh and mesh front door provide good airflow that keeps things dry. When bugs are not a problem, leaving the mesh doors open eliminates any possibility of condensation. In still, high-humidity conditions, condensation becomes more of an issue, especially with three heavy breathers. However, moisture is easily managed; condensation that accumulates on the tent walls runs down and drips outside of the floor area (another bonus for the bathtub floor design). When condensation occurs and three people are sharing the tent, it is harder to not bump against the wet walls.

Durability of the Tarptent Rainshadow 2 was never an issue during field testing but extra care is needed when using silnylon shelters. If you keep fire away from the tent and make sure not to pitch it on rough surfaces such as sharp stubs or rock, a Tarptent will give years of reliable performance in the field. As previously mentioned, my only concern came from fabric stress resulting from using a single pole for front support.

I’m not big on the tube-shaped stuffsacks that come with Tarptents. I find the tube-shape is difficult to stuff. Removal of the front strut is critical when stuffing the tent but a better approach is to roll the tent.

While the Tarptent Rainshadow 2 is a brilliant three-person, three-season single wall shelter, it has a few imperfections. The beak found in earlier Tarptents was one piece that attached permanently at one side and attached to the other with a Velcro strip. The beak of the Rainshadow 2, though, splits down the middle and secures in the center with a long strip of Velcro. While this gives the additional flexibility of leaving just one-half of the vestibule closed, it is also more difficult to neatly close because the Velcro strips have to be aligned under tension. This was not a big deal but was a little annoying at times.

Like the Squall 2, another aspect of the vestibule design is the addition of a front vent. While the front corner of the tent can now be left open to aid in ventilation, the lack of a stiffened brim or flap means that the vent also allows rain to enter the vestibule area. I would consider the front vent more of a work in progress than a functional vent.

What’s Unique

The refinements in the Tarptent Rainshadow 2 make it a nearly perfect ultralight three-person, three-season single wall shelter. The dual pole/dual ridgeline, floating bathtub floor, adjustable front guylines, and extended beak are excellent features that add to the usability of the tent. Like the Squall 2, the Rainshadow 2 is a marvelous design.

Recommendations for Improvement

I would like to see a design change with the vestibule and front vent. A wire-stiffened brim or a vent support would make the vent fully functional in all conditions. If the option of a single pole for front support is available, there should also be changes made in the vestibule so the pole doesn’t place extra stress on the fabric.

Introduction

Hilleberg calls the two-person Rajd (pronounced “ride”) “more than a tarp, yet not quite a true tent.” We call it a single wall tent. It’s made of Hilleberg’s superb Kerlon 1200, which is a high tenacity ripstop nylon triple coated with silicone. It weighs slightly more than standard silnylon, but is more durable and weatherproof. So, how does the Rajd perform under different field conditions, and how does it compare with its competitors?

What’s Good

• Very lightweight two-person shelter, only 2.2 pounds
• Quality materials and construction
• Quick setup
• Easy entry/exit
• Two doors with beaks
• Loads of headroom and usable space
• Very durable and weatherproof

What’s Not So Good

• Inadequate ventilation
• Very prone to condensation
• No vestibules or inside pockets

Specifications

Performance

The materials and construction of the Hilleberg Rajd are first-class. Hilleberg’s proprietary Kerlon 1200 tent fabric is a high-tenacity ripstop nylon coated on both sides with a total of three layers of silicone. It has a very high tear strength (26 pounds) and is very waterproof, yet it weighs only slightly more than standard silnylon (1.47 oz/yd² compared to 1.3 oz/yd²). All seams are flat-felled and double stitched using treated thread, and do not require seam sealing. The 2 millimeter guylines are made of Spectra fibers interwoven with polyester fibers.

Setting up the Rajd is as easy as a Tarptent. Lay the tent out in the desired location, stake the four corners of the floor, insert trekking poles set to 45 inches (115 centimeters, handles up) in pockets under the beaks and stake out the sides, and then extend the guyline system on the ends and stake it out.

The Rajd comes with ten aluminum alloy square pegs, each with a cord loop to pull them out. All ten stakes (four on the floor, two on the sides, and four on the ends), are required for a secure pitch. The tent can be pitched with six stakes (by not staking the floor), but the end walls do not assume their proper shape and wind can easily lift the floor. As an alternative to trekking poles, the Rajd can be pitched with sticks about 45 inches long, or can be tied between two trees. I was able to pitch the Rajd with 51-inch fixed length trekking poles by angling them out at the bottom.

On my first trip with the Rajd I pitched it on a slight slope and spent the night sliding around on its slick floor. I should have known better. I normally paint silicone stripes on an ordinary silnylon tent floor, and Hilleberg’s Kerlon 1200 fabric is just as slick as silnylon. After I applied the anti-slide treatment I had no further problems.

The Rajd is very roomy inside because the ceiling width is the same as the floor width, making the side walls vertical. The end walls are also quite steep, so all of the interior space is usable. With 45 inches of interior height and 100 inches of interior length, the Rajd is an excellent tent for taller people. Its 48 inch floor width is a bit narrow for a two-person tent, but the side walls easily expand out and there is plenty of elbow room, so the narrow width is not really an issue.

Storm Worthiness

A fellow Backpacking Light Editor used the Rajd through two hailstorms and one snowstorm in the Montana mountains, and reported no damage or problems at all. The Rajd’s tough skin and secure pitch easily deflected dime-sized hailstones and took a 2-inch dusting of snow in stride.

In the Southern Rockies, I tested the Rajd in prolonged steady rain, some light winds, and some cold nights down to 22 F. I also had no problems whatsoever with the Rajd’s ability to protect me from the elements.

Our main issue with the Rajd is condensation. The Rajd’s ventilation options are very limited: a small mesh panel on each side, tying back one side of the beak, unzipping the doors and letting them hang in place, or tying the doors completely open. The first three options are inadequate, unless there is a good breeze from the side. The last option (door completely open) is only usable in good weather when bugs are not a problem. Bottom line, it’s hard to have good storm protection, bug protection, and ventilation at the same time in the Rajd.

In the field, there were no occasions when I didn’t have condensation (or frost) inside the Rajd. With the doors zipped, the mesh panels do not provide enough cross ventilation, and the Rajd is a condensation chamber. Even with the doors completely open on a still night, I still had a lot of condensation on the inside walls. I found that the beaks protected the doors enough in a steady rain so I could leave them open, but not with wind-driven rain. The doors are not designed so the top half can be folded down. Overall, condensation management in the Rajd is a good absorbent pack towel to wipe the walls.

Assessment

The Rajd is a dichotomy. On the one hand it gets very high marks for light weight, quality materials and construction, ease of setup, interior space and headroom, and storm worthiness. On the other hand it bombs on ventilation, resulting in more interior condensation than other single wall tents I have tested. My experience with the Rajd reaffirmed how important ventilation is in a single wall tent. A good single wall tent design makes major use of mesh in end and side wall panels for flow-through ventilation, and adds high vents to create a chimney effect. With some major design changes to improve ventilation, the Rajd’s condensation problem could be overcome, and it could be a strong contender in the single wall tent market.

What’s Unique

Hilleberg’s proprietary Kerlon 1200 fabric is only slightly heavier than standard silnylon, yet is stronger and more weatherproof.

Recommendations for Improvement

The Hilleberg Rajd uses quality materials and construction and is well-designed in all ways except ventilation. With some modifications to improve ventilation, the Rajd could be very competitive with other popular lightweight single wall tents, specifically:

• Add mesh panels to the end walls under the flange that attaches to the guyout system
• Add high vents near the ridgeline
• Extend the side beaks so they function as vestibules, and use mesh for the entry walls

Introduction

The Gossamer Gear / Tarptent Squall Classic is a collaborative effort to create the lightest floored two-person shelter available. By combining the original triangular-front Tarptent design, the current floating bathtub floor, and lightweight spinnaker and silnylon fabrics, the Squall Classic delivers the usability, storm resistance, and ventilation of a Squall, while trimming the weight of the Squall 2 by 7 ounces. Add a pair of Fibraplex carbon fiber poles and you’ve got the lightest floored two-person shelter out there! Is the Squall Classic a through-hiker’s dream or can it be even lighter?

What’s Good

• At 1 pound 8.9 ounces, it’s very lightweight for a single wall shelter with floor
• With a Fibraplex pole, the tent weighs an even 1 ½ pounds and has an area to weight ratio of 1.62 – the highest of any floored shelter we’ve reviewed!
• Enough space for two full-sized adults
• Floating bathtub floor protects from splashing rain and is more durable than tensioned floors because it resists punctures
• Beak-style vestibule offers good protection while still allowing airflow
• Door and beak are easily rolled up for full ventilation and views
• New guyline adjusters are simple, lightweight, and easy to use

What’s Not So Good

• Not as much headroom as the Tarptent Squall 2
• Old-style Tarptent vestibule attachment is simple but lacks adjustability of new Tarptent designs
• Spinnaker cloth is a little noisy when new (but gets quieter with use)
• Condensation issues in still, high humidity conditions

Specifications

Specifications: Fibraplex Poles

Introduction

Fibraplex carbon fiber tent poles are lightweight replacements for stock aluminum tent poles. On the two sets tested, the Fibraplex poles cut the weight of poles by 33 to 43 percent and offered comparable stiffness to the stock poles. For those looking to cut ounces, Fibraplex poles are worth a close look.

What’s Good

• Lighter than stock poles by 33 to 43 percent (in the two sets tested)
• Comparable stiffness to DAC Featherlite 8.84 millimeter outer diameter poles (stock Black Diamond Lighthouse)
• Comparable flexibility and strength to aluminum models
• Good customer support with quick replacements (if needed)
• Pole sets available for many tents as well as custom poles
• Reasonably priced for shelters with fewer poles ($52 for a two-pole Gossamer Gear/Tarptent Squall Classic)

What’s Not So Good

• Not quite as stiff as Easton 7075 poles (stock on a Gossamer Gear/Tarptent Squall Classic)
• Need to use caution with ferrules – if not seated properly, they are a weak point
• If overstressed they will break instead of bending
• More expensive for shelters with more or longer length poles ($130 for the three-pole Black Diamond Lighthouse)

Specifications

Performance

The Fibraplex Fibrapole 292 poles are direct replacements for stock aluminum tent poles and are the only replacement carbon fiber poles available. They are available from Fibraplex (who also manufactures carbon fiber poles and cord for non-outdoor purposes) in pre-made sets for specific tents as well as in custom configurations for any shelter or tarp (including those with hubs such as the MSR Hubba Hubba and Big Agnes Seedhouse tents).

I tested Fibrapole 292 sets in two configurations: as a stock replacement set for the Black Diamond Lighthouse and as a custom set for the Gossamer Gear/Tarptent Squall Classic.

The first reason for selecting Fibraplex poles is weight reduction as compared to aluminum models. The Fibraplex Fibrapole 292 poles dropped 1.6 ounces off of the Gossamer Gear/Tarptent Squall Classic and 6.9 ounces from the Black Diamond Lighthouse. That is a weight savings of 33 and 42 percent, respectively, over stock sets.

The poles came with the correct tips and fit easily into both applications. The sizing for both shelters was just right producing fabric tension that was identical to the stock poles. Like the aluminum sets, the Fibrapole 292 poles are shock-corded and sized for easy storage. The only hassle was that the aluminum connecter tips were wider than the poles, causing them to snag in the pole sleeve of the Squall Classic. However, this was only a minor nuisance and by correctly pushing the pole out of the sleeve (instead of pulling it), there was no problem at all.

Stiffness of the Fibrapole 292 poles proved to be right in the ballpark when compared to aluminum poles. The Fibraplex models were of similar stiffness to the DAC Featherlite poles that came with the Black Diamond Lighthouse but a bit more flexible than the Easton 7075 models. When arched into a hoop application, the extra flexibility made little difference in the field. When used non-arched, such as the front pole of the Gossamer Gear/Tarptent Squall Classic, the pole bent under load more easily than the stock Easton model. This was only a problem when pitching the tent with high tension, however there’s no doubt that the Easton poles are stiffer in this application.

Because the Fibrapole 292 poles are so much lighter than aluminum models, I had initial concerns about the poles’ durability. Because of this Fibraplex sent me a complete extra pole section and several replacement segments to test for failure. I found that failures with the poles always occurred at the ferrule/pole junction where the carbon fiber split. Breakage of this kind was only possible with improper use or stressing the poles far beyond their reasonable range. During several tests, I was able to bend a 120 inch length until the tips actually touched before breakage occurred. When overstressing a shorter pole (such as the 73.5 inch Tarptent hoop pole), breakage occurred in a smaller arc but still one that was much more extreme than was required for the application.

When I inquired about the frequency of pole breakage, Fibraplex informed me that most breakages occur when ferrules are not fully inserted into the poles. My tests backed up that statistic; partially inserted ferrules resulted in pole breakage with far less bending than fully inserted ferrules. The bottom line: Fibraplex poles are strong enough as long as you make sure the ferrules are properly inserted and you don’t stress the poles far beyond what’s required for your application. But unlike aluminum poles, these carbon poles break instead of bend.

In the field, durability was never a factor. I used these poles in a variety of settings over several months with no issues at all. This includes pitching the Lighthouse on the Emmons Glacier on a climb of Mount Rainier. During moderate winds with 30-40 mph gusts, I had no problems, except for a minor increase in tent deflection (lean). By effectively guying out the tent I was able to greatly reduce this tendency to lean in high winds. With reasonable usage, I would trust these poles in far more extreme conditions than those experienced on Rainier; with proper guying out of the tent and clearing of heavy snow loads, the Fibrapole 292 poles will hold up just fine.

At $130 for the Black Diamond Lighthouse pole set and $52 for the Tarptent setup, Fibraplex Fibrapole 292 carbon fiber tent poles are a relatively expensive investment that doesn’t add much to the functionality of a shelter. But for us ounce-counters, Fibraplex poles are a good way to cut shelter weight without much (if any) sacrifice in strength or stability. At $32.50 per ounce of weight saved for the Tarptent and $18.84 per ounce for the Lighthouse, the question of whether or not Fibraplex poles are worth it is up to you.

What’s Unique

Fibraplex makes the only carbon fiber replacement tent poles that you can purchase, thus offering the only ticket to making your tent lighter. (While Easton also makes carbon fiber poles, they are not available aftermarket.) Fibraplex also offers custom setups, making them usable with most any shelter.

Recommendations for Improvement

While Fibraplex Fibrapoles are well built and high quality, I would like to see the following changes:

1. More robust offerings for mountaineering or winter applications.

2. A tapered design that places more material at the weak point – the ends of the pole shafts. This would be a positive step toward making the poles a little more durable.

3. Finally, a less expensive price would make Fibraplex poles a better value.

Introduction

The Crescent Moon Silver 10 Backcountry snowshoes are wider and longer to provide more flotation for soft snow conditions or carrying a backpack. Like all Crescent Moon snowshoes, they feature a pronounced teardrop shape for easier walking (so you are less likely to step on one snowshoe with the other). Features I especially like are their three crampon system (which adds a toe crampon for climbing), and single pull loop tightening system on the bindings. As for weight, 4 pounds per pair isn’t bad for 10-inch by 32-inch snowshoes, but a half pound lighter would be better.

What’s Good

• Good balance of traction, lightweight, and durability
• Teardrop shape allows easy walking
• Foot Glove binding provides precise foot placement
• Single Pull Loop tightening system evenly secures the toe area
• Three crampon system (including a toe crampon) provides excellent traction
• Excellent climbing ability and flotation
• Very stiff and durable frame
• Bindings flatten well for packing

What’s Not So Good

• 4 lb/pair is not bad for a 32-inch snowshoe, but I would prefer them to be a half pound lighter
• One rivet on a binding came off and required replacement
• Clear decking on the front shows fine scratches and discolorations
• Bindings allow the heels to float too much, especially on sidehills

Specifications

Performance

What really sets Crescent Moon snowshoes apart from the others is their exaggerated teardrop frame that is claimed to accommodate a natural stride and eliminate hip flexor irritation that occurs with larger, more traditionally shaped snowshoes. The Silver 10 Backcountry model is 10 inches wide and 32 inches long for extra flotation. They set my feet further apart compared to a traditional 8-inch wide snowshoe, but the teardrop shape helped with my stride so the snowshoes were not stepping on each other.

The frame on all Crescent Moon snowshoes is TIG (Tungsten Induced Gas) welded at the tail for extra strength. I found the longer 32-inch frame of the Silver 10 to be extremely stiff, with no twist whatsoever. The curved front is fairly short, which puts more of the snowshoe’s surface flat on the snow for good flotation. Also, the frame is polished, not painted, so there is no anodizing or paint to scratch. After several months of testing I could only detect a few small scratches on the frame.

The Foot Glove binding is close to a step-in. It consists of a foot encompassing polyurethane stirrup holding two Hypalon straps with ladder lock buckles on the front and a heel strap with a cam-locking buckle. The Single Pull Loop tightening system is a loop of Hypalon attached to the two ladder locks on the front; all you have to do is pull each end of the loop to tighten the toe area. The heel secures just as easily with a pull of the strap. The binding is fairly lightweight, secures your foot securely and aligns it properly, lays flat for packing, and is easy to enter/exit. The only flaw was a lost rivet that required replacement.

The main decking looks and feels like Hypalon, but Crescent Moon calls it TGS (which stands for "The Good Stuff!"), which is described as a blend of PVC and neoprene capable of withstanding -40 F temperatures and more abrasion and tear resistant than Hypalon. I can agree with the durability claim; I barely put a scratch on it. The decking on the upcurved front of the snowshoe is another story. The translucent decking there is DuPont Surlyn, which is apparently the same material used to coat golf balls. There doesn’t seem to be any problem with its strength, but after a few months of use it shows a lot of fine scratches and discolorations and looks unattractive.

Another unique feature of Crescent Moon snowshoes is their three crampon system, with crampons at the toe, ball of the foot, and heel. The toe crampon is very functional because each time you take a step, it maintains a grip on the snow when you push off and transfer weight to the other foot. And of course a toe crampon is very helpful for climbing. I found the Silver 10s would climb slopes so steep I had to hold on with my hands.

The Silver 10 uses a conventional pivot strap system, which is a very strong and flexible band that attaches to the foot plate and wraps around both sides of the frame. The pivot strap has a moderate torsion that does not cause the snowshoes to snap up and hit the bottom of your foot with each step, flipping snow on your back.

In Use

The Silver 10s perform very well in a variety of snow conditions. Their extra surface area provides plenty of flotation, even when carrying a backpack. They are quite maneuverable in spite of their longer length, which is attributable to their foot forward design and fixed pivot system. Their climbing ability is superb thanks to the three crampon system. The Silver 10s hold their own on sidehills, but the bindings does not “lock down” my heels very well, so there is some sideways twist. On steep downhills I can lean forward on the Silver 10s a little more than with other snowshoes to prevent tobogganing. When the slope gets steeper than about 35-40 degrees, it is hard to avoid going into a controlled slide, but glissading on snowshoes is a lot of fun.

In snow with a thin crust, the front of the snowshoes has a tendency to catch on the crust, which is a bit cumbersome. Slightly more upturn in the front will avoid this problem.

I like the balance of these snowshoes; the balance point is near the front so the snowshoes don’t feel as long as they are. But they are not front heavy (meaning the front dips down); rather the pivot strap lifts the front of the snowshoe up and positions the snowshoe at a proper angle to facilitate a smooth gait.

One issue I have with the Silver 10 is with tracking; my heels have a tendency to turn inward. I am pronated, so basically I am saying that the binding does not hold my feet in proper alignment in spite of my pronation. The result is walking slightly duck-footed. Users with normal feet may not have this problem.

Assessment

Overall, the Crescent Moon Silver 10s are nicely designed, reasonably lightweight, good performing backcountry snowshoes. They have exceptional climbing ability and flotation. The exaggerated teardrop shape definitely helps to maintain a normal stride, although the 10-inch width still places the legs a little farther apart than 8-inch snowshoes. The wider stance is noticeable but not a problem. The bindings are very user friendly, light, and compressible for packing, but they allow the heels to float a bit, which is most noticeable on sidehills. Lastly, the Silver 10’s are solidly built of durable materials; my only reservation being a rivet that fell out of one of the bindings.

What’s Unique

The Silver 10 Backcountry (and other Crescent Moon models) snowshoes have an exaggerated teardrop shape to facilitate a normal stride, and have a three crampon system to provide excellent traction. The frame is TIG welded at the tail and is very strong and solid.

Recommendations for Improvement

I commend Crescent Moon for the continual improvements and refinements they have made in their snowshoes. Overall, I am very pleased with the design and performance of the Silver 10 Backcountry snowshoes. However, I have a few suggestions for improvements that might be worth considering:

• Since our magazine is focused on lightweight backcounty travel, it’s not surprising that I recommend making them lighter by at least half a pound.
• The translucent Surlyn decking on the front of the snowshoe seems to be adequately durable, but it gets discolored after a few months of use. I suggest going to a brighter color so it is easy to see the front of the snowshoes in powder snow.
• Finally, I recommend a little better appearance and quality control on the rivet work.

Introduction

The Yowie Company claims their radically-different Yowie snowshoes are the world’s most agile. They use an injection-moulded flexible deck with an all-over grip, a fast binding and tough crampons. Yowie claims the shoes are used in the Iditasport Extreme in Alaska on snow, and by Army Commandos in Afghanistan on sand (no pictures unfortunately). They claim you can walk in them in any direction you like, just like walking without them. They also claim a very fast and reliable fastening system which is tailored to your shoes.

What’s Good

• Almost unbreakable
• Walk more naturally
• Simple webbing fastening system
• Single buckle fastening

What’s Not So Good

• Tricky to get webbing system adjusted perfectly
• Can be difficult to get rear strap over heel
• Some icing up possible on webbing
• Some balling up possible around the crampons (happens to any crampons)

Specifications

Overview

These Yowie snowshoes bear little resemblance to ‘conventional’ snowshoes: ones with a tubular aluminium frame and a synthetic fabric deck laced across the middle. They are however a bit like the ‘Little Bear’ children’s snowshoes. Basically, they are like very large duck’s feet (although my wife referred to them as tea trays).

The picture above shows the top and bottom of these snowshoes. The bottom has a very serious hexagonal pattern right across it, a bit like you find on pattern-base cross-country skis but far more aggressive. In addition there are sturdy aluminium crampons under the front and rear of the shoe. The intention is to provide a very serious amount of traction on all surfaces short of hard water ice. The top has an adjustable webbing binding which does up with a single side-release buckle. It looks almost too simple.

Once the Yowie snowshoes have been fastened to your shoes, and we will come to how that is done next, you walk – normally. The heels are fastened to your shoes, so you don’t have to pick the snowshoes up and glide forward: you just walk. OK, you do usually lift you feet a little more than normal when wearing the Yowie snowshoes. With your heels secured, you can equally walk sideways or backwards – much easier than with snowshoes which have pivoting bindings. Yowie claims you can run and even kick steps with these snowshoes. The plastic deck is quite strong enough to take ‘toeing-off.’ In an interesting thought, Yowie points out that the solid deck means the front of your footwear does not come into repeated and often abrasive contact with the cold or wet snow at every step. Since there is no fabric deck laced to a surrounding tube there are no worries about abrasion on the lacing at the edges – a problem I have seen with quite a few conventional snowshoes in the hire trade.

What does make these Yowie snowshoes stand out is their light weight. At 1.08 kilograms (38 oz, measured) per Medium pair they weigh the same as our measured weight for the Northern Lites Elite, which are the lightest, conventional non-racing snowshoes that we know of. The Yowie snowshoes are manufacturer rated for 86 kilogram (190 lb) loads, while the Elites are rated to 79 kilogram (175 lb). This makes it fairly easy to justify carrying the Yowie snowshoes during the shoulder seasons.

Fitting the snowshoes – According to Yowie

Most of the adjustment of the binding can be done at home before you use the Yowies – not that much is needed. The top of the deck is marked with a simple 1-2-3 position scale at the front and the back. You stand on the snowshoe so your boot or shoe is in the middle of the deck and positioned so as to have the same amount of the scale showing at the front and the back. Then you make several once-off adjustments to the webbing, as illustrated in the diagrams to the right (courtesy of Yowie). Once you start doing this you realise that the ‘simple’ webbing arrangement is slightly more complex (and cunning) than it looks. With size 42 light approach shoes I seemed to have plenty of room for adjustment; with heavier (bigger) boots I would still have had plenty of room in the binding.

In diagram A the user is shown adjusting the front webbing. This webbing is looped through slots through the deck on either side of your shoe. First you separate all the Velcro connections. The inner short bit of the webbing on one side is laid tightly against your shoe, then the outer longer bit of the webbing pressed down over it and secured by Velcro (shown in green). This is done on both sides of your shoe and then the outer long bits of the webbing are adjusted (tightened) over the top of your shoe using a ladder-lock buckle, to be a neat fit. The result is a very solid multi-layer webbing loop which fits over and around the toe of your shoes securely, and should prevent your shoe from moving sideways.

There are another two anchor points beside the heel of your shoe, and these operate in a similar manner. They are adjusted in the same way as shown at B, to locate the heel correctly. Then the strap over the ankle is done up using a side-release buckle (shown in red) to make a snug fit. It isn’t necessary to do this buckle up really tight. According to Yowie, this buckle should go on the outside.

Finally, the heel strap is tightened around the heel of your shoe through another ladder-lock buckle as shown at C and the free end is anchored with Velcro (shown in green). Once this has been done the side-release buckle can be undone to allow your shoe to be removed from the webbing. There are no bits of rigid plastic or metal to adjust.

What is interesting about this method of fitting is that you are adjusting (and relying on) the webbing to grip the sides of your shoe sole quite closely. This means that you don’t have to wear heavy boots with these snowshoes: approach shoes with a good sole are just as effective. (That’s what I wear.) It also means there are no hard bits to rub against the sides your shoes.

To get into the binding in the field you open the central webbing with the side release buckle as far as possible, then slip your shoe in place into the front loop. Then you pull the rear loop up over the heel of your shoe, and finally you tighten the middle strap over your shoe by doing up the side release buckle. In theory, all the adjustments can stay as they were set beforehand.

Field Performance – Putting Them On

My wife and I have previously used conventional snowshoes (two sorts of Northern Lites) in the Australian Alps as an alternative to long narrow back-country skis when our snow was poor. (This seems to be happening rather a lot these days.) So we have had some experience with ‘conventional’ snowshoes. These Yowie snowshoes were taken on an extended week-long backpacking trip over our Alps in the winter of 2006 in the hopes of finding out whether they would let us travel over more difficult terrain and over more variable snow conditions. Well, we certainly had the more difficult terrain and more variable snow conditions. Not everywhere was as nice as shown to the left.

What we did notice immediately was the difference in weight between the Yowie snowshoes and cross-country (XC) skis plus XC ski boots. As I was wearing medium-weight approach shoes with the snowshoes rather than big heavy ski boots, the difference really was significant! We also noticed that on easy terrain it was very easy to walk with the Yowies without using poles at all. This too was vastly different from using XC skis! My wife ended up carrying her XC ski stocks bundled up in her hand a lot of the time, while I had my single collapsible trekking pole on my pack sometimes as well. But then, we don’t carry trekking poles at all for normal walking, so your preferences may differ.

We found that getting one of our shoes into the Yowie binding is not quite as simple as the above instructions make out. Pushing the front of our shoe into the front loop requires some shoving, and this is probably due to the lugs on the bottom of our shoe interacting with the raised webbing at the edges, as pointed to by the green lines in the picture to the right. This wasn’t really serious, although when the webbing iced up as indicated by the pink lines it was a little more noticeable. My first reaction was to wonder whether the design could be altered to conceal this webbing below the surface, but then I realised that it is this very bit of webbing which grips the sides of my shoes to keep them in place. However, I do think a little recessing around that webbing would be possible without interfering with the gripping mechanism.

Having got the front of my shoe into the front loop, the next step is to get the rear loop up over the heel of my shoe as shown in picture C above. Well, that is not so easy with mitts on. After all, the rear strap is meant to keep my shoe in the binding, so it does not have any slack when properly adjusted. I managed, but usually by taking my gloves off to do the fitting. My wife found it easiest to let me fix this for her. I have to admit that sometimes I undid the Velcro to slacken the rear strap off before I could get it around my shoe. But then, it was easy enough to pull the rear strap tight again and hook up the Velcro. The best solution in my opinion would be to add some sort of pull-tab to the webbing at the heel, very much along the lines of the pull-tabs found on the rear of shoes. Same idea, same assistance. It would not have to be the same heavy webbing – almost anything would probably do.

With my shoe fitted into the front and rear straps, it is usually pretty easy to pull up the middle strap over my shoe and do up the side-release buckle. That part was not difficult in the field. Neither that strap nor the side release buckle seemed to get iced up at all. The picture to the left shows a Yowie fitted to my approach shoe. You will notice that my shoe has a white overboot covering it, under the gaiter: that helps to keep most of the snow off my non-waterproof approach shoe.

The Yowie company claims that ‘Efficient PTFE ice/water repellent is chemically bonded to the webbing.’ Well, as you can see we did get a little ice collecting under the shoes, but in general the rest of the webbing stayed free of ice. Knocking those little bits of ice off was not too easy though, so I rarely bothered. However, knocking the ice off did make it slightly easier to get my shoes into the front webbing.

Field Performance – Use

As some of the pictures suggest, walking with the Yowie snowshoes is very simple. But it is different from walking with the more common pivoting snowshoes because my heels are tied down to the deck. You could shuffle along flat-footed with these things on your feet, but we found that you could also just walk ‘normally,’ with a normal toe-off. The plastic deck flexes a bit as you lift your heel, but it seems to be extremely robust stuff and it took a lot of punishment over the rougher terrain. Shuffling is not necessary. Having the heel tied down securely meant I could move sideways and backwards with no trouble at all. I could walk around camp while setting up the tent without thinking about managing my snowshoes. This is seriously different from the shuffles I have to do with other snowshoes with pivoting bindings.

Another major difference which results from my heel being tied down is that in some conditions you can get a lot of snow being flung upwards from the heel region of the snowshoe. How much depends on exactly how you walk – whether you ‘glide forward’ or ‘walk’ or ‘stomp.’ I noticed that I was lifting less snow after a while as I got used to the Yowies. But wearing some full-length light gaiters does help stop the backs of your trousers from getting damp.

I mentioned above that I sometimes found it difficult to get the bindings really snug. So I let the bindings be loose a few times to see whether that would make the Yowie snowshoes difficult to manage. I have to report that a little bit of slack at the toes or the rear did not really make a lot of difference – at least not on fairly easy surfaces. Having a snug binding was helpful when going up or down steep slopes and especially when running down them. At one stage I noticed that one snowshoe seemed to be splayed outwards at the front. This was corrected by readjusting the front straps. But it didn’t seem to affect my walking at all.

On the other hand, ‘snug’ was quite sufficient for the bindings. I did not need the bindings to be so tight that blood flow through my feet was in any way limited. This is very good, because limiting the blood flow through your feet means you get very cold and very tired feet – not a good thing in the snow. In fact, with thick socks and the approach shoes, my feet were warm pretty much all the time – even when a bit damp.

A concern expressed by my wife was that she would have to walk with her feet a lot further apart than normal, due to the width of the Yowies. At the start I think we did tend to walk with our feet further apart, but after a day or so we forgot about the perceived width and seemed to be walking quite normally. Maybe I swung my lifted foot just a fraction wider and higher as it went past my stationary foot, but the marks on the snow didn’t seem to be especially separated.

A serious concern we had was whether the smaller deck area of snowshoes (compared to XC skis) would give us problems when crossing doubtful snow bridges. Well, we crossed a few such snow bridges and didn’t have much of a problem. There were a few places where we did fall right through the snow, but that was usually on thinner snow over bushes, and we were pushing our luck there anyhow. Well, I did say the winter season had been very poor. Extricating ourselves from such holes was not that difficult: the snow was so light it didn’t seem to hold the snowshoes down very much. We didn’t get a chance to try them out in real ‘powder snow,’ but we rarely get that in Australia.

The hexagonal pattern spread all over underneath the Yowie snowshoes shows up very clearly on the snow under a lot of conditions. It seemed to give a very good distributed grip too – a lot more than the smoother ‘conventional’ snowshoes offer. On softer snow, when the crampons under the deck would be expected to offer little traction, I found the pattern seemed to be gripping very well. Since the far thinner and finer pattern on the base of some XC skis will often grip going up hill, I was not at all surprised by this. I don’t think I ever sensed any slipping with the Yowie snowshoes – either going up and down a hill or traversing across a hill. I was even able to kick the side of the deck into the snow sometimes while traversing: doing so didn’t worry the plastic or the bindings at all.

The aluminium crampons underneath gave a fairly good grip on all sorts of harder snow, included some light crusty boilerplate ice I met while climbing up a short-cut at about 50 degrees to the summit of Mt Jagungal. I just stomped the front of the snowshoe into the snow and walked up. In fact, I was able to kick the front of the Yowie snowshoe into the snow a bit while climbing, a bit like kicking steps. I am not sure whether they are significantly better than many other types of snowshoes at climbing, but at least the Yowie snowshoes worked fine for the simple climbing I was doing on the light boilerplate and crusty stuff. Later on I found myself running down the steep side of Mt Jagungal on very hard icy snow, even boilerplate, with a pack on. Sure, there was snow flying everywhere behind me (really!), but I felt as though I had very reliable traction. I haven’t been able to try real glissading in them: we don’t have those sorts of conditions very often in Australia.

The crampons underneath balled up a little at times, despite a little layer of black ice-rejecting plastic inside the aluminium, but the ice could usually be kicked off on a bit of rock or hard ice. I found that the lump of snow/ice surrounding the crampons gripped just as well as the crampons themselves on a lot of surfaces anyhow. However, I have not been able to try the crampons out on ‘real ice.’ I found that with just a little concentration I could also travel over the iced-up boulders on Mt Jagungal quite happily, as shown to the right. The aluminium crampons seem to grip on this stuff without doing much damage to the rock. I was also able to do a little rock-hopping across creeks with the crampons giving me a good grip.

Given the worsening quality of our Australian snow each year, it is inevitable that we would end up walking off the snow with the Yowie snowshoes. As you can see in several pictures here, we did. They suffered a few minor scrapes to the plastic on the underside but these were very minor surface blemishes, despite the mud and the rocks we sometimes climbed over as well. The webbing does go under the deck, but it is surrounded underneath by some big walls which keep it from contacting anything hard. I didn’t notice any wear on the webbing itself. I suspect that there might be a bit more wear on the webbing underneath if you were to use them on sand, but I have not tried that.

Later on when we were traveling out in some pretty bad weather we were crossing mixed patches of snow, grass and burnt scrub. This is where I had my only accident with the snowshoes: I had become a little too confident and didn’t lift them over the scrub. The toe of one snowshoe hooked under a rather stiff bit of scrub and I tripped. However, that accident would probably have happened with any design of snowshoe.

As the snow patches shrank I found that wearing the Yowie snowshoes became less useful – of course. Eventually I took them off and hung one on each side of my pack, crampons outwards, with a simple bit of bungee cord around my pack where the upper cinch strap is placed. Each snowshoe being fairly light, they rode there quite happily and didn’t get in my way at all. The slight extra weight was no problem – especially compared to carrying XC skis! When we reached our car all I had to do was remove a few bits of grass before throwing the snowshoes in the back of the car. They didn’t seem to collect mud or other debris at all.

What’s Unique

• The whole ‘duck foot’ design
• The simple webbing fitting
• The very light weight
• The very high mobility in all directions
• The immunity to damage to deck edge bindings

Recommendations for Improvement

• Make it a bit easier to get the front of the shoe into the front webbing.
  Possibly recess some of the front webbing on the top of the deck a little.
• Make it a little easier to get the rear webbing up over the heel of a shoe.
  Add some pull-tabs to the rear webbing maybe.

Introduction

When it was introduced in Spring 2006, the Gatewood Cape generated a lot of interest among ultralight backpackers because it promised to provide the same advantages of a poncho/tarp while hiking, but be a much better shelter. At 11.65 ounces (with tieout cords and pole harness), the Gatewood Cape weighs about 7 ounces more than the most minimalist spinnaker poncho/tarp. However, many users routinely use a poncho/tarp in conjunction with a lightweight bivy sack or sleeping bag with a waterproof/breathable shell for extra protection from rain spray and spindrift. If the Gatewood Cape offers enough weather protection in the shelter mode that no added protection is required, the weights of the competing systems are comparable. Here, I report on the performance and weather worthiness of the Gatewood Cape based on five months of intensive testing under alpine conditions, including a lot of wet weather.

What’s Good

• Better ventilation than a typical poncho or poncho/tarp
• Much better shelter than a poncho/tarp
• Converts to a roomy one-person shelter with vestibule
• Eliminates the need for a supplementary bivy sack or bag cover
• Zippered pocket does triple duty – stuff sack, tent pocket, rainwear pocket
• Good fitting hood with drawcord
• Adequate space for a taller person in shelter mode
• Covers a backpack in rainwear mode, eliminating the need for a pack cover

What’s Not So Good

• Does not eliminate the drawbacks of a poncho
• Does not fully cover the arms in rainwear mode
• Available in only one size that fits a taller person
• Length adjustment snaps are difficult to use

Specifications

Performance

The Gatewood Cape is based on the same principle as a poncho/tarp, but the implementation is much different. For rainwear, the Gatewood Cape is like a poncho with a full front zipper for ventilation. But that’s where the similarity ends. In shelter mode, it converts to a one-person single wall shelter somewhat similar to the Six Moon Designs Lunar Solo (and very similar to the new Wild Oasis), but without the mesh entry. In other words, it is a better poncho and a much better shelter than a poncho/tarp.

I followed the instructions to set up the Cape the first time using one trekking pole set at 45 inches, which creates a rectangular shelter with a low front beak, adequate headroom only at the center, and a flat-sloped backside that limited interior usable space. I quickly discovered that the Cape pitches more to my liking using a 50-inch long trekking pole at the center and a second trekking pole to extend the beak. The resulting shelter, as shown in the photos above, has much better headroom, more usable interior space, and a large sheltered area under the beak. My modifications require a 30-inch extension to the front guyline. Overall, the Gatewood is very easy to setup. Six stakes are required for a secure pitch.

Performance in Rainwear Mode

In rainwear mode, the Gatewood has all the advantages and disadvantages of a normal poncho (See The Poncho Tarp: Techniques and Gear Systems for Inclement Conditions for an in-depth discussion.) On the plus side, the Cape serves as rainwear, pack cover, and shelter for only 11.65 ounces. On the negative side, it flaps badly in the wind, limits visibility of your feet, and has poor ventilation in the chest area.

For rain protection, the Cape is easy to don and extend over my backpack. It is nice to retract my hands to the inside to keep them warmer, and I can open the front zipper to increase ventilation when conditions permit. Unlike many poncho/tarps, I can leave the Gatewood’s 6-inch guylines attached while in poncho mode when hiking on trail, and have minimal problems with guylines catching on vegetation. However, the Gatewood (or any poncho) is a pain for bushwhacking. The guylines frequently catch on vegetation, and foot visibility is poor. I would much prefer to wear a rainsuit off-trail.

In rainwear mode, the Gatewood best fits a taller person, about 5 feet 10 inches or taller. On a shorter person it will be dragging on the ground. The Cape has some snaps and loops inside to shorten the sides, but they are difficult to attach and often come loose. It would be nice to have a shorter version of the Cape.

I donned the Gatewood Cape for protection from all types of precipitation, including hail and snow. On one occasion, at 13,000 feet on the Continental Divide Trail in July, I waited out a violent “thundersnow” storm by sitting down and covering myself with the Cape. On many other occasions I hiked with the Cape on briefly for showers or downpours, or on for hours in drizzle or intermittent rain. The Gatewood Cape works very well for showers, but gets very damp inside when walking in prolonged rain. When hiking uphill in very damp rainy weather, the Cape gets as wet on the inside as it is on the outside! This problem while carrying a pack uphill in damp rainy weather is not unique to the Gatewood Cape.

Performance in Shelter Mode

The summer of 2006 was a wet one in the Weminuche Wilderness in southwestern Colorado, so the Gatewood got plenty of testing under rainy conditions. The majority of the time I managed to set up the Gatewood with the back in the direction of incoming storms, or there was no really strong wind with the rain, so I stayed dry and warm under the Gatewood as a solo shelter.

However, on one occasion (shown in the top photo) I set up the Gatewood to take a siesta during an afternoon hailstorm which hit the backside of the shelter (so far so good). Then, after midnight I was hit by a thunderstorm with 30 mph winds from the front side (not so good). Wind-driven rain hit my sleeping bag as I huddled in the rear of the shelter, and in the morning I was sleeping on a puddle of water. Fortunately my sleeping bag (MontBell Alpine Down Hugger) has an excellent water-resistant shell and my down stayed dry. In retrospect, the Cape would have provided better protection from wind-driven rain if I had pitched it lower (as per the Six Moon Designs instructions), but this was one of those occasions where I was caught by surprise and just had to hunker down.

Under rainy conditions, and cool nights following a rain, the Gatewood shelter is as prone to condensation as any other single wall tent. When moving around in the Gatewood, such as when dressing, it is easy to brush the walls and get clothing damp. The best solution I found to minimize condensation is to raise the sides of the Cape, open the beak, and open the hood at the top as much as weather will allow. In wet or damp conditions when condensation is inevitable, I wipe the inside walls with my bandana to remove condensation.

Finally, note that the Gatewood Cape does not have any bug netting, so it provides little or no bug protection.

Assessment

Especially where bugs are not a big problem, the Six Moon Designs Gatewood Cape is a SuperUltraLight or ultralight backpacker’s dream come true. For less than 12 ounces, the Gatewood provides rainwear, pack cover, and shelter in one piece of gear. As rainwear, the Gatewood performs better than a normal poncho or poncho/tarp, but still has all of their disadvantages. Core ventilation is somewhat improved with the Gatewood’s full front zipper, but the zipper is of limited use when it’s raining. As a shelter, the Gatewood performs much better than a poncho/tarp, offering full protection from rain and spindrift (unless you get hit from the front with wind-driven rain). The front beak can be dropped down some to minimize that problem, if you plan ahead or have time to do it before you get blasted.

Overall, the Gatewood Cape is weight efficient when you factor in that you don’t have to also carry a lightweight bivy, bag cover, or use a heavier waterproof sleeping bag. It enables me to routinely and confidently camp in the alpine zone without these extras, much to my delight.

What’s Unique

In rainwear mode, the Gatewood Cape has a full front zipper to provide some core ventilation. In shelter mode, the Gatewood is a full-fledged solo shelter, providing much better storm protection than a poncho/tarp.

Recommendations for Improvement

The Gatewood Cape is an outstanding concept and design, and is a huge improvement in integrated rainwear/shelter gear for ultralight backpackers. A few details that could be improved are:

• Offer the Cape in a smaller size for shorter people.
• Improve the attachment for shortening the sides in rainwear mode.
• Offer an optional clip-in bug screen.

Introduction

The GoLite Multi-Sport pack is a frameless, panel-loading, small volume pack for ultralight backpacking, fast packing, and adventure racing. Alternatively, it can be used as a large day pack. The Multi-Sport is a larger version of the popular GoLite 24 adventure racing pack. With over fifty percent more volume than the 24, a dedicated ultralight backpacker can get a five-day or longer trip out of this pack. Other backpackers may eek out an overnighter or three day weekend. Part of the fun is challenging yourself to get your gear down to 31 liters (1900 ci)!

What’s Good

• For 1 pound 5 ounces (size medium) you get a bomber pack with almost every conceivable feature
• Excellent load control. Good for maintaining balance in difficult terrain and/or climbing. You can even run in the pack
• Good external storage – lots of pockets, bungees and daisy chains
• Durable 6.7 oz/yd² Arrowhead Cordura nylon pack body
• Hipbelt is comfortable, contours to the waist, distributes load well, and has pockets
• The air channel backpanel ventilates your back
• "Cool Factor" of carrying a small pack

What’s Not So Good

• Limited volume. Only dedicated ultralight backpackers will be able to get more than an overnighter out of the Multi-Sport (but those who can will love the pack)
• Shoulder strap foam is not firm enough
• External side pockets and hipbelt pockets are small
• Pack is not waterproof (nor is it intended to be waterproof)
• Lack of frame, and shoulder strap design limit load capacity to 20 pounds or less (but most hikers will be challenged to fit more than 15-20 pounds in the pack)

Specifications

Performance

The advantage of a small pack designed for adventure racing, such as the GoLite Multi-Sport, is its good load control. The pack and its contents are closer to your center of gravity than a large volume “backpacking” pack. As such, the pack moves with you helping your balance in difficult terrain such as off trail scrambling, peak bagging or even running. The narrow profile of the pack and durable fabric are well suited to bushwhacking, canyoneering, or climbing. And there is a definite "Cool Factor" to carrying such a small pack into the backcountry.

At 2000 cubic inches in size large, the Multi-Sport is also a popular pack size for a day hiking. It’s about the right size to hold summer gear for two people sharing the pack or winter day hiking gear for one person.

With the hipbelt, shoulder straps and sternum strap properly adjusted I found that I could run in the Multi-Sport Pack without it flopping around. I did just that on a couple of sections of the AT to make up time when I was behind schedule and losing daylight. I had an easy time boulder hopping across streams. A surprise advantage of the pack was its stability while walking long stretches of deep bogs with alternating footing of spongy sphagnum moss, rocks, decaying logs, and the occasional extra deep (and hidden) pocket of water and muck.

The feature set of the Multi-Sport includes a durable Cordura nylon pack body, webbing hipbelt with side pockets, padded shoulder straps, padded and ventilated backpanel, three external pockets, two internal 3-liter hydration sleeves with hydration ports, bungee cord frontpanel, daisy chain, and compression straps.

The Multi-Sport Pack has a good assortment of external pockets, bungees, and daisy chains. With strategic external storage of gear you may not need to go into the main pack body for most of the day. But some of the pockets are a bit small. The side pockets are too short to adequately stow a 2 liter Platypus bladder (although the side compression straps help). The hipbelt pockets are small – they will fit an energy bar, a snack in a baggie, or Geko size GPS, but they do not comfortably fit an e-Trex size GPS or a compact digital camera.

The suspension of the Multi-Sport is a mixture of mostly good and some just OK design. It has a very good webbing hipbelt. It wraps around the waist, distributes load well and is very comfortable. The overall geometry of the pack body, hipbelt, shoulder straps, and sternum strap did a good job of keeping the pack tight against my torso. As noted earlier I could even run in the pack. The only downside of the suspension is that the shoulder strap foam is not firm enough to distribute load across the full width of the straps. This affects the overall comfortable load carrying capacity of the pack. The shoulder straps worked fine with the 12-15 pound loads I typically carried, although I needed to use the sternum strap to adjust them to a comfortable position. At over 20 pounds the shoulder straps start to dig in and become uncomfortable. So, 20 pounds is probably the comfortable carry limit of the pack unless you have tougher than average shoulders. (This may be a moot point since most backpackers will be challenged get more than 15-20 pounds of gear into the 31 to 33 liter volume of the Multi-Sport Pack.)

The Multi-Sport Pack is not designed to be waterproof. Instead, it is designed to drain water. The main compartment zipper on the top of the pack is not waterproof and has no storm flap. There are large, strategically placed drain holes so that any water that gets in the pack body or pockets will quickly exit. To keep gear dry you’ll need to use a pack cover, a waterproof pack liner and/or waterproof storage sacks. One advantage of the draining design is that the main compartment zipper is easy to use (waterproof zippers are notorious for being sticky and difficult to operate). Another advantage is that you get to decide on the necessity and added weight of waterproofing your pack and its contents. Depending on your philosophy about waterproofing a pack, you’ll either love or hate the Multi-Sport Pack’s design. Personally, I like the design.

What’s Unique

The Multi-sport is a unique blend of very durable pack fabric, excellent load control, good external storage, sized for three to five day off trail trips (assuming an ultralight hiker with a compact load) in a pack that weighs 1 pound 5 ounces in size medium (1 pound 10 ounces in size large). It clearly shows its adventure racing roots, and is one of a few packs that one can run in.

Recommendations for Improvement

The shoulder straps on the GoLite Multi-Sport Pack need stiffer foam. The hipbelt pockets should be large enough to store an e-Trex size GPS and/or a compact digital camera. At least one of the side pockets could be a bit taller to hold a 2 liter Platypus bladder.