Articles (2020)

Backpacking Light Trip Planning Spreadsheet Contest Winners

The winners of the Backpacking Light Trip Planning Spreadsheet Contest are a diverse group.

2005 Backpacking Light Trip Planning Spreadsheet Contest Winners - 1

Introduction

The winners of the Backpacking Light Trip Planning Spreadsheet Contest have been selected. Readers responded with gusto to our call for entries and not only created spreadsheets to analyze gear lists, but also assist in other aspects of trip planning including meal preparation and gear selection. Eighteen entries were submitted for the contest covering a wide gamut of capabilities and needs. The wide assortment of features and design goals made for interesting discussions among the Backpacking Light staff. Determining the winners proved to be quite a challenge as we tried to weigh attributes of each entry.

The contest rules were simple. Create a spreadsheet “template” or “application” compatible with either OpenOffice or Microsoft Excel that could be easily adapted for any season, any trip, and any person. Given this rather open premise, determining a winner was difficult. We judged spreadsheets based on their ease of use, overall feature set, and how effectively the spreadsheet serves as a trip planning tool.

While each of the 18 entries had something worthwhile to offer in its approach to developing a gear list and helping to plan a trip, we were eventually able to narrow the field down to our final selections for first, second, and third place winners. While only three spreadsheets will receive prizes, Backpacking Light heartily congratulates everyone who submitted a spreadsheet for this contest.

2005 Trip Planning Spreadsheet Contest Prizes

First Place $100 gift certificate to BackpackingLight.com
Second Place $50 gift certificate to BackpackingLight.com
Third Place $25 gift certificate to BackpackingLight.com

Click screen shot thumbnails to enlarge.

First Place

Backpacking Light Trip Planning Spreadsheet Contest Winners - 2
A screenshot of Meir Gottleib’s first-place winning spreadsheet.

Backpacking Light Trip Planning Spreadsheet Contest Winners - 3
Meir Gottleib, the creator of the first-place winning spreadsheet, standing on top of Mt. Whitney after completing a hike of the John Muir Trail last year.

Download this spreadsheet, Zip file of Meir’s spreadsheetMeir Gottleib‘s spreadsheet receives the first place prize. Meir has crafted a spreadsheet that provides comprehensive tools for organizing gear and creating food plans. The Backpacking Light staff was particularly impressed with both his “gear closet” and “pantry” sheets. The latter takes meal planning to heights we had never seen in such tools.

About the Winner

Meir Gottlieb lives in Baltimore, Maryland. He is a graduate of Cornell University College of Engineering and co-founder of Salar, Inc., a healthcare computer software company. Meir started lightweight backpacking in 2004 and walks year-round in the hills of Virginia, West Virginia, and Pennsylvania. He has also completed the 211 mile John Muir Trail in California’s Sierra Nevada Mountains.

Second Place

Backpacking Light Trip Planning Spreadsheet Contest Winners - 4
A screenshot of Jim Wood’s second-place winning spreadsheet.

Backpacking Light Trip Planning Spreadsheet Contest Winners - 5
Jim Wood in the Dolly Sods Wilderness of West Virginia in October 2003.

Download this spreadsheetJim Wood has designed a spreadsheet that (once you understand how to take full advantage of its reporting capabilities) lets you create detailed reports to help you plan your trip.

About the Winner

Paraphrasing Jim’s own words from his website.

I am a mid-50s corporate finance executive temporarily living in Virginia but hoping to return to California soon. For as long as I can remember, I’ve held a deep and abiding passion for the wilderness. I began actually backpacking in 1988 and my only regret is that I didn’t start sooner.

Third Place

Backpacking Light Trip Planning Spreadsheet Contest Winners - 6
A screenshot of Ben Tomsky’s third-place winning spreadsheet.

2005 Backpacking Light Trip Planning Spreadsheet Contest Winners - 7
Ben Tomsky at the start of a hike in the Big Basin Redwoods State Park, California in May 2006.

Download this spreadsheetBen Tomsky receives the third place award. While his spreadsheet does not sport quite as sophisticated an interface as some of the other entrants, Ben has created a tool that allows you to quickly create gear lists and meal plans for trips quite effectively.

About the Winner

After growing up in flat, boring Midwest suburbia, Ben was enchanted by the wonders of the West Coast. He now calls San Mateo, California his home, and hikes and backpacks the nearby Santa Cruz, Santa Lucia, and Sierra Nevada ranges. Other hobbies/interests include: wine, espresso, cooking, music, travel, fly fishing, snowboarding, snowshoeing, and making ultralight alcohol stoves. He supports these habits by working as a User Experience Designer at a large software company.

Honorable Mention

Download spreadsheet #1, Download spreadsheet #2, Zip file containing all David’s spreadsheetsDavid Johnston designed a spreadsheet that brings a flexible and sophisticated user interface to gear selection and trip planning. His use of individual sheets for each class of gear is a novel approach for crafting complex gear lists.

Acknowledgments

We were impressed with the response we received in our Trip Planning Spreadsheet Contest, and regret that we could only choose three winners. We consider all of the passionate lightweight backpackers who made the effort to develop a trip planning spreadsheet to be winners. The wealth of ideas and ways to accomplish design goals was inspiring. Once again, we wish to thank everyone who entered the contest.

Backpacking Light Magazine Seeks Nominations for Outdoor Industry’s Most Stringent Product Award Program

Announcing the second annual Lightitude Award for the Best Gear of 2006

Bozeman, Mont. – May 31, 2006Backpacking Light Magazine (www.BackpackingLight.com) announces the second annual Lightitude Awards honoring product integrity and performance in lightweight gear and apparel. Lightitude Awards will be presented to recipients during the Outdoor Retailer Summer Market 2006.

Backpacking Light Magazine is now accepting nominations for the annual Lightitude Awards. The deadline is July 1, 2006. Nomination forms are available online at www.BackpackingLight.com by clicking “Lightitude.”

Lightitude Awards honor backcountry gear, apparel, footwear and accessories demonstrating exceptional field performance. Unlike most other magazine product performance award programs, unreleased or “new” products that have neither been field tested by the public nor subjected to the court of public opinion do not qualify for a Lightitude Award nomination.

Backpacking Light Magazine will accept nominations from qualified outdoor industry professionals and backcountry core users only. The selection committee consists of Backpacking Light Magazine’s staff (renowned for their rigorous standards for product performance), selected industry design professionals, and highly experienced backcountry enthusiasts, with input solicited from the public.

“Three barriers must be overcome for a product to receive a Lightitude Award,” say the Backpacking Light editors, Carol Crooker (online magazine) and Matt Colon (print magazine). “Nominations must first come from qualified individuals and are then subject to the court of public opinion. Finally, they are screened by a review committee who has put the product through the wringer in both lab and field settings.”

The purpose of the process is to make sure that Lightitude Awards are given to well-deserved recipients, and not just handed out to companies coming out with “cool new gear” with little market longevity or testing. Nominations, public comment and award committee reviews will be made publicly available at www.BackpackingLight.com for all Lightitude Award recipients to further validate the integrity of the award. Crooker and Colon are confident the Lightitude Award is setting a new industry standard for meaningful recognition of product design, performance and integrity that consumers can trust.

Award recipients will receive complimentary plaques for display at their booth and an award logo digital media kit. Award recipients also receive a license to use authentic Lightitude Award trade show, point of sale, and point of purchase materials, including banners, hang tags, packaging stickers and more.

Information for the Press

Award Information: Information about Lightitude Award winners will be available in electronic format after the Outdoor Retailer Summer Market. To request high-resolution photos and stock copy about the award-winning products, please send an email to publisher@backpackinglight.com.

About Backpacking Light
Backpacking Light Magazine (www.BackpackingLight.com) is the outdoor industry’s most recognized and authoritative voice for wilderness travel philosophy, techniques and gear. Catering primarily to prosumer and industry professional audiences, Backpacking Light technical articles and product reviews are based on accurate and trustworthy investigative research. In addition, Backpacking Light publishes content for beginning and novice wilderness travelers to help them go light while staying safe and comfortable in the backcountry. Backpacking Light offers two primary subscription-based products, including a print magazine of exceptional shelf quality (Backpacking Light, ISSN 1550-4417) featuring tactile and emotive articles about lightweight backpacking style, philosophy, and applications and a comprehensive online magazine (BackpackingLight.com, ISSN 1537-0364) that focuses on providing education and information about lightweight backpacking techniques and gear with reader forums, and a members’ co-op-style gear shop including some of the quirkiest and coolest ultralight gear on the planet.

Media Contact
Bridget Cavanaugh
O’Berry Cavanaugh
Phone: 406-522-8075
Email: bmc@oberrycavanaugh.com

Inov-8 F-Lite 300 Shoes SPOTLITE REVIEW

Very lightweight (300 g, 10.5 oz US men’s 9). Are they lightweight backpacking capable?

Overview

Inov-8’s motto is that the foot should control the shoe; the shoe should not control the foot. The F-lite 300 shoe exemplifies this motto. It is very lightweight (300 g, 10.5 oz US men’s 9), flexible and cradles the foot closely. That’s nice – but is it anything more than a glorified moccasin?

Yes. What makes the Inov-8 line stand out among other lightweight shoes is comfort and support. Inov-8 offers levels of support to match your tolerance, proceeding down to the F-lite 250 race flats (250 g, 8.8 oz US men’s 9). My recent favorite backpacking shoe has been the Inov-8 Terroc 330 (330 g, 11.6 oz, size US 9) which is nearly the heaviest shoe in the Inov-8 line-up. Then along came the F-lite 300. The F-lite 300 employs a new technology, Meta-shank, consisting of five bands running under the fascia bands of the foot. The result is a shoe that is an ounce lighter than the Terroc but just as supportive.

Many of the new Inov-8 shoes include fascia-band technology, which they believe can help prevent plantar fasciitis. The five bands of the Meta-shank run beneath the foot’s fascia and are believed to help prevent the fascia from over stretching – something that is more likely to happen on long, hard uphill climbs. The Meta-shank also adds torsional rigidity to the shoe without adding extra longitudinal stiffness.

Inov-8 claims that the Meta-shank harnesses the Windlass effect (the increase in tension on the plantar fascia as the foot moves fully through heel lift and toe extension) in the foot’s plantar fascia ligament structure to increase the propulsive efficiency of their shoe. In other words, that the energy of foot flex is converted into forward motion.

Inov-8 F-lite 300 SPOTLITE REVIEW - 3
Inov-8 claims the five-finger Meta-shank aligns with each individual metatarsal for greater flexibility when contouring while retaining underfoot impact protection. And not only that, the Fascia-band technology harnesses the energy of foot flex to convert it into forward motion.

Maybe, maybe not, but in practice, the fascia-band technology reduced my foot fatigue compared to what I’ve experienced wearing the Terrocs. I wore the F-lite 300s on a 5-day backpacking trip through Saguaro National Park in Arizona. Tail mileage on two of the days was about 50% more than is typical for me. My feet were less fatigued than usual. The shoes had enough midsole cushioning to prevent stone bruises on very rocky trails. Luckily, there was just enough toe bumper protection to keep the tips of my toes undamaged during a fast moonlit descent from sunset viewing on Rincon Peak.

I like the F-lite 300s but they have some flaws. The first has already been corrected. The test shoes I received have very slippery nylon laces. The bow will only stay tied if double knotted. Inov-8 informs me that production shoes will come with two sets of laces for a secure hold/tie. The second is a small toe box. A feature I love about the Terrocs (and Flyrocs) is a roomy toe box. The F-lite 300s have a narrower toe box which caused some minor trauma to both my pinky toe nails during the Saguaro trip. The F-lite 300s are running small – Inov-8 recommends sizing up a half size. My test shoes are size 11.5 where I normally hike in an 11. The 11.5 F-lite 300s are long enough for me, but I’m considering sizing up to a 12 for excess length that will move my toes back to a wider area in the shoe. The third flaw is documented in Water Weight Gain and Drying Characteristics of Lightweight Hiking Shoes after Submersion. The F-lite 300s soak up water like a sponge. These shoes, although the lightest tested, soaked up water (measured by weight) in the upper range of the shoes in the test. Both the Terroc and Flyroc shoes absorbed less water. The culprit is a spongy lining on the uppers.

One final comment, these are the only backpacking shoes I’ve worn that elicited comments on their good looks. One hiking partner even called them “stunning.”

Inov-8 F-lite 300 SPOTLITE REVIEW - 2
South Mountain Park in Phoenix. Day hiking in a rain storm.

Features and Specifications

  • Weight Measured: 1 lb 7.4 oz (663 g) men’s US 11.5 (Sizes run small, 11.5 is equivalent to an 11. If you like a roomier toe box, a full size up might serve you better.)
  • Weight Specified: Men’s size US 9 (UK 8), 300 g (10.5 oz)
  • Sizes US Men: 5-13 (including half sizes), 14
  • Sizes US Women: 6.5-11 (including half sizes)
  • Purpose: Supportive running shoe ideal for use on hard pack terrain with some road use
  • Features: Fascia-band, Meta-shank, medium profile cushioned midsole, endurance rubber outsole, endurance last.
  • MSRP: $90

Oware Poncho/Tarp REVIEW

The lightest silnylon poncho/tarp we have reviewed, but also the shortest.

Introduction

Oware Poncho/Tarp REVIEW - 1

The Oware poncho/tarp is a 5’2″ by 7’8″ rectangle of silnylon with a hood in the middle. The hood has a bungee drawcord closure around the face. There are 12 guy points around the edges plus four snaps to close up the sides. Just another poncho/tarp?

What’s Good

  • Light weight
  • Wider than most lightweight poncho/tarps
  • Adequate number of tieouts
  • Big hood size – a hat fits inside easily

What’s Not So Good

  • Hood seams are not sealed, and can leak slowly in tarp mode
  • Shorter than most lightweight poncho/tarps
  • The sewn-up neck section can get warm
  • The round hood opening is hard to seal in tarp mode, and can leak
  • Second row of stitching attaching tieout tape is through a single layer of fabric
  • Tieout tape is wide and folds flat making it hard to thread guy lines

Specifications

  Manufacturer

Oware

  Year/Model

2005 Poncho/Tarp

  Style

Poncho/tarp

  What’s Included

Stuff sack, 30 ft (9.1 m) cord, 10 ft (3 m) bungee

  Fabric

Silicone-impregnated nylon, 1.3 oz/yd2 (44 g/m2)

  Weight

Measured weight 7.8 oz (221 g); manufacturer’s specification 8 oz (227 g)

  Dimensions

62 in x 92 in (157 x 234 cm), actual and measured

  Features

Sewn-in hood with drawcord and cordlock, 2 snaps to close arm openings at each side, 12 nylon tie out loops, hood seams folded over

  MSRP

US $74

Performance

Oware Poncho/Tarp REVIEW - 2
The Oware poncho/tarp spread out on the snow with snap positions marked by blue lines.

The Oware Poncho/Tarp has two parts: the body and the hood. The body is a simple flat sheet, hemmed all around, with five tieouts down each side, counting the corners, and one in the middle of each end. The tieouts are made from 26-millimeter (1-inch) tape and are sewn onto the hems.

There are two sets of snaps set on each side to hold the edges together under the arms. One pair is set into a reinforced bit of the hem and the other pair is set through some of the tie outs. Their positions are marked in the above photo by short blue lines.

The hood is made from two pieces and is sewn into an oval hole in the middle of the rectangle. It is sewn up the front and has 3-millimeter bungee cord around the face opening, secured with a cord lock.

The Oware poncho/tarp packs into quite a small volume – see the picture at the end of this review. The red bag is 4″ x 6″ (10 cm x 18 cm) when flat.

Poncho Hood

Oware Poncho/Tarp REVIEW - 4
Details of the neck seam.

The hood has plenty of room inside for a hat to be worn under it. In fact, without a hat it falls over my eyes, but with a large Australian bush hat on my head it is just fine. The hood is large enough to cover the brim of my hat, keeping it dry, and the hat means that my head is insulated from the silnylon fabric and any condensation. The front of the hood is sewn shut so you can close the hood opening when the poncho is used as a tarp. However, this closed area around the neck can make the neck region a bit hot since it can’t be opened for ventilation. I would prefer 2 millimeter bungee cord to the 3 millimeter cord used: that would be softer and lighter, and quite adequate for a face opening.

Oware Poncho/Tarp REVIEW - 3
The Oware Poncho/Tarp with a hat under the hood (left) – a clear view, and without a hat (right) – vision blocked.

The connection between the hood and the rest of the poncho should allow light rain to slide off the join, and the seam over the top has been folded over, but neither seam is sealed. There will likely be some condensation happening anyhow, so total waterproofing seems a bit unnecessary for poncho mode, but is useful in tarp mode.

Poncho Body

The poncho is 62 inches wide, wider than many lightweight poncho/tarps (see table here), but I find the width a bit small. When I put my arms out I find my wrists are sticking out a bit and my windshirt is going to get seriously wet. I could pull the windshirt sleeves up or I could just pull my arms inside the poncho. To make the poncho any wider would mean a major seam as it already uses the full width of the standard silnylon fabric. The length of the poncho is plenty for me at 5’5″ (160 cm) tall: it comes down near my ankles. The length is dictated by its use as a tarp of course and is less than many lightweight poncho/tarps (see table in link above).

Oware Poncho/Tarp REVIEW - 5
The poncho is 62 inches wide, wider than many lightweight poncho/tarps, but does not offer full coverage for arms.

The snaps down the sides seem huge, but they weigh only about 0.35 ounces (10 g) total. We aren’t always that careful at the end of a wet day when trying to whip the poncho off and erect it as a tarp, so maybe the size is justified – I haven’t had any failures to date.

The Oware Poncho/Tarp rides up in the back when worn over a big pack (a lightweight style big pack, that is), but there is still coverage. If the pack is large enough, the snaps do not line up properly on each side. However, you can get creative here and line up snap #1 at the front with snap #2 at the back. It also means the arm gaps are pulled back a bit, but in pouring rain you may well have your arms inside anyhow.

The big worry with any silnylon raingear is condensation. I find that the voluminous nature of the Oware Poncho/Tarp means it doesn’t ‘cling,’ and air can circulate freely. How freely it circulates high up in the mountains with a strong wind blowing is another matter. Under those conditions you might find it convenient to tie the back corners around your waist with some guy line or the bungee cord.

I have tried wearing this and other ponchos in thick scrub in the rain. Basically, it doesn’t work. The poncho is at serious risk of damage owing to the way it flaps around, and I get just as wet under it as without it. But I should add in all fairness that I have the same problems with a conventional parka. There are some situations where you are going to get very wet, regardless.

Tarp

The theory behind a poncho/tarp is that you whip it off and quickly erect it as a tarp at the end of the day. You can’t erect it as a tarp while still wearing it – well, not very easily anyhow. I have to say I find pitching a poncho/tarp to be a very slow process. What isn’t often mentioned is that you have to fish out a minimum of six guylines and attach them to the tieout loops at the edges before you can pitch the tarp. And this takes time, while the rain is pouring down. No, I am not going walking with all those bits of string attached. Getting the tarp pitched correctly also takes a fair bit of time, in the rain. Practice in dry weather to hone your pitching skills to reduce the time you are exposed to wet weather.

Oware Poncho/Tarp REVIEW - 6

Oware Poncho/Tarp REVIEW - 7

The Oware Poncho/Tarp in tarp mode.

Oware Poncho/Tarp REVIEW - 8
The ends of the tieouts are attached with stitching through a single layer of fabric.

There are enough tieout loops, but the tape is wide and folds very flat, which makes threading the guylines through them difficult. Half the stitching attaching the tieout loops to the poncho/tarp is off the hem and through only a single layer of fabric (see photo). I’ve seen no failures at these points on the test Poncho/Tarp to date, but it appears this could be a weak point. Note: Dave Olsen of Oware reports that this has not been a failure point.

The tarp is wide enough for one person under low winds and under higher winds if you pitch it a bit lower to the ground. The length, at 7’8″, is shorter than many lightweight poncho/tarps. The tarp can be used in conjunction with a breathable bivy sack in milder weather but, for taller folks especially, is better suited for use as an awning over a waterproof/breathable bivy sack in very wet weather.


Oware Poncho/Tarp REVIEW - 9

Oware Poncho/Tarp REVIEW - 10

The fold in the roof from the hood opening collects rain and sags. The blue line (right photo) shows the edge of collected water during a garden hose simulated rain test.

You will of course get rain through the hole in the middle (where the hood is) unless you close it off. The simplest solution is to twist the neck of the hood up and tie the bungee cord fairly tightly around it, and this seems to be a reasonable way of closing the hole in theory. However, the result is not entirely satisfactory as the pitched tarp shows a severe distortion in the middle no matter how the hood is adjusted. This distortion worried me a fair bit when I saw it, so it was time for a rain test. I should mention here that when it rains where I live in Sydney (Australia), it rains. We can get 1 inch (25 mm) in an hour, easily. So I simulated some ‘medium rain’ with a hose on fine spray, and the result was not satisfactory. The folds in the slight distortion collected rain, and the fold deepened steadily as more ‘rain’ was collected. Eventually the channel in the middle had lots of water in it: the edge of the pool some time later is marked by little blue line in the right hand picture above. Such pooling is obviously a worry.

The first time I did this the pool shrank as I watched, and there was only one way this could be happening. I dived under the tarp for shelter from ‘the rain,’ and sure enough there was a big stream of water coming down from the hood. Some of the leak was through the stitching in the hood but most of it must have come through the face hole in the hood, even though I had tied it off. I suspect that the hole was underwater.

Oware Poncho/Tarp REVIEW - 11

Oware Poncho/Tarp REVIEW - 12

Unsuccessful (left) and successful (right) ways to close the hood opening.

I rearranged the tie-off to have the face opening further from the bungee cord (right picture), and a second rain test showed much less water coming through. But there was still a steady dripping of water through the stitching. You would get a wet sleeping bag from this. I tried to adjust the tarp guy lines to eliminate the folds around the hood, but to no avail. The folds are inherent in having a round hole in the middle of the tarp. Some poncho/tarps use a slit for the hood instead of a round hole: that design usually closes up much better under tension. The problem here is that you can’t really know whether you have tied the hood up properly until it rains, and you can not adjust it from the inside!

Oware Poncho/Tarp REVIEW - 13
Holding the hood up to stop water pooling.

So I tried another trick with a line from pole to pole to hold the top of the hood up. This worked moderately well with only a few drips coming through the stitching.

Summary

The Oware Poncho/Tarp is a reasonable poncho if you don’t have longish arms or are prepared for the lower part of your arms to get wet (as is the case with most lightweight poncho/tarps). As a tarp it is on the short side and appropriate accompaniments (breathable or waterproof/breathable bivy sack) should be added depending on expected weather and your height.

Oware Poncho/Tarp REVIEW - 14
Oware Poncho/tarp (red) and Chaps (blue) in home made silnylon bags.

That said, I would be quite happy to include the Oware Poncho/Tarp in my daypack for emergencies, or even just unexpected mildly bad weather. It’s light and it packs small (red bag).

What’s Unique

The Oware Poncho/Tarp, at 7.8 ounces (measured), is lighter than many other lightweight poncho/tarps (GoLite UltraLite Poncho/Tarp – 11 oz, Integral Designs SilPoncho – 10.2 oz, Mountain Laurel Designs Silnylon Pro – 9 oz). At 62 by 92 inches, it is wide but short. It offers a lightweight solution for the shorter person, or for emergency or mildly inclement conditions.

Recommendations for Improvement

  • Seal the stitching around the hood, or provide seam sealant to buyer
  • Change the hood attachment from a circle to a slit to avoid making a depression in tarp mode
  • Reduce the thickness of the hood bungee cord
  • Add a tag to the top of the hood to hold the hood up when pitched as a tarp

Oware Silnylon Rain Chaps REVIEW

Lightweight (3 oz), simple, and long.

OWare Silnylon Rain Chaps SPOTLIGHT REVIEW - 1

Introduction

The Oware Silnylon Rain Chaps are two simple trouser legs made of silnylon, without the entire backside/crotch region. Unlike full pants, they can be put on one leg at a time, and of course they weigh less. There are loops of bungee cord at the ankles with cord locks, and tape loops at the ankles for instep cords so you can tie them down for use in the snow. The silnylon extends up the sides to some sewn-in lengths of nylon cord, which are used to hold them up. The Rain Chaps combine well with the Oware Poncho/Tarp or any poncho/tarp.

What’s Good

  • Very light weight
  • Reasonably generous size
  • Fit easily over joggers
  • Very little condensation
  • Tie-down loops at ankles for snow conditions

What’s Not So Good

  • Leg seams are not sealed, and could leak slightly
  • Cords at waist level not very easy to use
  • Hard to adjust the vertical position of the chaps
  • Bungee cord at ankles gets in the way

Specifications

  Year/Model

2005 Oware Rain Chaps

  Weight

Measured weight 2.8 oz (80 g); manufacturer’s specification 3 oz (85 g)

  Fabric

Silicone-impregnated nylon, 1.3 oz/yd2 (44 g/m2) nominal

  Length
(inside seam)

31 in (71 cm)

  Width at foot
(flat)

10 in (25 cm)

  Seam sealing

None, but seam is folded over

  Packed size

2.4 in diameter x 3.5 in long (6 cm x 9 cm)

  MSRP

US $35

Performance

What a silly idea – ‘chaps’ indeed! They look ridiculous!

Except that when I pulled them on, there seemed to be some logic after all. They are easy to put on in the rain, one leg at a time, unlike full overtrousers where you have to do a sort of dance to get both legs on at once without sitting in the mud or standing on the legs in the mud. They cover all my legs just as well as full overtrousers. OK, my backside would be exposed with a jacket, but it was very adequately covered by a poncho/tarp (see Oware Poncho/Tarp REVIEW). And they are so light! Hum – maybe not so ridiculous after all.

OWare Silnylon Rain Chaps SPOTLIGHT REVIEW - 2
Back view of Oware Silnylon Chaps.

There are no zips at the bottom ends, but the legs are wide enough to be pulled over most joggers. The sewn-in cords at the waist level are there to hold the legs or chaps up, although exactly how you do this is not explained. I found two methods, described below.

The seam down the inside of the leg has been folded over so the edges are concealed, with one line of stitching visible. The inside leg length measures 31 inches (80 cm). I wore the chaps with gaiters in the snow, and this same strategy would extend rain protection for those who need a longer inseam.

They are quite roomy on me, but I weigh only 64 kg (141 lb, 10 stone).

Advantages and Limitations

I have already described one advantage: the Oware Rain Chaps are easy to get on and off one piece at a time. But there is more. By not covering my waist and backside, the Chaps allow much better ventilation. Let’s be realistic: full silnylon overtrousers can be a bit like a plastic bag. But with the open top end I get a fair bit of ventilation. Actually, it would be nice if the flair at the top of the leg opening was a shade wider, to improve the ventilation further, but this is a fine detail. You can achieve almost the same effect by not pulling the Chaps up too tightly, and this is quite possible.

OWare Silnylon Rain Chaps SPOTLIGHT REVIEW - 3
Side view of Oware Chaps, showing fabric going up side to waist cord.

The bits of fabric going up the sides are quite adequate to hold the Chaps up: more is not needed. But I found that their position made getting to my trouser pockets quite difficult.

OWare Silnylon Rain Chaps SPOTLIGHT REVIEW - 4
Oware Chaps with gaiters in the snow.

With the Oware Poncho/Tarp on, the lack of rain cover over my backside didn’t matter, and this would apply for most walking conditions. I am able to wander around in heavy rain with the Oware Rain Chaps and a poncho and stay quite dry inside. Under very cold conditions and with a short poncho, like in the snow in the picture here, I found my backside was a little cool at times. Also, I foresee problems in the snow if you go for a slide in them: you might get a very cold wet backside. Well, at that weight and volume, what do you expect?

Problems

OWare Silnylon Rain Chaps SPOTLIGHT REVIEW - 5
Close up of the cord sewn to the top edge.

That’s not to say the Oware Rain Chaps are perfect. The arrangement for holding them up consists of a bit of cord sewn into the top of the fabric on each leg, as shown here. There are two obvious choices of how to use this cord: tie the bits to a belt, or tie the two of them around the waist as a belt. I very seldom wear a belt so I normally use the latter method. However, this requires that I have the ends tied together behind my back. I can tie the ends together before I put the Chaps on, but this restricts the separation of the two legs and complicates getting them on. Tying the ends together behind my back is possible, but tricky. The simplest seems to be a thumb knot (simple overhand knot) with both ends, but even that can be difficult in the rain with a pack on.

However, I have found that I can tie a knot fairly easily by dropping the tops of the Chaps down a bit so I can see the string between my legs. This looks a little inelegant while I am doing it, but works. With that done I can easily tie the other ends at the front to hold the Chaps up. This works fine.

Just what other arrangement could be devised? One would be if the top edge of the Chaps had a short wide tunnel at the top as well as a long sewn-in cord on one leg I could thread the cord through the tunnel in the other leg once they are on. We don’t want a permanent connection between the two halves or we are back to the ‘dancing in the mud’ exercise.

I also find it difficult to adjust the position of the Chaps up my legs. The slippery silnylon tends to slide down a bit on me. It would be nice if one could devise a really simple way of adjusting the vertical position of the Chaps with respect to one’s waist. Will Rietveld’s review of the Oware Gore-Tex chaps Oware Gore-Tex Rain Chaps REVIEW demonstrates his solution to this – with longer legs, he simply ties the chaps tightly to his belt loops. I usually just do the cord up tightly around my waist, hitch the chaps up every now and then, and stop worrying.

The bungee cord at the ankles turned out to be a bit of a problem. The amount of cord provided is rather long, and when I did up the cord lock there was this great length of bungee cord, with a large lumpy knot and a cord lock at the end, flapping around. I trod on it several times, and got it down the inside of my light jogger once. I tried tucking the bungee cord inside the ankle, and that worked most of the time. It might be better to use a fixed length cord totally inside the tunnel at the bottom (no cord lock): short enough that the leg would be gathered around the ankle, but long enough that it could be stretched out to full diameter of the bottom end of the legging. You don’t need the ankle done up tightly – in fact that can be uncomfortable.

However, I eventually removed the bungee cord completely and now I just put the bottom end of the Chaps inside my gaiters. This works fine and is shown in the snow picture. The use of gaiters also means I don’t need the tie-down loops at the ankle either.

OWare Silnylon Rain Chaps SPOTLIGHT REVIEW - 6
Oware Poncho/Tarp in red bag, Oware Rain Chaps in blue bag

What’s Unique

  • The combination of separate legs (chaps) and the light weight is different from conventional rain pants, but not unique these days.

Recommendations for Improvement

For all my criticisms of fine details, these Oware Rain Chaps are very serviceable gear and I will be taking them with me on trips. A few suggested changes are:

  • Improve the mechanism for holding them up (possibly have tunnels at the top or waist region and/or a longer lighter cord at the waist)
  • Flare the top leg opening just a little more
  • Omit the bungee cord at the ankles (lighter!)

Headsweats Protech Hat SPOTLITE REVIEW

Headsweats offers an alternative to a conventional wide-brimmed sun hat.

Headsweats Protech Hat SPOTLITE Review - 1
The uniquely fashionable Headsweats Protech Hat. (Well, at least it diverts attention away from my skinny legs. Plus, it perfectly complements the bold style of a post-hike Nunatak Balaclava.)

Overview

Headsweats’ primary customers are endurance athletes. The company offers over seventeen styles of headwear targeted towards cyclists, triathletes, adventure racers, etc. This background is apparent in the design of their Protech Hat with its integrated cape and highly wicking fabric. Nevertheless, the hat can offer backpackers some advantages over more conventional wide-brimmed and ballcap-style alternatives.

I’ve been using the Protech Hat mostly for trail running in warm, sunny weather. In these conditions, the hat provides very good sun protection and moisture management. With a breeze from the front, or if you’re moving faster than four miles per hour in still air, the cape lifts off your shoulders and provides both sun protection and ventilation. However, if you are moving slowly with no wind, or if the breeze is from the rear, the cape can become plastered to your neck and restrict cooling airflow around your head. If the cape isn’t needed, it can be loosely folded and stored under the crown to wear the hat as a regular ballcap.

The hat features an elastic drawcord with rear cordlock for size adjustment and a stiffened bill with a black underside to reduce glare. The Coolmax fabric wicks perspiration very well, and is particularly refreshing on a hot day after dipping the hat in a stream. The fabric does limit the hat’s usefulness to sun protection, though – it’s definitely not a rain hat.

For backpacking, the Protech Hat offers nearly the sun protection of a regular hat with a 360° brim. However, it does leave the area in front of your ears more exposed. While the hat offers virtually no rain protection by itself, it is more easily worn under a rain shell than a regular wide-brimmed hat. Here, the cape offers a little neck insulation, while the bill gives the shell hood some structure and keeps the rain out of your eyes. This integration with a hooded rain shell is a key advantage over a regular hat and makes the Protech Hat worth consideration for backpacking – even if you don’t have skinny legs.

Features and Specifications

  • Fabric: Coolmax® Polyester
  • BPL measured weight: 2.4 oz (68 g)
  • One size fits most with elastic size adjuster and rear cordlock.
  • Integrated Cape shades back of your neck.
  • Wicking headband keeps sweat out of your eyes.
  • Black underbrim reduces glare.
  • Colors Available: White/Grey, Khaki/Olive, and Camouflage
  • MSRP: $25

GSI Bugaboo Cookpot SPOTLITE REVIEW

Light Teflon-lined aluminium cookpot for two people that is lighter and cheaper than the GSI Hard Anodised Extreme set.

Overview

The GSI Outdoors Bugaboo Cookset includes two aluminium pots with a triple-coated Teflon interior coating, two matching lids which also serve as frying pans, a pot lifter and a string bag. The outer surface of each pot has a heat-treated blue coating, shading to black at the bottom. The Teflon coating is fairly rugged, and can take temperatures up to 600 F (315 C) – that should allow a bit of frying! The base has a spiral pattern on it, turned on a lathe no less. GSI claim this makes the base grip onto the top of a stove. Compared to how my light stainless steel ‘Rocket’-brand pot moves around on several canister and alcohol stoves, this claim seems valid. Unfortunately, you can’t buy individual items from the set.

This set is slightly lighter and cheaper than the GSI Hard Anodised Extreme set . Apart from the hard anodising finish, the two sets look identical – and cook the same.

These pots are relatively wide compared to the beercan mug concept, but this makes for greater heat transfer efficiency on a stove. GSI claims that aluminium has much better thermal conductivity than stainless steel and titanium; while true this is irrelevant when it comes to rate of heating in the field as the walls are too thin to matter. On the other hand, the aluminium bases are thick enough that they do spread the heat quite well – better than titanium or stainless. Of course, the extra thickness comes as the price of weight, but it seems to work.

The pot lifter GSI supplies is designed to work with the stainless steel bracket riveted on the side of each item, to avoid scratching the non-stick coating. The brackets seem a little clumsy in design but are well riveted on. The pot lifter is a solid construction and is a bit heavy compared to other brands of pot lifters. You can remove the pivot rivet, take the part of the lifter with the hook and cut it down lengthwise, to give a ‘handle’ which works quite well with these pots but weighs only about 0.64 ounces (18 g). But then, a bent bit of aluminium or titanium strip also works fine hooked up under the bracket. Other brands of pot lifter work reasonably well on the rim as well.

GSI Bugaboo Pot with stew
The smaller of the two Bugaboo pots, full of stew, inside my blue tent late in the evening.

The whole cookset is of course far too much for a lightweight walker, but you can easily take just what you want and leave the rest at home. The pots are the most attractive bits. Even the smaller of the two pots may be too big and heavy for a solo walker, but it is about the right size when cooking for two. The larger pot is fine for three people. If you share gear like this the weight efficiency becomes quite good, at 71 – 76 grams per person. This is quite light even compared to some Ti wares.

Features and Specifications

  • Blue outer surface, with a Teflon non-stick lining
  • Very similar to the GSI HAE cookset
  • Large pot: 1.5 qt (1.42 L), 7.5 oz (212 g)
  • Small pot: 1.0 qt (0.95 L), 5.4 oz (152 g)
  • Large lid/frying pan: 7.5” (191 mm) diameter, 4.4 oz (125 g)
  • Small lid/frying pan: 6.5” (165 mm) diameter, 3.5 oz (98 g)
  • Each pot and lid has a lifting lug built in to match the supplied pot lifter
  • A pot-lifter is provided for the lifting lugs, at 2.4 oz (68 g), but can be slimmed down
  • MSRP $43.95 for the full set
  • GSI Hard Anodised Extreme Cookpot SPOTLITE REVIEW

    Light Teflon-lined aluminium cookpot for two people.

    Overview

    The GSI Outdoors Hard Anodised Extreme Cookset includes two nesting pots (sizes below), two matching lids which also serve as frying pans, a pot lifter and a string bag. Both pots and lids have a hard anodised finish inside and outside, with an ‘extreme triple-coat non-stick interior’ on the inside. The non-stick finish is actually Teflon, the same as in the GSI Bugaboo set. GSI say that DuPont claim that the Teflon finish can handle up to 600 F (315 C). That’s a bit hotter than I cook my dinner! The ‘hard anodised’ bit in the name applies to both inner and outer surfaces: it is done after the pot is formed, and the Teflon is bonded over the top of it. GSI claim that doing it this way produces a better and more durable result than other processes used by other manufacturers. The base has a spiral pattern on it, created on a lathe. It is meant to make the base grip onto the top of a stove. As noted in the GSI Bugaboo Spotlite Review, it does seem to work fairly well. Unfortunately, you can’t buy individual items from the set.

    This cookset is slightly dearer than the GSI Bugaboo cookset, due to the hard-anodising step. From a gentle user’s perspective I can’t see any real difference in performance: both are aluminium with a non-stick lining. However, GSI claim that the hard-anodised version will withstand more punishment.

    These pots are relatively wide compared to the beercan mug concept, but this makes for greater heat transfer efficiency on a stove. Aluminium has much better thermal conductivity than stainless steel and titanium, as GSI claim, but when it comes to the rate of heating in the field the thin walls make what metal is used irrelevant. On the other hand, the thick aluminium base does spread the heat better than either stainless or titanium – at a slight weight penalty of course. I found the pot cooked a stew, rice and pasta very well: there was no sticking at all, and the clean-up was extremely easy.

    The pot lifter is designed to work with the stainless steel bracket riveted on the side of each item. As explained in the Bugaboo Spotlite, the pot lifter is a bit heavy but can be slimmed right down to about 0.64 ounce (18 g). This is shown above: the ‘hook’ is inserted from underneath and handled the pot very well.

    GSI HAE Pot with stew
    The smaller of the two HAE pots, full of stew, inside my blue tent late in the evening.

    A lightweight walker wouldn’t want to carry the whole cookset, but you can easily take just one pot and leave the rest at home. Even the smaller of the two pots may be too big and heavy for a solo walker, but it is about the right size (1 qt or 1 L) when cooking for two. The larger pot is fine for three people. If you share gear like this the weight efficiency becomes quite good, at 75 – 79 grams per person. Compare this to a typical one-man Ti kettle/mug at 4.1 – 4.7 ounces (116 – 135 g). The size and inside coating make cooking very easy.

    Features and Specifications

    • Hard Anodised surfaces
    • Extreme triple-coated non-stick lining (Teflon)
    • Very similar to the GSI Bugaboo Cookset apart from hard anodising
    • Large pot: 1.5 qt (1.42 L), 8.0 oz (226 g)
    • Small pot: 1.0 qt (0.95 L), 5.6 oz (158 g)
    • Large lid/frying pan: 7.5″ (191 mm) diameter, 5.1 oz (144 g)
    • Small lid/frying pan: 6.5″ (165 mm) diameter, 4.1 oz (116 g)
    • Each pot and lid has a lifting lug built in to match the supplied pot lifter
    • A pot-lifter is provided for the lifting lugs, at 2.4 oz (68 g), but this can be slimmed down
    • MSRP $59.95 for the full set

    NEMO Hypno AR Tent REVIEW

    Slick, two-person inflatable single wall tent.

    Introduction

    NEMO Hypno AR Single Wall Tent REVIEW - 22

    The NEMO Hypno AR uses the AirSupported system consisting of two connected AirBeams that are inflated by one of two available pumps. With the fastest pump, the Hypno AR can be completely set up in less than one minute (even from inside the tent) and comes down even more quickly.

    But that’s not all that’s special about this tent – large side vents and a front vent provide good ventilation, Epic fabric panels increase breathability, and side support rods increase usable space. Built for adventure racing, this tent can fit two hikers reasonably comfortably or four racers in a "puppy pile." However, there are trade-offs with the design, especially in the weight category.

    What’s Good

    • Very fast set up – less than 1 minute with the foot pump including staking
    • Comes down equally fast – less than 1 minute
    • AirBeams are unbreakable – you can lay on this tent with no damage
    • Large side and front vents offer good high/low ventilation and are accessible through interior zippers
    • AirSupported system is reliable and field maintainable
    • Lightweight at less than 4 pounds

    What’s Not So Good

    • Set up with lighter Integrated pump (2-3 minutes) is not much faster than conventional poled tents
    • Front air dump valve on our test sample leaked air slowly (but was easily fixed with a little silicone grease)
    • A replacement air bladder weighs 2.6 ounces – necessary if an AirBeam springs a leak
    • Similar tents with carbon fiber poles weigh up to 2 pounds less
    • Short for those over 6 feet tall
    • Expensive at $434 with Integrated pump and $460 with NEMOID foot pump

    Specifications

      Year/Model

    2005 NEMO Equipment Hypno AR

      Style

    Single wall tent with floor

      Fabrics

    30d Silicone/PU fabric shell (silnylon), Epic breathable fabric panels with Dimension Polyant reinforcements

      Pole Material

    AirSupported Technology support system consisting of dual AirBeams with removable bladders and CPC shut-off quick-disconnect fittings

      Weight Full Package
    As supplied by manufacturer with all included items

    Measured weights
    4 lb 2.7 oz (1.89 kg) with Integrated pump
    4 lb 3.8 oz (1.92 kg) with NEMOID foot pump
    Manufacturer’s specification
    3 lb 8 oz (1.56 kg)

      Weight Manufacturer Minimum
    Includes minimum number of items needed to erect tent

    Measured weights:
    3 lb 14.6 oz (1.75 kg) with Integrated pump
    3 lb 15.7 oz (1.80 kg) with NEMOID foot pump

      Weight Backpacking Light Minimum
    Same as Manufacturer Minimum but with 0.25 oz (7 g) titanium stakes and 0.004 oz/ft (0.37 g/m) Spectra guylines

    Measured weights
    3 lb 11.1 oz (1.66 kg) with Integrated pump (3.6 oz, 102 g)
    3 lb 12.2 oz (1.71 kg) with NEMOID foot pump (4.7 oz, 133g)

      Area

    Floor area: 30 ft2 (2.79 m2)
    Vestibule area: n/a

      Floor Area/Backpacking Light Minimum Weight Ratio

    0.51 ft2/oz with Integrated pump
    0.50 ft2/oz with NEMOID foot pump

      Dimensions

      Measured Claimed
    Length 80 in (203 cm) 83 in. (210 cm)
    Width 54 in. (137 cm) 54 in. (137 cm)
    Height 35 in. (89 cm) 29 in. (137 cm)

      MSRP

    $395 for tent – requires additional pump purchase:
    $39 Integrated pump
    $65 NEMOID foot pump

    Total cost: $434 or $460

    Performance

    The NEMO Hypno AR is a unique tent utilizing NEMO’s own AirSupported system which sets up faster than any tent I’ve ever used. To set up, you simply stake out the corners, attach the pump to the tent inflation valve with a CPC quick-disconnect fitting, pump to inflate (the AirBeams are connected and inflate simultaneously), and you’re done. The whole process takes between 1 and 3 minutes, depending on which pump you use.

    NEMO Hypno AR Single Wall Tent REVIEW - 1

    NEMO Hypno AR Single Wall Tent REVIEW - 2

    NEMO Hypno AR Single Wall Tent REVIEW - 3

    To set up the Hypno AR simply: 1) stake out the corners, 2) attach the pump (NEMOID foot pump shown), and 3) inflate. Using the foot pump this can be done is less than 60 seconds!

    The system uses dual AirBeams (inflated tubes) in place of traditional aluminum or carbon fiber poles. These air beams consist of an outer tube made of strong and abrasion-resistant Dimension-Polyant fabric and a replaceable internal bladder.

    NEMO Hypno AR Single Wall Tent REVIEW - 4
    One AirBeam is outside of the tent body while the other bisects it and can be seen inside the tent.

    One AirBeam is outside of the tent and the other bisects the tent body. The two AirBeams are connected at the front of the tent with a long tube that connects both tubes to the valve interface. This interface, at the bottom right hand corner of the front of the tent, consists of the inflation valve with CPC connector and the deflation dump screw-on cap for easy deflation. At the base of each AirBeam is a CPC quick-disconnect for easy bladder changes.

    NEMO Hypno AR Single Wall Tent REVIEW - 5

    NEMO Hypno AR Single Wall Tent REVIEW - 6

    The valve interface of the NEMO Hypno AR tent.

    The NEMO Hypno AR requires one of two pump options:

    NEMO Hypno AR Single Wall Tent REVIEW - 7

    The $65 NEMOID foot pump weights 4.7 ounces, is constructed of welded abrasion-resistant fabric and lightweight foam, and has a one-way Dump-Check valve. It is just over 6 inches in diameter, has a 10.5 inch hose with CPC quick-disconnect one-way valve, and inflates from 1 inch (fully compressed for travel) to 3 inches high. To use it you connect the quick-disconnect to the tent’s main valve, remove the cover from the Dump-Check valve, and inflate by pressing on the pump with a foot, knee, or hand. By closing the cap and pressing the air out, the pump remains compressed for travel. I was able to complete the entire process of staking out and inflating the tent in less than one minute with the NEMOID pump – the fastest set up of any tent I’ve ever used.

    NEMO Hypno AR Single Wall Tent REVIEW - 8

    The $39 Integrated pump weighs 3.9 ounces and consists of a 25 inch hose with mouthpiece and one-way valve, an air bladder with an alternate inflation valve, and a10.5 inch hose with CPC quick-disconnect one-way valve. The Integrated pump is slightly more complicated to use, requiring you to blow through the mouthpiece (or alternate inflation valve) into a small air bladder, squeeze the air out through the one-way valve into the tent’s AirBeams, and repeat the process. While this was an easy process to master, it was more strenuous, requiring serious blowing, and took 2-3 minutes for basic tent set up.

    Of the two pumps, I prefer the NEMOID foot pump. Despite the 1.1 ounce weight difference and slightly larger size, the ease of use and faster set up made this pump my favorite in all situations.

    Once set up with a basic pitch, side guyouts add significant usable interior space and an additional four corner guyouts add stability in windy conditions. There is one interior pocket as well as a pump pocket that fits the Integrated pump and is accessible from both inside and outside the tent. The pump pocket with external zipper makes it possible to store the Integrated pump in the pocket and get to it without opening the door during normal set up. The pump pocket also allows the user to inflate the Hypno AR completely from inside the tent – just enter the deflated tent, close the door, open both the inner and outer zippers of the pump pocket, connect either pump with the quick-disconnect, and inflate. Voila! Tent set up while completely dry inside the tent with the door completely closed!

    The NEMO Hypno AR is constructed primarily of silnylon with a 4.3 square foot panel of breathable/water resistant Epic fabric on each side. The tent comes with a tube of Silnet for sealing the silnylon seams and Granger’s waterproofing spray for the Epic panels. While the spray increased the waterproofing of the Epic fabric, it also seemed to decrease its breathability somewhat. The floor is PU coated 70 denier nylon.

    NEMO Hypno AR Single Wall Tent REVIEW - 9

    NEMO Hypno AR Single Wall Tent REVIEW - 10

    NEMO Hypno AR Single Wall Tent REVIEW - 11

    The side vents seal with Velcro, are accessible from inside with side zippers, and can be staked out or rolled completely open.

    There are two triangular side vents on the tent that close with Velcro and can be staked out for weather protection or rolled completely open and secured with Velcro tabs in clear weather. Each vent also has a 9.5-inch zipper which makes it possible to open and close the vents from inside the tent.

    NEMO Hypno AR Single Wall Tent REVIEW - 12
    The door overlaps in the front for protected wet entrances and a rod extends the gap to create an effective front vent. A full mosquito netting door rolls up and is held neatly out of the way with Velcro tabs.

    The front door has a zipper that overlaps the interior zipper, creating a door that is stormproof when unzipped at the bottom. A supporting rod Velcros into place, creating a large front vent. This entryway/vent combination is an excellent idea, providing good floor-level ventilation with minimal extra materials. However, when not in use, the supporting rod had nowhere to go, flopping around and getting in the way of the zipper. A second Velcro tab would provide an easy way to get the rod out of the way.

    NEMO Hypno AR Single Wall Tent REVIEW - 13
    While the support rod is very effective supporting the front door vent, it had nowhere to go when not in use, flapping around and getting in the way of the zipper. A second Velcro attachment point would fix this small problem.

    NEMO Hypno AR Single Wall Tent REVIEW - 14
    Aluminum Y stakes are included with the NEMO Hypno AR.

    The Hypno AR comes with five aluminum Y stakes which are stiff but hard to place and even more hard on the hands. At 0.5 ounce each, they are twice the weight of the 0.25 ounce titanium skewers that are the Backpacking Light staff favorites.

    Included guylines are nylon with woven reflective threads. Guylines for the side guyouts are doubled for half of their length and include plastic clips for easy separation of the main guyouts from the vent guyouts. This makes it very easy to open the vents during a downpour: open the vent zipper, separate the Velcro securing the vent, disconnect the plastic clip from the main guyline attachment, and readjust tension (if necessary) via the plastic slider.

    Also included in the kit are a silnylon stake bag, a PU-coated and seam-taped dry sack tent bag, two replacement bladders, waterproofing package including Seamgrip, Silnet, and Granger’s spray, and an illustrated manual.

    NEMO Hypno AR Single Wall Tent REVIEW - 15
    With 30 square feet of space and no vestibule, the Hypno AR is snug but usable for two medium-sized hikers (or four adventure racing sardines).

    The minimum trail weight of the NEMO Hypno AR is about 3.75 pounds and it has 30 square feet of space. The area to weight ratio is 0.51 ft2/oz with the Integrated pump and 0.50 with the NEMOID foot pump. This puts the Hypno AR on par with some lightweight freestanding single wall tents that we’ve reviewed but other models offer much more floor space for the weight. Examples include the all-Epic Black Diamond Firstlight (0.63 ft2/oz) and the adventure-racing angled Mandatory Gear Puppy Pile (1.26 ft2/oz). In fact, the Puppy Pile gives 3.8 more square feet of floor space than the Hypno AR and a weight savings of over 2 pounds.

    While it’s important to note that the NEMO Hypno AR offers superior ventilation options, faster set up, and better usable space than the Mandatory Gear Puppy Pile, the AirSupported technology obviously comes at a significant increase in weight. While it’s still lightweight, especially when shared among four adventure racers, there are certainly lighter options.

    NEMO Hypno AR Single Wall Tent REVIEW - 16
    Side guyouts combined with stiff supporting rods create vertical sidewalls that increase usable interior space dramatically.

    While 30 square feet of floor space is pretty average for a two-person tent, the unique side-guyout design and rectangular layout maximizes usable space. The side support rods create vertical sidewalls that make the floor plan very livable; this is an elegant and lightweight solution that made a big difference in usable space. However, a short 80 inch length with steeply sloping ends makes for a tight fit for those over 6 feet tall. At 6 foot 2 inches tall, my feet pressed on the end when stretched out.

    NEMO Hypno AR Single Wall Tent REVIEW - 17
    An 80-inch length and sloping end walls make for a cramped space for those over 6 feet tall.

    Even when fully inflated, the AirBeams can easily be collapsed by hand. This led me to think that the Hypno AR wouldn’t do well in winds, but I was wrong. When guyed out on the side, the NEMO tent pitched very taut and stood up quite well to moderate winds. With the sloping front and back, relatively low ceiling, and strong side support, it took quite a gust to cause the Hypno AR to deflect. In winds up to 40 miles per hour, the AirSupported tent deflected no more than comparable single wall tents with carbon fiber or lightweight aluminum poles. The four corner guyouts were a little too low to make a big difference in wind stability but did anchor the tent well.

    Although moderate winds didn’t affect the NEMO Hypno AR more than other tents, snow load had a dramatically different effect. Using the side guyouts with side vents open created a roofline that was a little too flat to shed wet snow and about 2 inches caused the roof to flatten even more. Shoveling about 4 inches of snow onto the roof caused it to completely collapse. On a positive note, collapsing the tent (or even jumping on top of it) results in absolutely no damage. By removing the snow (or the body), the Hypno AR popped right back up to its original shape with no harm done. Try doing THAT with a traditional poled tent!

    NEMO Hypno AR Single Wall Tent REVIEW - 18

    NEMO Hypno AR Single Wall Tent REVIEW - 19

    Unlike traditional poled tents, fully collapsing the NEMO Hypno AR results in no damage – it just pops back up!

    While the Hypno AR was not designed as a four-season tent, it could hold its own in light snow and dealt very well with rain downpours. The side vent covers and overlapping front vent provide sufficient coverage to keep them open in wet conditions. While the tent is not huge inside, it wasn’t horrible to sit out a storm with two people inside. Without a vestibule, though, you have to leave gear outside or live with it inside.

    When it’s raining, opening the door brings the weather straight into the tent. By using the overlapping base of the door and sliding inside underneath the door, it is possible to make a dry entry. Good thinking. The door uses a waterproof zipper and waterproofing supplies are included to seal all the seams.

    The large mid-height vents on the sides and low vent at the front door create a chimney effect that provides excellent ventilation. This is further improved by the large Epic fabric panels. Epic is a highly water resistant and breathable fabric that has been used successfully in Black Diamond tents. However, I’d never seen Epic and silnylon walls used in combination like this before and it gave a good opportunity to compare the condensation resistance of the two fabrics. I tested this by setting up a stove inside the tent and boiling water for several minutes (with me outside the tent). The Epic panels were definitely drier at the end. However, they didn’t seem breathable enough to effectively reduce condensation on any of the silnylon panels. The walls seemed to condense just as quickly as an all-silnylon tent would have, leading me to question the design: while these panels create less dripping on the sides of the tent, they have little effect in reducing condensation at the head and feet. One positive aspect might be the greater ability to pass stove exhaust when people cook inside the tent, although I was unable to test this theory.

    When conditions were humid and the temperature dropped below freezing, both the Epic and silnylon panels condensed and froze, causing the standard "snowing inside the tent effect." In these conditions, the Epic panels seemed to be no different than the silnylon ones, possibly because the water molecules froze more quickly than they could pass through the fabric.

    With its large mesh vents and full mesh front door, the NEMO Hypno AR offers complete protection from bugs, although it is not the most comfortable space to hide out in. The large mesh front door offers good views when conditions are dry and buggy. The front door rolls away completely and is secured by small Velcro straps.

    The NEMO Hypno AR is well constructed and had no durability issues during field testing. The AirBeams and vent frames use Dimension Polyant fabrics which have proven extremely durable. All guyouts are reinforced. The main question of durability comes in the AirSupported technology. Despite having the tent pitched over 20 nights in a variety of conditions, inflating and deflating constantly, and laying on the tent many times, no part of the AirSupported system had any issues of durability. Once, the main dump valve had a slow leak but this was easily fixed by putting a small amount of silicone grease around the cap (Vaseline worked just as well).

    In the off chance that an AirBeam should leak, four access points on each beam make it easy to get to the beam for repair or replacement. Replacing a beam is very simple: 1) disconnect the AirBeam using the quick disconnect, 2) open an end access point, 3) tie the new AirBeam to the old one, 4) pull it through, being careful not to twist it, 5) connect the new AirBeam and inflate. The whole process took me less than 5 minutes my first time. However, a replacement AirBeam weighs 2.6 ounces, meaning that there’s a good chance it will be left at home. Even with one AirBeam totally deflated, though, the tent still remained upright and will get you through the night.

    NEMO Hypno AR Single Wall Tent REVIEW - 20

    NEMO Hypno AR Single Wall Tent REVIEW - 21

    The AirSupported system proved very reliable in the field. In the off chance that an AirBeam needs to be replaced, the whole process takes less than 5 minutes (left photo shows a damaged AirBeam bladder tied to a replacement in preparation for an exchange). Even with one AirBeam completely deflated, the tent will still remain standing (right).

    What’s Unique

    At $434 or $460 with the Integrated or NEMOID foot pump, respectively, the NEMO Hypno AR is not cheap. For this price, it is also just barely breaks the 4 pound mark, something done by the Black Diamond Lighthouse, the MontBell Hex, and the GoLite Den for much less money. While the Mandatory Gear Puppy Pile tents are more expensive, they are also up to two pounds lighter. However, none of these other tents pitch as quickly as the Hypno AR, nor can they survive someone falling on top of them. The NEMO also offers excellent durability and a ventilation system that exceeds these other tents. For the backpacking or adventure racing team that doesn’t mind trading an extra pound or two for these features, the NEMO Hypno AR is a unique and well thought-out design.

    Recommendations for Improvement

    The NEMO Hypno AR is a well designed tent that offers some unique features. However, I would offer these suggestions to improve the design:

    1. Select one shell fabric and stick with it – either all silnylon for decreased weight and stormproofness or all-Epic for breathability. The Epic panels only help to keep the Epic sections of the tent condensation-free.
    2. Use a gasket or something similar on the main air dump valve – hearing a slow leak in the field is disconcerting, even if it is easily fixed.
    3. Reduce the overall weight of the tent to below 3 pounds to be more competitive with poled tents. This may come with further design improvements or material changes. (Note: see the upcoming NEMO Hypno PQ for steps in this direction.)
    4. Provide an additional Velcro attachment point for the door vent support to move it out of the way when not in use.
    5. Increase the length of the tent to a full 84 inches to accommodate taller hikers.

    Jacks ‘R’ Better Biker Quilt SPOTLITE REVIEW

    Down quilt that surrounds a top-entry hammock.

    Overview

    The Jacks ‘R’ Better Biker Quilt is a down blanket that completely surrounds a top loading hammock. The advantage is that insulation beneath the hammock is not compressed by the user. The Biker Quilt is like a slimmed down Speer PeaPod. It’s 22 inches shorter, 3.5 inches narrower (based on measured dimenions), and 7 ounces lighter. It won’t fit very large users, but was fine for me at 5’10", 165 pounds.

    The Biker Quilt is styled like the other Jacks ‘R’ Better quilts: rectangular shape, 7.5-inch baffle spacing, with drawcords and toggles at each end. The differences are Omni-Tape (like non-scratchy Velcro) along the entire length of both long edges, and the color. The ex-Army Jacks are experimenting with colors other than green! The Biker Quilt is black on one side and a very striking orange color on the other.

    I spent a couple of nights in the Biker Quilt in the Arizona high country in early May. I used a Speer 8.0A hammock the first night and The Traveller Hammock the second night. The Biker Quilt was long enough for me to stretch out in and I didn’t feel constrained by the width. I slept in hiking clothes and a fleece hat comfortably cool down to the overnight low in the low 40s F. I like the pared down weight of course, and smaller size means less interior volume to heat up.

    Features and Specifications

    • Shell fabric: 1.1 oz/yd2 (37 g/m2) ripstop nylon with DWR
    • Down: 10.5 oz (298 g), 800+ fp
    • Baffles: continuous, 1 in (2.5 cm) high, 7.5 in (19 cm) apart
    • Measured dimensions: 86 x 63 x 2.0* in (218 x 160 x 5.2 cm)
    • *BPL measured loft: 2.0 in (5.2 cm)
    • Included: Silnylon compression sack (BPL measured weight – 1.2 oz/34 g) and zippered plastic storage bag
    • BPL measured weight: 1 lb 7.6 oz (669 g)
    • MSRP: $299.95
    • *Note: Loft measured at the peak between baffles across the width and length of the quilt at 12 spots and averaged.

    Patagonia Micropuff Vest REVIEW

    Simple, lofty and light – to be replaced fall ’06 with a heavier version – too bad.

    Introduction

    The Patagonia Micropuff vest is the sister garment to the Micropuff pullover, which was the top performer in our lightweight synthetic vests Review Summary in late 2004. With the same 2.7 oz/yd2 Polarguard Delta insulation, but simpler construction, the Micropuff vest has a specified weight of only 6 ounces.

    What’s Good

    • Excellent loft to weight ratio for a synthetic garment
    • Warm, 3 inch high collar
    • Stuffs nicely into internal pocket
    • Roomy enough for a light layer underneath

    What’s Not So Good

    • Elastic hem can ride up on your waist

    Specifications

      Manufacturer

    Patagonia

      Year/Model

    Spring 2006 Micropuff Vest

      Style

    Pullover vest

      Weight

    6.6 oz (187 g) measured weight size L; manufacturer’s specification 6 oz (170 g)

      Loft

    1.3 in (3.3 cm) double layer as measured

      Loft to Weight Ratio

    0.20 in/oz

      Shell Fabric

    1.3 oz/yd2 (44 g/m2), 20d ripstop polyester with Deluge DWR finish; Lining is 20x20d mini-ripstop nylon with Deluge DWR finish

       Insulation

    2.7 oz/yd2 (92 g/m2) Polarguard Delta

      Features

    Snapped placket, inside pocket can be used as stuff sack, elastic hem and arm holes

      MSRP

    $89

    Performance

    The Patagonia Micropuff vest is a light, packable, warm and versatile layer. One has been my constant companion on trips for most of the past year. I’ve had it with me on cold desert nights on the PCT, summit days in the Peruvian Andes, damp forest camps in the Amazon Basin, and winter hikes throughout the desert southwest. The Micropuff vest will keep you warm in wet weather and is a great choice to supplement other layers and add warmth to a clothing and sleeping system.

    The measured loft of the Micropuff vest is 1.3 inches (double layer) giving it an impressive loft to weight ratio for a synthetic garment – 0.20 inches per ounce. This loft to weight ratio is more than double the ratio of the leading vest from our 2004 lightweight synthetic garment review summary. A key to the light weight of this vest is the lack of a zipper and the simple snap system on the 8 inch chest placket. The snap closures also help improve compressibility over a zipper.

    What makes the Micropuff vest a good performer? Two things – simple design and good insulation. There are few garments on the market with as simple and light a design as this vest. No pockets, no zipper, simple elastic closures on the hem and armholes, a light snap system on the placket, and a warm collar to keep your neck toasty.

    Patagonia has also hit the mark with their choice of Polarguard Delta insulation. All Polarguard insulations are continuous filament insulations, which, according to the manufacturer, make them more durable and strong and less likely to form clumps or mattes than cut staple insulation such as Primaloft. Continuous filaments also help to maintain insulation when wet. On the other hand, Polarguard will absorb more water than Primaloft insulation of the same weight. In Backpacking Light tests, Polarguard 3D absorbed more water than Primaloft One fill of the same weight, but the Polarguard 3D had superior performance in maintaining insulation when wet. Polarguard Delta, as used in the Patagonia Micro Puff Pullover, is the latest and most efficient insulation offered by Polarguard. See our companion article on down versus synthetic clothing for additional test results and comparisons of down and synthetic insulation performance when wet.

    I had the Micropuff vest with me in Peru this summer, where conditions ranged from surprisingly cool, moist forests in the Amazon basin, to cold, nasty days in the Andes. I found the vest to be a versatile layering component, and wore it every day. On a cold hiking day at high altitude, it is the perfect layer to wear under a wind shirt or waterproof/breathable rainwear. Without a zipper, and with the small placket, the vest offers few options to cool off when you get warm – taking it off is the only reasonable option. I also found it to be a good combination with a down jacket while around camp or in a sleeping system. Combined with a light jacket such as the Western Mountaineering Flight Jacket or the GoLite Cumulus, you get a heck of a lot of warmth for less than 20 total ounces.

    The cut of the Micropuff vest is loose enough to wear a light layer underneath, but not too baggy. The shoulders are cut widely, easily covering my shoulders. Torso length is moderate, with a slight drop tail. Both the arm holes and waist hem are lined with elastic. One thing about the vest I did not like was the tendency of the elastic hem to ride up on my waist during activity. The was mostly an issue when not wearing a pack; the vest would ratchet up my waist during hiking or walking, and need to be pulled down frequently. The 3-inch collar is a nice touch when the weather is cold or windy. The collar and placket have a series of plastic snap closures which do a pretty good job of sealing off the elements, but not as good as a zipper and storm flap. There is an inside chest pocket with Velcro closure which doubles as a stuff sack. The vest stuffs easily into the pocket and can be sealed with the same Velcro closure. My vest is in great shape after several washings and at least 75 days of outdoor use this year.

    Patagonia Micropuff Vest REVIEW
    The Patagonia Micropuff vest stuffs easily into the internal chest pocket.

    NOTE: Patagonia will discontinue the Micropuff vest in its current form with the release of their Fall 2006 line. It will be replaced by a full zipper vest, which also has a zippered pocket. Other features will be largely the same as the current vest, including the Polarguard Delta insulation. The manufacturer’s specified weight for the new vest is 9 ounces, a full 50 percent increase in specified weight over the current Micropuff vest.

    Patagonia Micropuff Vest REVIEW
    The Micropuff vest excels as a layering garment. Here the author (left) has a Micropuff vest layered beneath a waterproof/breathable layer before the onset of bad weather in Peru’s Vilconata range.

    What’s Unique

    Patagonia has done a great job of maximizing performance per weight with the Micropuff vest by minimizing features and choosing high quality materials. Combined with the attractive $89 price, this makes the Micropuff a great value.

    Recommendations for Improvement

    I’d rather see Patagonia keep the current version of the vest than the updated, heavier version they will release in Fall 2006. In the current version, I would prefer a lightweight drawcord to the current elastic hem so that it could be adjusted to keep the vest from riding up.

    Western Mountaineering Flash Vest REVIEW

    The lightest down vest on the market, with a full zip but no neck coverage.

    Introduction

    I’ve been itching to get my hands on a Western Mountaineering Flash vest ever since Western Mountaineering announced the product last year. The Flash aims to set a new standard in lightweight insulation with a specified weight of only 3.5 ounces (100 grams). With every feature aimed at shaving a few grams, the Flash vest gives up some comfort. But does it matter when you get a down vest at this weight?

    What’s Good

    • The lightest down garment on the market
    • Superb loft to weight ratio (0.45 inches/ounce)
    • Full zipper
    • Stuffs down to the size of a baseball
    • Good torso and shoulder coverage

    What’s Not So Good

    • No collar
    • Elastic hem rides up on your waist
    • Heavier than the specified weight

    Specifications

      Manufacturer

    Western Mountaineering

      Year/Model

    2006 Flash Vest

      Style

    Full zipper vest

      Weight

    4.4 oz (125 g) measured weight size L; manufacturer’s specification 3.5 oz (99 g)

      Loft

    2.0 in (5.1 cm) double layer loft, as measured

      Loft to Weight Ratio

    0.45 in/oz

      Shell Fabric

    0.9 oz/yd2 (31 g/m2) nylon taffeta

       Insulation

    850 fill power goose down, sewn through construction

      Features

    Full zipper, reflective trim

      MSRP

    $125

    Performance

    The Flash vest is lighter than many windshirts; Western Mountaineering specifies the average weight of the Flash vest as 3.5 ounces. Our sample is a size large and weighs a bit more, at 4.4 ounces, but this is still an impressive amount of warmth in a small package. The Flash uses sewn through construction and a limited feature set to provide a fantastic loft to weight ratio. The Flash has a full zipper, no collar, a fairly large v-neck opening, no pockets and simple elastic for the hem and armholes.

    The Flash vest packs its insulation into a square grid of sewn through down compartments, with each compartment about 3 inches per side. With 850 fill power down, the Flash lofts up to 2 inches of double layer loft. The loft to weight ratio of the Flash is 0.45 inches per ounce – the second highest loft to weight ratio of any garment tested by Backpacking Light. Only the Western Mountaineering Flight vest has been measured by Backpacking Light at a higher loft to weight ratio. I found the loft very even across the whole vest, with no obvious low points and continuous loft in each down compartment to within 3/8 of an inch from the edge of each compartment. The shell is a 20 denier, 380 thread count, 0.9 oz/yd2 nylon taffeta. The shell is also DWR treated. The full zipper is easy to use and is not backed by a storm flap. The finish fabric on the elastic hem and armholes is reflective for a bit of night safety.

    The light weight and core warmth provided by the Flash make it a good option for layering and in a sleep system. The same is true for most vests, but does the warmth of the Flash live up to its impressive loft to weight ratio? I took the Flash vest out on a winter hike in Arizona’s Aravaipa canyon recently, with low temperatures right at freezing. I was toasty all night in my unzipped bag with the Flash, and I am usually a cold sleeper. I did miss a collar though, and felt noticeably more cool air along my neck and upper chest than I would have with better coverage. The vest would certainly be warmer with a collar, or a higher cut in the neck, but of course there is a weight trade-off. According to Gary Petersen, production manager for Western Mountaineering, the Flash vest has been designed without a collar and with a lower cut zipper to make it easier to layer over the Flash and to reduce clothing and zipper clutter around your neck and upper chest. I did not note any cold spots due to the grid pattern of the down compartments. With a vest this light, I expected that torso coverage might be lacking, but I was pleased with the overall torso coverage. I had plenty of coverage on my long torso and over my shoulders. The cut is plenty roomy enough to allow some layering under the vest. There is no drop tail.

    Western Mountaineering Flash Vest REVIEW
    The Flash vest provides good coverage for such a light vest – with more than adequate shoulder and torso coverage (left). The reflective tape in the finish is a nice touch as seen in this flash photo (right).

    It’s obvious that the Flash should be able to pack down to a small size, but I decided to see for myself. The Flash vest does not come with a stuff sack, but I easily stuffed my vest into a stuff sack normally used for a wind shirt. It fit into this sack with plenty of room to spare, and with a little tighter squeeze, it would pack down even smaller. Just like a wind shirt, the small size and light weight eliminate reasons not to carry it. It is a good choice for emergency insulation in case of unexpected cold on short trips. Heck, take a couple of them.

    Western Mountaineering Flash Vest REVIEW
    Two inches of loft packed into a windshirt stuff. Now that’s compact! (Stuff sack not included.)

    For the past year, I’ve been using synthetic vests whenever I carried a vest. How well would the Flash vest hold up if it got really soaked? To find out, I dunked and soaked the Flash vest and am pleased with its ability to recover rapidly from a complete soaking. See the accompanying article on down versus synthetic vests for the complete test results. In light rain the shell fabric has easily repelled water and kept the down dry – but my field testing in this regard has been hampered by a record drought this winter in Arizona. The performance of the shell fabric repelling water is still largely untested. I don’t care much for elastic hems – especially if they close up tightly on my hips or waist. The elastic hem on the Flash cinches securely around my torso and has a tendency to ride up on my waist as I move around.

    What’s Unique

    The lightest down vest on the market. Core warmth with 2 inches of double layer loft, and only 4.4 ounces for a size large…and that includes a full zipper. At $125, it’s a lot of warmth for your dollar.

    Recommendations for Improvement

    My only recommendation would be the addition of a light drawcord at the waist, or a looser elastic hem. Either of these changes would make the Flash more comfortable.

    The Flash excels just as it was designed – as a layer under other garments. Any additions such as adding a collar or closing up the neck opening might increase the versatility of the Flash, but would add weight. After a winter of use I’m glad to have such a light, warm layer and have come to prefer the cut just as it is.

    Six Moon Designs Gatewood Cape SPOTLITE REVIEW

    Compared to a poncho/tarp, is it possibly a better poncho AND a better shelter?

    Introduction

    Is the Gatewood Cape better than a poncho/tarp? The introduction of the Six Moon Designs’ Gatewood Cape in Spring 2006 has generated a lot of interest – especially from those of us who have weathered wind-driven rain (or sand) under a skimpy poncho/tarp. But what exactly is the Gatewood Cape, and how is it different from a poncho/tarp?

    In poncho, err cape, mode, the Gatewood Cape is very similar to a poncho/tarp, except it has arm slits in the sides and a full zipper in the front for extra ventilation.

    In shelter mode, it creates a real shelter rather than a glorified umbrella. The sheltered area measures 105 inches long by 66 inches wide, providing a floorless area of 35 square feet. That’s more space than many two-person tents! However, the walls are fairly flat, so much of the space is only usable for gear storage. In case you’re wondering, the shelter is long enough for a taller person. The height is only 36 inches in the center when the sides are staked nearly to the ground, but more headroom can be gained by raising the sides. Overall, it’s a roomy one-person shelter.

    Six Moon Designs Gatewood Cape SPOTLITE REVIEW - 1
    A birds-eye view of the Gatewood Cape set up as a shelter. It is supported by one trekking pole that connects to a clip-in harness under the hood. The small rectangles on either side of the hood are arm slits for use as rainwear. The zippered entry in front of the hood also serves to provide ventilation when the cape is worn. The cape packs into the pocket at the left front, which also serves as an inside pocket in shelter mode and a chest pocket in rainwear mode.

    The shelter is supported by a single trekking pole at the front center, under the hood. Entry is from the side via a zippered door and vestibule. Six stakes (not included) are required around the perimeter, and the sides can be staked to the ground to provide better wind or bug protection.

    At 11.65 ounces with the pole harness and extender loops on the tieouts (our measurement), the Gatewood Cape is 2-3 ounces heavier than a silnylon poncho/tarp and about 5 ounces heavier than a spinnaker poncho/tarp. However, with the Gatewood, you don’t need to also carry a lightweight bivy or bag cover weighing 5 to 7 ounces.

    We’re really excited about the possibilities for the Gatewood, and are eager to get out and test it. It most likely will work in a SuperUltralight backpacking system, allowing us to stay under 5 pounds base weight, while gaining in rain protection and shelter. Look for our full review this summer.

    Specifications and Features

    • Manufacturer: Six Moon Designs (http://www.sixmoondesigns.com)
    • Fabric: 30d (1.3 oz/yd2) silnylon
    • Rainwear Features: attached hood with front drawcord, arm slits, integrated stuff sack that doubles as a chest pocket, full-zip front opening for ventilation
    • Shelter Features: sets up quickly with one adjustable trekking pole and six stakes, integrated stuff sack doubles as an interior pocket, zippered entry door on front vestibule
    • Included: Cape, integrated stuff sack, pole harness, lightweight cord to make tieout extender loops
    • Measurements: 105 in (267 cm) long, 66 in (168 cm) wide in center, 36 in (91 cm) high in center
    • Weight: Measured weight 11.65 oz (330 g) with tieout extender cords and pole harness, manufacturer specification 11 oz (312 g)
    • Floor Area: 35 ft2 (3.25 m2) canopy coverage
    • MSRP: $110

    Jacks ‘R’ Better JRB Down Hood REVIEW

    Seals perfectly with the head opening in the JRB poncho quilts and has lots of puff for the weight, but the non-adjustable neck opening can let in drafts when it is used for sleeping.

    Jacks R Better Down Hood REVIEW - 1

    Introduction

    The Jacks ‘R’ Better JRB Down Hood is a super-light (2.3 oz, 66 g measured) complement to the wonderful No Sniveller quilt. Omni-Tape (like non-scratchy Velcro) around the bottom edge seals it perfectly to the head opening in the quilt. Is it functional enough to be attractive to non-Jacks ‘R’ Better quilt users?

    What’s Good

    • High warmth to weight ratio
    • Practical
    • Supplements a quilt or hoodless sleeping bag

    What’s Not So Good

    • It makes you look like a Teletubby
    • The down fill requires protection from moisture
    • Single drawstring means that only a circular face hole is possible
    • Neck opening is not adjustable

    Specifications

      Manufacturer

    Jacks ‘R’ Better

      Year/Model

    2006 JRB Down Hood

      Weight

    2.3 oz (66 g) measured weight; manufacturer specifies 2.0 oz (57 g)

      Fabric

    1.1 oz/yd2 (37 g/m2) ripstop nylon with DWR

      Insulation

    0.85 oz (24 g) of 800+ fill power down, 1.5 in (3.8 cm) baffles

      Loft

    1.7 inches (4.4 cm) single layer

      Size

    One size only

      Features

    Omni-Tape to connect to Jacks ‘R’ Better quilts at the neck opening

      MSRP

    $59.95

    Performance

    In cool conditions, it’s important to guard against heat loss from your head. A down and ultralight fabric down hood is a very lightweight way to do that. At only 2.3 ounces the Jacks ‘R’ Better hood is the lightest down hood that we are aware of. It is half the weight of the Nunatak down hood and a third of the weight of the Finbar Hood.

    Jacks R Better Down Hood REVIEW - 2
    The Jacks ‘R’ Better JRB Down Hood with the No Sniveller quilt/poncho and Down Sleeves form a very warm garment.

    With 1.7 inches of single layer loft, the JRB Down Hood works as a standalone hood to boost the rating of a hoodless sleeping bag or quilt. It doesn’t cover all of the neck, but this is not an issue when using it with the No Sniveller Quilt worn as a poncho. The hood seals the gap at the neck of the No Sniveller. It only comes in green, with a black liner, and wearing it with the No Sniveller around camp, I got a hard time from the older women who accused me of looking like a Teletubby – but it’s hard to care when you’re warm and happy.

    Jacks R Better Down Hood REVIEW - 3

    Jacks R Better Down Hood REVIEW - 4

    The JRB Down Hood can be cinched up to leave only the mouth exposed.

    The hood has a simple drawstring face closure. On a cold night it can be pulled closed to just leave a gap for the mouth, however it is difficult to pull it tight without covering your eyes.

    The hood is a pleasure to wear around camp. The shape works well; the design is nice and simple, and the warmth for weight makes it a must-take for most trips.

    What’s Unique?

    The Jacks ‘R’ Better JRB Down Hood is the lightest down hood we know of, and it is reasonably priced. For dual uses, hook the tape to itself, pull the drawcord and use it at a stuff sack or a foot warmer.

    Recommendations for Improvement

    The JRB Down Hood is simple and very light. Most “improvements” I can think of would only add weight, except one: make it available in colors other than green.

    Innovations by Fin Finbar Hood REVIEW

    A big (almost 7-ounce), synthetic hood for cold weather.

    Innovations by Fin Finbar Hood REVIEW - 1
    Tukuche, Dhaulagiri and a Finbar hood. Nepal.

    Introduction

    Sure they mocked my fashion sense at low altitude but once we got up in the snow and bitter cold the envy started. The question turned to “Is it warm in there?”

    The Innovations by Fin Finbar Hood is a big, insulated synthetic hood. Does it have a place in a lightweight pack?

    What’s Good

    • Warm, so warm
    • Great companion for a quilt or hoodless sleeping bag
    • Maintains-loft-when-wet synthetic insulation
    • Rolls with you at night
    • Adjustable insulation thickness

    What’s Not So Good

    • Heavier than necessary
    • Toggle digs into head when reading in bed

    Specifications

      Manufacturer

    Innovations by Fin

      Year/Model

    2005 Finbar Hood Hunter/Walker model

      Weight

    6.8 oz (192 g) measured weight (includes 0.9 oz, 26 g removable insulation)

      Fabric

    Supplex nylon

      Insulation

    Two layers of 3M Lite-Loft insulation plus a removable layer of polyester fiberfill

      Loft

    1.3 inches (3.4 cm) single layer with removable insulation included

      Size

    One size only

      Features

    Shoulder straps, dual drawcords, uninsulated shoulder shield

      MSRP

    $45

    Performance

    The Innovations by Fin Finbar hood is an innovative, well thought-out hood. I took it on numerous winter trips in New Zealand and on a two-month trip across western Nepal. Despite its nearly 7-ounce weight, it became a firm favorite.

    Innovations by Fin Finbar Hood REVIEW - 2
    2005 Innovations by Fin Finbar Hood.

    On a cold night putting the Finbar hood on is like moving into another world, noise is muffled and I soon become warm and cozy. The great value of the Finbar hood compared to a sleeping bag hood is that you can wear it as you move around. It becomes a dual use item: a boost to your sleeping bag at night as well as great for wearing on cold mornings and at lunch stops in the snow. It sure dampens the shock of transition from sleeping bag to outside world to be able to keep the warm hood on while eating breakfast and packing.

    The Finbar Hood has a generous uninsulated shoulder shield that helps seal the hood into a sleeping bag to prevent drafts. The hood also has straps under the armpits that prevent it rotating in the night so that you wake to find your eyes blindfolded and the fabric covered in drool.

    I found the Finbar hood wonderful for use with a hoodless sleeping bag or quilt. It is valuable when worn in a hooded bag as well to help boost the rating in marginal conditions.

    The Hunter/Walker model tested has two drawcords: one to pull the hood into a small circular breathing hole in front of the mouth and a second drawcord which, when the hood is cinched up, pulls the standard circular opening into a horizontal slit that keeps the eyes clear and allows some peripheral vision. This is much more practical for walking around while leaving a minimum of face exposed. The horizontal toggle tended to dig into my head when lying down. I plan to replace it with a smaller toggle.

    With a single walled tent I often have condensation or ice accumulate on the inside walls overnight, and accidentally rubbing it off with my hat or hood is common. Because of this the Finbar hood got quite wet on occasions but the Lite-Loft synthetic insulation meant that the hood maintained loft and stayed warm. A down hood would be lighter (e.g. the Nunatak Down Balaclava at 4 oz, 113 g or the Jacks ‘R’ Better JRB Hood 2.3 oz, 66 g) but the down is much more susceptible to loft loss from moisture. Still, it would be nice to have a more water resistant outer fabric on the Finbar hood, especially on the top where it is most susceptible to getting wet. The comparable down hoods as well as being more expensive, also lack the adjustable face hole, the shoulder shield and shoulder straps, and the ability to vary the insulation thickness.

    Innovations by Fin Finbar Hood REVIEW - 3
    The Finbar Hood can be cinched up to just leave the mouth exposed or adjusted to a horizontal slot to keep the eyes clear.

    The Finbar hood is quite bulky but instantly justifies its place in my pack when it saves carrying a warmer sleeping bag or extra insulating jacket just for camp. It allows me to use a hoodless bag or quilt to below freezing and greatly extends the conditions I can enjoy being out of my sleeping bag at a cold campsite. I also found it good insurance when using a down sleeping bag in conditions where I was worried the down could get soaked. Whether stopped for lunch in a Himalayan snowstorm or watching stars on a frosty night the Finbar hood is a pleasure to wear.

    What’s Unique?

    The Innovations by Fin Finbar Hood is unique as a synthetic insulated hood that seals to your upper body rather than simply being a hat. An uninsulated shoulder shield seals it into a sleeping bag and under armpit straps keep the hood in place when rolling in your sleeping bag at night. It also has dual drawcords to adjust the shape of the face hole and a removable layer of insulation to adjust for warmer weather.

    Recommendations for Improvement

    The Finbar Hood has a well thought-out and executed design. Some further refinements I would recommend are:

    • Lighter weight fabrics
    • Smaller shoulder shield to save weight
    • Primaloft or PolarGuard insulation for slightly improved performance
    • More water resistant fabric, especially for the top panel. I would love to see a Pertex Quantum version of this hood.

    Jacks ‘R’ Better JRB Down Sleeves REVIEW

    Lightweight, stand-alone down sleeves to pair with a vest or wearable poncho quilt.

    Introduction

    The Jacks ‘R’ Better JRB Down Sleeves are designed to be worn under the Jacks ‘R’ Better wearable, poncho-style quilts to add extra arm insulation. The sleeves can also be worn with a standard vest. The concept is simply executed in a pair of 5-ounce sleeves. Does this novel concept have a place in a lightweight backpacker’s pack?

    What’s Good

    • Well made of quality materials
    • Lofty
    • Shell fabric is downproof and water resistant
    • Simple to attach
    • Dual use as foot warmers

    What’s Not So Good

    • Attachment system accounts for nearly a third of the total sleeve weight
    • Kelly green color

    Specifications

      Manufacturer

    Jacks ‘R’ Better

      Year/Model

    2006 JRB Down Sleeves

      Weight

    Measured weight size Regular, 4.9 oz (139 g); manufacturer’s specification 5 oz (142 g)

      Fabric

    1.1 oz/yd2 (37 g/m2) ripstop nylon with DWR

      Insulation

    0.85 oz (24 g) of 800+ fill power goose down for each sleeve; sewn through at bottom and top longitudinal seams and at two horizontal seams creating six down compartments in each sleeve

      Loft

    Measured loft 2.9 in (7.4 cm) double layer loft measured at the center of each of the down compartments and averaged, then averaged for both sleeves

      Sizes

    Short, sleeve length 30-31 in (76-79 cm); Regular, 32-33 in (81-84 cm); Long, 34-35 in (86-89 cm)

      Features

    Elastic wrist band, shoulder opening has two elastic tethers with non-scratchy Omni-Tape tabs sewn to the ends to secure sleeves

      MSRP

    $79.95

    Jacks 'R' Better JRB Down Sleeves REVIEW - 3
    The Jacks ‘R’ Better JRB Down Sleeves with the No Sniveller Quilt and JRB Hood on a hammock camping trip.

    Performance

    I tested the JRB Down Sleeves with the Jacks ‘R’ Better No Sniveller wearable quilt, and with two vests (GoLite Core and a prototype Mountain Laurel Designs hooded down vest). Test locations were in Arizona in Saguaro National Park and in the Flagstaff peaks.

    The sleeves look like a standard set of parka sleeves without the parka. They are simply designed: sewn-through construction, elastic cuffs, and two tethers on each sleeve to hold the sleeves in place. The JRB Down Sleeves will fit over a base layer and possibly over a mid-layer for those with less bulky arms. The six down chambers on each sleeve are nice and puffy, with the cuff end compartments the loftiest – presumably since the upper arms will be covered when the sleeves are worn with a quilt. I haven’t observed any down leakage through the 1.1 oz/yd2 ripstop shell fabric. All-in-all a nice concept that is well executed.

    The JRB sleeves are sewn through with an average double layer loft of 2.9 inches. For comparison purposes, the sleeves on the Western Mountaineering Flight jacket are also sewn through (with ten down compartments per sleeve rather than six) and have an average double layer loft of 3.6 inches (the loftiest sections are those closest to the shoulder). Jacks ‘R’ Better keeps the sleeve attachment system simple and relatively light, but the 1.6 ounces (44 g) of added “software” still accounts for nearly a third of the total sleeve weight and the lower loft of the JRB sleeves compared to the similar weight Flight sleeves (the Flight Vest weighs 5 ounces less than the Flight Jacket). Still, the loft:weight ratio of the JRB Sleeves is good – 0.59 inch/ounce compared to a very respectable 0.32 inch/ounce for the Flight jacket and an estimated 0.72 inch/ounce for the Flight sleeves alone.

    Jacks 'R' Better JRB Down Sleeves REVIEW - 4a

    Jacks 'R' Better JRB Down Sleeves REVIEW - 4b

    Simple yet functional attachment system on the JRB Sleeves. The squares on the ends of the elastic tethers are Omni-Tape (non-scratchy hook and loop).

    The Regular length sleeves are a good fit for my 32-inch arms. The sleeves are easy to put on and take off. The shoulder seam tethers either connect to the Omni-Tape lining the head opening in a Jacks ‘R’ Better quilt, or the two Omni-Tape squares on the end of each tether attach to each other. When using the sleeves with a vest, the second set of tethers connect to each other across the chest like a sternum strap. The sleeves are surprisingly secure with this system. They did not slip even when I waved my arms around like a lunatic in camp or when I wore them overnight inside a close fitting sleeping bag.

    It’s clear that the sleeves make a good companion to the Jacks ‘R’ Better wearable quilts. The No Sniveller quilt adds an amazing amount of comfort in a cold camp and the 5-ounce sleeves extend that comfort. Bonus dual uses for sleeping: use one sleeve as a foot cozy for both feet; wear the sleeves like leg warmers under a quilt. But what if you don’t use a quilt – are the sleeves still useful?

    The sleeves allow another level of temperature regulation when used with a vest compared to an insulated jacket. They also allow the mixing of down and synthetics. In cold, wet conditions, a synthetic vest can be worn under a rain jacket or poncho and the down sleeves added for warmth in camp. So yes, the sleeves do have a place in a lightweight pack, although I’d like to see a lighter attachment system. I should add that the current attachment system is elegantly simple, functional and light – but lighter would be even better.

    Jacks 'R' Better JRB Down Sleeves REVIEW - 2
    The Jacks ‘R’ Better JRB Down Sleeves with the GoLite Core vest. An attractive option with stand-alone down sleeves is to pair them with a synthetic vest – wear the synthetic vest under a poncho in cold, rainy weather and add the down sleeves in camp.

    What’s Unique

    The Jacks ‘R’ Better Down Sleeves are the only lightweight, stand-alone down sleeves commercially available.

    Recommendations for Improvement

    Jacks ‘R’ Better once again uses their favorite kelly green fabric in the JRB Down Sleeves. The two Jacks are ex-Army, which may explain the green fixation – but it’s so 80’s. How about basic black? My other request is for a lighter attachment system.