Articles (2020)

Fanatic Fringe PG Delta 30 Quilt SPOTLITE REVIEW

Looking for an ultralight quilt, but don’t trust down insulation? With a few compromises, this may be your solution.

Overview

When the package from Fanatic Fringe arrived and I opened the box revealing their PG Delta 30 Quilt, the thought that immediately struck me was, "This thing is going to be really drafty." My next thought was, "Wow, this is really light for a synthetic bag." Those two initial observations pretty well define the product. Fanatic Fringe has distilled the sleeping quilt down to its essence, stripping away all zippers, straps, buckles, and drawcords, leaving only an enclosed footbox as its sole luxury feature. This lack of extraneous hardware may be aesthetically appealing to the same type of ultralight backpacker who doesn’t bring along gloves because he could always use his spare pair of dirty socks in a pinch. It also contributes to a loft:weight ratio superior to some feature-rich down bags.

However, the lack of any means to secure the quilt around the sleeper’s neck, shoulders, or even sides can lead to a drafty and chilly night when used alone under a tarp. Plus, the Polarguard Delta insulation doesn’t drape around you and conform to your shape to form a draft seal as well as down does. Fortunately, the situation changes when the quilt is combined with a tent or highly-breathable bivy sack to stop drafts. A bivy sack, in particular, complements the quilt well both by stopping drafts and by restraining the sides of the quilt to mold better to the sleeper’s shape. The quilt still is prone to drafts around the neck area, but this can be reduced by using some insulated clothing to form a gasket around the neck and shoulders.

Fanatic Fringe PG Delta 30 Quilt SPOTLITE REVIEW - 1
Underside of the quilt. Note the enclosed footbox.

The 48 inch girth at the shoulders is wide enough to cover most hikers. And, like all quilts, insulated clothing can be worn underneath without compressing any of the insulation. However, the formed footbox is narrow. It is roomy enough for an average hiker lying on his back. But, if you have extra-large feet, plan to wear booties, or sleep on your side, the footbox is too confining.

As its name suggests, the PG Delta 30 Quilt is made with Polarguard Delta insulation. This offers a significant advantage over down insulation due to its resistance to moisture-induced loft degradation. For wet-climate use, or for long trips where accumulated moisture from perspiration might reduce a down bag to a sack of wet oatmeal, synthetic insulations can be well worth their increased weight and diminished compressibility with respect to down. Plus, with its simple construction and lack of heavy and non-compressible accessories, this synthetic quilt has a higher loft:weight ratio and compresses smaller than some overbuilt down bags. The quilt is constructed by stitching the insulation to the shell fabric around its perimeter, without any any internal stitching, baffling, quilting or scrim to stabilize the insulation. The result is remarkably light weight. But, as the insulation is only secured at its edges, care must be used when handling the bag, particularly during stuffing and unstuffing, to prevent  damaging the insulation. The long-term durability of this construction remains to be seen.

Fanatic Fringe PG Delta 30 Quilt SPOTLITE REVIEW - 2
Combined with a breathable bivy sack and tarp, the PG Delta 30 Quilt is well protected against drafts and moisture.

What’s Good

  • Simple design devoid of extra hardware.
  • Moisture-resistant synthetic insulation.
  • Loft:Weight ratio comparable to some down bags.
  • Well suited for use with a breathable bivy sack.

What’s Not So Good

  • Limited draft control provisions.
  • Narrow footbox.
  • Construction offers little protection to the insulation, requiring careful handling.

Recommendations for Improvement

  • Improve the size and shape of the footbox.
  • Offer a version with a neck drawcord and side straps for draft control.
  • As the quilt already requires careful handling to protect the insulation, overall weight could be further reduced by using a lighter shell material.

Features and Specifications

  • Manufacturer’s Claimed Weight: 22.5 oz
  • BPL Measured Weight: 22.0 oz
  • BPL Measured Loft: 2.2 inches
  • Loft to Weight Ratio: 9.0 cm/kg
  • Dimensions: 48 inch girth at shoulders x 72 inch length
  • Insulation: Polarguard Delta
  • Fabric: 1.1 oz nylon ripstop with a urethane DWR finish
  • Manufacturer’s Temperature Rating: 30 °F
  • MSRP: $189

GoLite Hut 1 SPOTLITE REVIEW

Roomy, bombproof floorless shelter for one.

Overview

The Golite Hut 1 is a one-person, fully-enclosable, floorless shelter with a number of unique features. Rather than the typical guyline cords seen from other manufacturers, it uses the easily adjustable tieout strap system borrowed from its older and  larger cousin, the Golite Hex. This allows re-tensioning the tieouts from inside the shelter, and the reflective straps are easily spotted with a flashlight at night. The front and rear ridgeline guyouts are more conventional, but they do employ guyline tensioners to minimize fumbling with knots. The Hut 1 can even be pitched over an adjustable trekking pole at its apex without any external guyline in front – the vestibule tieouts can support the front of the shelter in this configuration alone. Plus, when set up this way, only six stakes are needed for a fair-weather pitch. The large vestibule has a sturdy zipper closure, complete with a reinforced snap at the bottom to reduce stress on the zipper. Finally, the 1.76 oz/yd2 silnylon used is sturdier than the lighter silnylons and silicone-impregnated polyesters used by Golite’s competitors.

All these robust features come at a price, however. Competing shelters made from lighter materials are available with weights under 10 ounces, while the Hut 1 weighs in on the BPL scales at 17.4 ounces (not including stakes and stuff sack). Also, it’s fortunate the tie-out straps are easily adjustable, as the fabric stretches noticeably when wet, causing the Hut 1 to sag from rain or condensation. Those same straps are also too short to pitch the shelter more than a couple inches off the ground for ventilation. Finally, while the zippered entrance is convenient, opening and closing the zipper alters the tension on the fabric panels, causing minor pulling and sagging that requires more fiddling with the tieout straps to correct.

What’s Good

  • Bombproof – potentially a winter shelter for experienced ultralight backpackers!
  • Fully enclosable – rain, spray, and spindrift proof.
  • Convenient zippered vestibule.
  • Easily adjustable reflective tie-outs.
  • Very roomy for one person.
  • Requires only six stakes for a minimum pitch; up to ten for a storm pitch.
  • Catenary Ridgeline – easy to achieve a taut pitch.

What’s Not So Good

  • Requires collapsible trekking pole or nearby trees to erect. (Poles which cannot be shortened to less than 40 inches are not usable without modifying the shelter.)
  • Heavier than competing products; heavier than advertised.
  • Strap tieouts are not long enough to allow an elevated pitch for ventilation.
  • Fabric sags when wet, requiring re-tensioning guylines.
  • Fabric tension changes with zipper open and closed, making it hard to achieve a taut pitch without adjustment.

Recommendations for Improvement

  • Lengthen strap tieouts to allow an elevated pitch. (I ended up replacing the straps with longer lengths of cord, as shown in the photo above.)
  • Include a hole with a weather flap near the apex to allow using a longer, protruding pole.  (I ended up making this modification myself.)
  • Use a more stretch-resistant fabric.

Features and Specifications

  • Manufacturer’s Claimed Weight: 15 oz
  • BPL Measured Weight: 17.4 oz
  • Manufacturer’s Claimed Floor Area: 39 ft2
  • Body Material: SilLite™ (1.76 oz/yd2 silnylon)
  • MSRP: $130

The North Face DIAD Jacket SPOTLITE REVIEW

Well under 9 ounces, including pit zips – but those pit zips are pretty small

Overview

The North Face DIAD Jacket is a lightweight waterproof-breathable jacket weighing only 8.6 ounces in men’s size extra large with quite a few features for a jacket in the 8 ounce range. DIAD is an acronym for Done in a Day – a common climbing phrase referring to long, one day, fast and light ascents. The DIAD is perhaps the most feature laden rain jacket on the market that weighs in below 9 ounces. And in a size medium it will be closer to 7 ounces.

Performance and Features

The DIAD is targeted at lightweight climbs and other fast moving outdoor activities. It has intrigued me since I first read its specs – 7.0 ounces, mini-pit zips, chest pocket and fully adjustable hood. That is an impressive list for a 7.0 ounce jacket. The test jacket we have weighs 8.6 ounces and is a men’s extra large large; a men’s size medium may weigh close to the specified 7.0 ounces. The DIAD is also available in women’s sizes.

The DIAD has 2.5 layer HyVent DT fabric. HyVent DT is a lighter version of the original HyVent feabric from The North Face. It reduces the 3rd layer to a microgrid half layer to eliminate some weight. This grid still separates the microporous elements from the skin and allows some air flow between the skin and the microporous layers. I have found the fabric very packable and light. I can pack the DIAD into a softball sized stuff sack. I have had it out in only one storm – pictured at right in Jacks Canyon, AZ just prior to the storm.

Another bulk reducing feature is the welded seams of the DIAD. The seams are built using The North Face’s Magic Seam contruction. This technique eliminates sewn seams and is advertised to improve waterproofness. The jacket has a roomy chest pocket and two small pit zips that are situated under the upper arm. The North Face refers to these an mini pit-vents, and they are indeed fairly small at 8 inches each. They will certainly help to move some moisture out in the right conditions – but the impact may be limited by the size of the opening. I’ll report on their performance in a full review later this year.

The cuff closures on the DIAD are a simple lightweight velcro, but have less bulk and weight than other velcro closures I’ve seen; a very nice feature. The hem has an elasticized drawcord with pull closures on both sides. The hood is roomy and will work with a low volume climbing helmet. The hood has an elastic drawcord with pull closures on both sides. The hood cinches down very nicely; significantly better than other rainwear with a similar weight. The sleeves are quite long and will easily slide down over your wrists or gloves. The torso coverage is not as generous – acceptable, but not enough keep your hips dry.

I’m looking forward to getting the DIAD into the field this summer. Especially to give the mini-pit zips a full trial. At first glance the DIAD looks to be an impressive competitor in the limited field of 7 to 8 ounce rainwear.



Left image: The 8 inch mini pit-vents are placed under the upper arm. Right image: The velcro cuff closures are simple, light, low-bulk and secure.

Features and Specifications

  • Weight – 8.6 ounces, men’s size extra large – manufacturer’s specification 7.0 ounces
  • Shell Fabric – 15 denier, 2.1 oz/yd2,100% Nylon ripstop
  • Waterproof/Breathable Technology – HyVent DT 2.5 layer
  • Features – Hem drawcord, hood drawcord, velcro cuff closures, chest pocket, reflective logos, 8 inch mini pit-vents
  • MSRP $199

Backpacking Light Print vs. Online Magazines: Vision for 2006 and Beyond

A letter to the readers of Backpacking Light Magazine.

 

Illustration by Mike Clelland

Dear BackpackingLight.com Reader,

Over the course of the past several weeks, BPL Premium Members have expressed some confusion and concern about the role of the online vs. print format of Backpacking Light. The confusion is completely warranted. There exists no other publication in any industry that we know of, that follows this publication model, so we certainly don’t expect everyone to completely understand the rationale behind something that seems to fly into the face of conventional expectations.

Thus, the purpose of this letter is to clarify some of these issues, and provide a response to some excellent feedback from our subscribers.

First, some definitions. Generally, BackpackingLight.com and more specifically, the BackpackingLight.com Premium Membership, are referred to herein as the “online magazine”, while Backpacking Light Magazine (the print quarterly) is referred to as the print magazine. When the term “Backpacking Light” or “BPL” is used, we are generally referring to the publishing company as a whole.

About the Online Magazine Subscription

In 2001, BPL launched the website BackpackingLight.com, and in 2003, it became a subscription-based online magazine (“Premium Membership”). The core value of the online subscription is tied to the following primary benefits for Premium Members:

  • Access to all article content at BackpackingLight.com
  • Discounts on gear sold in the BackpackingLight.com gear shop

Visitors to the site who are not subscribers to the online magazine still retain access to free content, which includes Gear Guides, Forums, Reader Reviews, public (unrestricted) article content, and gear shop purchasing at MSRP.

About the Print Magazine Subscription

In 2004, in response to a growing number of reader requests for a print magazine, we launched a pilot issue of Backpacking Light Magazine. After much deliberation about content, we made the decision that if we were going to launch a print magazine, it would have its own unique identity and thus, its own unique content, separate from that of the online magazine.

The quantity of magazines that are thrown away each year, or otherwise filled with “junk” content and irrelevant advertising, is incredible, and we want to minimize our contribution to that pile. Therefore, one of the most important features that we want to maintain with the print magazine is that it be an archival quality, journal-like mini-book that will occupy space on a bookshelf in a home library. The downside to this is the higher cost involved in producing that type of quality.

Because of the high cost of producing an archival-quality print magazine, financial sustainability is achieved primarily through economies of scale. This doesn’t mean we intend to turn the magazine into a typical letter-format rag one might find in a supermarket, but it does mean that we need to scale its distribution in a meaningful way. In short, we’d like to see the magazine on the shelves of fine bookstores and outdoor specialty retailers nationwide so that (1) sufficient economies of scale can be achieved to ensure long-term sustainability and (2) the message of lightweight backpacking is delivered to others not reached through the BackpackingLight.com channel.

In 2005, Backpacking Light Magazine (print) became available as a subscription based magazine. Issue 4 just went to press, Matt Colon has been appointed as the Editor-in-Chief for Issue 5 and beyond, and we are beginning to understand, as a staff, the very real need to communicate to you about how the individual identities of online and print are going to be maintained, and perhaps more importantly, the rationale behind it all.

The need to maintain different editorial directions for BPL’s print and online magazines is better understood in light of a review of existing print magazine models in the outdoor industry.

Magazine Publishing Model #1: A Superficial (Free) Web Presence and a Subscription-Based Print Magazine

The typical scenario is this. A publisher will produce a high quality print magazine that realizes revenue through subscriptions, single copy newsstand sales, and advertising. The breakdown between the three revenue streams is different for every magazine, but the objective of all mass-market print magazines is to increase revenue primarily through advertising. As such, the focus of the publisher’s marketing strategy is necessarily placed on growing the subscriber base and otherwise increasing magazine distribution. That’s where their website comes in. Their websites serve to promote the print magazine and drive Website visitors to subscribe to the print magazine. The end result is more print magazine subscribers, which leads to a higher distribution, which commands higher advertising rates, which leads to more revenue.

We have made it very clear since day one that we desire to produce an excellent product first, with increased distribution driven by demand for that product. Advertising is not a significant revenue stream for us. We are striving for long-term financial health and sustainability through subscription revenue, not advertising revenue. It gives us more editorial flexibility, more editorial freedom, and keeps us accountable to our subscribers for developing a fine product, and not to our advertisers for superficially growing a distribution base.

Magazine Publishing Model #2: One Content Set, Two Modes of Distribution: Subscription-Based Electronic and Print Versions

Some magazines maintain equivalent content sets but deliver them in two mediums. The typical revenue model for this is based on either (1) the option to subscribe to one or the other, or (2) the option to subscribe to both at a discounted rate, so that you have a choice of medium. This is the model most commonly used by major premium newspapers to provide article access via the Web, and by magazine publishers that publish their print magazines in PDF format for online distribution.

BPL’s model closely, but not exactly, resembles this model. While we offer two medium types (print and online), they are not replicates of each other and thus two distinct products. However, both products are available as a combined option at a discount (i.e., online subscribers can purchase a discounted print subscription).

The BPL Publishing Model

And so, BPL has taken a slightly different road, in part out of necessity of growing a company organically, and in part out of a desire to focus on product (content) quality first, instead of maximizing distribution of a mediocre product.

Consequently, our model consists of the online membership being our core product. We feel, and have had reader feedback confirming this, that online membership has been and will continue to be our core product with the most value to the most serious practitioners of ultralight backpacking.

Obviously, we want to improve the product quality of our online magazine. Reader feedback on our forums in recent weeks indicates a sense of reader stress about the quality of the online magazine going down. We’ve been listening, and we respond with a new editorial calendar for the online magazine that incorporates your suggestions. View it here:

Because the online magazine contains such a wide variety of content types (articles, gear guides, forums, reader reviews, gear review summaries, etc.), and because the online magazine contains such a prodigious quantity of content, there are financial limitations to (1) preparing that content for print publication, and (2) printing that content.

1We do recognize that our article publication breakdown indicates a review-heavy editorial calendar over the last 12 months. Much of this was due to the backlog of product reviews that our Section Editors were mandated to complete as part of their training and commitments made to manufacturers, both of which result as the outfall of growing pains of our organization. Now, with a full corps of experienced and talented Section Editors, and a gear review selection policy that is more disciplined and restrictive (so we can focus on reviewing gear that has the highest amount of interest to our readership), we are able to unleash our staff to do what they do best, in addition to writing reviews: comprehensive review summaries, technique articles, and lightweight backpacking features. See the Editorial Calendar (link above) to see what’s in store for the rest of 2006 and beyond!

In the 12-month period ending April 17, 2006, more than 330,000 words of content in 221 articles1 were released at BackpackingLight.com (333,562 to be exact). The content can be broken down as follows:

  • 9 Editorials
  • 21 Features
  • 10 Techniques
  • 122 Reviews
  • 54 SpotLites
  • 5 Review Summaries

It is worth noting that this content does not include the dozens of articles and several thousand more words of content released as dispatches from the Outdoor Retailer Summer and Winter Markets, nor does it include any of the print magazine features published in Issues 2-4 of 2005-2006.

Thus, in our current print size format, we would have to publish 14 issues of the print magazine per year, just to deliver this content in both online and print formats. And this does not consider the new content that we published in the print magazine last year.

Then the question arises: “Why not just take the ‘best stuff’ from the online magazine and publish it as a print magazine; that way, online subscribers get it all, and print subscribers get the best stuff”. Because the ‘best stuff’ from the online magazine is more technical in nature and focused on more time-sensitive content such as gear reviews, a quarterly print publication intended for archival and reference purposes is a poor medium for publishing this type of content. The result would be a dilution in the quality of the print magazine and its inability to serve its primary target markets, which include, but are not necessarily limited to, retailers, bookstores, and subscribers seeking a more literary tactile experience than what is available on the Internet. Ultimately, distribution of the magazine would be limited by scope and cannibalization of print subscribers by an online version, and long-term sustainability of the print magazine would be at risk.

The next question then, is: “OK, so you have two distinct magazines: one online, one print. Why not just give online subscribers full access to digitized articles that appear in the print magazine?” The answer to this question is more complicated.

First, retailers of the magazine have expressed concerns about stocking a print magazine that makes its content available in other channels.

The rationale for this concern is that once a print magazine reader finds out they can acquire the content online or through another otherwise competitive channel, the retailer will lose revenue. We have no desire to cannibalize revenue from the retailers that stock the print magazine. Thus, we intend to support their sales efforts with content that is exclusive to print magazine readers.

Second, the print magazine is largely staffed and financially supported by separate means than the online magazine (due to personal investments made by selected members of the staff to launch the print magazine).

The online editorial staff and budget is not sufficient in and of itself to provide the editorial and financial support to launch a print magazine. Thus, to make the print magazine successful, a new staff with a new budget supported by investment capital was required. Because of this separation between the print and online magazines (a necessary objective consistent with our own internal goals of growing BPL organically without debt to insure maximum long term health and sustainability), it’s not possible – at this early phase of print magazine “start-up” – to leverage the efforts and financial risks of the print magazine staff and investors to add value to the online magazine.

Third, in spite of all this, we really do have a desire to give our core customers (online premium members) lower barriers in accessing print magazine content.

Because print magazine content is produced above and beyond online content (with different staff, different budgets, and different financial models), those barriers cannot be zero or financial sustainability of both online and print subscriptions would be at risk. Currently, benefits to online subscribers come as discounted PDF reprints of articles published in the print magazine, and as discounted subscriptions for premium members. Currently, premium members can purchase print subscriptions at our cost of producing the print magazine. Ideally, we expect to lower these barriers of entry to access print content by online subscribers by reducing the costs of PDF reprints and print subscriptions to online subscribers. In fact, we’ve already done that, in the short time that the print subscription has been available. Initially, print subscriptions were available to online subscribers for $19.99 (print subscription list price to the general public is $24.99). Now, they are available to online subscribers for $14.99. Likewise, PDF reprints (MSRP $4.99) have reduced in price for online subscribers from $3.99 to $2.99 to $1.99 (current) in the past several months.

There are undoubtedly online subscribers who would like to read the print magazine content, but who do not want it in a print format. Currently, PDF reprints are the only mechanism of delivering that content to online subscribers or other online-only readers. We are evaluating options for delivering a print magazine subscription online, and will probably provide that access to print subscribers, so that the print subscription fee buys access to both print and electronic versions of the print magazine.

We are continuing to brainstorm ideas about ways to integrate the print experience to online readers in a more meaningful way, so please stay tuned and look for more progress on this topic.

Content and Structure: Online vs. Print

The final, and perhaps the most important question, is: “What are the real differences between the online and print magazines, and how will these differences affect me as a lightweight backpacking enthusiast?”

Overview of the Online Magazine

The online magazine BackpackingLight.com was founded on the premise that consumers could become highly educated with technical information that would allow them to (1) make better gear buying decisions, and (2) be safe and comfortable with ultralight backpacking techniques. We intend to continue those online roots and make education the driver behind its editorial strategy.

And so, the first objective of the online magazine is an ambitious one: to provide meaningful education for its subscribers about gear and technique.

The second objective exists to take advantage of the online medium. Unlike print, online publications can be multi-media, interactive, more timely, and without space limitations. Consequently, audio and video content, interactive features, news reporting, time-sensitive content that changes frequently, and data-intensive content will be delivered through the online subscription channel.

Summary of Content in the Online Magazine*

The online magazine focuses on providing education and information about lightweight backpacking techniques and gear.

  • Research & Testing
  • Comprehensive Product Reviews
  • In-Depth Techniques
  • Review Summaries
  • Field Notes
  • Outdoor Retailer News
  • Community Forums
  • Reader Reviews
  • Interactive Gear Guides

* This is not a comprehensive list, but rather, the characteristic types of content that are “generally” found in the online magazine and not “generally” found in the print magazine.

In addition, there will be the case from time to time where submissions for the print magazine are of exceptional quality but there is no page space in the print magazine to publish them in a timely manner. In this situation, there may be articles that fit better into the print format (see below), but will be published online in lieu of not publishing them at all.

Overview of the Print Magazine

The print magazine Backpacking Light Magazine was founded on the premise that readers wanted a more readable, less technical, and more tactile experience that invoked the more emotive responses available in a hard copy format (color photographs, well-written stories and prose) than in an online format. In addition, because the potential distribution of information through a print magazine channel can reach a much wider audience of beginning and intermediate hikers than an online channel (due primarily to newsstand, bookstore, and specialty retailer distribution), the print magazine is well-suited for publishing information about the style, philosophy, and general techniques of ultralight backpacking. Finally, because the print magazine is designed to be an archival quality publication, its content will be comprised primarily of features that are less time sensitive (such as news and reviews).

Summary of Content in the Print Magazine*

The print magazine focuses on providing a more tactile and emotive experience about lightweight backpacking style, philosophy, and applications.

  • Commentary (Land Stewardship, Environmental Policy, and Humor)
  • Destination Features
  • Applications of Lightweight Backcountry Travel
  • Lightweight Philosophy
  • Travel Narratives
  • Photo Essays
  • Technical Abstracts of Comprehensive Online Features
  • Lightweight Backpacking Technique (Shorts & Tips)
  • Review Summaries: Annotated
  • Gear Guides: Annotated
  • Market Relevant & Cottage Industry Advertising

* This is not a comprehensive list, but rather, the characteristic types of content that are “generally” found in the print magazine and not “generally” found in the online magazine.

Common Content in Print and Online Magazines

Although individual gear reviews will generally be published only online, selected (e.g., four per year, or one per print issue) review summaries (in-depth performance comparisons of related gear) and gear guides (in-depth statistical comparisons of related gear) will be available in both online (full review summary) and print (annotated review summary) formats.

The advantage of a print version is off-line portability, better at-a-glance visual presentation, and consolidation of the salient features of the review category for those that do not subscribe to the online magazine. The advantage of the online version is more in-depth gear guides with interactive features for product comparison and selection, the availability of detailed individual product reviews, and the full text of the review summary.

So, while some content will be reproduced in both print and online formats, that amount is small, strategically selected and edited to optimize the strengths of both mediums for those that subscribe to both online and print magazines, and valuable enough as standalone products for subscribers to only one or the other.

Summary

We certainly don’t claim to do everything the “right” way, whatever that means – let’s explain what we mean by this. Throughout this process, we’ve realized that “right” for somebody is “wrong” for others. A more appropriate disclaimer would be this one: “We certainly don’t claim to be able to please all of the people all of the time, all of the people some of the time, or even some of the people all of the time. We just want to make sure that we are preserving for and enhancing your passion for the outdoors in general, and lightweight backpacking in particular.”

But we do know some things to be right for everyone all of the time. In this regard, what we do strive for is (1) involvement of our subscriber base in developing and executing our vision, (2) creating and maintaining publication products with outstanding quality, and (3) upholding the highest ethical standards of communications, customer service, and public relations in the industry.

To that end, the print vs. online strategy outlined in this letter has been motivated more by direct feedback from our most vocal and loyal subscribers than by any other singular factor. And for that, we offer you the utmost thanks.

We sincerely hope this letter clarifies some of the issues that have been brought up in recent months. More important, we hope that it gives you a vision for the future of where BPL is going as we continue to strive to provide quality publications for the lightweight backpacking community.

And whether you decide to subscribe to the print magazine, the online magazine, or both, we’ll do our very best to make sure your reader experience is a good one that is worth the subscription fee.

Best Regards,
The BPL Editorial Board

  • Ryan Jordan, Publisher
  • Carol Crooker, Online Editor-in-Chief
  • Matt Colon, Print Editor-in-Chief
  • Vic Lipsey, Director of Marketing
  • Alan Dixon, Senior Technical Editor

Make Your Own Gear: The Micro Z-Stand Pot Support

Using Backpacking Light Titanium Alloy UltraRods to build a sturdy, and now heat resistant, sub-0.20 oz (5.7 g) Z-Stand pot support for alcohol and solid fuel stoves.

Backpacking Light Titanium Alloy UltraRods are certainly thin – and light.

We’ve received a number of comments from those that have purchased the UltraRods that they won’t support a heavy pot of water when used in some designs for wire-type pot supports, including the Z-Stand Pot Stand Design published here earlier. We offered a redesign of the standard Z-Stand to work with the UltraRods; and while this has worked fine for many, the direct flame from some side-ported stoves overheats the titanium, causing it to soften and bend under the weight of a cook pot.

Here, we offer a Z-Stand redesign that supports a heavy pot of water and withstands the heat from side-ported alcohol stoves. The trick is to relocate the diagonals on the Z-Stand to a lower position along the verticals by spiraling them down the verticals. Ron Liljedahl, a Backpacking Light subscriber, loaned us his stove setup, which had previously “melted” three UltraRod Z-Stands, to allow us to test the new design. Thanks again Ron!

To make your own, use the same technique as the original Z-stand design. Start with a vertical going up, and make the bend and spiral at the top using needle nose pliers. Caution! You must make gentle curves and bend the material slowly to prevent it from snapping (yes, I believe we’ve met the threshold of what this material can do). Finish it off with a third diagonal that spirals up the first vertical, as we did with the modified Z-Stand. The final weight for the stand pictured above is under 0.2 ounces.

Outdoor Research Nimbus Sombrero REVIEW

A warm weather, wide coverage, rain hat from the makers of the classic Seattle Sombrero.

Introduction

Outdoor Research Nimbus Sombrero REVIEW - 1

The Outdoor Research Nimbus Sombrero is a rain hat that provides full coverage against the elements. Its proprietary Ventia shell is waterproof and breathable and it has a foam-stiffened brim with plastic edging. Its mesh lining with a Coolmax headband keeps you cool during warmer downpours. The Nimbus is wider than the popular Seattle Sombrero. How does the Nimbus Sombrero stand up to pouring rain and slush?

What’s Good

  • Wide brim provides full coverage from rain and snow
  • Waterproof and breathable
  • Easily adjustable with one hand
  • Secure in windy conditions, even with the chin cord removed
  • Very durable, keeps its shape after being stuffed many times
  • Mesh liner and lack of insulation keep things cool in moderate temps.

What’s Not So Good

  • Ventia fabric is not as breathable as Gore-Tex or eVENT
  • Wide curving brim restricts vision somewhat

Specifications

  Year/Model

 2005 Outdoor Research Nimbus Sombrero rain hat

  Weight

 3.3 oz (92 g) as measured (size L); manufacturer’s specification 3.4 oz (95 g) size L

  Fabrics

 Proprietary Ventia waterproof/breathable – seam taped, mesh-lined crown, Coolmax mesh headband

  Features

 Foam-stiffened brim, flexible plastic piping, external one-handed drawcord adjustment, side snaps, removable chin cord, floats

  MSRP

 $35

Performance

During my review, I focused on how the Outdoor Research Nimbus Sombrero compares to the classic Seattle Sombrero (a popular rain hat that I’ve used for years) and what advantages it offers, if any. In short, the Nimbus Sombrero has a stiffer brim, broader rain coverage, and less insulation that makes it more comfortable in warm weather. I was able to wear the Nimbus Sombrero in heavy summer rains without overheating, under wider coverage than the Seattle Sombrero offers.

The Outdoor Research Nimbus Sombrero is a well-designed rain hat. The outer shell is made of Ventia, a proprietary fabric from Outdoor Research that is waterproof/breathable, although less breathable than Gore-Tex or eVENT. It is fully seam taped and never leaked during field testing. It has a mesh lining and a Coolmax mesh headband.

Outdoor Research Nimbus Sombrero REVIEW - 2

Outdoor Research Nimbus Sombrero REVIEW - 3

The Outdoor Research Nimbus Sombrero offers broad rain coverage and a one-handed adjustable elastic cord headband that is very secure.

The Nimbus Sombrero includes a removable chinstrap (0.1 ounces) that I rarely needed, even in blustery conditions, because the elastic headband adjustment is so secure. The headband adjustment is made via a one-hand drawcord on the back; as winds pick up, just reach back and pull on the cord for a super secure fit. The chinstrap is an excellent second defense for use during consistent high winds such as those found above the tree line or during sea kayaking.

Outdoor Research Nimbus Sombrero REVIEW - 4
Side snaps tuck the hat out of your way during dry conditions.

The Nimbus Sombrero features a brim that is 3 1/2 inches wide in the front and 4 inches wide in the back (a full 1 inch wider than a Seattle Sombrero front to back). This provides complete coverage, keeping my collar dry in all but the worst driving rains and funneling water well away from my face. However, this extra coverage also blocks views somewhat and I had a difficult time keeping the front brim out of my eyesight because the plastic brim material is non-bendable. Side snaps tuck the sides of the hat up during dry conditions. After stuffing and re-stuffing the Nimbus Sombrero hat many times, it still retained its original shape due to the stiffened brim.

Outdoor Research Nimbus Sombrero REVIEW - 5
A mesh liner is comfortable and a lack of insulation keeps your head cool during warmer conditions.

When comparing the Nimbus Sombrero to the Seattle Sombrero, it’s important to consider the conditions in which you plan to use it. If you’re looking for a cool weather hat to shed rain and snow, the classic Seattle Sombrero is a good choice. However, if you are looking for the ultimate in broad rain coverage for use in warmer conditions, the 3.3-ounce Outdoor Research Nimbus Sombrero is hard to beat.

What’s Unique

The Nimbus Sombrero has an extra wide, stiffened brim and a non-insulated liner making it a good hat for warm weather, heavy rain conditions.

Recommendations for Improvement

An eVENT version of this hat would have greater breathability.

Outdoor Research Women Cloudburst Hat REVIEW

Outdoor Research Women introduces a lightweight, warm weather, sun and rain hat.

Introduction

Outdoor Research Women Cloudburst Hat REVIEW - 2
The Outdoor Research Women Cloudburst hat is a well-designed rain hat that handles moderate precipitation and gives good sun protection.

The Outdoor Research Women Cloudburst hat is a full-brimmed waterproof/breathable rain hat. It offers good sun protection and rain protection that is sufficient for most rain conditions.

What’s Good

  • Moderate brim is a good compromise between coverage and all-weather usage
  • Waterproof and breathable
  • Adjustable chin cord and elastic headband keeps the hat secure
  • Very durable, keeps its shape after being stuffed many times
  • Mesh liner and lack of insulation keeps things cool in moderate temps
  • Lightweight at 2.5 ounces

What’s Not So Good

  • Ventia fabric is not as breathable as Gore-Tex or eVENT
  • Brim isn’t wide enough for driving rain
  • Headband isn’t adjustable – be sure to get the right size

Specifications

  Year/Model

 2005 Outdoor Research Women Cloudburst hat

  Weight

 2.5 oz (71 g) as measured (size M); manufacturer’s specification 3.0 oz (85 g) size L

  Fabrics

 Ventia waterproof/breathable – seam taped, mesh-lined crown, Coolmax mesh headband

  Features

 Foam-stiffened brim, elastic headband, removable chin cord, floats

  MSRP

 $38.00

Performance

Outdoor Research Women (formerly known as Wild Roses) sells a wide variety of outdoor gear specifically designed for women. The Outdoor Research Women Cloudburst hat is a versatile rain hat that can double as a sun hat. The outer shell is made of Ventia, a proprietary fabric from Outdoor Research that is waterproof and breathable, although less breathable than Gore-Tex or eVENT. It is fully seam taped and doesn’t leak. It has a mesh lining and a Coolmax mesh headband.

Outdoor Research Women Cloudburst Hat REVIEW - 3
An elastic headband and adjustable chinstrap keep the Cloudburst secure in windy conditions.

An elastic headband keeps the hat comfortably secure but the Cloudburst includes a removable chinstrap (0.1 ounces) that is essential during high winds. A sliding plastic keeper keeps the chinstrap secure.

Outdoor Research Women Cloudburst Hat REVIEW - 4
A rear brim that is 1/2 inch wider than the front ensures that rain stays off your neck.

The Cloudburst features a brim that is 2 1/2 inches wide in the front and 3 inches wide in the back (1 inch shorter than the classic Seattle Sombrero front to back). This provides moderate coverage, keeping a collar dry during downpours but not windblown rain. The extended back keeps rain out of a rain jacket neckline if it is snugly secured. However, when using a rain jacket with a hood, it is important to tuck in the hood so that it doesn’t catch water.

What’s Unique

When comparing the Cloudburst to the classic Seattle Sombrero, the Cloudburst is much cooler due to its mesh liner and minimalist design. It offers less rain coverage but enough for moderate conditions. However, it does offer all-day utility that makes it good for both rainy and dry conditions. At 2.5 ounces (0.6 ounces lighter than the Seattle Sombrero), the Outdoor Research Women Cloudburst is a true lightweight.

Recommendations for Improvement

An eVENT version of this hat would have greater breathability and would extend its usable range.

Boy Scout Gear List: Philmont Scout Ranch, New Mexico, Summer

Philmont Guidebook to Adventure: “Remember, the key to successful backpacking is to go lightly.”

Introduction

Boy Scout Gear List: Philmont Scout Ranch, New Mexico, Summer - 1
Rock climbing at Cow Camp, Philmont 2004.
Courtesy of Larry Keil, ASM, Troop 815, Danville, CA

Whenever you walk around base camp at Philmont Scout Ranch during the summer you will see the “cripples”: Boy Scouts, mostly adult leaders, who have broken down on the trail and had to be removed from their crew and evacuated from the backcountry. They are almost always limping but quite often you will find them hobbling around with crutches. For each one you see in the base camp there are many more on the trails that are just barely making it and regretting their decision to come to Philmont. Why is this happening when Philmont is one of the great adventures in Scouting? The two most common errors are insufficient training and carrying too much weight. When these two errors happen simultaneously that person has created a dangerous situation for himself, and his crew.

Philmont publishes a pamphlet, Philmont Guidebook to Adventure, which gives Scouts information on the Philmont experience, the training, and equipment needed to hike its trails. The equipment list is extensive (read “heavy”), with lots of gear and multiple sets of clothing. Most people who read this pamphlet assume that this is the recommended list of equipment to bring to Philmont. It is not! There is one paragraph in this pamphlet that is the key to your success at Philmont that most people miss:

Gathering Your Equipment

Backpacking requires proper equipment just as any outdoor sport. Without suitable equipment you will face unnecessary hardships. Take only what you need. After several overnight camps you should be able to conduct your own shakedown to eliminate items you didn’t need. Remember, the key to successful backpacking is to go lightly. Check your equipment against the recommended lists on page 12 and 13. This is the maximum. All backpackers can reduce this list and still be comfortable, clean, and safe.

Philmont Guidebook to Adventure 2002, 2003, 2005 and 2006

The above paragraph sounds like something Ray Jardine wrote instead of the Boy Scouts of America. Statements like “take only what you need,” “eliminate items you don’t need,” and “the key to successful backpacking is to go lightly” have been heard for years throughout the lightweight backpacking community.

This article will show you a reasonable list of gear and techniques that will allow you to carry a lighter pack and truly enjoy the wonders Philmont has to offer.

When I asked my 18-year-old son (Philmont trek 2002, Rayado 2003) how others or I could lighten our packs, his immediate response was, “Bring your 18-year-old son and give him all your gear.” He was joking, of course, but there’s a lot of wisdom in this statement. At Philmont you function as a “crew” or team. You succeed or fail as this team. If you have immensely strong Scouts they can and should carry more of the group gear than the weaker ones, whether boys or leaders. This allows the whole crew to move the most efficiently around Philmont.

Philmont assigns a Ranger to your crew for the intake process and to hike with you for a few days. The Ranger will get your crew through the intake process, ensure that you bring the appropriate gear, and train the crew on Philmont techniques. Your particular Ranger is the one you need to convince concerning the clothing and equipment you bring. Many people who frequent Backpacking Light will know a bit more about backpacking than your average 18-22 year old Ranger, but please do not harass them. Just take the time to explain yourself and your choices and most of the time they will go along with your choices. I recommend that you not challenge them on anything to do with bear protection. In 2002 we wanted to bring lighter ropes and bags, but our Ranger disagreed. We took the Philmont ropes and bags. In 2005 we had a similar event. I cannot see them approving the Bozeman Mountain Works AirCore Pro URSA Dyneema Bear Bag Hanging Rope even though it may be a better and lighter choice.

Philmont does a really good job of having thousands of Scouts camping in close proximity to lots of bears with very few problems and needs to be congratulated for their efforts to keep everyone safe.

Context

The gear on the list below was selected specifically to meet the requirements of Philmont Scout Ranch while being as light as possible. Although the list was compiled for Boy Scouts and Scout Leaders attending Philmont, it will work equally well for others interested in a lighter pack.

  • Seasons: Summer – lows to the 40s F, high 80s to 90s F, short afternoon showers common
  • Length: Four days between resupply
  • Where: Philmont Scout Ranch, Sangre de Christo mountains, New Mexico

Boy Scout Gear List: Philmont Scout Ranch, New Mexico, Summer - 2
Equipment check on day one, Philmont 2004.
Courtesy of Larry Keil, ASM, Troop 815, Danville, CA

Rationale for Selected Gear

The gear you carry is broken into five sections: Personal Equipment: Clothing; Personal Equipment: Gear; Personal Equipment: Sleep Systems; Crew Equipment Issued at Philmont; and Crew Equipment Provided by Your Crew.

1. Personal Equipment: Clothing

Philmont sets some standards that influence your clothing choices. They require completely separate sleep clothing, full rain suits (no ponchos), and long pants for various activities. These requirements dictate some of your choices, but still allow you to go fairly light.

Philmont requires long pants for some of the activities (spar pole climbing, horseback riding, conservation projects). These activities could conceivably be done in your rain pants. I tried this during my 2002 trek, but now my rain pants have numerous pieces of duct tape covering the holes I put in them at Philmont doing these activities. Since most people prefer to hike in shorts, a better solution would be a long pair of pants with zip-off legs. A good choice is the Ex-Officio Amphi Convertible Pant. In addition to zip-off legs, it has a built-in brief so that you do not need to bring underwear. For a shirt, I recommend one with an SPF-30 rating and sleeves you can roll up or down. RailRiders, Ex-Officio, and REI make nice shirts, among others. Another advantage of these shirts over T-shirts is that the fabric weave is much tighter making it hard for mosquitoes to bite through the shirt. Remember to treat your clothing with Permethrin prior to coming to Philmont. All you need to take is the one pair of zip-off pants and one hiking shirt for the whole trek. When you get a chance to shower at one of the staff camps wash your shirt, pants, and socks; put them back on and they will be dry usually in less than an hour. I take two pairs of hiking socks, one to wear and the other to change into part way though the day or when getting into camp.

Boots are not necessary since almost all hiking is done on well-worn trails, and your pack weight should be below 30 pounds. Running shoes with good tread will do fine, especially if they are trail runners. Make sure they are broken in before going. A wide brim hat finishes off your hiking clothing.

I have used Frogg Toggs at Philmont for rainwear. I combined them with an umbrella to keep the rain off my face. The umbrella also functions to keep my pack fairly dry. The Gossamer Gear Micropore Rain suit costs $25 versus $70 for Frogg Toggs and weighs less (10.3 oz vs. 16.2 oz). Several people in our crew tried the Micropore Rain Suit on my 2005 trek with mixed results. Some of the suits were really trashed after a 10-day trek. The consensus of our group was that the Frogg Toggs were a better choice, but for Scouts it’s hard to overlook the low cost of the Micropore Rain suit.

You will also need to bring a warm sweater and/or jacket/vest. I found that a lightweight fleece or wool sweater works OK but adding a lightweight vest really keeps you toasty socializing with other groups at night. If you find you are getting cold due to wind, just wear your rain suit to act as a wind barrier. Don’t use down exclusively for your insulation, in case it gets wet. Mix some wool, fleece, or high loft synthetics into your clothing line. I use a PossumDown (wool) sweater, Patagonia synthetic vest, and a down sleeping bag.

2. Personal Equipment: Gear

When I was in Philmont in 2002 I used a Gossamer Gear G4 pack with a trash compactor bag inside as waterproofing. The G4 worked well at Philmont but it seemed a bit too big even with the bulky food that you get issued. The Ranger was skeptical, but accepted my setup when I showed him I had everything on his list, and then some. In 2005 I used a Gossamer Gear G5 pack (silnylon version). This pack has a smaller volume than the G4, but my gear has also gotten a bit lighter and smaller. The Ranger never questioned me about the pack. Some members of our trek used a GoLite Gust pack (20 oz), and some the Granite Gear Virga (21 oz). The Virga has compression straps to secure the contents better than the Gust, but all the adults and Scouts were happy with their selections. Some of the others took heavier packs that they have owned for a while but are cutting down on other weighty items. Most lightweight packs will work at Philmont if you get total weights to less than 25 pounds with food and water. You need to keep a big enough area in the pack to carry about four days of food, which is usually the most they issue at any one time. Plan on the space for this food to be approximately the size of a bear canister but made up of numerous smaller packages. When the food is issued, go through the food bags and remove items that you and your food group will not use.

Take your water containers of preference. A bladder system, such as Platypus or CamelBak, helps you easily stay hydrated. Bring enough water containers to hold at least 4 liters so that the nights you are in a dry camp you will have water for the morning. If everyone has an extra 2-3 liters of water you do not need to carry the Philmont extra water containers, thus saving a little bit of weight. One other suggestion when going into a dry camp: eat your dinner for lunch near a water source, since dinners require water, whereas lunches and breakfasts are usually dry.

I carry my small pocketknife, whistle, and a couple of photon lights on a necklace so I know where everything is when I need it. The other personal gear you will need are a plastic bowl, cup for hot liquids and a spoon for eating. Some other items are a small propane lighter, personal first aid kit, medicines, sunglasses, and a “stash” of coffee if you are a big coffee drinker. If you really need your caffeine, chocolate-coated coffee beans were really popular on our 2002 and 2005 treks. Remember to bring two cotton bandanas, one for cooking with and one for personal needs.

Boy Scout Gear List: Philmont Scout Ranch, New Mexico, Summer - 5
Troop 257 group photo after arriving back at base camp at the conclusion of their 2005 trek. Tent City, where everyone spends their first and last night at Philmont, is in the background.
Courtesy of Doug Prosser, ASM, Troop 257, Ventura County Council, CA

3. Personal Equipment: Sleep Systems

Philmont requires separate sleeping clothes from the clothing you wear during the day. This is because your hiking clothes could be contaminated with spilled food, thus leaving odors on your clothing that bears might be attracted to while you sleep. Philmont is very serious about bear avoidance. They spend a lot of time teaching your crew the “Philmont” way to prevent bear attraction. Please do not challenge them on these issues, just go with the flow. They have been very successful in preventing most bear attacks with thousands of Scouts going through the Ranch, always camping in the same fixed locations. Your sleep clothing choices depend on a) whether you sleep warm or cold, and b) the rest of your sleep system. Night temperatures are rarely colder than the low 40s. I sleep cold, so I wear lightweight fleece pants with a long sleeve synthetic shirt and sleep socks that double as shoulder pads on the G5 pack. I add, as needed, a lightweight beanie, wool sweater, and vest.

Philmont requires a tent; no tarps or bivies are allowed. They do not require that a tent have an integrated floor, so many lightweight options are available. The Scouts in 2002 and 2005 used the Mountain Hardwear Kiva, which holds up to four Scouts. Our Scoutmaster and I used the Betamid in 2002, and this year we purchased a Betamid Light to save even more weight. Some people use bathtub-type ground cloths, because the campgrounds are all very hard and flat, thus allowing water to pool around the tents. A flat ground sheet will work fine, however, if you pay attention when setting up your camp, just like you would on any other camping trip.

As I’ve aged I have migrated to thicker and thicker sleeping pads, to increase the quality of my sleep on the hard ground at Philmont. I am currently using the Big Agnes Insulated Air Core Pad at 25 ounces. In 2005, three of our crew slept on the Big Agnes pads.

In 2002, I used a three-quarter length thin Therm-a-Rest combined with my Therm-a-Rest Ridge Rest closed cell foam pad and a Western Mountaineering MityLite sleeping bag. In a tent, a 30-40 degree bag will work well when combined with some of your insulation layers and a hat. In 2005, I used a Pertex Quantum Arc X down bag, which is both warmer and lighter than the MityLite. I was much warmer sleeping with the Arc X and I may need to lighten my sleep clothing for the next Philmont trek. One other topic that concerns people at night is bugs. We really had no problems with bugs in 2002 and 2005; I never even had to use any Deet or my head net.

Boy Scout Gear List: Philmont Scout Ranch, New Mexico, Summer - 4
Fish Camp just after Troop 257 has finished setting up camp in the rain. The Scouts under the 8’x10′ silnylon dining fly are breaking out the food packets for dinner and getting the cooking started. Note the Micropore Rainsuits, two Mountain Hardwear Kiva shelters, Black Diamond Betamid (purple/white), and Black Diamond Beta Light (blue/gray silnylon). Philmont, 2005.
Courtesy of Doug Prosser, ASM, Troop 257, Ventura County Council, CA

4. Crew Equipment Issued at Philmont

Philmont will issue gear to your crew if you do not bring your own. The Philmont gear is heavy and designed to take the constant abuse that Scouts can deliver. If you plan well you will not have to take much of Philmont’s heavy gear. Below is a discussion of the gear listed in “Philmont 2005 Guidebook to Adventure.”

The first item is a nylon dining fly (12’x12′) weighing about 4 pounds. Its two collapsible poles weigh about 1 pound. Instead, have your crew take a silnylon tarp at least 8’x10′ along with extra titanium stakes and lightweight line. In place of the dining fly poles, our crew used two hiking poles velcroed together to give them added height, just single poles if we wanted to keep the tarp low. For whatever reason, our Ranger did not want us to tie our dining fly to trees.

Do not use the Philmont tents, since they weigh about 5.5 pounds for two people. There are many current lightweight options under 2 pounds per Scout (see above). The cook kits Philmont provides range from 4-6 pounds per cook group and cutlery kits weigh 0.5 pound. Each cook group needs a 6-8 liter pot (4 liters is a bit small), and a 2-liter pot for some desserts. Another option for desserts is to mix them in plastic bags. We did this in 2005 with good success; only one dessert bag blew up on a Scout who was too rough with it. Leave the fry pan at home. The whole crew will need one other 6-8 liter pot to boil water for sterilizing eating utensils and for washing. Philmont is really big on regularly sterilizing your eating and cooking gear. The only cutlery item you need is a large spoon and a serving cup with a handle. Leave the spatula at home.

Due to the Philmont logistics, we always use two stoves, when in theory we could get by with only one. Many of the memorable activities at Philmont happen in late afternoon and early evening. The Scouts want to get out there for those activities as fast as possible. One stove for cooking and another stove to boil water means our crew can finish their meals and get out to the activities much faster. In my opinion this is worth the added weight of a second stove.

The next item from the Philmont cook kit is hot-pot tongs (two pairs), weighing about 0.5 pounds. I never saw a use for these since we bring a cooking bandana (our only cotton item) that works great for grabbing hot items.

The next item on the list is a camp shovel, weighing about 1 pound. This is a relic of early days when latrines were dug at each camp. Today every campsite has an outhouse, so we leave this behind.

The next items are plastic trash bags, salt, and pepper. The packets in which you carry your food provide sufficient space to stuff your trash, but trash bags may come in handy as emergency rain wear if a Scout’s rain gear gets lost. The salt and pepper are in small individual packets, which generate a lot of small pieces of trash. A better option is to bring a small container of each, along with some additional spices for your trail meals.

Philmont provides scrub pads, toilet paper, and small containers of both dishwashing soap and hand sanitizer. We also bring additional hand sanitizer bottles with us so that we have them readily available when cooking, eating, or returning from the outhouse. We think this is one of the most important aspects of avoiding sickness on the trail.

Philmont also provides Katadyn Micropur water purification tablets, a variety of other cleaning equipment, and bear bags and ropes. Philmont uses a plastic strainer to filter food particles out of wash water and drain it into an underground sump. A spatula is used to scoop the larger food particles from the strainer to be thrown in your trash. I feel a fine mesh screen circle, 6-8 inches in diameter, could accomplish the same function as the plastic strainer, and the spatula could be replaced with a small thin flat piece of plastic like a credit card. I’ll be doing this next trip to Philmont.

5. Equipment Provided by Your Crew

This section addresses those miscellaneous gear items that your crew may bring with them that will not be supplied by Philmont.

Philmont recommends a sewing kit with heavy thread and needle. During our past treks we brought a “hotel” sewing kit but we never used it for anything other than draining blisters.

Bring enough tent stakes to put up all your tents, plus the dining fly (in windy conditions) instead of the recommended 10 per person.

Two to three collapsible water containers, 2.5 gallons each are recommended so that when you go to dry camps your crew can bring extra water. In 2002, a number of us brought extra Platypus 2.5 liter containers and in 2005 a few of the crew brought 2.5 gallon containers that they could inflate and use as pillows at night. Either way works fine but it is convenient having some larger containers. I also recommend that you have the crew fill all their water containers and purify them prior to going to bed so you can hit the trail immediately in the morning. You usually need to remind the Scouts to make sure this happens.

Two or three backpacking stoves are recommended. We brought two MSR Simmerlight stoves. Since we had two stoves, we did not bring a repair kit, but we did bring two, 33-ounce and one, 12-ounce fuel containers. We ended up with way too much fuel. I think that a 33-ounce fuel container per stove will provide adequate fuel in between food/fuel pick-ups.

One crew first aid kit is required but the list of items in the kit Philmont suggests is a bit much. Our first aid kit was not any different than we take on a weekend trek. Every Ranger staffed camp has extensive first aid supplies, trained first-aid providers, and the ability to transport people out of the backcountry, so you will not need to provide care for multiple days.

Our crew brought along duct tape wrapped around each of our hiking poles. The duct tape was used for a number of things during the trek but the most important was to patch holes and tears in Micropore Rain suits.

One waterproof ground cloth (5’6″ x 7’6″) per tent is recommended, but we only brought the ground cloth that came with our tents and did not bring this item. Three 50-foot lengths of 1/8 inch nylon cord are recommended but we only brought two 50-foot lengths that we mainly used for tying up the dining fly. We could have saved some weight here by using the AirCore line to tie up our dining fly.

One adult in 2005 brought along a picture guide to plants which some of the boys found interesting. Our crew brought one 4-ounce bottle of sunscreen, one 2.5-ounce tube of 3M Ultrathon insect repellant, and no shampoo. In three treks to Philmont I have never felt a need to use insect repellant so this may be another area to save a little weight. We do bring a small bar of soap for showers and/or use a little Camp Suds.

Conclusion

Boy Scout Gear List: Philmont Scout Ranch, New Mexico, Summer - 3
Untangling bear bagging ropes, Philmont 2004.
Courtesy of Larry Keil, ASM, Troop 815, Danville, CA

I have shown you a way to solve one of the two reasons for failure at Philmont: carrying too much weight. The other reason for failure is lack of training before going to Philmont. The people who walk regularly had no real problems hiking around Philmont while those who did no real training were hard pressed at times to complete the day’s hike. All adults and any Scouts who are not playing sports in high school need to get out and walk five to seven days per week. Everyone who has not done this has slowed down our crew whether adult or Scout. When walking, carry a daypack or the backpack that you will be taking to Philmont. Each week you are walking, increase the weight in your pack by 3-5 pounds until it is a little above what you will carry at Philmont. In 2002, my training route took me past a supermarket where I would stop every other day and buy a bag of dried beans or peas and throw them in my pack until I had 30 pounds to carry. Each week, increase the distance that you are walking until you are doing 3-5+ miles daily. Try to plan your route such that you include some hills. Have your crew plan weekend treks twice a month for a few months before going to Philmont so that you all can learn to work as a team. Refine your gear list until you have it optimized.

With the steps described above you and your Scouts will enjoy the trip of a lifetime, and just maybe get to come back one day with you children and even possibly your grandchildren.

My gear list for Philmont follows. It includes specific brands and models/styles of gear for reference only. This list neither represents an endorsement of any particular product nor suggests that any product listed is the best choice in the context of any particular situation. The list is easily adaptable for Scouts and Leaders and each person’s specific needs.

Philmont Gear List
CLOTHING WORN WHILE HIKING
FUNCTION STYLE/Rationale EXAMPLE Ounces Grams
hat with brim wide-brimmed hat Dorfman Pacific 4.3 120
hiking shirt short sleeve wicking shirt Troop Cool-max shirt 5.0 140
hiking pants long zip-off pants with built-in briefs Ex Offficio Amphi Convertible 12.8 364
hiking socks lightweight merino wool or Coolmax trail running socks Thorlo Lite Walking Level 2 Mini-crew Socks 2.9 82
hiking shoes breathable, lightweight trail shoes Lowa Vento II, size 13 46.4 1316
Total 71.4 2022
OTHER ITEMS WORN OR CARRIED
FUNCTION STYLE/Rationale EXAMPLE Ounces Grams
bandana cotton Survival Bandana x 2 (one for cooking; one for everything else) 3.2 88
watch multifunction: compass, altimeter and time Suunto Vector 1.9 54
neck cord nylon line – holds light, whistle, knife, can-opener Kelty Triptease line – reflects light at night, easier to find 2.5 70
lighter small butane lighter, without child locks cheapest on the market 0.5 14
eye glasses case combination glasses case and retainer Backpacking Light Hides TechnoSkin Sunglass Case/Retainers 0.6 15
eye glasses prescription – 0.7 20
sun glasses clip-on sun glasses and case – 1.4 38
hiking poles adjustable poles with duct tape wrapped on Komperdell Pro Series AS 21.2 600
Total 32.0 899
OTHER CLOTHING
FUNCTION STYLE/Rationale EXAMPLE Ounces Grams
insulation layer wool shirt PossumDown Sweater, XL 10.3 390
insulation vest synthetic vest Patagonia Micro Puff 6.0 170
rain/wind suit jacket and pants Gossamer Gear Micropore Rainsuit (pants XL 4.2 oz, jacket XL 5.5 oz) 9.7 460
warm hat wool or fleece beanie/watch cap generic lightweight beanie 1.2 34
sleep pants fleece pants REI Polartec 100 Teton Pants, large 10.3 290
sleep shirt nylon short or long sleeve t-shirt LL Bean synthetic shirt 8.0 226
sleep sock warm socks/used as pads on pack’s shoulder straps unknown brand 3.7 106
extra hiking sock lightweight merino wool or Coolmax trail running socks Thorlo Lite Walking Level 2 Mini-crew Socks 2.9 82
Total 52.1 1758
SLEEP SYSTEMS
FUNCTION STYLE/Rationale EXAMPLE Ounces Grams
overhead shelter lightweight tent Black Diamond Beta Light ($140) 22.0 622
overhead shelter lightweight flooring for tent Black Diamond Betamid Floor ($55, 20 oz, partner carries) 0.0 0
tent stakes standard, shaped like shepherd’s crook titanium stakes (6) (2 oz, partner carries) 0.0 0
sleeping bag lightweight down Pertex Quantum Arc X Variable Girth Down Sleeping Bag 16.4 466
sleeping pad thick inflatable pad (my one comfort!) Big Agnes Insulated Air Core Pad Mummy, extra-long 25.0 710
Total 63.4 1798
PACKING
FUNCTION STYLE/Rationale EXAMPLE Ounces Grams
backpack lightweight Gossamer Gear G5 Ultralight Backpack, silnylon version, size small 7.7 216
waterproof liner trash bag to protect clothing from water and for emergencies trash compactor bag with two extras 6.9 198
sleeping pad closed cell foam cut down to use as frame for pack Therm-a-Rest Ridge Rest 3/4 length closed cell pad-cut down 7.0 196
Total 17.0 478
COOKING AND WATER
FUNCTION STYLE/Rationale EXAMPLE Ounces Grams
utensil spoon Lexan soup spoon 0.3 8
dish plastic margarine container, small any brand 1.8 50
spices personal use hot pepper 0.9 26
cup plastic 8-12 oz cup able to take boiling water free plastic cup from Family Fun Cuts that fits in cook kit 0.8 24
water bottles 3 liter sipper w/ tube CamelBak insulated 100 oz Unbottle 9.5 272
extra water bottle 2.5 liter, empty except for dry camps Platypus 3 liter 1.0 28
Total 14.3 408
OTHER ESSENTIALS
FUNCTION STYLE/Rationale EXAMPLE Ounces Grams
maps wax coated Philmont official map and plastic bag 5.3 150
first aid/medications minor wound care assorted wound and blister care items, antimicrobial ointment 2.0 57
hand sanitizer 2 oz bottle for pre-cooking/eating and post-bathroom least expensive available 3.0 85
toilet paper non-scented toilet paper small amount in plastic zip-lock bag 6.0 168
personal hygiene teeth and body cleaning kit small toothbrush, small toothpaste, small soap in zip-lock bags 2.0 57
lip balm SPF 15 or higher – 0.3 8
bug barrier head net Campmor Backpacker No-See-Um Head net 0.8 22
umbrella lightweight umbrella folds small MontBell umbrella 5.7 160
money – – 0.1 4
Total 25.2 711
CONSUMABLES
FUNCTION STYLE/Rationale EXAMPLE Ounces Grams
food Philmont provided 3lbs/day/person Average 2 days carried (Best Guess!!!) 96.0 454
water average carried – 2 liters 2 L 64.0 1814
water treatment chlorine dioxide based treatment Katadyn Micropur Purification tablets 0.3 8
Total 160.3 1879
TREK SHARED GEAR (split between 10 people on trek)
FUNCTION STYLE/Rationale EXAMPLE Ounces Grams
stove and windscreen lightweight White Gas MSR SimmerLite stove and windscreen x 2 (13.8 oz each) 27.6 773
fuel bottles and fuel white gas MSR 33 oz bottle x 2 (estimate 2 lbs each) 64.0 1792
cookpot lightweight aluminum or titanium, 4-6 quart 4 liter aluminum pots x 3 (10.8 oz each) 32.4 907
guylines 100 feet nylon rope 1/8 inch or less REI Braided Nylon Cord, 1/8 inch, 100 ft 5.6 160
dining fly 10′ x10′ lightweight tarp silnylon 10′ x 8′ + 4 titanium stakes 16.0 454
first aid kit expedition size kit with common medications Adventure Medical Kit Weekender with some additions 23.0 650
spices – salt and pepper 4.0 113
cooking utensils spoon and spatula MSR folding large spoons x 2 and 1 spatula 2.7 76
bear bags and rope Philmont provided 3 bags (0.5 lb each) and 1-150 ft, 1/4 inch rope (2.5 lbs) 64.0 1811
sunscreen SPF 30 or higher 4 oz bottle 5.4 152
insect repellant Deet based 3M UltraThon insect repellant 2.5 72
sewing kit small hotel kit 0.1 2
repair kit minimal nylon ties, pins, clevis pins (if needed), stick of hot glue 2.0 56
plastic strainer Frisbee style provided by Philmont 8.0 224
dish soap biodegradable 3 oz Camp Suds 3.4 96
scrub pads small 2 cut down scrub pads 0.6 12
hand sanitizer alcohol based 4 oz Purell x2 10.0 283
camera digital camera and extra batteries Pentax Optio S 50 9.0 255
Total 280.3 7888

 

WEIGHT SUMMARY
Pounds Kilograms
(1) Total Weight Worn or Carried 6.5 2.9
(2) Total Base Weight in Pack 11.0 5.0
(3) Total Weight of Consumables 10.0 4.5
(4) Total weight of Trek Shared Gear 1.8 0.8
(5) Total Initial Pack Weight (2) + (3) + (4) 22.8 10.4
(6) Full Skin Out Weight (1) + (2) + (3) + (4) 29.3 13.3

New Boy Scouts Gear List for Three-Season Mild Conditions - 3

About the Author

Doug Prosser is an Assistant Scoutmaster for Troop 257 in the Ventura County Council, California with 11 years experience. He lives in Camarillo, which is located on the coast in southern California between Santa Barbara and Los Angeles. He has participated in numerous hikes in the local mountains and has planned many treks into the High Sierras for his Troop. He attended Philmont Scout Ranch as a Scout and as a leader, most recently in 2005. He started out with 50+ pound packs and continues to lighten his load, always looking for a better way of backpacking. His friends have dubbed his garage “Doug’s Camping World.” Doug has a strong interest in teaching both kids and adults how to enjoy backpacking. He continues to train and gear up for an extended trek on the Pacific Crest Trail within the next few years. Doug can be contacted at DougProsser@verizon.net

Patagonia Base Layers SPOTLITE REVIEW

Patagonia revamps its Base Layers for Fall 2006

Overview

For fall 2006 Patagonia will update its line of performance base layers and will offer two approaches to the single goal of keeping dry and comfortable. The Capilene polyester garments have been updated and Patagonia will release a completely new line of merino wool base layers.

Capilene Base Layer Updates

The Capilene line will be offered in four weights, now simply named Capilene 1, 2, 3 and 4. These correspond roughly, but not exactly, to Patagonia’s current and previous four weights; silkweight, lightweight, midweight and expedition weight. The photo at right is Karen Wilson in a women’s Capilene 3 Zip-Neck. Note that she was stung by a bee the first day she wore this Golden Yellow color layer in the field!

The Capilene 1 weight is identical to the current silkweight; 3.7 ounces/yard squared. Capilene 2 will be slightly lighter than the current lightweight (4 ounces/yard squared versus 4.6 ounces/yard squared). Capilene 3 is identical in weight to the current midweight at 4.8 ounces/yard squared. Capilene 4 is similar to the previously offered expedition weight at 5.3 ounces/yard squared.

Patagonia is striving to convert their entire Capilene line to recycled polyester fibers. The Capilene 1 fabric is the first to reach this goal and will be made from 100 percent recycled polyester fibers. The other weights are comprised of roughly 50 percent recycled fibers. All of the fabrics are 100 percent recyclable for future generations of clothing as part of Patagonia’s common threads recycling program.

An infamous property of the current Capilene line is the rapid build-up of odor that will occur if you wear them for any length of time without a thorough washing. All new Capilene products will feature a natural odor control technology which Patagonia calls Gladiodor. Patagonia refers to Gladiodor as a natural odor control which uses environmentally benign amino acid chains to break down bacteria whose waste causes odor. In limited testing to date, our Capilene test products are standing up well and have built up very limited odors.

Merino Wool Base Layers

Patagonia’s new merino wool line is made from 18.5 micron, 100 percent merino wool. The wool line will come in 3 weights; Wool 2, Wool 3 and Wool 4. These are named to correspond to the weights of the Capilene line and facilitate comparison and layering. Fabric weights for the 3 wool fabrics will be 4.3, 6.8 and 7.8 ounces per yard squared, respectively.

Again considering the environmental impacts of manufacturing, all of Patagonia’s wool fabrics are developed using a 100 percent chlorine free process. Most other wool fabrics on the market use chlorine during the manufacturing process.

My test garment is a Wool 2 Zip-Neck. I have used it extensively this winter on long training hikes, trail runs and days climbing at our local crags. The fabric weight and performance is comparable to the lightest wool base layers available from Ibex, Icebreaker and Smartwool. It is comfortable and cool in warm weather and dries very rapidly. The zip neck is a nice feature if you plan to use it during high exertion activities such as trail running or aerobic winter sports. I haven’t washed mine all winter. I just take it off when I get home from a hike or run, then toss it in with the other stinky base layers. Wool lives up to its reputation for natural odor resistance – my Wool 2 Zip-Neck doesn’t stink a bit. All of the updated Patagonia base layers will have a more trim fit with the fall 2006 lines. This is a welcome change in my opinion, easing the layering process and creating garments more efficient for use in high exertion activities.

A fundamental difference between the wool and Capilene base layers is the price. The wool line will set you back quite a bit more than the Capilene line. For example, the men’s Capilene 2 Zip-Neck is $43, while the men’s Wool 2 Zip-Neck is $88. In the heavier weights the difference is substantial, but not quite so drastic. The men’s Capilene 4 Zip-Neck is $85 and the men’s Wool 4 Zip-Neck is $125.



Don in a Patagonia Wool 2 Zip-Neck in Arizona’s Aravaipa Canyon.

Capilene Base Layers Features and Specifications

  • Fabric – Polyester, with varying recycled fiber content
  • Gladiodor odor control technology
  • 4 fabric weights
  • Capilene 1 – 3.7 oz/yd2
  • Capilene 2 – 4.0 oz/yd2
  • Capilene 3 – 4.8 oz/yd2
  • Capilene 4 – 5.3 oz/yd2
  • Styles
  • Capilene 1 – Crew, Graphic Crew, T, Bottoms
  • Capilene 2 – Zip-Neck, Crew, T, Bottoms
  • Capilene 3 – Zip-Neck, Crew, Henley, Bottoms
  • Capilene 4 – Zip-Neck, Crew, Bottoms

Merino Wool Base Layers Features and Specifications

  • Fabric – 100 percent merino wool
  • 18.5 micron wool fibers
  • Chlorine free manufacturing process
  • 3 fabric weights
  • Wool 2 – 4.3 oz/yd2
  • Wool 3 – 6.8 oz/yd2
  • Wool 4 – 7.8 oz/yd2
  • Styles
  • Wool 2 – Zip-Neck, T-Neck, Crew, Bottoms
  • Wool 3 – Zip-Neck, Crew, Bottoms
  • Wool 4 – Zip-Neck, Crew, Bottoms

Photon Freedom LED Micro-Light SPOTLITE REVIEW

This miniscule wonder has most of the functionality of a regular headlamp, at a fraction of the weight.

Introduction

The new Photon Freedom micro-light is a perfect example of the amazing things that are attainable with tiny microprocessors. It essentially has all the functionality of a regular headlamp, and even more utility, especially for ultralight backpackers.

Photon Freedom LED Micro-Light SPOTLITE REVIEW - 1
The Photon Freedom advances beyond its predecessors in both microprocessor technology and utility. It’s claimed to be 100% brighter, easily adjusts to the desired brightness level, and comes with both a neck lanyard and a swiveling bill clip.

To make it even more usable, the Freedom comes with a clip so you can easily attach it to the bill of your hat or to a loop in your tent, and also comes with a thin lanyard to carry it around your neck. The bill clip even has a swivel so you can aim it just right, and little imbedded magnets for attaching it to steel surfaces. No more holding the Photon light with your teeth!

Photon Freedom LED Micro-Light SPOTLITE REVIEW - 2
The Photon Freedom comes with a swiveling bill clip (left), key clip (upper center), and a neck lanyard (right).

The Freedom can be switched on by either of two ways: by pressing and holding the button down starts at the dimmest level and brightens until it reaches maximum, which is indicated by a brief blink. Or, a quick push and release starts the light in brightest mode, then a second continuous press dims it to the desired level. After a pause in either mode, a quick press switches the Freedom off. This simple yet sophisticated control strategy places the Freedom ahead of virtually every flashlight and headlamp we’ve tested in terms of user control and preservation of night vision.

The Freedom sports multiple flash modes as well, making it useful as a location marker or a signal light. Other improvements are the Freedom’s greater water resistance and the addition of a pry-off battery cover, eliminating the four tiny case screws formerly used. Our white LED Freedom is powered by two CR2016 button cells (certain colors use one CR2032).

LED’s keep getting brighter and more efficient, and the Freedom (and the new Photon II) is claimed to be 100% brighter than its predecessors and any other micro-light on the market. To check that claim we measured the Photon Freedom’s output, and found a teensy weensy little problem. Read on.

We measured maximum intensity with new batteries (in lux, at beam center and one foot off-axis from a distance of 2 feet) at 30-minute intervals for 12 hours. The initial brightness measurement confirmed what our dazzled retinas had already told us – the Freedom is very bright. As a point of comparison, initially it’s actually brighter than a Princeton Tech Aurora with fresh batteries.

Unfortunately, the performance went downhill from there. Our measurements revealed that intensity dropped by two-thirds in the first half hour (50% in the first 15 minutes), followed by a long tailing off in brightness. We terminated the test at 5 lux, so we don’t know how long it would hold this glimmer, which was still bright enough light to see inside a pack at night.

Photon Freedom LED Micro-Light SPOTLITE REVIEW - 3
At its brightest setting, the Photon Freedom is remarkably bright at first, but intensity dropped rapidly after the first 30 minutes of use, and tailed out from there.

Based on these results, our main caveat for anybody interested in this light is that you can’t count on the dazzling in-store performance for long. The Freedom rapidly drops to output similar to other single 5mm LED lights. The very lowest setting is so dim is that we couldn’t record it. It’s definitely dimmer than 5 lux. The Freedom could probably run at that level for a week.

Beam color and quality are a huge improvement over the original white Photon Micro-Light, there’s hardly a comparison. There’s still a purple beam center but it’s more even and better controlled, and the surrounding halo is a pleasant warm white.

In the field, we used the Freedom on several winter and early spring outings, and found it very user-friendly. Using the bill clip made it easily to read a magazine in our tent while waiting for bedtime. Will especially liked using it with the neck lanyard, and carried it around his neck most of the time so it was always handy.

Don’t let our test results discourage you from buying the new Photon Freedom; it’s the best Photon yet. We found the Freedom’s utility and light output to be a big step above previous Photon models. It’s very versatile and convenient to use, and the light output is certainly adequate for general camp chores and reading. Just don’t expect endless dazzling light to guide you hour after hour down a long, difficult trail, at least not without pausing to swap batteries.

Specifications and Features

  • Manufacturer: Photon Light (www.photonlight.com)
  • Features: one button operation, electronic on/off, continuously adjustable brightness, signaling modes, water-resistant, 10 different beam colors
  • Included: light, clip/swivel, neck cord and clip, key chain clip
  • Weight: light 0.24 oz, clip/swivel 0.2 oz, cord and clip 0.06 oz
  • MSRP: $20

Sierra Designs Hyperlight Tent REVIEW

Spacious, durable, wind-stable 4.5 lb tent – while very light for its size, it still can’t match the area to weight ratio of our highest rated double wall tent.

Overview

Sierra Designs Hyperlight Tent REVIEW - 3

The Sierra Designs Hyperlight is the roomiest two-person lightweight tent we reviewed. It has more usable area than other tents considered to be spacious, like the MSR Hubba Hubba. The Hyperlight’s large asymmetrical floor plan, optic white tent walls, and mosquito netting create a huge, bright and pleasant living area – an antidote to tent-bound claustrophobia from long periods of rain or heavy bug pressure. (Tent pictured at right is under siege from formidable Maine mosquitoes in high summer.)

What’s Good

  • Roomy – largest floor area of lightweight two-person tents reviewed
  • Our highest rated large durable tent – reflects an excellent balance between weight, durability, weather performance and usable space
  • High area to weight ratio for a tent with durable fabrics and materials
  • Asymmetrical floor plan increases usable space over traditional rectangular tents
  • “Jake’s corner,” a short third tent pole, is one of a number of low weight features to increase wind stability
  • Durable floor hold ups well to field abuse

What’s Not So Good

  • Lower area to weight ratio compared to the very lightest (but less durable) double wall tents
  • Single door
  • Long side of tent (body and rainfly) could use an extra tie out or two in high winds to reduce sidewall deflection
  • Asymmetrical floor plan may not suit all tastes
  • Included tent stakes are heavy

Specifications

  Year/Model

 2005 Sierra Designs Hyperlight

  Style

Freestanding double wall tent

  Fabrics

 Floor: 70d taffeta nylon, 1800 mm PU (polyurethane) coating; Body: 40d nylon ripstop; Fly: 40d 1.94 oz/yd2 (66 g/m2), 246 thread, high tenacity nylon

  Pole Material

 Aluminum – DAC Featherlite sectional poles of 7001 aluminum. Two main crossing poles and a shorter “Jake’s corner” pole.

  Weight Full Package
As supplied by manufacturer with all included items

 4 lb 12.9 oz (2.24 kg) measured weight; manufacturer’s specification 5 lb 1 oz (2.30 kg)

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

 4 lb 12.1 oz (2.16 kg) measured weight

  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

 4 lb 8 oz (2.04 kg) measured weight

  Area

 Floor area: 37 ft2 (3.4 m2)
Vestibule area: 8.4 ft2 (0.8 m2)

  Floor Area/Backpacking Light Minimum Weight Ratio

 0.51 ft2/oz

  Dimensions

 Length: 115.5 in (293 cm)
Width: 87.5 in (222 cm)
Height: 40 in (102 cm)

  MSRP

 $269.99

Performance

The outstanding feature of the Sierra Designs Hyperlight tent is its large floor area. We found the asymmetrical floor plan to provide plenty of room for two sleepers while leaving enough extra room to store all our gear. The yellow fly and white optic tent canopy let lots of pleasant light in. The tent has a single oversized door and vestibule. There are numerous pockets to hold hard-to-keep-track-of items. Although there is no attic for the tent, we found hanging a line from the loops in the tent ceiling sufficient for our needs.

Sierra Designs Hyperlight Tent REVIEW - 5
The spacious asymmetric floor plan of the Hyperlight.

The Hyperlight has an exceptional area to weight ratio for a full-featured tent with a durable 70-denier floor and a strong 40-denier fly and body. Its area to weight ratio is comparable to some very light tents using silnylon floors, mesh tent bodies, and silnylon flies, like the Big Agnes Seedhouse SL2.

For a large and relatively light tent, the Hyperlight is strong enough to withstand substantial wind. When kayaking along Florida’s Gulf Coast we were surprised by a sudden overnight cold font. The winds shifted to blow straight off the gulf onto our exposed beach campsite, hitting the tent broadside. By the time we realized it, the winds were too high to allow re-pitching of the tent with the foot into the wind or to find a more sheltered spot. All we could do was guy the tent out as best we could and wait. The strong winds persisted and we were forced to wait for a day, as we couldn’t launch off the beach in the high surf. The Hyperlight survived 30 hours of constant 45 mph broadside winds with some higher gusts. Many lesser, non-mountaineering tents would have flattened. Our only gripe with the Hyperlight was that the windward sidewalls deflected in particularly strong side gusts.

 

The Hyperlight uses a number of innovative features to stabilize and strengthen the large tent without adding too much weight. These include a short third pole called “Jake’s corner” and a “Clip Loc” at the intersection of the two crossing poles. The Clip Loc creates a rigid non-slipping joint where the two main poles cross.

 

Sierra Designs Hyperlight Tent REVIEW - 2
The yellow arrows point to the “Jake’s corner,” a short, third “V” shaped pole that stabilizes the end of the tent and reduces pole rotation that can lead to tent collapse. The Jake’s corner weighs less than a full sized pole and has the added benefit of spreading out the end of tent for more foot room.

Sierra Designs Hyperlight Tent REVIEW - 6
The Clip Loc is a simple idea. It uses tightly wrapped shock cord to create a rigid non-slipping joint where the two main poles cross, significantly adding to the structural rigidity of the tent in strong winds.

Pitching ease on the Hyperlight is about average. There are faster and more innovative pitching systems out there. In defense of the Hyperlight, its focus is on tent strength, where it has an advantage over many tents in its class. With its strength, high fabric walls and a minimum of mosquito netting, the Hyperlight could be pushed to a 3+ season tent.

The two main poles are in a standard crossing X pattern with clips attaching the tent body. The Hyperlight has a few more pitching tasks than a traditional two pole, rectangular X tent. There is wrapping the Clip Loc at the pole intersection, attaching the Jake’s corner, and the asymmetrical floor requires six stakes instead of the normal four for a rectangular tent. The tent comes with eight 6-millimeter diameter aluminum shepherd’s crook stakes. While the stakes work reasonably well, the aluminum can bend and they are heavy at 0.55 ounce each. The shepherd’s crook stakes are much easier to palm into the ground than the sharp-ended stakes provided by many tent manufacturers.

Attaching the fly is easy with snap buckles and color-coded webbing. The webbing is substantial with excellent tension adjusting buckles. There are two pole grommets on each body stakeout webbing to allow for stretch when the tent is wet.

The Hyperlight provides good rain protection with its high catenary cut, and well-tensioned bathtub floor. The high sidewall fabric provides good protection from rain blowing in under the fly. We had no problems staying dry in the tent. There are no vents on the tent fly, and limited amounts of mesh in the tent body. The Hyperlight depends on wind under the gap between fly and ground to ventilate the tent and reduce condensation. In use, we did get condensation on the inside of the fly on cool, humid and windless nights. Little if any of this condensation found its way into the tent proper. A peak vent in the fly would lessen condensation.

Sierra Designs Hyperlight Tent REVIEW - 7
High fabric sidewalls (white fabric under yellow lines) on the Hyperlight provide warmth and wind protection giving a potential for 3+ season camping. Most tents now use considerably more mesh in the tent body. The high fabric walls limit views and ventilation compared to tents with mostly mesh bodies.

Sierra Designs Hyperlight Tent REVIEW - 4
The high catenary cut bathtub floor and high sidewall fabric provide good protection from wind and rain blowing in under the fly. Well guyed out, the tent weathered 30 hours of constant 45 mph winds hitting it broadside.

Even so, an extra stakeout loop for the tent floor/body (arrow A), and two guyline attachments at the lower edge of the fly (yellow arrows B and C), instead of the current single guyline attachment (seen in the middle between B and C), would reduce deflection of the tent body and fly in high winds. Linking the tent body to the fly at guyline attachment indicated by arrow D would also help with tent body deflections.

After extensive field testing in a variety of environments, the Hyperlight has shown no durability issues. We’ve used it on rough mountain ground with too many rocks and sharp sticks to clear, and in unforgiving rocky beaches with sharp shell fragments, coral pieces, and other floor damaging detritus. The floor is still intact. The tent also survived substantial wind and rain with aplomb.

At $269.95 the Hyperlight is very price competitive with the MSR Hubba Hubba ($299.95), the Sierra Designs Lightning ($249), the Big Agnes Seedhouse SL2 ($299) and other tents in its class. The Hyperlight’s advantage over many of these tents is substantially more room, an excellent area to weight ratio, and more durability compared to silnylon based tents like the Big Agnes Seedhouse. The Hyperlight provides good wind stability and storm protection. If you want a large tent and don’t mind it being a bit heavier than the smaller tents then it is a good value.

What’s Unique

My wife and I like the asymmetrical floor plan of the Sierra Designs Hyperlight tent. There is plenty of room for the two of us in the middle. The storage area remaining in the corner area of the tent is huge. In mosquito infested campsites we could bring all our gear into the tent and even spread out a bit without feeling cramped.

The Hyperlight has good wind stability without adding too much weight: the “Jake’s corner” does a good job of stiffening-up the 9.5 foot long side of the tent without the weight of a full sized pole. It also spreads out the terminal corner for more space. A “Clip Loc” (a fancy term for a multiple wrap of shock cord) binds the intersection of the main poles into a rigid non-slipping structure to improve the tent’s stability with minimal increase in weight.

The Hyperlight has a very high area to weight ratio for a durable double walled tent. It uses 70-denier fabric in the floor where it is most needed, combined with lighter 40-denier tent body and fly fabrics, an asymmetrical floor plan, and a number of lightweight solutions to increase tent stability and strength.

Recommendations for Improvement

  • Two doors is fast becoming an industry standard for two-person tents. Fortunately, the Hyperlight’s single door is large and at the head of the tent so you don’t have to crawl over your tent partner to get out. But with a second door you’ll always have a lee exit even if the wind changes, or for campsites with access to only on side of the tent (assuming you want to keep the rear of tent pointing into the wind).
  • The single vestibule may be small for two people. This applies only for storing wet and muddy gear. There is plenty of room in the tent for dry gear.
  • High fabric walls (non-mesh) on tent body reduce ventilation and limit views when the rainfly is off. (It does however, provide warmth and additional splash and wind resistance for the lower edge of the rainfly.) A peak vent in the fly would vent moisture via convection and reduce condensation.
  • A few extra guyline attachment points on the tent body and fly would help reduce wind deflection along the tent’s 9.5 foot sides (this is especially true if the wind shifts to hit the tent broadside). Attaching the tent body to the center of the fly on the longer sides would help with sidewall deflection as well.
  • Window(s) or some other option to see out of the fly would be nice.
  • Include lighter stakes with the tent

Big Sky Evolution 2P Tent REVIEW

Other double-wall tent manufacturers claim that their tent is “ultralight” or even “hyperlight,” but the Evolution 2P really IS light without sacrificing anything in features or convenience – but of course it’s not perfect.

Introduction

The Evolution 2P is the flagship of Big Sky International’s now extensive line of lightweight shelters. Simply stated, it is the lightest, best designed, most user-friendly three-season two-person double-wall freestanding tent available. This review presents the facts behind that statement and makes recommendations to make the Evolution 2P even better.

What’s Good

  • Lightest two-person double-wall freestanding shelter with two doors and two vestibules
  • Fibraplex carbon fiber poles are strong and light, and withstand moderate winds (assuming good staking)
  • Titanium stakes included
  • Fast and easy setup
  • Superb views and ventilation with the fly off
  • Both vestibules offer space for a pack and boots without blocking entry
  • Vestibules are easily accessed from outside or inside the tent
  • Large zippered mesh entry doors
  • Large mesh gear/clothing storage pockets
  • Adequate length and headroom for taller people
  • Good wind stability if you use four angled guylines

What’s Not So Good

  • Inner mesh tent contacts the fly in some places, and some condensed water can drip inside the tent
  • Only eight stakes and two guylines are included (12 stakes and four guylines are needed for a stable pitch in moderate winds)
  • With carbon fiber poles, the tent deflects a lot in moderate winds, especially from the sides (aluminum poles are highly recommended if you expect strong winds or snow loads)

Specifications

  Manufacturer

 Big Sky International

  Year/Model

 2006 Evolution 2P (Rev. C)

  Style

 Three-season, two-person, double wall freestanding tent with two doors and two vestibules

  Fabrics

 Inner tent is no-see-um mesh, fly and tent floor are 30d 1.3 oz/yd2 (44 g/m2) silnylon

  Poles

 Two Fibraplex carbon fiber, 132 in (3.4 m) long, 8 oz (277 g) per pair. Easton aluminum poles weighing 12.6 oz (357 g) are available as a stiffer/stronger and less expensive option

  Features

 Carbon fiber poles, titanium stakes, two doors, two vestibules, side entry through zippered vestibule doors and large mesh zippered entry doors, large vents on vestibules, two large mesh stow pockets at head end, two large mesh stow pockets at foot end, window, compression stuff sack

  Weight Full Package
As supplied by manufacturer with all included items

 With carbon fiber poles: 3 lb 6.3 oz (1.54 kg) measured weight; manufacturer’s specification 3 lb 4.9 oz (1.5 kg)
With aluminum poles: 3 lb 10.9 oz (1.67 kg) measured weight, manufacturer’s specification 3 lb 9.5 oz (1.63 kg)

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

 With carbon fiber poles: 3 lb 3.6 oz (1.46 kg)
With aluminum poles: 3 lb 8.2 oz (1.59 kg)

  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

 With carbon fiber poles: 3 lb 3.7 oz (1.46 kg) measured weight
With aluminum poles: 3 lb 8.3 oz (1.6 kg)

  Area

 Floor area: 32.7 ft2 (3.04 m2)
Vestibule area: 19 ft2 (1.77 m2)

  Area to Backpacking Light Minimum Weight Ratio

 With carbon fiber poles: 0.63 ft2/oz
With aluminum poles: 0.58 ft2/oz

  Dimensions

 Length 84 in (213 cm), width at head end 56 in (142 cm), width at foot end 46 in (117 cm), peak height 42 in (107 cm)

  MSRP

 $345 with Fibraplex carbon fiber poles, $260 with Easton aluminum poles

Performance

The Big Sky International Evolution 2P is a three-season two-person double-wall freestanding tent with two vestibules and two doors. There are lots of other tents out there with the same feature set, like the MSR Hubba Hubba, Sierra Designs Hyperlight, REI Quarter Dome UL, and The North Face Vector 22. However, there’s one BIG difference: the Evolution 2P is a pound (or more) lighter than these tents. The Evolution 2P weighs 3 pounds 6.4 ounces (my measurement, which includes stakes, guylines, and stuff sacks). Put another way, the Evolution 2P at 0.63 ft2/oz with carbon fiber poles, has the most tent area for its weight among these tents.

As the name implies, the Evolution 2P has had some…evolution. Our SpotLite Review published in 2005 was based on Revision A. The current model is Revision C, and Revision D will be out in April 2006. With each revision, the design is tweaked and the tent becomes even more user-friendly.

Design

I will start this review with a photo gallery of the outside of the tent to get you familiar with its design.

Big Sky Evolution 2P Shelter REVIEW - 1
The Evolution 2P uses two sleeved poles in an X pattern (top left). The inner tent is mesh with a silnylon floor. Door openings are large. To create the two vestibules, the tent fly expands out to the sides and stakes to the ground (top right). The entry doors are at the far left, and the window is at the foot end. Each vestibule has a large vent at the top. The lower photos show the foot end (bottom left), and head end (bottom right).

Features and Ease of Use

Overall, the Evolution 2P “gets it right”:

  • All tent components are lightweight – Fibraplex carbon fiber poles, titanium stakes, mesh inner tent, and silnylon floor, fly, and stuff sacks
  • Fast, easy setup – no complex instructions, set it up in minutes
  • Easy entry – large zippered side entry doors in the vestibules and inner tent
  • Plenty of storage options – the vestibules are 9.5 square feet each, enough for a backpack and boots, and there are four large interior mesh pockets
  • Plenty of room – while 32.7 square feet of floor space for two people isn’t huge, the steep tent walls, storage pockets, and vestibules add up to tons of usable space
  • Convenience – two vestibules and doors plus plenty of pockets allow tent mates to remain good friends, and everything is within easy reach
  • Fly only option – the tent can be pitched using only the fly, poles, and optional footprint, (total weight 2 pounds)

Big Sky Evolution 2P Shelter REVIEW - 2
The tent comes in a compression stuff sack (top left) to minimize its packed size. Included are tent, fly, carbon fiber (or optional aluminum) poles, titanium stakes, two guylines, and stuff sacks (top center). Setup is fast and easy, simply insert the poles through the sleeves and connect the ends to grommets (top right). The fly also has grommets that attach to the pole ends. Although 32.7 square feet of floor space isn’t huge, the tent is roomy inside because of its steep walls, readily accessible vestibules, and four large storage pockets. The bottom left and right photos show the head end and foot end of the tent, respectively.

Ventilation

The mesh inner tent allows maximum airflow. There are two large vents at the tops of the vestibules, and the fly is raised off the ground enough to provide good high-low airflow. Most condensation forms on the inside of the fly, but the mesh inner tent can contact the fly in a few places to transfer water, sometimes dripping into the tent.

Big Sky Evolution 2P Shelter REVIEW - 3
The Evolution 2P has good high-low and cross ventilation through two large vents at the tops of the vestibules (left) and a 6-inch gap at the bottom of the fly at both ends (right).

Wind Stability

The fly has four Velcro tabs to anchor it to the pole sleeves. This along with corner attachments, eight stakes, and two guylines are adequate for “normal” conditions. However, for stability in strong winds (and to protect your investment), I strongly recommend using four guylines at 45-degree angles to the corners. For a truly wind stable pitch, twelve stakes and four guylines are required.

With carbon fiber poles, don’t even think of using this tent without four guylines! Even with good staking, it still deflects a lot in strong winds because of the poles’ flexibility. A strong wind from the side will nearly flatten it. If you expect to use this tent in above average wind (more than 30 mph) or snow conditions, I strongly recommend getting the stiffer/stronger (and less expensive) aluminum poles.

For the best of both worlds, you might consider owning both pole sets: a carbon fiber pole set for less severe conditions, and an aluminum pole set to use when you expect snow and/or strong winds.

Storm Protection

The fly completely envelops the tent and has good overlap with the bathtub floor. The floor is silnylon, with a hydrostatic head pressure rating of 1800 mm, which means that water can pass through in places where you apply pressure (like sitting on the floor, or your hip contact area while sleeping). Therefore it’s important to pitch the tent in a well-drained area.

My wife and I weathered numerous showers, rainy nights, and even a light snow in the Evolution 2P and stayed dry and cozy. The silnylon fly stretches when damp or wet, so it’s important to keep the fly tensioned so it doesn’t contact the mesh inner tent.

Big Sky Evolution 2P Shelter REVIEW - 4
The tent can easily withstand a light snow, but the carbon fiber poles are not appropriate for heavy snow loading. If you anticipate using this tent in above average snow and wind conditions, consider getting it with the stiffer/stronger aluminum poles.

Assessment

The ideal application for this tent is three-season camping with a spouse or close friend, or solo hiking for folks that like the comfort, security, wind resistance, bug protection, and privacy of a double wall tent. For two people, ease of use is hard to beat with the Evolution 2P. Each occupant has plenty of interior pocket storage for organization, and dual vestibules and doors go a long way towards keeping tent mates close friends. Vestibules are large enough for boots, a mid-sized backpack, and plenty of other gear. The fly is adjustable in several different positions on each vestibule side, allowing you to fine tune ventilation and views ranging from entirely open sides to fully sealed. Vents at the top of the vestibules vent moisture, and a clear vinyl window brings morning light into the shelter.

This tent is not bombproof by any means. While I would not call it fragile, the Evolution 2P does require special care. There are definite limits to the abrasion and puncture resistance of silnylon and no-see-um mesh. Setting it up on sharp rocks or stubs could puncture the floor, and rough edges or stubs could snag the mesh or fly. This is where heavier tents with more durable floors, like the MSR Hubba Hubba and Sierra Designs Hyperlight will have an advantage.

A final thought: if you get the Evolution 2P with carbon fiber poles, you are paying $85 more to save 4.6 ounces. Carbon fiber poles are subject to breakage at the connections, and require careful use. They are also more flexible, so the tent leans in response to wind gusts. Bottom line, the 7000-series Easton aluminum poles are bomber and cost a lot less, so give them some serious consideration. The 2P with aluminum poles is an excellent value at $260.

What’s Unique

The Evolution 2P is the lightest two-person double-wall freestanding shelter available with two doors and two vestibules. Besides being a lightweight champ, it is exceptionally well designed and user friendly.

Recommendations for Improvement

  • Add guyline loops to each end of the fly and to each vestibule for extra wind anchorage.
  • Offer a guyline kit for use with carbon fiber poles that includes enough guylines and stakes for good wind stability.
  • Offer a heavy-duty version with a more durable floor, aluminum poles, and extra guylines and stakes.

Toilet Paper Free Expeditions

Go wild – leave the TP at home.

Introduction

I am always surprised when I see my camping peers walk into the woods for their privacy time, and they bring along their toilet paper. Good grief, what kind of wilderness experience is that?

Mankind has been pooping in the woods since we climbed down out of the trees, and in historical time, toilet paper (TP) is a pretty recent invention. And, a huge percentage of our comrades on this planet have never even seen TP.

If you’re seeing this on a computer screen, you’re obviously a member of a privileged part of the world population, the part that has bathrooms. We live in a society with toilets and they’re all accompanied by a nice roll of TP. There’s nothing to think about, we do our little duty and wipe and flush. This is a delightful convenience we’ve created. But it’s separated us from what should be a very simple bit of outdoor know-how.

Why are so many campers so dependent on toilet paper? I would have to guess that they either haven’t used anything other than the store bought stuff on a roll or, they’ve had bad luck with their one-and-only time with natural wiping material.

It’s a sad truth, Natural Butt-Wiping is a lost art.

I work as an instructor for an outdoor school, and one of the very liberating skills I teach is using natural “toilet paper” – in quotes on purpose. My job involves spending 30-days at a time in the Wilderness, far away from flushing toilets. My fellow instructors and I teach a very thorough Poo-Poo class on day one, and for the next month the students get a lot of practice. In over a decade at the school, taking many hundreds of students into the mountains, I have never had a student complain, just the opposite – they all feel genuinely empowered!

That said, we do carry a small amount of TP in a plastic bag for emergencies. If a team member gets diarrhea, toilet paper becomes a very comforting tool. We keep the bag closed with a knot, and consider it part of the first aid kit. It’s been extremely rare that we ever untie that knot.

The lightweight benefits? Obviously, not having TP saves 100% of its weight. But beyond that, it’s fabulous to learn something that liberates you from something we “think” we need.

What’s Problematic about Toilet Paper?

  • It’s hard to use TP in the rain.
  • It’s a drag to triple bag and then carry out the used TP.
  • Everybody says, “Oh, I burn my TP.” But, I’ve never had any luck doing this. It’s time consuming, and I can’t get it 100% to ash.
  • I’ve seen folks burn their used TP in a campfire, and what they end up doing is tossing the entire triple bagged plastic package right into the fire. Plastic burns poorly and creates airborne pollution.
  • Too many people (of course, not you) bury their used TP, or worse, they just leave it on the surface. We don’t have to deal with it in the bathroom, and that transfers to people not “dealing” in the backcountry too.

What to Use?

Any camper who wants to make fun of natural TP will sneer and mention pinecones. Yikes, just the image of a pinecone with all those pointy things makes my butt wince. With very few exceptions, pinecones don’t work! But, if you find a batch from a Douglas Fir, you’re good to go! Please know, when you are in the backcountry, you are surrounded by a plentitude of wonderful wiping things. Please see the ratings chart.

- 7

Snow:

If you have snow available, you will have a stupendously clean bunghole! No foolin’ – snow has all the properties that make it the crème de la crème of natural butt wiping. Don’t use gloves, use you bare hand and make a snowball by squeezing. You don’t want a round shape; you want a pointy feature for the business. Snow is the perfect combo of smooth and abrasive, it’s just wet enough for a little extra cleaning power – and, it’s white! The whiteness will allow the wiper to accurately monitor any residue in the area in question. Plus, if you have snow, you usually have a LOT of it. Here’s an insight into my personal wiping habits: I use a LOT of wiping material. I am never satisfied until I know that things are super-duper-clean.

- 1

River Rocks:

Smooth and elegant, these polished beauties are the second best behind snow. Before visiting your private zone, collect a load of these rocks. Not to big, not too small, a little flat, a little pointy and NOT round. Once again, grab a lot of ‘em.

Wooly Lamb’s Ear:

The Northern Rockies has been graced with this gangly weed, and a very similar plant called Mullein (Verbascum thapsus). It’s a rather homely plant with a dull purple flower, but the leaves are like the wings of an angel. They are big, thick, strong, fuzzy and satisfying. This is a pretty common plant, and they grow in clumps. If you are collecting these leaves, please carefully get them from multiple plants, taking just a few leaves from each. Do not strip one of these cute plants of all their leaves just to guarantee yourself a tidy butt. You don’t need to kill anything for hygiene!

- 2

Old Man’s Beard:

Have you ever marveled at that weird electric yellow moss that hangs from the pine trees? This stuff is great. Once again, grab a little bit from multiple trees.

Grass:

A goodly clump of grass makes for a pretty good cleaning tool. For a nice stiff set of bristles, you can fold the grass into a very tidy little brush. Grab the grass from a big zone; avoid stripping an area of all the green stuff.

- 3

Size Matters

For obvious reasons you’ll want to keep your hands away from the contaminants that you’re trying to wipe away. So, whatever you use – make sure it’s big enough to keep your fingers a good distance from the working area.

- 4

Time Required

The humble act of pooping in the woods involves a goodly amount of busy work. If your partner says it’s dump time and then comes back after just a minute, don’t let ‘em put their hand in your bag of gorp! To do a good job requires at least 10 minutes.

Plan Ahead and Prepare

Before the urge becomes a raging alarm, there are a few small things you’ll need to do. The act of collecting the wiping tools may take a little time and some searching. While hiking on the trail, begin filling your pockets with nice round rocks, lots of ‘em. Keep an eye out for the perfect collection of broad leaf plants. Is it a short walk to a small batch of snow from last winter?

Do not – I repeat, DO NOT just squat down and expect to find the perfect wiping material within arms reach. It won’t be there, I know from experience. No need to describe this unpleasant dilemma.

What to Do with the Used Material?

After wiping you’ll need to dispose of the goods. If you’ve dug a deep enough hole, depositing the wipers in there is a great solution. Re-fill the hole, and you’re done. But, often the hole is too full (or barely deep enough) so you’ll have to toss ‘em. Carefully look around for a good place to toss the contaminated post-wipe product. Avoid any place a fellow camper may travel or step, and think about where water will run in the rain. Under a nice bush is a good solution.

Hygiene

Wash your hands when you’re done! Don’t be a slob – fecal contamination is the cause of backcountry NVD! That’s Nausea, Vomiting & Diarrhea!

For the highest degree of success, employ your teammate as a helper. When you come back from your dump-run, tell ‘em that you’ll require their assistance. They’ll dig through the pack and touch the water bottle. They put the soap in your hands and they pour the water. Your contaminated hands touch NOTHING.

- 5

Ryan Jordan wrote an excellent feature/instructional titled Backcountry Hygiene for Ultralight and Long-Distance Hikers.

Hygiene Tools

Purell Alcohol Hand Gel, repackaged in a tiny vial.

Dr. Bronner’s Castile Soap, repackaged in a tiny vial.

Also, I know some folks that take the liquid anti-bacterial hand soap (repackaged in a tiny vial). But, it’s my understanding that the germ killing benefits advertised with these products isn’t any better than a good washing with plain ol’ soap. This might be an okay alternative, but after reading the Dr. Bronner’s label, I’m devoted to the ALL-IN-ONE goodness of the castile soap, and Almond is my favorite.

On a long trip, I’ll include a few WET-ONES SINGLES. These are the individually packaged moist towelettes, with alcohol as the active ingredient. I keep these in the first aid kit, but they are a godsend if there’s a poo-poo accident. Four of these weigh in at 0.5 ounces. Get ‘em at the grocery in the picnic or diaper section.

Clean your Butt!

A fellow backcountry traveler once spoke this little truism, “A clean butt is a happy butt!” Words to live by.

On a long trip, taking a little time to wash your butt is essential to your wilderness experience. This humble act can genuinely make the world a more wonderful place. I’ve taught this valuable skill and my students really enjoy the benefits.

Find a private spot away from the trail and away from any running water. You’ll need at least a liter of water in a bottle and some kind of soap. A nice warm day makes this all the more pleasant. Pant’s off and squat down. The area getting washed will be positioned low, so all the water should run off onto the ground. Dedicate one hand for doing all the clean work (right), and the other for doing all the dirty work (left). The right hand opens the water bottle and squeezes the little soap vial. Just a tiny bit of soap is plenty. The left hand rubs and scrubs. C’mon, get right in there and do a high-quality job!

Here’s a rinse trick. In the squatty pose, you can pour water along your left arm with your right hand, the water will run like a “sluice” and gravity will deliver it down into that work-zone. This rinsing works perfectly. When the washing is done and the soap is rinsed off, the pant’s come up.

Then, wash your hands, and do a good job! Take a full minute with the soap, sing a song, and don’t be lazy. Really rub those hands together, this scrubbing action is essential. And point your fingers downward so gravity will let the water and soap (and those germs too) fall off and onto the ground. If you fingers are pointed up, everything runs down along your arms.

Give a good rinse with non-soapy water. If you have antibacterial alcohol gel, use a little and you’re done.

I do NOT use a hanky or a washcloth for washing anything “private” in the backcountry, it’s just too hard to clean completely.

- 6

Note: This is not an instructional for Leave No Trace pooping skills, insights into this very important subject can be found at www.lnt.org

About the Author

- bio

Mike Clelland! divides his time between illustration work and instructing for the National Outdoor Leadership School, NOLS ( www.nols.edu ). He teaches in Alaska, Canada, the North Cascades and the Rockies. His books as illustrator include LIGHTEN UP! by Don Ladigin and the Allen & Mike’s Really Cool series. Mike is a regular contributor to Climbing magazine. He lives in Driggs Idaho.

Big Sky Revolution 1P Shelter REVIEW

There are lighter and roomier silnylon tents, but this is the lightest freestanding breathable fabric (Epic) solo tent on the market.

Introduction

In a crowded field of lightweight one-person single wall tents, the Big Sky Revolution 1P’s distinction is that it is the lightest freestanding breathable fabric tent available. Notice the adjectives. There are lighter and roomier solo tents available, but they are not made of breathable fabric.

  • The Mandatory Gear Puppy Pile tent at 25.1 ounces is the lightest freestanding solo tent (actually adventure racers like to cram the whole four member team into one tent!), has loads of floor area (36.7 square feet), but it is made of non-breathable silnylon and is a sauna with its minimal ventilation.
  • The Tarptent Virga 2 weighs a couple ounces less, has 77% more floor area, is well ventilated, but is not free standing
  • The Lightitude Award winning Six Moon Designs Lunar Solo provides 57% more floor area and weighs a scant 23 ounces, but it is also made of silnylon and is not freestanding
  • The new Rainbow by Tarptent is neck and neck for the title – a prototype silnylon version weighs 32 ounces, but production versions are promised to weigh 24 ounces, and an Epic version of this free-standing tent is likely.

So, what are the notable features of the Big Sky Revolution 1P that might persuade you to choose it over the others? Read on.

What’s Good

  • Lightest freestanding breathable fabric solo tent
  • Fibraplex carbon fiber poles are very strong for their weight
  • Fast setup with clips attached to external poles
  • Epic fabric and vestibule vent provide good breathability in warm weather
  • Vestibule offers space for a small pack and boots plus good access to entry door
  • Vestibule is easily accessed from outside or inside the tent
  • Large zippered mesh inside door
  • Large mesh gear storage pockets
  • Adequate length and headroom for taller people
  • Good wind stability if you use four angled guylines

What’s Not So Good

  • Zipper on vestibule easily snags on the storm flap, especially when zipping from inside
  • High condensation at cool and cold temperatures
  • Dark blue color makes it dark inside (but color will change to granite gray)

Specifications

  Manufacturer

 Big Sky International

  Year/Model

 2005 Revolution 1P

  Style

 Three-season, single wall, freestanding, breathable fabric, one-person tent with floor and entry vestibule

  Fabrics

 Tent shell is Epic by Nextec, fabric weight is proprietary; entry wall is mesh, tent floor is 30d 1.3 oz/yd2 (44 g/m2) silnylon

  Poles

 Two Fibraplex carbon fiber 143.5 in (3.64 m) long, 7.8 oz (221 g) per pair. Easton aluminum poles weighing 12.8 oz (363 g) are available as a less expensive option

  Features

 Epic breathable fabric, carbon fiber poles, titanium stakes, vestibule, side entry through zippered vestibule door, large mesh entry door, large vent on vestibule, large mesh stow pocket at head end, large mesh “clothes hamper” at foot end, window, compression stuff sack

  Weight Full Package
As supplied by manufacturer with all included items

 2 lb 4.3 oz (1.03 kg) measured weight; manufacturer’s specification 2 lb (0.91 kg

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

 2 lb 2.9 oz (0.99 kg) measured weight

  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

 2 lb 2.8 oz (0.99 kg) measured weight

  Floor Area

 17.5 ft2 (1.63 m2), vestibule area 9.0 ft2 (0.84 m2)

  Area to Backpacking Light Minimum Weight Ratio

 0.5 ft2/oz

  Dimensions

 Length 84 in (213 cm), width at head end 36 in (91 cm), width at foot end 24 in (61 cm), peak height 39 in (99 cm)

  MSRP

 $300 with Fibraplex carbon fiber poles, $225 with Easton aluminum poles

Single Wall Tents and Condensation

Condensation or frost on the inside of a single wall tent is a fact of life and completely agrees with the laws of physics. For an in-depth explanation of condensation processes, read Mariah Walton’s article on Night Time Condensation on Tarp and Tent Fabrics.

Condensation occurs when the temperature of the tent fabric drops below the dew point of the surrounding air. For a breathable fabric tent, the process is as follows:

  • As the air cools at night, the amount of water vapor it can hold decreases
  • Because of nighttime infrared radiation, the tent walls typically cool below the air temperature at night, creating a cold surface
  • Campers inside the tent generate lots of water vapor from exhalations
  • At warmer temperatures (above about 50 F, as long as the outside air is above the dew point), the inside air will hold significantly more water vapor and moisture can be adequately exhausted via tent ventilation and passage through the tent fabric
  • But at cool/cold air temperatures (a situation where the outside air is near or below the dew point), people’s activity inside the tent my provide enough energy to drive moisture through the tent fabric, but after the activity stops and the temperature drops further there is not enough energy (temperature/vapor pressure gradient) to drive moisture vapor through the fabric
  • As warm/moist air reaches the cold tent wall, the dew point is exceeded in the air near the wall, and condensation results
  • When the temperature is below freezing, the result is frost on the inside of the tent

The principle is similar to condensation or frost forming on the inside of your car window, or condensation on a glass of ice water.

Breathable fabric helps, but tent ventilation is the primary mechanism to exhaust moisture from a single wall tent, especially at low temperatures. A tent made of non-breathable fabric (silnylon) is totally dependent on ventilation to exhaust moisture, so serious condensation can occur when ventilation is inadequate and temperatures drop below the dew point. As explained above, at low temperatures, a breathable fabric tent performs about the same as a non-breathable fabric tent, i.e., they both have abundant condensation (depending on the amount of ventilation).

In the case of a double wall tent, the inner tent fabric is usually very porous, so moisture laden air is more likely to pass through rather than condense. If ventilation within the fly is good, the moisture will be whisked away, but if ventilation is restricted, condensation or frost is likely to occur on the inner surface of the tent fly.

Performance

The Big Sky Revolution 1P shelter is designed to be light. The shell is lightweight Epic water-resistant/breathable fabric by Nextec. The bathtub floor is silnylon. The entry wall is mesh. Provided stakes are titanium, and the tent is available with either Easton aluminum poles or Fibraplex carbon fiber poles. The complete package with carbon fiber poles weighs 36.3 ounces (my measurement) and provides 17.5 square feet of floor area plus an entry vestibule with 9 square feet.

Big Sky Revolution 1P Shelter REVIEW - 1
Several views of the Big Sky Revolution 1P tent. The entry side (top left) has a zippered vestibule door and vent, the back (top right) is solid and nearly vertical, the foot end (bottom left) is narrower than the head end and has a window, and the top view (bottom right) shows the use of four angled guylines for a wind-secure pitch.

Setup is quick and easy. The Revolution 1P has two external poles that slip into grommets at the four corners of the tent to create an asymmetrical “X” frame. The tent body attaches to the frame with clips and then is staked at the four corners plus two loops on the vestibule.

Although the Revolution 1P’s 17.5 square feet of floor area is a bit small compared to other solo tents, it has a very large zippered mesh entry door that ties off to one side. This functionally adds the vestibule’s 9 square feet to the tent’s usable space, making the tent seem a lot roomier. The doors in both the vestibule and mesh wall are tall and wide for easy entry and exit. Inside the tent all of the space is usable because of the tent’s steep walls, 84 inches of length, and 39 inches of headroom. I left the mesh door open most of the time, which increased interior roominess and allowed easy access to items in the vestibule.

Big Sky Revolution 1P Shelter REVIEW - 2
The Revolution 1P comes with Fibraplex carbon fiber poles and titanium stakes (top left); less expensive Easton aluminum poles are available. The tent attaches to the external poles with clips (top right). Corners are held taut with “Teton Tensioners” (Center photo). The tent packs small in a provided compressor stuff sack (bottom left). There is one large high vent on the vestibule (bottom right).

One annoyance I encountered was the vestibule zipper’s tendency to snag on the storm flap. It happened most often when I was unzipping from the inside, and caused consternation a couple of times when it snagged in the middle of the night when I was trying to get outside for bladder relief.

The tent I reviewed was a dark blue color, which made it pretty dark inside. However the production tents by the time you read this review will be a light gray and much brighter inside. The newer fabric will be slightly heavier (adding about 1 ounce to tent weight), but it is about 25% stronger.

The tent has an eye-shaped window at the foot end, which provides a fair amount of light. Interior accompaniments include a 20-inch by 6-inch mesh stow pocket at the head end and a large triangular “clothes hamper” in a corner at the foot end. The ceiling has four loops for a clothes line or suspending a tent light.

Big Sky Revolution 1P Shelter REVIEW - 3
The vestibule is roomy enough to hold a medium sized pack and boots without interfering with entry (left). View to the foot of the tent (right top), showing the window and large clothes hamper pocket. View to the head of the tent (bottom right), showing the bathtub floor and ample mesh gear pocket. The mesh entry door is open in all of the photos.

For a wind-stable pitch (which I consider a necessity to protect your investment), the tent should be tautly anchored with six perimeter stakes plus four guylines at 45 degree angles to the corners. Eight 6-inch titanium stakes and two guylines are provided with the tent, but 10 stakes and four guylines are required for a secure pitch. With proper staking, I found the Revolution 1P with carbon fiber poles to be surprisingly stable in a 30 mph wind, and had no problems with the clip attachments. If you anticipate frequent exposure to strong winds, I advise getting the stiffer Easton aluminum poles for more wind stability.

I added the section on single wall tent condensation to this review for a reason. During my testing, mostly in cool and cold weather, I found that the Revolution 1P accumulates a lot of condensation or frost inside. The condensation was enough to form larger droplets and run down the sides of the tent (see photos). Unless there was a good nighttime breeze, I found the condensation hard to avoid at cool and cold temperatures (as explained in the section on condensation).

A big contributor to the condensation problem is the Revolution’s ineffective high-low ventilation. There is a large vent at the top of the vestibule, but the only provision for ground-level air entry is a small gap at the bottom of the vestibule. The entire ventilation system is on the vestibule, and the bottom of the vestibule stakes nearly to the ground, which limits air entry. There is no provision for ventilation in the main tent, other than fabric breathability.

Big Sky Revolution 1P Shelter REVIEW - 4
The Revolution 1P was very prone to inside condensation and frost on cool or cold nights (left photos). One annoyance was the zipper on the vestibule entry door (right photo) had a tendency to snag on the storm flap.

The condensation issue is not unique to the Revolution 1P; when I slept in a borrowed Black Diamond Lighthouse tent (also made of Epic fabric) on a 12 °F night I had abundant frost on the inside tent walls – the same situation as the Revolution 1P. So, my point is that condensation and frost on inside tent walls is a fact of life in single wall tents (including breathable fabric tents at cool/cold temperatures), and the only factors that seem to make much difference are abundant tent ventilation and a good breeze.

In warmer weather, the Epic-shelled Revolution 1P worked with aplomb. On several nights with temperatures in the 50’s and 60’s I had no inside condensation at all. For three-season use in predominantly warm weather conditions, the Revolution 1P will provide very user-friendly shelter with a minimum of condensation issues. When you do get condensation in extended rainy weather, a good solution is to wipe down the inside tent walls with a towel.

I weathered both rain and snow storms in the 1P and found it to be plenty storm worthy. Although the Epic fabric is only water-repellent, it sheds rain very well because of the 1P’s steep walls and tautness. I found that it would eventually wet through in prolonged rain, causing weeping on the inside, which exacerbated the condensation problem. Snow typically stuck to the outside of the tent and required slapping the tent walls to get it to slide off. Although the Revolution 1P will handle a light snow, I don’t recommend it for snow camping. The Big Sky Evolution 1P or 1P EX with aluminum poles would be a better choice. Their double wall construction with silnylon fly will shed snow much better than the Epic fabric single wall Revolution tent.

Big Sky Revolution 1P Shelter REVIEW - 5
I don’t recommend the Revolution 1P for any more than a light snow. The snow does not readily slide off and it flattens the vestibule, so repeated slapping of the tent walls is required during the night to prevent a collapse. Further, the snow seals the bottom of the vestibule, so the tent has no effective high-low ventilation when it is covered with snow.

Overall, I found the Revolution 1P to be very well designed, very user friendly, and very storm worthy and wind stable. It’s also a great value compared to the competition.

What’s Unique

The Big Sky Revolution 1P is the lightest freestanding breathable fabric one-person tent on the market, and that includes a vestibule.

Recommendations for Improvement

The Revolution 1P is well designed, is very user friendly, and provides most of the features a lightweight backpacker would want. Some suggestions:

  • The single vent on the vestibule is not enough to lessen condensation in cool/cold/wet conditions. Some serious high/low vents are needed to increase tent ventilation and exhaust moisture
  • Redesign the zipper and storm flap on the vestibule door so it can be easily zipped and unzipped from the inside

Mountainsmith TrekLight AT 55 Backpack REVIEW

Cutting edge design and materials, loaded with features, user-friendly, load capable, and fits like wearing a vest – but a tad heavy by lightweight standards, and needs a few tweaks here and there.

Introduction

Mountainsmith’s popular MountainLight series is gone and is being replaced with a new TrekLight series that so far consists of the AT 55 and PCT 45/CDT 45. The new packs depart from the familiar beige Dimension Polyant fabric, and are frankly “softer” and more user-friendly. The AT 55 essentially replaces the popular Auspex, but the new pack is so different that they can hardly be compared. A closer comparison is with the new 2006 Osprey Aether 60 which we recently reviewed. How does the new TrekLight AT 55 stack up as Mountainsmith’s new frontrunner lightweight pack, and how does it compare with Osprey’s Aether 60? Read on.

What’s Good

  • X frame is flexible and effectively transfers weight
  • Suspension system easily adjusts for a perfect fit
  • Firm, comfortable shoulder harness and hipbelt
  • Top lid converts to a day pack
  • Eight outside pockets provide plenty of convenient storage
  • Water-resistant zippers operate smoothly
  • Zippered map pocket under top lid
  • Zippered access to main compartment
  • Lightweight yet durable fabrics

What’s Not So Good

  • Heavy by lightweight standards.
  • Zipper on the main compartment opens from the top (it would be more convenient if it opened from the bottom)
  • Inside PU coating on side stretch-woven pockets resists when sliding in gear or water bottles
  • Straps and buckles on the top pocket make conversion to a day pack cumbersome
  • Hipbelt pockets are too small
  • At 4 lbs 3.3 ounces, the AT 55 is heavier than we would like

Specifications

  Manufacturer

 Mountainsmith

  Year/Model

 2006 TrekLight AT55

  Style

 Internal frame, top loading, drawstring closure, floating top pocket

  Volume

 Size LT tested: standard volume 3356 ci (55 L), extended volume 5309 ci (87 L)

  Weight

 4 lb 3.3 oz (1.9 kg) measured weight; manufacturer’s specification Weight: 4 lbs 2 oz (1.91 kg)

  Fabrics

 Main body is 210d PU coated Cordura nylon, bottom and reinforcements are 420d Cordura nylon, pockets are 500d nylon Kodra

  Frame

 Two 0.75 in (1.9 cm) T6 6061 corrugated aluminum stays in an X configuration, secured in Hypalon pockets at the ends

  Features

 Floating top lid with zippered mesh map pocket on the underside, 5-inch extension collar with drawstring closure, internal white PU coating, two side and one top compression straps, zippered access to the main compartment, water-resistant outside zippers, two stretch-woven side pockets, large gusseted stretch-woven front pocket, stretch-woven lower front pocket, two hipbelt pockets (one zippered), two ice axe loops, two side accessory attachments, hydration sleeve with one port, haul loop, load lifters, hipbelt stabilizers, sternum strap

  Volume To Weight Ratio

 49.9 ci/oz size L (based on 3356 ci and a measured weight of 67.3 oz)

  Comfortable Load Carrying Capacity

 35 lb (16 kg) estimated comfortable load for an average person carrying the pack all day

  Carry Load to Pack Weight Ratio

 8.3 (based on 35 lb and a measured weight of 4.21 lb)

  MSRP

 $199 US

Performance

The rather low, 3356 cubic inch (55 L), volume specification for the new Mountainsmith TrekLight AT 55 is deceiving. In reality it has about the same capacity as the old MountainLight Auspex/Chimera packs and the new 2006 Osprey Aether 60. The weights of these packs are equivalent within an ounce or two, so the real considerations are features, load carrying ability, and comfort. I will start with a full description of the AT 55.

While the previous Mountainsmith Auspex was rather utilitarian with its dominant (stiff and very durable) Dimension Polyant fabric and minimal features, the new TrekLight AT 55 is constructed of a variety of fabrics and is loaded with features. The pack body is 210 denier Cordura nylon with a white PU coating on the inside for better visibility, while the bottom is heavier 420 denier Cordura. Stress points are reinforced with Hypalon. Overall, the AT 55 pack fabrics are an excellent balance of lightweight and durability.

Mountainsmith TrekLight AT 55 Backpack REVIEW - 1
Mountainsmith is replacing their popular MountainLight pack series with a new TrekLight series beginning in 2006. The flagship of the new TrekLight series is the AT 55 (left), which is completely different from its predecessor, the MountainLight Auspex (right).

The outside bungee attachment system on the Auspex is replaced by real pockets, lots of them. The pack has a total of eight outside pockets: two stretch-woven side pockets, two stretch-woven front pockets, two hipbelt pockets, and a top lid with a zippered map pocket on the underside. The stretch-woven pockets have ample bellowing and gusseting so they have good capacity even when the pack is stuffed full. I am thankful for the hipbelt pockets, but they are small and will hold only the smallest items.

Mountainsmith TrekLight AT 55 Backpack REVIEW - 2
Want outside pockets? You got ‘em; the AT 55 is loaded, eight in all. There are two large stretch-woven pockets on the frontpanel (left top and bottom), a top lid with a map pocket on the underside (top right), two stretch-woven side pockets (bottom right), and two hipbelt pockets (next photo).

Mountainsmith TrekLight AT 55 Backpack REVIEW - 3
The hipbelt sports two stretchy pockets (center). The one on the right side (left photo) is zippered and has a white lining for extra visibility. The one on the left side (right photo) is an unzippered sleeve. Both pockets are small and accommodate only smaller items.

A nice feature on the TrekLight AT 55 is zippered outside access to the main compartment. A 14.5-inch water-resistant zipper on the right side of the frontpanel extends to about the middle of the pack. However, the zipper opens from the top, which is under the top lid. It would be more convenient for it to open from the bottom.

Mountainsmith TrekLight AT 55 Backpack REVIEW - 4
A water-resistant zipper on the right side (left) provides direct access to the pack’s interior. The AT 55 has 5 compression straps for load volume control (right), four on the sides and one on the top. There are tool loops at the upper side straps. All of the straps are extra long and have Velcro retainers so they can be rolled up.

Another nice feature is a removable top lid that converts to a fanny pack or day pack. The lid quickly detaches from the backpanel with two side-release buckles. With the straps extended, the lid can be worn as a fanny pack or as a shoulder pack. The straps are a little too short for use as a shoulder pack and it’s a struggle to get it on and off. As a fanny pack it would work much better if one buckle was reversed where it attaches to the backpanel, which would make opposite buckles mate. As it is, only diagonal buckles mate.

Mountainsmith TrekLight AT 55 Backpack REVIEW - 5
The top lid converts to a day pack, which can be configured as a shoulder pack (left) that is a bit tight to get on and off, or a fanny pack (right) that is angled because only the diagonal buckles mate.

The TrekLight AT 55’s frame is very different from the former Auspex. The Auspex had two vertical sleeved stays that could be removed and bent to fit the user. The AT 55 also has two flat stays, but they are arranged in an X pattern, with the ends secured in Hypalon sleeves. This arrangement discourages the user from removing the stays and bending them. I found the shape satisfactory as is, and did not feel the need to adjust it.

The AT 55 is available in regular torso and large torso versions (equivalent to size medium or large). To dial in the fit, the pack torso length is adjusted by raising or lowering the hipbelt on a Velcro pad, in combination with adjusting the shoulder strap length.

I found the AT 55’s suspension system to be first class. The backpanel is thermo-molded firm EVA foam with extra padding in the lumbar region. The wide, thick shoulder straps and hipbelt are also firm EVA foam to increase their capability to carry heavy loads. The hipbelt is further reinforced with a thin external polyethylene sheet to increase stiffness and resist distortion.

Mountainsmith TrekLight AT 55 Backpack REVIEW - 6
The AT 55’s shoulder straps, backpanel, and hipbelt (left) are molded double or triple density EVA foam, providing excellent weight dispersion and load-carrying ability. The frame (right) consists of two flat aluminum stays in an X configuration, which provides excellent flexibility at top and bottom and weight transfer to the hips.

On the trail, I found the AT 55 to be very competent. It easily carried 25 to 30 pound loads of lightweight gear with comfort. To see what the AT 55 would do, I loaded the pack with increasingly heavy loads up to 45 pounds, and found that its frame and suspension could handle anything that I could stuff in the pack. The limiting factor is how much weight you can carry without your knees buckling. For me (6 feet, 170 pounds), I found the AT 55 comfortable to carry all day with up to 35 pounds. The pack was capable of transferring all of the weight to my hips, and I tended to carry it without the sternum strap attached.

Assessment

Overall, the TrekLight AT 55 is a well-designed lightweight internal frame backpack capable of carrying a sizeable load with comfort, and is very user-friendly. It quickly became my favorite medium volume internal frame pack. This lightweight pack is loaded with features! I really like the numerous outside pockets that provide plenty of places to organize my gear and make items needed on the trail readily available. Also it readily handles a bear canister; a Bearikade Weekender (9 inches wide x 10.5 inches high) easily slipped in and turned to horizontal at the bottom of the pack.

How does the Mountainsmith TrekLight AT 55 compare with the 2006 Osprey Aether 60? I found the AT 55 to be more user-friendly with more outside storage space, while the Aether 60’s stretch-woven pockets were tight and would not hold very much. On the other hand, the Aether 60’s peripheral frame rods and load lifters allowed the pack to pull in closer to my back and maintain a closer center of gravity. Bottom line, they are both very capable packs, and each has pros and cons, so I recommend trying both before making a decision.

Unfortunately, the AT 55 breaks the 4 pound limit we normally place on packs this size, as does the new Osprey Aether 60. I expect both packs to be very popular, but speaking on behalf of lightweight backpackers, I would like to see pack upgrades without a significant weight increase. Although I really like the improved suspension and features of these packs, I would like the changes to be weight neutral.

What’s Unique

The new TrekLight AT 55 sets a new standard for a medium volume lightweight (not ultralight) internal frame backpack. Its design and materials are cutting edge, it’s very user-friendly, load capable, and fits very well. It can easily become a good friend on a long trail, like the AT.

Recommendations for Improvement

Of course, we’d like to see it be lighter weight. Other than that, specific recommendations for improvements are:

  • Reverse the gender on one of the buckles of the top lid where it attaches to the backpanel. This will provide buckle ends that mate for easier use as a fanny pack
  • Reverse the direction on the zipper providing access to the main compartment, so that it opens from the bottom rather than the top
  • Eliminate the PU coating on the side stretch-woven pockets to save a little weight and allow items to slide in easier
  • Increase the size of the hipbelt pockets
  • Reduce weight by half a pound

Snot Spot Nose Wipes SPOTLITE REVIEW

Got snot? Slip a Snot Spot over your glove or mitten.

Overview

Snot Spot - 1
Backpacking Light Editor, Aubrin Heinrichs, swiping a dripping nose with the Snot Spot mitten model.

Snot Spots are a very simple idea. They are reusable, washable, microfleece additions to gloves or mittens that provide a soft place to wipe your runny nose. Snot Spots fit around your wrist and have an extension to slip your thumb (mitten style) or index finger (glove style) through. The wiping surface area is generous, covering the back of your hand and finger (or thumb) to about the first joint. There is surface area available for wiping even with a trekking pole strap over the back of your hand.

Of course, simple ideas don’t always work in practice – but this one does. I took along a Snot Spot on a three-day snowshoe trip in Yellowstone National Park. My nose usually feels sore after a few days of winter backpacking from the constant wiping – with a tissue if I have one handy and don’t mind de-gloving to grab it or, more typically, with the back of a glove or mitten – but the Snot Spot saved my nose. I had a mitten style Snot Spot along but ended up wearing gloves or nothing on my hands in warmer than expected conditions. I wore the thumb ring over a finger and it worked just fine with mid-weight gloves or barehanded.

The Snot Spot didn’t fall off my glove when I removed the glove and added a little warmth to my bare hand. The Snot Spot picked up a lot of snow when I was pushing in tent stakes so I learned to stow it in a pocket, or remove my finger from it and flip it over and tuck it into my sleeve when I set up camp. Even with a lot of snot wiping, the Snot Spot wasn’t gross after three solid days of use and washed easily in a standard washing machine.

The regular size Snot Spots fit over thin to thick gloves and mittens and the kid size is a good fit for an adult’s bare hand.

Two other Backpacking Light staffers used Snot Spots on the Yellowstone trip and I’ve used one for day hikes in 60-degree desert "winter" conditions. Options we’d like to see:

  • A thinner, less bulky version for warmer weather or personal preference
  • How about just a finger ring?

Features and Specifications

  • Weight: large 0.3 oz (9 g), small 0.2 oz (6 g)
  • Sizes: large mitten type and large glove type fit adult mittens (over thumb) and gloves (over index finger), small fits thin adult or youth/junior gloves and bare hands
  • Fabric: 100% polyester microfleece
  • Colors: black (hides dirt) and alabaster (hides snot)
  • Parent Company (When I Grow Up, Inc.) mission: To donate $1 million to charitable organizations by 2015
  • Website: www.snotspotvail.com
  • Features: reversible, washable, fit on either hand
  • MSRP: $9.95

Snot Spot - 2
Snot Spot glove model (left) and mitten model (right) next to a snow stake for size perspective.

MontBell U.L. Alpine Down Hugger Thermal Sheet Sleeping Bag REVIEW

Summer weight sleeping bag or winter bag liner with great features, but a fairly trim fit.

Introduction

The MontBell U.L. Alpine Down Hugger Thermal Sheet is designed to fit inside another sleeping bag to use as a winter liner, but serves equally well as a summer stand-alone bag in warmer weather. I like this simple bag’s features, baffled down construction and the exceptionally durable-for-the-weight ballistic nylon fabric. My only complaints are a slightly trim fit and that the features add weight. You’ll have to decide if the features are worth the extra weight.

What’s good

  • Baffled construction eliminates cold spots
  • Full length, two way zipper and drawcord neck edge provide ample venting
  • Full length zipper creates a handy foot pocket for hammock use
  • Reversible design allows it to be a right or left zip to correspond to the outer bag’s zipper
  • Fabric is highly durable for its weight

What’s not so good

  • Lack of hood requires a skull cap or balaclava when used as a stand alone bag
  • Slightly heavy for the amount of insulation it provides
  • Girth is fairly snug in the chest

Specifications

  Manufacturer

 MontBell

  Year/Model

 2005 U.L. Alpine Down Hugger Thermal Sheet

  Style

Hoodless down sleeping bag liner or peak-summer (45 °F to 60 °F) ultralight hoodless mummy bag

  Fill Type

 725-fill European goose down, 4.5 oz (128 g) of fill

  Manufacturer Claimed Temperature Rating

 Manufacturer does not specify

  Sizes

 One size; length 70 in (178 cm), shoulder girth 60 in (152 cm), foot girth 38 in (97 cm), fits a person up to 70 in (178 cm) tall

  Loft

 Two-layer loft averages 3 in (7.6 cm)

  Weight

 Measured weight 14.4 oz (408 g); manufacturer’s specification 12.5 oz (354 g)

  Fabrics

 15d Ballistic Airlight nylon, 0.9 oz/yd2 (32 g/m2) with standard DWR treatment

  Features

 Box-construction baffling, full length zipper, drawcord neck edge, hang tabs

  MSRP

 $175

Performance

The MontBell U.L. Alpine Down Hugger Thermal Sheet is a hoodless, mummy style sleeping bag liner. I found it equally usable as a warm weather stand-alone bag. Compared to other liners, this bag is well outfitted with a full length zipper, baffled down construction, and drawcord neck line.

MontBell uses 725 fill-power down (1 ounce of which will fill a volume of 725 cubic inches). Down is a great material for use as a liner bag. In cold weather, condensation will tend to collect on the inside of the outer most layer of fabric where vaporized moisture hits colder temperatures. When using a synthetic outer bag with the down MontBell Thermal Sheet as a liner, moisture will tend to condense on the outside of the synthetic bag with little reduction in loft of the down liner. When used alone in warmer temperatures, condensation is less of a problem.

The MontBell Thermal Sheet can also be used as a top bag either on the ground or in a hammock. Place the zipper on the bottom, with the foot zipped. The neck drawstring remains adjustable thanks to a Velcro closure at the neck. Using the Thermal Sheet as a top bag allows you to wear insulating layers, such as a synthetic jacket, without compressing the loft of those layers.

The Thermal Sheet is designed with uniform loft. I measured the loft in six places across the bag. The MontBell Thermal Sheet has 3 inches of double layer loft, or 1.5 inches of single layer loft. MontBell does not offer a temperature rating for their Thermal Sheet but the amount of loft compares to other bags rated for 50 °F to 60 °F temperatures.

The U.L. Down Thermal Sheet uses baffled construction. Down feathers will shift unless chambers are created to contain the down into confined spaces. Many bags this thin use sewn through construction, where pockets of down are separated by sewing through the bag. Sewn through baffles use less material and are therefore lighter, but heat is lost through the seams creating cold spots. The box construction baffles in the MontBell Thermal Sheet are only 0.5 inch high, preventing direct heat loss, but still reasonably light. With 1.5 inches of single layer loft, the baffle height suggests this bag is overstuffed, a condition that will prevent down from shifting towards the sides of the Thermal Sheet.

The full length YKK #3 non-separating double slider zipper on the Thermal Sheet allows significant venting options. The bag can be vented from the top down, or the bottom up using the lower slider. MontBell’s logo label would suggest the zipper is on the right side. However, the hoodless, symmetrical shape of this bag allows it to be flipped over, placing the zipper on the left, and consequently the MontBell label on the ground. This allows the Thermal Sheet to be used within either a right-zip or left-zip sleeping bag. A drawcord along the neck edge adjusts for ventilation or draft prevention at the neck and shoulders. Lacking a hood, the Thermal Sheet will prompt the use of a skull cap or balaclava in cooler weather.

- 1
The MontBell U.L. Alpine Down Hugger Thermal Sheet is a full-featured sleeping bag liner. It has a full length two-way zipper that closes with Velcro at the top. The top edge adjusts with a drawcord to seal out drafts.

With inside girth measurements of 60″/45″/38″, the MontBell Thermal Sheet is sized fairly typically for an ultralight sleeping bag. As such, using the Thermal Sheet as a liner within another ultralight sleeping bag will likely cause some loft compression in either the outer bag or liner. I gained very little warmth when using the Thermal Sheet as a liner inside a Marmot Hydrogen. The similar snug fit of these two bags kept the MontBell liner from lofting fully. When I used the Thermal Sheet with a top bag (homemade, down with 2.5″ of loft), I had much better results, lowering the top bag’s temperature rating by 10 °F to 15 °F. Other sleeping bags with an accommodating interior volume should see similar results.

I found the fit to be tight in the chest while moving my arms from the closure cordlock to my sides. This condition only presented itself when closing and opening the neck closure and did not affect comfort while sleeping. For reference, I am 5’7″ tall and weigh 155 pounds. For some, the fit may feel confining.

The Ballistic Airlight fabrics used in the construction of the MontBell U.L. Down Thermal Sheet have a high strength to weight ratio. Most of us associate Ballistic nylons with thick, heavy bullet stopping fabrics much more akin to war zones than to ultralight backpacking. It is not the weight of fabric, but the manufacturing process that gives Ballistic nylons their unique characteristics. The nylon fibers are heated and stretched, which aligns the nylon molecules in each fiber. Ballistic nylons are one-and-a-half times more abrasion resistant and have three times more tear strength than heavier nylons (according to MontBell). The fabric weighs 0.9 oz/yd2. MontBell Ballistic Airlight uses hollow core fibers, which are flattened such that they overlay one another like shingles. The resulting fabric is very thin, down proof, and more durable than similar weight fabrics of conventional construction.

Missing from this review (and for all sleeping bag reviews published here, for that matter) will be an assessment of whether or not the sleeping bag performs adequately at temperatures near its manufacturer-reported temperature rating. Click here for the complete Backpacking Light Position Statement on Sleeping Bag Temperature Ratings.

What’s Unique

Baffled construction is rare in a bag this thin and eliminated cold spots. We also liked the use of ballistic nylons to create a strong, down-proof fabric at a respectable weight.

Recommendations for Improvement

Many will enjoy the venting opportunities gained from the full length zipper of the U.L. Alpine Down Hugger Thermal Sheet. Others will prefer a lighter weight. My recommendation is to reduce the zipper to a three-quarter length to shave weight.

Lighter materials could be used in the neck drawcord and cord lock, again to shed some weight.

I would prefer a tad more girth in the chest, though not in the shoulder. The shoulder girth should continue a couple of feet down the bag before tapering to the foot girth.

I liked the baffled construction despite the additional weight it adds. However, I do wonder how well this bag would perform with baffled construction only over the chest and feet, with sewn-through construction over the legs.

Big Agnes Lost Dog 50 Sleeping Bag REVIEW

Generously sized summer synthetic top bag that is on the heavy side of lightweight.

Introduction

The Big Agnes Lost Dog 50 is a synthetic fill sleeping bag that compresses into a tiny package. It is a top bag with insulation only above the sleeper, relying on a sleeping pad to provide insulation underneath. It is the lightest in the Big Agnes range of top bags at 21.2 ounces. The Lost Dog 50 has 0.4 inches of loft and is rated to 50 degrees F. Not a lot of loft for the weight, but it does have some advantages over ultralight sleeping bags.

What’s Good

  • Light weight
  • Compacts remarkably small for a synthetic bag (5 inch diameter x 10 inches long)
  • Good price
  • Seals to a rectangular sleeping pad without gaps at the sides
  • Generously sized – plenty of room to move about
  • Large enough to use as an overbag

What’s Not So Good

  • Only 0.4 inch of loft
  • Only 24% of the total bag weight is insulation
  • Poor seal around the neck

Specifications

  Year/Model

 2005 Big Agnes Lost Dog 50

  Style

 Hoodless synthetic fill top bag

  Fill Type

 Primaloft Sport 1.8 oz/yd2 (60 g/m2)

  Loft

 Measured loft 0.4 in (0.9 cm), all on top of the sleeper

  Manufacturer Claimed Temperature Rating

 50 °F (10 °C)

  Weight

 Measured weight 21.2 oz (600 g); manufacturer’s specification 20 oz (567 g)

  Sizes

 Regular tested; available in Regular – 72/70/66 in (183/178/168 cm) length/shoulder girth/hip girth, and Long – 78/73/69 in (198/185/175 cm) length/shoulder girth/hip girth

  Fabrics

 Shell and liner fabric: nylon microfiber ripstop with water-repellent surface treatment (Big Agnes WRM)

  Features

 6-in (15-cm) baffles sewn through outer shell but not liner, elastic drawcord collar, full length zipper, nylon stuff sack

  MSRP

 $109 Regular, $119 Large

Performance

The Lost Dog 50 is a lightweight summer top bag. It has about the thinnest sleeping bag insulation available; 0.4-inch thick Primaloft Sport. This leads to the odd situation of only 5 ounces of insulation in a bag that weighs a total of 20 ounces. There are other synthetic fill sleeping bags that weigh the same and have more loft on top, and down sleeping bags that weigh the same with five times the top loft. However, in common with other Big Agnes bags, especially with the Classic Series, the Lost Dog 50 has much more room and is constructed of more durable materials than its ultralight competitors. The generous rectangular shape of the Lost Dog 50 provides ample room and comfort even for larger users. It has a full-length zipper, which adds to the usability – and also to the weight.

As a light summer bag the Lost Dog 50 performs satisfactorily but with one annoying problem. Sealing the gap between your neck and the sleeping pad is often difficult in hoodless top bags and the Lost Dog 50 also struggles here. If the drawcord is pulled tight it strangles your neck and doesn’t seal, if it is left loose the gap remains and the drawcord becomes redundant. (A less stiff sleeping pad reduces this effect.) When the temperature dropped a bit and I needed the warmth, the inability to cinch the neck up became a frustration – every time I moved I could feel the warm air pumping out of the bag. For anything but the warmest nights, I needed to wear all the insulated clothes I was carrying to stay warm inside the bag.

Big Agnes Lost Dog 50 Sleeping Bag REVIEW - 1
Pulling the neck drawcord tight puts pressure on your throat and creates a gap for drafts.

Big Agnes Lost Dog 50 Sleeping Bag REVIEW - 2
The Lost Dog 50 seals effectively and securely to a rectangular pad – a feature not as common as it should be in top bags.

While the Lost Dog 50 is large enough to use as an overbag to boost the rating of another bag, the small amount of additional insulation makes it barely worth carrying the extra weight and I found myself looking for something with a bit more loft when I needed additional insulation.

Missing from this review (and for all sleeping bag reviews published here, for that matter) will be an assessment of whether or not the sleeping bag performs adequately at temperatures near its manufacturer-reported temperature rating. Click here for the complete Backpacking Light Position Statement on Sleeping Bag Temperature Ratings.

What’s Unique

The Big Agnes Lost Dog 50 is a synthetic top bag with much more girth and a more durable build, but less loft per weight than other down and synthetic summer bags.

Recommendations for Improvement

Doubling the thickness of the Primaloft insulation would only add 25 percent more weight to the Lost Dog 50 and would make it useful in a much wider range of temperatures. Also, a means of sealing around the neck (such as a draft collar attached to the bag bottom) would greatly improve the performance.