Articles (2020)

Introduction

For families who want to do overnight backpacking trips or groups who need to set up a base camp, a larger tent is usually required. In both cases, this is a common scenario: the group carries their gear to a central location where a camp is established, from which day trips are launched. Tents used for this purpose are selected for their space, features, and comfort. They should be lightweight (if you are the parent you might have the whole thing in your pack), suitable for backpacking, easy to set up and enter/exit, and possess good wind stability, bug, and storm resistance. Tents in this category can also be used for car camping.

The Nemo Petalite is a four-person, three-season, single-wall, five-sided pyramid tent. With the optional nest, the Pentalite converts from a floorless shelter to a fully enclosed, bug-proof shelter with bathtub floor and vestibule, while maintaining a rectangular sleeping area.

A versatile shelter with a unique design, the Pentalite manages to bring something new to the realm of pyramid tent design: a large floorspace and optional full bug protection without a full-height inner bug net. The size, weight savings, and flexibility of this design make it a good candidate for a group backpacking, car camping, or base camp use. So far, so good, right?

Specifications

* Trail weight: Nemo’s published trail weight (they call it minimum weight) includes the body and poles. BPL’s measured trail weight includes the minimum required to pitch the tent: tent body, poles, and five stakes.

Design and Features

The Nemo Pentalite is a five-sided pyramid-style shelter. It requires a minimum of five stakes (one at each corner) and no guylines to setup. Additional stakes and guylines (included) can be used to improve the stability and ventilation.

The use of five sides – rather than the four used in conventional pyramid shelters – has allowed Nemo to add a couple of unique features to the design:

• The shelter can be pitched with the door completely open, effectively making it a three-sided tarp shelter. In pleasant weather, this gives great ventilation and views.
• When used in combination with the inner wedge, one of the corners of the shelter becomes a vestibule, while the remaining space turns into a rectangular shaped sleeping area.

The shelter features an adjustable pole, which enables it to be pitched at varying heights for better ventilation or storm resistance. Three of the five sides have vents which can be guyed out to provide better air flow. Guying out the side vents also has the benefit of additional stability to the tent as well as additional volume by pulling out the sides.

The Wedge, an optional accessory, is another unique design element to this shelter. The Wedge is an insert that fastens into the shelter through a combination of zippers and Velcro, effectively adding full bug protection, a bathtub floor, and a vestibule space. What makes the Wedge unique is that it provides all of these features with minimum additional fabric. Other manufacturers typically design these inserts as a mesh pyramid with slightly smaller dimensions so that they fit neatly under the waterproof shelter. The Wedge fastens in by attaching to the interior of the shelter around the perimeter so that the mesh fabric is not required to go directly to the peak of the shelter all the way around. Another unique design element of the Wedge is that the center pole passes directly through the floor to prevent abrasion.

Performance

The set-up of the Pentalite is quite easy: with the door closed, stake out the five corners, then unzip the door and erect the pole. To improve tent stability, ventilation, and interior space, three more stakes can be used to guy out the side vents. The pitch can be tightened by pulling on the adjustable tie-outs at each stake, tightening the guylines, and by raising or lowering the center pole.

Once the tent is erected, the optional Wedge can be inserted to provide complete bug protection and a bathtub floor. The Wedge can remain in place when erecting or taking down the tent, eliminating that extra step if it is something you will always be using. Inserting the Wedge involves zipping it in around the door and attaching the bathtub floor using Velcro along the remaining three sides.

For four people, the Pentalite is comfortable. In fact, the main sleeping area of the Wedge has enough room for our family of five, the only caveat being the person in the middle has to be our youngest child as the pole prevents a full-sized adult from fitting there. As a family, we found the triangular shaped vestibule to be somewhat limited in its usability due to the shape (you can’t fit much gear in the corners). For three or four adults, the vestibule would be more than adequate.

When sitting up in the tent, headroom is at a premium along the sides. The center two people have great headroom while the people on the sides have the sloped roof of the tent to contend with. At the center of the tent, there is enough room for an adult to stand in a hunched position.

We took the tent out on a spring weekend family backpacking trip in the White Mountians of New Hampshire. The weather dipped into to the high twenties during the night, and fresh snowfall greeted us in the early morning. Although there were no bugs, we decided to use the wedge so that we could see how it worked. Overall, the tent performed well with some minor issues worth noting.

In fair weather, the tent size was quite adequate. It wasn’t until the snow started falling that things began to feel a little cramped. When backpacking with kids, there is a lot of gear, clothes, packs, and shoes to deal with. Usually this stuff ends up spreading around at some point or another; it can be difficult to keep on top of organization. Having a large usable vestibule space really helps out in this regard, especially in inclement conditions. When the snow started to fly, we found the vestibule to be too cramped for anything other than making a big pile. There wasn’t enough room for cooking or organizing gear. Because the door of the tent opens right to the peak, when the door is open the actual protected area of the vestibule is quite small.

When we pitched the tent, we were on a slight slope with our feet lower than our heads. The long side of the bathtub floor (the side with the mesh and zippered door) could not be staked out. The result was that the entire Wedge slid a bit downhill towards our feet. The only thing that kept it from sliding further was the center pole, which seemed to be putting quite a bit of stress on the floor.

Condensation that collected on the tent walls ran down and pooled on the floor.

When it was time to break camp, we removed the Wedge and used the large floorspace as a gear packing area. Everyone stayed warm and dry while we organized our packs. The final step involved a quick exit and takedown of the tent prior to hitting the trail. When used floorless, the full space afforded by the tent is very nice.

Weather resistance was good. The seams are all factory sealed.

Comparisons

Two other pyramid shelters similar in design to the Nemo Pentalite are the Oware 10×10 silnylon pyramid tarp and the GoLite Shangri-La 5.

The Oware 10×10 silnylon pyramid shelter sleeps two to four people and weighs in at 1 pound 10 ounces for the shelter, stuff sack, and some guyline (not including pole or stakes). Adding the optional 6-foot collapsible/adjustable aluminum pole adds another 14 ounces, bringing the total to 2 pounds 8 ounces (without stakes). While Oware does not have an option for an inner tent, they do have an option to add an strip of noseum mesh along the bottom edge of the tent to improve bug protection. The tent has a single door and no high vents, and the seams are not factory sealed. It retails for $249 for the tent, $29 for the pole, and an additional $90 for the bug netting.

The GoLite Shangri-La 5, while slightly smaller in square footage (90 sq ft) than the Oware pyramid and the Nemo Pentalite, is listed as a five-person shelter. Built using GoLite’s SilLite fabric, its stated weight is 2 pounds 14 ounces, including an adjustable aluminum pole and stakes. The shelter features a single door, a high vent, and also has an optional mesh insert (called the nest) for full bug protection. The nest weighs 2 pounds 11 ounces, has a bathtub floor, an extra layer of fabric in the center to minimize pole abrasion, and has one corner chopped off at the door to create a vestibule area. Due to the reduced area of the nest (71 sq ft), and the odd shape, the tent is best suited for no more than four people when using the nest.

Assessment

Nemo has taken the time-tested pyramid design and added a few improvements that actually work: the five-sided shape, the unique side venting, and the optional Wedge are the features that set it apart in an increasingly crowded pyramid market. As a floorless shelter, it is comparable in weight to most other silnylon pyramid tents on the market. As a fully enclosed bug-proof shelter (with the optional Wedge), it is on the lighter end when compared to tents of similar size. The versatility achieved by this combination make it a compelling option for people who are looking for one tent to work in a wide variety of scenarios.

Since it is a single-wall tent and despite the additional ventilation, the Pentalite still suffers from condensation, but nothing outside of what is normally expected from a shelter of this type. With the door fully closed, the restricted perimeter ventilation with the Wedge installed, and four people generating moisture, it performs as well as could be expected. As stated previously, the only real downside in this configuration is the fact that when the condensation runs down the walls, it collects on the bathtub floor.

What’s Good

• The through-the-floor pole design of the wedge is well thought out and protects the floor from excessive abrasion.
• The use of Velcro and zippers for attaching the Wedge eliminates the need for excessive material while still providing complete bug protection. This design saves weight over more traditional inserts.

What’s Not So Good

• Use of the Wedge means no perimeter ventilation along three sides.
• Condensation on the inside of the tent runs down the walls and collects on the floor of the Wedge.
• No tie-out on the front of the Wedge means that it can shift around, stressing the floor fabric around the pole.
• Triangular shape of the vestibule hinders use of all the floorspace.

Recommendations for Improvement

• Add a tie out point at the center front of the wedge to hold it more securely in place.
• The adjustable pole really only needs to be adjustable on one end. Weight could be shaved from the design by removing the adjustability from one of the two ends.

Disclosure: The manufacturer provided this product to the author and/or Backpacking Light at no charge, and it is owned by the author/BPL. The author/Backpacking Light has no obligation to the manufacturer to review this product under the terms of this agreement.

Introduction

These four-section collapsible poles weigh 9 ounces (280 grams) and cost $70. This is similar in weight, but half the cost of the nearest competitor, the Black Diamond Ultra Distance Poles, which received a Recommended rating. Can the CAMP Xenon 4 Poles achieve the same results at half the cost? Or are they, as Will Rietveld asked, too good to be true?

Description

There is nothing revolutionary in the design or construction of the Xenon 4 Poles. They are made of four aluminum sections that pull together with the tug of a cord, just like an avalanche probe. The tip is pressed into one end, and a foam grip and nylon strap are attached to the other end. The 120-cm pole is bright orange and weighs 4.9 ounces (140 grams) per pole. A 135-cm length set is also available; it is blue and weighs 5.3 ounces (150 grams) per pole. The poles are available as of April 2011 at a retail price of $70.

Performance

When I first tried the Xenon 4 Poles, I was more amazed by how flimsy they felt, rather than by their low weight. First off, the pole sections didn’t fit tightly together. Each connection has a bit of play, which can be felt by shaking the pole. Second, the sections are made of very light, thin aluminum that is not stiff. This combination of a flexible shaft and three semi-loose connections means that the pole is not at all rigid. The pole bends under a small amount of pressure that, on any other trekking pole, would go unnoticed.

I wasn’t sure how well the poles would fare on the trail. I double-checked the packaging and read that the poles were designed for light backpacking and sky running (Italian for high-altitude off-trail running). “Here goes nothing,” I thought.

On the second day of testing, Kristin slipped on a patch of slushy snow and the pole snapped under her weight. Her hand was not in the strap and the pole wasn’t caught in any hard spot, like rock or ice. She wasn’t wearing a backpack or running. She was simply walking and slipped.

Before we had a chance to break the other pole in the field, we wanted to put it through BPL’s stiffness test. Unsurprisingly, it did not fare well.

We contacted CAMP, who stated that other users had reported problems with the poles from the first round of production. CAMP supplied us with another set of Xenon 4 Poles to test.

There was no noticeable difference between the old and the new poles. CAMP did not specify what was wrong with the first production run or what they changed in subsequent runs. Kristin and I used the new pair of poles on a number of day hikes. The poles did not break on any hikes, but they also did not feel any stronger than the original set – they still felt alarmingly fragile. For example, I used the poles to help hop over a creek and I nearly fell in as the poles flexed wildly under my weight. I knew how weak these poles were and didn’t want to risk injury by depending on them.

The rest of the poles’ features are a mixed bag. The basket is perfectly sized for hiking and can easily be removed. The wrist strap is unpadded, which saves weight, and is not uncomfortable. Many ultralight backpackers do not use wrist straps, so it is unfortunate that the wrist straps are not removable (unless you fancy a permanent dismemberment by cutting the straps off). I dissected one of the poles after it broke, and found that the wrist strap is held on by a simple zip tie. The foam grip is relatively comfortable, though it is not as easy to hold as other grips that have a more anatomical shape. The grips taper too much towards the bottom half to be very useful. Furthermore, the hole in very top part of the grip, to allow for the plastic cord lock, is uncomfortable to palm.

Comparison

The closest competition, in terms of weight and design, are the Black Diamond Ultra Distance Poles. These three-section collapsible poles, which are also new as of spring 2011, weigh 4.75 ounces (135 g) and retail for $150. They have carbon fiber shafts, interchangeable rubber and carbide tips, left and right-hand specific molded grips, and utilize avalanche connector technology. The poles are available in 100-, 110-, 120-, and 130-cm lengths.

Another attractive option are the Fizan Compact Poles, which are three-section collapsible, adjustable poles that weigh 5.6 ounces (158 g) and costs about $80 for the pair. The Fizan Compact have about the same strength as the Ultra Distance, cost nearly the same as the Xenon 4, and, additionally, offer adjustable length from 58-132 cm, for a weight penalty of only 0.7 ounces (20 g) per pole.

Assessment

CAMP’s website touts that the Xenon 4 Poles are “the lightest trekking poles in the world!” At 5 ounces (140 grams) for the 120 cm length, the poles are not the lightest by any measure. The Black Diamond Ultra Distance poles are collapsible and weigh 4.75 ounces (136 grams). Gossamer Gear Lightrek 4 and Titanium Goat Adjustable Poles, adjustable but not collapsible, are 1.5 ounces (43 grams) lighter. With such a bold claim despite evidence to the contrary, CAMP’s credibility is brought into question. It is therefore unsurprising that the poles did not fare well in our rigorous testing.

The Xenon 4 Poles are essentially four sections of a tent pole with a cord lock and handle at one end and a basket and tip plugged into the other end. They are thin, light, and compact. However, they are very flexible and prone to breaking. As such, they are suitable only for hikers who put very little weight on their poles. For the rest of us, it would be worthwhile to invest in more durable poles, such as the Fizan Compact ($10 more) or Black Diamond Ultra Distance ($80 more).

Specifications and Features

Disclosure: The manufacturer provided this product to the author and/or Backpacking Light at no charge, and it is owned by the author/BPL. The author/Backpacking Light has no obligation to the manufacturer to review this product under the terms of this agreement.

Introduction

For families who want to do overnight backpacking trips or groups who need to set up a base camp, a larger tent is usually required. In both cases, this is a common scenario: the group carries their gear to a central location where a camp is established, from which day trips are launched. Tents used for this purpose are selected for their space, features, and comfort. They should be lightweight (if you are the parent you might have the whole thing in your pack), suitable for backpacking, easy to set up and enter/exit, and possess good wind stability, bug, and storm resistance. Tents in this category can also be used for car camping.

The MSR Twin Brothers is a four- to six-person, single-wall, four-season, double-pole pyramid tent. The largest single-wall shelter in the MSR line, the Twin Brothers boasts a six-foot peak height, steep walls, and 96 square feet of floor space.

A lot of work has gone into the design of this shelter to minimize weight: lightweight fabrics, non-adjustable aluminum poles, lightweight tie-outs, and a single door.

Specifications

*Trail weight: MSR’s published trail weight (they call it minimum weight) includes the tent body and poles. BPL’s measured trail weight includes the minimum required to pitch the tent: tent body, poles, and six stakes.

Design and Features

The Twin Brothers is a two-pole pyramid design. Two-pole pyramid tents allow the tent designer to increase usable floorspace without having to increase center pole height (and subsequent pole thickness/weight). Since this is not a free-standing tent, it requires a minimum of six stakes (one in each corner and one in the center of each side) and no guylines to set up. Additional stakes and guylines can be used to improve the stability and weather resistance.

The poles are fixed in height but offer some adjustment by changing their angle: by angling them inwards (towards the center of the tent), the height can be lowered slightly. The lack of adjustability means that there is no way to pitch the tent higher off of the ground without propping the poles up on a rock or something similar. Hang loops at the peak of the tent make it possible to pitch without using the poles by hanging it from above.

This is a floorless shelter, although an optional footprint is available that clips in along the perimeter to provide a waterproof barrier. The footprint is completely flat (i.e. no bathtub floor).

The tent features a single door at one end, two peak vents, one interior mesh pocket on either side, and snow flaps around the perimeter. All seams are factory sealed.

Performance

The Twin Brothers sets up quickly: stake out the back of the tent with two stakes, stake out the front of the tent with two more stakes, insert the poles, stake out each side, then tighten the pitch by tightening the front two tie-outs. For increased stability in inclement weather, additional stakes and guylines (not included) can be employed.

The optional floor is installed by fastening it around the perimeter using the attached elastic cords. It is most easily done prior to inserting the poles. Once the floor is in place the tent can be erected/taken-down without removing it.

Listed as a four- to six-man tent, our experience has found that it can’t really comfortably hold more than four people despite the high square footage. The shape of the tent makes it difficult to take full advantage of all the protected space. Although long enough to sleep six people laying side-by-side along its length, the width at the ends of the tent are too narrow for a full-sized body. Additionally, sleeping two rows of three people laying side-by-side across its width is impossible due to the center poles. About the only way to fit more than four people would be to use the external hang loops instead of the poles for pitching the tent.

One thing apparent with this tent when compared to others of a similar design is that it is narrow. The narrow design makes for steep side walls which provide a few advantages: good headroom near the sides of the tent, excellent snow-shedding capabilities, and, when pitched with either end facing the wind, great wind stability as well.

Because we couldn’t fit the entire family into the tent at once, usage of the tent was limited to myself and a couple kids at any given time (not ideal for us). The tent was tested in fall and spring conditions, both with and without the optional floor. Based on our tests, the following observations were made:

• The tent is compact, lightweight, easy to carry, and easy to set up.
• It is very stable and storm worthy. It was able to handle the moderate wind and strong downpours we experienced with relative ease. The snow flaps prevent driving rain from getting in, and the seams are all factory sealed.
• In order for the high vents to work properly, air needs to be drawn from elsewhere. There is little ventilation around the perimeter due to the low pitch and snow flaps. In warm, humid conditions, having adequate ventilation meant keeping the door open.
• In order to get adequate bug protection for east coast spring conditions, we had to use lightweight bivy sacks. At 7 ounces each for four people, that additional weight starts to approach the same weight of what an internal mesh tent would likely weigh (MSR currently doesn’t make one).
• The only tie outs that are adjustable are the two on the front, the rest are a fixed length. There were times when we wished we could tighten the pitch by either raising a pole, or by tightening a tie-out, neither of which we could. Sometimes the only way to do it was to pull out and re-set one or more stakes.
• There are no internal hang loops for stringing up a line, or tying up the head area of a lightweight bivy.
• The floor fabric is not reinforced under the poles. If you use the floor a lot, we expect this would be a high wear area.

Comparisons

The only other shelter currently on the market that compares in design to the Twin Brothers is the Mountain Laurel Designs (MLD) Circus Tent. Otherwise, all other large-sized pyramid-style shelters use only a single pole. A couple of years ago the GoLite Shangri-La series included two large double-pole pyramid shelters (six- and eight-person), but those models have since been discontinued.

At 9 ft wide x 16 ft long x 6 ft tall, the Circus Tent features a 135 ft² of protected area at a weight of 3 lbs 8 oz (not including poles). In order to pitch this shelter, your own pole system is required: either by strapping trekking poles together, using skis, paddles, or otherwise. Stated as being large enough to sleep four to eight people, the Circus Tent is one of the largest ultralight shelters available and, according to MLD is “about as large a tent possible with SilNylon that is strong enough in moderately strong wind.” It has two peak vents, interior hang loops and two doors. This tent retails for $495.

Assessment

The design of this tent appears to be best suited for four people in cold conditions or dry climates. The low pitch, snow flaps, limited ventilation, steep sidewalls, and general storm-worthiness make this tent a great candidate for winter use. The lack of adjustable tie outs might be problematic in winter conditions as re-setting the stakes is a more complicated process. Adding additional adjustable line is recommended.

Groups and families looking for a general purpose three- or four-season shelter for backpacking or base camp use may find the Twin Brothers too specialized for their requirements. Ultralight backpackers, skiers, and snowshoers looking for a lightweight fall/winter shelter for more serious backcountry use will probably really like what this has to offer.

What’s Good

• Excellent weather-worthiness
• Quick and easy to set up

What’s Not So Good

• Not wide enough at either end to sleep a full sized adult
• Very little ventilation when door is closed
• Line locks only on front two tie-outs

Recommendations for Improvement

• Adding more line locks on perimeter tie-outs would facilitate tightening the pitch
• Adjustable poles, even as an option, would allow the tent to be pitched higher and therefore improve ventilation in warm/damp conditions

Disclosure: The manufacturer provided this product to the author and/or Backpacking Light at no charge and is owned by the author/BPL. The author/Backpacking Light has no obligation to the manufacturer to review this product under the terms of this agreement.

Editor’s Note:This product is reviewed as part of our three-part State of the Market Report on Lightweight Integrated Canister Fuel Cooking Systems 2011.

Specifications and Features

The Jetboil Flash Cooking System, introduced in spring 2011, is basically an updated version of the original PCS, and my understanding is that it will eventually replace the PCS. Compared to the Zip Cooking System, the Flash is more full-featured and has a larger 1 L cook pot. The additional features are a piezo igniter on the burner and a temperature indicator on the cozy.

According to our weight measurement, the Flash is only slightly lighter than the PCS, not a full ounce (28 g) lighter as the manufacturer specified weights would indicate. With a total weight of 14.7 ounces, the Flash is not lightweight, so it presents the same weight conundrum as the original PCS: we like its efficiency and performance, but we don’t like its weight.

For hikers looking for more cooking capacity, the Flash’s 1 L pot is a plus, but it has the same drawback as the original PCS – although the pot size is 1 L, the manufacturer cautions the user to not fill it more than half full because of the risk of boil-overs. And that caution is real; if you are cooking food in the pot, you need to watch it closely so it doesn’t boil over. It’s a mess if it does. For hikers who will cook a meal in-pot, the Flash will cook for two people, using care as mentioned.

In our performance tests, the Flash Cooking System is in the middle of the pack: average heating rate, excellent fuel efficiency, above average wind resistance, poor cold resistance, and acceptable burner control. Its fuel efficiency is excellent, as with all the Jetboil stoves, but it lacks the superior performance of the more advanced Sol systems. Burner control on the Flash (and Zip) at low settings is not as good as the other Jetboil stoves and the Primus Eta Solo stove. Its main strengths are its fuel efficiency and versatility. The Flash does not have the new Jetboil Thermo-Regulate™ Technology that maintains burner output as the fuel in the canister declines and improves performance at lower temperatures.

Jetboil’s range of available companion cups and accessories, and included pot support make this and other Jetboil stoves the most versatile in the group of stoves we tested. Although the stove’s cook pot is only 1 L, which is suitable for cooking in-pot for two people, larger volume pots are available to fit this stove, and the included pot support allows the burner to be used with conventional cook pots.

One bummer we found is the design is the connection between the cook pot and burner. A small slot on the base of the pot needs to line up exactly with a bead on the burner’s flange, then turned to lock. The design is awkward in use, but a Jetboil user gets used to it. Jetboil is basically stuck with the design in order to have all of their companion cups be backwardly compatible with previous models.

Overall, the Flash is just a flashier PCS, with more graphics on it plus a temperature indicator. Interestingly, its burner control is not as good as the original PCS. Its heating rate is a little faster, but otherwise its performance is pretty much the same as the PCS.

What’s Good

• Solidly constructed and durable
• Excellent fuel efficiency
• Good wind resistance
• Wide range of optional pots and accessories
• Included pot support allows burner to be used with conventional pots

What’s Not So Good

• Too heavy
• Cold resistance not as good as the Jetboil Sol stoves and MSR Reactor
• Burner control is not as good as the Jetboil PCS and Sol stoves
• Pot to burner connection is awkward to use

Disclosure: The manufacturer provided this product to the author and/or Backpacking Light at no charge and is owned by the author/BPL. The author/Backpacking Light has no obligation to the manufacturer to review this product under the terms of this agreement.

Editor’s Note:This product is reviewed as part of our three-part State of the Market Report on Lightweight Integrated Canister Fuel Cooking Systems 2011.

Specifications and Features

When the Jetboil Personal Cooking System was introduced in 2004, we marveled at its innovation and efficiency, but the PCS weighs 15 ounces (425 g), and it’s simply too heavy to be given serious consideration for lightweight backpacking. Finally, seven years later, Jetboil is introducing a lightweight system. The Jetboil Sol Ti Premium Cooking System is Jetboil’s lightest and most technically advanced integrated canister fuel cooking system. It’s also their most expensive, because it has a Titanium cook pot.

Jetboil has made a concerted effort to lighten nearly every component of the Sol Ti system: the cook pot is Titanium, the top lid is a bit lighter, it has a thin neoprene cozy without a heat indicator, the burner unit is lightened up, the cook pot is smaller, and the heat exchanger fins on the bottom are thinner. However, it does have a piezo igniter. Our measured weight of the complete system is 9.8 ounces (278 g). If you are willing to do without the top lid, cozy, and bottom cover the stove can be further lightened to just 7.5 ounces (213 g).

In our performance tests, the Sol Ti Premium Cooking System had the second fastest boil time and heating rate (the MSR Reactor was faster), best fuel efficiency, good wind resistance, excellent cold resistance, and excellent burner control.

The improved performance is partly due to Jetboil’s new Thermo-Regulate™ Technology, which is a pressure regulator incorporated into the burner that maintains a more constant gas pressure to the burner, so burner output is more uniform as the fuel in the canister diminishes. It also significantly improves stove performance in colder temperatures, as verified by our testing.

Jetboil’s range of available companion cups and accessories and included pot support make this and other Jetboil stoves the most versatile in the group of stoves we tested.

One bummer we found is the design of the connection between the cook pot and burner. A small slot on the base of the pot needs to line up exactly with a bead on the burner’s flange, then turn to lock. The design is awkward to use, but a Jetboil user gets used to it. Jetboil apparently stays with the design in order for their companion cups to be backwardly compatible with existing stoves.

Also, note that the heat exchanger fins on the bottom of this stove’s pot are very thin and fairly fragile, more so than on the other Jetboil stoves, so more care is required to avoid damaging them.

What’s Good

• Lightest Jetboil cooking system
• Very fast heating rate
• Excellent fuel efficiency
• Good wind resistance (but benefits from wind protection)
• Excellent cold resistance
• Pressure regulation maintains burner output
• Wide range of optional pots and accessories
• Included pot support allows burner to be used with conventional pots

What’s Not So Good

• Expensive, due to its Titanium pot
• Pot to burner connection is awkward to use

Disclosure: The manufacturer provided this product to the author and/or Backpacking Light at no charge and is owned by the author/BPL. The author/Backpacking Light has no obligation to the manufacturer to review this product under the terms of this agreement.

Editor’s Note:This product is reviewed as part of our three-part State of the Market Report on Lightweight Integrated Canister Fuel Cooking Systems 2011.

Specifications and Features

The Monatauk Gnat is currently the lightest canister fuel stove in the world, with a claimed weight of 1.6 ounces and 1.72 oz (48.8) g measured weight. That’s as light as some alcohol stoves.

The Gnat is constructed of Titanium and Aluminum alloy, has a 2-inch (5-cm) diameter burner head, and three serrated pot supports that swing out to provide a 4-inch (10-cm) footprint. To save weight, the stove does not have a piezo igniter, and also does not have pressure regulation technology.

The Gnat (1.7 ounces/48.8 g) combined with a Backpacking Light Firelite 900 SUL Titanium Cookpot (3.1 ounces/88 g) is just 4.8 ounces (136 g). Add a 4-ounce (113-g) canister of fuel and a lightweight windscreen and you have an extremely lightweight canister fuel cooking system.

The stove produces a dark blue flame that is adjustable down to a fine simmer, and the flame does not fade after being set.

The downside, of course, is wind. The performance of most conventional canister fuel stoves is severely impacted by any amount of wind; the wind simply blows the heat away. Some type of wind protection is warranted, but in doing so, one must be careful not to overheat the fuel canister.

The performance of the Monatauk Gnat depended on the testing conditions: with a moderate flame its heating rate was the slowest in the group, at full throttle it was in the middle of the group of integrated stoves tested. Unprotected in a 5 mph (8 kph) wind the heating rate was extremely slow, and with windscreen protection the heating rate was still quite slow because of turbulence effects. In cold conditions, the Gnat was the fastest of the unregulated stoves. Fuel consumption with a moderate flame in warm/calm conditions (the best conditions) is one-third more than the Jetboil Sol integrated stoves.

In general, a conventional top-mount conventional canister fuel stove, like the Gnat, is relatively inefficient in transferring heat to the contents of a cook pot. Heat is mainly absorbed through the bottom of the pot, so it helps to conserve fuel by using a moderate flame as much as possible. Use of a windscreen helps to route heated gases up the side of the pot to increase heat transfer. Cookpots with heat exchanger fins attached to the bottom are available from Jetboil and Primus that are meant to be used on a conventional canister fuel stove. These pots can increase heat transfer efficiency as much as 50%, but they are much heavier than an ultralight Titanium pot like the one mentioned above.

The bottom line is that although it’s possible to achieve a very lightweight cooking system with the Monatauk Gnat stove, the system only achieves efficient heat transfer in calmer conditions, and even then it’s not nearly as fuel efficient as an integrated stove.

What’s Good

• Well designed and solidly constructed
• Extremely lightweight
• Good fuel efficiency in calm conditions, but not as good as an integrated stove
• Good performance in cold temperatures
• Excellent burner control
• Wide and effective pot support

What’s Not So Good

• Very susceptible to wind; wind protection is essential
• Performance is still reduced by turbulence when protected by a windscreen
• Slower heating rate compared to Jetboil Sol stoves and MSR Reactor

Disclosure: The manufacturer provided this product to the author and/or Backpacking Light at no charge and is owned by the author/BPL. The author/Backpacking Light has no obligation to the manufacturer to review this product under the terms of this agreement.

Editor’s Note:This product is reviewed as part of our three-part State of the Market Report on Lightweight Integrated Canister Fuel Cooking Systems 2011.

Specifications and Features

The Jetboil Sol Advanced Cooking System, introduced in spring 2011, is the same as their top of the line Sol Ti Premium Cooking System, except it has an Aluminum pot instead of a Titanium pot, and the cozy has a heat indicator strip on it. It uses the same burner as the Sol Ti. Opting for the aluminum pot saves you US$30, and its only 2 ounces heavier.

The Sol Cooking Systems are Jetboil’s lightest and most technically advanced integrated canister fuel stoves. Besides being lightened throughout, they incorporate the new Jetboil Thermo-Regulate™ Technology, which is a pressure regulator that maintains burner output as the fuel in the canister diminishes and improves performance in temperatures down to 20 F (-6 C).

Jetboil has made a concerted effort to lighten nearly every component of the Sol Advanced Cooking System: the cook pot is smaller, the top lid is a bit lighter, it has a thin neoprene cozy, and the burner unit is lightened up. It does still have a piezo igniter. The stove can be further lightened by eliminating the top cover, cozy, and bottom cover to reduce the weight to just 9.2 ounces (213 g), which is 1.7 ounces (48 g) more than the stripped Sol Ti Premium Cooking System.

In our performance tests, the Sol Advanced Cooking System was just behind the Sol Ti Premium Cooking System: fast heating rate (only the MSR Reactor and Jetboil Sol Ti were faster), excellent fuel efficiency, good wind resistance, excellent cold resistance, and excellent burner control.

Jetboil’s range of available companion cups and accessories and included pot support make this and other Jetboil stoves the most versatile in the group of stoves we tested. Although the stove’s cook pot is only 0.8 L, which is suitable for cooking in-pot for one person, larger volume pots are available to fit this stove that will cook in-pot for three people, and the included pot support allows the burner to be used with conventional cook pots to cook for even larger groups.

One bummer we found is the design of the connection between the cook pot and burner. A small slot on the base of the pot needs to line up exactly with a bead on the burner’s flange, then turn to lock. The design is awkward to use, but a Jetboil user gets used to it. Jetboil seems to maintain this design in order to have backward compatibility of their accessory pots with existing stoves.

Unlike the Sol Ti, the heat exchanger fins on the bottom of this stove’s pot are thicker and more durable, so this stove can be packed sans the bottom cap without concern for damaging the fins.

Overall, the Sol Advanced Cooking System is a good value, it has all of the features (except the Titanium pot) and most of the performance of the top of the line Sol Premium Cooking System, at a lower cost. It costs a little more than the Jetboil Flash and PCS, but the advanced technology and superior performance are worth the extra cost. The smaller 0.8 L cook pot needn’t be a deterrent; our tests find that this stove will quickly boil all the water you need, and if you want more cooking capacity consider getting Jetboil’s new 1.8 L Sumo Companion Cup.

What’s Good

• The Sol is Jetboil’s lightest, most advanced cooking system
• Less expensive than the Sol Ti (because of its aluminum pot), but has the same features and nearly the same performance
• Excellent heating rate and fuel efficiency, almost as good as the Sol Ti
• Good wind resistance (but benefits from wind protection)
• Excellent cold resistance
• Pressure regulation maintains burner output
• Wide range of optional pots and accessories
• Included pot support allows burner to be used with conventional pots

What’s Not So Good

• Pot to burner connection is awkward to use

Disclosure: The manufacturer provided this product to the author and/or Backpacking Light at no charge and is owned by the author/BPL. The author/Backpacking Light has no obligation to the manufacturer to review this product under the terms of this agreement.

Editor’s Note:This product is reviewed as part of our three-part State of the Market Report on Lightweight Integrated Canister Fuel Cooking Systems 2011.

Specifications and Features

The Primus Eta Solo, introduced in late 2010, is the newest member of their expanding line of fuel efficient and wind resistant heat exchanger stoves. It’s obviously targeted at the Jetboil PCS because of its similar design and size. The burner is in fact identical to the PCS because Jetboil initially obtained their burners from Primus. A few differences are: the Eta Solo’s pot capacity (0.9 L) is slightly smaller, its robust QuickClick locking mechanism holds the pot securely to the burner, the cozy is made of heat-resistant fabric rather than neoprene, there is no temperature indicating strip on the cozy, there is no cap/measuring cup on the bottom of the pot, and Primus includes both a pot support and a hanging system.

In contrast to the locking mechanism on Jetboil systems, Primus’ QuickClick locking mechanism is much more secure, especially if you plan to hang the stove using the included hanging system.

With a measured total weight of 13.7 ounces (388 g), the Eta Solo is 1.2 ounces (34 g) lighter than the Jetboil PCS and an ounce (28 g) lighter than the Flash. But it’s not lightweight; the weight conundrum is still there: we like its convenience and efficiency, but we are reluctant to backpack this much weight.

The 0.9 L cook pot on the Eta Solo will cook in-pot for one or two hikers. For more cooking capacity, Primus does not offer larger heat exchanger accessory pots that attach to the burner base. But they do include pot supports for using the burner with a conventional cook pot or heat exchanger pots designed to fit over a conventional canister fuel stove. The conversion consists of three individual pot supports that slip into holes on the burner, plus a separate plate around the burner to prevent deflected heat from overheating the canister. The Primus pot support system is not as elegant as the one Jetboil supplies, and the individual supports will fall out if the burner is tilted.

In our performance tests, the Eta Solo is in the middle of the pack: a slower heating rate, very good fuel efficiency, very good wind resistance, poor cold resistance, and excellent burner control. Compared to the Jetboil PCS (our benchmark for integrated stoves), the Eta Solo is slightly lighter, has a similar heating rate, slightly lower fuel efficiency, similar wind and cold resistance, lower versatility (larger heat exchanger pots to fit this stove are not available), and similar burner control. Overall, its performance and utility are approximately the same.

The main strengths of the Eta Solo are its sturdy construction, fuel efficiency (almost as good as the Jetboil stoves), excellent burner control, better locking mechanism, and the inclusion of a hanging system. However, it lacks the performance of the next gen Jetboil Sol systems.

What’s Good

• Solidly constructed and durable
• Very good fuel efficiency
• Very good wind resistance
• Excellent burner control
• Included pot support allows burner to be used with conventional pots
• Pot to burner connection is much better than the Jetboil design
• Included hanging system

What’s Not So Good

• Too heavy
• Poor cold resistance
• More expensive than the Jetboil PCS or Flash

Disclosure: The manufacturer provided this product to the author and/or Backpacking Light at no charge and is owned by the author/BPL. The author/Backpacking Light has no obligation to the manufacturer to review this product under the terms of this agreement.

Introduction

For families who want to do overnight backpacking trips or groups who need to set up a base camp, a larger tent is usually required. In both cases, this is a common scenario: the group carries their gear to a central location where a camp is established, from which day trips are launched. Tents used for this purpose are selected for their space, features, and comfort. They should be lightweight (if you are the parent you might have the whole thing in your pack), suitable for backpacking, easy to set up and enter/exit, and possess good wind stability, bug, and storm resistance. Tents in this category can also be used for car camping.

The Hilleberg Nallo 4 GT is a four-person, double-wall, four-season tunnel tent. The largest tent in the Nallo line, the GT designation of this tent means that it features an extended-length vestibule. The extra vestibule length is achieved by adding a third pole to the normal two-pole design of the Nallo series.

Although the extended vestibule and associated third pole add additional weight, the extra space has potential for creative use by families and large groups. On paper, the size and shape of the vestibule could – in a pinch – provide sleeping space for up to two additional people. For families with small children, the large porch area has the potential to be very beneficial for dealing with egress, gear, or cooking in inclement weather. Is the luxury of this additional space worth the extra weight?

Specifications

* Trail weight: Hilleberg’s published trail weight (they call it minimum weight) includes the outer tent, inner tent, and the poles. BPL’s measured trail weight includes the minimum required to pitch the tent: outer tent, inner tent, poles, and four stakes.

Design and Features

The Nallo 4 GT is a three-pole tunnel design. Because it is not free-standing, it requires a minimum of four stakes (two at either end) and no guylines to set up. Additional stakes and guylines (all included) can be used to improve the stability and weather resistance.

The two main components of the tent system are the outer and inner tents:

• Outer tent: The outer tent is fabricated out of a product that Hilleberg refers to as Kerlon 1200, a 30 denier ripstop sil-nylon (1.47 oz/yd², 50 g/m²). External pole sleeves are constructed out of a slightly beefier fabric and are designed to be wide enough to handle two poles each for extreme weather conditions (having the pole sleeves external to the canopy help prevent breaches of the tent wall in cases of pole failure). The outer tent has small loops on the inside, along the seams of the pole sleeves and at the tie-out points, for attaching the inner tent.
• Inner tent: The inner tent is fabricated out of DWR treated 30 denier ripstop nylon (0.94 oz/yd², 35 g/m²) and has a bathtub floor consisting of 70 denier PU coated nylon (2.65 oz/yd² 90 g/m²). At the head end is a large circular zippered door. The interior fabric of the door can be zipped away and rolled down, exposing a lightweight mesh screen for additional ventilation and visibility. At the foot end of the inner tent is a small wedge-shaped arrangement of zippers that expose a mesh vent. The inner tent has elastic cords with plastic tabs that allow it to attach to the outer tent.

Three optional accessories were also tested as part of this review:

• Mesh inner tent: The mesh inner tent is the same size, shape, and design as the regular inner tent except that it is constructed out of lightweight mesh instead of ripstop. This allows for better ventilation in warmer three-season conditions. The difference in weight between the ripstop inner tent and the mesh inner tent is negligible.
• Footprint: The tent footprint is fabricated out of the same fabric as the inner tent floor. It covers the entire tent area, including the vestibule. The footprint can be used as a groundsheet when in floorless mode, or as extra abrasion protection for the inner tent when car camping or otherwise.
• Pole holders: Pole holders are little pockets that attach to the bottom of the inner tent, allowing it to be pitched without the outer tent.

The standard way to pitch the Nallo is with the outer and inner tents attached. Pitching the tent in this fashion creates a robust, bug-proof, four-season, double-walled shelter. The outer tent can be pitched without the inner tent in floorless mode, and the inner tent can be easily added or removed without taking it down. Additionally, the inner tent can be pitched without the outer tent using the pole holders, creating a protected space from bugs while allowing for maximum ventilation. The outer tent cannot be pitched over an already set up inner tent.

Some other features worthy of note:

• The vestibule has a zippered door on either side.
• The front of the vestibule features a large vent that can be adjusted via a zipper.
• The front of the vestibule can be completely rolled back to make a covered porch.
• The pole sleeves are designed such that the poles are all inserted from one side.
• The foot of the tent features an adjustable vent where sections of the tent body can be unzipped and rolled away, allowing air to circulate between the outer and inner tents.

Performance

The basic set-up of the Nallo is relatively easy: stake out the back of the tent using two stakes, insert the three poles into the pole sleeves, then stake out the front using two more stakes. The pitch can be tightened by pulling on the adjustable tie-outs at each stake, and by tightening up the pole sleeves using the adjustable straps at the end of each pole. For additional stormworthiness, a stake can be added at the end of each pole and several guylines can be employed at various points around the tent.

For four people, the Nallo 4 GT is adequate, thanks mostly to the large vestibule. The main sleeping area has just enough room to hold four full-length sleeping pads. It is a perfect size if you have kids, but for four full-sized adults, it would be a little cozy. It would be spacious for three. If you want lots of space and comfort for four adults in this shelter, I would suggest that the fourth person sleep in the vestibule, or use it in floorless mode so that you have lots of room to spread out. For three people and gear, you probably wouldn’t need the GT version.

When sitting up in the inner tent, headroom is at a premium along the sides of the tent. The center two people have decent room for sitting up, but the people on the sides have the sloped roof of the tent to contend with. The situation is much improved when also using the vestibule or when the inner tent is removed, as there is room for everyone to spread out.

We took the tent out on a fall weekend family backpacking trip in the White Mountains of New Hampshire. The weather was cold (dipping to the high teens at night) and windy, with some snow at higher elevations. The tent performed very well. The two-wall design ensured that everyone was warm and comfortable. Although the tent did make lots of noise in the wind, it was nice and stable.

While designed for four people, there was enough space for our family of five; the vestibule was big enough for me to sleep in a lightweight bivy sack while still leaving room for all of our gear as well as space to cook. The large vestibule also made entry/exit a breeze for the kids (who are known to be a little clumsy when dealing with their footwear) making camping in foul weather a very pleasant experience. We also liked having two zippered entry doors as it allowed us to select our entry point based on the weather conditions.

When it was time to break camp, we took down the inner tent and used the large floorspace as a gear packing area. Everyone stayed warm while we got organized. The final step involved a quick exit and takedown of the tent prior to hitting the trail. Weather resistance is superb. The tunnel design is very stable in windy conditions. Because the tent is pitched right to the ground, there is little wind or water that is able to find its way in around the perimeter.

In New England, it is common for backcountry sites to have tent platforms. Pitching shelters that are not self-supporting can be a challenge, especially when they are large. The Nallo was just big enough to set up on a large wooden tent platform. Because it only needed four stakes, set-up was a relatively easy task.

Comparisons

There are few other shelters on the market that are similar in design to this tent at this size. The only one that would be considered equivalent is the Stephenson Warmlite 5R.

The 5R, while similar in overall size to the Nallo, has a few important differences: The inner wall and floor are not removable, and thus the tent cannot be used as a floorless single-wall shelter. There is no separate vestibule space, the floor extends across the entire bottom of the tent. The double layer of fabric only exists in the main body of the tent, not over the ends (although this can be added as an option). The tent has a door at each end. At 5 lbs 10 oz, the Warmlite 5R base price is $850, and only a few ounces lighter than the minimum trail weight of the Nallo.

Assessment

If I were to describe this shelter in one word, it would be versatile. While it isn’t the lightest shelter in the lineup, it isn’t bad at all when you consider all the different ways that it can be used: In four seasons, outer only (single-wall, floorless), outer with ground sheet (single-wall, floored), outer and inner (double-walled), and inner only (screened sleeping area), with a variety of vestibule ventilation and entrance options. The stock weight can be trimmed by using lighter guylines and fine tuning the stakes, using lighter models where appropriate. If Hilleberg were to offer carbon fiber poles as an option, the weight could be reduced even further without losing any functionality.

This tent is seriously engineered. Out of all the tents I have ever used, this one feels like an incredible amount of thought and design went into every detail, with performance and durability being of utmost priority. It is also engineered to withstand virtually any four-season weather most regular people would encounter. This level of design does have a cost (both financially and weight-wise). If you are looking for one shelter to meet all your needs no matter what the climate or the season, for the weight, there are few others out there that can match it.

What’s Good

• The vestibule is real usable space (including sleeping), not just storage space. We found this to be very useful as a family.
• The wide variety of pitching options.
• The ability to erect the both the outer and inner tents simultaneously.
• Full bug protection.
• Usable in four seasons.

What’s Not So Good

• The headroom is limited near the sides of the tent.
• For its square footage, this tent is on the heavy side.
• Although it is listed as a four-person tent, the inner tent would be cramped for four full-sized adults.

Recommendations for Improvement

• If Hilleberg could figure out a way to make it possible to change between the regular vestibule and the GT vestibule while maintaining water-tightness and without additional weight, this tent would be truly stellar in its versatility.
• The weight of the tent could be reduced if an optional carbon fiber pole set were available.

Disclosure: The manufacturer provided this product to the author and/or Backpacking Light at no charge and is owned by the author/BPL. The author/Backpacking Light has no obligation to the manufacturer to review this product under the terms of this agreement.

Editor’s Note:This product is reviewed as part of our three-part State of the Market Report on Lightweight Integrated Canister Fuel Cooking Systems 2011.

Specifications and Features

The Jetboil Zip Cooking System, introduced in spring 2011, is a lighter weight and lower cost alternative to their other systems. It’s basically a smaller and more Spartan version of the original PCS.

The Zip is spare and lacks the high tech components of the new Sol systems. The burner is a little heavier and has a knob on the valve rather than an easier to reach wing, there is no piezo igniter, the cozy is a bit thicker and heavier and doesn’t have a temperature indicator strip, and the 0.8 L aluminum cook pot is the same as the one on the Sol Advanced Cooking System. The Zip does not have the new Jetboil Thermo-Regulate™ Technology that maintains burner output as the fuel in the canister declines.

In our performance tests, the Zip Cooking System was in the middle of the pack: average heating rate, excellent fuel efficiency, below average wind resistance and cold resistance, and acceptable burner control. Its fuel efficiency is excellent, as with all the Jetboil stoves, but it lacks the superior performance of the more advanced Sol systems. Burner control on the Zip (and Flash) at low settings is not as good as the other Jetboil stoves and the Primus Eta Solo stove. Overall, its performance is on par with the original Jetboil PCS, which we are using as a benchmark. Its main attributes are its lighter weight (due to a smaller cook pot) and lower price.

Jetboil’s range of available companion cups and accessories, and included pot support make this and other Jetboil stoves the most versatile in the group of stoves we tested. Although the stove’s cook pot is only 0.8 L, which is suitable for cooking in-pot for one person, larger volume pots are available to fit this stove, and the included pot support allows the burner to be used with conventional cook pots.

One bummer we found is the design of the connection between the cook pot and burner. A small slot on the base of the pot needs to line up exactly with a bead on the burner’s flange, then the pot is turned to lock. The design is awkward to use, but a Jetboil user gets used to it. Jetboil is basically stuck with the design in order to have all of their companion cups be backwardly compatible with previous models.

Overall the Jetboil Zip has average performance equivalent to the PCS, which is quite good, but not as good as the standout Jetboil Sol systems. The main appeal of this system is its lighter weight and lower cost.

What’s Good

• Light weight
• The least expensive Jetboil cooking system
• Excellent fuel efficiency, as with all Jetboil stoves
• Wide range of optional pots and accessories
• Included pot support allows burner to be used with conventional pots

What’s Not So Good

• Wind and cold resistance not as good as the other stoves tested
• Burner control is not as good as other Jetboil stoves
• Pot to burner connection is awkward to use

Disclosure: The manufacturer provided this product to the author and/or Backpacking Light at no charge and is owned by the author/BPL. The author/Backpacking Light has no obligation to the manufacturer to review this product under the terms of this agreement.

Introduction

The Vango Helium Superlite 200, at a claimed 39.5 ounces (1.12 kg), is one of the lightest two-person double-wall tents on the market. The tent is very similar in design to the Vaude Power Lizard UL and Terra Nova Photon/Laser line. Like its European brethren, the Helium Superlite 200 utilizes lightweight fabrics, minimal features, and a hybrid tunnel design to save weight, while still providing good weather protection. However, there are a few significant differences. How does the Vango Helium Superlite 200 perform, and are the unique qualities an advantage over the competition?

Specifications

Design and Features

The Helium Superlite 200 is new to the market and is part of a larger line of similar tents by Vango. The standard Helium line has been around for several years and uses more traditional (read: heavier) fabrics. The 100 and 200 part of the name denotes the tent size (100=1 person, 200=2 person, and so on). The Helium Superlite tents are lighter weight versions of the original line, but the difference is not great. For example, the Helium Superlite 200 is only 5.6 ounces (160 g) lighter than the Helium 200.

The Helium Superlite 200 has one central pre-angled pole that gives the tent structure and steep sidewalls. There is one vertical strut at the foot of the tent, creating more interior space and better airflow. The fly can be set up without the inner, creating a floorless waterproof shelter that weighs 24.7 ounces (701 g). The inner is a bright orange solid nylon with small mesh windows at the foot end and on the door. The inner attaches to the fly via half a dozen plastic clips. The four corners of the bathtub style floor have 2.8-inch tall (7-cm) struts and elastic straps that connect to the fly stakes.

Performance

We tested this tent in a variety of conditions over numerous trips during the winter and spring of 2011. The Rhine Trail of Germany, the Italian Dolomites, and the Norwegian coastal mountains were our testing ground.

Our first backpacking trip was a multi-day affair along the Rhine River, where the temperature dropped to 14 °F (-10 °C) each night. On the first night, we were concerned about warmth so we closed the tent door and closed the fly door but lowered the two-way zipper to help ventilate. In the morning, we woke with frozen condensation on the fly and both sides of the inner tent! For the remainder of the trip, we left at least one of the doors halfway open, trying to balance condensation with heat retention. Our efforts were insufficient for such calm, cold weather, as we experienced bad condensation the entire trip.

From that experience in Germany, we realized that condensation is a serious weak point of the tent. The two mesh panels on the inner tent are too small to allow proper ventilation, with the one at the foot being mostly blocked by the sleeping bag. There is no vent on the fly. Furthermore, the fly comes nearly to ground level, creating a tight seal around the entire tent, effectively blocking any airflow. It does not help to unzip the two-way zip on the door, as zipper flap also blocks airflow. The only options to increase ventilation are to leave one or both doors open. This design flaw is a significant limitation.

The Superlite 200 is small in every way. It is not wide enough to fit two full length Neo Air sleeping pads, which are slightly narrower than standard-width pads. Kristin and I share a down quilt, which means that we need less space to sleep. However, even cuddling under one quilt, we pressed against the edges of the tent at our feet and our heads. There was very little extra space at our head – just enough for a book, water bottle, and headlamp. The pocket is not practical, as it is located next to the door at a point where the fabric does not have structural support. Any item in the pocket pulls down on the tent, further reducing head space. Finally, it is impossible to sit up in the tent as it hangs far too low. In fact, crawling through the front door was so tight that we often inadvertently pushed against the tent as we finagled our way in and out.

Pitching was fairly easy and took about five minutes, once we got the hang of it. First, erect the center pole and slide it into the pole sleeve. Tighten the pole adjuster, located on the opposite side of the door. Stake out the two corners at the head. Then stake out the foot area, with the single strut angled slightly away from the sleeping area. Only five stakes (at 5 grams each) are needed, but two more are provided to secure each end of the main pole.

The Helium Superlite 200 is excellent at protecting against rain, albeit the real-world usefulness is limited by the condensation issue. The highly-rated (5000 mm) waterproofing of the fly is the main aspect where the tent really outshines its peers. The fabric is significantly more waterproof than Cuben Fiber and sil-nylon (including the double-sided coated sil-nylon used on the Vaude Power Lizard UL). Three days of constant downpour in the Dolomites did nothing to penetrate the fly. The stakes are too short to hold really well when it rains continuously – longer stakes would be appreciated. Setting up a tent “as-one” is a very welcomed attribute. The fly is erected with the inner tent hanging beneath it, so that the interior doesn’t get wet. To battle condensation when the wind and rain was not strong, we would partially close the fly door, leaving the rest of the door rolled up and attached to the fly. This way the inner tent would be protected from rain, but the vestibule would still be exposed. A half-open fly door aided with ventilation, but left us vulnerable to changing winds.

The tent is very stable in strong winds due to its hybrid tunnel design, tension band system, and low profile. Nothing we experienced ever made me question the wind stability of the fly. The stability of the tent relies heavily on a good pitch, which is not always possible. The two corners or angles in the main pole improve the usable interior space by making the side walls steeper and decrease the risk of a pole breaking under stress. For tunnel tents, a standard straight pole would need to be curved at a strong angle, the stress of which brings the pole closer to its breaking point. The pre-angled pole of the Superlite 200 reduces that forced curvature. The tension band system was a nice bit of insurance, but we never really needed it as we were able to pitch the tent in line with the wind. Still, it was nice to have, because we have tested other tents that failed when the wind changed directions at night and pounded the tent from the side. This tent never flapped in the wind. As noted before, we actually hoped for wind, as we knew the tent could withstand it and it would reduce condensation.

We tested the tent without the inner, hoping this would offer good wind and rain protection for a mere 24.7 ounces (701 g). There is more space at the head area and better sit-up room in the fly-only mode. However, the short pole at the foot area prohibits sleeping bags/pads from gaining any usable area down there. While we appreciated the extra space without the inner tent, the condensation was exponentially worse. Condensation formed along most of the fly within minutes of us sealing the fly door so we had to leave the door open. Based on our testing, we surmise that there are only two situations when the fly-only setup is practical. First, if there is no need for bug or rain protection, the door can be left open. However, in that case a fly is also not necessary. Second, if there is strong wind, which would help push out moisture and thereby reduce or eliminate internal condensation.

For a tent of this weight class, I would consider the fly and tent floor to be extremely durable. We had no problems with holes in the fabrics or any rain leakage. The inner tent, however, showed signs of wear and tear after the few uses (see photos above). This was disappointing, as I thought maybe Vango used nylon on the inner tent because it is more durable than mesh. Clearly this is not the case. One of the stakes is also slightly bent from use in the rocky terrain of Norway.

Assessment

The Helium Superlite 200 could be a great tent for the right person(s) in the right conditions. There should be a high probability of wind, and a good chance of very strong winds. Rain would be a problem only if it was not accompanied by wind. Livable space should not be a priority. Low pack size and low weight should be necessary. The maximum user height should be 6’0” (1.83 m) and they shouldn’t mind pressing their head and feet against the tent. Obviously, these few parameters really limit the useful range of the Helium Superlite 200.

We appreciate the low weight, small packed size, and robust design. However, for us, it is not worth the compromise when there are so many other tents on the market that weigh the same or less, handle condensation better, and are much more livable. The tent is too small for two average-sized people to use, and not long enough to even feel like a spacious one-person tent. Even though it is more waterproof than its peers, it handles condensation so poorly that the interior still gets wet (when it is not windy). The tent was measured at 2.2 ounces (62 g) heavier than Vango claims. The sloppy seams and fragile fabric of the inner tent make us question the durability, which is especially notable considering the high price. With a few improvements in design, construction, and fabric choice, the tent could be much better. Of course, if Vango made those changes, the tent would also be even more similar to its competitors.

What’s Good

• Low weight for two-person, double-wall tent
• Hybrid Tunnel Design is good at shedding wind
• Fly is highly waterproof
• Fairly quick set-up
• Option to pitch in fly-only mode
• Ability to set up fly and inner tent “as-one” ensures that the interior stays dry during rain
• Side entry protected during rain

What’s Not So Good

• Bad condensation
• Too little usable space
• Small door
• Poor durability of inner tent
• Expensive

Recommendations for Improvement

• Add a high vent
• Increase usable head area with a strut, small pole or some other structural improvement
• Change fabric on inner tent
• Use more mesh on inner tent
• Provide three long stakes for the most critical points (one at the foot and two at the head)

Disclosure: The manufacturer provided this product to the author and/or Backpacking Light at no charge, and it is owned by the author/BPL. The author/Backpacking Light has no obligation to the manufacturer to review this product under the terms of this agreement.

Introduction

We prefer shoes and boots that are all synthetic, no leather. Although leather components in a hiking boot seem to communicate quality and durability to consumers (therefore consumers “demand” leather, according to manufacturers), we see no advantage to leather. It’s heavier, absorbs water, and stiffens and cracks when it dries out. Many manufacturers would argue that modern leathers are treated to avoid these problems, but we much prefer synthetics because they are lightweight and perform better (boot manufacturers, are you listening?).

That’s why the Keen Growler, became our favorite lightweight winter boot. It has a mostly synthetic upper, an outsole that provides good traction, a good fit, and it’s reliably waterproof. Since the Growler is now discontinued, we have been looking for a good replacement, and we found one in the New Balance 1000.

Description

The New Balance 1000, introduced in fall 2010, is a lightly insulated multi-purpose boot. This would include hiking, snowshoeing, snow walking, shoveling snow, après ski, doing winter errands in town; you can even wear them to church if you’re so inclined. They are mid-height plus, so the boot surrounds the ankle and extends up the leg a bit. It’s the same height as the Keen Growler.

Insulation is 200g Primaloft Eco, which is sufficient for cool weather active sports, like hiking, walking, backpacking, and snowshoeing – anywhere extra warmth and traction are desired. It is not meant for really cold conditions like snow camping.

We tested men’s size 12 4E width and women’s 6.5 D width, which weigh 18.9 oz/boot (536 g) and 13.2 oz/boot (374 g) respectively, which are about the same weight as the lightest mid-height hiking boots.

The boots are fairly flexible, which is good for a general-purpose insulated boot, because the foot flexing helps to keep feet warm. A really nice feature of New Balance shoes and boots is that many models are available in extended sizes and widths, including the NB1000. I have wide feet, so I got the boots in a 4E width. The extra width provides plenty of room to wear heavy socks inside the boots for extra warmth. My advice for fitting insulated boots is to size up at least one size and add one increment of width too. Fortunately, New Balance allows you to do that, while other shoe and boot manufacturers don’t.

Other notable features include a D-ring to attach a gaiter hook at the front of the boot, a ridge on the heel to hold a snowshoe strap, soft foam padding and a gusseted tongue around the ankle area to keep snow and debris out, a lugged Vibram outsole for multi-directional traction, and a durable rand around the sides.

Performance

We tested the NB1000 in most of the activities mentioned above. In winter they are handy for doing just about anything outside where extra traction and warmth are needed. In early spring we wore them on an overnight hike to a mountain cabin, where we hiked a total of 18 miles (29 km) in them through wet snow, water, and mud. They stayed dry inside and were very comfortable to wear while hiking all day.

The rigid plastic external heel counter provides support equal to a heavier boot. For me, the heel cup was a little loose with thinner socks, but snug when wearing thicker socks.

While we found the NB1000 to be perfect for winter walking, they are a bit chilly for things like snowshoeing, unless it’s a sunny warmer day, or we are pushing it as an aerobic workout. When snowshoeing with friends, it’s a workout for the person in front breaking trail, but the people plodding behind get cold feet with lightly insulated boots. A good solution is to use heated insoles, like the new rechargeable ThermoSoles, that have a wireless controller. (We will publish a review on those later on.)

New Balance states that the 1000 upper is “water-resistant and seam-sealed to keep feet dry and comfortable.” The boots do not have a waterproof-breathable membrane or bootie. We tested the boots in lots of snow, water, and mud and they did not leak. The aggressive Vibram Icetrek sole grips hardpacked snow very well. The best test of a boot’s waterproofness is to walk several hours in wet snow, which we did with the NB1000 and they stayed dry inside. This is saying a lot, because other boots with OutDry, Gore-Tex, and eVENT membranes that we have tested have wetted through during the same test.

Assessment

The NB1000 weighs about 3 ounces/boot (85 g) less than the Keen Growler, which is evident when we compare the two side by side. The Growler has a more robust construction, with more durable materials and Keen’s traditional pronounced toe cap. The NB1000 reflects New Balance’s running shoe expertise, with a preference for utilizing lightweight materials to attain the same functionality. Overall, we would say that the Growler is built to withstand more rugged use and last longer, while the NB1000 will perform well but will have less longevity. The bottom line for most people is that winter shoes are worn less often and in less rugged conditions than summer hiking boots, so they will last a long time with normal use.

It’s also notable that the original Keen Growler is insulated with 200g Primaloft and has an eVENT bootie. The boots we reviewed had that configuration, and they performed exceptionally well. However, about a year later Keen switched to a proprietary insulation called KeenWarm and a proprietary membrane called KeenDry, which perform well from what we hear. The Growler is also wide in the toebox, equivalent to the NB1000 in a 4E width, so they fit me very well. No matter, the Keen Growler is discontinued, although there may still be some around in retailers’ storage rooms.

Back to the present, we feel the NB1000 is a worthy replacement for the Keen Growler as our favorite lightly insulated winter boot. It has New Balance’s DNA in their selection of lightweight materials combined with design features that maximize functionality and longevity. In other words, they are not overbuilt like the Keen Growler, rather they resemble a rugged trail runner more than a light hiker. And that is the type of lightweight footwear that we prefer. They are also a great value, about the same price as a pair of trail runners.

Specifications

Disclosure: The manufacturer provided this product to the author and/or Backpacking Light at no charge, and it is owned by the author/BPL. The author/Backpacking Light has no obligation to review this product to the manufacturer under the terms of this agreement.