In this final part of the series we assemble the information gleaned from our field testing into an informative discussion with down to earth conclusions. We also present field test data for each individual jacket, comment on its utility, and identify standouts.
You don’t have access to view this content.
Everything about the Sierra portion of the PCT was harder this year. Balls and Sunshine faced record-setting snow, low food, dangerous water crossings, injuries, and a markedly slower pace.
BackpackingLight sponsored a father/daughter team on their PCT thru-hike in the summer of 2011. To get the full skinny on what a dynamic duo they are, read their first installment of adventure, Eleven Years Old on the PCT, then their second, We’re Going to Disneyland!
The snowy Sierra.
You may remember from our last article that we had just completed the first 700 miles of the PCT in the Mojave Desert. Everything about our experience in the Sierra Mountains was so different that you may find yourself checking our names from our last article to verify that this is the same story. The desert was such easy walking and even had ideal sunny-yet-cool weather conditions. We often found ourselves ahead of schedule and had extra time and energy each day to enjoy other forms of recreation in town or camp. You are about to hear a very kind of different tale from the mighty and wild Sierra Mountains.
I hiked the entire Sierra in 2010. Many were referring to that season as one of the highest snow years ever in the Sierra along the PCT. Everyone was telling us that no thru-hiker had ever seen more difficult trail conditions. I remember struggling through snow and high water 5 to 6 miles either side of the high passes. Once through the difficulties, I was able to enjoy the serenity these mountains offered. I had never before seen such rare and vast beauty! I was amazed by the 14,000-foot peaks, the endless alpine lakes, and the exotic trees. I told everyone later that the Sierra was the best but most difficult part of my hike. I looked forward to returning this year to share it with Sunshine. Stories of high snow were already swirling around Kick Off, and I remember telling Sunshine not to worry because I had heard it all before. I referred to it as “fear mongering.” Shortly after leaving Kennedy Meadows, we began running into snow in unbelievably low elevations. I tried referencing the previous year’s conditions so I had a comparison. When I realized that we were seeing snow 50 miles sooner and 2,000 feet in elevation lower, I knew this would not be easy. Please keep in mind as you read these accounts that Sunshine was never placed in any danger that we could not control. Nor did we take any undue risks with her safety. I have been mountaineering and long distance hiking for many years and am competent in all these skills. After hiking the Sierra last year, I knew that with some care and attention to detail, I could safely guide my daughter through. Also, even though I mention great hardship, we had a blast the entire time.
Hunkering down after a snow storm.
We had already been on the trail for six weeks and had our food consumption per day dialed in really well. We had been walking 27-plus-mile days in the desert, but knew that we couldn’t expect that here. On our first real difficult section in the snow, we planned for four days of hiking approximately 17 miles a day, then added a day of extra food. We’re good right? Nope! It took six days, and our appetites almost doubled! I knew that Sunshine was in a critical growth spurt and would not deny her calories, so I began rationing my food portions. I let her eat her fill at every meal, and I would eat whatever was left over. Other hikers saw our situation and wanted to help, but frankly, they were all experiencing the same problem. There was a ranch three miles off trail that we had sent a package to, but we had been told more recently that they weren’t open yet due to snow, so we didn’t figure them into our food planning. However, at the end of day four and watching our food quickly dwindling, it was worth the risk of adding miles for the chance of more sustenance.
The ranch was not open yet, but a few employees were there preparing the facilities for the following week. More importantly, our resupply package was there! We walked half a mile away before stopping to rip into a bag of Cheetos and devour several energy bars. We then camped two miles further down trail and ate a lavish double meal. Some how, we had sent ourselves so much food that we were able to share an extra meal with our friend Pellet, who was also running low. Once we arrived to Vermillion Valley Resort we took a well deserved day off, which consisted mostly of stuffing our bellies. Now we had a new problem which followed us all the way to Canada: over packing food! We were not going to run low again, no matter the cost in pack weight. We added a fourth meal of the day… second lunch. Despite my best efforts to keep my weight up, I lost almost 20 pounds in central California. Sunshine, however, gained 4 pounds there.
Sunset in the Sierra Mountains.
We later learned that the Sierra had 300% the snow pack of an average year. What’s this mean? Well to us it meant almost 500 miles of continuous snow. We saw very little snow-free trail in the Sierra, and what wasn’t covered in snow became a raging river from the melt. Our bodies were confused because the ambient temperatures were in the 90s, but we were in snow all day and freezing water up to my chest several times a day. It was like the top half of your body was in summer, but the lower half was in the dead of winter in Antarctica.
Example of what we saw every day.
The snow seemed like an insurmountable obstacle. No matter how hard we tried or how long we walked, we just couldn’t put in the miles we needed to stay on schedule. Remember, Sunshine was to start middle school in September. A 14-mile day became something to be proud of, and we often hung our heads in defeat after 10 to 12 miles. We began bringing absurd amounts of food instead of projecting progress. We didn’t set daily milage goals any more because it was too demoralizing to constantly fail. Instead, we chose to take each day one at a time and stopped hiking ridiculous hours. We pushed our goal to reach Canada to the backs of our minds and focused only on getting out of the snow and water. When we were above the tree line, we had to contend with sun cups. Sun cups are small depressions in the snow caused by uneven melting. They looked like an endless sea of footprints, but were too small for our feet to fit into, so our hips, ankles, and knees twisted and turned every which way with every exhausting step. Inside the forest, we had to climb steep irregular snow drifts up to 8 feet tall. These drifts were frozen solid, so we did a lot of slipping and sliding, expending outrageous amounts of energy. We did wear Yaktrax for traction, but will switch to MICROSpikes in the future. I believe the dependability will be worth the extra 6 ounces. The Yaktrax would slip off our shoes and break far too often.
Sunshine climbing Mather Pass.
Sunshine absolutely loved her 6-ounce carbon fiber ULA Ice Axe. I found having an ice axe blade on my trekking pole handle with the Black Diamond Whippet compensated for my clumsiness. We used these tools very often. We had both obtained Mt. Whitney climbing permits, since it was only eight miles off the PCT. However, Mt. Whitney was early in our snowy section, so Sunshine had very little self-arresting experience, and she was reluctant to trust her axe earlier that day on an icy descent. I knew she wasn’t ready for Whitney and told our small group that we wouldn’t make the climb. After realizing how much snow we had ahead of us, I wasn’t too excited to climb the tallest mountain in the Lower 48 any way.
Free Range announced at base camp that she wouldn’t be climbing the mountain either. This left only Goose from Missouri, who really wanted to do it. I knew that if I didn’t climb, Goose would miss his chance as well. I didn’t feel comfortable making that decision for him, so Free Range volunteered to watch Sunshine at camp while we climbed. It was a perfect sunny day and the mountain was still buried in snow, so we ice climbed and kicked in steps all the way to the summit. This is where No Knees was given his name the day before, after falling and sliding on his belly (and knees) several hundred feet, grinding all the skin off both knees before self-arresting.
The snow became so vast and endless that we really couldn’t enjoy the spectacular views. I remembered amazing places from the year before that I wanted to share with my daughter, only to realize five miles after passing it that I hadn’t recognized a major landmark because it was buried under snow. Navigation became so tricky that much of my view in the Sierra was that of my hand holding the GPS receiver. Many times, if I looked away for more than a few minutes we would spend great amounts of energy getting back on track (usually climbing uphill). Actually we were very blessed to have the GPS. I didn’t need one in 2010, so I didn’t bring one this time either. Beacon asked me if I wanted to borrow his extra GPS for the rest of the trip. Who brings an extra GPS on a 2,652 mile hike? Beacon, that’s who, and I sure am glad he did! Thank you, Beacon!
I carried a small length of cord to tie us together while glissading and crossing steams. After glissading together many times, Sunshine started doing it on her own. On one occasion, she slid away from me too quickly. As my 11-year-old sped away from me down the mountain, all I could do was yell “Plant your axe!” She instinctively rolled onto her belly and self-arrested like a pro. I was so proud of her. She later said that she did not hear me yelling. She really got good at glissading, and it became the highlight of each day for her.
Thanks to Thumper for the video!
On the positive side, we did cross over many streams on snow bridges instead of through the water. However, the water that we did cross was much higher and faster than usual.
We left VVR on the afternoon ferry. We planned to hike until there was one hour of daylight left, but the water crossings were becoming more frequent and tumultuous. After only four miles, we crossed a stream just below a sizable waterfall. Not only was the water past my waist, but I was getting drenched by water blowing off the falls. Like many crossings, I crossed five times in order to dump my pack, go back for Sunshine’s pack, then return for her. This gave me opportunity to take different routes through the water, finding the best crossing for her. However, it also put me in freezing cold conditions for an extended amount of time.
Balls and Sunshine, stream crossings as a team.
Sunshine crossing a creek.
Sunshine wore her water resistant BackpackingLight Cocoon Hoody, which amazingly kept her upper body dry and warm. I didn’t wear a coat at all and soon found myself shivering uncontrollably. I tried raising my body core temperature by continuing to hike, but 20 minutes later I realized that it was actually dropping quickly, and I was losing function in my arms and legs. We agreed that the best thing to do now was to set up camp and get into my sleeping bag and dry clothes. This warmed me up quickly, and we all rested easy that night. It rained the next night, which then turned to snow by morning. Wired was with us, and we decided to hunker down in our tents for 24 hours to let the storm pass. Sunshine and Wired had a great time playing cards while I slept most of the day away.
Wired and Sunshine playing cards during a storm
Arriving at Tuolumne Meadows in Yosemite National Park marked a huge milestone. We were done with the highest and most difficult passes. We were starting to see some breaks in the snow, which created a new problem: higher and faster water. Two hikers had drowned in one of the upcoming creeks, and two highly respected and experienced thru-hikers turned back on another, deeming it impassable just days before our arrival. We called my beautiful and wonderful wife, Teresa, from our town stop before Tuolumne, asking her to meet us for an extended break. We took four days off, hoping the waters would crest and even recede. I suggested to Sunshine that we should drive 200 miles north and walk south back to where we left off, giving the water two more weeks to go down. She wouldn’t hear of it. She indefatigably said, “I’m not flip-flopping, Dad!”
Teresa and Annika came to visit us at Tuolomne Meadows.
The whole family relaxing together at Yosemite Falls on the 4th of July.
We had a great time seeing the sights as a family in Yosemite. Spending time with her mother and sister was just what Sunshine needed. It also gave us time to put together a great team of hikers to ensure each others’ safety through the toughest section yet. Wired, the voice of reason. Bottle Rocket, the ER nurse. Thumper, the mountaineer. Snow Blind, the motor to keep us moving. Little Jimmy, the Eagle Scout. Sunshine, the reason to be cautious. Me, the navigator.
We took our time, choosing the best routes. We seemed to always take many extended breaks getting lost in deep conversation. Everyone had a great sense of humor and morale was high. We all got along well and had a great time in camp each night before crashing into the deepest sleep of our lives. It turns out that most of the “death defying” crossings weren’t all that bad. We did do some swimming, but even that became fun in a positive group setting. We knew we were all doing something amazing and were proud of our decision to continue. On many occasions, we would have to strip the wet clothes off, down to our skivvies, and sun ourselves on hot granite boulders for up to an hour after particularly difficult high river crossings just to regain strength and warmth.
Thanks to Thumper for the video!
Considering the potential, we actually had very few brushes with injury. The most common owie was scraping our knees, knuckles, and elbows on the hard crusty snow. I scraped up my shins pretty good once crossing a rocky stream. I also had a cut on my leg that got pretty infected from the dirt and grime of northern California. I had to lance, clean, and treat it twice a day.
Sunshine contracted a strange and painful rash on her feet. She had just switched to wool socks, so we thought she might be allergic. We bought new synthetic socks on our next stop, but the rash came back. We then deducted that she must be allergic to the factory detergent since we didn’t pre-wash the socks before wearing them for the first time. We washed the socks at the next town and the problem was finally solved.
Sunshine’s mysterious foot rash.
I noticed early on that when she fell or scraped herself up, nothing fixed it faster than a watermelon Starburst. She would go from crying to smiling and giggling before the one piece of candy was gone. One day while glaciating standing up, she took a bad tumble twisting her leg and then landing on a rock with her knee. It looked bad, she was crying and writhing about in pain. Noah rushed over to help, but didn’t know where to start. I worked my way up the steep hill saying that I had her medication. Noah looked at me curiously as I handed her a Starburst. The first piece calmed her down, but she still had tears in her eyes. I gave her a second one, and she began to smile. After finishing the candy, she stood up, brushed herself off and resumed walking like nothing ever happened. We later referred to more serious injuries as “two Starburst injuries.”
Once we reached Lake Tahoe, we knew that the end of our snow was in sight. We still had 100 miles of snow, but it was becoming less frequent and easier walking. Most importantly, we were able to bump up our milage to 20-mile days there. This called for a celebration… hiker trash style! You have no idea how it thrills the heart of a mother to hear her 11-year-old daughter exclaim over the phone, “Guess what Mom? We’re doing a Reno run tomorrow!” We rented a car (Snow Blind almost got kicked out of the rental company for looking homeless), piled in as many smelly hikers as we could and headed for the closest casino. We gorged ourselves at an all-you-can-eat buffet. Seriously, just because you can eat everything there doesn’t mean you should. Sunshine and I played video games in the arcade while the others tried their hand at poker. Snow Blind got kicked out of there too because he was under age, but I still think it had to do with looking homeless. The next day we all went to the Olive Garden (they didn’t seem to mind the homeless look there) and REI.
Sunshine and Butterfly on a trail ride at Drakesbad.
Yea! We made to the California/Oregon border!
As we entered northern California, the trail became more clear, and we picked up our pace and milage. Soon, we were in this wonderful pocket of Trail Angels every few days. Mike let eight of us stay at his place (with a hot tub) for the weekend while he was away climbing in Yosemite. It was great seeing the new, thinner, and rejuvenated Bill at Pooh’s Corner. Bill and Margaret of The Red Moose Inn at Sierra City are so generous to the hikers. During hiking season, they close their business to everyone but hikers and then only charge for the cost of food. Sunshine had a great time playing with the kids at Honker Pass. We loved getting to know Piper’s Mom and Lowell in Chester. I can never say enough wonderful things about Ed and Billie at Drakesbad Ranch in Lassen National Park. Not only do they provide hikers with free showers and use of their hot spring pool, but they only charge hikers half price at their five-star restaurant. Ed also made arrangements for Sunshine and her sister to take an afternoon trail ride on horse back. They absolutely loved it. We later stayed the night with Joanne by Mt. Shasta for a badly needed break.
The mosquitoes really came out after we got out of the snow.
Once the trail was completely clear, there was no stopping us. Teresa and Annika drove down and began meeting us at jeep roads when they could, supporting us so we only had to carry food (such as glorious hoagie sandwiches and homemade cookies from Grandma Schuck) and water for the day. We quickly resumed high 20s and low 30-mile days. We regained our strength and vigor with the help of “home” cooked meals and family support many nights. We reached the PCT mid point by day 90. This seemed momentous and ominous at the same time. It took us 90 days to hike half way to Canada, but we only had 60 days left to finish. Could we do it? I guess you’ll have to read my final article next month about Oregon and Washington.
Balls and Sunshine at the PCT midpoint.
Yea! Real trail at last!
Thank you for following along on my journal and especially for your words of kindness and moral support. This really helped us continue on and was an invaluable source of our success.
In the Sierra, there seemed to be endless amounts of snow. I’m not saying it was boring. It was a lot of fun. It was basically a HUGE roller coaster. I love my ice axe. It is now my trophy. It is super light, cool looking; and ONLY MINE. Who doesn’t want that? We climbed the tallest point on the PCT, Forester Pass (13,200 ft), in the last hour of daylight. Because it was almost dark when we summited, we cowboy camped on the top of the pass. Every star in the sky was out. There were a ton more than you would see in the city. You could count them starting now and you wouldn’t be alive by the time they were all counted. The sky was basically one huge star. People usually ask if it was cold, and I tell them I don’t know, I was in my warm sleeping bag. We never got to swim because the lakes were iced over, but it was 90 degrees out. It was confusing.
Sunshine arriving at Forester Pass just before dark. Cowboy camping at the highest point of the PCT.
At Kennedy Meadows, we stayed in a trailer. At VVR we had a tab, so I asked Dad if I could get things for myself. I enjoyed having a lot of root beer. We hiked with Wired for a long time, but I wish it was longer. She is nice and pretty. Dad and I both enjoy her company. The good thing is she lives close to us so we can hike together during the year. Unlike some people, her and I have the same pace. Some people did not want to hike with us because they thought I would hike too slowly, but we ended up passing them later.
Mom visited us a couple times in the Sierra, for several days. Coming out of Tuolumne Meadows, we were hiking with Thumper, Snow Blind, Wired, Bottle Rocket, and Little Jimmy. We did many stream crossings with them. It was a great group. There was only one problem: our breaks got longer than we wanted because we all started talking instead of walking. We once crossed a knee deep stream and got to the other side and just stood there talking for 20 minutes without realizing we had stopped. Wired was the only one who noticed it. She just laughed and said we were funny and suggested we start walking to get to camp early. She was also the one getting everyone going in the mornings.
Sunshine doing homework in the tent.
Snow Blind had a jar of Skippy peanut butter in his outside pack pocket. On a stream crossing he (Skippy) fell out and floated downstream as we all yelled “Skippy! Skippy!” Snow Blind and I made a memorial to Skippy at camp that night. The rest of the week we talked about him as it he were a close friend. We would say “This is for Skippy,” or “Skippy would have wanted it that way.”
The Sierra was the most difficult thing I’ve ever done, but it feels awesome to have accomplished it on such a hard year.
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?
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?
| Year/Manufacturer/Model | 2011 Nemo Pentalite |
| Style | Three-season, four-person, five-sided, pyramid-style, single-wall, non-freestanding shelter, with a single door |
| Included | Tent body, pole, stakes, two guylines, pole storage bag, stake storage bag, tent storage bag |
| Fabrics | Tent body: 30 denier PU coated ripstop nylon 1.8 oz/yd2 (61Â g/m2) Wedge (floor): 30 denier PU coated nylon 2.98 oz/yd2 (101Â g/m2) and noseum mesh 1.0 oz/yd2 (34Â g/m2) |
| Poles and Stakes | One 19-mm diameter aluminum pole and eight 6.25-in (16-cm) aluminum DAC V stakes |
| Floor Dimensions | 130 in (330 cm) wide, 146 in (371 cm) long, each side of pyramid 100 in (254 cm) wide, 72 in (180 cm) high at peak |
| Features | Five-sided design, large front door that can be rolled back to create three-sided shelter, side vents on three sides, removable nest provides full bug protection and bathtub floor, roll-top dry bag stuffsack |
| Packed Size | 12 x 7 in (48 x 23 cm) for tent body in the stuffsack, folded pole measures 19 in long |
| Total Weight | Specified: 4 lb 15 oz (2.2 kg) Measured: 4 lb 10 oz (2.1 kg) |
| Trail Weight * | Specified: 3 lb 5 oz (1.5 kg) Measured: 4 lb 4 oz (1.9 kg) |
| Protected Area | Floor Area: 77 ft2 (7.1 m2) Vestibule Area: 20 ft2 (1.9 m2) Total Protected Area: 97 ft2 (9 m2) |
| Protected Area/Trail Weight Ratio | 15.6 ft2/lb (3.5 m2/kg) |
| MSRP | $370 |
| Options | Wedge (bathtub floor and bug mesh) $140 Footprint $50 Pawprint (fabric tent liner to protect floor of tent from the inside) $6 |
* 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.
What’s included.
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 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.
Left: Peak vent, from the outside. Right: Peak vent from the inside, can be zipped closed.
Left: Side vent, from the outside, doubles as a tie out for the guylines. Side vents can be pulled closed. Right: Side vent from the inside.
The pole-through-the-floor design prevents abrasion.
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.
Left: The front mesh portion of the Wedge is zipped into the underside of the tent body. Right: The sides of the Wedge’s bathtub floor Velcro and snap to the bottom perimeter of the tent.
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.
Left: Designed for four but wide enough for five sleeping pads. If you do this, the middle person had better be short due to the center pole. Right: Limited headroom near the sides, even for kids.
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.
Left: The triangular shape of the vestibule has limited protected space, especially with the door open. Right: With the Wedge removed, sorting out gear and getting ready to pack up on a snowy day.
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.
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
What’s Not So Good
Recommendations for Improvement
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.
These highly anticipated poles made quite a splash at 2011 ORWM. The Xenon 4 Trekking Poles are light, compact, easy to use and reasonably priced. How did they stand up to testing?
The Xenon 4 Poles easily stow away alongside a water bottle in this GoLite Jam2.
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?
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.
Like an avalanche probe, the Dyneema cord and aluminum ferrules are the basis for joining the pole sections (left). A tug on the cord loop, located on top of the grip, eliminates cord slack and pulls the four sections together (center). Pulling the knot over the notch in the plastic cap locks the cord in place, forming a rigid pole (right).
The hand grip is very basic: foam with an unpadded strap and a loop of Dyneema cord (left). The adjustable strap and 8-inch (20-cm) grip allow adjustments in hand placement, which is necessary for a fixed-length pole (center). The foam grips have two small bulges on the top half, which helps the hand maintain a strong grip, and the bottom half has a slight taper (right).
The 50-mm baskets are easily removed with a few twists (left). Tungsten carbide tips are standard (right).
Kristin and I tested the poles on numerous hikes in the French Alps, Canadian Rockies, and Glacier National Park (pictured).
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.
I took this pictures just seconds after Kristin fell, to show the hiking conditions (left). The pole snapped in the center, with the internal ferrule being the weak point (right).
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.
BPL’s method for measuring pole stiffness: hang a 25-pound (11.34-kg) bag at the center of a 110-cm section of pole and measure the deflection from horizontal. The general range for lightweight poles is 2-4 inches (5-10 cm) of deflection. The Xenon 4 bent 15 inches (38 cm) before collapsing completely between the chairs.
Upon further inspection, we found that the pole was permanently damaged. The center ferrule was again the weak point (top). The bent ferrule resulted in 4 inch (10 cm) permanent deflection (bottom).
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.
Testing the second set of poles: as I lowered the 25-pound (11.34-kg) bag on the center, I measured pole deflection of more than 10 inches (25 cm) before it collapsed completely (left). As with the first set of poles, the center ferrule was the breaking point (center). The pole was permanently damaged in testing (right).
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.
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.
CAMP Xenon 4 – very thin compared to the already minimalist Fizan Compact.
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.
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).
CAMP Xenon 4 Poles in use above Chamonix Valley, looking onto the Argentiere Glacier.
| Manufacturer | CAMP |
| Year / Model | 2011 Xenon 4 |
| Style | Four-section collapsible, fixed length |
| Shaft Material | Aluminum alloy 7005 |
| Tips | Tungsten carbide |
| Grips and Straps | 8-inch (20 cm) foam grip with nylon strap |
| Lengths Available | (extended/collapsed, in cm): 120/32 (tested), 135/36 |
| Weight per Pole | Manufacturer: 4.9 ounces (140Â g) Measured: 5.0 ounces (143Â g) including 0.2 ounce (5Â g) removable basket |
| Features | Compact collapsible aluminum poles; internal Dyneema cord; twist style removable 50-mm basket; adjustable nylon strap; foam grip; available in 120 or 135 cm lengths. |
| MSRP | $70 |
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.
Manufacturers make lofty claims for the enhanced breathability of the new fabrics. I tested ten jackets under challenging and forgiving backpacking-type conditions, while recording temperature and humidity inside and outside the jackets, and reported my findings. Perhaps I didn’t experience “air and water vapor permeability so shocking you’ll swear it’s magic,” but I did identify some standouts and some promising trends of interest to backpackers.
You don’t have access to view this content.
On paper, the palatial space and bare-essentials engineering of this tent make it appear like a dream come true for ultralight group travel. How does it actually perform in the real world?
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.
| Year/Manufacturer/Model | 2011 MSR Twin Brothers |
| Style | Four-season, four- to six-person, double-pole pyramid-style, single-wall, non-freestanding shelter with a single door |
| Included | Tent body, poles, stakes, two guylines, pole storage bag, stake storage bag, tent storage bag |
| Fabrics | Tent body is 30 denier PU and silicone coated ripstop nylon 1.68 oz/yd2 (57Â g/m2) Floor is PU coated nylon 2.27 oz/yd2 (77Â g/m2) |
| Poles and Stakes | Two 16 mm diameter aluminum poles and six 7.5 in (19 cm) aluminum Y stakes (MSR Groundhog) |
| Floor Dimensions | 96 in (44 cm) wide at center, 76 in (193 cm) wide at ends, 168 in (430 cm) long, 72 in (180 cm) high at peak |
| Features | Large floorspace, large door, high peak, snow flaps, and covered external peak vents. Hang loops allow the tent to be pitched without poles. |
| Packed Size | 20 x 7 in (51 x 18 cm) |
| Total Weight | Specified: 5 lbs (2.4 kg) Measured: 5 lb 4 oz (2.39 kg) |
| Trail Weight * | Specified: 4 lb 14 oz (2.2 kg) Measured: 5 lb (2.29 kg) |
| Protected Area | 96 ft2 (8.9 m2) |
| Protected Area/Trail Weight Ratio | 19.2 ft2/lb (3.9 m2/kg) |
| MSRP | $400 |
| Options | Tent footprint $60 |
*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.
What’s included.
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.
Left: Peak vents on both peaks, as viewed from the outside. Right: Peak vents, as viewed from the inside.
Left: Internal mesh pocket, one in the center of each side wall. Right: There are two adjustable tie outs on the front of the tent, one at each corner. All other tie-outs are not adjustable.
Left: Snow flaps. Right: Poles are not adjustable, but can be adjusted a little by changing their angle. The tent features a single door at one end.
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:
Left: Four sleeping pads arranged length-wise in the tent. This is the optimum arrangement for this floorplan. Right: When sleeping pads are laid across the width of the tent, it is a little too narrow to comfortably fit a pad.
Moving the same sleeping pad to the center of the tent yields adequate room.
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.
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
What’s Not So Good
Recommendations for Improvement
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.
This part assembles the information from our testing and evaluations of integrated canister fuel stoves and provides a review of each stove.
You don’t have access to view this content.
The Flash is basically a flashier PCS and will eventually replace it.
| Manufacturer | Jetboil |
| Year and Model | Flash Cooking System |
| Materials | Aluminum pot, neoprene cozy, stainless steel burner, plastic bottom cover and top lid |
| Pot Size | 1 L |
| Weight | Measured total weight: 14.7 oz (417 g) Measured minimum weight: 11.0 oz (312 g) Manufacturer total weight: 14.0 oz (397 g) |
| Features | Aluminum pot, neoprene cozy with handle and temperature indicator, wing valve on burner with piezo igniter, drink-through lid with pour spout and strainer, bottom cover/measuring cup |
| Included | Burner, cook pot, pot support, canister tripod |
| MSRP | US$100 |
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.
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.
Jetboil’s lightest and most technically advanced integrated canister fuel cooking system.
| Manufacturer | Jetboil |
| Year and Model | Sol Ti Premium Cooking System |
| Materials | Titanium pot, neoprene cozy, stainless steel burner, plastic bottom cover and lid |
| Pot Size | 0.8 L |
| Weight | Measured total weight: 9.8 oz (278 g) Measured minimum weight: 7.5 oz (213 g) Manufacturer total weight: 8.5 oz (240 g) excluding bottom cup |
| Features | Titanium pot, thin neoprene cozy with handle, lightweight burner with wing valve, piezo igniter, Jetboil Thermo-Regulate™ technology, drink-through lid with pour spout and strainer, bottom cover/measuring cup |
| Included | Burner, cook pot, pot support, canister tripod |
| MSRP | US$150 |
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.
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.
The lightest canister fuel stove in the world.
| Manufacturer | Monatauk |
| Year and Model | 2010Â gnat Titanium Stove |
| Materials | Titanium and Aluminum |
| BTU/hr | 11,000 |
| Weight | Measured weight: 1.72 oz (48.8 g) Manufacturer weight: 1.6 oz (48 g) |
| Features | Large area burner head, three serrated retractable pot supports, wing valve |
| Included | Burner, hard plastic storage case with screw lid |
| MSRP | US$60 |
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.
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.
Same features, nearly the same performance, and less expensive than the Sol Ti Premium Cooking System.
| Manufacturer | Jetboil |
| Year and Model | Sol Advanced Cooking System |
| Materials | Aluminum pot, neoprene cozy, stainless steel burner, plastic bottom cover and lid |
| Pot Size | 0.8 L |
| Weight | Measured total weight: 11.8 oz (335 g) Measured minimum weight: 9.2 (261 g) Manufacturer total weight: 10.5 (300 g) |
| Features | Aluminum pot, thin neoprene cozy with handle and heat indicator, lightweight burner with wing valve, piezo igniter, Jetboil Thermo-Regulate™ technology, drink-through lid with pour spout and strainer, bottom cover/measuring cup |
| Included | Burner, cook pot, pot support, canister tripod |
| MSRP | US$120 |
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.
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.
An integrated stove from Primus similar to the Jetboil PCS, with a few design improvements but similar performance.
| Manufacturer | Primus |
| Year and Model | 2010 Eta Solo Cooking System |
| Materials | Aluminum pot, fabric cozy, stainless steel burner, plastic bottom cover and top lid |
| Pot Size | 0.9 L |
| Weight | Measured total weight: 13.7 oz (388 g) Measured minimum weight: 11.4 oz (323 g) Manufacturer total weight: 12.9 oz (365 g) |
| Features | Aluminum heat exchanger pot, QuickClick locking mechanism, heat-resistant fabric cozy with handle, burner knob valve and piezo igniter, drink-through lid |
| Included | Burner, cook pot, pot support, canister tripod, hanger |
| MSRP | US$120 |
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.
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.
Capable of handling all four seasons as either a single-wall floorless shelter or a fully bug-proof double-wall tent, the Nallo 4 GT can easily be tailored to meet a wide variety of environmental conditions. Is it the right tent for your family backpacking outings?
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?
| Year/Manufacturer/Model | 2010 Hilleberg Nallo 4 GT |
| Style | Four-season, four-person, tunnel-style, double-wall, non-freestanding shelter, with front entry and vestibule. |
| Included | Outer tent, inner tent, poles, guylines, stakes, pole repair sleeve, pole storage bag, stake storage bag, tent storage bag |
| Fabrics | Outer tent:Â Kerlon 1200 (30 denier ripstop sil-nylon) 1.47 oz/yd2 (50Â g/m2); Inner tent: 30 denier ripstop nylon w/ DWR 0.94 oz/yd2 (35Â g/m2); Floor: 70 denier PU coated nylon 2.65 oz/yd2 (90Â g/m2) |
| Poles and Stakes | Three 9 mm diameter aluminum poles and twenty 6.3 in (16 cm) aluminum V stakes |
| Floor Dimensions | 83 in (211 cm) wide at head end, 87 in (221 cm) long, front height 46 in (117 cm) |
| Features | Large vestibule with multiple entry configurations. High vent in vestibule, low vent at foot. Multiple pitching options. |
| Packed Size | 19 x 9 in (48 x 23 cm) |
| Total Weight | Specified: 7 lb 8 oz (3.4 kg) Measured: 7 lb 11 oz (3.5 kg) with inner tent 5 lb 8 oz (2.5 kg) floorless |
| Trail Weight* | Specified: 6 lb 6 oz (2.9 kg) Measured: 5 lb 12 oz (2.6 kg) with inner tent 3 lb 9 oz (1.6 kg) floorless |
| Protected Area | Floor Area: 46.3 ft2 (4.3 m2) Vestibule Area: 34.4 ft2 (3.2 m2) Total Protected Area: 80.7 ft2 (7.5 m2) |
| Protected Area/Trail Weight Ratio | 14.0 ft2/lb (2.9 m2/kg) with inner tent 22.7 ft2/lb (4.7 m2/kg) floorless |
| MSRP | $795 |
| Options | Tent footprint (covers entire tent area, including vestibule) $98 Mesh inner tent $160 Stuff sacks and bags (various) $4 – $55 Guy line $18.50 Tent stakes and peg sets (various) $20 – $70 Extra poles $38 ea. Pole repair section and sleeve $6 Pole holders $0.75 ea. |
* 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.
What’s included in the package.
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:
Left:The adjustable tie-outs have lightweight metal rings for the tent stakes.This is to help prevent the tie-outs from cutting on the stakes in windy conditions. Right:Tie-outs for guy lines are strategically placed in multiple locations around the tent.
Three optional accessories were also tested as part of this review:
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.
Left: Outer tent pitched in floorless mode without the inner tent. Viewed through the vestibule door on the left side. Right: Viewed through the vestibule door on the right side.
Left: The front of the vestibule can be rolled completely back to form an open awning. Right: Five sleeping pads arranged in floorless mode with the front of the vestibule rolled back. Still room to spare.
Left: Outer tent pitched with inner mesh liner. Right: Five sleeping pads with the inner mesh liner. Things start to get cramped inside the inner tent.
Some other features worthy of note:
Left: External pole sleeves and plastic pockets are designed to handle an extra pole if required. Right: The adjustable vent at the foot of the tent can be rolled back in sections.
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.
Left: Headroom is adequate in the middle, but drops off quickly near the sides. Right: Dad cooking in the vestibule while the rest of the family are warm and cozy inside. This is the standard inner tent which is constructed out of a DWR ripstop nylon for colder conditions. The front door has a zip-away panel with mesh as can be seen in this photo.
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.
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.
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.
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.
A scaled down and inexpensive version of the original PCS, the Zip is lighter weight and a great value.
| Manufacturer | Jetboil |
| Year and Model | Zip Cooking System |
| Materials | Aluminum pot, neoprene cozy, stainless steel burner, plastic bottom cover and top lid |
| Pot Size | 0.8 L |
| Weight | Measured total weight: 12.2 oz (346 g) Measured minimum weight: 9.5 oz (269 g) Manufacturer total weight: 12.0 oz (345g) |
| Features | Aluminum pot, neoprene cozy with handle, lightweight burner with valve knob, drink-through lid with pour spout and strainer, bottom cover/measuring cup |
| Included | Burner, cook pot, pot support, canister tripod |
| MSRP | US$70 |
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.
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.
An example of what a lightweight backpacker might take on a 3-day outing.
Revised and Updated: October 2011
Seasons: Spring, Summer, Fall
Length of Trip: 3-Day Weekend
Context: The gear list provided below is an example of how a lightweight backpacker might select equipment for a 3-day weekend outing. Generally, the choices below are suitable for most ‘three-season’ conditions in the mountain ranges of continental U.S., recognizing that some level of skill and experience is required to successfully use this equipment kit in inclement conditions. More experienced backpackers can trim weight even further from this list, while less experienced backpackers will find that an extra pound or two of clothing, shelter, and/or food will give them a more acceptable level of comfort and safety.
Some examples of brands and models/styles are listed below for reference only. They neither represent an endorsement of that particular product nor a suggestion that the product listed is the best choice in the context of any particular situation.
(Right) Participants in Backpacking Light’s Wilderness Trekking School “2011 Ultralight Backpacking Boot Camp” travel for a week on Montana’s Beartooth Plateau with starting pack weights of less than twenty pounds. Ryan Jordan photo.
|
Clothing Worn |
|||
| FUNCTION | STYLE | EXAMPLE | WEIGHT |
| hat with brim | wide-brimmed water-resistant nylon hat | REI Lightweight Fitness Runner’s Cap | 2.0 oz (57 g) |
| hiking shirt | lightweight merino wool long sleeve crew | Patagonia Wool 2 Merino Crew | 7.4 oz (210 g) |
| underwear | trim-fitting support shorts, boxer-style | Rail Riders Ultralight Boxer Briefs | 3.0 oz (85 g) |
| hiking pants | soft shell stretchwoven long pants | Patagonia Rock Guide Pants | 10.5 oz (298 g) |
| hiking socks | lightweight merino wool trail running socks | Darn Tough Merino Wool Micro Crew | 1.5 oz (43 g) |
| hiking shoes | breathable synthetic trail running shoes | Inov-8 X-Talon 212 | 16.0 oz (454 g) |
|
Other Items Worn / Carried |
|||
| FUNCTION | STYLE | EXAMPLE | WEIGHT |
| trekking poles | adjustable, carbon fiber | Gossamer Gear LT4 | 7.2 oz (204 g) |
| whistle | pealess whistle on Spectra cord | ACR Whistle, AirCore Spectra cord lanyard | 1.0 oz (28 g) |
| watch | compass / altimeter watch | Suunto Core | 1.6 oz (45 g) |
|
Other Clothing |
|||
| FUNCTION | STYLE | EXAMPLE | WEIGHT |
| wind shirt | thin, breathable full zip, hooded wind shirt | Patagonia Houdini | 4.3 oz (122 g) |
| insulation layer | high loft synthetic or down jacket | Western Mountaineering Hooded Flash Jacket | 9.0 oz (255 g) |
| rain jacket | waterproof-breathable, full zip hooded jacket | GoLite Malpais Trinity | 7.5 oz (213 g) |
| rain pants | waterproof-breathable, simple pull-on | GoLite Tumalo | 7.0 oz (198 g) |
| warm hat | light fleece balaclava | Outdoor Research Wind Pro Balaclava | 2.0 oz (57 g) |
| warm gloves | wool liner gloves | Outdoor Research Omni Gloves | 1.5 oz (43 g) |
| rain mitts | waterproof-breathable shell mitts | Mountain Laurel Designs eVENT Rain Mitts | 1.0 oz (28 g) |
|
Sleep System |
|||
| FUNCTION | STYLE | EXAMPLE | WEIGHT |
| overhead shelter | solo tarp shelter | Mountain Laurel Designs Silnylon Solomid | 13.0 oz (369 g) |
| tent stakes | titanium skewer style | Gossamer Gear Tite-Lite (8) | 1.6 oz (45 g) |
| ground cloth | pallet shrink wrapping or similar ultralight/ultratough material | Gossamer Gear Polycro | 1.6 oz (45 g) |
| sleeping bag | variable girth down bag | Katabatic Gear Palisade Down Quilt | 17.5 oz (496 g) |
| sleeping pad | torso sized closed cell foam or inflatable pad | Gossamer Gear Nightlight Torso | 3.5 oz (99 g) |
|
Packing |
|||
| FUNCTION | STYLE | EXAMPLE | WEIGHT |
| backpack | lightweight internal frame pack | Hyperlight Mountain Gear Windrider | 25.6 oz (726 g) |
| stuff sacks | Three (3) for insulating clothing, sleeping bag, storm clothing | Hyperlite Mountain Gear Cuben Fiber L & XL Stuff Sacks | 1.1 oz (31 g) |
|
Cooking and Water |
|||
| FUNCTION | STYLE | EXAMPLE | WEIGHT |
| stove & cookpot | integrated canister cookset | Jetboil SOL Ti | 8.5 oz (241 g) |
| fuel container | canister, small size | Jetboil 100g fuel canister (empty) | 3.5 oz (99 g) |
| utensil | spork | Light My Fire Titanium Spork | 0.6 oz (17 g) |
| water bottles | 1L soft side bladders | Platypus 1L (two) | 1.8 oz (51 g) |
| water treatment | chlorine dioxide | Aqua Mira Kit | 1.1 oz (31 g) |
| food storage | bear bag | Zpacks “Blast” Food Bag, 12.5 x 20.5 O.P. Sak, 6″ x 6″ stuff sack for “rock”, and 50 ft 2.5 mm Spectra Rope | 3.0 oz (85 g) |
|
Other Essentials |
|||
| FUNCTION | STYLE | EXAMPLE | WEIGHT |
| maps | custom printed on waterproof paper | National Geographic Topo! | 2.0 oz (57 g) |
| light | LED headlamp | Petzl e-Lite | 1.0 oz (28 g) |
| first aid | minor wound care & meds | assorted wound & blister care and medicines | 2.0 oz (57 g) |
| firestarting | emergency firestarting – waterproof | Light My Fire Firesteel Mini + Four Seasons Survival Tinder-Quik Tabs in 4"x5" Aloksak | 1.0 oz (28 g) |
| sunglasses | 100% UV blocking, plastic lenses/frames | any old pair will do | 1.0 oz (28 g) |
| sunscreen | 100% UV blocking, waterproof, paste | SPF 30+ in tiny tubes | 1.0 oz (28 g) |
| insect repellent | 100% DEET | repackaged in tiny dropper bottle | 0.5 oz (14 g) |
| personal hygiene | assorted toiletries | toothbrush, soap, toilet paper, alcohol hand gel, in 4" x 7" Aloksak | 2.0 oz (47 g) |
|
Consumables |
|||
| FUNCTION | STYLE | EXAMPLE | WEIGHT |
| fuel | canister, small size | Jetboil, 100g | 3.5 oz (100 g) |
| food | 2.5 days | 22 oz / day | 55.0 oz (1559 g) |
| water | average carried | half quart | 16.0 oz (454 g) |
|
Weight Summary |
||
| (1) | Total Weight Worn or Carried | 3.14 lb (1.42 kg) |
| (2) | Total Base Weight in Pack | 7.83 lb (3.55 kg) |
| (3) | Total Weight of Consumables | 4.66 lb (2.11 kg) |
| (4) | Total Initial Pack Weight (2) + (3) | 12.49 lb (5.66 kg) |
| (5) | Full Skin Out Weight (1) + (2) + (3) | 15.63 lb (7.08 kg) |
Tired of solo trips? Ditch the tiny tarp for one of these multi-person shelters and share the weight with your friends and family. You may even save a few ounces!
You don’t have access to view this content.
Poking poles around for added stability is fairly intuitive, but the full promise of two more legs – greater endurance, building upper body strength, and reducing injury from stress or falls – requires some technique. Try Skip’s straightforward and effective approach!
You don’t have access to view this content.
Integrated canister fuel cooking systems have advanced substantially in every way – they’re lighter, faster, more efficient, and have more cooking capacity and versatility. In this part we highlight this evolution, explore how these stoves can be very weight-efficient, and identify the top performing stoves for different situations and needs.
You don’t have access to view this content.
An open letter from a grandfather to his two grandsons, about his CDTA volunteer time.
Sleeping in mother nature’s flower garden.
My dearest boys,
I just returned from my Continental Divide Trail Alliance – Hopewell Lake project and want to add another chapter to Bobo’s Misadventures. In addition to an expected trail work experience, several things happened that were entirely unexpected. Sort of like life, right?
On the eve of my departure to New Mexico, the sunset was exceptional. Crooked Stick sunsets are always a delight, but tonight’s was a real show stopper. As I watched the sun go down over Shavano, I could not help but wonder how such a thing of beauty was created? There are a lot of theories on how our sunsets are created, but one thing is for sure, a sunset is not manmade!
Sunset on Crooked Stick.
After sunset I went down to a local restaurant for dinner. I saddled up to the bar and started talking with the young man sitting next to me. You know I like to learn people’s stories, so I started learning about my new friend, Phillip. Phillip is in Salida on a solo fishing trip. He is a software consultant from Denver, is married with a young child, does not particularly like his work, Is 40 years old, and was recently diagnosed with multiple sclerosis.
He shared the story of his two most recent MS episodes, one of which has left his left leg feeling permanently hot. He also attempted to describe how he is trying to come to terms with his illness. He went on to describe the out of this world cost for his medical treatments and the price he will pay the rest of his life for the simple misfortune of getting sick. Phillip was remarkably upbeat, given his future.
Here I was on a stool next to Phillip on the eve of four very physically demanding days in the woods, and in perfect health, while the young man sitting next to me, 20 years my junior, has a life changing medical condition. How did this come to be? More importantly to me, what do we think and how do we act when we learn of others’ misfortunes?
We have all heard the quote, “There but for the grace of God go I”, but I just can’t accept that. I have done nothing to earn a special place in God’s graces, and I am sure Phillip has done nothing to fall out of Gods graces. I have never seen the problems of others as a contextual/comparison opportunity for me to feel good about my good fortune. What to do?
I decided I would carry Phillip’s condition with me in my heart while in New Mexico and do my best to send him healing energy. Praying? Yes, perhaps it can be called that.
On Sunday, July 31, I mounted my trusty BMW GS 1200 and left for Hopewell Lake, New Mexico. The ride was everything you hear about Colorado and New Mexico: curving roads, Norman Rockwell scenery, cool, dry weather, perfection.
On my way down I was passed by another GS and Gold Wing, pretty much hauling the mail. Up to that point I was behaving myself, but given I am almost 60 and yet to fully mature, I gave chase. My BMW was fully loaded, but I had set the suspension accordingly, so it handled pretty well. We ran through the mountains as a group of three jet fighters, having a ball. We pulled into Chama, New Mexico and had lunch as three old friends. Such is the motorcycle and adventure bond. One guy was a retired judge and the other was an ad man.
Loaded up, the trusty BMW is always ready to take me on an adventure.
One the special things that I like about group adventures is the make-shift family that forms around shared purpose. Whether it is the burning man family or a trail family, I always enjoy being a part of my short-term focused family.
In the case of my New Mexico trail family, I decided to name us the Flower Children. I did so because we worked in Colorado meadows during the peak flower bloom and because some of the trail experiences brought me back to the flower child mindset of questioning everything.
We set up camp Sunday afternoon in the wildflowers and had our orientation meeting.
Paying attention at our safety meeting.
A make-shift family photo.
We were told we were going to build brand new Continental Divide trail, but we were around 45 miles from the Continental Divide. This did not make sense to me, until we were told the Divide crossed reservation land, and the Native Americans said they already had a trail and did not need another one. Thus we were building the “Continental Divide Trail,” just 45 miles from the actual divide.
Our leaders, Mugzy on my left and Jon on my right, introduced themselves, followed by volunteer self introductions. Our flower family consisted of a man who had hiked the Appalachian Trail four times and had 15,000 hiking miles under his belt, a couple of wonderful cooks that gave us everything they had in order to make our food enjoyable and plentiful on a $7.50/person/day budget, a strikingly beautiful lady who worked harder than any woman I have ever seen, a 77-year-old man that outworked all of us combined, a young man who took time off from his restaurant job to work hard labor and be with folks who share the love of the outdoors, an brilliant engineer from the New Mexico lab, a young man learning music, another young man who was working on building a new life, plus Jon and Mugzy, who went out of their way to assure everyone their work was valued and appreciated. Great leadership!
Me as the head of the snake, breaking trail.
We would build new trail like a snake. The head of the snake would establish the route, followed by a couple of volunteers (me and a young man named Xander) who hacked out organic matter with a heavy tool, followed by a team raking the organic matter into piles, followed by tossing organic matter off the trail, followed by a cleanup crew to make it tidy. We were always mindful of how water impacts the trail, working hard to avoid creating erosion problems. After a half day or so, we found our rhythm and work that we individually found comfortable.
Tuesday morning, I found myself at the head of the snake. We were crossing beautiful meadows in full blossom and aspen groves, doing what I think makes America great and what has made civilizations successful for eons: difficult volunteer work. When we’re committed to a common goal and each other, watching out for each other, we can create a lasting benefit to all of humanity. We were engaged in the slowest of all possible enterprises, working with our hands, walking the land, building and creating a thing of beauty intended to be of benefit to others for eternity. Totally satisfying.
A new trail is taking shape.
I was immersed in these thoughts when a frightening and intense sound thundered out of the sky. It was a shocking contrast to the quiet of the forest. One B1 bomber flew by, then another screamed at us at tree top level. I was immediately struck by the visual image of one of the fastest, most destructive machines in the world flying so low, while we toiled laboriously on the ground to create something good. Fast/slow… destruction/creation. What a contrast!
In a flash, the machine and noise were gone, leaving our little family attending to our business of creating a timeless thing of beauty and utility.
The extreme opposing images kept rolling around in my head. I started thinking, “Is the B1 bomber Americas premier visual and audible symbol of freedom and global stability? Or is the B1 the tip of America’s spear turned on our humanity? Does the bone chilling noise coming out of the B1 represent power and freedom? Or is that awful noise the tearful cries of humanity being shredded? Are humanity’s basic needs for health, hope, security, justice, food, and fuel being consumed and sprayed out the tail of a machine purpose built for destruction and death?”
Boys, I would guess you will be the ones to answer the questions above. For humanity’s sake, I hope we as a country make the switch and use our power to create, rather than destroy. Using destruction to gain success just doesn’t make any sense to this old flower child.
The last three days we worked on the trail and visited with campers coming through the camp site. We talked with a German motorcyclist who had traveled the trail that extends from Canada to Mexico and with Americans who had just started on their bikes, headed north from Mexico on their way to Canada. On the last night of camp, our cook Tim made an upside-down pineapple birthday cake for me! Wow, what a generous and appreciated surprise.
Sorry, I can’t divulge my wish!
The nicest bedroom on the planet.
Friday I packed up and rode home with a tired body and an energized soul: another wonderful volunteer CDTA project completed and a glorious motorcycle ride home through New Mexico and Colorado.
Hey, Ethan and Nate, remember how I’m always harping on the power of writing things down? Just before I left for New Mexico, I was reviewing the written things I wanted to accomplish this summer. My calendar showed that I wanted to hike two fourteeners before leaving for California. I hiked Shavano once this summer, but since time was running out, I wasn’t going to be able to hike the second mountain.
Xander, the young man who was at the head of the snake with me, mentioned in camp that he wanted to hike Shavano and Tabeguache. Both are 14K+ mountains. Since both are also in our backyard and Xander had impressed me with his work ethic and maturity, I invited him to hang out at Crooked Stick. Once home, I asked him if he wanted company up Shavano.
Yesterday, Saturday August 6, we hiked Shavano while Xander bagged both mountains. I got my two 14K hikes completed. Did I get up those mountains because I wrote it down? Did writing things down and living with intention coalesce, enabling me to get up the mountains? I think so. If you want it, write it down.
Next week I leave for my sixtieth birthday Triple Crown: Muir, the Grand Canyon, and Zion. I will do a trip report for you when I return.
I love you both,
Bobo Bruce
A sub-40 ounce, two-person, double-wall, hybrid tunnel tent that sheds wind and rain with ease?
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?
| Year/Manufacture/Model | 2011 Vango Helium Superlite 200 (www.vango.co.uk) |
| Style | Three-season, two-person, double-wall, non-freestanding hybrid tunnel tent with floor and one side-entry door with vestibule |
| Included | Tent body and fly, two aluminum poles with sack, seven aluminum stakes with sack, repair kit (four patches of fabric and one pole sleeve), storage bag |
| Fabrics | Fly: Protex 20d ripstop nylon, 5000 mm, taped seams Inner Tent: 40d ripstop nylon with two mesh windows Tent Floor: Protex 20d nylon, 5000 mm |
| Poles and Stakes | One pre-bent center pole and one vertical strut at foot of tent, F10 Flexlite 7.9 mm aluminum; c-shaped aluminum stakes (x7), 4 in (10 cm) |
| Measured Floor and Height Dimensions | 74.8 in (190 cm) long x 31.5 in (80 cm) wide at head and foot x 47.2 in (120 cm) wide at the middle; head-end height is 3.3 in (7.5 cm), center height is 32.3 in (82 cm), and foot-end height is 11.8 in (30 cm). |
| Features | Lightweight fabrics, no-drip side entry door with vestibule, tent pocket, Tension-Band System (TBS), can be pitched all at once or fly only, no guylines |
| Packed Size | 15.7 x 4.7 in (40 x 12 cm) |
| Total Weight | Measured weight: 41.7 oz (1.18 kg) Manufacturer specification: 39.5 oz (1.12 kg) |
| Trail Weight | Measured weight: 39.9 oz (1.13 kg) Manufacturer specification not available; weight excludes stuff sacks and repair kit |
| Protected Area: | Floor Area: 20.4 ft2 (1.9 m2) Vestibule Area: 7.0 ft2 (.65 m2) Total Protected Area: 27.4 ft2 (2.55 m2) |
| MSRP | 280 GBP (440 USD as of 9/22/11) |
The tent packs down small – barely larger than two Nalgene bottles (left). One pole, one vertical strut, a few stakes and it’s up! I could have tightened the lines a bit to make the fly fabric more taut (right).
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.
The entry-way is protected from rain when the door is rolled up, but is small and hard to crawl through (left); the vestibule is just big enough for Kristin’s GoLite Jam2 and the circular door has mesh only on the top third (right).
The tent set up in fly only mode: the foot area (top left) and head area (top right). It is still a tight squeeze to fit two full-length sleeping pads – the corners of the pad touch the edges of the fly in the foot area (bottom left) but there is sufficient room at the head area (bottom right).
Things get even tighter in inner tent, as two pads must overlap at the foot (left) and head (right).
The tension band system (TBS Pro) provides structural support against lateral winds by forming a triangle with the ends of the pole and the apex. The TBS Pro as shown in fly-only mode (left). When the inner tent is set up, the bands fit through velcro-sealed slits in the fabric (right).
At the foot of the tent, a 17 inch (43 cm) strut slides into a small sleeve attached to the fly (left). This is tensioned by three nylon straps, providing structure at the foot area of the tent, while also leaving a pyramid of unused protected area (right).
The bathtub-style floor has elastic cords at the corner that attach to the two fly stakes at the head and two at the feet (left). The elastic straps on the inner tent attach to plastic hooks on the fly along the poles (right).
The YKK #3 zipper on the fly door has a zipper cover that is kept from flapping with velco in two places, and can be further secured from inside the tent with a metal hook and loop fastener at the very bottom. The two-way zipper allows venting from the top (right).
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.
Upon first inspection, the tent had a few unsightly construction issues on the tent inner: sloppy sewing work at the ends of all four TBS velcro holes (left); long strands of fabric dangling, as contrasted against the black of my shirt sleeve (center); loose fibers along the entire length of the door zipper (right).
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.
Moisture condensed and froze during really cold nights in Germany (left). Condensation was guaranteed to form on the fly and inner, if we closed the fly door, even when the weather was warmer. On other trips with better conditions, we still faced serious condensation issues (right).
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.
It is a tight squeeze for even one person: me (6’0”/1.83 m) and my light down quilt. The sleeping bag blocks most of the 2.8-inch (7-cm) tall mesh window in the foot area (left) and even without a sleeping bag hood, my head pushes against the tent (right).
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.
It was slightly challenging to get a really taut pitch at the foot end of the tent. Any initial slack was exacerbated overnight by rain, which softened the top soil and enabled the short stakes to slip a little by morning. Hence, a sagging tent.
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.
One uncomfortable night in the Dolomites: super soft snow and frozen ground made for a difficult situation where I was not able to get a good pitch. The tent was like a bad bivy, or worse, like a nylon blanket.
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.
The tent in fly-only mode: easy to set up, lightweight, and roomier, but by no means spacious.
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.
Holes started forming on the tent inner after the first few uses: on the seams of the apex (left), and on the ceiling near the holes for the tension band (center and right).
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.
When the Helium Superlite 200 could be set up well in ideal conditions, such as this grassy plateau in Norway, it could withstand strong winds as well as a conventional mountaineering tent that weighs four times as much.
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
What’s Not So Good
Recommendations for Improvement
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.
© Beartooth Media Group Inc.
Loading...
