Articles (2020)

Introduction

Case file: Espri 2P

Multiple personality disorder is characterized by the presence of two or more distinct or split identities or personality states in a single individual. Espri 2P’s parents, Nemo Equipment, referred her to me for review. What I found was a traditional two-person double-wall tent with a trail weight of 3.74 pounds (1.7 kg) that thinks she is also a fast and light dry-weather tent that has a trail weight of 3.48 pounds (1.58 kg), and yet also a luxury/wet weather tent coming in at 4.27 pounds (1.94 kg) of trail weight.

Amazingly, I determined that Espri 2P IS all three tents. As Nemo has waived the Patient Privacy Act in this case, feel free to peruse my findings.

Specifications

Design and Features

While I enjoy having fun with the intro, I have to say that the Espri 2P, and its big sister the Espri 3P (not reviewed) are truly multiple tents in one package. Well, multiple vestibule treatments, to be honest.

The Espri uses a common X-ed crossing pole design. The poles are factory bent at the back to make it steeper at the rear of the tent to add room. The inner tent clips to the poles with a single DAC H-clip and fourteen pole clips. The body has a bathtub floor that’s made of 30 denier polyurethane coated nylon. It would seem at first glance that Nemo expects the Espri to handle rains of biblical proportions as the “tub” part goes way up the sides of the tent as can be seen in the pictures. This is common to a few of their tents, more in just a second. (No, don’t skip forward… ) Above the side walls is no-see-um mesh for ventilation and weight reduction.

The Espri has a single front entry door that almost opens completely. For some reason, Nemo chose to start the zipper that opens the door eight inches (20 cm) away from the corner and end it a little bit up once it has made its journey around the opening. Personally I would like to see it start all the way to the side. Inside the tent we find a small hanging mesh storage pocket on the side wall, and looking up we find a pretty cool suspended gear loft. The loft slides up and down to either offer more space for storage or head room for sitting up. I have to admit that I was mainly soloing with the Espri, and while I played with it on one trip, I then took it off to save weight. Fortunately, that is quite easy to do.

The outer fly sits on top of the poles and we now see why the sides of the floor go up so high. Nemo has cut the fly down to save weight. Catenary curves are cut into the bottom of the fly. These arcs just come down over the mesh portions of the inner walls. Guy points at the center of the arcs allow the fly to be pulled out to allow ventilation and give strength. The fly can be clipped to the inner at the apex of the catenary curves. As this is tied into the guy point when the guy-lines are deployed it adds to the room inside the tent by pulling out the sides a bit. Nemo calls these volumizing vents. A very nice touch (which I wish more manufacturers would emulate) is the hooded vent at the top rear of the fly that allows air movement and draw. The vent is held open by a tensioned wire at the edge. It is not closable, something to consider in high wind conditions.

Last but certainly not least in the Espri’s case is the vestibule, or lack thereof. Nemo includes a 7.1-ounce (201-g) standard vestibule easily recognizable to those of us accustomed to front entry tents. The vestibule zips onto the fly running around the outside of the door track and snaps to the tent at the bottom and top center if so desired. Two stakes are used to pull it out, forming a small but adequate vestibule. The vestibule can be opened from either side or both sides at the same time.

In the case that a vestibule is not wanted or needed, Nemo sends a 4.5-ounce (128-g) solid door cover that zips on instead. It lets the weight of the vestibule be left behind but will still keep the inside dry should you be surprised by a freak storm.

The opposite end of the spectrum is taken care of too. Nemo offers an optional Trekking Pole vestibule that adds a whopping 17.6 square feet (1.0 m²) of protected space. This is quite welcome when sharing the tent with another, or when in bad weather conditions. The Trekking Pole vestibule attaches to the same zipper track as the others and requires one trekking pole for use, fitting into a reinforced pocket.

Both vestibules and the door cover have windows inserted, but to be quite honest they are not very useful for seeing out of. They do allow light inside a bit.

Nemo (like many other tent makers) has chosen to use the Jakes Foot set-up from DAC, the pole people. This nylon foot is hooked to the tent body at the corners. The poles have a ball on the ends which snap into a spot in the middle of the foot. The fly has a hooking clip that attaches to the end of the foot.

The tent comes with a 2.4-ounce (68-g) stuff sack to hold everything. A 0.6-ounce (17-g) stake sack and 0.8-ounce (23-g) pole sack are included too.

Nemo has made some major changes to the materials to save weight and improve performance. For 2010, the mesh was given an optimized knit pattern to reduce weight by 9% and increase airflow for better breathability. The fly and floors have been given a high quality DWR treatment in addition to the regular coatings. The fly is rated to 1,500mm hydrostatic head and the floors are at 5,000mm. The first tent they sent me had a black nylon making up the lower walls. This was changed in the production tents to the lighter grey nylon seen in some of my pictures as I swapped as soon as they got the actual retail model available. (It was worth the wait as it just gave me more time to play with the Espri. What’s that about a deadline, Addie?)

Performance

Nemo Equipment was wonderful to work with for this review. I asked about the weather proofing and was answered by one of their techs who told me that the Espri was tested in a rain chamber for four hours, after which they made some changes to the size/length of the upper vent. Four hours? Dude, I put two days straight in the rain chamber of backpacking life – you know, San Diego County – with it.

This has been one of the wettest winter and springs I can remember in Southern California. The Espri has been subject to some pretty harsh conditions. The trip mentioned above saw me use it for a section of the Pacific Crest Trail near the border of California and Mexico. We spent the night before the three-day hike at Moreno Lake Park, and since we were going through it, we planned it as our next night. So we just left our stuff set up there for the day. It had started raining at 1:00 pm and rained solid on us the entire next day. The Espri held up wonderfully to all the rain. There was no leaks or splash back, something I had worried about with the high cut fly design. I used the trekking pole vestibule on that trip, as I knew I would want the extra space for cooking and putting boots on. The vestibule garnered a few comments, my favorite being, “Does your tent have a garage?”

I took it on a solo trip to San Jacinto State Park knowing that a big storm was hitting that day. I wanted to test a sleeping system and figured that the Espri could share the abuse. It was snowing before I even got up the mountain, and I had to set up the tent in falling snow at 9,000 feet (2900 m) elevation. Thankfully it went up quickly. I used the standard vestibule this time and dug a twelve-inch (25-cm) depression under the footprint of the vestibule. This makes it much easier to enter and exit, plus gives a nice place to sit with my feet out if trapped in the tent. Well, I was certainly trapped. It never stopped snowing and dropped between six to eight inches (15 to 20 cm) of new snow on top of the Espri and the eight feet (1.7 m) of previous snow that the tent was set up on. The Espri proved to be quite strong and shed the snow well. I banged the tent every so often to knock the snow off, not because I was worried about the structural integrity of the tent, just as I had nothing else to do (should have brought a book). The sides did start collapsing a bit as the snow dropped down to push against the walls. I needed to push it away at one point when I woke to think that I was living out The Pit and the Pendulum by Edgar Allen Poe. “Ahh, the walls are moving in.” Hmm, maybe this generation would relate to the trash compactor scene from Star Wars better.

The tent did very well with condensation considering what the conditions have been. In the snow I had zero condensation, even though I had to keep the vestibule door closed. I did have to cook dinner in the vestibule and had visions of calling BPL and Nemo to explain how I burned the tent down with my Trail DesignsTi-Tri. Once I cooked dinner and then ate the rehydrated, steaming freeze-dried dinner, the moisture level jumped up, never to go down again. Then when the storm broke after midnight the temperature plummeted to 13 F (-10 C) from a stable 21 F (-6 C) most the day and night. Suddenly I had massive condensation that formed and froze on everything.

Assessment

I have enjoyed using the Espri over the past few months. It has impressed me with the way it shrugged off the rain and snow. When used in rain with the standard vestibule, it will get wet inside as the inner is not protected when the vestibule is opened. Every time I had to exit during a snow storm the snow would fall straight inside. This is the reason I took the big Trekking Pole vestibule when I knew I would be in multiple days of rain. I would want this optional vestibule along if using the Espri for two people also, just to have extra protected storage space.

The ventilation is very good. Along with the great hooded vent, Nemo has come up with a good ratio of mesh and solid material. I was thankful for the high walls on a windy night in Angeles National Forest. While the air was definitely blowing through the tent (keeping condensation to zero) the walls kept it from hitting my face as I lay wrapped in my quilt.

Nemo, like many manufacturers lately, has started using the DAC Jake’s Feet corner anchoring system. I quite honestly prefer the grommet and Fastex buckle system of old. The Jake’s Feet forces me to get my hands in the snow and mud to attach or remove the fly, plus it makes it more difficult to remove the poles when breaking down alone. Of course this could just be the grumblings of an old dog that has to learn a new trick.

Nemo has itself a solid contender in the lighter weight backpacking market with this multi-use shelter. While not at the cutting edge of the top tier, it does stand above the middle of the pack.

Dare to Compare

Other single door tents that compare to the Espri are the Marmot Zonda and the MontBell Thunder Dome 2. The Thunder Dome uses an X-ed pole design like the Espri, while the Zonda a hubbed system with crossing poles to add volume. Both those tents use a side door placement. Personally, when using a single-door tent for multiple sleepers, I would rather it be in front so that the person sleeping by the door does not have to be crawled over.

While the Zonda has more room, the rest of the specs are very similar and all are within $11.00 in price. The Esprit has much better ventilation than the other two.

Of course there are many other lighter options out there. If you are willing to shell out $50.00 more and give up some interior volume the Big Agnes Fly Creek UL2 is 1.35 pounds (0.61 kg) lighter.

Notes:

*Backpacking Light Trail Weight: This is the weight of tent, rain fly, poles, and stakes needed for basic setup. It does not include stuff sacks, extra guylines, extra stakes, or repair kit.
**Dimensions: maximum Length x maximum Width x maximum Height (LxWxH). In the case of oddly-shaped floor, a double measurement is given for head and foot (H/F). The numbers are as verified by BPL and may differ from the manufacturer’s stated dimensions.
***Floor Area/Trail Weight ratio: This is the floor area divided by the trail weight.
****Protected Area/Trail Weight ratio: This is the floor area plus vestibule area divided by the trail weight.

What’s Good

• Excellent ventilation
• Very weather worthy

What’s Not So Good

• Door/vestibule design allows water to fall inside the tent

Introduction

This separate review provides additional descriptive and performance information on the Salomon Minim Down Sweater. Read our article Ultralight Three-Season Down Jackets State of the Market Report 2010 for a state of the market analysis and comparative specifications and performance for a range of ultralight down jackets.

Salomon is expanding their Minim line of lightweight outdoor clothing with the introduction of the Minim Down Sweater in fall 2010. This is a multi-purpose three-season down jacket designed to be as versatile as possible. How suitable is it for backpacking?

Description

The new Minim Down Sweater features the new 0.8 oz/yd² (27 g/m²) Pertex Quantum which is 20% lighter than the “old” Quantum, with the same tear strength and a slightly softer hand. According to Salomon, the jacket is insulated with 8.3 ounces (235 g) of 800 fill-power down. That’s a little hard to believe, but it’s the number they provided after much searching around. The puffiest jackets in our state-of-the-market roundup contain only 4.5 to 5.2 ounces (128-146 g) of down fill, so Salomon’s fill weight spec doesn’t compute.

The hangtag on the jacket explains that the down fill is Eldeven duck down. I Googled it and found out it comes from a company called Pyrenex in southwest France that has been producing down for bedding and insulated apparel since 1859. Eldeven down (90/10 down + feathers) is apparently their highest grade. This is the first time I have run across 800 fill-power duck down.

The type and amount of fill notwithstanding, this jacket is indeed well insulated. Its measured single-layer loft is 1.1 inches (2.8 cm), which is one of the highest in the group of multi-purpose three-season down jackets evaluated in part 3 of our state-of-the-market report cited below.

Performance

Sizing on the Minim Down Sweater runs small, so you may need to size up for a proper fit or room for layering. The sample I tested is a size large, and it barely fit me (6 ft/1.83 m tall, 167 lb/76 kg, 39 in/99 cm chest). The fit is okay, but if it were any smaller I would need to size up. It’s roomy enough to fit over a thick baselayer, but not a sweater or another jacket. A Salomon representative verified that the “Salomon fit” runs on the smaller side.

Features are minimal, lightweight, and adequate. The hand pockets are small, not fleece-lined, and do not have any elastic binding or zipper to hold contents inside. The pocket lining tends to pull out, especially if my hands are wet. The zippered chest pocket is quite large inside.

In our comparative jacket warmth tests (see cited article below), the Minim Down Sweater comes out on the warmer end of the group of multi-purpose down jackets we tested. The jacket is indeed puffy and warm and definitely has a good bit of down fill, but perhaps not 8.3 ounces (235 g) as claimed.

Comparisons

Our article Ultralight Three-Season Down Jackets State of the Market Report 2010 provides complete specifications and ratings for the Salomon Minim Down Sweater in comparison to a range of other lightweight down jackets. The jackets most similar to this one are the PHD Minimus Down Jacket, Westcomb Chilko Down Sweater, and the MontBell Alpine Light Down Jacket.

Assessment

This jacket is more difficult to assess because it’s unclear what the fill weight actually is. The number provided to us (8.3 oz/235 g) simply does not compute. Also our calculation of the jacket’s fill weight:jacket weight ratio is uncertain, partly because of the uncertain fill weight and partly because of Salomon’s high claimed weight (14.1 oz/400 g) for the jacket. The ratio based on Salomon’s claimed fill weight and the actual jacket weight (12.9 oz/366 g) is 64, which would put it higher than the Nunatak Skaha. Fat chance! However, it is certainly possible that the actual fill weight is somewhere in the 4 to 4.5 ounce (113-128 g) range, which would still be impressive.

The sample jacket I tested is only one of two in existence, so it’s likely some details could change in the final version.

Overall, the Minim Down Sweater is one of the nicer jackets in the group in terms of light weight, warmth, and lightweight features, but it’s also one of the more expensive jackets. The Western Mountaineering Flight Jacket and Feathered Friends Hyperion cost about the same as the Minim Down Sweater. Given that choice, I would choose one of the former, as both weigh less than the Minim.

Specifications and Features

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

Introduction

The fixed length Gossamer Gear Lightrek 3 Pole is a staff favorite and received our Highly Recommended rating. The new Gossamer Gear Lightrek 4 poles bring an adjustable model to the Lightrek line. Like the Lightrek 3 poles, the Lightrek 4 poles have oversized carbon shafts, multi-position Kork-o-Lon grips, carbide tips that accept Leki baskets, and a good balance of stiffness and vibration damping. This model brings adjustability, optional wrist straps, and also a new spiral-wound lower section for added durability.

What’s Good

• Among the lightest adjustable trekking poles on the market – just 7 ounces a pair.
• Similar stiffness to the Lightrek 3 poles.
• Excellent vibration damping and a comfortable amount of shock absorbing flex.
• Molded EVA “Kork-o-Lon” grips are comfortable and offer multiple hand positions.
• Available straps and camera mount.
• Use common Leki-style screw-on baskets.

What’s Not So Good

• Not quite the lightest adjustable poles (the Titanium Goat Adjustable Goat poles are claimed to weigh 0.1 ounce less).
• $160 without straps and $175 with straps is pretty expensive (but comparable to other carbon trekking poles).
• Not as stiff as some other trekking poles.

Specifications

Performance

The Gossamer Gear Lightrek 4 poles are the company’s first adjustable trekking poles. They weigh 3.5 ounces per pole for the regular length, which is adjustable from 90-140 cm (tested) and weigh 0.1 ounces less for the short model, which adjusts from 85-125 cm. The regular is 84 cm fully closed, while the short is 76 cm.

When compared to the lightest poles from other companies, the Lightrek 4 poles are among the lightest on the market:

• Titanium Goat Adjustable Goat (no straps): 3.4 oz
• Gossamer Gear Lightrek 4 (no straps): 3.5 oz
• Gossamer Gear Lightrek 4 (Nordic straps): 4.1 oz
• Leki Carbonlite AERGON: 6.4 oz
• Komperdell C2 Carbon Tour Men/REI Peak UL: 6.5 oz
• Komperdell Carbon Duolock Men: 6.7 oz
• Black Diamond Alpine Carbon Cork: 8.0 oz
• MSR Overland Carbon Poles: 8.5 oz
• Life Link Guide 57”: 9.0 oz

The strapless Lightrek 4 poles are a virtual tie with the Titanium Goat poles, while the Nordic Strap version is 2.3 to 4.9 ounces lighter per pole than the lightest strapped poles from other manufacturers. The light weight makes swings almost as easy as the fixed length Lightrek 3 and the reduced weight leads to reduced soreness after long days of hiking. The poles feel extremely light in your hand or on your pack.

While the Lightrek 3 poles taper from 1.4 to 1.0 cm, the Lightrek 4 poles have straight 1.4-cm upper sections with lowers that taper from 1.3 to 1.0 cm. The result is that the Lightrek 4 is slightly thicker in the middle of the pole, but looks very similar to the Lightrek 3 poles.

The standard color of the poles is black carbon fiber. There is also limited availability of poles in a Khyber Camo pattern. A difference from the earlier poles is a new spiral carbon wrap on the lower part of the poles. This extra carbon fiber adds durability to a part of the pole that is susceptible to damage. A new painted logo is an aesthetic improvement over the previous stickers used by Gossamer Gear.

The Lightrek 4 poles have carbide tips that accept Leki-style screw on baskets. The poles come with small two-inch trekking baskets which are highly recommended when hiking in rocks or long boardwalks. The poles are compatible with a variety of widely-available Leki baskets; I used the large Leki snow baskets on many occasions with no issues.

The Lightrek 4 poles are available in no-strap and Nordic Strap versions. The multi-position EVA “Kork-o-Lon” grips are used in both versions and have three usable hand positions, adding comfort during extended uphills or steep downhills. They have a nice cork-like feel and don’t get slippery in wet or snowy conditions.

The no-strap version makes moving between positions on the grip easy and the light weight of the poles results in few dropped poles on the trail. I’ve used strapless Kork-o-Lon grips on four different sets of poles and I’ve rarely missed having straps. Further, not having straps means that it’s easy to let the poles go when they become wedged between boardwalk slats or boulders. For times when you can’t afford to drop a pole, such as high angle snow crossings, small loops at the base of the grips allow wrist loops to be attached to the poles.

The Lightrek 4 poles are also available in a Nordic Strap version. This option adds 0.6 ounces and $15 to the poles. The straps attach to the top of the grips with a grommet in the straps and are removable with a screw. The straps are simple nylon straps with a plastic adjustor. Lacking padding, the Nordic straps are not among the most comfortable straps on the market and have to be adjusted carefully to keep the plastic adjustors from rubbing your hands and to control extra strap length. Overall, the straps are simple and light and the comfort is reasonable. I used the straps for many miles both with and without gloves without issues.

While I’ve come to prefer a non-strap grip, straps are preferred by many hikers. They eliminate dropped poles, allow for a very loose grip, add a feeling of security, and allow extra extension when cross country skiing or using a Nordic Walking technique.

The Nordic Strap version also has a monopod accessory that will be available soon. By removing a strap screw and replacing it with the 0.3 ounce accessory, it is possible to turn a pole into a functional monopod. Using the monopod, I was able to take smoother videos and crisper photos- well worth the tiny weight penalty.

The Gossamer Gear poles use a simple rubber expansion adjustor to adjust their length. By turning the lower section clockwise, the screw tightens into the rubber spacer, compressing it and locking the pole. Reinforced carbon fiber at the base of the upper section prevents damage from splitting. The system is simple and effective. At first I was concerned about potential slipping and durability, which is why I had five different hikers besides myself take these poles into the field, including Franco Darioli and Petras Surna, both avid Backpacking Light members. During hundreds of trail miles on the two sets of poles, none of us experienced durability issues or slipping, which I found very impressive.

However, adjusting the poles received mixed reviews. When adjusting the poles, it’s often difficult to get the initial friction between the expander and the inside of the shaft necessary to lock the poles. Despite cleaning the expanders, adding sand, etc., I never got them to consistently grab during adjustments. According to Franco Darioli, “we eventually found that by separating the two pieces, undoing the expansion screw and breathing on the rubber to give it some grip, it made it easier (or possible) to lock them into position again. It works, but is too fiddly to bother for minor adjustments.” After further experience with the poles, I finally settled into an adjustment system that works every time:

1. Loosen the adjustors by turning the lower sections counter-clockwise.
2. Back out the lower sections, turning the lower section clockwise until you feel the “grab.” Typically this happens immediately but if necessary and particularly in cold conditions, pull the sections nearly apart and exert a slight flex to the poles to create extra friction necessary for the “grab.”
3. Slide the poles to the desired position, tightening the expander as you go to keep the friction strong.
4. Tighten until snug and get hiking!

This may sound complicated, but it’s done very quickly, even in wet or snowy conditions. Once in place, the adjustment is solid and slip-free. Compared to the Black Diamond FlickLock system (which Franco typically uses), the Gossamer Gear system does take more time to adjust. However, with practice the difference in adjustment time is seconds and once locked, both systems have proven to be reliable. For most hikers, adjustments are only occasional and the Gossamer Gear system is a lighter, simpler solution.

A big advantage of adjustable poles is how easily they adapt to different shelter designs that require trekking poles. The Lightrek 4 poles work with a wide variety of trekking-pole-supported shelters. In addition, the two section poles compact easily to stow in a pack and come apart for transport. They include a tough cardboard tube for transportation, shipping, or storage.

Early generation Gossamer Gear Lightrek poles were known for their excellent shock-absorbing flexibility but they were also less stiff than most other poles on the market. The Lightrek 3 fixed length poles addressed that with oversized and tapered shafts, increasing stiffness of the poles significantly. The Lightrek 4 adjustable poles share this increased stiffness.

Using our 2008 Backpacking Light Pole Stiffness Test, the Lightrek 4 poles were supported in a fixed rig at a 110-cm length with a 25-pound load suspended from the center of one pole. Pole deflection is then measured using calipers. While the previous generation Lightrek 2 poles deflected over 9.0 cm and exceeded the maximum deflection of the testing system, the Lightrek 4 poles deflected a much more moderate 5.0 cm, slightly less than the Lightrek 3. While this deflection is still more than some other poles we’ve tested, they are comparable to most trekking poles on the market and also compared well to fixed length poles.

On the trail, the Lightrek 4 poles have a comfortable balance of stiffness and flexibility. They feel reasonably stiff when pushing off, adding efficiency during high mileage days and inspiring confidence during tricky descents. They are also comfortable on the trail, flexing somewhat when absorbing harsh impacts. This balance between rigidity and flexibility was perfectly functional.

The poles also proved to be durable. Despite being used by a variety of hikers over hundreds of miles, both sets of poles had zero durability issues. The Spiral Weave on the lower sections took care of scuffs and nicks I’d seen in previous Lightrek poles and despite serious usage ranging from backpacking to snowshoeing and off-trail scrambling, both sets are ready for many more seasons of use. My only durability concern came from the camo paint of the Khyber Camo model which scratched a bit, showing the black carbon below – purely a cosmetic issue.

The biggest downside of the Gossamer Gear Lightrek 4 poles is the cost. At $160 for the no-strap version and $175 for the Nordic Strap version, these are expensive poles. However, they are still in the range of other poles in their class including the Titanium Goat Adjustable Goat ($130), Leki Carbonlite AERGON ($180), Komperdell C2 Carbon Tour Men/ REI Peak UL ($130), Black Diamond Alpine Carbon Cork ($140), and MSR Overland Carbon ($140). The light weight, feature set, and options of the Lightrek 4 poles make them a good overall value and a purchase that I would highly recommend.

What’s Unique

These are extremely light adjustable poles and significantly lighter than other poles on the market. They are available in no-strap and Nordic Strap versions, as well as regular and short lengths. They also have a great balance of stiffness and vibration reducing flex. They also float!

Recommendations for Improvement

The pole adjustment system could use some refinement to make adjustments quicker, but I’m not sure this could be done without a weight increase. Padding for the wrist strap would be nice in some situations, but again, this would add to the weight of the product. Overall, the Gossamer Gear Lightrek 4 poles are a well thought out and highly refined product.

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

Technical Details

We recently reviewed the previous shoe in this series, the MT875OR, after I took a pair through Switzerland for two months over many mountain passes. Normally one does not expect a large change between successive models – often it is just a marketing-driven change of number with a few trim changes – but no so in this case. I was reasonably happy with the MT875OR shoes; these MT876OR shoes seem to have had some significant changes.

The shoes are described as ‘highly responsive lightweight trainer built for the off-road runner seeking exceptional cushioning and ground contact… the 876 offers outstanding performance for the dedicated extreme terrain runner.’ We (my wife and I) received two identical pairs (Mens, US 10, 4E) for testing as soon as they were released in April 2010. (Yes, my wife takes a man’s fitting.) The shoes weigh 364 g (12.8 oz) each for that size.

The sole design has changed significantly. The MT875OR shoes had large (mud-shedding?) lugs which were widely spaced, and there was always a risk that one might begin to feel the individual lugs through the sole if the footbed started to break down at all. On these MT876OR shoes the sole design is a lot more ‘traditional’ – a cross between a jogger design and the original Vibram style. This gives these soles a very distinct edge far more suited to rock work.

These days a lot of joggers have a hard PU substrate inside the shoe to provide a solid foundation and prevent twist. On the MT910GT shoes (also reviewed) the way this substrate was implemented caused me some concern: it was allowed to protrude to the same height as the lugs, and could sometimes slip a bit on wet rock. The PU substrate is inside these shoes too and can be seen as the black lines along the sole pattern forward from the arch. However, it has been recessed so it cannot come into contact with the ground. New Balance have labeled this layer ‘Rockstop’ (literally: it’s on the moulding), and it should do that quite well.

The MT910GT shoes had a very solid PU toe buffer or rand. That’s fine in theory, but the mass of polyurethane does have some weight, and this weight at the toe of the shoe can be felt after a while. The MT875OR shoes reduced the size of the PU rand significantly and substituted some PU-coated fabric around the front – stuff probably not very distant from the Hyperlon used in snowshoe decks. I noted that this material on the MT875OR shoes seemed pretty indestructible. New Balance seems to have developed further confidence in this material as it features at the front of these MT876OR shoes much more prominently, replacing most of the PU rand.

Looking more closely at the toe of the shoe, you can see that the side bits of fabric are sewn over the outside of the front bit. This is a mistake. If you go through a lot of scrub it is very likely that the stitching (not the fabric) holding the side bit in place will eventually fail as the scrub tries to peel the edge back. Something similar happened with the MT875OR shoes, and I had to sew the bits back on during our walk in Switzerland. Photos in the Addendum to the MT875OR Review show what happened. The bit of fabric at the front should overlap the two side bits: perhaps this will be corrected in the next model?

The uppers feature a mesh exterior with what looks like an encapsulated layer of foam inside that. The MT875OR shoes had this technology as well but the layer was detached at the top: I could get my finger in between the mesh outer and the padded interior layer. That did not give me any trouble, but on these shoes the inner layer is fairly firmly attached all around the edge to the outer layer. Unfortunately the sewing is not close enough to the edge in one place (out of four shoes) and the edge curled over, indicated by the blue arrow in the photo above. However, with good wool socks I never felt a thing. I fixed this with a discrete bit of sewing inside the shoe later.

The tongue is a bit different too. Normally the tongue is anchored at the root or front of the shoe and can flap around. On shoes with a membrane (eg the MT910GT) the sides of the tongue are usually gusseted so as to keep the water out, but this is not normally done when there is no membrane. These shoes don’t have a conventional tongue: the upper seems to go straight over the top of the shoe when looked at from the outside. Inside it is possible to see that there is indeed still a tongue, but there is no slack anywhere. To some extent this means that the lacing down over the tongue could almost be considered redundant. Not quite yet: the tongue material does not have the strength to substitute for the laces. There is a little note at the root of the tongue, saying ‘debris free’. There does not seem to be anywhere for debris, or sand, to get in.

The top end of the tongue is a real tongue and can flap around. Once again it is very different from ‘normal’ however: it has long wings out the sides. These go under the top two lacing holes to ensure good padding under the laces. It looks very strange, but it works quite well.

The laces are knobbly to prevent the bow from untieing accidentally: New Balance call this Sure Lace. The knobs seem to work. The lacing is fairly conventional and can be seen in several photos. The lower lacing is all through standard tape loops, with the tapes generally going right down to the sole. The top two anchors are reinforced holes. The top tape loop has its tape going around the heel of the shoe: perhaps the idea is that as you lift your foot the tape will apply a bit more grab at the heel. Personally, I don’t think it has any effect at all however.

The footbed supplied is a simple one, but it has always been adequate for us. It has a faint heel cup and a very thin bit of padding at the side of the inside arch. It is very close to a flat footbed with no arch support or pronation control gimmicks. I (we) strongly approve. Under that there is a flat layer of firm EVA foam, probably only a few millimetres thick. You wouldn’t think that this would give enough cushioning, but it does.

Field Testing

Field testing started when we (that’s my wife and me) opened the shoe boxes. Our immediate reaction was “uh” at the bright red colour. But does the colour really matter? And after a few walks my wife commented that, actually, she rather liked the colour.

Then we looked at the soles and were immediately struck by the Vibram-like soles with square edges: that too got immediate approval. The way the black PU inner plate is recessed was also noted with approval.

Then we tried the shoes on. The sole flexed where it should and did not show much twist. That was good. The sole rubber gripped whatever we stood on very nicely, and that too was good.

Just walking around outside at home showed a more subtle feature, but one we regard as extremely important. In explaining this, please bear in mind that we both take a very wide fitting. Also, at the start of testing each of us had a minor injury (mainly bruising) at the edge of a foot, making us sensitive to any narrow or poor fit. Well, what we noticed as we walked around was that the fabric sides to the shoes are soft and flexible. No hard reinforcing strips just where you don’t want them, no ‘arch supports’ intruding, no ‘pronation control’ features. The soles were pretty flat, the way they should be. The shoes just felt right.

The tongue and lacing had us intrigued for a while. There is very little real scope for altering the shoe width by doing up the laces tightly. Provided you have bought the right shoe size and width, we don’t think this matters at all. Certainly it didn’t worry us. The two top holes for the laces are useful for keeping the heel in place, but I would recommend that you don’t do the laces up tightly. I did think that maybe the two top holes could be moved forwards 2 – 4 mm to cope with people who have solid ankles, but it was not very significant. I will add that you will very quickly discover if you have done the laces up too tightly. I found that despite having the laces tied quite loosely, the shoes didn’t show any signs of falling off, even in very rough country (below). A minor flaw is that the laces supplied were not very long, and the bows ended up rather small. I think another few inches of length would be good here, but the knobbles do mean you don’t have to double-knot the laces.

So the next step was to go walking. My wife normally goes for a fast local trail walk every morning for a few hours, and recently I have been going with her while carrying a 13-kg internal frame pack – a different one each day for a comprehensive report. Halfway along this, I pass the pack to my wife for a short while to get her opinions – photo above. This means we had been using these shoes for a few hours every day for a while, over road surface, trails, and rough ground, while carrying a heavy pack. Our impressions have been very favourable so far.

Emboldened, we decided to take the shoes on a multi-night exploration trip into Wollemi National Park. The section we visited is a bit rough in places, and very few people ever go there. The cliffs below us in this photo were about 50 m high: good footing was desirable. The cliffs were actually a bit unfortunate; the only water anywhere around was down below, and it was clear we weren’t going to get down there. We managed.

The one place where we had a few problems on this trip was in crossing this swamp very early one morning. There was no way we could avoid getting wet feet, but shoes with membranes would have faired no better. Yes, that’s frost on the grass. At least the icy water drained out of the shoes very quickly. The amusing bit was the way the tannin-rich water darkened the bright red dye on the outer mesh of the shoes – tannin is a rather good dye you see.

We didn’t see any significant dust penetration on this trip, although my toe nails came back a bit darker (due to the tannin dye). We didn’t have any problems with the sore bits of our feet on this trip either, and they certainly got pushed around a bit. The traction was good, on both dirt and rock. We haven’t seen any real wear on the shoes either, despite all that rock.

My wife is usually a bit suspicious of all my new bits of gear – I wonder why? On one recent walk she asked how long this model will be available – I told her my understanding is that it should be current until April 2011. Her response, after thinking about that for a while, was to suggest we ought to buy a second pair each before they go out of stock.

Specifications

What’s Good

• Light weight
• Excellent sole
• Soft fabric sides
• Little dust or debris penetration
• Comfortable with loose laces

What’s Not So Good

• Toe rand is sewn the wrong way (only matters if seriously off-trail)
• Lace is a bit short
• Top two lace holes could be moved forwards 2 – 4 mm

Introduction

This separate review provides additional descriptive and performance information on the Sierra Designs Gnar Down Sweater. Read our forthcoming article Ultralight Three-Season Down Jackets State of the Market Report 2010 for a state-of-the-market analysis and comparative specifications and performance for a range of ultralight down jackets.

The Sierra Designs Gnar Down Sweater will be introduced in fall 2010 in men’s and women’s versions. It’s a full-featured jacket, and the features are lightweight, keeping the total weight of the jacket down to 11.8 ounces (335 g) for men’s size Large.

Description

The Gnar is insulated with 4 ounces (113 g) of 800 fill-power down, giving it a single-layer loft of 0.9 inch (2.3 cm), which is average. Based on its 36.4% insulation weight (fill weight divided by jacket weight), the Gnar barely makes it into our “seriously lightweight” down jackets” category (35 % is the lower limit). Realistically, the Gnar is a better fit in our “multi-purpose three-season down jacket” category, which is jackets that balance light weight, warmth, and features (more coming on these categories in the State of the Market Report).

The jacket’s shell is 20 denier 1 oz/yd² (34 g/m²) ripstop nylon with DWR, which is considered average for this type of jacket. All jackets in this category have a high quality shell fabric with excellent wind and water resistance. Weight-wise, the Gnar’s shell falls in the middle of the range, balancing durability with its light weight.

Performance

The Gnar has a roomy fit, enough to wear over a heavy sweater or another thin jacket. A size Large fits me (6 ft/1.83 m tall, 167 lb/76 kg, 39 in/99 cm chest) with room to spare. The sleeves are plenty long and the 28-inch (71-cm) body length covers the butt. The Gnar seals well with its elastic cuffs and hem drawcord, but the neck is loose.

From my testing, I would judge the Gnar’s warmth as average within the range of jackets we tested. It’s not a furnace, but it’s not a wimp either. In our comparative warmth tests, the Gnar was not as warm as similar jackets (Mountain Hardwear Nitrous Jacket and Rab Microlight Jacket).

Comparisons

Our forthcoming article Ultralight Three-Season Down Jackets State of the Market Report 2010 provides complete specifications and ratings for the Sierra Designs Gnar Down Sweater in comparison to a range of other lightweight down jackets. The jackets most similar to the Gnar are the Rab Microlight Jacket, Mountain Hardware Nitrous Jacket, Eastern Mountain Sports Ascent Sector Down Sweater, Patagonia Down Sweater, Eddie Bauer First Ascent Downlight Sweater, and the Westcomb Chilko Down Sweater.

Assessment

What is remarkable about the Gnar is that it has a large number of features and manages to keep the jacket weight down to 11 ounces (312 g). Sierra Designs minimizes the weight in the jacket’s features by using #3 zippers instead of #5 and using thinner elastic cord for the drawcord hem. Overall, the Gnar achieves a good balance of sizing and fit, features, and overall light weight. Is the Gnar the perfect down sweater? Not quite. Based on our testing, the Gnar is a little weak in warmth compared to similar jackets, and could benefit from an extra half ounce of down.

Specifications and Features

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

Introduction

The Integral Designs Wedge eVENT Bivy is more like a short tent than a traditional bivy. With a two-crossed-pole “wedge” design, it is similar to other single-wall tents except for its very low profile – it is only twenty-four inches tall. This height clearly classifies it as a bivy and not a tent. However, it is generously sized in length and width for even a tall solo hiker, with space for gear inside the tent. Made of extremely breathable eVENT and with solid wind stability, it’s a shelter that can handle the most unforgiving weather and alpine environments. At just over three pounds, the Wedge Bivy is a shelter that can make it through the harshest environments. An optional vestibule adds a great deal of storage and living space, adding versatility.

Performance

The Integral Designs Wedge Bivy is a unique shelter. It’s short, but sized for comfortable sleeping – even for a tall person. It’s built out of eVENT, which is unparalleled for breathability and condensation resistance while remaining completely storm-worthy. The optional vestibule provides generous space for gear or cooking and can be dug out in the snow for extra foot space. It’s just over three pounds (without vestibule) which is very light for a bomber solo tent, but quite heavy compared to a full-featured bivy such as the two-pound Integral Designs EXP Unishelter Bivy. The Wedge Bivy is beyond a traditional bivy, though, and this is where the Wedge lives – right between a full-featured bivy sack and a bomber solo tent.

The Integral Designs Wedge Bivy has some similarities to the Rab Summit Extreme (now called the Rab Superlite Bivi which is a bit longer, shorter, and lighter). Like the Rab tent/bivy, the Wedge is made of single wall eVENT, sized for a solo hiker, designed to handle extreme conditions, and has a very low ceiling height (the Wedge is 24 inches tall, the Rab Summit Extreme was 33.7 inches, and the Rab Superlite Bivi is 27.5 inches). While the Integral Designs shelter doesn’t have the direct harness tie-outs that make the Rab tent unbeatable for extreme alpine-style ascents, it has some unique features such as an optional vestibule, an easy to use entrance, and nearly vertical walls at the head and foot that give it an edge in versatility.

The Wedge bivy has a traditional “wedge” design with crossing aluminum poles. This is a common design for one- to two-person four-season shelters, due to the combination of wind stability, snow load capacity, and relative light weight. However, the asymmetrical pre-bent Easton poles provide more vertical walls at the head and foot of the shelter, increasing usable space. Straight arched poles limit the interior space of a shelter this short, due to the tight angles at either end of the tent, but the Wedge Bivy design eliminates this issue.

The doorway is another unique design element. It is cut far back into the top of the tent, making entering and exiting the Wedge very easy. The door also allows views of the sky on clear nights. On clear but buggy nights, the mesh door offers full views and an open-air feel. The downside of the large door is that rain comes straight into the living area when the door is open, although the optional vestibule eliminates this issue.

At only twenty-four inches high at the peak, the Wedge Bivy is a very low shelter. In fact, it is so low that my knees touch the ceiling when slightly bent while using a three-inch down air pad. Turning around while inside the tent requires advanced flexibility – don’t expect to easily get items at the foot end of the shelter, and you can forget trying to sit up. However, the sleeping space in the Integral Designs shelter is quite comfortable. I’m 6 feet 2 inches and had length to spare. With twenty-one square feet of space, there was room for gear storage, even when using a winter bag. I found the shelter to be far less claustrophobic than a traditional bivy sack. It might be possible for two people to survive a night in the Wedge Bivy, but I would save this only for emergencies or ultralight summit attempts. Used in this setting, though, the Wedge would be great for keeping two climbers warm, dry, and safe.

The Wedge Bivy is pitched with interior poles. After extending the poles, you slide the them into pole pockets at the rear of the tent, ensuring that the tips will be in the correct position. This is a great addition, especially with this shelter’s tight quarters. After placing the front pole tips in position, Velcro tabs are attached to hold the poles in place. The three-piece Velcro tabs provide extra strength over other systems I’ve used and are easy to attach.

Two interior pockets provide small item storage. I found the front one to be very useful, but the rear one was extremely difficult to access unless I crawled in head-first. I think it would have been better to have two pockets at the head end of the shelter. The rear pocket may have been intended for a second sleeper, but regular use for two people seems like a long shot.

As stated in the Backpacking Light article The eVENT Single Wall Tent: Here, Then Gone – What’s Replacing It??, tents made of eVENT are extremely rare. This shelter can be made from the fabric because it falls into the class of “bivy shelter” due to its low height. The use of eVENT is a serious bonus; it is amazingly breathable while remaining completely waterproof. Like the Rab Summit Extreme, I was stunned by the breathability of this shelter. In the field, I experienced almost no condensation in above freezing conditions and very little frost build-up in sub-freezing conditions.

In the past, I tested the breathability of the Rab Summit Extreme eVENT tent by boiling water in the sealed tent for several sessions of ten to fifteen minutes. When finished, I collected condensation with a paper towel to weigh the total condensation. Each time, I was only able to detect moisture on the aluminum poles and on the seam tape – total condensation only measured 0.1 oz after a fifteen-minute boil. I simply could not make condensation occur in these conditions. Similar tests in the field yielded similar results with the Wedge Bivy – it has amazing condensation resistance.

Given the right conditions, condensation will occur with any tent. However, I have found condensation extremely difficult to find under any conditions in eVENT shelters. I still hold the opinion that eVENT is a magic fabric when used in a single-wall shelter.

When comparing condensation between the eVENT bivy and the silnylon vestibule, the difference between the fabrics was obvious, with significantly more condensation in the vestibule. Where the two fabrics overlap, there was more condensation inside the shelter when using the vestibule, but it was minor and in a relatively small area.

Besides the highly breathable eVENT fabric, the Wedge Bivy also includes a closable tube vent on the door with a mesh backing. This vent adds to the shelter’s ventilation and also serves as a small window to check outside conditions. On most nights I slept with the vent closed and with minimal condensation, raising the question of whether this feature is necessary in an eVENT shelter. However, it would be a welcome addition during warm summer rains when opening the door is impossible.

There are a grand total of fourteen stake and guy-out points on the Integral Designs shelter. I added plastic sliders to the guylines for easy adjustment and found that when using twelve of the points, the bivy was virtually unmoved in moderately high winds. With its low profile design and guy-outs that are reinforced with interior attachments at the Easton poles, I would feel confident bringing this bivy into the scariest storms. Two additional guy-outs at the top of the tent add even more confidence.

An option vestibule adds $85 and 12.4 ounces to the Wedge Bivy. The vestibule is constructed of silnylon for lighter weight and uses a single Easton aluminum pole to increase the space. It attaches quickly to the shelter with a snap buckle, a grommet on either side, and a single stake in front. The vestibule is taller than the actual bivy, making it a comfortable place to sit up, organize gear, and cook, especially when digging it out in the snow. It has a side entrance that rolls up, giving a generous entrance while providing full rain coverage over the shelter door.

The vestibule adds a great deal of versatility to the shelter and makes it much easier to live with in conditions where you’re trapped inside for extended periods. It doesn’t have the extreme wind stability of the bivy (or the guy-out points) but in moderate conditions, it held up just fine. On one night when the winds picked up and the vestibule started to shake, I was able to pull my gear inside the bivy and quickly take down the vestibule to stash it inside. I found the combination of extra living space with the backup of a bomber solo shelter to be a great combination for a variety of conditions.

A few details were missing on the Wedge Bivy. The included guylines lacked plastic adjustors, the four included stakes were only sufficient for the most basic pitch, and the doors included simple ties that were hard to manage with cold hands. I would have appreciated extra stakes and a full guyline kit as I’ve seen from other manufacturers. Rolled door closures made of bungee material or using toggles are much simpler to use in cold conditions and would be a welcomed change.

At $400 the Integral Designs Wedge Bivy ($485 with the vestibule) is not an inexpensive shelter. However, it is a good value when compared to bomber single-wall tents. The construction is superb, and it is sure to last many seasons. The eVENT fabric is extremely rare in a tent and will keep you dry on even the most humid nights. Most importantly, you are sure to survive storms that would destroy lesser shelters. If a bomber bivy suits your needs, the Wedge Bivy is hard to beat.

What’s Unique

Scour the market and you’ll see just how rare and unique this shelter is. eVENT is a magic fabric that’s only available if you’re willing to accept a low ceiling height (and this is certainly a low ceiling height!). But for those that want a bomber shelter that’s a bit more than a bivy, not quite a full tent, but has the versatility of an optional full vestibule, the Wedge Bivy will suit your needs perfectly.

Specifications

What’s Good

• Lightweight, at just over three pounds, for a solo bomber shelter
• eVENT is extremely breathable, and extremely rare in traditional tents
• Long enough for a tall hiker and enough space for some gear inside
• Low wind profile with fourteen guy-out points for fantastic wind stability
• Optional vestibule adds a great deal of versatility for just over twelve ounces
• Large front entry with mesh door that offers sky views

What’s Not So Good

• Extremely short at only twenty-four inches – not tall enough to sit up
• Heavy for a bivy (but light for a tent)
• Open door lets in rain and snow, making the vestibule necessary in poor weather
• Expensive at $400 (or $485 with the vestibule)
• Guyline adjustors aren’t included and only includes four stakes

Recommendations for Improvement

• Include enough stakes for a full pitch and plastic adjustors for the included guylines
• Move the rear pocket to the front where it can be more easily accessed
• Trade the ties for door roll-ups with elastic toggles or plastic adjustors to make them easier to use
• Consider making a taller version of the Wedge – the bent poles would be a great addition to a larger shelter as well

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

Introduction

This separate review provides additional descriptive and performance information on the Crux Halo Top. Read our forthcoming article Ultralight Three-Season Down Jackets State of the Market Report 2010 for a state-of-the-market analysis and comparative specifications and performance ratings for a range of ultralight down jackets.

Crux is a small company in the UK that designs specialty products for climbers, with emphasis on durability, lightweight, and functionality. The Crux Halo Top provides some competition for the MontBell Ex Light Down Jacket, but it’s significantly different in several ways. The Halo Top is a unisex down-insulated minimalist anorak that weighs 7.9 ounces in size Medium, a couple of ounces more than the Ex Light. How does it perform for backpacking?

Description

The Crux Halo Top has very few features, just an 8-inch (20-cm) #3 front zipper, down-filled stand up collar, simple elastic cuffs and hem, and a dropped tail. No pockets. It’s simple and light, just the way we like it for ultralight backpacking.

What is unique about the Halo Top are its long sleeves and body length. On the size Large I tested, the sleeves are 35.25 inches long (90 cm), and the back length is a whopping 30.25 inches (77 cm), which is extra long and covers the backside well (see photos below).

The Halo Top is designed for use as a midlayer. It’s highly quilted in a 1.9-inch (4.8-cm) square pattern. The current shell fabric is 15 denier 0.77 oz/yd²) (26g/m²) ripstop nylon with DWR, which is among the lightest to be found (MontBell’s 7 denier shell fabric on the Ex Light is 0.74 oz/yd²/25 g/m²).

It’s insulated with 3.9 ounces (110 g) of 800 EU fill-power down, which is equivalent to 832 fill-power by US measurement. The measured single layer loft is 0.6 inches (1.5 cm), which is low and indicates that the down is compacted by the quilting.

Performance

The Halo Top fits me (6 ft/1.83 m tall, 167 lb/76 kg, 39 in/99 cm chest) very well. It’s moderately roomy, with some room left to layer over a sweater or thick baselayer. As mentioned, the sleeves are extra long and the back length is really long, both of which are really appreciated by a tall person. All openings on the jacket (neck, cuffs, and hem) seal well to eliminate drafts.

I found the Halo Top to be quite warm when layered over a thick baselayer and a shell jacket over it. For cool and cold weather outings, the Halo Top is just the right amount of insulation to maintain comfort when active. On high elevation snowshoeing trips on colder days, I found the jacket quite comfortable as long as I was active. For backpacking, its best use is three-season outings where the nighttime temperature is above freezing.

Comparisons

Our forthcoming article Ultralight Three-Season Down Jackets State of the Market Report 2010 provides complete specifications and ratings for the Crux Halo Top in comparison to a range of other lightweight down jackets. The jackets most similar to the Halo Top are the MontBell Ex Light Down Jacket and the MontBell UL Down Inner Jacket.

Assessment

Although the Crux Halo Top weighs about 2 ounces (57 g) more than the MontBell Ex Light Down Jacket, and costs about the same, the two jackets have some significant differences. The Halo Top has twice as much down fill in it than the MontBell Ex Light (3.9 ounces versus 1.8 ounces/110 g versus 51 g), but the loft is only half as much. Our comparative warmth tests revealed the Ex Light to be a bit warmer. The dense quilting pattern on the Halo Top compresses the down, but that should not affect warmth. The main difference between the two garments are the style (anorak versus jacket) and the much longer body length of the Halo Top (30 inches versus 26 inches for the Ex Light). So the longer body length distributes the down insulation over a larger area.

Which jacket do I like better? That’s a tough question, it’s like asking me which one of my kids I love the most. Both jackets are excellent and ultralight, and I love them for different reasons. I especially like the sizing of the Halo Top and the facts that it covers my butt well and that all openings seal well. Its long body length makes it a better choice for taller people.

Specifications and Features

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

Introduction

This separate review provides additional descriptive and performance information on the Brooks-Range Alpini Mountain Anorak. Read our forthcoming article, Ultralight Three-Season Down Jackets State of the Market Report 2010 for a state of the market analysis and comparative specifications and performance for a range of ultralight down jackets.

Brooks-Range designs and manufacturers gear for mountaineering. Their new Alpini Mountain Anorak is seriously warm, lightweight, and capable. But it is designed for climbers, and combines with their Elephant Foot Sleeping Bag (a waist high sleeping bag) to create a lightweight sleeping system. How suitable is the Alpini Mountain Anorak – by itself – for lightweight backpacking and other lightweight pursuits?

Description

The Alpini Mountain Anorak is a lightweight and warm garment, a pullover style with a half-height front zipper, two unique side zippers, reach-through front pockets, and adjustable cuffs. The manufacturer weight for size Medium is 12.6 ounces (367 g). It contains 5.2 ounces (146 g) of 800 fill-power Canadian goose down, which yields a single-layer loft of 1.6 inches (4.1 cm). Brooks-Range claims a comfort rating of 15 F/-9 C. Applying some math, the jacket is 45% down using our measured weight for size Large. This big boy is one puffy jacket! It’s also available with a hood.

The shell fabric is a very lightweight 15-denier 0.86 oz/yd² (29 g/m²) ballistic mini-ripstop nylon with DWR, which is soft to the touch and quite durable with reasonable care.

Performance

The first thing I discovered is that the Alpini runs small. A size large normally fits me, but the Alpini in that size (the red one in the photo above) was a bit too short in the body and tight in the sleeves. It will layer over only a thin baselayer. I exchanged it for an extra large (the yellow one), which fits me well with more room inside for layering.

The Alpini is a furnace! In Part 1 of our state-of-the-market article cited above, we report that the Alpini is one of the warmest jackets we tested. It has a very high fill weight:jacket weight ratio. Brooks-Range apparently uses very high quality 800 fill-power down, because 5.2 ounces (146 g) of it produces a really puffy jacket. Other jackets with 4 to 5 ounces (113-142 g) of down fill I tested were not nearly as puffy or warm.

Although the Alpini is very light weight and warm, I have an issue of the side zippers and Velcro tabs. Personally I did not find the side zippers that useful for venting, so for me they are just extra weight. For colder weather activities (backpacking, snow camping, backcountry skiing, and snowshoeing) I normally wear lighter layers during the day when my exertion level is high; I don’t wear a heavy-duty down anorak because I would get too hot. The Alpini is too much jacket for daytime use, unless it is wicked cold and/or windy. My main need for the Alpini is in camp for cold evenings and mornings, and in my sleeping bag at night to extend its warmth.

Also, the jacket has a total of four Velcro tabs – two on the side zippers and two on the cuffs. They don’t snag on the jacket itself, but they do snag on other gear when I stuff the jacket into a backpack. Velcro can damage other fabrics, and I personally prefer a Velcro-free jacket.

The bottom line for me is I would much prefer a version of the Alpini without the side zippers and Velcro tabs, and I would like a #3 front zipper to further reduce weight. That said, I readily acknowledge that the side zippers can be very useful for any cold weather activity (like climbing) where one’s exertion level varies, and it’s not convenient to remove the jacket.

The jacket has a tendency to slide up my torso when I raise my arms, and I find myself repeatedly pulling the bottom of the jacket back down over my butt. Perhaps a good design for non-climbers would be to eliminate the side zippers, and add a lightweight hem drawcord so the jacket can be snugged below the waist. So, my suggestion for Brooks-Range is to offer another version of the Alpini without side zippers and Velcro tabs, add a lightweight hem drawcord, and go to a #3 zipper on the front. That version for non-climbers would be easy to create (simply sew the side seams instead of putting in zippers, and add simple elastic cuffs), would be less expensive to manufacture, and would cut a couple of ounces.

Comparisons

Our forthcoming article Ultralight Three-Season Down Jackets State of the Market Report 2010 provides complete specifications and ratings for the Brooks Range Alpini Mountain Anorak in comparison to a range of other lightweight down jackets. The jackets most similar to the Alpini are the PHD Ultra Down Pullover, Minimus Down Pullover, and Nunatak Skaha Anorak.

Assessment

The Alpini easily became my favorite jacket for winter camping. It’s super warm and very light weight. I would also take it on early spring and late fall trips in the mountains. I don’t mind the pullover style at all; it pulls on easily enough and seals warmth inside.

For colder weather backpacking or winter travel with skis or snowshoes and snow camping, I can easily do without the jacket’s side zippers and Velcro cuffs. I would love to see a version of the Alpini without the side zippers and Velcro tabs, a lightweight hem drawcord, and a lighter front zipper. For me that would be perfect.

Specifications and Features

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

Overview

There are many different sorts of compasses, ranging from tiny button things to great hulking surveyor/military things. In between we have the typical baseplate compasses.

One problem with the tiny compasses is that many of them are prone to sticking if you don’t have them precisely level. I’ve tried quite a few and never been really confident about relying on them, even though they are so ultralight. Another problem with them is that they don’t allow you to get a very accurate bearing. In fact, many of them don’t have much more than the four (or eight) cardinal points marked on them.

The obvious problem with the big surveyor/military ones is weight. I have an Australian Army prismatic compass which weighs half a ton: it is made from solid brass. It (truthfully) comes from World War II. To be sure, I can read it (and trust it) to half a degree or better, but I don’t need that accuracy in the field. I did find it useful for surveying my farm though.

In between we have the broad category of baseplate compasses. These have a disk-shaped liquid-filled module mounted on some sort of flat baseplate and come in a range of weights and sizes. The heavy end is the domain of the mirror and other sighting compasses. I am sure they have a use somewhere, but I find them rather clumsy and impractical. In fact, some of them seem downright awkward or worse. I also find that I can get just as good a bearing from a simpler compass as one of these, so they are just excess weight for me. Perhaps if I was trying to locate myself on a broad flat plain by sighting on distant sharp peaks they might have a slight advantage, but ‘flat plains and distant peaks’ doesn’t describe any of the country I walk in.

That leaves us with the simple baseplate units. Some of these have big baseplates, and others have little baseplates. The argument for the bigger baseplate is greater accuracy, except that I have never found that necessary or even useful, even for tricky navigation. The bigger baseplates also sometimes have a magnifying glass embedded in them: I haven’t found that to be a real lot of use either.

In fact, up until recently my favourite ‘baseplate’ compass did not even have an extended baseplate per se. It was very much like the Brunton 9030 shown here: just the round compass module, rotating inside an outer ring for declination adjustment. Yes, there is a ‘baseplate’ attached to the black ring under the rotating module, with the logo and arrow on it. I bought mine in France after I (ahem) lost my previous compass in the mountains. I think mine was made in China: it was fairly cheap. I have shown the Brunton 9030 here to illustrate what I mean by a compass without an extended baseplate. But after many long trips in the mountains over many years, my Chinese one started to lose the damping fluid inside the module, and it was time for a new one.

I looked at a range of baseplate compasses. Many of them had long plates with corners. The length can be a bit inconvenient at times, since I usually carry my compass hanging around my neck (a compass is of no use if you can’t get at it easily). The corners on the long baseplates can dig into my chest. This model 7DNL is the lightest and smallest baseplate in the Brunton range, at only 25.5 g (0.91 oz).

The rotation of the compass module on the baseplate to set the local declination is really very smooth, but there is just enough friction to keep the declination set. The red ring used to rotate the module is a smooth and tactile polymer band: no sharp corners. It handles nicely.

The markings around the edge have been hot-stamped into the plastic: they are not just painted on the surface. This means it should be a long while before they wear off. One could wish the lines were a shade narrower, but really they don’t matter that much. I normally align the compass with the needle anyhow by rotating the whole unit. This automatically corrects for the local declination.

One thing I did notice was that the needle looks a bit tilted when the compass is flat on the table. The white S-seeking end of the needle points slightly downwards. That means I have to tilt the compass slightly (about 5 degrees) to be absolutely sure the needle is able to swing freely. This isn’t hard to do and becomes automatic.

The need for this tilt is hardly surprising, as the magnetic field around where I live (Sydney, Australia) is actually tilted some 64 degrees downwards. That’s really pretty savage, so a tilt of the compass needle of 5 degrees is rather small. Actually, all our compasses need a similar amount of tilt to swing most freely, so there is nothing special about this one. Yes, in Europe the tilt goes the other way, as expected.

Brunton supplies a soft red loop of cord which can be used as a neck loop for hanging the compass around your neck. It’s a very good idea, and that’s how I carry my compass. However, an hour after hanging the compass around my neck, I found the cord was really twisted up something awful. I unraveled all the twists and continued. An hour later, the twists were back: this happened several times in one day. I simply do not know what was the matter with the string, but it was too much for me and I replaced it with my own.

Specifications and Features

What’s Good

• Robust
• Light
• Easy to use
• Bold markings

Possible Improvements

• Slightly finer definition on the printing
• Better quality string

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

Overview

First we had the Primus Eta Power stove, reviewed in our Stove Shootout series. A fine stove, but a heavy combination. One might suggest that the overall concept came from a traditional heavyweight backpacker. Then we got the Primus Eta Packlite stove: a reduced-weight version of the Eta Power, but the result was still a bit heavy for the fanatics, even though both of these stoves had good performance and low CO emission.

Now, what happens when you take the core of one of these stoves and strip away all the fancy frills? In short, you are left with the burner and a pot stand. In other words, the Primus Express Spider.

The burner is the same one used in the two parent stoves, and the CO emissions were very similar – around 10 ppm once the stove has passed through the normal warm-up spike in CO. This figure is gratifyingly low. This stove could well be used in the vestibule of a tent in mid-winter.

The efficiency of the stove is quite reasonable too, requiring between 11.7 (at low power) and 12.7 (at high power) grams of fuel to raise one litre of water through 80 C (our standard test conditions). The stove takes between 5.8 (high power) and 12+ (low power) minutes to heat that litre of water through 80 C. Of course, if you are melting snow you will need more fuel and more time than this.

The stove does need to be started on gas rather than liquid if you can manage it, and converted after maybe 15 seconds to a liquid feed as shown in the two photos here. If you have to start it with a liquid feed, warm the preheat tube up in your hand for a moment first, and then start with a very low flame. Once the flame is bathing the preheat tube, you can start increasing the power.

Being a rather low stove means that you only need a low windshield for it, as shown here. It also means it is quite stable in the field. This is convenient, but given its fairly high power, you would definitely be well-advised to use a moderately wide pot to get the best efficiency from it. Me, I pack the stove inside the pot for protection – no kinks in the hose please!

Summary

With a weight of roughly 200 grams and the good all-round performance outlined above, this stove would be excellent for two people in the winter and still very suitable for a solo walker (skier, snow-shoer, …)

Specifications and Features

What’s Good

• Robust and stable
• Fairly light for a remote canister stove
• Easy to use

Possible Improvements

• Refine design of brass air inlet region to titanium/aluminium
• Titanium legs?

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