Articles (2020)

Eddie Bauer First Ascent Downlight Sweater Review

This jacket really rocks – an excellent balance of light weight, basic features, warmth, wind and water resistance, and cost.

Introduction

Eddie Bauer First Ascent Downlight Sweater Review - 1
Hiking in the Eddie Bauer First Ascent Downlight Sweater on a cold January day in Arches National Park, Utah

Eddie Bauer was not on my radar screen to find lightweight performance outdoor clothing. That changed with the introduction of their First Ascent line, in concert with a successful Everest expedition in May 2009. Their experienced climbing team provided a lot of input into the garments’ design, which is evident in the Downlight Sweater. This jacket has an excellent balance of light weight and essential features, it’s very warm, and it’s a great value.

Description

The Downlight Sweater meets our requirements for ultralight three-season backpacking: it’s insulated with high-loft down (800 fill-power), has a lightweight shell with a DWR finish, has a minimal feature set (see the feature list in the specifications table at the bottom of this review), and weighs less than 14 ounces (397 g). A special edition of this jacket insulated with 900 fill-power down is available for a limited time. A hooded version is not available.* (*Editor’s note: a hooded version became available in late 2010.)

The shell fabric is 1.1 oz/yd2 ripstop polyester, which is more water resistant than nylon and nearly as strong. Actually, modern polyesters are essentially equivalent to nylon for strength and durability.

Eddie Bauer claims that the features of garments within the First Ascent line are designed to be compatible when worn together, including body sizing and length, location of pockets and zippers, sleeve length, need for a hood, etc. I have not personally tested this.

Eddie Bauer First Ascent Downlight Sweater Review - 2
Several things stood out when I first discovered the Eddie Bauer First Ascent Downlight Sweater: it’s available in both men’s (left) and women’s models (right), it’s available in regular and tall sizes (plus petite for women), and it costs about US$50 less than many other down jackets.

Eddie Bauer First Ascent Downlight Sweater Review - 3
Front and rear views of the Eddie Bauer First Ascent Downlight Sweater.

Eddie Bauer First Ascent Downlight Sweater Review - 4
The front of the jacket (left) has two zippered handwarmer pockets that are fleece-lined. There are two drop pockets on the inside (right) that are very convenient for drying gloves, or for keeping a variety of smaller items warm and handy.

Performance

Eddie Bauer First Ascent Downlight Sweater Review - 5
I tested the Downlight Sweater in late fall and winter while backcountry skiing (shown), snowshoeing, winter hiking, and snow camping. Note that I am wearing the down jacket over a shell jacket during a break; the jacket does not have a hood.

The Downlight Sweater in size Large has a roomy fit on me (6 feet, 167 pounds, 37-inch chest, 34-inch arms), with enough room inside to wear several thin layers or another jacket or vest. Its 27.5-inch (70-cm) body extends below the hips (see photos). The tall version’s body is 2 inches (5 cm) longer and sleeves are 1.5 inches (3.8 cm) longer.

I measured the jacket’s double-layer loft at 1.75 inches (0.9 inches single layer / 4.4 cm double, 2.3 cm single), which is good. Eddie Bauer does not specify the amount of down in the jacket. In my field trials I found the jacket to be quite warm when worn while hiking on cold days, worn as a midlayer under a shell while backcountry skiing on cold days, worn as a midlayer under another insulated jacket while snow camping, and worn in my sleeping bag to extend its warmth.

Eddie Bauer First Ascent Downlight Sweater Review - 6
I measured the “Relative Warmth” of the Downlight sweater according to the method developed by subscriber Richard Nisley and posted in the Backpacking Light forums. I inserted a heating pad pre-heated to 95 F (35 C) into the jacket (back side up; room temperature at 60 F / 16 C) and measured the surface temperature in twenty locations after one hour with an infrared thermometer (left). The Relative Warmth (average surface temperature) for the men’s version was 77 F and 74 F (25 C and 23 C) and for the women’s version (right). The difference between the two is not significant, so the men’s and women’s versions have equivalent warmth. Note that the seams on the men’s version leaked more heat than the women’s version.

Eddie Bauer First Ascent Downlight Sweater Review - 7
In December I wore the Downlight Sweater while hiking in a wet snowstorm (31 F / -1 C) for several hours, and found the jacket’s DWR finish repels water for awhile, then wets out (right). The sleeves (right) wetted out more on the underside where they contact the jacket. I weighed the jacket and found it absorbed 0.7 ounce of water. The water did not soak through the jacket and wet the down.

Eddie Bauer First Ascent Downlight Sweater Review - 8
I followed up my field observations with a one-hour indoor “puddle test” (left). The results confirmed my field observations – the fabric surface wetted some (which is difficult to show with a photo), but NO water soaked through the fabric or the seams to wet the down. The tray I placed inside the jacket was completely dry.

The jacket’s water resistance is excellent; although the outside surface of the shell wetted somewhat with prolonged exposure to water, no water soaked through to wet the down or enter the inside of the jacket. This suggests that the surface DWR could stand some improvement, but fabric and seam resistance to water penetration is excellent. From my testing experience, only the Rab Microlight Jacket has better water resistance; in that case the shell fabric did not wet out and no water passed through the seams.

I also found the Downlight Sweater to have good wind resistance. The elastic cuffs and hem seal well, but the neck is loose. While hiking into the wind on a cold day in Arches National Park (top photos) I felt a cold draft around my neck, but when I put my chin inside the collar, it sealed better.

Lastly, I did not have any problems with the shell fabric snagging easily, as I have seen with a few jackets. Overall, the shell fabric is very soft, adequately durable with reasonable care, mostly downproof (only an occasional feather came through), and very water resistant.

Comparisons

The following table compares specifications of jackets similar to the Eddie Bauer First Ascent Downlight Sweater. All jackets have premium down insulation, sewn-through construction, and a full-height front zipper. Manufacturer data for size men’s medium are shown.

Jacket Shell Fabric Insulation Measured Single Layer Loft (in / cm) Features Weight (oz / g) Cost (US$)
Eddie Bauer First Ascent Downlight Sweater 1.06 oz/yd2 polyester 800 down 0.9 / 2.3 Two zippered hand pockets, two inside drop pockets, elastic cuffs and hem 13.4 / 380** 169
Mountain Hardwear Nitrous 1 oz/yd2 polyester 800 down 0.6 / 1.5 Two unzippered hand pockets with flap, zippered chest pocket, drawcord hem, elastic cuffs 12.0 / 340 220
Rab Microlight Jacket 1.3 oz/yd2 Pertex Microlight (nylon) 750+ down 0.75 / 1.9 Two unzippered hand pockets, zippered chest pocket, elastic cuffs and hem 11.3 / 320 190
Patagonia Down Sweater* 1.4 oz/yd2 polyester 800 down 0.9 / 2.3 Two zippered hand pockets, one inside zippered mesh pocket, drawcord hem, elastic cuffs 12.4 / 352 200
Western Mountaineering Hooded Flash Jacket 0.9 oz/yd2 (dot ripstop nylon) 850+ down 0.9 / 2.3 Insulated hood, elastic cuffs and hem, two unzippered hand pockets 9.0 / 255 260
MontBell Alpine Light Down Jacket 30 d Ballistic Airlight (nylon) 800 down 1.1 / 2.8 Two unzippered hand pockets, two inside drop pockets, elastic cuffs and hem 11.3 / 320 160

*The Patagonia Down Sweater has been upgraded since BPL reviewed it in 2005. Data in the table (except loft) are for the current version.

** The actual weight for size Large is 12.6 ounces (357 grams).

The Eddie Bauer Downlight Sweater compares favorably with similar jackets in terms of down quality, loft, and cost. The closest comparison is the Montbell Alpine Light Down Jacket which has a little more loft, weighs about 1.5 ounces (43 g) less, and costs a little less. The Western Mountaineering Flash Jacket has similar loft and features, weighs about 3 ounces (85 g) less (and has a hood), but it costs $90 more.

Assessment

The Downlight Sweater has become one of my favorite ultralight down jackets. It’s an excellent balance of light weight, basic features, warmth, and cost. It is sized well for layering under it, and the fleece-lined pockets are appreciated on cold days. Its water and wind resistance are excellent. I can personally do without the pocket zippers to save a little weight, but that feature gets down to personal preference.

Overall, the Downlight Sweater is well designed and sized, it’s lofty and warm, and a great value. It’s quite light weight, but not the lightest. It’s an excellent choice when you realize that the lightest jackets with comparable warmth cost about $100 more. I noticed the Downlight Sweater on sale in late 2009 at $139, which is an outstanding value.

Specifications and Features

  Manufacturer

Eddie Bauer (http://www.eddiebauer.com/)

  Year/Model

2009 First Ascent Downlight Sweater

  Sizes Available

Men’s regular and tall S to XXL
Women’s regular, petite, tall S to XXL

  Style

Hoodless jacket with full front zip

  Fabrics

Shell is 1.06 oz/yd2 (36 g/m2) ripstop polyester with DWR
Lining is 1.3 oz/yd2 (45 g/m2) nylon taffeta

  Insulation

800 fill-power down

  Construction

Sewn through with 2.5-in (6-cm) horizontal quilting (men’s), 4-in (10-cm) rectangular quilting (women’s); set-in sleeves

  Loft

Measured two-layer loft is 1.75 in (4.5 cm)

  Features

Down-filled stand up collar, full height #5CNs YKK reverse coil zipper with one slider and storm flap under zipper, two fleece-lined zippered side pockets, two interior drop pockets, elastic cuffs and hem (no drawcord), 1.5 in (3.8 cm) dropped tail, chamois chin guard, stuffs into left hand pocket

  Weight

Size men’s Large tested
Measured weight: 12.6 oz (357 g)
Manufacturer specified average weight: 13.4 oz (380 g)

  MSRP

US$169

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.

Sierra Designs Nitro 30 Sleeping Bag Review

Remarkably lofty and warm for a 30 F (-1 C) rated bag – this is the first sleeping bag I have tested that’s warmer than its claimed temperature rating!

Introduction

Sierra Designs Nitro 30 Sleeping Bag Review - 1
Modeling the Nitro 30 after on an overnight igloo camping trip.

My preference for an ultralight sleeping system that will handle occasional unexpectedly cold nights is a 30 F rated mummy-style down sleeping bag with enough girth so I can wear extra clothing inside to extend its warmth when needed. Backpacking Light will publish a series of three articles in spring 2010 covering the insulated components of an ultralight three-season sleeping system for colder temperatures. This review is a separate evaluation of the Sierra Designs Nitro 30 sleeping bag.

When selecting sleeping bags to include in my upcoming state of the market article on ultralight three-season down mummy-style sleeping bags, I at first rejected the Sierra Designs Nitro 30 because it weighs 26 ounces. The lightest bags in this category weigh in at 19 to 23 ounces. Then I noticed that the Nitro 30 (size Regular) contains 12 ounces of down, while the lighter bags contain 10 ounces of similar quality down. That’s 20% more, which should translate to more loft and more warmth. The Nitro 30 has some other features that also should contribute to warmth, so how does the slightly heavier Nitro 30 stack up compared to the lightest 30 F (-1 C) rated sleeping bags?

Description

Sierra Designs’ Partial Stretch technology is similar to MontBell’s Super Stretch Down Hugger technology, in which a proprietary elastic thread is used in the seams to provide enough elasticity to draw the bag up so it gently hugs the sleeper’s body. Sierra Designs puts the flex in the location where it is most needed – the widest part of the bag (shoulders to hips) – where excess volume requires more body heat to warm it up. To be specific, there are 7 inches of flex in the top of the bag from your chin down to your knees, so the shoulder girth expands from 53 to 60 inches and the hip girth expands from 50 to 57 inches.

Sierra Designs Nitro 30 Sleeping Bag Review - 2
The Nitro 30 (women’s Spark 30) is a member of Sierra Designs’ Ultralight Series of bags that feature a unique jacket-style hood, half-length zipper, partial flex technology (upper top of the bag), and lots of 800 fill-power down.

Sierra Designs Nitro 30 Sleeping Bag Review - 3
All Sierra Designs bags feature a Snag-Free Zipper Track to prevent zipper snags. The key component is a stiff piping (white) on both sides of the zipper that creates a barrier between the bag’s lining and the zipper track. The bag also features a large down-filled draft tube next to the zipper to prevent cold spots.

Sierra Designs Nitro 30 Sleeping Bag Review - 4
The Nitro 30 has Sierra Designs’ unique Jacket Hood (left), which is exactly what it says – it looks like the hood on a down parka when open, and it’s well insulated. The bag’s zipper angles from the side to the base of the hood. The hood draws down like a sleeping bag hood to expose only your nose and mouth. The gap below my mouth is explained in the next section.

Sierra Designs Nitro 30 Sleeping Bag Review - 5
The Nitro 30’s footbox has an 8-inch zippered vent (left) to provide extra ventilation when needed. There are two removable Pad Locks (thin straps that pass through loops on the bag) to attach the bag to a sleeping pad (right) to prevent slide off.

Performance

Sierra Designs Nitro 30 Sleeping Bag Review - 6
Winter camping using the Nitro 30 bag inside an igloo at 9,500 feet elevation on a cold January night.

I measured the loft of the Nitro 30 to be 6 inches (double-layer; single-layer loft is 3 inches). That’s one-third more than the lightest sleeping bags with the same temperature rating. Obviously, not all 30 F rated sleeping bags are created equal! Additionally, the bag has continuous baffles, so it’s possible to shift more of the down to the topside, if desired.

Sierra Designs Nitro 30 Sleeping Bag Review - 7
Verification that the Nitro 30’s double-layer loft measures 6 inches.

According to our table of estimated temperature ratings based on measured loft (read our Backpacking Light Position Statement on Sleeping Bag Temperature Ratings), 1.8 inches of single-layer loft translates to a 30 F (-1 C) rating and the Nitro 30’s 3 inches of single-layer loft translates to a 0 F rating. Please read the referenced article and Ryan Jordan’s article entitled Sleeping by Faith: Bag Temperature Ratings and realize that sleeping bag warmth depends on a number of factors.

So, how warm is the Nitro 30? I would hesitate to sleep in it on a 0 F (-18 C) night, but I had no problem staying warm down to 28 F (-2 C), wearing microfleece long johns and sleeping in a single-wall solo tent with a Therm-a-Rest NeoAir pad and RidgeRest foam pad under me. This is the first sleeping bag I have tested that actually exceeds its claimed temperature rating!

Next I wore a lightweight down jacket and pants (plus appropriate headwear and footwear) inside the Nitro 30 to see how much I could extend its warmth, and stayed warm down into the single digits (3 and 6 F / -16 and -14 C) on two occasions, and 15 and 19 F (-9 and -7 C) on other nights (yes, as explained in the above referenced articles, sleeping bag warmth is affected by a lot of variables). That’s remarkable for a 30 F rated sleeping bag! You are probably wondering what clothing I wore inside the bag, but that’s the subject of an upcoming article, so I will save that information for later.

One disappointment with the Nitro 30 is the bag length is shorter than expected. Sierra Designs specifies that size Regular fits a person up to 6 feet tall; I am 6 feet tall and I press against both ends of the bag. I was able to “get by” with a size Regular, but it was less than comfortable, and I constantly wished for a couple of extra inches in length for a better fit. Notice in the hood photo above that there is a gap under my chin. That resulted from the bag being too short for me; when I extend my legs the gap opens up, but when I bend my legs the gap closes and the hood seals around my mouth.

The bag’s girth, regardless of its stretch technology, is on the slender side. Note in the specifications table that the extended shoulder girth is 60 inches, which is the same as the Mountain Hardwear Phantom 32 and less than the Marmot Hydrogen’s 62-inch girth. I found the girth to be perfect (for me) when wearing light sleeping clothing, but snug when wearing additional down clothing.

Sierra Designs Nitro 30 Sleeping Bag Review - 8
I noticed on several occasions that the bag’s shell fabric wets out from condensation from my breathing at night (left), so I tested the bag’s water resistance with my “puddle test.” I put an eighth of a cup of water on a seam (right) and allowed it to stand for one hour. No water soaked through the seam or fabric.

My fall-winter testing period for the Nitro 30 did not provide an opportunity for me to test the bag’s foot vent, but I assume it works well to compensate for the half zipper on warm nights. I personally don’t have a need for additional features like a zippered foot vent, but some people do.

The bag’s pad attachment straps are useful for a back sleeper or hammock sleeper. As I’m a side sleeper, I had no use for the pad attachment straps because I want the bag to turn with me.

Sierra Designs Nitro 30 Sleeping Bag Review - 9
A lightweight (0.6-ounce) stuff sack is provided with the Nitro 30 that is properly sized to stuff the bag without over compressing it. Actually, it’s a little extra roomy, which I don’t mind a bit.

Comparisons

The following table compares the Sierra Designs Nitro 30 with some popular 30-32 F (-1 to 0 C) rated ultralight mummy style down sleeping bags. All of the bags have baffled construction, and all data are manufacturer specifications for a size Regular bag.

Manufacturer Model Temperature
Rating (F / C)
Measured Single-
Layer Loft (in / cm)
Fill Weight
(oz / g)
Fill Power Total Weight
(oz / g)
Cost US$
Sierra Designs Nitro 30 30 / -1 3.0 / 7.6 12 / 340.0 800 26 / 737 289
MontBell* UL Spiral Down Hugger #3 30 / -1 1.9 / 4.8 10 / 283.5 800 19 / 539 229
Mountain Hardwear Phantom 32 32 / 0 2.0 / 5.1 10 / 283.5 800 22 / 624 290
Western Mountaineering SummerLite 32 / 0 2.0 / 5.1 10 / 283.5 850+ 19 / 539 315
Marmot Hydrogen 30 / -1 2.0 / 5.1 11 / 311.8 850+ 25 / 709 319
The North Face Beeline 30 / -1 2.4 /6.1 10 / 283.5 850+ 22 / 624 279

*Note: A size Regular MontBell bag fits to 5 feet 10 inches, while the other bags fit a 6 foot tall person.

Interpreting the data, the Nitro 30 has 2 extra ounces (57 g) of down compared to the lightest bags, giving it exceptional loft, though it weighs a bit more too. Its US$289 cost makes it a good value (considering its extra warmth) compared to the other bags, but the MontBell Spiral Down Hugger at US$229 remains the best value despite it being less warm.

Assessment

The Sierra Designs Nitro 30 is warm!! The bag has 20% more down than a typical 30 F rated sleeping bag, giving it a full 6 inches (15 cm) of double-layer loft, one-third more than many other bags. Factors that contribute to the bag’s warmth are its extra down, flex technology that eliminates extra inside volume to keep warm, half zipper with a large down-filled draft tube, and jacket-style hood. For comparison, the MontBell Spiral Down Hugger #3 does not have a down-filled draft tube, has 2 ounces (57 g) less down, and lighter shell and lining fabric, which reduce weight, but the MontBell bag is clearly less warm, although it has the same temperature rating.

That extra warmth comes with some extra weight, 4 to 7 ounces (113 to 198 g) more than to the lightest bags. Two ounces (57 g) of the extra weight is the additional down insulation. The half zipper saves weight, but its Snag-Free Zipper Guard uses a heavier webbing-like material on both sides of the zipper, which adds weight. There is also extra fat in the bag’s foot vent, sleeping pad attachment straps (but they’re removable, saving 0.3 ounce), and 1.0 oz/yd2 shell and lining fabrics.

Overall, the Nitro 30 is an excellent choice for hikers who want to have an extra measure of warmth and for three-season camping in colder climates where a warmer sleeping bag is needed. Another way to look at the Nitro 30 is that its loft and warmth are equivalent to many bags that have a claimed rating of 15 F, so one might say it’s a very light and less expensive 15 F rated bag.

Specifications and Features

  Manufacturer

Sierra Designs (https://www.sierradesigns.com/)

  Year/Model

2009 Nitro 30

  Style

Hooded mummy with half-length zipper

  What’s Included

Sleeping bag, stuff sack, cotton storage bag

  Fill

800 fill-power down, 12 oz (340 g) size Regular, 14 oz (397 g) size Long

  Construction

5.5 in (14 cm) straight wall continuous baffles, flex technology in upper half of bag, ergonomically shaped footbox, six-chamber jacket hood

  Measured Loft

6 in (15 cm) average double-layer loft
Manufacturer specification not available

  Manufacturer Claimed Temperature Rating

30 F (-1 C)

  Stuffed Size

17 x 7 in (43 x 18 cm)

  Weight

Size Regular tested, measured weight: 1 lb 9.6 oz (726 g)
Manufacturer specification: 1 lb 10 oz (737 g)

  Dimensions (Shoulder/Hip)

Regular 53-60/5057/35 in (135-152/127145/89 cm)
Long 55-62/5259/37 in (140-157/132150/94 cm)
Measurements are relaxed-extended

  Sizes

Regular fits to 6 ft (1.83 m)
Long fits to 6 ft 6 in (1.98 m)

  Fabrics

Shell is 22 denier 1.0 oz/yd2 (35 g/m2) ripstop polyester with DWR
Lining is 22 denier 1.0 oz/yd2 (35 g/m2) ripstop polyester

  Features

Half-length zipper with one pull, anatomical footbox, continuous baffles, large down-filled draft tube, snag-free zipper track, jacket hood, partial flex, zippered footbox vent

  MSRP

Regular US$290
Long US$309

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.

REI Quarter Dome T2 Tent Review

There’s a lot of bang for the buck in this roomy, lightweight, double-wall tent!

Introduction

With the 3.8-pound Quarter Dome, REI did some thinking outside of the box, or rather outside of the tent, to come up with an interesting pole design that cuts weight while increasing interior space. The result is one of the lightest and roomiest two-person tents they have ever sold under their own name. I found that it is quite strong as well, shrugging off high winds and precipitation. Its low retail price makes this fine tent an even more attractive, providing a lot of bang-for-the-buck in the lightweight double-wall category.

REI Quarter Dome T2 Tent Review - 1
The REI Quarter Dome T2 – seen here overlooking the frozen Buffalo River – is the company’s lightest two-person double-wall tent. The 3.8-pound three-season tent will handle moderate winter weather quite well.

Specifications

Year/Manufacturer/Model 2009 REI Quarter Dome T2 Two-Person Tent
Style Three-season, two-person, double-wall tent.
Fabrics Body: Nylon mesh
Floor and Fly: Coated ripstop nylon
Poles and Stakes Poles: 3x 9mm DAC Featherlite NSL poles all attached by DAC hubs, total weight 15.3 oz (434 g)
Stakes: 8x 6.8 in (17 cm), 0.5 oz (14 g) round aluminum shepherd’s hook stakes, total weight 4 oz (113 g)
Dimensions
v(Length, Width, Inside Height)
Listed: 84, 51, 40 inches (213, 130, 101 cm)
BPL Measured: 84, 48, 40 inches (213, 122, 101 cm)
Packed Size 7.5 x 20 in (19 x 51 cm)
Total Weight Listed Weight: 4.13 lb (1.87 kg)
BPL Measured:
4.34 lb (1.97 kg)
Trail Weight 3.8 lb (1.72 kg) with two stakes
Protected Area Floor Area: 28 ft2 (2.6 m2)
Vestibule Area:
13.4 ft2 (1.24 m2)
Protected Area/Trail Weight Ratio 10.9 ft2/lb (2.23 m2/kg)
MSRP US $269.00
Options Footprint: $26.50, ~13 oz (369 g)
Website http://www.REI.com

REI Quarter Dome T2 Tent Review - 2
When the weather is nice, the Quarter Dome can be pitched with the fly off to view your surroundings. As I knew that this camp on the summit of 11,500-ft Mt. San Gorgonio would get windy as the sun fell, I added the fly later. John Muir’s favorite southern California mountain, San Jacinto, is seen across the valley.

Design and Features

The REI Quarter Dome T2 is a complete redesign of the company’s Quarter Dome UL tent, and from where this guy writes, it was a success. Utilizing DAC poles and swivel hubs, they came up with a smart design called "Tension Truss" architecture that gives structural integrity while adding headroom. It also keeps the sides steeper to give more move-around room in the tent.

REI Quarter Dome T2 Tent Review - 3
The Quarter Dome comes with stuff sacks for everything and enough thick aluminum stakes to secure all points and still have a couple extra for guy lines. While it looks bulky packed from the factory, carrying the poles separately will allow the rest of the tent to compress, taking up much less space than seen here.

A fellow BackpackingLight member and friend of mine said she can’t stand poles that are all connected like the Seedhouse SL2 she saw me using in Yosemite. Well, L, you really won’t care for this one. The Quarter Dome uses twenty-four sections of shock-corded aluminum and two swivel hubs to make three poles. The longest pole (silver) runs at an angle from one corner to the other, where it plugs into grommets in color-coded silver straps. The two shorter orange poles start at their own orange corner locations and curve across the silver pole to end at a grommet above each of the doors. The length of orange pole that goes past the silver one creates a cantilevered truss, hence the name so familiar to those of us in the construction industry.

Once the poles are in place, the mesh walled inside tent attaches with clips, a welcome departure from the pole sleeves in the old version. The fly has attachment points at the ends of the truss poles and adjustable straps at the corners to give a strong, tight pitch. The two vestibules are formed by pulling the fly away from the doors and securing with a single stake at each one.

While the walls of the inner have been changed to full mesh (compared to the partial solid nylon of the old model), REI wisely left solid material on the very top of the Quarter Dome T2. This keeps condensation from dripping from the fly to the mesh and raining down as mist.

REI Quarter Dome T2 Tent Review - 4
Views of the Quarter Dome. Top left: the orange poles form the Tension Truss that terminates above the door. Top right: the effect of the truss is seen as it pulls the side walls more vertical. While not as wide as REI claims, there is still plenty of room for two pads. Bottom: front and side views of the fly in place.

One of my favorite things about the Quarter Dome is its teardrop-shaped doors. As they have full double zippers, the doors can be completely tucked away into a small mesh pocket above each one. More pockets for gear storage may be found lower at each corner inside the tent.

On each side of the fly a good sized vent provides extra air movement. The vents have tethered struts to hold them open and can be adjusted from inside the tent without the need to open the vestibule doors.

The Quarter Dome comes with a large stuff sack that has a carrying strap and two compression straps. It weighs 2.6 oz (74 g). It also comes with a 0.6-oz (17-g) pole sack and a 0.4-oz (11-g) stake sack.

REI did not send a footprint with the tent, but the 23.9-oz (678-g) fly and 15.3-oz (434-g) poles can be used with one to cut the weight of your shelter if bugs are not a concern. As the only weight I can find for a footprint says “about 13 oz” and the inner weighs just 20.8 oz (590 g), it is only a savings of 7.8 oz (221 g).

REI Quarter Dome T2 Tent Review - 5
The devil’s in the details. Top: All points that stake down are adjustable after the fact to provide a taut pitch. The large vents can be opened or closed from inside the tent if you’ve got long monkey arms like me. Well, it works for normal arms too. Bottom: Gear storage pockets are in each corner, but the two above the doors may be used to tuck the open door out of the way.

Performance

I got to use the Quarter Dome in the mountains of California and quite a bit in northwestern Minnesota. Once I set it up a couple of times, I got used to the poles. The color coding helps. Over half of my trips with it were in temps at or below freezing, and I am happy to say that it is easy to set up with gloves on.

The pole design works as well as REI says, giving the Quarter Dome a lot more room to move around in than most tents of the same dimensions. I was able to sit up with plenty of clearance. Being 6′ 3” (1.91 m) tall, I found that the length was fine when using my quilt, but once I had the big winter bags inside they hit both ends of the tent. REI addresses this with a T2 Plus version that is longer; of course, it weighs more too.

The heavy-duty aluminum stakes that REI provides worked great in both the rocky terrain of California’s mountains and the clay of Minnesota, though they sat down and said “no way” once the ground froze. While trying to stake down the Quarter Dome in Minnesota’s Buffalo River State Park in November, they not only would not go in more than a half inch, they bent! A month later after a spell of temps down to -29 F (-34 C), I had to substitute six hardened steel screwdrivers to set it up in anticipation of a snow storm that I wanted to ride out in it. (Yeah, we testers are weird…)

Speaking of storms, the Quarter Dome did an excellent job of weathering them. The symmetrical shape lends itself well to shedding wind. There are really no flat areas for the wind to catch.

The wind does blow snow and sand inside the tent through the mesh walls. This occurred when I was in just 4 to 6 inches (10-15 cm) of snow, and I was a bit concerned the night I spent in the storm. I needn’t have worried, as the falling snow slid down the sides and eventually blocked the openings at the bottom of the tent, though that killed a lot of my air movement as far as ventilation went. As it was 0 F (-18 C), I did not need the wind-chill – I mean, air movement – that much. I had no problems with condensation inside the tent proper except for the area of my bag around my face and my balaclava, but the next morning the entire inside of the fly was coated with ice crystals. The humidity was at 74% in the morning when I split.

That was the only condensation I experienced in the Quarter Dome, as the two vents work very well. Opening the bottom of the vestibule door lets you add draw during inclement weather while still keeping the inner dry. There are two loops at the bottom of the fly on the sides that will allow the fly to be pulled out further to do the same thing.

REI Quarter Dome T2 Tent Review - 6
Top Left: the large vents help keep the Quarter Dome dry inside, even in humid camp sites like this one next to the Buffalo River. Top right: The Quarter Dome earned its winter wings during this storm. Bottom: my size long -20 F sleeping bag hits both ends of the tent.

Assessment

I came away quite impressed with the REI Quarter Dome. I found the design to be brilliant. It really works! It has plenty of room for two people and the steep sides add to the comfort. If it was as wide as they say it is supposed to be it would be even better. No matter how I pulled the corners out I could never get more than 48 inches (122 cm) from side to side.

While not the lightest tent in its category, its strength overcomes much of the weight penalty. I would not hesitate to take the Quarter Dome on any trip that I thought bad weather was possible. One thing I learned was to get the poles all put together before taking the body out during bad weather. I had snow go into the tent as I was setting it up, which is not so bad as I can shake it out before staking it down. However, setting up during a downpour will result in a wet floor inside no matter what. Better to lessen the exposure as much as possible.

I am a fan of setting up mesh walled tents without the fly to be able to feel more in touch with nature, without nature being able to touch (or bite) me back. I also spend so much time at rocky camp sites that a free-standing tent is almost imperative. The Quarter Dome shines for both scenarios.

One thing that I was sad to see go away was the partial-height solid walls of the Quarter Dome UL. I think that the new version would benefit from even the bottom third being lightweight breathable nylon, which would block much of the blown in debris. Plus, a lot of newer fabrics are as light as the mesh or near to it.

The Quarter Dome has been durable as far as I can see. The floor is still in good shape after the abrasive rock in the mountains, and the fly is in good shape through all the weather woes of windy, stormy Minnesota.

Dare to Compare

In terms of comparisons, I believe that the Quarter Dome’s closest competitors that share the same design attributes are the MSR Hubba Hubba HP, and the Sierra Designs Lightning XT. I also threw in Big Sky’s Revolution for another choice in the same category. The Quarter Dome comes in at a lower weight than the Hubba Hubba and Lightning, but it sacrifices both interior and vestibule space to do so. The Revolution really beats it in all space and weight comparisons, but the heftier fabrics used in the Quarter Dome should handle prolonged bad weather better. The ventilation of the Quarter Dome is as good as I have seen, although the Revolution and Hubba Hubba HP are no slouches in that regard. The Quarter Dome represents a better value in price.

Manufacturer and Model REI Quarter Dome T2 Big Sky Intl Revolution 2P w/porch MSR Hubba Hubba HP Sierra Designs Lightning XT
Manufacturer Trail
Weight* lb (kg)
3.75 (1.7) 3.19 (1.45) 3.69 lb (1.67 kg) 3.93 (1.78)
Backpacking Light
Trail Weight** lb (kg)
3.8 (1.72) 3.41 (1.55) 3.9 (1.77) 3.98 (1.81)
Fabrics Floor coated ripstop nylon
Fly coated ripstop nylon
Body nylon mesh
Floor/fly 30D 1.3 oz/yd2 (44 g/m2) silnylon
Summer interior no-see-um mesh
Floor 40D nylon 66, 10,000mm PU
Fly 20D 1000mm PU/silicone coated nylon
Body 20D nylon 66 & 20D polyester mesh
Floor 70D 3000mm PU/silicone coated nylon
Fly 40D 1500mm PU/silicone coated nylon
Body 20D nylon mesh
Poles DAC Featherlite NSL pole system with two hubs Two lightweight aluminum poles DAC Featherlite NSL pole system with two hubs & short crossing pole DAC Featherlite NSL pole system with two swivel hubs
Dimensions***
L x W x H in (cm)
84 x 48 x 40
(213 x 122 x 101)
84 x 56/46 x 42 (213 x 142/117 x 107) 84 x 50 x 42 (213 x 127 x 107) 83 x 52 x 40 (211 x 132 x 102)
Floor area ft2(m2) 28 (2.6) 32.7 (3.04) 29 (2.7) 30 (2.79)
Number of Vestibules
& Area ft2(m2)
Two, 13.4 (1.24) Two, 16.6 (1.54) Two, 17.5 (1.6) Two, 21 (1.95)
Floor Area/Trail
weight ratio****
ft2/lb (m2/kg)
7.37 (1.51) 9.59 (1.96) 7.44 (1.53) 7.54 (1.54)
Protected Area/Trail
weight ratio*****
ft2/lb (m2/kg)
10.9 (2.23) 14.45 (2.95) 11.9 (2.43) 12.81 (2.46)
Cost US$ 269 360 450 289

Notes:

*Manufacturer Trail Weight: This is the minimum weight as listed by the manufacturer. Different companies may include different components in this weight.

**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

  • Structurally sound
  • Plenty of room for two people
  • Lots of interior space
  • Good value for the price

What’s Not So Good

  • Stakes are soft and bend easily
  • Mesh walls let in blowing sand and snow

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.

PHD Minim 400 Sleeping Bag Review

This zipperless down mummy-style 23 F rated sleeping bag is elegant for its simplicity, light weight, and high loft-to-weight ratio.

Introduction

PHD Minim 400 Sleeping Bag Review - 1
The standard PHD Minim 400 sleeping bag is a zipperless mummy-style bag. It’s insulated with 800 fill-power down and rated at 23 F (-5 C). I tested this bag in size Short with their lightest shell fabric available.

A good way for some women to save weight on a sleeping bag is to purchase a size Short, which usually fits a person up to 5 feet 6 inches. However, only a few manufacturers of ultralight sleeping bags offer a size Short; PHD Mountain Software, a small company in Stalybridge UK, is one of them. Being a small company that manufacturers their bags themselves, PHD (which stands for Peter Hutchinson Designs) offers customers a variety of options (at extra cost).

I don’t need a sleeping bag with a lot of features. I just want to be WARM. So the basic zipperless hooded Minim 400 suits me just fine. To further reduce weight, I opted for their MX Microfiber shell fabric, which is their lightest (comes in black rather than red). I chose and tested a size Short (I’m 5 feet 2 inches) hooded and zipperless down sleeping bag rated at 23 F (-5 C) with a measured weight of just 22 ounces. I’m very pleased with the Minim 400’s weight and performance, as I report in this review.

Description

The Minim 400 is a member of PHD’s ultralight series of sleeping bags. The basic bag is a hooded mummy-style, and it’s zipperless to save weight. If you desire a zipper, you can add a full-length zipper on either side of the bag for £25.

The beauty of working with a small company like PHD that makes each bag to order is that you can get exactly what you want. Rather than choose a specific model on their website, you can design your own sleeping bag from scratch. This gives you the opportunity to choose the length and girth (slender, standard, wide) you want, shell and lining fabrics, down quality and quantity, zipper length and position, and other options to satisfy your needs.

I chose to test the Minim 400 sleeping bag with minimal options. It’s a mummy-style bag with no zipper and insulated with 800 fill-power down. Rather than the standard microfiber shell fabric, I chose their lightest shell fabric, which is 0.88 oz/yd2 (30 g/m2) MX Microfiber. This fabric is calendared on both sides (more on the inside) to make it stronger and downproof, and it has a DWR finish. Since this is a minimalist down bag, there is not much else to describe.

Performance

PHD Minim 400 Sleeping Bag Review - 2
I tested the Minim 400 while summer backpacking and car camping in the southern Rockies and southern Utah canyon country. I slept under the stars and inside single-wall and double-wall tents.

I live in southwest Colorado and backpack in the summertime in our local mountains, where nighttime temperatures often drop down into the 30s F(-1s C). In the fall I camp and hike in the southern Utah canyon country, where nighttime temperatures range from 35 to 50 F (2 to 10 C). To test the bag’s lower temperature limit, I slept on our back porch on a late fall night where the nighttime temperatures dropped to 19 F (-7 C).

The Minim 400 in the Standard size contains 400 grams of down. I measured my size Short bag’s double-layer loft to be an average of 5.25 inches/13.3 centimeters (2.6 in/6.6 cm of single-layer loft). From Backpacking Light’s table of estimated temperature ratings based on measured loft (read our Backpacking Light Position Statement on Sleeping Bag Temperature Ratings), 2.6 inches of single-layer loft translates to about a 10 F (-12 C) temperature rating, so the Minim 400’s 23 F (-5 C) rating appears to be very conservative. Please take the time to read the referenced article and note that sleeping bag warmth depends on a number of factors.

PHD Minim 400 Sleeping Bag Review - 3
The Minim 400’s hood has seven panels and is operated by a braided drawcord and cordlock. It surrounds my head and places a breathing hole right at my nose and mouth.

Although many backpackers may prefer a zippered sleeping bag for the versatility it provides, I do not have any problems with sleeping in a bag without a zipper. I’m normally a cold sleeper, so I rarely have a problem with being too warm. Quite the contrary, I often wear my camp clothes inside my sleeping bag to provide extra warmth. The warmest night I spent in the Minim 400 was at Lake Powell in southern Utah, where it only got down to 50 F (10 C), and I slept comfortably with the top of the bag open and my body partly out of the bag. I have used a zipperless sleeping bag before (GoLite FeatherLite, 40 F/4 C), so I am familiar with the experience, and it doesn’t present me with any problems.

On my coldest night of testing (19 F/-7 C), I slept warm in the Minim 400 with baselayer and light insulated clothing until 4:00 a.m., when I noted the temperature to be 24 F (-4 C). I put on heavy insulated camp clothing I had stashed next to me. It took about thirty minutes to warm up the cold clothing, but then I was warm the rest of the night. Note that the Minim 400 has continuous baffles, so some of the down can be moved from the bottom of the bag to the topside to make the bag even warmer (this assumes you have a sleeping pad under the bag that provides adequate bottomside insulation).

PHD Minim 400 Sleeping Bag Review - 4
I tested the bag’s water-repellency by placing a puddle of water on the shell and letting it stand for one hour (left). I found the bag’s shell fabric to be very water-resistant, but the seams easily transmit water. A large amount of water accumulated on a tray that I had placed inside the bag to catch the water (right). The down was wet in the area surrounding my test.

In my field testing, the ends of the bag came into contact with condensation inside a single wall tent. The bag’s shell easily shed that small amount of water, and water did not enter the bag through the seams. I did not test the bag in rainy conditions to see if the bag absorbed moisture from moist humid air. From my tests, I conclude that the bag’s DWR treatment on the shell and lining provides adequate water-repellency to keep moisture from entering the bag and wetting the down under normal conditions, but water will penetrate the seams. This performance is comparable to most other sleeping bags with a DWR treatment on the shell, and the Minim 400 has a DWR treatment on the lining as well.

PHD Minim 400 Sleeping Bag Review - 5
The PHD Minim 400 comes with a durable stuff sack (0.9 ounce) that is properly sized to avoid overstuffing the bag.

PHD Minim 400 Sleeping Bag Review - 6
The two ends of the hood drawcord are wrapped with a small piece of fabric and sewn together, which creates a bit of a lump (left side of picture). The drawcord is not anchored in its channel, so the lump is free to move out of the channel, and once out is quite difficult to get back in the channel (especially in the dark in the middle of the night).

I didn’t notice the drawcord problem before using the bag. As it got colder on the first night, I cinched the hood, the knot slipped out, and I couldn’t get it back in. To tighten the cord, I needed to pull just one of two cords through the cord lock. After becoming aware of this problem, I learned to keep the knot centered inside the channel by pulling both sides of the cord evenly through the cordlock. Another aspect of this problem was that when the lump came out of the channel, it pulled the unfinished hem out of one side of the opening of the channel as seen in the lower right quadrant of the photo. In my opinion, this design is not durable enough for the long term, and a redesign could readily solve the two problems (cord coming out and unfinished hem being exposed).

Overall, from my testing, I found the Minim 400’s temperature rating of 23 F (-5 C) to be realistic. Note that since I am a cold sleeper, I always need to wear extra insulation to stay warm at a bag’s temperature rating. This Minim 400 bag is adequately roomy to wear extra clothing inside to extend its warmth. The zipperless design is not a problem if you are a person who wants to save weight and rarely experience situations where it’s warmer than about 50 to 60 F (10 to 16 C) at night. For a short person, getting a size Short sleeping bag is an excellent way to save weight and stay warmer, because there is less bag to warm up.

Comparisons

The hooded zipperless PHD Minim 400 is in a class of its own. The best comparison is with other 20-30 F (-7 to -1 C) rated ultralight mummy style down sleeping bags that are available in a size Short. All of the bags have baffled construction, and all data are manufacturer specifications for a size Regular bag. All bags have a zipper, except the Minim 400.

Note: all bags in this table are available in a size Short, though these specs are for a size Regular.

Manufacturer Model Temperature
Rating (F/C)
Measured Single-
Layer Loft (in/cm)
Fill Weight (oz/g) Fill Power Total Weight (oz/g) Cost US$
PHD Mountain Software Minim 400 23/-5 2.6/6.6 14.1/400 800 24/680 £235 (approx. US$382)
Sierra Designs Spark 30 30/-1 3.0/7.6 12.0/340 800 25/709 289
Nunatak Alpinist 20/-7 2.5/6.4 11.5/326 850+ 21/595 410
Feathered Friends Grouse 30/-1 2.0/5.1 13.9/394 850+ 26/737 329
GoLite Adrenaline 20/-7 2.5/6.4 10.1/285 800 29/822 325

The Nunatak Alpinist at 21 ounces is the lightest bag in this comparison, and the most expensive. The Sierra Designs Spark 30 is rated at 30 F (-1 C), and has the most loft of all the bags listed and the lowest cost, as well as a half-length zipper. Because of the low current (late 2009) exchange rate between the US dollar and the British pound, the PHD Minim 400 is expensive, and the Sierra Designs Spark 30 is perhaps a better value (about US $100 less). Note that buyers outside the UK do not pay Value Added Tax (VAT), so 17.5% is deducted from the price when purchased. However, when the dollar is strong, the Minim 400 is a much better value.

Assessment

I personally like the PHD Minim 400 because of its simplicity, high loft, and high warmth-to-weight ratio. I don’t mind the bag not having a zipper, because it keeps the bag simpler and lighter. I realize, however, that many people prefer having a zipper for personal convenience and to increase a bag’s versatility. The Minim is available with a full-length zipper option, which bumps up the weight and cost. For a zippered bag, the Sierra Designs Spark 30 (men’s version is the Nitro 30) is a standout. It has the most loft of all the bags listed, which suggests its 30 F (-1 C) rating is very conservative. It’s also the best value.

Specifications and Features

  Manufacturer

PHD Mountain Software (http://phdesigns.co.uk/)

  Year/Model

2009 Minim 400

  Style

Zipperless hooded mummy (optional zipper available)

  What’s Included

Sleeping bag, stuff sack, mesh storage bag

  Fill

800 fill-power down, 14.1 oz (400 g) size Standard

  Construction

4 in (10 cm) boxed wall baffles, continuous

  Measured Loft

5.25 in (13.3 cm) average double-layer loft, manufacturer specification not available

  Manufacturer Claimed Temperature Rating

23 F (-5 C)

  Stuffed Size

12 x 6.5 in (30 x 17 cm)

  Weight

Size Short tested
Measured weight: 1 lb 6 oz (624 g)
Manufacturer specification: 1 lb 8 oz (680 g) size Standard

  Measurements

Size Standard: Shoulder/hip/foot: 67/58/39 in (170/148/98 cm)

  Sizes

XShort fits to 5 ft 1 in (1.55 m)
Short fits to 5 ft 6 in (1.68 m)
Standard fits to 6 ft (1.83 m)
Long fits to 6 ft 7 in (2.01 m)
XLong fits to 7 ft (2.13 m)

  Fabrics

Optional MX outer shell (tested) is 0.88 oz/yd2 (30 g/m2) mini-ripstop nylon, calendared both sides, DWR finish; standard M1 shell is 40 g/m2; lining is MX Microfiber

  Features

Seven-panel baffled hood with braided drawcord and cordlock

  MSRP

Short and Standard £235 (approximately US$382), Long +7.5%

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.

Petzl Tikka XP2 and Tikka Plus2 LED Headlamp Reviews

Petzl has been busy upgrading and gives us two new versions of an old stand-by.

Introduction

Petzl has been busy upgrading the Tikka-Zipka line, and as part of this suite of six new headlamps gives us two versions of the old Tikka XP: the Tikka Plus2 and the Tikka XP2. Physically, the new Plus2 and XP2 have more similarities than differences and each includes the following:

  • Single, high-output, white, collimated LED
  • Small, red, 5mm LED
  • Single control switch, mounted top-center
  • Ratcheted angle adjustment
  • Hinged battery compartment
  • Wraparound elastic headband

The headlamp shells are similar in shape and incorporate the same materials – a combination of crystal clear and gray translucent plastics. Each is powered by three AAAs and, new to the 2-series, take any battery formulation: alkaline, NiMH, NiCd and yes, disposable lithium. Their switch control sequences are identical and both sport an IPX4 water resistance rating (“limited ingress of water sprayed from any direction”). Like the previous Tikkas, neither new light has current regulation, and both have battery life meters.

There are differences: The XP2 has a diffuser lens and head strap whistle and, importantly, is much brighter. The XP2 body is a bit deeper to accommodate the diffuser and has a slightly larger switch and collimator. The Plus2 weighs 5 grams less and costs $15 less.

A Bit of History

Four years ago, Petzl expanded the popular Tikka series of small LED headlamps with the XP, their first AAA-powered Luxeon (1-watt hyperbright LED) headlamp. Compared to the other Tikkas, with their floody 5 mm white LED arrays, the XP provided a bright pencil beam with much longer throw and very good battery life. Then, to tame that narrow beam into a wide flood Petzl added an optical diffuser lens that simply slides in front of the LED. At a bit over 3 ounces with batteries, the XP competed with the best from other headlamp makers in nearly every way, but with two exceptions: no current regulation and no use of disposable lithium cells. These XP descendants correct one of those shortcomings, add several new features, and shave a bit of weight.

Petzl Tikka XP2 and Tikka Plus2 LED Headlamp Reviews - 1
Tikka Trio. From top: Original Tikka XP, XP2, Plus 2.

Battery Options

Many BPL readers will be primarily interested in the restoration of lithium cells to Petzl’s list of approved batteries (across the entire Tikka/Zipka line, but not brand-wide). There is no documentation as to what changes Petzl made that renders them safe to use, and I don’t know whether the deletion of the old XP’s boost mode is somehow related. It’s likely fresh lithium cells (capable of high-current draw well beyond what alkaline or NiMH cells can eke out) were overdriving the older LEDs to premature failure. Since a major appeal of LED flashlights is their effectively limitless service life compared to incandescents, a cautious approach is understandable if there is a chronic weakness.

As a refresher, disposable lithium batteries provide more stable output as they discharge compared to alkaline cells and, as noted, tolerate higher current draw. They also perform better than alkalines in the cold and are much lighter. These benefits come at considerable cost, since lithium AAAs run at or above $2 each, nearly ten times the price of quality alkalines bought in bulk. While I’ve almost completely switched over to NiMH rechargeables for everything but long-duration hikes (especially since we now have low self-discharge cells), the ability to load up the new Tikkas with lithiums is welcome indeed for longer trips and very cold locations.

Design, Construction, Controls

You can see from the photo that the Plus2 and XP2 bodies differ from the XP. The new shell plastic feels slicker and the shape is a departure, although overall dimensions and weights are roughly comparable. The old XP has a fully removable (and potentially losable) battery cover, while the new models have a secure hinged lid with thumb tab opening that’s much easier to use. Interestingly, the new battery compartment is not sealed against the elements like the old model, which seems at odds with the IPX4 rating. However, through the clear body a seal can be spotted protecting the electronics. It appears Petzl doesn’t consider keeping water and fine grit out of the battery compartment to be an issue, but instead has gasketed just the electronics against intrusion. This may be in consideration of the fact that lithium cells can off-gas in use and require venting, a potential problem in sealed battery compartments. However, I caution folks in salt environments to take note of the new Tikkas’ unsealed battery compartments – anybody who uses one in the wet should dry it out when they can. If exposed to salt water or airborne grit, first rinse the battery compartment with fresh water.

Petzl Tikka XP2 and Tikka Plus2 LED Headlamp Reviews - 2
The works are partly visible through the case, as is the seal protecting the electronics.

As a certified klutz, I am qualified to say both lights are tough. I’ve dropped them plenty with no damage or failures. They seem reasonably sturdy, although I defer to spelunkers to weigh in on just how sturdy. The collimator, red LED, and battery meter are protected by a clear shield, and the XP2 diffuser offers a second protective layer.

The old XP diffuser slides sideways while the XP2’s slides vertically, a minor change that makes operation a bit easier. The new diffuser design also uses a larger tab for notably easier gloved operation and a spring assist helps return it to its hiding spot. The diffuser portion only covers the white LED and does not affect the red LED beam. The XP2 diffused beam is a bit narrower than the XP’s, but is still quite wide and even.

Both 2-series lights have a large single switch in a depression that should reduce accidental switch-on, but cannot eliminate it. I recommend stowing the light on red mode in case it does get turned on in your pack, because red mode won’t drain the batteries like white mode will. Compared to the old XP’s miniscule buttons, these new switches are a breeze to operate – a definite advance.

Operation

The operation of both 2-series Tikkas is identical. The lone switch controls all LED functions as follows. From off, a brief press switches the light on, while a long press switches between the red and white modes. Following initial power-on, each brief press cycles through the mode states in sequence.

  • White mode has three states: high, low and flash, in that order from off.
  • Red mode has two states: steady and flash, in that order from off.

Once the desired mode and state have been selected and the switch is unused for a few seconds, the next quick press switches the headlamp off. A long press will alternate the color mode without turning the light off. Regardless of this wordy description, the control sequence is easy to learn and use!

Petzl Tikka XP2 and Tikka Plus2 LED Headlamp Reviews - 3
Large, central switch is easy to find, operate even with gloves.

By comparison, the old XP has three continuous levels plus flash. It also has a boost mode accessed via a second button that gives a short burst of very high output. Boost is heat-limited and shuts off automatically if the button isn’t released first. This happens in less than one minute (for more on boost mode, see the Petzl MYO XP Review).

For me, the most important control advance in the Plus2 and XP2 is the color mode memory. They switch on to the last mode used, whether red or white. I would prefer that they also recalled which white level the light was last in (i.e., low was retained) but red mode recall is very helpful in retaining night vision by not inadvertently blasting my eyes with high-intensity white light. Star party folks, feel free to rejoice.

Beam

Tikka Plus2 and XP2 beam patterns are similar, but not identical. The Plus2 beam is more even and has no obvious artifacts (beam unevenness or odd shape and coloration). The XP2 beam is more center-weighted and has a couple of shadow artifacts. These differences are notable projected against a white wall, but undetectable in the field. Both lights are very different from the old XP, which uses both a collimator behind and a Fresnel lens in front of the LED, a rather sophisticated control scheme that gives it a superior beam pattern in my opinion. The new models use only a bare collimator, which seems to control the beam less completely. The XP2 diffuser spreads the beam wide and evenly, dropping intensity by a factor of about ten. The Plus2 doesn’t have this option, of course.

Why the diffuser feature isn’t slavishly copied by others is a mystery; instead they’re seemingly content to load up their hybrid lights with auxiliary banks of white 5 mm LEDs, rather than simply lensing their superbright main light. The costs to this approach, of course, are complexity and weight. (Conceptually, a red LED is better than a red lens [filter] in front of a white light source. A filter subtracts light, creating inefficiency compared using a red LED’s full output.)

Petzl Tikka XP2 and Tikka Plus2 LED Headlamp Reviews - 4
XP2 (left) clearly outperforms the Plus2 with no cost in extra power used.

Petzl Tikka XP2 and Tikka Plus2 LED Headlamp Reviews - 5
XP2 diffuser lens in place compared to Plus2 unlensed beam (both lights set on high).

Petzl Tikka XP2 and Tikka Plus2 LED Headlamp Reviews - 6
XP2 (left) and Plus 2 in red mode. Beam size difference likely an LED manufacturing variation.

Color

Tikka Plus2 beam is cool white, while the XP2 is a warmer white. When not compared side-by-side, the difference isn’t noticeable, but in my experience, warmer light is a little easier on the eyes over extended periods.

Fit and Aiming

Petzl uses very good quality headband material – soft with a reassuring amount of stretch. The new headbands are a bit longer than before – good news for helmet wearers and my fellow melonheads. The buckles don’t loosen in use. Helmet users can also investigate Petzl’s ADAPT system for mounting the headlamps without the headband. For all, the headband removes easily for cleaning. The whistle, added to one of the XP2 buckles, was a pleasant surprise and packing an XP2 takes care of two of the “ten essentials.” Its quite high frequency is the bane of dogs everywhere.

Petzl Tikka XP2 and Tikka Plus2 LED Headlamp Reviews - 7
Non-whistlers will be pleased with the XP2 whistle-buckle.

The headlamps aim slightly downward when set to the highest angle and the ratcheted adjustment allows roughly an additional 45 degrees of downward tilt. Anyone wanting to angle the light upwards (e.g., for bear-bagging) can simply flip it over, since there’s no top strap. I find the angle setting holds securely, although the ratchet mechanism is looser than my old XP. I’m not a trail runner, so I can’t verify that these new lights hold their position while pounding dirt through the dark, but they haven’t slipped in my use. The curved base is mostly padded by the strap and is comfortable on my forehead for extended stints. Petzl has been a leader in headlamp comfort for as long as I’ve used the brand (going back as far as the Zoom).

Petzl Tikka XP2 and Tikka Plus2 LED Headlamp Reviews - 8
In profile. The larger XP2 is on top – extra bulk is to accommodate the diffuser.

Performance in the Lab

Intensity

At the starting gate (fresh alkalines, initial reading) the Plus2 delivered 800 lux at 2 feet, while the XP2 achieved 1,800 lux, a whopping 225% brighter – a surprise given Petzl’s specs showing the XP2 putting out just 20% more lumens than the Plus2*. The Tikka XP2 also exceeded the old XP by roughly 80% (the XP measured about 1,050 lux), while the Plus2 was moderately dimmer. The original XP has a trick in its bag, however; an astonishing 2,500 lux in boost (albeit for less than a minute at a shot). (Please note: none of the lights holds the measured high value reported in the specifications for long, regardless of batteries used. A comparison of the values after at least half an hour is more valid.)

Output Over Time

Petzl Tikka XP2 and Tikka Plus2 LED Headlamp Reviews - 11
I tested both lights using Duracell “Ultra Advanced” alkalines and Sanyo Eneloop NiMH rechargeables and additionally tested the XP2 with Energizer lithiums. All tests were done in high mode and measured at two feet using a lux meter.

It’s plain from the alkaline results that these headlights are unregulated. The graphs plunge over the first hour then, after stabilizing for a bit, continue their downward slope, never settling into an extended period of flat output. The results show an odd “bounce” that may be heat-related (more on this later). Some, but not all, regulated lights can hold a steady output for quite awhile on alkalines.

NiMH rechargeable results show the same initial drop as the alkalines, then have a lengthy period of steady output before quickly dimming to the point that they must be changed. The performance of both Tikka models with NiMH is better than alkalines starting at about hour two and staying higher until they drop steeply at around four and a half hours. Most surprising to me is that the XP2 results essentially trace the lithium response through about hour four. Especially in view of the NiMH base cell voltage of 1.2V, this performance is laudable. Setting battery weight aside and considering the typically good NiMH cold performance, it’s hard to make an argument for lithium cells except for the most extreme pursuits. The performance and frugality of today’s NiMH cells are both indisputable and heartening, and we eagerly await the forthcoming nickel-zinc rechargeables to see if they can up the ante further. Reliable field-recharging is perhaps the final hurdle.

Lithiums were only tested in the XP2, and it proved an excellent pairing. Following the predictable initial drop, the output achieved a steady and very bright level for nearly five hours. The minor oscillation displayed on the graph up to hour five is likely battery-heat related and of no consequence in the field. The XP2 effectively mimics a regulated light throughout this period, perhaps signaling Petzl’s intent that this light really should be powered with lithuim (or NiMH) batteries in demanding uses. The observed drop beginning at hour five is little different from a regulated headlamp dropping out of regulation as battery voltage declines. XP2 output dropped quickly after that point, as is typical of flashlights with lithium cells. Lithiums don’t have more capacity than alkalines, but as noted are better able to endure high current draw, yielding results like we observe here (this is also why alkaline batteries work so poorly in digital cameras).

We did not measure red mode battery life on either light, but suffice to say it will be very, very long – probably days – with all battery types. Red mode performance should be identical in both Tikkas.

XP2 vs. Plus2 Measured Performance Verdict

From the start, the Tikka XP2 completely mopped the floor with the Plus2. It generally emitted twice the light and there was never a penalty at the back end – some point where the output curves would cross, and the Plus2 proved to be the frugal cousin over the long haul. The results beg the question, why the performance difference between the Plus2 and XP2? It’s clear the XP2 LED is simply more efficient – extracting more light from a like amount of current. If the other electronics are the same (a reasonable presumption in the absence of regulation), then it probably boils down to what “bin” the two LEDs are sourced from. Suffice to say the XP2’s LED is much more competent than the Plus2’s, so its bin was probably fur-lined.

Petzl Tikka XP2 and Tikka Plus2 LED Headlamp Reviews - 9
XP2 diffuser lens tab at rest below the main light.

I’m obliged to note that the XP2’s best performance – with lithium cells – is mimicked by the Princeton Tec Eos I tested a full five years ago. It’s hard to believe after five years of LED advances they’re so similar.

Temperature

Backpackers and other outdoor enthusiasts stress a lot over battery temperature, and rightly so, but they tend to look at it from just one perspective – the cold. There’s no arguing that very cold temperatures diminish battery capacity and performance, and that some formulas respond better than others (partly explaining the zeal for lithium cells). It’s generally considered a good idea to keep batteries from freezing, going so far as to use remote battery cases tucked in our clothing in harsh weather. But what about heat? Lights such as these Tikkas that combine the battery compartment with the works can get surprisingly warm, so much so I believe they sometimes become warm enough to negatively affect performance. If you look at the XP2 lithium graph you’ll see a jump in output at 2:15. This occurred after I opened the battery compartment and allowed the very warm cells to cool in the air while running. I’ve puzzled over this apparent contradiction ever since testing the PT Eos, when I got better performance from alkalines keeping the light in a refrigerator than I did keeping it at room temperature (the fridge Eos stayed warm to the touch despite the near-freezing environment). I’ll leave it to the smart folks to determine when taking steps to cool your headlamp might be advantageous.

All measurements for this test were performed at room temperature (about 68 F). I am hesitant to record the high initial outputs because they’re so fleeting, but feel it represents an achievable target when LED and battery technology mature sufficiently, so I think of these levels as goals tantalizing today’s flashlight and battery designers.

Dimming and RFI

Dimming of these new Petzls appears to be through pulse control modulation (PCM). Set on low, they visibly strobe when swung in the dark (but not when on full power) and would even blank out when I photographed them with relatively high shutter speeds. The old XP either uses another dimming scheme or the PCM frequency is too fast to notice. I can’t hear any high-frequency noise, as with some PCM lights, but these new Petzls do create a small amount of longwave AM radio interference when near a receiver. Petzl notes the following:

“Conforms to the requirements of the 89/336/CEE directive on electromagnetic compatibility.”

“Warning, when your lamp is lit and in close proximity to an avalanche beacon in receive (find) mode, it can interfere with the operation of the beacon. In case of interference (indicated by static noise from the beacon), move the beacon away from the lamp until the noise stops, or switch off the lamp.”

Performance In the Field

Red Mode

The little 5mm red LED is moderately focused, neither floodlight nor narrow spot. Red performance (intensity) is virtually the same on both models (Plus2 beam is a bit wider, probably due to LED variation) and is reasonably bright for simple navigation and camp chores. Ability to read by red light depends on one’s eyes; I’ve found it’s generally possible (making out colored detail on maps a notable exception). Importantly, red is bright enough for unwanted midnight trips to the bushes while conserving night vision. White low is, of course, much brighter than red.

White Modes

As noted previously, the new lights only have high and low levels, dropping the old XP’s mid. Anecdotally, flashlight makers are dropping the mid level (Petzl isn’t the only one) because their research tells them folks use just high or low and skip what’s in between. I don’t know whether that’s true, but when I’m night hiking I prefer more, rather than fewer options to help me maintain the minimum amount of light required by the situation, and no more. A valid counter-argument is fewer redundant button presses is better. Anybody who owns a headlamp with a six- or seven-mode cycle will understand the sentiment.

Regardless, we have two white settings with these lights, so two it shall be. The XP2’s diffuser effectively doubles the settings, because it greatly reduces intensity as it spreads the beam. Nighttime navigation is typically a task for a pencil beam, and the beams of both are narrow and fairly even with some spill. I don’t find much real-world difference between the Plus2 and XP2 beams other than intensity and there, the XP2 throw distance is clearly superior, whether trying to find a trail fifty yards ahead or spotting a high tree branch to target for bear bagging.

On the trail, I generally start out in red mode. I can usually follow very distinct paths that lack tripping hazards, but if not, I switch to low white mode, which is bright enough for decent trails. Here, the difference between the two lights shows, since the XP2 low mode is twice as bright. When technical bits of navigation arise, I switch to high setting, frequently needed on typical Sierra trails that are indistinct, gravel and rubble-strewn, eroded yards wide by pack animals or disrupted by blowdowns. The XP2 can prove almost too bright with fresh batteries, so the diffuser helps knock down the intensity and preserve night vision. It’s interesting to me how much I used the high setting the same way I use the old XP boost.

In camp, the XP2’s diffused beam is great. With it I can perform most of my chores without playing swivelhead and without a hotspot seared into my retinas. Reading, including maps, is another obvious application. It’s primarily the diffuser that has kept the XP in my backpack the last few years, instead of the competition and even despite the lack of regulation and lithium batteries. What finally displaces it is this new XP2. The Plus2 is a nice little light that also delivers on the trail and in camp, but its lack of key features and reduced performance instantly make me miss the XP2.

Stealthiness and Glare

If one of your nighttime goals is not being spotted from the side whilst wearing a headlamp, you might not want one of these new Tikkas. The clear/translucent bezel spills noticeable incidental light. This quality could come in handy if you were part of a team spread out some distance – the side spill could help team members keep track of one another’s location. It also increases the lights’ usefulness as location markers. I’ve used flashing lights to mark a location that I want to return to, such as my hammock in a stand of woods, while I’m wandering the area after dark without a light (an actual use for flash mode!). The wider the light source, the easier it is to spot from a distance.

I don’t mind the spill, but noted both lights create some glare on eyeglasses, more than the old XP, perhaps because they’re shorter and spill incidental light downward on the lenses. Some headlamps do this more than others, so glasses wearers should to test beforehand to see whether glare might be a problem. When I wear contacts or wear the light over a cap, there’s no glare.

Battery Meter

The Petzl website describes their battery meter as follows: “flashing green: ok, flashing orange: remaining charge <30%, flashing red: remaining charge <10%.” The owner’s manual says this: “When the red battery discharge indicator comes on, 50% of the original battery life remains for proximity lighting.” Contradictions aside, I have only noticed the meter in the red indicator mode once the batteries were well drained, and I suspect it’s not easy to notice when either light is still operating brightly.

Battery Swap

The tabbed battery compartment is easy to pop open, and unlike the old XP, there’s no chance of losing the cover. It opens wide for full access, but I need bare fingers to retrieve and replace the tiny AAAs. Polarity is marked inside and on the cover (not easy to read in dim light) and the asymmetrical contacts also hint as to correct battery alignment. The cover snaps shut readily and distinctly.

Petzl Tikka XP2 and Tikka Plus2 LED Headlamp Reviews - 10
The battery compartment is easy to open and close, but is not sealed.

Recommendations for Improvement

In a high-tech and competitive marketplace like LED headlamps, everything can be made better, by upgrading technology such as selecting more efficient LEDs, by adding (or deleting) features and by rethinking the physical form. With the Tikka Plus2 and XP2, Petzl has done all three.

Current regulation is an obvious area that Petzl eschews in the Tikka line (and to be fair, their main competition uses it in only a few models). I’m one of the evidently rare users who occasionally calls upon the middle brightness setting, and I’d prefer that it be restored, especially considering the huge brightness gulf between the XP2’s two modes. I’d include intensity in mode memory; I’d like a switch lock; I’d prefer that the battery compartment be gasketed (and if need be, vented via a valve). I find Petzl took a small step backward in pencil beam quality from the XP, possibly when deleting the Fresnel lens.

Ultimately, I would be interested in an XP2 variant powered by two AA batteries, regulated and stepped up to operating voltage. To my knowledge, nobody makes my dream light, so I can’t demerit Petzl for not reading my mind while designing the Tikka Plus2 and XP2. As it is, they’ve taken my favorite headlamp, the XP, and improved it in several regards with the XP2. The Plus2 is a nice enough light, but it doesn’t stand out amongst the competition and frankly, isn’t even as good as the old XP. Its much higher output and diffuser put the XP2 into a completely different league and certainly place it among the best lightweight, high-performance headlamps today. Spend the extra fifteen bucks.

Specifications

  Tikka XP2 Tikka Plus2 Original Tikka XP
Weight (no batteries) 51 g 45 g 57 g
Weight (3 AAA alkalines) 85 g 79 g 91 g
Control Buttons one one two
LEDs two (1 red, 1 white) two (1 red, 1 white) one (white)
Modes (total) five five five
Beam Diffuser? yes no yes
High (lux @ 2 feet, alkalines) 1800 800 1050
Boost (lux @ 2 feet) N/A N/A 2500
Low (lux @ 2 feet) 210 110 270
High (lux w/diffuser) 180 N/A 70
Red (lux @ 2 feet) 30 30 N/A
List Price $55 $40 $50

What’s Good

  • True red and white modes
  • Mode memory
  • IPX4 water resistance
  • Operable wearing gloves
  • Take lithium cells
  • Easy battery access
  • Plus2: Small, lightweight, moderately bright and efficient
  • XP2: Small, lightweight, bright and efficient
  • XP2: Diffuser lens
  • XP2: Rescue whistle

What’s Not So Good

  • No current regulation
  • Unsealed battery compartment
  • No mid output level
  • XP2: Beam artifacts
  • Plus2: Significantly less power than the XP2 and original XP

*BPL measures intensity (in lux) but not total light output (in lumens). The two values are not directly comparable and should not be substituted for one another.

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

PHD Mountain Software Ultra Down Pullover Review

The ultimate down jacket for ultralight backpacking and lightweight cold weather pursuits.

Introduction

PHD Mountain Software Ultra Down Pullover Review - 1
PHD Ultra Down Pullover worn in camp at 12,000 feet in the southern Colorado Rockies. It’s insulated with 900 fill-power down and weighs just 8 ounces (size medium).

PHD (Peter Hutchinson Designs) Mountain Software is a small company in Stalybridge UK that manufactures sleeping bags and garments “from the lightest in the world to the ultimate in extreme expedition protection.” Their garments are offered in standard or custom sizing, plus options for added fill or features at additional cost. All products are sewn in their small factory after the order is placed. This review covers their new Ultra Down Pullover, which is designed to provide maximum warmth with minimal weight. Is this the ultimate down jacket for ultralight backpacking and lightweight cold weather pursuits?

Description

The PHD Ultra Down Pullover features 900 fill-power down, which PHD tests on-site to be sure it meets or exceeds their specifications. One ounce of down of this quality expands to 900 cubic inches, so a relatively small weight of down produces a very puffy jacket. The jacket has sewn-through construction and 3.5-inch down chambers. I measured the jacket’s double-layer loft at 2.5 inches (single-layer: 1.25 inches), which is exceptional for a jacket that weighs just 8 ounces.

PHD Mountain Software Ultra Down Pullover Review - 2
Front and rear views of the PHD Ultra Down Pullover. Features include a half-length front zipper, stand up insulated collar, reach-through front pocket with zippered security pocket inside, dropped tail, and elastic hem and cuffs.

The loftiest down available is enclosed in PHD’s MX superfine nylon ripstop, which at 0.88 oz/yd2 (30 g/m2) is one of the lightest shell fabrics currently available. MX is calendared on both sides (more on the inside) to increase strength, wind resistance, and downproofness. The fabric weight is equivalent to that used in the Western Mountaineering Flash and Flight Jackets and slightly heavier than MontBell’s 7 denier Ballistic Airlight fabric 0.73 oz/yd2 (25 g/m2) used in their Ex Light Down Jacket. The latter fabrics are calendared as well. Calendaring increases fabric strength, wind-resistance, and downproofness, at the expense of some breathability.

As expected, the Ultra Down Pullover has a very Spartan feature set to keep weight to a minimum. The front YKK #3 coil zipper is twelve inches long. The cuffs have a simple elastic binding, and the hem has elastic at the sides rather than all the way around. Thankfully, the jacket has one front pocket, and it’s a good one – a full-width reach-through pocket with loads of room inside to hold an assortment of items.

PHD Mountain Software Ultra Down Pullover Review - 3
The front reach-through pocket (right) is full width and high volume. There is a zippered security pocket (left) inside on the right side.

Performance

PHD Mountain Software Ultra Down Pullover Review - 4
Cooking breakfast on a cold November morning in the southern Rockies.

I tested the PHD Ultra Down Pullover on a number of summer and fall backpacks in the southern Colorado Rockies and southern Utah desert over a five-month period. I also used it while backcountry skiing in late November. Nighttime temperatures ranged from 25-50 F (-4 to 10 C). I typically wore the jacket in camp and in my sleeping bag on colder nights.

I normally wear a men’s size large and found the sizing of the Ultra Down Pullover to be perfect. It’s roomy enough inside to wear over a baselayer plus a microfleece top, and the sleeves are extra long. The fit at the neck, wrists, and hem are snug, but not tight. The dropped tail covers the rear somewhat (see photos above) but the jacket is not extra long in the body.

One trip with this jacket is all it took to convince me that it is the ultimate down jacket for ultralight three-season backpacking in the mountains, winter backpacking in the desert, or cold (but not frigid) weather pursuits of any kind. For just 8 ounces of weight (9.1 ounces in size large tested), the Ultra Down Pullover has loads of loft and warmth. For hikers who prefer a hooded jacket, e.g., as part of their sleeping system, a hood is available as an option.

For cold weather camping, a dynamite combination is the PHD Ultra Down Pullover paired with a lightweight down pant – like the Western Mountaineering Flash Pant (7 oz), PHD Minimus Down Trouser (8 oz), or MontBell Down Inner Pant (6.8 oz). I am testing the mentioned pants for a future article, and find that the combination – scarcely adding up to one pound – not only provides plenty of comfort in camp but also extends the warmth of an ultralight sleeping bag by ten to fifteen degrees. I have found that wearing an ultralight rain jacket and pants over my insulating layers really increases their warmth in camp, and have been known to wear my raingear inside my sleeping bag on really cold nights to stay warm.

PHD’s MX fabric is super-light and is also quite durable and downproof. Worn alone, it’s very wind resistant, owing to the fabric being calendared inside and out.

PHD Mountain Software Ultra Down Pullover Review - 5
I tested the jacket’s waterproofness by placing a puddle of water on the shell for an hour (left), then checking for leakage. Water readily soaked through the seam, wetting the down, and creating a sizeable puddle on the inside of the jacket (right). The down in the area surrounding the puddle was completely wet and collapsed.

PHD Mountain Software Ultra Down Pullover Review - 6
I further tested the jacket’s water resistance by wearing it while hiking in a snowstorm at 31 F (0 C) (left). Water beaded up on the fabri, and eventually wetted the surface (right), but the water did not soak through the fabric and wet the down.

From my tests, I conclude that the jacket’s seams readily transmit water, but when the jacket is worn, it sheds water fairly well. The DWR treatment on the MX fabric is sufficient to repel a brief shower, but it is nothing exceptional – good, but not excellent. Compared to other jackets I have tested, e.g., the Rab Microlight Jacket which completely sheds water, the PHD Ultra Down Pullover has only moderate water resistance.

PHD Mountain Software Ultra Down Pullover Review - 7
The Ultra Down Pullover comes with a high quality, durable stuff sack that is properly sized for the jacket.

Comparisons

The following table compares specifications of jackets similar to the PHD Ultra Down Pullover. All jackets have ultralight shell fabric and premium down insulation. Manufacturer data for size medium are shown. All jackets have sewn-through construction except the Nunatak Skaha, which is baffled.

Jacket Shell Fabric Fill Power Measured Single Layer Loft (in) Features Weight (oz) size Medium Cost (US$)
PHD Ultra Down Pullover MX Microfiber
0.88 oz/yd2
900 1.3 Half zip, reach-through front pocket, zippered security pocket, elastic cuffs and hem 8.0 ~284
MontBell Ex Light Ballistic Airlight
0.73 oz/yd2
900 1.0 Full zip, elastic cuffs and hem 5.7 165
Nunatak Skaha Pullover Pertex Quantum
0.8 oz/yd2
850+ 2.0 Half zip, baffled construction, drawcord hem, elastic cuffs 9.0 319
Western Mountaineering Flash Dot-Ripstop Nylon
0.9 oz/yd2
850+ 0.9 Full zip, hood, two side pockets, elastic cuffs and hem 9.0 260
Western Mountaineering Flight Dot-Ripstop Nylon
0.9 oz/yd2
850+ 1.9 Full zip, two side pockets, drawcord hem, elastic cuffs 10.5 250

There are numerous high quality ultralight down jackets to choose from. The closest competitor to the PHD Ultra Down Pullover is the Nunatak Skaha Pullover, which is baffled and has more loft. Because of the low current (late 2009) valuation of the US dollar versus the British pound, the Ultra Down Pullover is a bit pricey, and the Nunatak Skaha Pullover is perhaps a better value (about 60US$ more. Also note that buyers outside the UK do not pay VAT, so 15% is deducted from the price when purchased). However, when the dollar is strong, the Ultra Down Pullover is an excellent value.

Assessment

Based on its fit and exceptional loft and warmth for its weight, the PHD Ultra Down Pullover is my new favorite jacket. This is the jacket I will pack when I’m expecting nighttime temperatures to drop down to freezing or lower. It’s rated at 23 F (-5 C), and I would say that’s a fair rating. For spring and fall backpacking in the mountains, the Ultra Down Pullover gives me the extra warmth I need. I would also use it for summertime backpacking when I expect to camp above 12,000 feet. A jacket like this will also perform well for many wintertime activities, like backcountry skiing and snowshoeing, but would be too warm for extended climbs, unless it is really cold and/or windy. Finally, I prefer to wear the Ultra Down Pullover as a midlayer with a light shell over it to keep it dry and protect it from branch stubs and other things that might puncture it.

For an ultralight jacket, the Ultra Down Pullover is at the warm end of the scale, equivalent to the warmth of many jackets that weigh 14 ounces or more, but not as warm as the Nunatak Skaha and Western Mountaineering Flight. Some hikers may want to extend this jacket’s warmth a little more by ordering it with overfill and a hood so they can use it for winter camping. And some hikers may need less warmth, so a thinner jacket like the Montbell Ex Light Down Jacket or Western Mountaineering Flash may suffice. Of course, there is always the option of owning more than one jacket so you can match your insulation to the expected conditions.

Specifications and Features

  Manufacturer

PHD Mountain Software (http://www.phdesigns.co.uk/)

  Year/Model

2009 Ultra Down Pullover

  Style

Half zip pullover

  Fabrics

Outer shell and lining are 0.88 oz/yd2 (30 g/m2) MX Microfiber mini-ripstop nylon, calendared both sides, DWR finish

  Insulation

900 fill-power down

  Loft

Measured two-layer loft is 2.5 in (6 cm)

  Features

Sewn through construction with 3.5-in (9-cm) horizontal quilting, down filled stand up collar, half length front #3 YKK coil zipper with one slider and storm flap under zipper, reach through front pocket with zippered security pocket inside, elastic cuffs and hem, 2-inch (5-cm) dropped tail, stuff sack included

  Weight

Measured weight, size large tested: 9.1 oz (258 g)
Manufacturer specified average weight: 8 oz (227 g)

  MSRP

£169 (approx. US$284) Price includes VAT; if the item is to be delivered outside the EU, VAT does not apply, and 15% is deducted from the price

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.

Be Prepared, Not Equipped

The main reason my pack got lighter was because I realized that being prepared had little to do with the equipment I carried.

The main reason my pack got lighter was because I realized that being prepared had little to do with the equipment I carried. I had first learned to backpack in the Boy Scouts, where fellow youth and adults alike took the motto "Be Prepared" to be synonymous with "Be Equipped." Truth be told, we weren’t just equipped… we were equipped for just about anything. Socks and underwear for nearly every day. Full-size towel, washcloth, and toiletry kit – with a sawed-off toothbrush. The odd trenching tool and hatchet would find its way to the pack. We had a habit of carrying back-ups of back-ups – if something failed, we reasoned, we’d need a replacement to cover it since we were so far "out there."

Back in the day when I adhered to the motto "Be Equipped," I traveled the backcountry with a back-up stove. Just a little hexamine stove and several tubes of tablets, but a stove and fuel nonetheless. I used to carry a lantern and a flashlight… and a small spare flashlight. (At one point, years later, I realized that I regularly walked the woods near my home without a light, and for a time quit carrying any light altogether.) I carried a repair kit with several colors of thread, patches, and adhesives for everything on my back. I carried spare buckles and cord and webbing, duct tape and safety pins and – in the day – a bevy of clevis pins and rings. My first aid kit was stocked for just about anything short of a full-on freeway accident. My dad likes to tell people about my first backpacking trip, walking behind me and seeing my legs from the knee down… and nothing else. I got my first severe ankle sprain on that trip.

Be Prepared, Not Equipped - 1
Packed and ready for anything. No, really: ANYTHING!

We kids were intrigued by all the cool gadgets we could carry, and our adult leaders were pleased because we had enough stuff to be safe. (Funny how "safety margins" can lead to unsafe loads.) What we all missed was that we were going about the process backwards, subverting knowledge by carrying equipment. It’s a trend that I see continuing not only in some Scouting programs, but in widespread expectations of all backpackers new and old.

So what does it mean, this concept of "Be Prepared?" How can understanding it help us pack smarter… and lighter? What truly clarified the concept for me was a Wilderness-EMT course. If you want to talk about something that’s gear-intensive, EMS is a great place to start! We use tons of highly specialized equipment on ambulances. We see most of that equipment as critical for doing our jobs efficiently and effectively, but when it comes time to hit the woods, we can’t carry most of the gear. A major component of the W-EMT course, then, is learning to improvise using materials you’re likely to have on hand.

"Multiple-use items," you say, "of course." But it’s not quite that easy – nor is figuring out the best or most functional use of your gear.

One of the first steps for me was realizing that "Be Prepared" didn’t mean "Be Redundant." I don’t (and didn’t) need more than one source of light. I didn’t need a clean shirt, or extra clothes in case mine got wet, because everything I take dries quickly. I didn’t need a splint in my first aid kit, because I can easily make one from just about anything. I used to bring more fuel than I needed, just in case… and it was easy to grab an extra fuel canister (or two!) that I never used. I didn’t need a pot, a bowl, a plate, a fork, a knife, and a spoon… One pot, one spoon, and a mug will do just fine.

The big step for me in really understanding "Be Prepared" was what I call the "Superman" or "Alien" clause. In other words, I need to be prepared for reality, not for situations that could only happen "if Superman came down to fight a battle against an evil guy freezing Florida solid in July." I didn’t need to be prepared for any situation that could occur at any time in any place – since each of my trips occur at a given point in time, in a specific place, with a limited number of situations possible.

A summer backpacking trip in Michigan will not get (much) below freezing, so there’s no point in hauling the weight and bulk of a zero degree bag or expedition parka. Only once have I ever had a problem with a stove, and that was because I hadn’t maintained it at all in years… so I don’t need a backup stove. Besides, if something horrid happens I’ll just build a small fire. A three-person mountaineering tent is completely unnecessary for most two-person backpacking trips. I don’t need a pocket knife, sheath knife, multitool and sharpening stone. One good blade, and maybe a strip of sandpaper, will do 95%+ of what I need. And I don’t need a seven-pound pack to carry a twenty- to thirty-pound load.

You might think I exaggerate the problem. And yet, I met a guy recently who takes great pride and (stated) pleasure in carrying a 120-POUND pack. Even for long weekends. He told me it was great, because he was ready for anything. Not only did he carry every piece of the military ECWCS (Extended Cold Weather Clothing System) layering system for every trip, but he carried his complete military sleeping bag system for every trip. A -60 F bag, with bivy, for trips at least 90 degrees warmer at night and inside an expedition tent. He allowed that you sure knew it after hiking a six-mile day, though it was a great way to travel. I allowed that it didn’t make much sense to carry an extra few pounds of sleeping gear that would never see the outside of a stuff sack, but kept to myself that I usually hike an easy six miles or more by lunch.

What I’m getting around to saying is that being prepared is more of a cognitive thing than an equipment thing. Much of preparation is planning. Mental gymnastics more than grunt work. Education, knowledge, organization. Just like going for groceries, it’s a good idea to make a list and stick to it. Minimize your "unknown" variables by making more "known," but allow a small cushion for error. Being prepared means planning ahead for possible and expected conditions.

Be Prepared, Not Equipped - 2
This makes my back and knees much happier… and my eyeballs too.

That’s important enough to repeat: "Planning ahead for possible or expected conditions." If you’re planning a four-day summer trip, don’t plan as though you’ll be taking a month-long trip in the arctic. Leave the snowshoes at home! There is a difference in being prepared and being burdened. Having "extra" is frequently not a good thing… it isn’t always wise to have "extra" for something that won’t happen. Being prepared requires understanding not only the weather, terrain and demands of the trip, but requires understanding the components of your gear, how each works individually, and how they work together.

I suggest that you think of being prepared as doing more with less, NOT doing less with more, as I used to believe. In fact, I might be inclined to argue that what most people think of as being prepared is actually its antithesis, that their approach is to do less with more. And although that might be good for a budget, no, that’s not a good thing when you’re carrying a bunch of gear through the backcountry.

Let me say that I have been extraordinarily offended by the strident self-righteousness and superiority expressed by some ultralighters. Many times have I come across language saying, if effect, that "people carrying heavy packs are inexperienced and stupid, whereas people carrying light packs are experienced and bright." I know that I had been backpacking nearly twenty years before I lightened up. Doing so wasn’t a matter of overnight experience or a sudden giant leap in IQ, but rather was reflective of a shift in my priorities and interests in backcountry travel. Now that I have lightened up and found that if anything I’m MORE prepared and comfortable than I used to be, I’m simply hoping that my words can help others find the same pleasures in a lighter pack.

Now to the tough part. When I realized that my trips would be more enjoyable with a lighter load, I refused to get that lighter load by being unprepared (or uncomfortable). What I didn’t expect was how comfortable I’d be in camp and on the trail with that lighter load. Even though I had less, trail life was even easier… no more digging through bags or pockets of things, everything I needed was right at hand. What I ultimately came to realize was that it was possible because of the simple act of consideration.

Before, I would shove extra things into the pack "in case." When I made the move to lighten up, I spent more time actually thinking about each thing going in the pack, and I found a lot of overlap. I found some of the biggest differences in my clothing. I mean, if you think about sitting around a summer campfire, you’d probably envision yourself in a t-shirt, and maybe a flannel shirt on a cool night. So why would you need much more warmth than that when backpacking? My typical three-season kit now includes just a long-sleeve baselayer (worn at all times), a midlayer, and a thin down vest… more than adequate for any temps I’m likely to encounter. You might say that I’m well-prepared, even though – or perhaps precisely because – I don’t have the spare long underwear top, the thin jacket, the thin vest, and the fleece jacket that used to be in my pack.

And that’s what it comes down to – consideration and planning. If you’re prepared for a given situation you’ll be able to respond in a positive way given your circumstances. In other words, think of your backpacking endeavors in the light of a jazz musician. Know your craft, your tools, and the context in which you’ll use them well enough to pull off some killer improvs. Be able to adapt to your situation, and you’ll be well-prepared.

MontBell Ex Light Women’s Down Jacket Review

The lightest down jacket to be found, but the women’s version doesn’t have as much loft and warmth as the men’s version.

Introduction

Montbell Ex Light Down Jacket Review - 1
The MontBell Ex Light, as the name implies, is their lightest down jacket, with an average weight of 4.7 ounces for the women’s model (left) and 5.7 ounces for the men’s model (right). It’s insulated with 900 fill down, has a very thin 7 denier shell, and does not have any pockets.

MontBell states that the Ex Light Down Jacket is “the ultimate in minimalist design” and it’s hard to argue with that. It combines cutting edge materials – 7 denier (0.74 oz/yd2) shell, 900 fill-power down – and minimizes features to create the lightest down jacket to be found. It’s claimed to provide more warmth than a fleece jacket with a fraction of the weight or bulk and is basically targeted to people like us who want a high warmth-to-weight ratio. So what’s not to like? Is it truly a gift from heaven?

Description

Montbell Ex Light Down Jacket Review - 2
Front and rear views of the MontBell Ex Light Down Jacket in women’s size medium.

The outer shell fabric is 7 denier Ballistic Airlight nylon ripstop with a surface DWR finish. This 7 denier fabric weighs just 0.74 oz/syd2 (25 g/m2), which sets a new standard for a lightweight shell fabric. Ballistic Airlight has a very tight weave and is calendered, which is a heat and stretching process similar to tensiling steel. The resulting fabric (according to MontBell) has one-and-a-half times more abrasion resistance and three times more tear strength. Calendering also makes a fabric more downproof. On the downside, calendering reduces the breathability of the fabric somewhat.

While the shell fabric is very thin, it’s also very soft to the touch. It does not snag easily and is not damaged by Velcro. That said, we note that MontBell (on their hangtag) makes a point of saying: “Please be aware that this fabric will NOT fare well if exposed to sharp objects, high abrasion situations, or the occasional campfire spark. Going ultra-light comes with some inherent responsibility.” We commend MontBell for including this very appropriate message, and we fully agree with it.

Montbell Ex Light Down Jacket Review - 3
The Ex Light has sewn-through construction. The women’s version has a quilted diamond pattern (left), while the men’s version has a rectangular quilted pattern. It has a full-height #3 zipper; the closures at the neck, cuffs, and hem are snug, but not tight.

Insulation is 900 fill-power down, which is the volume that 1 ounce (28 g) of down will expand to (900 cm³/g). This is the highest fill-power down presently available, and of course it is more expensive. The amount of down in a size medium MontBell Ex Light women’s jacket is 1.4 ounces (1.8 ounces in men’s medium). The actual amount of down in the jacket will depend on the jacket size. I measured the jacket’s two-layer (front and back together) loft at 1.25 inches, which means the single-layer loft is 0.6 inch. I held the jacket up to a bright light and observed that the down is uniformly distributed and is held in place by the jacket’s quilting.

Performance

Montbell Ex Light Down Jacket Review - 4
I tested the Ex Light jacket while summer backpacking in the southern Rockies, while fall camping and hiking in the southern Utah canyon country and while cross-country skiing in the southern Rockies. I wore it as an outerlayer and midlayer in camp, in my sleeping bag, while hiking on cool or windy days and as an outerlayer when cross-country skiing. Temperatures ranged from 20 to 50 F (-7 to 10 C).

I normally wear petite sizing, and it’s always difficult to get a good fit with standard women’s sizing. Size medium usually fits me the best in order to get enough girth at the hips. The women’s medium fits me fairly well: the sleeves are a bit long, but I like the extra length to pull my hands up inside the sleeves. The body has a trim fit, but is not tight. The jacket extends down about six inches below my waist. There is enough room inside the jacket to wear it over a thick baselayer.

One problem I have had with the Ex Light Jacket, from day one, is that the zipper is very difficult to start. Rather than damage the zipper by forcing it, I wore the jacket as a pullover during the entire five-month test period. The problem seems to be a faulty zipper in my case, but it does emphasize the issue that ultralight garments are more fragile.

Another thing I discovered is that the women’s version of the Ex Light Jacket has less loft than the men’s version. As mentioned, the measured double-layer loft of the women’s size medium I tested is 1.25 inches. I measured the loft of my husband’s size large (2008 model) Ex Light Jacket at 2.0 inches. That’s a 37.5% difference! The fill weights are 1.4 ounces for the women’s jacket and 1.8 ounces for the men’s, which seems to be proportional to jacket size. When viewed side by side, men’s jacket is clearly loftier than the women’s. The reduced loft is likely due to the smaller quilting pattern in the women’s version, which may compress the down more. Personally, I would prefer to have a jacket with the loft of the men’s version, and I recommend that women interested in this jacket take a look at the men’s version first to see how well it fits. You will get a loftier jacket for the same price. I imagine however, that some women might prefer the slimmer look of a less lofty jacket.

Montbell Ex Light Down Jacket Review - 5
To determine if the loft difference between the women’s and men’s versions significantly affects warmth, we conducted a “relative warmth” test (developed by subscriber Richard Nisley, which he posted in the Backpacking Light forums). We inserted a heating pad pre-heated to 105 F (41 C) into each jacket (back side up; room temperature at 60 F/16 C) and measured the surface temperature after one hour with an infrared thermometer (left). The surface temperature of the women’s version averaged 90.3 F (32 C), and the men’s averaged 67.6 F (20 C) (right). That’s a 25% difference, meaning the men’s version is significantly warmer than the women’s version of this jacket.

In my field testing, I did in fact find that the Ex Light provides more warmth than a fleece jacket, with a lot less weight and bulk, as MontBell claims. I wore the jacket as an outerlayer while hiking and carrying a pack on cool and windy days and found it to be very wind-resistant and warm. Abrasion from the shoulder straps of my backpack did not damage the thin shell. I found that it is not easily damaged from brush while hiking or skiing through branches, but I am always careful.

In camp, I wore the Ex Light as a midlayer most of the time. In the cooler temperatures I experienced in camp (33-45 F/1-7 C), I did not find the jacket warm enough by itself, so I normally wore another jacket over the Ex Light and sometimes a shell jacket over that.

Montbell Ex Light Down Jacket Review - 6
I did not have an opportunity to test the Ex Light Jacket in rain or snow, so I tested it’s water-resistance by placing a puddle of water on the shell for an hour (left), then checking for leakage. About half of the water soaked through the seams and collected on a tray inside the jacket (right). The fabric surface wetted out, and the down was wetted inside in the area surrounding the puddle.

I found that the jacket’s DWR finish repels water well, up to a point, but the fabric eventually wets out. Most of the water transmitted went through the seams and not the fabric.

Montbell Ex Light Down Jacket Review - 7
The Ex Light comes with a stuff sack (0.3 ounce) made of the shell fabric, and it is properly sized for the jacket. The drawcord is longer and thicker than it needs to be, but that can easily be changed.

Comparisons

There are no other down jackets available as light as the MontBell Ex Light. The following table compares the Ex Light to the lightest down jackets from other manufacturers. For comparison, the listed specifications are manufacturer data for a men’s size medium (or unisex medium). All jackets have sewn-through construction except the Nunatak Skaha, which is baffled.

Jacket Shell Fabric Fill Power Measured Single-Layer Loft (in) Features Weight (oz)
(men’s medium)
Cost (US$)
MontBell Ex Light Ballistic Airlight
0.73 oz/yd2
900 1.0 Full zip, elastic cuffs and hem 5.7 165
MontBell Down Inner Ballistic Airlight
1.1 oz/yd2
800 0.85 Full zip, two side pockets, elastic cuffs and hem 7.3 150
PHD Ultra Down Pullover MX Microfiber
0.88 oz/yd2
900 1.3 Half zip, reach-through front pocket, zippered security pocket, elastic cuffs and hem 8.0 ~284
Nunatak Skaha Pullover Pertex Quantum
0.8 oz/yd2
850+ 2.0 Half zip, baffled construction, drawcord hem, elastic cuffs 9.0 319
Western Mountaineering Flash Dot-Ripstop Nylon
0.9 oz/yd2
850+ 0.9 Full zip, hood, two side pockets, elastic cuffs and hem 9.0 260

The closest competition is MontBell’s own Down Inner Jacket, which weighs 1.6 ounces more and costs $15 less. The Down Inner Jacket has a more durable 15 denier shell, less lofty 800 fill down, and two hand pockets. A parka version is also available. The Ex Light Jacket is made of cutting-edge materials (900 fill down and 7 denier fabric), and is nearly devoid of features, so you are paying more for the lower weight.

Assessment

The MontBell Ex Light Down Jacket is truly in a class of its own – the lightest down jacket available. Its only close competition is the MontBell Down Inner Jacket and Parka. For hikers wanting hand pockets, the Down Inner Jacket adds them at a modest weight increase, and the Parka version adds a hood.

Nevertheless, I am not totally happy with the lower loft and warmth of the women’s version of this jacket compared to the men’s version. I went down to a local outdoor store and measured the loft of the Ex Lite Jacket there to verify my home measurements and found the same difference. I also compared the men’s and women’s version of the MontBell Down Inner Jacket and found that the women’s jacket has 30% less loft. The women’s version of many lightweight down jackets has more quilting to make it more stylish, and also to give the jacket a lower profile (news flash: women don’t like to look fat, or even puffy). While some readers argue that slightly compressed down insulates better than fully expanded down, the extra quilting on the women’s version of many down jackets seems to go beyond that. Why should men get a loftier/warmer jacket, for the same price? Seems like the reverse ought to be the case! I may be in the minority in my thinking though, because I value warmth more than style.

Overall, I am very impressed with the amount of warmth the Ex Light Jacket provides for its miniscule weight, as well as its versatility. While many down jackets are simply too warm to wear while hiking uphill, the Ex Light is more comfortable on the trail, and it cuts the wind very well. If it gets colder or windier, a shell over it is usually enough.

Specifications and Features

Manufacturer MontBell (http://montbell.us/)
Year/Model 2009 Ex Light Down Jacket
Style Full zip jacket
Fabrics 7 denier Ballistic Airlight 0.74 oz/yd2 (25 g/m2)
Insulation 900 fill-power down
Construction Sewn through with 2.5-in (6-cm) diamond quilting (women’s), 3.25 x 4.25 in (8 x 11 cm) rectangular quilting (men’s)
Loft Measured two-layer loft 1 in (2.5 cm)
Features Down filled stand up collar, full height front #3 YKK zipper with one slider and storm flap under zipper, elastic cuffs, simple sewn hem (not elastic), stuff sack included
Weight
Measured weight, women’s medium tested: 4.2 oz (119 g)
Manufacturer specified average weight: women’s 4.7 oz (133 g), men’s 5.7 oz (162 g)
MSRP US$165

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.

Mountain Hardwear Nitrous Jacket Review

An ultralight down jacket that performs well in active pursuits, but it’s not the best choice for ultralight backpacking.

Introduction

Mountain Hardwear Nitrous Jacket Review - 1
The Mountain Hardwear Nitrous Jacket is insulated with 800 fill-power down and has an ultralight polyester ripstop shell. It’s full-featured and has a trim fit.

The Mountain Hardwear Nitrous Jacket is designed to be as versatile as possible. It has a compact design and trim fit, moderate warmth, and a full feature set, so it can be worn as an outer layer in cool conditions or as a midlayer in colder conditions. It’s designed as a performance jacket for active alpine pursuits, but is equally appropriate for a trip to meet friends at the local pub or coffee shop, especially if you live in a mountain town. The focus in this review will be on the Nitrous Jacket’s suitability for ultralight backpacking and various cool weather silent sports.

Description

The Mountain Hardwear Nitrous Jacket is characterized by its narrow horizontal quilting, which gives it a “down sweater” appearance. The jacket is insulated with 800 fill-power down. The shell and lining fabric is 1 ounce/square yard EcoSensor ripstop polyester (87% virgin, 13% recycled) with a DWR finish.

Mountain Hardwear Nitrous Jacket Review - 2
Front and rear views of the Mountain Hardwear Nitrous Jacket. Features include a full-height front zipper, stand up insulated collar, two hand pockets, zippered chest pocket, elastic cuffs, and drawcord hem.

Mountain Hardwear Nitrous Jacket Review - 3
There are three pockets on the Nitrous Jacket, a zippered chest pocket (left) and two side pockets (right) that are insulated but not fleece-lined. Note that the side pockets have a unique flap-over closure.

The Nitrous Jacket is available in men’s and women’s versions, and a hooded model is also available.

Performance

I tested the Nitrous Jacket over five months while mountain summer backpacking, fall canyon country hiking, and late fall mountain day hiking. I wore the jacket in camp, in my sleeping bag, and on cold/windy days on the trail.

The Nitrous Jacket has a trim fit and extra long body and sleeves. The jacket in size large fits me (6 feet, 167 pounds, 37-inch chest, 34-inch arms) very well, with room to wear a couple of thinner layers under it. The body length is 29 inches, which is about 0.5 to 1.0 inch longer than many outdoor jackets. While the jacket fits well on a skinny person like me, the same size jacket would likely be a bit tight for a stockier build.

This jacket is basically lightweight, but it has some contradictions. While the elastic cuffs and flap-over pockets minimize weight, the front zipper is a heavier #5 (compared to a #3 on a really light jacket), and the hem has a rather heavy elastic drawcord and cordlock.

I found the Nitrous Jacket to be moderately warm. Measured double layer loft is 1.25 inches (0.6-inch single-layer loft). It’s warm down to about 40F when inactive, which is sufficient for summer backpacking in the mountains. But the jacket’s forte seems to be active backcountry pursuits; I found it very comfortable while hiking on cold days and cloudy/windy days. If I got a little warm, I opened the zipper; if I felt chilly, I added a layer under it or a shell over it. The jacket’s collar is snug, but not tight, and covers my chin; however the elastic cuffs are loose.

Mountain Hardwear Nitrous Jacket Review - 4
I found the jacket’s ripstop polyester shell to be downproof as claimed, but some feathers found their way out through the numerous seams (left). Even though I tried to avoid direct contact with my skin, the collar stained badly (right). The bright orange color probably shows the staining more than other colors would.

The jacket’s ripstop polyester shell is very soft, adds an increment of warmth, and is very water- and wind-resistant. It’s not damaged by Velcro. Polyester is generally considered to be a little less durable (less abrasion-resistant) than nylon, but it is still very strong because it’s a polymer-based material, as is nylon. All jackets with an ultralight shell (1 ounce/square yard or less) require special care to avoid snagging or puncturing.

Mountain Hardwear Nitrous Jacket Review - 5
I wore the Nitrous Jacket while hiking in a snowstorm and found its shell to be quite water- and wind-resistant (left). Water readily beaded up on the shell, but the surface eventually wetted out (right, underside of sleeve). However, water did not soak through and wet the down.

Mountain Hardwear Nitrous Jacket Review - 6
I followed up my field observations with a one-hour indoor “puddle test” (left). The results confirmed my field observations – the fabric surface wetted out (right), but no water soaked through the fabric or the seams to wet the down.

Comparisons

The following table compares specifications of jackets similar to the Mountain Hardwear Nitrous Jacket. All jackets have premium down insulation, sewn-through construction, and a full-height front zipper. Manufacturer data for size medium are shown.

Jacket Shell Fabric Insulation Measured Single Layer Loft (in) Features Weight (oz) Cost (US$)
Mountain Hardwear Nitrous 1 oz/yd2 polyester 800 down 0.6 two unzippered hand pockets with flap, zippered chest pocket, drawcord hem, elastic cuffs 12.0 220
Rab Microlight 1.3 oz/yd2 Pertex Microlight (nylon) 750+ down 0.75 two unzippered hand pockets, zippered chest pocket, elastic cuffs and hem 11.3 190
Patagonia Down Sweater 1.4 oz/yd2 polyester 800 down 0.9* two zippered hand pockets, one inside zippered mesh pocket, drawcord hem, elastic cuffs 12.4 200
Montbell Ex Light Down Jacket 0.74 oz/yd2 Ballistic Airlight (nylon) 900 down 0.5 Stand up collar, elastic cuffs 5.7 165
*The Patagonia Down Sweater has been upgraded since BPL reviewed it in 2005. Data in the table (except loft) are for the current version.

Except for the Montbell Ex Light Down Jacket, all of the jackets in the comparison table are full featured and have narrow horizontal quilting. All of the jackets have a trim fit. The Rab Microlight Jacket has a superb nylon shell (Pertex Microlight) that makes the jacket more durable and very water-resistant (more suitable for mountaineering), and it’s also a good value compared to the Mountain Hardwear Nitrous Jacket. The Patagonia Down Sweater now has a heavier, 100% recycled polyester shell and more features, which increase the weight from the previous version. The Montbell Ex Light Down Jacket’s loft is similar to the Mountain Hardwear Nitrous Jacket, the weight is half as much, and the cost is significantly lower. However, the jacket does not have any pockets at all, and there is no hem closure.

Assessment

Ultralight down jackets that are highly quilted so they have narrow down tubes, such as the first three jackets in the above table and the women’s version of many jackets, have two basic drawbacks: 1) the narrow tubes do not allow the down to completely expand, and 2) the area adjacent to each seam is not insulated at all. Hold a sewn-through down jacket in front of a window, and you will see what I mean: there’s no down in the space about a half an inch along each seam. The more seams, the more cold spots (or cold lines). Perhaps the extra uninsulated space next to the numerous seams is intentional to allow excess heat to escape during high exertion activities? That would explain why the Nitrous Jacket performed well in active pursuits. Or is it simply that a thinner down sweater can be worn comfortably while other down garments cause you to overheat? Actually, both explanations account for the performance.

Yes, the quilting does hold the down in place, but properly filled down chambers (slightly compressed) do not normally have a problem with down shifting. The conventional wisdom for ultralight backpacking is that we want a jacket with a high loft/weight ratio (maximum warmth for the weight), and I will stick with that reasoning for backpacking. For active day trips, perhaps a jacket that allows excess heat to escape more easily – while still being highly wind-resistant – is the best strategy. If I get cold, I can always put a shell on over the insulated jacket.

Overall, the Nitrous Jacket is a mixed bag: it fits well (for a slender person) and performs well in active cool weather pursuits, but its loft/weight ratio is not all that good, and its narrow quilting design is not very thermally efficient. It’s also not a very good value; there are several alternative jackets available that have a better loft/weight ratio and cost considerably less.

Specifications and Features

Manufacturer Mountain Hardwear (http://mountainhardwear.com/)
Year/Model 2009 Nitrous Jacket
Style Hoodless jacket with full front zip
Fabrics Shell and lining are EcoSensor 1 oz/yd2 ripstop polyester (13% recycled) with DWR finish
Insulation 800 fill-power down
Construction Sewn through with 1.75 in (4.5 cm) horizontal quilting, set-in sleeves
Loft Measured two layer loft is 1.25 in (3 cm)
Features Down-filled stand up collar, full height #5CN YKK zipper with one slider and storm flap under zipper, two side pockets (not fleece lined) with flap-over closure, zippered chest pocket, elastic cuffs, microchamois chin guard, drawcord hem with single-handed adjustor, stuff sack included
Weight Size large tested, measured weight 10.2 oz (289 g), manufacturer specified average weight 12 oz (340 g)
MSRP US$220

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.

Marmot Hydrogen Sleeping Bag Review

The Hydrogen is a well designed, high loft, roomy, warm, mummy-style down 30F-rated sleeping bag, but its shell fabric is heavy and wets out too easily.

Introduction

marmot_hydrogen_bag_review - 1
The Marmot Hydrogen is a 30F-rated mummy-style bag featuring 850+ fill power down, a full-length zipper, lots of loft, and a well-designed, easy to operate hood.

Ultralight backpackers have different preferences for a sleeping system, depending on their location and style of travel. I normally backpack in the Rocky Mountains spring through fall, and spring and fall in southern Utah, where nighttime temperatures frequently drop below freezing. I want the lightest sleeping bag that will do the job, but still want a sleeping system that will handle the occasional unexpectedly cold night. My preference is a 30F-rated mummy-style down sleeping bag with enough girth so I can wear extra clothing inside to extend its warmth when needed. Backpacking Light will publish a State of the Market article on this subject in spring 2010; this review is a separate evaluation of the popular Marmot Hydrogen bag.

The Marmot Hydrogen is the quintessential ultralight down sleeping bag, dating back almost to the beginning of ultralight backpacking’s popularity. The original Hydrogen had a half-length zipper and 10 ounces of 800 fill power down – which was state of the art at the time – and weighed 24 ounces. Review ratings of the Hydrogen have fallen in right behind Western Mountaineering bags, which is very good. The current (2009) Marmot Hydrogen is better than ever, or bloated a bit, depending on your point of view.

Description

The latest Marmot Hydrogen, at 25 ounces, has gained 1 ounce of weight, making it 3 to 6 ounces heavier than many competing bags with a 30-32F temperature rating. However, before you scratch the Hydrogen off your list in favor of a lighter bag, it’s important to look at the specifications. The Hydrogen now has 850+ fill power down – the best to be found, save for super premium 900 fill power down – and a size Regular contains 11 ounces of down compared to 10 ounces in the original Hydrogen and many other 30F-rated bags (including the Western Mountaineering SummerLite). I measured double layer loft at 4 inches (2 inches of single layer loft), which is very good. (Down fill power is the expanded volume, in square inches, of one ounce of down.)

Another notable difference is the Hydrogen now has a full-length zipper, and I mean full-length: it ends a mere 7.5 inches from the foot of the bag. This is one feature where your feelings about it are dictated by your point of view. On the one hand, many hikers insist on a full-length zipper so they can open it up like a quilt on warm nights, use it to cover two people, or more easily couple two bags together. Then there are the gram pinchers and mountain hikers who can get by just fine with a short zipper or no zipper at all, preferring to save the weight. One thing appears to be clear – more manufacturers are going to a full length zipper, based on “user input,” and they are probably right: The number of folks who prefer the full-length zipper is bigger than the number of those who do not like it.

Other design features on the Hydrogen have essentially remained the same, with material upgrades as better components become available. There is a 1.5-inch stiffening tape between the zipper and an oversized down-filled draft tube to avoid snagging (more on that later) and to fully insulate the zipper. The hood has six down chambers and covers the head the same as Marmot’s 8000 Meter Down Parka. It closes with a simple braided drawcord and cordlock that work smoothly. The zipper is an YKK #5 CN auto-locking type with two pulls, so the foot of the bag can be opened for ventilation when needed. There is no Velcro tab at the top of the zipper, so the Hydrogen is a Velcro-free bag.

marmot_hydrogen_bag_review - 2
The zipper guard on the Marmot Hydrogen consists of a 1.5-inch stiffening tape between the zipper and draft tube on the top side and a grosgrain tape on the bottom side.

So far I have only accounted for 3-4 ounces of extra weight compared to lighter bags. The remainder appears to be due to Marmot’s use of 1.2-ounce/square yard shell fabric and 1-ounce/square yard lining, which is significantly heavier than MontBell’s 0.86-ounce/square yard Ballistic Airlight used in the Spiral Down Hugger, Western Mountaineering’s 0.9-ounce/square yard Extremelite fabric, and Nunatak’s new 0.8-ounce/square yard Pertex Quantum. The heavier fabric adds 1-2 ounces to the weight, but it also adds an increment of durability and warmth.

Performance

marmot_hydrogen_bag_review - 3
I slept in the Marmot Hydrogen on a variety of trips during the summer and fall, with nighttime temperatures ranging from 25-50F. On this particular trip I camped at an alpine lake at 12,000 feet, where the overnight temperature was 36F and breezy.

Overall, I found the Hydrogen to be a little warmer than 30-32F bags I have recently tested (The North Face Beeline, Mountain Hardwear Phantom 32, and MontBell Spiral Down Hugger #3). Wearing only microfleece long johns and wool socks inside the bag, I had no trouble staying warm down to the bag’s 30F temperature rating. Wearing my camp clothing (insulated jacket and pants, windstopper fleece cap) inside the bag, I was warm as toast down to 25F and could have managed a few degrees lower without getting chilly.

The numbers in the comparison table below account for the Hydrogen’s additional warmth: the Hydrogen has 850+ fill power down and 1 ounce more down than the other bags listed. The bag has continuous baffles, so it’s possible to shift more of the down to the topside, if desired. According to our table of estimated temperature ratings based on measured loft (read our Backpacking Light Position Statement on Sleeping Bag Temperature Ratings), 1.8 inches of single layer loft translates to about a 30F rating. The Hydrogen exceeds that target, which gives it an extra increment of warmth. Please read the referenced article and note that sleeping bag warmth depends on a number of factors.

marmot_hydrogen_bag_review - 4
The Hydrogen’s initial loft and warmth were so noticeable that I decided to perform a comparison test to get some numbers. I improvised a heat retention test to compare the Hydrogen with the Montbell Spiral Down Hugger #3, which is closer to the “standard” loft (1.8 inches single layer) for a 30F sleeping bag. I placed a covered pan containing one gallon of 125F water in the chest area of each bag (left) and recorded the rate of temperate loss overnight with a Kestrel 4000 Pocket Weather Meter in each bag. The plotted data (right) show that the Hydrogen cooled down less during the night, indicating that it provides more insulation. The actual difference in the morning was 6.6F.

marmot_hydrogen_bag_review - 5
I noted in the heat retention test that the fabric on the Hydrogen was wet (left) where heat from the pan of water inside melted frost on the outside. On another cold night I found that the bag’s fabric wetted out around the head area (right). I weighed the bag and found it absorbed 3.6 ounces of moisture that night. A water puddle test on the bag confirmed that the bag’s fabric does in fact wet out over time.

I really like the Hydrogen’s zipper guard, draft tube, and hood. They come together to create a tightly sealed bag nearly devoid of drafts. With a little practice, the zipper slides smoothly with minimal snagging, and is well insulated by the oversized draft tube. It helps to straighten both sides of the zipper before closing it.

marmot_hydrogen_bag_review - 6
The Hydrogen’s Nautilus hood is one of the best to be found; it surrounds the head and draws down to a small breathing hole around the mouth. I couldn’t find a purpose for the small down tube on the right.

marmot_hydrogen_bag_review - 7
A lightweight (0.7 ounce) stuff sack is provided with the Hydrogen that is properly sized to stuff the bag without over compressing it. Kudos to Marmot!

Comparisons

The following table compares the Marmot Hydrogen with some popular 30-32F rated ultralight mummy style down sleeping bags. All of the bags have baffled construction, and all data are manufacturer specifications for a size Regular bag.

Manufacturer Model Temperature Rating (°F) Measured Single Layer Loft (in) Fill Weight (oz) Fill Power Total Weight (oz) Cost US$
MontBell* UL Spiral Down Hugger #3 30 1.9 10 800 19 229
Mountain Hardwear Phantom 32 32 2.0 10 800 22 290
Western Mountaineering SummerLite 32 2.0 10 850+ 19 315
Marmot Hydrogen 30 2.0 11 850+ 25 319
The North Face Beeline 30 2.4 10 850+ 22 279
*Note: A size Regular MontBell bag fits to 5 feet 10 inches, while the other bags fit a 6-foot-tall person.

From the data, the Marmot Hydrogen matches the Western Mountaineering SummerLite in down quality, fill weight, and loft. It weighs 6 ounces more and the cost is about the same. The MontBell Spiral Down Hugger #3 is one of the lightest bags, and it’s a great value, but it’s not as warm as the Hydrogen.

Assessment

While the Marmot Hydrogen has equivalent down quality and loft compared to the Western Mountaineering SummerLite, it is also a roomier bag (shoulder/hip/foot 62/58/40 inches versus 59/51/38 inches for the slender SummerLite), which means there is more area inside the bag to warm up. It’s entirely possible that the two bags may be equivalent in warmth, but I have not tested the WM SummerLite, so I have no personal experience to compare it with the Marmot Hydrogen. Don Wilson reviewed the WM SummerLite, but he makes no mention of the bag’s warmth, noting that a sleeping bag’s warmth depends on a large number of variables. I agree, but in my sleeping bag reviews I will at least try to compare sleeping bag materials and design characteristics that contribute to warmth. In mummy style sleeping bags, more so than in down garments, the amount and quality of down is a useful factor in estimating a bag’s warmth. However, that assessment needs to be adjusted for factors such as the bag’s cut (slender versus roomy) and other factors. It’s easy to get sidetracked and compare sleeping bags entirely by their weight, purchase the lightest one, and end up disappointed. It’s also important to look at the amount of down in the bag, design features, and sizing. There are substantial differences among bags with the same temperature rating; not all 30F-rated sleeping bags are created equal.

Overall, the current Hydrogen is better insulated and warmer than the original and easily meets its claimed temperature rating. It also has a nearly snag-proof zipper and an excellent hood. However, it uses heavier shell and liner fabrics, and the shell fabric wets out, allowing the bag to absorb moisture more readily than other bags. It also has a longer zipper, which adds weight. Its wider cut provides extra room for a larger hiker, but it’s a little too roomy for a slender person.

Specifications and Features

Manufacturer Marmot (www.marmot.com)
Year/Model 2009 Hydrogen
Style Hooded mummy with full length zipper
What’s Included Sleeping bag, stuff sack, cotton storage bag
Fill 850+ fill power down, 11 oz (312 g) size Regular, 13 oz (369 g) size Long
Construction 5.5 in (14 cm) stretch tricot continuous baffles, trapezoidal footbox, six chamber hood
Measured Loft 4 in (10 cm) average double layer loft (manufacturer specification not available)
Manufacturer Claimed Temperature Rating 30F (-1C)
Stuffed Size 10.5 x 7 in (27 x 18 cm)
Weight
(size regular tested)
Measured weight: 1 lb 9.2 oz (714 g)
Manufacturer specification: 1 lb 8.8 oz (703 g)
Measurements
(shoulder/hip/foot)
Regular: 62/58/40 in (158/147/102 cm)
Long: 64/60/42 in (163/152/107 cm)
Sizes Regular fits to 6 ft (1.83 m)
Long fits to 6 ft 6 in (1.98 m)
Fabrics Shell is 1.2 oz/yd2 (41 g/m2) nylon ripstop with DWR
Lining is 1.0 oz/yd2 (34 g/m2) polyester taffeta with DWR
Features Full-length zipper with two pulls, trapezoidal footbox provides more foot room, oversized down-filled draft tube, stiffened zipper guard, six-panel baffled hood with muff to avoid zipper contact with face, ground level seams
MSRP Regular US$319
Long US$339

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.

2009 Backpacking Light Staff Picks

Backpacking Light staff pick their favorite gear of 2009.

Another year has gone by and it is time once again for the BackpackingLight staff to come up with their lists of favorite pieces of gear. Some have commented that it is getting noticeably tougher to come up with three pieces of gear that have become most favored and most depended upon over the past year. But in due time the staff came up with their lists and this is the result.

This isn’t an “Editor’s Choice” or formal endorsement, just a list of gear we like.

Enjoy – and don’t forget to add your own 2009 favorites in the forum below.Your BPL Eds

2009 Staff Picks of Favorite Gear
Backpacking Light Staff Member Favorite Pieces of Gear
Ryan Jordan Sigma DP2 Digital Camera Tenkara Hane Fly Rod Pak-Rifle
Sam Haraldson Backpacking Light UL Merino Wool Hoody Spark R&D Splitboard Bindings Arc’Teryx Palisade Pant
Will Rietveld Rab Off-Limits Pants Gossamer Gear Lightrek 4 Trekking Poles Sea to Summit AlphaLight Short Spoon
Roger Caffin Taslan Clothing (MYOG) MSR Titan Pot Benchmade 530
Mike Martin Brynje Super Thermo Shirt Western Mountaineering Expedition Booties Primus ETAPacklite Stove
Carol Crooker SmartWool PhD Run Light Mini Socks Columbia PFG Pants ExOfficia Air Strip Lite Shirt
Alan Dixon Therm-a-Rest NeoAir Mattress Westing Mountaineering Down Booties Patagonia R2 Vest
Doug Johnson Custom EnLIGHTened (Tim Marshall) Baby & Toddler Sleeping Bags Gossamer Gear Lightrek 4 Trekking Poles Z-Packs Blast 32
Janet Reichl Marmot Mica/Crystalline Jacket GoLite Peak Frameless Backpack Keen Ridgeline
Alison Simon Apple iPod Backpacking Light FeatherLite Vapor Mitts In the spirit of being light, I only had two favorites this year.

Ryan Jordan – Bozeman, Montana

 

2009 Staff Favorites - 1

Sigma DP2 Digital Camera I spent the entire year immersed in the study of digital cameras. I shot with the best of them that might be of interest to lightweight backpackers: Panasonic TS1, Olympus E-P1, Olympus E-620, Leica M8.2, Panasonic GF1, Canon S90, and the Panasonic Lumix LX3. But I fell in love with one little unassuming digital that’s superbly simple, painfully slow, has an awful screen, but shoots fantastic images. Many of my 2010 gallery shots (up to 16 x 20 inches) will be from this camera. The only other camera that garnered something close to being a “favorite” of 2009: my twenty-one-year-old Leica M6 Classic, paired with Fuji Velvia 50, of course.

Weight: 9.3 oz
MSRP: $649

2009 Staff Favorites - 2

Tenkara Hane Fly Rod 2009 saw the introduction of the coolest piece of fishing gear that seemed tailor-made for lightweight backpacking, in terms of style, design, and technique: Tenkara fly rods. My favorite, by quite a long margin, is the short little Hane, for its ability to collapse to a tiny, packable size that fits in my smallest pack or my carry-on briefcase for travel. Never before have I been so excited to eliminate gear from my kit – this time, a fly reel, once revered as a non-negotiable item for most of my summer backpacking treks.

Weight: 2.7 oz
MSRP: $200

2009 Staff Favorites - 3

Pak-Rifle At 16 ounces, the ability to carry a .22LR rifle on trips that offer small game opportunities excites me for the prospect of being able to supplement my packed meals on long trips, but perhaps more exciting, allows me to combine two of my favorite passions: grouse hunting and mountain backpacking. Now, I don’t have to lighten my kit to carry a heavy rifle. My triple crown goal for 2010: catch a trout, shoot a grouse, and cook’em up at the summit of a 10,000 foot peak!

Weight: 16 oz
MSRP: $425

Sam Haraldson – Bozeman, Montana

 

2009 Staff Favorites - 4

Backpacking Light UL Merino Wool Hoody The BPL UL Hoody has become the perfect single garment for warm weather trips. During the summer of 2009, I started bringing this as the sole shirt to be worn from trip beginning to trip end. I paired the UL Merino Wool Hoody with a windshirt and puffy jacket for conditions ranging from hot in the Wind Rivers to below freezing in the Absarokas.

Weight: 5.5 oz (size large)
MSRP: $70

2009 Staff Favorites - 5

Spark R&D Splitboard Bindings My backcountry experiences aren’t limited to summer and they aren’t limited to hiking. I extend my backpacking into the winter, and here in Montana, that means finding a way to propel myself through the wilderness atop meter upon meter of snow. My focus in the winter is typically snowboarding, so an ultralight splitboard set-up is a must. The item that best performed for me during 2009 was a splitboard-specific binding from Spark R&D. Using these bindings as opposed to a mounting kit for a regular set of snowboard bindings shaved over a pound off the weight of my kit.

Weight: 1003 g (35.38 oz) per pair (size large)
MSRP: $299

2009 Staff Favorites - 6

Arc’Teryx Palisade Pant I’ve been wearing the Arc’Teryx Palisade Pant since about 2007 and have yet to have found a more durable, comfortable, and functional pant. It has no extras – only what is needed. On top of their Spartan design, they are constructed of a fabric that has proven itself absolutely bomber. From a 1200-mile backpacking trip in the Pacific Northwest to days spent cragging along the shores of Lake Superior, the Palisade pant has served me well.

Weight: 299 g (10.53 oz.)
MSRP: $125

Will Rietveld – Durango, Colorado

 

2009 Staff Favorites - 13

Rab Off-Limits Pants I prefer to wear rain pants because they not only keep me dry in the rain, but they also serve as wind pants, and I like to wear them in camp over thin long johns for extra warmth. I even wear them in my sleeping bag on unexpectedly cold nights. My favorite lightweight rain pant is the Rab Off-Limits. It’s made of Pertex Shield DS 2.5L waterproof-breathable fabric and has calf-length leg zips, which I really like because I can easily pull them on over my size 12 hiking shoes. They are trim fitting and plenty long for my long legs. The only other feature is an elastic waistband; no pockets or fly.

Weight: 6.2 oz
MSRP:
$100

2009 Staff Favorites - 8

Gossamer Gear Lightrek 4 Trekking Poles While I can do without trekking poles on-trail, I really like to use them off-trail. Also, I need trekking poles for many of the solo shelters I use. My favorite poles by far are the Gossamer Gear Lightrek 4. These carbon fiber poles are superlight and adjustable, so I can adjust them as needed for the terrain or the length I need for my shelter. They are also good and stiff, so they are a definite advantage for creek crossings and dropping off of ledges.

Weight: 6.8 oz/pair
MSRP: $150

2009 Staff Favorites - 9

Sea to Summit AlphaLight Short Spoon I only use a spoon for eating camp meals, and for years I carried a cheap-o plastic spoon that easily broke. I finally upgraded to a good ultralight spoon, the Sea to Summit AlphaLight Short Spoon. I love it! It brings me transcendental happiness integral to the calmness derived through the wilderness experience. Unlike other “premium” cookware, this spoon is made of hard anodized 7075-T6 aircraft aluminum alloy, which is plenty strong and slightly lighter than titanium. Other lengths and sizes of spoons are available, plus a spork.

Weight: 0.2 oz
MSRP: $7

Roger Caffin – Berrilee, NSW, Australia

 

2009 Staff Favorites - 10

Taslan Clothing (MYOG): Trousers & Shell My wife and I have been using our MYOG Taslan clothing for over 15 years now. It has served us in the mddle of the Australian desert (on the Larapinta Trail) and in sub-zero weather in our Alps. It has survived some of our worst lawyer vine scrub (and made sure we survived it too), and it has lasted for months with little noticeable wear in Europe. An added feature is that my designs lack all the useless commercial frills which the clothing manufacturers love to add in. No large metal studs, no bulky zips, no pointless tabs and other ‘pseudo-macho street-appeal’ junk; just functionality. And yes, OK, I’m biased.

Weight: Varies
MSRP: Make it yourself!

2009 Staff Favorites - 11

MSR Titan Pot I tried some of the heat exchanger pots, but I found their high weight was generally not balanced by efficiency gains, and I always go back to this very simple 115 -g (4.1-oz), 1.5L titanium pot. I tried using an alfoil lid for a while, but I have gone back to using the 58-g (2-oz) Ti lid for two reasons. The first is that when all packed up, the lid means that whatever is inside the pot is safe in my pack – very often that includes my stove. The second reason is that the upside down lid also serves quite well as a plate: dual use!

Weight: 115 g (4.1 oz)
MSRP: about US$140 for the full 2-pot set

2009 Staff Favorites - 12

Benchmade 530 The funny thing about including this knife here is that I am definitely not a knife fanatic. I took it to Switzerland in 2009 for two months alpine walking on the off-chance it might be useful. We usually eat a LOT of bread (and jam and cheese) in Europe: the 51-g (1.8-oz) Benchmade 530 knife turned out to be in constant use for this. It is the lightest folding knife I know of with a decent (82-mm / 3.25-inch) blade, and it stayed razor sharp for the whole trip.

Weight: 51 g (1.8 oz)
MSRP: US$100

Mike Martin – Coeur d’Alene, Idaho

 

Style modesty prevents me from posting a picture of this shirt. It’s FISHNET after all.

Brynje Super Thermo Shirt North Idaho sees a lot of rainy weather with temperatures around freezing. These conditions challenge the moisture management capability of any clothing layering system – especially during high-exertion activities like trail running or hill climbing. After going hard for a couple of hours, it’s nearly impossible to prevent wetting out your clothing layers. The Brynje baselayer products are made from a polypropylene fishnet material that is simply more comfortable across a broader range of conditions than anything else I’ve tried. The fabric absorbs less moisture than knit polyester or Merino wool alternatives. Plus, rather than wick perspiration farther away from your warm skin into your cool, condensation-prone, outer clothing layers, the Super Thermo fabric allows perspiration to evaporate directly from your skin. The result is a high warmth per weight ratio garment that continues to perform well after extended use in cold, wet conditions. I’ve done four-hour trail runs in 35F rain wearing a Super Thermo Shirt and a windshell and been comfortable…Well, cold, tired, wet, thirsty, and hungry, but relatively comfortable.

Weight: 5.2 oz (size large, long sleeved crew neck)
MSRP: $50

2009 Staff Favorites - 14

Western Mountaineering Expedition Booties Don’t tell the ultralight police, but for winter camping, I like to use insulated camp booties. Snowshoe footwear just isn’t warm enough for me when I stop moving in camp. And, while plastic ski boots are warm enough with the right liner, it’s just a nice luxury to get out of those Franken-boots at the end of a ski day. I’ve used, and think well of, competitive products from 40 Below and MEC, but neither can match the combination of warmth and light weight of the Western Mountaineering Expedition Booties. My favorite feature (shared with the much heavier MEC Expedition Booties) is the integrated gaiter that keeps snow from entering over the top, even in the deepest powder.

Weight: 9.2 oz/pair (size large)
MSRP: $90

2009 Staff Favorites - 15

Primus ETAPacklite Stove I’ve been a proponent of inverted-canister stoves for winter snowmelting for a decade. Over the years, I’ve used the class-standard Coleman Xtreme and even modified my MSR Windpro for inverted canister use. The Primus ETAPacklite is my favorite of the current generation of remote-canister stoves suitable for snowmelting in cold weather. The complete package, with a heat-exchanger pot, robust windsreen, piezo igniter, and all the goodies is compact, efficient, and convenient, though ultralighters may balk at the 24.3-oz system weight. However, the real jewel is the stove itself. At 8.3 ounces, it’s lighter than the defunct Coleman Xtreme, and offers a swiveling canister connection, clever windscreen support, and flat base that can be used directly on snow. My current winter stove system consists of the ETAPacklite stove, homemade windscreen, and Evernew 1.3L Titanium Pot. The whole package weighs in at 14 oz.

Weight: 24.3 oz (complete), 8.3 oz (stove only)
MSRP: $115

Carol Crooker – Mesa, Arizona

 

2009 Staff Favorites - 16

SmartWool PhD Run Light Mini Socks SmartWool PhD Run Light Mini socks on Arizona’s Bluff Spring Trail in December. The PhD socks are so luxuriously soft and cushiony, I grin every time I put them on.

Weight: 1.6 oz/pair (women’s large)
MSRP: $16

2009 Staff Favorites - 17

Columbia PFG Pants Columbia PFG pants in the Superstition Mountains. These have been my favorite hiking pants for years. I tried to retire them since the seat is about to blow out, but I haven’t been able to find a replacement pair. The best thing about them is they have an elastic waist and just pull on: no fiddling with a zipper, button, or belt. They are long enough to act like gaiters to keep desert stickers off my socks; the material is very lightweight, supple, and quick drying; they have a nice variety of pockets; and the legs are wide enough to pull on over my shoes. I’ve probably had these pants five years and have worn them on almost every three-season trip. I’m looking hard for a replacement pair before I embarrass myself, but summerweight pull-on pants that fit my long legs are few and far between.

Weight: 10.2 oz (men’s medium)
MSRP: NA

2009 Staff Favorites - 18

ExOfficio Air Strip Lite Shirt ExOfficio Air Strip Lite shirt on a day hike near Taos, New Mexico. I wear sun shirts a lot, living in the desert. Even when it gets cool I am reluctant to give up my Ex Officio shirt, since it has two nice pockets I can stow stuff in. The women’s large has sleeves long enough so my wrists stay mostly covered even when swinging hiking poles. The material is very soft and dries in a flash. As a bonus, these shirts are often on sale online and come in lots of nice colors.

Weight: 7.2 oz (women’s large)
MSRP: $80

Alan Dixon – Washington, D.C.

 

2009 Staff Favorites - 19

Therm-a-Rest NeoAir Mattress Two of my favorites this year are comfort items. It deeply pains me to make the same pick as Backpacker but the NeoAir mattress tops my list. Sure, it’s a bit narrow, a bit noisy and takes a while to inflate – but what a restful night’s sleep! I didn’t realize how comfortable I was until I suffered insomnia when taking another mattress on a long trip this summer. For use with the mate, I sewed a pair of custom couplers for the NeoAirs. My wife and I aren’t large people, and with two mattresses strapped together, we have plenty of sleeping real estate under our shared down quilt. While we don’t go out of our way to abuse the mattresses, we don’t baby them either. We’ve used them in the spiky desert and in rocky areas of high Western mountains without a problem. For us, their insulation is fine down to at least freezing.

Weight: 9 oz (size small)
MSRP: $120

2009 Staff Favorites - 20

Western Mountaineering Down Booties A 6-oz pair of down booties for $65 is exciting news. My feet run cold. Once a fall nip is in the air, my feet can stay ice cube cold from when I stop hiking in the evening to when I warm them up with a brisk walk the next morning. Little else is as satisfying as putting on a pair of dry socks and down booties when I hit camp – warm feet all night! But until now I didn’t bring down booties on my fall trips. My inexpensive 12-oz down booties were too bulky and heavy, and I’ve never been able to put myself on a wait list and spend $130 or more on a pair of lighter booties. This year Western Mountaineering introduced their Down Booties and solved the problem. (The only difficulty is that my wife has “borrowed” them. I’ll need to buy her a pair to get use of mine again.)

Weight: 6 oz
MSRP: $65

2009 Staff Favorites - 21

Patagonia R2 Vest The R2 Vest is probably the most versatile insulation garment I own. I bought my first one production year and since then, an R2 Vest has been on most of my trips. Somehow even when it’s not on my gear list, I seem to slip it into my pack at trail head. My R2 Vest has been to Patagonia, New Zealand, Scotland, the Olympics, Cascades, Rockies, Sierras, Wind Rivers, Appalachians, Southern Utah, backcountry ski tours, kayaking in below freezing weather, and many more trips. The R2 Vest is quite warm under a shell and makes a great pillow. At 8 oz, it is not much heavier than a down or synthetic vest, but it has many advantages over them. It is much more breathable and less sweaty during hard work, it absorbs little water, and dries fast. Thus, it is my primary insulating piece when I exercise in cold weather. The R2 Vest is quite compressible for a fleece garment and takes up little pack space when not in use. It’s no wonder that I now own three of them!

Weight: 8.2 to 9.8 oz (depending on production date)
MSRP: $125

Doug Johnson – Redmond, Washington

 

2009 Staff Favorites - 22

Custom EnLIGHTened (Tim Marshall) baby and toddler sleeping bags At just 7.4 oz for the infant bag and 9.2 oz for the toddler bag, these Climashield XP bags saved a lot of bulk and weight on my back and fit the kids perfectly! These are sized for a baby and a toddler, but Tim makes bags for all shapes and sizes. The custom design is hoodless with a drawstring 6 inches from the bottom to allow for growth. Tim charged me $190 for both sleeping bags, and his craftsmanship is fantastic. These were by far the most exciting gear items I purchased this year!

Weight: 7.4 oz (infant) or 9.2 oz (toddler)
MSRP: $190 (total for both)

2009 Staff Favorites - 23

Gossamer Gear Lightrek 4 Trekking Poles The Lightrek 3 poles are incredible. That is, if you are okay with fixed length poles. But it’s always been that if you wanted adjustability or ease of traveling, you had to have some clunky poles. NO MORE! The Lightrek 4 poles weigh just 3.4 ounces each, adjust from 84 cm to 140 cm, and lock firmly. They aren’t quite as easy as a Flicklock to adjust, but they are consistent and don’t slip – and they weigh a fraction of almost anything on the market. Besides that, they use excellent Leki tips and have an extra tough layer of carbon fiber on the lower to protect against rocks. You can even get straps if you like – or a camo color! These poles are marvelous.

Weight: 6.8 oz/pair
MSRP: $150

2009 Staff Favorites - 24

Z-Packs Blast 32 This is the toughest Cuben I’ve ever seen! The pack carried weight and bulky loads well during summer overnights with the kids. The translucent blue beauty is a little space-age-looking, but what the heck! I love this sub-5 ounce pack: superlight, bomber, and well thought-out.

Weight: 4.3 oz
MSRP:
$125

Janet Reichl – Durango, Colorado

 

2009 Staff Favorites - 25

Marmot Mica/Crystalline Jacket I was happy to see my Frogg Toggs jacket wear out so I could upgrade to something more durable and better fitting. The 6-oz Marmot Crystalline Jacket (women’s model, men’s model is the Mica) is my dream come true. It has a full feature set (hood, water-resistant full-height zipper, hand pockets, adjustable hood/cuffs/hem), it’s very light, and the Crystalline is sized specifically for women. The waterproof-breathable technology is Marmot’s 2.5 layer MemBrain Strata, which is claimed to have 20,000 mm waterproof performance and 20,000 g breathability.

Weight: 6 oz
MSRP: $130

2009 Staff Favorites - 26

GoLite Peak Frameless Backpack Until now, I have stuck with my GoLite Breeze pack that I bought used from Ryan Jordan about eight years ago. My new favorite backpack is the GoLite Peak, which won’t be available until spring 2010. I have had the privilege of testing it for an upcoming Backpacking Light article on frameless backpacks, and you can’t tear it away from me! It will be available in unisex sizes Small, Medium, and Large. I am testing the small size, which fits me very well. It’s made of durable Dyneema Gridstop, has a rigid foam removable backpanel pad, a huge zippered front pocket, two side stretch mesh pockets, and two hipbelt pockets. The hipbelt is removable. The volume is 2318 cubic inches, which sounds small, but it’s actually large enough for ultralight backpacking. I use it as much for day hiking as I do for backpacking. The new Jam (2857 cubic inches/31 ounces) is one step larger and has a similar design.

Weight: 27 oz (size medium)
MSRP: $125

2009 Staff Favorites - 27

Keen Ridgeline The Keen Ridgeline is my favorite summer hiking shoe. It‘s very light (10.5 oz/shoe), very breathable, and provides good support and rock protection. Of course, fit is a big part of the equation, and I like the fit and comfort of Keen shoes. These shoes are well padded around the ankle so they do absorb water when wet.

Weight: 10.5 oz/shoe (women’s 7)
MSRP: $100

Alison Simon – Washington, D.C.

 

2009 Staff Favorites - 28

Apple iPod NANO My life backpacking changed when I started carrying an iPod Nano. At just over an ounce, the iPod takes up neither space nor weight in my pack, yet it provides hours of entertainment. Yes, I do enjoy the crickets chirping, the birds singing and the frogs barking (or whatever they do), but I also enjoy being told a good ‘ole fashioned story at bedtime. Downloading an audio book onto the iPod and listening to it is a superb way to go to bed at night, no matter where you are attempting to get to sleep. In the winter months, it is great for the long nighttime hours in the tent; during the summer, it either helps me go to sleep or provides comic relief if the trek has taken an unexpected turn (euphemism for “things got really screwed up”). The minimum I bring with me on my iPod for a trip includes one audio book, 2-3 of my favorite podcasts, and 2-3 comic distractions (podcasts or stand-up comedian routines).

Weight: 1.3 oz
MSRP: $150

2009 Staff Favorites - 29

Backpacking Light FeatherLite Vapor Mitts I am officially addicted to cross-country skiing. For those who haven’t had the pleasure, cross-country skiing involves going to very cold places and sweating your butt off. Forbes rated the best workout sports of 2009, and cross-country skiing came in at 5th place, beating out basketball, cycling, running, and the modern pentathlon. Whatever goes on your body has to keep you warm while simultaneously pouring out gallons of sweat per hour. It also has to be versatile enough to take on and off, and on and off, and on… The BPL Vapor Mitts are a superb outer layer for my hands, which tend to run cold. With a set of SmartWool liner gloves inside, the FeatherLite Vapor Mitts provide the perfect wind block and warmth for downhill sections. On sweaty uphill sections, their vapor barrier keeps the insulation dry and maintains the glove’s warmth, even over a number of days skiing—long after other gloves would be a frozen mass of drenched sweat. The Vapor Mitts are also agile enough to be quickly put on if needed, yet big enough to throw a set of hand warmers in if required. They even fit under racing pole straps. Best of all, at 3.5 ounces, they do the job without weighing me down, allowing me focus on the herringbone up that next hill.

Weight: 3.5 oz
MSRP: $100 (currently on sale)

Lowrance Endura Sierra GPS Review

Lowrance adds touchscreen functionality with its top of the line Sierra GPS. With a plethora of multimedia options, it comes across as more entertainment device than a dedicated navigational aid. How does it work for backpacking?

Overview

BPL Measurements Summary
Weight: 6.2 oz (176 g) without batteries
7.9 oz (225 g) with alkaline batteries
Battery Life: Tested up to 8 hours with alkaline batteries

Note: I received a previously used sample GPS to use for a couple of months. This review reflects the limited use I had with the unit.

The Lowrance Sierra is the top of the line of the company’s Endura series of touchscreen GPS units. It comes with 4 GB of built-in memory and has Intermap’s Accuterra high-resolution topographic maps and the NAVTEQ road network for the contiguous forty-eight states preloaded.

Working with the Sierra was a mix of highs and lows for me. It kind of made me think of one of my favorite Clint Eastwood westerns, The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.

Cue the music.

The Good

As can be seen in the picture below, showing the size of the Sierra compared to my Garmin GPSmap 60C and etrex Legend, this is not my first color screen. It is the first touchscreen GPS I have used, and I loved it. The screen is very bright and the maps looked great. While all of the GPS functions may be accessed by way of the touchscreen, Lowrance chose to keep the standard buttons on the face of the unit as well. I found the touchscreen to be much faster than using the buttons.

lowrance_sierra_review Review - 1
As a size comparison I have the Lowrance Endura Sierra bracketed by my Garmin GPS units.

The included Accuterra maps are a nice feature. The display will alternate between the Base map, which shows streets, Imagery which shows topographical lines trails, and Hybrid which seems to show all.

A peek into the Tools menu shows the multimedia options available: MP3 player, Photo Explorer, and Video player. When the Sierra is attached to a PC, the unit is displayed as an external drive with assorted folders. To add multimedia content, one just drops photos, songs, or videos into the appropriate folder.

Folders for Routes and Geocaches let you do the same with downloaded route and geocaches as long as they are in GPX format. I easily downloaded a GPX route of a hike in Joshua Tree National Park and added it to the routes folder. It pulled up the route later with no problem.

On the right side of the unit is waterproof rubber door/flap covering the jack for a headset to plug in for listening to MP3s or video. On the bottom is another door/flap covering the ports for a USB cable and a Mini-SD card. The Mini-SD supports up to an additional 32GB of storage for mapping, pictures, and MP3 audio files.

Satellite acquisition is pretty fast, under two minutes and sometimes in as little as one minute.

The basic functions of the Sierra are very easy to use, as was borne out by letting my ten-year-old children use it on a three-day camping/hiking/waterfall hunting trip to Minnesota’s North Shore area. I only explained how a GPS works and what the screen shows and demonstrated the touchscreen, then let them see what they could do. Within thirty minutes both were zooming in and out and telling me what river or stream we were going to come to next. Next, my little electronics nut Raymond discovered all the various screens and pages and would inform me when I was going over the speed limit… Time to give that back to Dad!

The Bad

Unfortunately, I found more shortcomings with the Sierra than I found things to like about it. The most glaring (and a deal killer were I buying this unit) is the lack of software for a computer interface. There is no way to build my own route and add it to the Sierra unless I have my own software that saves in GPX format. I’ve worked with a number of other GPS units, and all of them have software to allow me to place waypoints and create routes that can be saved to the GPS.

I can build a route by manually adding waypoints, but I found this to be an excruciating process. Even though the built-in map has a cursor that can be scrolled around, there is no way to use it to add a waypoint. Pressing the Mark button will just add a waypoint where the GPS actually is geographically. Adding by hand brings up a pre-set waypoint that must be edited to the numbers you want. OK, but to do so means back-spacing with a tiny keyboard displayed on the touchscreen. The backspace button works about 50% of the time, so it takes lots of clicks to get the numerical string blanked and ready for new numbers. The tiny virtual keys are so small that my big fingers wanted to hit two numbers at the same time resulting in mistakes that needed to be fixed… with more backspacing!

Giving the waypoints a name is more of the same. The unit automatically assigns it a name of Waypoint 00001 and so on. To change it, I chose Edit. But instead of giving me a blank space, I must go through the backspacing again. This is an easy software fix that I think should be implemented.

I never used the multimedia features of the Sierra. I cannot see myself wasting precious GPS battery life to watch a video on a tiny screen in the wilderness, and I really do not see the point in using my $500.00 GPS as a $30.00 MP3 player.

While satellite acquisition was fast, it dropped them easily too. I had real problems in the trees on the Pacific Crest Trail near Lake Tahoe. It was impossible to use the GPS while walking; I had to find a clear spot and hold still to keep it dialed in.

The USB and Mini-SD ports have a rubber cover to seal them from moisture. The cover wouldn’t stay closed for the entire time I had the unit. I was always cognizant of this fact while crossing streams and rivers. While the unit is supposed to be waterproof, I don’t think it can be, so long as this cover doesn’t seal.

lowrance_sierra_review Review - 2
The rubber port cover above hides and protects the USB and Mini-SD ports. It refused to stay shut more than a couple seconds and would pop open as seen to the right.

The Ugly

Battery life was not good when I got the unit, and it got worse with use. As I noted earlier, this was a sample unit sent around to other writers and reviewers, so there could be something wrong with it.

While Lowrance claims fifteen hours with alkaline batteries, I found that my first three days, using it to place water caches in the desert, I would get about eight hours from a set of Duracell batteries. On the road trip with my children I let them use it, knowing that they would keep it much more active than I normally will and tracked two sets of batteries over the course of two days, only using it while driving to the next waterfall location. Even with the screen being kept on quite a bit I got 6.3 hours and 6 hours.

With this in mind, I brought the Sierra on an 82-mile hike near Lake Tahoe, loading it with new batteries and carrying two sets of spares. I turned it on only when I needed it and with just four uses, none of which lasted for more than 15 minutes, it went through a new set of batteries. As I carry a GPS for use in snow to find the trail, the short life had me pretty concerned.

My friend hurt his back, and we had to bail early, right before a big snow storm too, whew! When I got back in the office and sat down to write this review, I put another new set of batteries in. They too did not even last an hour. All the batteries used during the entire time came from the same twelve-pack purchased the first trip with the Sierra.

lowrance_sierra_review Review - 3
The batteries are easy to access and change out. Unfortunately, due to rapidly declining battery life, you could be doing this far more often than you’d like.

What’s Good

  • Quality touchscreen
  • Multi-tasks with plenty of multimedia entertainment options
  • Fast satellite acquisition
  • Fast basic learning curve
  • Easy to add downloaded geocaches and routes

What’s Not So Good

  • No included software for direct input of routes and waypoints
  • Manual input is a pain
  • Virtual keyboard is hard to use for adult fingers
  • Battery life kept getting worse
  • Very limited owner’s manual

Specifications (as stated by Manufacturer)

DISPLAY
Display Size 2.7 in 68 mm
Display Resolution 320 x 240 (H x W)
Display Type QVGA Touchscreen
GPS / NAVIGATION
GPS Antenna Type Internal GPS+WAAS
GPS Receiver Channels 42 channels
Background Map Premium outdoor content pre-installed, including Accuterra high-resolution topographic maps, extensive outdoor trails and POIs, as well as NAVTEQ road network for contiguous 48 states
Custom Mapping Optional full-featured turn-by-turn navigation
Waypoint Storage 2000
Routes 60
Plot Trails 30
Graphic Marker Icons 194
TECHNICAL / ENVIRONMENTAL
Built-in Backup Memory Yes
Sealing Waterproof to IPX7 standard
Width 2.4 in 60 mm
Height 5.1 in 130 mm
Depth 1.2 in 31 mm
Weight 0.36 lbs 0.165 kg
POWER
Battery Lifetime 15 hrs (alkaline batteries)
Battery Type 2 AA (not included)
OTHER
Memory Card Capable Micro SD card slot for up to 32 gB cards
Memory Size 4GB
Other Features Directly accepts GPS trails and geocaches, as well as POIs from web communities or other sources – store up to 3000 geocaches; Sensor enhanced navigation with digital, stabilized 3-axis compass and barometric altimeter; Trip computer records trails, altitudes, trip times, speed and distance travelled; Multimedia MP3/voice notes, picture, and video players – for entertainment or viewing trail camera photos; Power standby mode saves battery life while allowing ultra fast startup; Speaker, headphone jack and microphone; Mini USB port for power and data cables

Disclosure: The manufacturer provided this product to the author and/or Backpacking Light at no charge, and the author/BPL has returned or will return 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.

Big Agnes Fly Creek UL2 Tent Review

Big Agnes raises the bar for two-person double-wall tents by creating their lightest offering ever. In fact, it is the lightest tent in this category from any manufacturer. Will it Fly high, or leave us up a Creek?

Introduction

The new Fly Creek UL2 is the lightest two-person tent that Big Agnes has ever made. In fact, it is the lightest two-person double-wall tent made by any manufacturer at the time of this writing. By tweaking the design of their popular Seedhouse SL2 and using some new components and materials, Big Agnes was able to drop 12 ounces from the total weight for a tent that ends up with a trail weight of only 2.39 pounds (Note: Big Agnes’ trail weight is stated at a lower weight of 2.12 lb (0.96 kg). As their trail weight does not include stakes, and I found that at least four are required for set up, the BPL trail weight is higher.). This puts it in the realm of single-wall tents for weight. But while low weight is one thing, a tent needs to be livable too. How did the Fly Creek do in extended field tests, and how did it compare to lightweight stand-outs from Big Sky International, MSR and Terra Nova?

Specifications

Year/Manufacturer/Model 2009 Big Agnes Fly Creek UL2 2 Person Tent
Style Three-season, two-person, double-wall tent.
Fabrics Body: ultralight breathable nylon rip-stop and polyester mesh
Floor and Fly: ultralight silicone treated nylon rip-stop with a 1200mm waterproof polyurethane coating
Poles and Stakes Poles: DAC Featherlite NSL pole system with press fit connectors and lightweight hubs, total weight 10.2 oz (289 g)
Stakes: 10x 6.25 in (15.9 cm) DAC aluminum J stakes, total weight 4 oz (113 g)
Dimensions Length Listed: 86 in (218 cm)
Width Listed: Head 52 in/Foot 42 in (132/107 cm)
Inside Height Listed: 38 in (97 cm)
BPL Verified Accurate
Packed Size 6.5 x 19 in (16 x 48 cm)
Total Weight Listed Weight: 2.62 lb (1.19 kg)
BPL Measured Weight: 2.58 lb (1.17 kg)
Trail Weight 2.39 lb (1.08 kg)
Protected Area Floor Area Listed: 28 ft2 (2.6 m2)
Vestibule Area: 7 ft2 (0.65 m2)
BPL Verified Accurate
Protected Area/Trail Weight Ratio 14.64 ft2/lb (3.01 m2/kg)
MSRP US $349.95
Options Fast Fly Footprint, 5 oz (142 g)
Website http://www.bigagnes.com

Design and Features

The new Fly Creek UL2 is the two-person version of last year’s Fly Creek UL1. Both tents are basically reengineered and lighter versions of the Seedhouse SL tents. I have been using every generation of the Seedhouse SL2 as my go-to solo shelter since its introduction in 2004. I found it very interesting that the Fly Creek bests the Seedhouse SL2 by 12 oz (113 g), yet the Fly Creek has more floor space, as it is two inches longer. It is only 4 oz (340 g) heavier than the Seedhouse SL1, yet boasts 27% more floor space.

The Fly Creek 2’s most noticeable difference is in its 9 mm DAC pole system. By eliminating the back hub and two angled rear poles, Big Agnes was able to drop 3 oz from the pole weight. With the Fly Creek, three sections of poles meet in a front hub to form a Y, the short ends (arms of the Y) of which go to either side of the door. The long part curves over the tent to anchor in a grommet centered in the back. While it can be called a free-standing tent, the back corners need to be staked to take full advantage of all the available space.

The tent body attaches to the poles with DAC Swift Clips. These newer clips are much faster to deploy and remove than the old style clips. The center clip is a two piece DAC H-Clip. The female end H-Clip is permanently attached to the poles and when attached to the corresponding male end on the top of the tent keeps the tent from sliding along the poles. DAC even provides the J-stakes (aluminum, with a V cross-section); they weigh only 0.4 oz each.

The tent body is made of solid, lightweight, breathable nylon on the lower sections of the body, only using the trademark mesh on the top third or so.

The only entrance to the Fly Creek is by way of a large D-shaped mesh door in the front. A loop and toggle allow it to be gathered to the side. To either side of the door inside the tent are mesh gear pockets. A third small mesh pocket sits centered above the door. On the top of the tent are the loops to attach an optional Triangle Gear Loft.

The rain fly and floor are made of ultralight, high tenacity micro-denier ripstop nylon. Due to its proprietary nature, that is as much information about it as they will share. It is very light and pretty tough from what I have seen so far. All seams have been taped to ensure waterproofness. Big Agnes includes pre-attached guy lines and lightweight sliding tensioners at the guy points and ventilation pull-out points on the rain fly. At these spots inside the fly are straps with hooks that attach to a reinforced loop on the inner tent to allow it to be pulled out to give added space.

The fly pulls away in front of the door to provide a small vestibule. It is not really big enough to store more than boots and possibly a small pack inside and still be able to get in and out of the tent.

Big Agnes Fly Creek UL2 Tent Review - 1
Top left: The single hub Y-shaped poles go to just three points at the ground. Top right: Just one DAC H-clip and five Swift clips are needed to attach the body to the poles. The solid material on the lower two-thirds of the side walls help keep out blowing dirt. Bottom left: The large single door takes up the entire front face of the Fly Creek. Two pads (one regular sized and one Long shown) fit with no problem. The sloping side walls do make it cramped for two people to do much more than sleep. Bottom right: the fly provides full coverage and good weather protection.

Big Agnes Fly Creek UL2 Tent Review - 2
Left: Stuff sacks galore! The Fly Creek comes with the tent, fly poles, eleven DAC J-stakes and stuff sacks for all of them. A pole repair section was sent too, but it is not in the picture. Right: The Fly Creek makes a pretty compact package. By carrying the poles separately (as I do), it gets even smaller.

Performance

As I have owned so many of Big Agnes’ tents over the years, set-up was pretty quick. I almost always use the optional footprint to stop abrasion of the floor from all the rock I find myself making camp on when in the mountains of California. In humid, rainy Minnesota, I use it just to keep the bottom clean.

I often set the guy lines on all my tents, and I have found that they are even more beneficial for the Fly Creek UL2. All of the Big Agnes tents with this design suffer from wind stability when it comes from the side. It can’t be helped with the flat face presented. Always try to make sure the back is to the wind, as this is the strongest, most aerodynamically stable position. The first time I set it up was right before a thunderstorm hit. The winds were at 18 mph with gusts to 31 mph. I attached the fly-to-body points and deployed the guy lines, and set it with the back to the wind, but the sides still blew inward quite a bit. I watched the wind hitting it straight on, finally putting enough pressure on one side to cause the single pole to flex to one side, finally jumping inside when the rain hit.

Big Agnes Fly Creek UL2 Tent Review - 3
Present this side into the wind for best performance.

The Fly Creek spent an evening, night, and most of the next day in a very big thunderstorm in Moorhead, Minnesota. I escaped back to my house in the morning but left the tent up until the rain was completely through. It weathered it quite well. (Note: I bring tents to Minnesota, where I spend at least a week each month with my twin children, for the opportunity to use them in weather that I may not see for months at a time in California.) The back has no provision to pull the fly out further like the sides do to provide more space for ventilation. Thinking about it later, I realized that when the rain was being driven into the back of the tent by the wind, it is better this way. When there is little or no wind, the fly sits out as far as the stake placement allows. The stronger the wind against it, the more it seals itself.

On a backpacking trip in the northern Sierra Nevada, I encountered temperatures to 29 F (-2 C), but pretty low humidity as it was at 50% to 54% the entire time. It rained and snowed one night, but the Fly Creek shrugged it off without a bit of condensation. (The humidity was so low that, with the wind, everything was dry by morning.)

The same was true of two nights in Domeland Wilderness further south in the Sierra Nevada that saw temperatures of 27 F (-3 C) at night. This area is almost high desert in places and has a lot more bare ground and dirt than the northern Sierra. The wind was blowing almost the entire trip.

A last trip to the south Sierra Wilderness with the Fly Creek saw two nights down to 32 F (0 C) with humidity levels at 67%. On this trip I purposely left the vestibule completely shut one night, and just the top of the door unzipped the next. Buttoned up all the first night, there was light condensation build-up on the inside of the rain fly. It was not enough to drip or run, but I could wipe moisture from the walls. The night with the top of the vestibule door opened at the top just a few inches created enough of a draw to wake up to completely dry walls in the morning.

Big Agnes Fly Creek UL2 Tent Review - 4
The Fly Creek 2 in the Domeland Wilderness. The solid walls helped keep blowing dirt out of the tent here.

Assessment

Nothing in the literature I received from Big Agnes made any mention of the Fly Creek UL2 being the lightest two-person double-wall tent. Nothing I have been able to find perusing the "stacks" at BPL or the internet has given me any indication that this is not the case. So here it is, in its first long-term in-depth review. Big Agnes, you have a winner. Is it perfect? No. Is it viable? In a big way!

Because of the areas I frequent (mountains) and the four-season nature of my hiking, I have always preferred a double-wall tent. I have had many tarptents and use them on occasion, but I like a double-wall tent because the pros outweigh the cons for me. Yes, they are heavier. They take up more room in my pack. These are the main reasons that I carried the TT Rainbow and Squall 2. However, the advantages of condensation control and the ability to do without the protection from rain fly to just use the inner by itself makes me choose the weight hit on most of my trips. Big Agnes has hit into a weight versus convenience/features range that really blurs the lines between the two for me.

I really like the use of the solid nylon part way up the walls. The Fly Creek kept much cleaner inside than other mesh-walled tents, as it did not let as much dirt or dust blow in.

One drawback of all tents of this shape/configuration (my tarptents included) is the necessity to sleep with your head at the high end (door) of the tent. This limits choices when finding a good camp site. The areas I frequent rarely see a flat spot so I want my head to be at the uphill end of a sloped site. However, if the wind is blowing that way, I have to either choose to have the wind blowing in the door or sleep with my head downhill.

Another negative is the fact that the rain fly does not protect the door opening when the vestibule is open. Rain or snow can fall straight down into the tent. As this is where the users’ heads are, care must be taken to move sleeping bags or quilts away from the front before somebody enters or exits in inclement weather.

Big Agnes Fly Creek UL2 Tent Review - 5
As may be seen above, the rain fly does not cover the front of the tent when the vestibule door is open. This results in water inside the tent when entering or exiting in rainy conditions.

It would benefit from a high vent, as my experiment in the south Sierra Wilderness proved. The Fly Creek can be ventilated at the vestibule door, but if it is raining, this results in water on the inner tent. A small hooded vent would allow air to be drawn from below and the warm moist air inside could flow through it. Will it add weight? Yep, maybe an ounce or so. That may even knock it out of "lightest ever" range, but such a feature would make a tent that I would want to buy even more. Big Agnes does put a high vent on the Copper Spur series (I had the Copper Spur UL3 and now have the Copper Spur UL2), and it adds a lot to the ventilation capability. Changing the design of the rain fly to move the vestibule further away from the front of the tent would do the trick too. This would allow the top of the vestibule door to be open while still keeping rain off the front of the inner.

I used to do a lot of mountaineering, and I should be kicking it back up again soon. Unless I am on a mountain or with my wife, I do not like to share a tent. Because of my height (6’3" / 190.5 cm), I tend to use two-person tents as solo shelters. The Fly Creek has worked wonderfully in this role. I have plenty of room to bring my backpack inside, which is nice when I am packing up in the morning.

For two people, it is another story. While the Fly Creek UL2 has a head height of 38 in (97 cm), it is at one area directly centered in the tent towards the front. Only one person can sit and enjoy the maximum clearance. Two adults of my height would find it pretty hard to share the tent. I will use it with one of my kids, but not another adult, unless we were really REALLY friendly. My twins Emma and Ray used it together and thought it was the best, but they are 4’9" (145 cm) tall.

If insect protection is not needed, or you just want the lowest possible weight, the rain fly can be pitched with just the poles and optional footprint to cut 9.2 oz (261 g) off the total.

I am pretty impressed by the Fly Creek UL2. While it is a bit cramped for two adults, it still offers two people a weather-tight tent at a minuscule weight with the ability to forgo the rain fly on nice nights. Or, as in my case, it offers a very nice solo tent for a tall hiker. From what I have seen during the past few months, I believe that the durability is going to be better than my Seedhouses of old, even though the new materials are lighter.

Dare to Compare

In terms of comparisons, I believe that the Fly Creek’s closest competitors are the Terra Nova Laser and the MSR Carbon Reflex, both of which are lightweight, two-person, double-wall tents.

The MSR Carbon Reflex 2 is probably the closest comparison. With its 2-inch (5 cm) taller peak height and 1 sq ft (0.9 sq m) more floor space, it is slightly roomier than the Fly Creek, though it also weighs 9.4 oz (266 g) more.

The Terra Nova Laser is a two-person double-wall tent that is actually an over-sized single person tent as two standard-width sleeping pads can’t fit inside unless they are stacked. With a mere 5.3 oz (150 g) heavier trail weight, it has much less head room and 22% less floor space. To its credit, the Laser sets up blazingly fast and has better ventilation than the Fly Creek.

It should also be noted that neither of those tents are freestanding and both cost at least 40% more than the Fly Creek UL2.

Manufacturer and Model Big Agnes Fly Creek SL2 MSR Carbon Reflex 2 Terra Nova Laser
Manufacturer Trail Weight* 2.12 lb (0.96 kg) 2.81 lb (1.28 kg) 2.47 lb (1.12 kg)
Backpacking Light Trail Weight** 2.39 lb (1.08 kg) 2.98 lb (1.36 kg) 2.72 lb (1.23 kg)
Fabrics Floor/fly: 1200mm PU/silicone coated ripstop nylon
Body: nylon & polyester mesh
Floor: 40D nylon 66, 10,000mm PU
Fly: 20D 1000mm PU/silicone coated nylon
Body: 20D nylon 66 & 20D polyester mesh
Floor: 7000mm PU coated nylon
Fly: 4000mm silicone coated nylon
Body: nylon mesh
Poles DAC Featherlite NSL pole system with one hub 2 Easton FX carbon fiber poles 1 DAC aluminum pole, 2 carbon fiber struts
Dimensions*** L x W x H 86 x 52/42 x 38 in
(218 x 132/107 x 97 cm)
84 x 46.5 x 40 in
(213 x 118 x 102 cm)
87 x 34 x 33 in
(221 x 86 x 84 cm)
Floor Area 28.0 sq ft (2.6 sq m) 27.1 sq ft (2.52 sq m) 21.8 sq ft (2.02 sq m)
Number of Vestibules & Area 1 7 sq ft (0.65 sq m) 2 14 sq ft (1.3 sq m) 1 7 sq ft (0.65 sq m)
Floor Area/Trail Weight Ratio**** 11.71 sq ft / lb
(2.41 sq m / kg)
9.64 sq ft / lb
(1.97 sq m / kg)
8 sq ft / lb
(1.64 sq m / kg)
Protected Area/Trail Weight Ratio***** 14.64 sq ft / lb
(3.01 sq m / kg)
13.8 sq ft / lb
(2.81 sq m / kg)
10.57 sq ft / lb
(2.17 sq m / kg)
Cost US$ 350 500 538

Notes:

*Manufacturer Trail Weight: Minimum weight as listed by the manufacturer. Different companies may include different components in this weight.

**Backpacking Light Trail Weight: This is the weight of tent, rain fly, poles, and stakes needed for basic set-up. It does not include stuffsacks, extra guylines, extra stakes, or repair kit.

***Dimensions: maximum Length x maximum Width x maximum Height (L x W x H). In the case of an odd 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 manufacturers’ 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

  • Lightest two-person double-wall tent at this time.
  • Very small packed size.
  • Solid fabric blocks blowing dirt and snow.
  • Proven storm worthiness.
  • Light yet strong and durable materials.
  • Decent ventilation.

What’s Not So Good

  • Too cramped to be useful for two adults of my height.
  • Strong winds hitting the flat sides can cause problems.
  • Rain will fall into tent when vestibule door is open.

Recommendations for Improvement

  • Place a small high vent on the rain fly.
  • Redesign fly to protect tent while exiting in rain.

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.

Lighten Your Heaviest Gear: You!

As lightweight backpackers, we obsess over the weight of every piece of gear we carry, but many of us give little thought to the weight of the heaviest piece of gear of all: ourselves. How do we begin to treat our own weight with the same care that we treat the weight of our gear? By doing what we already do well: going light.

You don’t have access to view this content.