#Moonlight tent …

I don't think this tent is for me but thanks for posting.

How do you plan on putting this tent into production? Do you plan on sewing each one individually, overseas manufacturer? Given it is a great design, what about quality control? That seems to be the downfall of many good designs. You do need a thick skin or a really good product with a really good business plan. If it was that easy, we would all be designers. There is a lot of experiance here, with a few standouts. When they fail, they refine their product, not their wording. Take it as a lesson learned, not an insult.

Terran,

Give the guy a break. He provided the manufacturing details on his KickStarter page. I think the OP has more experience in this area than any of us, you may want to read his resume too.

I have to agree with Nick. The guy has a pretty impressive resume.

I don't really understand the vitriol. The problem is not the tent, or the ability to produce them. There are several tents built like that.

The only real issue is the marketing strategy.

I also agree with Nick. Just because his tents don't really appeal to lightweight backpackers such as ourselves (yes, I LOVE my crazy light/expensive cuben fiber pyramid that sets up with 1 trekking pole!) doesn't mean the guy shouldn't make it and try to sell it.

Good for him.

I just think he's got the wrong audience here – whiteblaze is probably better for this type of thing anyway.

Sadly this is nothing but a personal dispute between Roger and Mike that has continued for years. Going back a bit in their post histories and you'll see them constantly bickering and contradicting one another on a number of topics. It's unfortunate that Roger appears to be using his 'moderator overlord power' to make rules on the fly due to his disdain for Mike, however.

"Sadly this is nothing but a personal dispute between Roger and Mike that has continued for years. Going back a bit in their post histories and you'll see them constantly bickering and contradicting one another on a number of topics. It's unfortunate that Roger appears to be using his 'moderator overlord power' to make rules on the fly due to his disdain for Mike, however."

That seems a fairly ridiculous conclusion to jump to. Looking through old posts, it seems they've had some discussions, but nothing bickering or rude. I might even call them polite by BPL standards. I hardly think Roger's tunnel tents are in any way a competitor to these Moonlight tents.

Thanks Dave, I've never heard of that kind of two-stage trip before. Not as a regular thing anyway. Interesting.

Ian B – that other thread is AWESOME! You rock.

Brandon – Let me talk about the differences between the BA Copper Spur and the MoonLights to show how the weight increases from one to the other. Please (everyone) keep in mind that I am not dumping on the BACS or the other tent I'm going to mention: the MSR Hubba Hubba. They are both excellent tents with MANY thousands of satisfied users. I have CHOSEN to make a different tent with different features and benefits to cater to different priorities. If someone sees those others as more aligned with what they want, I WANT them to buy those other tents. But one can't choose between things that one has never heard of, so I must speak.
I believe it’s correct that the BACS and MSRHH are both 20D class tents like the MoonLights. That is to say that the largest amount of one type of fabric is 20D sil/pu (the rainfly). The floors are 30D, the ripstop is 20D uncoated (but there’s not much of it), and the netting could be 10D, 15D, or 20D with very little difference in weight, cost or durability. All of us are using fairly similar poles: DAC (of course!) 8.5 or 9mm (it’s hard to know exactly which diameters are where without having one to look at, specs are vague, incomplete and sometimes contradictory).
The BACS has a minimum weight of 2lb 13 oz, the MSRHH comes in at 3 lbs 7 oz, and the MoonLight2 comes in at 4 lbs 4 oz.
Looking at the first two there’s 10 ounces of difference: the floor areas are identical but the shapes aren’t – the BACS has a trapezoidal floor with a smaller foot area/larger head area and the occupants sleep head-to-head (couples style). The MSRHH has a rectangular floor which is often preferred for sleeping head-to-foot (buddy style). The pole architectures are nearly identical. So the pole weight difference is probably only about 2 ounces. The fabric needs of a roomier shape would be about 2-3 oz, 3000mm coatings on the floor and splashwalls (that are taller), 3-4 oz, one more vent (.2 oz) and a little web for the stakeloops (1 oz). That all totals 8-10 ounces so there’s probably also a difference in the fabric+coating weight of the rainfly – let’s call it 2-0 ounces. Thousands of people (not saying a majority) buy the 10 oz heavier tent every year because it’s roomier and a little more rainworthy.
Now the 13 oz difference from the MSRHH to the MoonLight: significantly roomier shape – a roughly 10% bigger floor and 20% bigger vestibule (~3 oz of fabric), a commensurately larger frame (with a different pole structure) which I show is strong – 6 oz more. Coatings look similar, the 2 vents and 2 side windows have zippers so they can close (1.5 oz), two clear windows (.4 oz), extra zipper sliders preinstalled (.5 oz)extra gear loops (6ea=.78g, 1/36th oz – less than a meager spit) and all the other features (1.5 oz). Polyester 20D fabric weights range over exactly the same weights as nylon. There isn’t a general difference but there may be a difference between two specific fabrics.
So it’s all accounted for even if my guesses are a little off here or there, the gist is that roominess mostly accounts for the differences between these tents. Nothing is heavier because of bad material choices or fabrications. Most of the MoonLight’s weight difference is because it's roomier and stronger.

Nick, Jennifer, DD, thank you!

Hope that helps,
Mike

So Mike, educate me:

You claim (I think) that polyester weighs the same, absorbs less water, stretches less, and is more UV-resistant.
So why does almost everyone else use nylon?

> why does almost everyone else use nylon?
They do indeed, when performance matters.

Nylon is stronger than polyester, denier for denier, and this advantage becomes much bigger when you look at dynamic loads. This applies to rope (ever heard of polyester climbing rope?) and also to tent fabrics. Nylon has much greater dynamic capabilities than polyester, which is good when your tent is in a storm.

It also applies to sewing thread. You get poly-cotton threads for lighter use at a lower cost, where the cotton fibres protect the polyester, but when you want a really strong thread it is always nylon. It is usually 'bonded' to better handling.

The UV resistance is much hyped by some, but it is not really all that significant under most conditions. Sure, leave a yellow nylon tent pitched in the sun for 6 months and it will go paper-weak, but that is as much due to the dye as to the fibre (and to the idiot who left it pitched). For someone who pitches their tent in the evening and pulls it down next morning, you are not going to see any significant difference in under maybe 10 years.

However, polyester is cheaper than nylon. Nylon is a premium fibre, but it costs more. In consumer products the cost can matter.

Cheers

>"So it’s all accounted for even if my guesses are a little off here or there, the gist is that roominess mostly accounts for
>the differences between these tents

Thanks for the detailed breakdown. Do you think you'd ever try to market a tent yourself that lacks that extra 10oz? Maybe even look to come under the weight of similar tents, rather than being heavier than similar tents?

> "Thousands of people (not saying a majority) buy the 10 oz heavier tent every year because it’s roomier and a little
> more rainworthy."

No doubt. I'd also imagine thousand of people return tents of that sort, or just regret the purchase if they can't return it.

I could be off base, but in my own experience and the experience of many of the people I know. You initially gravitate towards what you think is a bomb proof, full of frills backpacking tent. Then as you run into people on the trail that have been backpacking for years, you start to realize you're carrying a lot of heavy gear and some of those frills aren't really needed.

Where to start: polyester yarns can be less expensive and more expensive. The 68D and 75D yarns, used to very good effect in less expensive tents, have very satisfactory performance for literally millions of users. Every 2-person tent in the US around the $200 price uses these for at least the rainfly. ALL larger tents use 100% polyester now but the reason initially wasn't price – it used to cost more than 70D nylon. The reason for the change was quality control. Large tents made in vast numbers in China's high humidity would come over here and be literally too tight to set up because the nylon had shrunk. 3.5% shrinkage on a 200" over-top dimension is 7" of shrink and cannot be reasonably compensated for. So initially polyester was used to solve this expensive problem. Over the years the 68D and 75D fabrics came down in price. Now it's fair to say that they are a huge bargain for the consumer. They perform more than adequately, there's nothing against them but their (merely normal) weight.

Polyesters and nylons both come in high tenacity versions. I believe that high tenacity polyester from Japan is currently the top dollar product. Regarding the hypothetical value of extra tear strength fabrics and where the MoonLight fabrics fit in I'm going to point to this page: http://thetentlab.com/MoonLightTents/Tear.html

Regarding dynamic loading I fear I must point out that there two fundamental types of loading: loading a structure with a non-bending connection to an anchor (like the ground) and loading a structure with a pivoting connection. Tents fall into the pivot category, sailboat masts, for instance, fall into the fixed end category. And do I really need to mention that a tent is not a rope. The tent structure itself always flexes under dynamic loads and the fabric plays an important role in sustaining the aerodynamics of the tent. Any fabric stretching (OR stretching guylines) worsens the aerodynamics because of cupping. This loads the tent poles more than a non-stretch system. Watching wind tunnel test after test has shown me this. Take a look at my wind test videos and see if it comes to you too: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpxurC28qDZKPI9_pLomdFw

Heck, I could even punt the whole argument and simply point to my wind tests – all done with 20D polyester fabrics and NO GUYLINES to prop up an intrinsically weak design. The MoonLights are really strong. Does anything else even matter?

At what point would one reasonably turn to higher strength fabrics? Traditionally polar explorers and mountaineers use heavier denier fabric for just this reason and high tenacity nylon would be preferred over high tenacity polyester for large cost reasons. Beating both by a wide margin, however, would be Cuben fiber fabrics – vastly stronger and lighter and completely non-stretch (for about an 8x cost increase).

Hi Mike

Interesting stuff, for which we are indebted, but some doubts remain. Let's look at a few.

A 200" arch corresponds to about 10.5' diagonal on the ground. Definitely not UL tents, so the relevance is reduced. What puzzles me though is the idea that the Chinese could not compensate for the difference in humidity, if they were making thousands of these tents. Surely there would have been some feedback from America? Could they not have simply made the fabric slightly larger, by the 3.5%? Or made the poles for the USA version 3.5% shorter? Strange.

My experience of the Chinese has been that if you ask them to lower the price, they will, but they will do that by changing something. The move from nylon to polyester could have been due to a demand from the customer for a lower price.

> two fundamental types of loading: loading a structure with a non-bending connection
> to an anchor (like the ground) and loading a structure with a pivoting connection.
> Tents fall into the pivot category, sailboat masts, for instance, fall into the
> fixed end category.
Forgive me, but do you have this back to front? Masts and booms flex or bend, but ground anchors on tents do not. Or at least, MY tent stakes don't move.

> The tent structure itself always flexes under dynamic loads and the fabric plays
> an important role in sustaining the aerodynamics of the tent. Any fabric stretching
> (OR stretching guylines) worsens the aerodynamics because of cupping. This loads
> the tent poles more than a non-stretch system.
I have to agree with you here. If the tent starts to flap around, the poles cop it, sometimes badly.
On the other hand, the ability of nylon fabric to absorb shocks has always been of great value in tents for extreme weather. The nylon can recover. That is one reason I have long hesitated to try Cuban Fibre material in a tunnel tent: it cannot absorb shock loading. Pierre D's experiment with a CF tunnel is being watched closely by many.

> The MoonLights are really strong. Does anything else even matter?
Oops, and Oh Dear! You asked this on the wrong web site!
For most of our readers, WEIGHT is far more important, as most fabrics are sufficiently strong. Which may be why CF tarps are so popular.

Nonetheless, good luck.

Cheers

"On the other hand, the ability of nylon fabric to absorb shocks has always been of great value in tents for extreme weather. The nylon can recover. That is one reason I have long hesitated to try Cuban Fibre material in a tunnel tent: it cannot absorb shock loading. Pierre D's experiment with a CF tunnel is being watched closely by many."

Didn't Chris Townsend published an article about nylon versus polyester in high winds about three years ago?

If I recall, he mentioned polyester fabrics are okay for fixed structures (eg. Duomid) but not so much for dynamic pitches (eg. Trailstar).

But to be honest, after experiencing Norway's tundra, I would be reluctant to use polyester in a tunnel tent too.

Half way funded.

Reading back over the thread I think my "I like to sleep in exposed sites" got ridiculous-ed both ways: one meant "duh, of course" and the other (I think) meant "who'd do a fool thing like that". Fun stuff.

Regarding dynamic loading, are you talking about failing the tent structure or failing the guyouts? In wind tests it's the structure that fails and non-stretch is the way to go. If you're ripping out guylines for any reason then it's the reinforcement that needs improving. I'm not seeing any need for nylon's dynamic load absorption (stretchiness) at all. What impact? Air is soft and compressible, the timescales for loading are much longer than any "impact" one would think of normally. Are you saying that polyester stretches and doesn't come back? Never seen that. The tensile strength of all tent fabrics is extremely high – what is this impact need of which you speak?

In the late 80's I made Rick Ridgeway a couple of polyester rainfly Windfoil tents (tunnel) and those tents worked really well in Antarctica. No "wind impact" issues but they did have actual flying debris issues: the wind was picking up dinner plate sized chunks of hard snow/ice and pummeling everyone and everything (good thing they were wearing thick insulation). The tents held up great.

> The MoonLights are really strong. Does anything else even matter?
>>Oops, and Oh Dear! …
Context: theoretical strength advantages are trumped by actual testing. The MoonLights are proven to be strong (even without guylines). It's not a general all-encompassing statement intending to act as an eleventh commandment or anything.

Brandon – Sure, some people buy much heavier stuff than what they later come to like. VE24s are used for carcamping all the time. The MoonLight2 is just over four pounds FHS and it weighs that mostly because it's bigger. Anyone can make a lightweight small tent, doubly so if they think it's OK to crowd the user's feet.
RB – It's very hard for a company to change anything basic. Nylon is used because nylon has always been used. Marketing anything else is complicated and distracting. Right now 20D polyester is about as light as one can (conservatively) go so there would also be a huge story problem: in a fundamental way cheap tents (68D) work better than expensive tents (<15D). That's a muddy and conflicted story.

Thank you all again for taking a look at the project and asking such good questions. Truth be told: I often use what I find here to nudge my writing this way and that. It's always good to hear the opinions of others.

Hi Mike

> Regarding dynamic loading, are you talking about failing the tent structure or
> failing the guyouts? In wind tests it’s the structure that fails and non-stretch
> is the way to go.
I’ll record my technical disagreement here about non-stretch, although (hopefully) few will ever get that close to the edge. For my background to this, read When Things Go Wrong.

> I’m not seeing any need for nylon’s dynamic load absorption (stretchiness) at all.
> What impact? Air is soft and compressible,
Technically true … but at 100 kph at 3 am in the snow, it sometimes feels a little harsher.

The real problem is that the wind rarely comes at a constant speed in a storm: it comes in gusts, which can be quite short and savage. I have watched the tent flex just slightly as a gust hits, and then recover. The shock absorbtion in the nylon seems to take some load off the stakes, although the integrity of the CF poles was critical. I will add that I have never had a stake pull out.

But we are talking about different markets really, so different criteria apply.

Cheers

Thanks Roger!
-Mike

I am a few weeks late to the party but I just read most of this thread and have a few points that I would like to add. Maybe they are worth reading, maybe not..

First, I think Mike has every right to post on here and I am glad he did. While his tent might not match the customer base on BPL, he is offering a deal. Kind of like one of those group buys. And I can't hate on him for loving to be a tent designer and sharing his passion by creating what he feels is the best tent. We all have our unicorn tents. Mine is a mid that I made for myself. Mikes is obviously the one he is offering, so I think some of you need to cut him some slack. After all he is not on here selling rolling luggage..

Next, I hate nylon for tents and I am glad Mike is shedding some light on this issue. In my personal experience using it for my whole life, its horrible as it sags. Catches wind. Etc. That's not to say I don't own several silnylon tents as I do, but I would like every single one of them more if they were made from Polyester and or a laminate. As in my experience, these are much better materials for a shelter.

Last, I get super annoyed when I read broad posts that say Nylon is much stronger than Polyester and more expensive. (Roger) I think I could be the only person on this whole site that actually buys yarn so in this regard I consider myself knowledgeable on the subject. And your statements are mostly not correct. I recently purchased a polyester yarn that had 10.60 g/den tenacity. Which exceeds any nylon specs I have ever seen. I am not saying nylons of that high of tenacity don't exist, but I have never seen them. With the deniers of yarn I buy, its far more common to buy 8+g/d colored poly and 9+g/d natural than it is to buy Nylon of these tenancies. While there are mills that make them, they are not as common and they are certainly not used in nylon tent fabrics. So I think you should start citing your work and stop pulling it from down under haha : )

Hi Lawson

> I recently purchased a polyester yarn that had 10.60 g/den tenacity.
Yeah, that IS high. Nylon 6,6 gets close, maybe up to 9.8, while nylon 6 is much lower. I can imagine that the PE you mention might be rather expensive.

No, I don't buy yarn, but sometimes I do buy fabric. I agree with your implied comment that finding a mill who is selling the 'right' fabric can be the hardest bit of all.

Ah well, we each have our preferences and enthusiasms. May that continue.

Cheers

"ALL larger tents use 100% polyester now"

Interesting as I quickly looked up some big tents from a few manufacturers and all have a nylon fly.

Yes I agree Roger. Some mills make nylons in the mid to upper 9's but these are used in tire construction and for airbag fabrics. Not outdoor gear. But either is the 10.6 g/d PES I bought, so I guess my point is, its hard to make blanket statements when there are so many variations between the two fibers. As you said, its all about the mill.

But the one thing that never varies is how nylon absorbs moisture and grows longer. Its like one of those straw worms. Which is the reason it sags. Put water on it and watch it grow. And the reason why I think polyester is a better shelter fabric.

"But the one thing that never varies is how nylon absorbs moisture and grows longer. Its like one of those straw worms. Which is the reason it sags. Put water on it and watch it grow. And the reason why I think polyester is a better shelter fabric."

True but the sagging has never been to me such an issue that I even desired then to have a polyester fly.

"True but the sagging has never been to me such an issue that I even desired then to have a polyester fly."

Everyone has their preferences of course, but if polyester is sufficiently strong enough for shelters, is similarly priced and doesn't sag – what other reason is there to use nylon?

Ryan

I would like to believe that the cottage makers of ultralight shelters are using the highest performing products they can – silnylon and cuben. If polyester was so good, they would be using it as it is cheaper to buy. But it isn't so good.

The newer silnylon with high hydrostatic head does not sag very much at all (I am assuming that the term 'grow' means sag).