Does Hilleberg make burlier (say 10mm) poles as an option or accessory for red-label tents?

Hilleberg, just like every other brand of tents, do not make its own poles .
Their poles are made by DAC .
I have not seen DAC poles for sale but you can get Easton either made to your measurements or as a DIY project (very easy)
Just Google "tent poles for sale" or something like that.
I cannot tell you for sure but I can assume that a clip that takes a 9mm pole will take a 10 mm too.
If you had one you would just wrap some tape on it and see for yourself.

Try here:

http://www.shelby.fi/catalog/default.php?cPath=33_193&osCsid=89c4a98bff10b3800b4aea467d6d68b1

Look at th e pole lengths on the back models, I know that some of them have the same pole lengths as the red ones.

I got a heavy duty pole from Tentpole Technologies. (larger diameter, thicker tube wall)

The pole is for my TT Scarp 2 as part of my "winterizing" mods. They needed to know the pole length, and, with pole in the erected tent, the distance between pole tips as well as the height at the center of the arch. This gave them the proper curvature B/C a pole that stiff must be slightly pre- curved.

As I recall the cost was just over $40.

(You can see a photo of it laying beside the standard arch pole at "Winter Camping and Hiking" page her on BPL.)

Thank you, all respondents, for your suggestions and links.

The link to Shelby (www.shelby.fi) seems especially useful, in that they list this pole:
[DAC_10_368] Tent Pole Featherlite NSL 10.25mm, 368 cm
with the information that …
This is a spare pole for Keron 4 tent or sturdier replacement for Nallo 4, Stalon Cambi or Jannu tents!

Now, according to the Hilleberg US website Accessories page (us.hilleberg.com/EN/products/accessories/), the Allak pole length is also 368cm, so I thought that this DAC_10_368 pole might be a suitable sturdy upgrade for that tent too. But I was not sure if the amount of pre-bend was suitable for the Allak. That is, merely matching the pole length may not be enough.

So I sent an email to Shelby questioning this. In a reply, received just now, Shelby tells me that the pre-bend of that pole is not an issue, but I have got the pole length wrong: the Allak has 370cm poles, not 368! And, yes, according to the Allak page (us.hilleberg.com/EN/products/red-label/allak/allak.php) they are right: 370cm. Very confusing, when the Allak pole length is given as both 368 and 370 on two different pages of the Hilleberg website. (Maybe the Allak has grown a bit over the last few years and that the old pole length, 368cm, has not been updated in the Accessories page?)

Anyway, Shelby can source 370cm DAC Featherlite 10.25mm poles suitable for the Allak if needed; they do not have them in stock.

That is as far as I will take this matter for now, because all this is just pre-purchase precautionary information gathering. That is, I do not yet own any Hilleberg tent, but am strongly considering buying one in the near future when funds allow. A 2-person tent. And it will probably be an Allak. (Or maybe a Kaitum? 2 or 3 or 2GT ? Or perhaps a Nammatj? 2 or 2GT? Help!! Decisions, decisions!!)

One of my concerns about the Kaitum and Allak is pole strength under unseasonably strong winds or rogue gusts. (The Kerlon 1200 fabric is probably strong enough.) That is why I was enquiring about the feasibility of using stronger replacement poles for places and times where such weather was more likely.

Once again, thank you all for your thoughts on this matter and the useful URLs.

The tunnel tents are generally easier substitute 10.25mm poles for the original 9mm poles, as the pole sleeves are sized to allow two sets.

Tye clips on the dome tents are rather more precise, and it's possible they might be stressed by the wider diameter poles over the long run. Hilleberg's official answer is to use two sets of 9mm poles and alternate which pole is clipped in.

As for choice of 2P, I did a comparison of the Allak, Jannu and Nammatj 2 recently. My conclusion is that the Nammatj 2 has the most usable interior space for two. It already has the 10.25mm poles, but as a tunnel it is less suited for unattended base camp use than either dome.

Have just received email reply from tentmaker@hilleberg.com:
The Allak takes 3 9mm x 370 poles. We will correct that on the accessories page.

Mark – You seem to have decided on the Allak, but then wondered about the Kaitum and Nammatj models, both standard and extended vestibules. They're very different shelters than the Allak. How, where and when do you intend to use a Hilleberg, so folks can give you their thoughts? Which criteria are the most important for you out of the following?

– Weight
– Footprint size
– Interior space
– Vestibule space
– Freestanding vs non
– Wind resistance
– Static snow load capability
– Ventilation

Although Hilleberg market all three tents as four season capable, my impression is that the Allak is better suited to Spring / Summer / Autumn with occasional Winter trips. In contrast the Kaitum and Nammatj are more likely to be used in Autumn / Winter / Spring, and occasionally in the summer, albeit for slightly different reasons.

When I tried the Allak, it was surprisingly cozy for two with three season sleeping bags. In contrast, the vestibules were massive, and swallowed the gear I'd normally take at that time of year. Open up the inner tent doors with the inverted T zips, and you have a very spacious setup, but close it and it feels tighter than either tunnel tent. I put my 0F winter bag in, and it took up 2/3 of the interior space. For me, I could only use it solo in winter. The roof vents and mesh panels on the doors offer excellent ventilation and a cross breeze in warmer conditions. And the freestanding design works well on solid rock or other locations where it's challenging to pitch a tunnel. The Allak is popular among kayakers. Dimensionally, the Allak is somewhat wider than it is long.

The Kaitum has two vertical doors for excellent interior space, and large vestibules that can be rolled back in good weather to maximise ventilation. The middle pole is longer than those at the doors, which causes it to taper and the inner tent can sag. The newest brochure does indicate how much narrower and lower the inner tent is at the doors than the centre. My impression is that it was more pronounced on the Kaitum 3 that I owned than on the Kaitum 2. The Kaitum's Achilles heel is its length. At 14' (or 17' for the GT), it's fine above treeline or on snow, but can be challenging to find a site below treeline. If the wind shifts 90 degrees during the night, the side provides quite a target and it will flex a lot without upgraded poles. However you do have three poles, which Roger Caffin recommends.

The Nammatj is the strongest of the three tents, with heavier duty materials throughout. Its single door design means it's quite a lot shorter than the Kaitum, and much narrower than the Allak, so it can fit in tighter spots than either. The two vents are excellent and are both mesh and fabric backed, so they can be closed to help keep the mozzies or spindrift out, depending on the time of year. The two poles are of identical length, allowing adults to sit up front and back without a problem. This also helps keep the inner tent more taut than on the Kaitum, so the side walls are almost vertical for about half its height. The inner tent door is vertical, but there is only one. The outer tent door unzips about 40%, and cannot easily be rolled back as on the Kaitum. The foot end slopes so your sleeping bag may brush against it. My 6' three season bag does not, but my 6'6" winter bag does.

The GT vestibules are incredible if you have a lot of gear you need to store out of the elements (I was able to fit a pulk inside the Nammatj 2GT's vestibule) or if you need the space out of the elements but away from the contents of the inner tent to sit, work, prepare food, etc. However they add 2.5-3' length, an extra pole, and ~1.5lb more weight than the non-GT version.

If funds were not a consideration, I'd choose a Nammatj 2/3 for shoulder season and winter use, and an Anjan 3 for summer use, both for two people.

Thank you, Stuart, for these two postings, especially for the comprehensive summary of the competing virtues (and shortcomings) of the Allak, Kaitum and Nammatj families of tents.

I recognised your distinctive white wild goat icon from some other postings on various BPL threads that I had been perusing recently. At the moment I am re-reading some of those threads relating to shelters and to Hilleberg tents in particular, including the granddaddy of them all: Hilleberg Tent thread, started by Doug Smith in May 2012 and still going strong in July this year!

If I have followed that thread correctly I recall that you started with a Soulo (sold in 2013) and a Kaitum 3, then bought a Nammatj 2 (2013). You became unhappy with the Kaitum 3, after finding that it could not comfortably hold 3 adults due to the narrowness and low ceiling near the doors. You arranged with Hilleberg US to exchange the Kaitum 3 at reasonable cost for a Keron 3 in 2014.

So I am still considering the various attributes of these tents and trying to work out what features and properties are most important to me, and what are merely nice to have. All the while watching the weight and bulk! (And cost!)

Feedback from you, and Doug Smith, StephenM, Ben Wartman, and many other contributors to these threads, who own various Hilleberg models and have used them in various conditions, is a valuable resource for those like myself who have yet to commit to purchase and are keen to avoid a possible costly mistake.

As to the criteria you listed:

– Weight
Preferably about 3Kg or just over, unless the extra features are compelling enough to justify a little extra weight. Would not want to exceed 3.6 or 3.7Kg for 2P.
I could possibly save about 100 or 150g on the packed weights of the larger tents by substituting lighter pegs.
For example, the Nammatj 2GT uses 22 stakes and, as a Black label tent, comes with the fairly hefty Y-pegs at 16g each (according to the Hilleberg Accessories page.) The average weight could be reduced to say 10g or less by substituting some or all these pegs with lighter alternatives (V pegs, Ti nails or carbon tubes). So that might reduce total weight from 3.7 to 3.6Kg or less.
But the same scale of weight saving would not apply to the Allak as it has only 12 V-pegs (11g each).

– Footprint size
Not critical, but obviously the smaller the better for a given amount of useable interior space.
I can see that a Kaitum 2GT, which looks to be a very nice tent at the limit of my weight allowance, might sometimes be hard to site due to its total length, including the axial guy lines. However, only the 2.2m long inner tent needs to be over good flat ground, as the vestibules can be over rougher terrain – but not too rough or the pitching will be very uneven, the tent will flap in the wind and the vestibules will be less useful.
One reason I am drawn to the Allak is that it seems very compact. And being essentially symmetrical in design (including its radial set of 6 guy lines) it can easily be rotated on-site, before guying out, on the possibly sloping ground to get a good sleeping orientation (head level with or above feet), without the need to worry about aligning it with the wind direction, or fitting it into an awkwardly shaped space.
The Nammatj 2, likewise, is fairly compact.

– Interior space
All of the candidates are adequate for 2P, but admittedly some are more commodious than others, mainly due to steeper walls and more headroom over a larger area. For the extra 300g I would seriously consider the 3P variants (Kaitum 3, Nammatj 3) to give extra inside space for 2P, and to accommodate 3P – possibly a bit cramped – when needed.

– Vestibule space
The Allak seems to have plenty of space for its 2P. And the fact that each person has their own door and vestibule is a plus. I often need to get up during the night a few times, so this arrangement of doors minimises disturbance to partner’s sleep.
The only criticism I have read about the doors on the Allak is that if it is raining great care needs to be taken when going outside or coming back into the tent. You need to open the outside door from the bottom just enough to get in and out, without that door flapping back onto the inner door, thus wetting the side of the inner tent.
The standard versions of the Nammatj 2 or 3 has enough vestibule space, and the Kaitum has twice that, which is nice (at the cost of a much longer footprint)
I really like the extended GT vestibules, but they come at a considerable cost, financial and physical: extra footprint length and much extra weight (about 600g). I regard them as rather an indulgence for my needs, so would probably forego them to save weight. The 2GT variants of the Kaitum and Nammatj are at my weight limit (about 3.6Kg), but the 3GTs are far too heavy (at about 4Kg) for backpacking for 2P. When more vestibule space is needed, say while cooking or organising gear, one can unclip and roll back the front part of the inner tent to give more space. And when using the tent for car camping or whenever weight is less important, one can improvise a porch from a tarp sheet and poles, to give extra shade or shelter.

– Freestanding vs non
In itself this is not a big issue. Sure, it is nice to be able to move the already-erected Allak a few feet here or there, or to rotate it before guying it in its final position. But I would be as happy with a tunnel design, which is obviously not freestanding, and where you need to take a bit more care with positioning it before it is erected. As Roger C. and others have pointed out many times, ALL tents need tying down to resist wind loads.

– Wind resistance
This is of great importance to me, as I have been in a tent that collapsed and whose fly was ripped in a storm. I am prepared to pay a bit extra, in cash and weight, if need be for some extra security against wind damage.
Tunnel tents are best pitched with their axis parallel to the wind direction. But wind can change direction overnight. Also, the constraints of an available site might contradict that imperative. In small clearings or on uneven rocky slabs the available clear space or the slope of the land may force you to orientate the tunnel tent more or less at right-angles to the wind. This is less of a problem with a dome like the Allak, which would have equal wind resistance from any direction.

– Static snow load capability
Not important. So either a tunnel or dome shape is OK, in this regard. I am not sure how much I will be using the tent in very snowy conditions. But I am sure the tent will be OCCUPIED during any snow storms, not left standing unoccupied for days as a base camp. The occupants can dislodge any snow accumulation from time to time.

– Ventilation
Very important. That is why I have already ruled out the Nallo tents, in spite of their toughness and tempting low weight. (The Anjan family is even lighter, but venting is not a problem as the fly does not touch the ground.) Likewise, the Jannu seems an ideal and cosy tent for the cold mountain air but less suited for valley camping on hot Summer nights.
The Kaitum is probably the most efficient ventilation machine, but I am sure the Allak would be good too. (On very warm, still nights one can lie with ones head next to the open inner doors, rather than next to the solid fabric, to get fresh air and take advantage of the slightest breeze.)
I am a little doubtful about the venting in the Nammatj in Summer conditions, especially on hot still nights. From reading reports by users, I feel that with all the vents open there is sufficient ventilation to prevent or minimise condensation problems, but there may not be sufficient air throughput to keep temperatures bearable on very hot nights or sunny days.

– Views of the great outdoors
Both the Allak and the Kaitum seem to offer good views under ideal conditions; when it is warm enough to open the doors and/or fold up the vestibule flysheets.
The Nammatj less so: its focus is more inward looking – secure cosiness, separate from the possibly harsh outdoors, rather than the easy indoor/outdoor flow of the Kaitum and Allak. The difference between an ideal Winter tent / Summer tent.

I will post again when I have some questions to ask about specific models, or when I am closer to making up my mind.

Thank you and best wishes.

Hi Mark,

Long time Kaitum 3 user here, I really liked it but it was a bit tight for 3 for winter camping and a bit heavy for 2 for 3 seasons trips so I ended up changing it for an Anjan 3 and Keron 4.

PS I am 1.78m tall (about 70") and my partner is about the same height. So we do not necessarily have to choose the Kaitum on the basis of personal height, as persons who are well over 6 feet tall may have to.

We use Exped UL 7 mats (down or syn), which are of course 7 cm thick, and either quilts or sleeping bags of moderate loft, such as Exped Comfort 600 or 800. All this may be relevant in calculating whether the sloping rear of the Nammatj inner may touch the footbox of the bags.

I presume that with the Nammatj 3, when used by only 2 persons, each person can lie slightly diagonally to provide more effective bed length.

From the Hilleberg Tent thread I recall Doug Smith stating that he also is 70" (5'10") tall and that he found (posted: 18 May 2012) that his Nammatj 2, which he later later sold, was a good size for him, and that he could sleep in it either way around: with either his head or his feet at the sloping end. (I hope I have recalled that correctly, Doug.)

If you're worried about wind and beefiness with stouter poles I'd go straight to a black label Hilleberg tent and forget all about the others. (They used to categorize their tents by Kerlon 1800, Kerlon 1200 etc but now they use the color Label system).

Everything about the Allak is less strong than the Staika for instance. The poles are thinner, the fly is thinner, the zippers are weaker and above all, the guyline tabs are much less stout.

STORY: I had a friend on Bob Mt at 5,300 in a North Carolina midnight open bald windstorm and he had an Allak with the six guylines pegged. The wind actually ripped out a couple guy webbing tabs off the side of his tent and he had to bail off the mountain.

I've been at the same place in worse storms in a beefier Keron Hilleberg and never had a problem.

I know weight seems to be the prime consideration for a shelter but when things hit the fan and conditions go south wouldn't it be better to go beefier with an extra couple lbs?

Except for a 20 day trip with the Akto, all I'll ever use are the Hilleberg black labels.

"If I have followed that thread correctly I recall that you started with a Soulo (sold in 2013) and a Kaitum 3, then bought a Nammatj 2 (2013). You became unhappy with the Kaitum 3, after finding that it could not comfortably hold 3 adults due to the narrowness and low ceiling near the doors. You arranged with Hilleberg US to exchange the Kaitum 3 at reasonable cost for a Keron 3 in 2014."

That's pretty much right, Mark. Currently I own the Enan for three season solo use, and the Keron 3 for 3P three season use and 2P winter use. I foolishly sold my Nammatj 2 after I took delivery of the Keron 3, thinking there was too much overlap between the two. However in hindsight the 1kg weight difference makes a bit of a disincentive for me to take the Keron 3 out solo in winter, and I've been torturing myself this spring / summer as to what would fill the gap best.

"Tunnel tents are best pitched with their axis parallel to the wind direction. But wind can change direction overnight. Also, the constraints of an available site might contradict that imperative."

Yes, and I've definitely encountered that with tunnels. Wind directions are much more variable in the Rocky Mountains than – say – out on the plains or on polar regions where the Keron and Nammatj are often used as base stations. It's why I was so grateful to Doug Smith for lending me his Jannu, so I could see firsthand how that worked for me.

"The Kaitum is probably the most efficient ventilation machine, but I am sure the Allak would be good too… I am a little doubtful about the venting in the Nammatj in Summer conditions, especially on hot still nights… Both the Allak and the Kaitum seem to offer good views under ideal conditions; when it is warm enough to open the doors and/or fold up the vestibule flysheets.
The Nammatj less so: its focus is more inward looking – secure cosiness, separate from the possibly harsh outdoors"

Exactly. As a side sleeper the doors on the Allak appealed, but the overall weight of the Kaitum got my attention. Have you considered the Rogen? It has virtually the same space as the Allak, but in a non-freestanding version. The tent can still be rotated once set up, but the vestibules have to be staked out. At 1.78m the lower roof height of the Rogen shouldn't be a disadvantage. However I don't believe it can be double poled, and the grommet setup means you can't substitute for 10.25mm poles as easily.

Like you, I feel the Nallo is too much of a compromise, a jack of all trades but a master of none.

I really wanted to like the Allak, but it didn't quite tick the boxes for my intended use. One other comment I'll make is that it's not really a 2P Soulo. That shelter sets up tight as a drum. In contrast, the Allak has a lot more play and I'd say the guylines are required to give it lateral rigidity in strong winds. The Staika is much more robust than the Allak, but there's no such thing as a free lunch.

With respect to 2P vs 3P tunnels, I'd agree that it makes sense for the single vestibule Nammatj to upsize to the 3. The extra width and height are appreciated. However the Kaitum 3 felt like a huge tent for three season use. I had trouble pitching it below treeline more than once. You might consider the second door / vestibule as a tradeoff, and stick with the 2P version if you go that route.

Feel free to PM on any specific questions, or we can discuss them publicly here if you think others might find them valuable.