Oct 10, 2006 at 10:32 pm #1219870
Carol CrookerBPL Member
@cmcrookerLocale: Desert Southwest, USA
Companion forum thread to:Oct 11, 2006 at 8:03 am #1364648
Mark VerberBPL Member
@verberLocale: San Francisco Bay Area
I think your comparision is great. I have had an opportunity to use both shelters in the last year and think you accurately captured the spirit of these two shelters. The one place my experience is slightly different is when it comes to condensation resistance. I agree that if the weather is such that you can leave the vestibute open on the Europa but need to close it on Squall2, that the Europa is much better. But when the vestibule can be open on both I found condensation to be the same in practice, even though there is more mesh in the Europa.
I can certainly understand why the Europa is given a slight nod as the best general purpose shelter. I have found that the Squall2 is slightly better for me due to it’s superior pitching. This works out in two ways. I often see more extreme conditions, especially high winds where the Squall2 is a better performer. Second, I am regularly loaning my Squall2 to people I am introducing to light-weight backpacking. The Squall2’s easier setup helps win them over.Oct 12, 2006 at 10:22 am #1364730
Henry SBPL Member
Just wanted to note that the Squall 2 (including stakes) is $225 and the Europa (not including stakes) is $290. You can’t find that information in the article although it is listed in each of the individual reviews.
-HOct 13, 2006 at 7:07 am #1364774
Alan DixonBPL Member
Henry Shires of Tarptent makes an excellent point. The Squall 2 definitely gets a nod for value. The Squall 2 is less expensive than the Europa for a similar tent. The Squall 2 includes four Easton tubular stakes while the Europa comes without stakes.
$225 = Tarptent Squall 2
$298 = Six Moon Designs Europa $290 + (4) Easton sakes $8
Comparing similar packages, the Europa is $73 or 32% more than the Squall 2. As such, the Squall 2 is an excellent value for a high performance ultralight shelter. We apologize for not mentioning this in the comparison.
(Backpacking Light Staff)Oct 14, 2006 at 4:37 pm #1364851
In response to the taller hiker issue. I’m 6’7″ and have no problem with length in the Squall. Perhaps the argument is that one needs room for proper gear storage inside the tent. I have not found this to be a problem as I place my gear to the right and left at the wider end of the tent. It seems to me that the additional length would be an unneccesary weight addition. Just my 2 cents.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.