Double Rainbow vs. Lunar Duo

I do not have either one but am looking for a UL 2 man.

Observations:

1. The Lunar Duo looks like the mesh sides are straight up while the Double Rainbow mesh sides look like they taper in.

2. The Shires looks like a better bathtub floor design.

3. The Shires looks like it has better egress w/o the poles in the center of the mesh walls.

4. The Lunar has larger vestibules.

5. The Shires weighs 3oz less

Any owners of these or the Shires Squall 2 please opine (post your opinion)

Thanks,

Egads

I have owned the Lunar Duo.
The one problem I have had is that the two hoop poles are inserted inside of the bug netting. One must open the door and then insert the poles before setting the tent up. Other than this one fact, the Lunar Duo is wonderful. It is huge and the two vestibules are great. I have never seen a double rainbow in person so I wouldn't know.

Thanks, David – I have a bunch of questions, if you wouldn't mind answering….have you had the tent up in any strong winds? Do you experience any condensation issues? In a related sense, how "breezy" is it inside, in colder weather with the vestibules closed? Does it get a nice tight pitch?

Thanks –
Debbie

email me and we can talk about the Lunar Duo more.
dstenberg@gcts.edu

come on guys, we are all interested in the details.

I think I might understand why David would prefer to handle this via email. Think about it. A possible plausible reason is pretty easy to figure out.

David, would you mind if i emailed you also?

Thanks, David, I emailed you (kramalc).

Ok, I will post here instead of the email thing so everyone can hear. I said email me so I could answer specific questions, not to bash the tent!! ( I did not have anything bad to say about the tent, sorry for some thinking this may be why I did not post earlier)

I received the Lunar Duo and used it one night. I slept on snow with no ground cloth. I have the standard floor (not the ultralight). I used it with Easton stakes which you can buy from Six Moon Designs. I originally found that there was a stiching problem with the velcro on one of the pole sleeves. I also had problems with the poles sliding out of the poles sleeves. I contacted Mr. Moak and he said send it back. He returned it very quickly with a new beefier velcro tab which holds the poles in place. Problem solved. I cannot say enough good things about Six Moon Designs and Mr. Moak. Great communication, does what he says he will do, and goes above and beyond to help out hikers! Another guy in my hiking group sent back an old Starlite which he ripped. Mr. Moak repaired the pack, and placed a custom top strap for a bear canister free of charge.

The Lunar Duo is easy to get a taught pitch on the canopy. I inserted the poles, staked the four corners, and then went to each side placing my trekking pole and staking the vestibule guy line. Then went around tightening everything down. I set it up by myself without too much effort the first time. The floor is self tensioning which is very nice. Crawling in, I was amazed with the amount of space. This tent is huge. This tent felt so much larger than the MSR Hubba Hubba I had previously used. Like it says on the webiste, four people can sit inside and play cards without touching the walls of the tent. The vertical mesh sides are great for breeze and ventilation. At the head and foot end there is vertical mesh attached to the canopy. I do not see how one would come in contact with the silnylon canopy unless the wind was causing a lot of deflection. There are no seems on the upper canopy except for the places the mesh are sewn to it, nothing overhead. The two vestibules provide ample room and can store a lot of gear or be used for cooking. The vestibules can be adjusted from inside the tent by sliding them up or down the guyline. Ventilation can be adjusted as well by this feature. It seems that even in a rain the vestibule could be raised to provide ventilation without getting wet. The night I slept in the tent there was no condensation on the canopy, but there was on the floor due to sleeping directly on snow.

Two drawbacks for me about this tent:
The poles must be inserted inside the tent. One must open the mesh door to put the poles in their sleeves. This is just an extra step. I wish the pole sleeves were more accessible under the vestibule and outside the tent. I am sure there are structural reasons that this is a bad idea. The other minor complaint I have is the vestibule slider on the guylines. I had trouble keeping the vestibule connected to the plastic slider. I think this could be solved by using some cord on the end of the grossgrain loops on the vestibule.

Overall an incredibly roomy tent for under three pounds with the standard (more durable) floor. It is a little finicky at the beginning getting used to a new tent, but after a couple of set ups no big deal.

"The other minor complaint I have is the vestibule slider on the guylines. I had trouble keeping the vestibule connected to the plastic slider. I think this could be solved by using some cord on the end of the grossgrain loops on the vestibule."

I did that on my Lunar Solo and it works quite well.

Thank you David. I understand you not wanting to bash an item(and in my oppinion you didnt). You gave a great review and insite to your experience with it. Always happy to here a companys customer service policies are above average.

David, excellent Post. Just what i wanted to hear. I now find that i'll be needing a 2p tent and hate wrestling with very long shock-corded poles, preferring, instead, to use t-poles for support – plus, doing so, save wt. The LD has to go on my short list. Many thanks for such a detailed and thorough reply.

Just a couple of comments on Gordon's post. Hopefully they'll make sense.

2. The Shires looks like a better bathtub floor design.

The Double Rainbow has a hybrid bathtub floor while the Lunar Duo has a true bathtub floor. On the Double Rainbow that floor style is needed to enhance ventilation. On the Lunar Duo the end mesh walls are 18” high and inset well away from the edge of the canopy. This provides maximum protection from rain splash and reduces your contact with the canopy in these areas. You’ve still got excellent ventilation without the need raise and lower the tub floor.

Plus the floor is comprised of a single piece of fabric so it has no seams that need to be sealed.

3. The Shires looks like it has better egress w/o the poles in the center of the mesh walls.

Both the Lunar Duo and Double Rainbow have L shaped doors of approximately the same size. With the Lunar Duo the side poles are offset from the edge of the door to keep them from interfering with egress.

Plus the zippers on the Lunars door drop lower before making their horizontal run than the Double Rainbow thus eliminating the higher entry threshold of the Double Rainbow.

On each door we have a gear pocket sewn into the front mesh at the point the zipper turns to run horizontally. This makes a convenient place to store your flashlight, glasses etc. when needing to do those nighttime forays.

One additional note on egress, the Lunar Duo has a zippered vestibule closure. This allows you to open and close the vestibule with a single hand. Or if you’re really lazy, you can simply slide the end of the vestibule up the main guyline crawl under and slide it back down. The variable height vestibule allows you to easily adjust its height to match the prevailing conditions without getting out and re-staking it.

5. The Shires weighs 3oz less

The Double Rainbow is 40 oz. with stakes, the Lunar Duo is 39 oz. without stakes. The recommended stake set for the Duo weighs in at 2 ounces. So that puts the difference at about an ounce. Give or take.

For that additional ounce you’ve got twice the headroom of the Double Rainbow. In the Lunar Duo two people can easily sit up side by side.

Ron

Thanks to both David and Ron for all the info. Perhaps one or both of you (maybe Ron, since David only slept one night in it) could comment on the stability in strong winds (I was thinking the DR looks more streamlined but perhaps I'm somehow influenced by the pic of the LD with vestibule open, which of course looks a bit more "boxy" but probably has nothing to do with vestibule-down stability).

Also, with the vestibules zipped up and in the lowest position, how much does that lessen the "draftiness" that I seem to experience in tarptent-style shelters (I'm a cold wimp, though I realize it may be necessary for anti-condensation purposes)?

And when is BPL going to do a comparison review of these two fine tents??? :-)

So the Double Rainbow weighs 37 oz. without stakes and the Lunar Duo weighs 41 oz. with stakes? That's a 4 oz. difference! Love the spin.

Henry should respond in fairness to another manufacturers claims on a competing product.

nm

I am not sure if I would call it "spin", but I would welcome Mr. Shires into the conversation to speak for his own products.

The Double Rainbow weighs 40 ounces with stakes according to the website (easton aluminum I think which are .3 ounces per stake or 1.8 for 6 stakes). That means the Double Rainbow would weigh 38.2 without stakes. The Lunar Duo with the same floor weighs 39 ounces without stakes. Adding the same 6 stakes as used on with the Double Rainbow then the Lunar Duo would weigh 40.8 ounces with the stakes. This is only a .8 ounce difference.

Of course this requires the use of trekking poles for the Lunar Duo and not for the Tarptent Rainbow. If you do not use trekking poles then then there would be the added weight included for the Lunar Duo. If you do use trekking poles, this is a nonfactor.

Also if using the Double Rainbow with trekking poles in the free standing configuration, 4 stakes could be eliminated from the Double Rainbow; a total of 1.2 ounces. This would make the Double Rainbow 2 ounces lighter (1.2 + .8) than the Lunar Duo when used in free standing mode.

If one used trekking poles then the only differences between these shelters is either .8 or 2 ounces depending on if you want the free standing pitch of the Double Rainbow. I think I would prefer to stake the Double Rainbow if I owned one (and I am interested in trying one out), but that is just me.
(I think my math is correct, if not please correct me)

John,

>> So the Double Rainbow weighs 37 oz. without stakes and the Lunar Duo weighs 41 oz. with stakes? That's a 4 oz. difference! Love the spin.<<

Sorry, no attempt to spin here! The discussion of weights is more of a general guide than an absolute. Final weight obviously depends upon a number of factors including the rest of the gear you carry, what stakes you carry, how you seam seal the tent, and any weight reductions modification you make to the tent.

Just taking seam sealing alone, you can vary final weight of the shelter by as much as an ounce or more depending upon what sealer you use and how it's applied.

In addition the absolute weight of the tents will vary slightly from production run to run depending upon fabric or component differences.

Bottom line is that either tent provides significantly more room for considerably less weight than most traditional tents.

>> Thanks to both David and Ron for all the info. Perhaps one or both of you (maybe Ron, since David only slept one night in it) could comment on the stability in strong winds (I was thinking the DR looks more streamlined but perhaps I'm somehow influenced by the pic of the LD with vestibule open, which of course looks a bit more "boxy" but probably has nothing to do with vestibule-down stability). <<

Instead of simply talking about stability, I’d like to turn it around and approach it from the failure point of view. What is important is important is what is the possible failure points and how catastrophic is the failure should it occur. There are three primary vectors of failure causing a tent to collapses (Fabric or Seams Ripping Out, Poles Breaking and Stakes Popping Out). While each of these failures results in a collapsed tent. The first two can life threatening if they occur at the wrong time.

That said it’s also important for the user to understand the limits of whatever shelter they chose. The more you know the better prepared you’ll be in using your gear comfortably and safely over a wider range of environments. Ultimately you have the final choice of where to setup your shelter so that it’ll provide you a safe and secure night’s sleep.

That said, while the Lunar Duo is designed to deflect the wind, it doesn’t so by incorporating a rigid frame. The only real tension is on the two vertical poles on either side of the tent. If one is using trekking poles, you’ve got a significantly greater amount of support than found in traditional tent poles. After all how long do you expect your tent pole would last if you had to substitute it for your trekking pole. The two small spreader poles at the ridgeline are not under pressure and simply pivot at the apex as pressure is applied.

The wide side panels of the Lunar Duo will collect a greater volume of wind than the more tapered Double Rainbow. However, there are 3 guy outs on each side that can be used to minimize deflection if needed. Even you don’t add the guy outs, there is such a large volume of space within the tent that you’ll have a lot of room in the tent even at maximum deflection.

The Lunar Duo is designed with no seams in the canopy over the sleeping area. So a ripped seam can be fairly easily repaired enough to get you back to civilization, with minimal affect on the main area of the tent. The Lunar Duo also has no poles that can be easily broken. Even if you manage to break a pole, with a little effort you can make a substitute that’ll get by.

Hopefully no spin just my perspective.

Ron

David/All,

Your numbers for the DR look pretty accurate to me. I'll leave it to the rest of you to have fun with comparison shopping…

-H

Double Rainbow:

Dimensions – clipped up for bathtub-to-bathtub configuration comparison – (l x w x h) = 88 x 48 x 43

Weight (no trekking poles):

Tent – 31.1 oz
Longitudinal pole – 6.8
Total minimum weight is 37.9
6 stakes – 2.1
Total weight – 40 oz

Lunar Duo:

Dimensions (l x w x h) = 90 x 54 x 45

Weight (no trekking poles):

Tent and spacer poles – 39.0 oz
Two 45" vertical poles – 3.6
Total minimum weight is 42.6
6 stakes – 2.1
Total weight – 44.7 oz

NOTE: With trekking poles, the LD's weight can be reduced by 3.6oz — or just 1.1 oz diff. in total minimum weight between the two!

Point Lunar – much better width for two (54" vs. 48")!

Point Lunar – Roofing eaves do a better job at preventing rain splattering/misting through the mesh and into the tent.

Point Lunar – Clean (seamless or minimal seam) canopy should mean better rain protection / less seam sealing maintenance than the myriad of seams atop the Rainbow's canopy.

Point Rainbow – lighter weight.

This is turning into a Ginger or MaryAnn question.

We are all lucky to have a choice of two fine tents.

Good analysis Ben.

>Double Rainbow:
> Dimensions – clipped up for bathtub-to-bathtub configuration comparison – (l x w x h) = 90 x 46 x 43

Actually, that's not correct. The floor is rectangular with no variation in width. Not sure where you get the dimensions but the floor is now seamless–was seamed along the "flat" floor perimeter on prior version at a 48" width–and is 56" wide x 96" when fully flattened (which is not doable right at the corners but doable everywhere else). There is a much less distinct edge between clipped up and unclipped now but the "useable" width is about 53" with a bit (1 1/2") of wall edge where the floor turns the corner at the mesh edge and runs up the sidewall. You can clip it up further if desired with elastic loops at the midway point. Length is 88-90" when clipped up but relaxes to as much as 96" if you put any pressure on it.

-H

Henry, thanks for the quick feedback. Please clarify for me, and I'll correct the errors on my comparison above.

Your website states the DR floor area as 29-36 sq ft., and length as 88-96 on one page and 98 on another. I used 98, but will try 96 and see how that affects width:

If max sq ft = 36, and
if max length = 96" or 8ft, then
computed max width should be 4.5 ft. or 54 inches

If min sq ft = 29, and
if min length = 88" (eg clipped up) or 7.333 ft, then
computed min width should be 3.95 ft or 47 inches.

47 inches is not far off from my original computation of 46 — and is still pretty narrow (although do-able) for two.

Another way of deducing, clipping the floor results in a loss of 4 inches on each side or 8 inches total (eg. length goes from 96 to 88). So, if floor width is 54 unclipped, then clipping would reduce it to 46 — which again, jives with my computation above.

So, what's wrong or missing here?

Ben,

I think the "min sq ft = 29" is indeed 48" x 88" (which is actually 29 1/3 square feet). On the prior seamed floor that was a reasonable way to measure the clipped-up width since the seam line was 48" apart and the mesh edge was sewn to the floor seam. Now the mesh edge is sewn to the top of the floor wall and there are no floor seams so there's just no distinct line anymore. The website needs to be updated to match the newer design. If you really want a middle-of-the-range number then split the difference.

-H

This helps! I'll use 48 and update my comparison above.

I think you should state 48-54 width on your website, just as you state the length as 88-96. Length wise, most people using the bathtub floor configuration will still be happy when 96" becomes 88". However, width wise, 54" becoming 48" can be a world of difference to some. Thanks!