Top Ultralight Tent Review

[Eric Gjonnes]

"You are carrying the Unaweep to carry heavy loads. Given that, I can't see 5 oz making a significant difference and would go with the higher durability."
See Dave U. I can also pull your past coments out of context to make you look like a hypocrite, but I believe that you are an intelligent man. I'm sure if I read the related article that your coment would prove to be relevant and insightful.

[Glenn S]

Truly an article written from a design/engineering viewpoint. All about material specs, with very little in the way of actual functionality IMO. I was left knowing nothing about these tents except what they weigh, and why.

Along with maybe a few of the authors personal peeves and how he could break a 2mm line on a rock, twice. (A missed edit I hope)

[Ken Thompson]

http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/mountain_hardware_bunker_1_orsm06.html?mb_sort=#.U09N9V5d1nF

[Adam Klags]

Yeah I think its worth pointing out that I think we shouldn't be directing any anger at the author at all… its great to have input on any tents in general available on the market. But personally I feel that if BPL and the editors are going to email out an article that is "supposed to appeal to a larger segment of the market" or "address brands that are more available in the average store," they need to understand why this article misses the mark. These kinds of articles are great. The issues are very clear:

1) the small selection of products from brands that are FAR from desirable to most people on this site, even though there are plenty of options the author could have chosen from
2) the lack of proper selection and definition of categories – 1 and 2p tents in the same review, choosing free-standing tents only, which are usually completely unnecessary.
3) lack of consistency in the language – seems like the author is either confused or just choosing to use "superlight" and "ultralight" when describing tents in the "same" category
4) lack of cottage brands
5) the perspective of these reviews is from a design standpoint, for obvious reasons – what we really need is more information about how it actually feels to do things in these tents… getting in and out, zippers, space in vestibules, condensation feedback, etc etc…

I don't want to be that jerk who's like "screw this article and everything about it" but it really just feels like it doesn't belong… not because of the subject matter, but because of the lack of detail, the format, the lack of the usual rigorous specifics that set this site apart… I'd like to see the author go back and redo this article properly, with more tents, the proper comparison chart, and some manufacturers that we want to see. And I'll just say this straight up – screw sticking with "freestanding" tents. Anyone who is entirely unwilling to consider the benefits of the other options (and I'm not talking about tarps) is just not going to be a member of this site, and therefore is not the target audience for articles being posted here. Focus on weight or something else if you want to categorize, not freestanding vs not. There are too many levels in between.

[Lukas Kull]

I was expecting more than 3 tents to be reviewed. There is much more variety, where are reviews on all the interesting tents? Hyperlite, Zpacks, …? MID tents, tarp tents, …? What are the differences between the different types of tents? I hope there is more on that soon.

[Adam Klags]

"Kind of like the way I fell after eating "the Best" french fries at McDonald's."

EXACTLY. We all know that some people like McDonald's. But we also know that you don't go serving McDonald's to people eating local, grass-fed beef burgers or veggie burgers, for that matter… same idea applies here, doesn't it?

[Kevin Kingma]

Just to round out the selection it would have been nice to see the Stansport, Eureka and Coleman UL tents in this review.

[Adam Klags]

Why doesn't BPL crowdsource the tents for review from this discussion? Look how many brands/tents have been recommended for comparison right here…

[Aaron Sorensen]

My Cuben fiber tent weighs 14 oz, but most can't afford it.

Yeah right. These tents cost the same as most CF Tents.'
What, do people think they are getting more for their money because it weighs 3X as much?

I'm just wondering what audience this article is trying to appeal?
It's certainly none of us at BPL.

This is like comparing the latest technically advanced bicycles and the ones selected for the article were all aluminum and steel with sub-par parts. The ones more people would buy as their first bike.

[David Drake]

Did I miss the part where where the author discloses if the tents were purchased by him, or provided free by the manufacturers?

I've come to expect this kind of statement in review articles from BPL–seems like a mark of professionalism and integrity.

If not part of the original article, perhaps such a statement could be added?

Respect to the author for putting the research and time into this article.

However it should not be called the "top" ultralight tent review – yes, some of those reviewed are great shelters, but far from the "top", the cream of the crop, of the UL shelter market.

For those ragging on the author about these being heavy shelters… not really sure myself what the author is trying to present… the title says "ultralight" yet the first introduction of the article states, "a review of the best superlight tents on the market" – so what is it… ultralight tents or superlight tents?

And for those who are interested: the worlds lightest fully enclosed solo shelter comparison does exist.

[Eric Blumensaadt]

I agree with Tjaard, finish this article as Will Reitvelld would do, with two more articles on the "other" lightweight tents out there and a final fourth article with good comparison tables – i.e. separate tables for 2 person tents and solo tents.

Rent a big fan and do some "windworthy" comparisons on all tents.

Include prices.

Compare floor space AND interior volume.

Compare vestibule and door setups for space and ease of use.

Even a table for "suggested improvements" for each tent.

[Tom Clark]

Adam said it well…
"1) the small selection of products from brands that are FAR from desirable to most people on this site, even though there are plenty of options the author could have chosen from
2) the lack of proper selection and definition of categories – 1 and 2p tents in the same review, choosing free-standing tents only, which are usually completely unnecessary.
3) lack of consistency in the language – seems like the author is either confused or just choosing to use "superlight" and "ultralight" when describing tents in the "same" category
4) lack of cottage brands
5) the perspective of these reviews is from a design standpoint, for obvious reasons – what we really need is more information about how it actually feels to do things in these tents… getting in and out, zippers, space in vestibules, condensation feedback, etc etc…"

Also as others noted, know your audience and don't claim the best tents unless you can back it up. It really sounds like a Backpacker blurb.

Really my biggest complaint was that it was written from a design perspective, not a performance perspective…think about that long and hard.

Tom

[Wayne Norman]

I know this is a late comment, but…I can't reconcile the dimensions given in the review with the advertised specs. The SuperMegaUL 1 is spec'd smaller in length, width, and height than the Obi Elite 1P. Here's the specs for the two tents:

http://www.nemoequipment.com/product/?p=Obi+Elite+1P

http://www.mountainhardwear.com/supermegaul-1-OU9649.html

The Obi Elite is larger in each dimension. Am I missing something? Having a table with measurements would have been very helpful.

[Ryan Jordan]

Hello All,

First, thank you for taking the time to comment on the quality of this article.

In spite of a lot of heavy handed criticism, I am appreciative that some of you found at least a little bit of redeeming information provided by the author.

The breakdown in the system regarding the article's publication was with me. I did not have a chance to sufficiently review the article prior to its publication, which allowed both the article title, and some of its editorial content (a description of criteria, and what constituted the author's definition of "top ultralight tents" without considering what many of us here consider as "top ultralight tents), and styling (e.g., lack of a comparison table, verified weights, etc.). I apologize to you for not delivering the quality you expected in a review summary like this, and for not editing the headline appropriately.

That this article did not come from an established and active member of the BPL community – I'm ok with that. I'd like to open authorship up to anyone who wants to give it a shot. I'm appreciative of those of you who were sensitive to the fact that this was a first time author, and that he wasn't a member of our community, and were able to offer helpful feedback to him in a way that wasn't disparaging or discouraging.

As a result of this article and the feedback you gave, I am working with our Production Editor to tighten up our editorial review process, with my involvement occurring earlier in the process, in order to help authors be more successful here and help preserve high standards in the quality of our content.

Ryan

[Robin B]

Hey, as someone who offered criticism–particularly about the silence of the editorial team–I'd just like to officially say thank you for your response. It really does make a difference to know that you're paying attention and listening. I think bringing in new writers from outside the community is great, but clearly they will sometimes need help in order to connect with this audience. Looking forward to future content that'll make me re-up my membership for full access.

[Ken Thompson]

Why Ryan did you delete some remarks and not give a reason? At least Roger has the courtesy to do so.

[Ryan Jordan]

Ken: Some of the comments were deleted because they were not relevant to the article's topic, and were instead directed at editorial process. I was fine with those comments but they don't belong here. There are a couple of forums in the Admin section where these topics could be better discussed aside from the editorial content of this article – which is the purpose of the Editor's Roundtable Forum.

Other comments were deleted because they simply communicated a lack of respect for people. There are ways to deliver criticism, and there are ways to deliver criticism with respect. There's a difference between discussing process in a way that is constructive and leads to positive engagement, and complaining in a negative or destructive way. Some posts met this criteria.

—

This forum thread has been closed. Please review the BPL Forum Guidelines here. As always, if you do not agree to these guidelines, which have been proposed, reviewed, and changed in response to feedback from this community, you are welcome to a full refund of your subscription: please contact [email protected] to request it. However, disagreement with these guidelines does not constitute your right to abuse them. These forums exist for a community of recreational enthusiasts to build each other up, not tear each other down.

[Author]

Posts