Durston xdome

How do you know this to be true?

I don’t. Dyneema does stretch and deform, even at the seams. Just to a lesser degree. Wait and see. It may not be a big issue if anything at all. It makes me hesitant. We’ll see how the first batch goes.

After watching a review, it looks like a very nice tent overall. Maybe a tad small for someone 6′ and over.

Compared to a Rainbow Li dw? The Rainbow has a great track record.

I don’t. Dyneema does stretch and deform, even at the seams. Just to a lesser degree. Wait and see. It may not be a big issue if anything at all. It makes me hesitant. We’ll see how the first batch goes.

After watching a review, it looks like a very nice tent overall. Maybe a tad small for someone 6′ and over.

Compared to a Rainbow Li dw? The Rainbow has a great track record.

Hi Teran, thanks for the response. Absolutely, “wait and see.” However, I do tend to think the excellent reinforcing provided at the pole clips might make all the difference. Honestly, the worry about deformation won’t keep me from buying one in the future. It just doesn’t look like enough pressure is applied at any one point to make it an issue. I guess we’ll see.

Agree on the size. I’m 5’10” and it seems like anything much over 6’2″ might be pushing it. However, touching the inner on a DW tent is not the same as a SW for sure.

The TT Rainbow’s! Such great tents, and a classic all-purpose 3 season choice. It’s survived the test of time for good reason. I have a Rainbow li and will never sell it. However, it’s probably not the right tent to compare to the X-Dome since it’s not freestanding, and in the case of mine, it’s not double wall.

I think the better comparison is with the Big Agnes Copper Spurs. I think Durston took the basic CS structure (another tried and true tent design) , and elevated/refined it to a higher level. In my estimation, a good place to be!

I think the better comparison is with the Big Agnes Copper Spurs. I think Durston took the basic CS structure (another tried and true tent design) , and elevated/refined it to a higher level.

True, the basic structure of the pole set, with the double-Y and cross piece, does remind me of the Copper Spur. Although I have no idea whether Big Agnes may have had inspiration from an earlier design.

Personally, I don’t have a need for a double-wall or a freestanding tent for my use case, and I prefer the weight savings of a SW trekking-pole tent, but this recent release has obviously shave some ounces and I’ll be interested to see if it lives up to its promise.

I was hoping the guy in the video would stop gushing over the tent and show more of the structure. Much would depend on on wind conditions where it’s used. While being the lightest is a great bragging point. It’s not the end all.

Still it looks like a very nice tent. It was only the comment in the video about 6′ size limit that would stop me from buying it. That and I already have too many tents.

I compare it to the Rainbow price wise. While not a true freestanding tent, it checks off a lot of the boxes for many of us. For many, I believe, a freestanding tent is a preference rather than a need. We don’t need the benefits unless facing harsh weather in which case the Rainbow has more structure than a simple trekking pole tent. Solidly built though not the lightest.

Here are a few replies:

“I think it will stretch where the poles attach. ”
I don’t expect this because (1) these areas are carefully designed, and (2) the X-Dome Pro is actually relatively gentle on DCF.

Consider that a trekking pole tent is putting pretty much all of the strain on 1 or 2 peaks, whereas a freestanding tent like has less strain (because the stake are under less tension) and then it is distributed over many more points, so freestanding tents in general are easier on DCF. In this case there are 13 clips instead of 2 peaks like our trekking pole tents, so any given connection point is seeing perhaps 10% as much tension. Plus these areas are reinforced with DCF tape and DCF reinforcement patches. So I actually think it is quite gentle on the DCF and I expect a longer material lifespan than most Dyneema tents.

“I too like the pole gusset/sleeves better.”
There are some pros and cons here. The main advantages to clips are that they are quicker to pitch, heavier, and enables the tent to be more modular. With sleeves it is harder to pitch just the interior and you can’t as readily roll back the fly partway for ventilation.  They are nice in more severe weather because you get a slight increase in stability, but they can be hard to erect in high winds, the poles can freeze inside in the winter, and sliding the poles in tends to take longer. I prefer clips for a 3/3+ season tent and then a mix of partial sleeves and clips for 4-season (e.g. Hilleberg Soulo).

“The xdome pro 1+ will be harder to find sites for out here than the xmid 1”
The footprint of the X-Dome Pro 1+ is substantially smaller than the X-Mid 1. It is 56″ x 88″ rather than 65″ x 100″, so it is about 9″ narrower and a foot shorter. Yes the floor is 50″ wide, but the there isn’t dual vestibules like the X-Mid 2 and all the walls curve steeper to trim off the edges, so the footprint is actually pretty normal for a 1P freestanding tent and noticeably smaller than our trekking pole tents.

“For people like me who value a smaller footprint, the HMG Crosspeak 1 fits the bill at same weight and price.”
The footprints are actually pretty similar (see below). The X-Dome Pro 1+ does have a larger floor (23 vs 18 sq ft), but the HMG looses area along the back sidewall where mesh covers where a second vestibule or larger floor could have been. If they would have made this area into floor, it would have been more similar in floor size and footprint, but as is, the X-Dome Pro has a larger floor in a similar footprint.

Each tents have advantages. Where I think the X-Dome Pro 1+ stands out are that you get a larger interior, doublewall protection, and 100% freestanding while also being lighter.

“I think my the pole sets should be interchangeable between the normal and the pro”
Yes they are.

“Maybe a tad small for someone 6′ and over.”
It looked a bit short in that review but it may have been the walls not being totally tight. The floor is longer than average for a 1P tent, and you see people in the comments who are 6’3″ and happy. It’s not the longest tent out there, but usually people are happy up to about 6’2″ – 6’4″. And then that is just touching the interior walls which don’t matter if you brush them, as the fly is still a good distance away on both ends.

“While being the lightest is a great bragging point. It’s not the end all.”
I agree with you. I am actually surprised it is the lightest doublewall freestanding tent on the market because we could have made it quite a bit lighter by sacrificing more. More specifically, we could have made it quite a bit lower and narrower while still be as large as other tents, and chopped off features like vents and all the guyouts. I didn’t because the goal was to optimize the user experience moreso than purely just the weight. I think that’s what stands out about it – it is jus a comfortable, liveable and capable tent for what is quite a low weight. Other tents will be lighter like singlewalls and trekking pole tents, but typically quite a bit smaller and usually less protective.

Thanks for all the replies Dan. Do you know when the next batch will be available?

It looks like probably November.

Thanks for the outer dimensions diagram comparison Dan. Even though the X-Dome Pro 1 appears to only be slightly larger, in terms of the level and unobstructed area needed for set up the Crosspeak 1 requires substantially less because the triangle portions are of course vestibules, therefore unlevel ground, smaller rocks, etc don’t impede on them. Only the rectangular floor portion of the Crosspeak needs to be clear and level (rectangle from end corners), whereas the X-Dome Pro 1 is going to require significantly more clear level ground because the floor is so much wider and a smaller percentage of its total area is vestibule. In other words, I believe I could slip into a tight spot easier with the Crosspeak 1. That’s no slur on the X-Dome Pro 1 and it certainly provides far more living space, but some UL backpackers don’t care too much about having loads of space.

Fair enough. Yeah if you look only at the floor area as what the tent needs, then 23.5 vs 18.6 sq ft is a real difference. I personally think that most people are better off with more space even if it does narrow site selection some, but that is just a value judgement and I can totally see how other people would have different values/preferences.

This is why it is good to have multiple options. The ability to pitch a tent in small sites is a high priority for me.

Are people putting guylines on the tent? And if so, where is the best “bang for the buck” as far as adding strength if you want to attach a max of say 4 guylines?

I’m considering this tent for my wife and I to use together.  I’m 5’7″ and she is 5′ 2″.  We used a home made tent for a number of years that had a similar footprint.

Would be half the weight of our current 4 lb Big Sky Tent.

Would prefer a flap to cover the mosquito netting completely when needed but otherwise it looks all good.

@John:  The tent comes with 30′ of extra 2mm cord. That is enough for a basic guyline setup, but for more advanced guylines you’ll need some more cord. Ideally it would be low stretch cord like Dyneema core.

@Daryl and Daryl:  The 3 way zipper can close pretty much completely. It looks more open from the exterior side, but on the interior side you can see the 3 parts pretty much touch (as long as they are fully closed).

The footprint of the X-Dome Pro 1+ is substantially smaller than the X-Mid 1″

When comparing ease of finding suitable spots to pitch, a more meaningful comparison is the floor dimensions, not the fly dimensions.   My xmid1 fly routinely gets pitched over roots, rocks etc ( I carry a couple guy extensions to facilitate this) and skinny pitched when needed.   If not, the even the xmid1 would be a struggle to find spots for in many Ontario back country provincial parks.

The floor can’t be pitched over the same sort of obstructions that the fly can without accelerating wear and possibly risking the pad.    The Xmid1 floor will be much is easier to find sites for than the 50″ wide Xdome Pro 1+ floor.  Besides weight, difficulty finding suitable sites for my xmid2 52 inch wide floor was a major reason I purchased the xmid1.