New BA tents

[James Marco]

Has anyone seen these?

https://www.bigagnes.com/Gear/Tents/Crazylight

[Jeff McWilliams]

Tiger Wall 2 Carbon:

27oz (Packed Weight)

27sq feet

39″ peak height

DCF Fly

That’s feature competitive with the TT StratoSpire Li, at least in terms of square footage and weight.  The SS Li has a higher peak height, but the Tiger Wall 2 Carbon is “free standing”, at least as much as most other free standing tents are, and a lot of people seem to be dismayed by trekking pole setups.

On the other hand, the $1,000 price tag is quite the shocker.  People will inevitably talk about how they can purchase 3 or 4 Kelty tents for that price and be just as happy.

Fly Creek HV2 Carbon:

Okay.  The sleeping diagram for this tent makes me giggle.

Keep in mind this is a single entry on the end design.

 

Do you expect me to crawl head first into that thing and sleep with the fabric against my face? BA makes some great tents, but I think this takes ultralight a bit too far.

Haha.

 

[James Marco]

Yeah, that one would be out. I was thinking more along the lines of the Scout 2 carbon at $700.

[J-L]

https://andrewskurka.com/2018/preview-big-agnes-carbon-dyneema-tent-tarp-bivy/

Andrew Skurka reports that Big Agnes is using 0.34 oz/yd2 DCF for the fly and 0.51 oz/yd2 DCF for the floor. If correct, that is much lighter than what Tarptent and Zpacks are using (1oz/yd2 DCF for the floor, 0.51 oz/yd2 DCF for the flys). It will be interesting to see how these hold up. Big Agnes must be assuming that everyone will be using groundsheets with these tents.

Their stock photos are ridiculous. Who is going to pitch their DCF tent with a fragile floor on an exposed ridgeline covered in jagged rocks?

 

[Jeff McWilliams]

“It’s totally cool, bro!  I’ve got like an 8″ thick sleeping pad!  ”

Most uncomfortable campsite ever.

.34oz DCF?  Man, I think I’ll stick to the heavier stuff that TarpTent and ZPacks are using!

 

[James Marco]

Yeah, .34 is LIGHT. Good and bad. But for the eastern half of the country, probably a good choice for a fly. The fly doesn’t really do a heck of a lot in 3 seasons but turn rain and some pine needles. I kind-of doubt it would hold up to the winter months at all, though. Wind, snow and ice? Uh, uh. The floor is a little different. Even though most of the ground is duff, I still worry about an occasional rock or root. Especially in a NY/DEC park, these would not be a good option with the sandy and/or gravely ground. For packing?  It will likely hold up, but I would prefer to see a silnylon or something that could be easily waterproofed after poke or two.

Typically we are talking weight here. At about 13oz for a total package (including lines and 6 stakes) vs about 21oz for the Duplex (including lines and 8 stakes) is around an 8oz difference for the same cost. Overall durability is less, but after about 3x more patches over about 5 years, it will still be a good 6oz difference. I am intrigued.

BTW, my current 2p tarp goes about 17oz…

[Brad P]

$1000 for a 2 person tent that’s a little heavier and $400 more than an already expensive Duplex?

Making the Duplex freestanding adds $125 and does make it a few ounces heavier than the BA, but holy frijoles!

[Dan @ Durston Gear]

While it’s nice to see these tents, I think their DCF choices are crazy. The 0.34oz DCF only has 30% as much dyneema as the 0.51oz DCF. Some cottage makers like Zpacks, Sulak46 and others experimented with the stuff years ago and quickly turned back to 0.5 for almost everything because it’s far stronger for a relatively small weight difference. Even then, many think the 0.5 stuff is pushing it and have stuck with mostly 0.7 (e.g. MLD). I’ve used 0.3 DCF myself a fair bit and I’d never build a tent with it.

With the 0.34 stuff you’re saving about 1 – 1.5oz on the entire shelter (it’s lighter by 0.15oz/yd multiplied by 8-9 yards in a small tent) but the stuff is terrible at holding stitching and far weaker than the 0.5oz DCF since it only has 30% of the dyneema. I expect you’d probably cut the life of the shelter in half compared to 0.5oz DCF, in exchange for 1.5oz of weight savings.

Similarly, almost no one besides BA is using DCF with the 0.08 mylar for a floor. Most companies are using the thicker 0.18 mylar because the mylar is really what you have to combat abrasion (since the dyneema is inside the sandwich). Even .18 mylar is pushing it and no where near as abrasion resistant as a 20D woven floor. Opting for 0.08 mylar for a floor makes a ground sheet basically mandatory. So it’s kinda like shifting weight on your gear list from “carried” to “worn” – it might look lighter but it doesn’t improve the total weight. Here, the shelter looks lighter but it would actually be a lighter and simpler just to spec a proper floor.

One point of good news though is that Big Agnes has really got the bonding process dialed in for these tents. It’s probably the best bonding that exists for DCF tents. Most DCF makers have taken it upon themselves to sort out how to bond the stuff, but Big Agnes and the factory that makes these have been working closely with Dyneema Corp themselves to dial in some proprietary bonding techniques that seem to be a nice improvement over the tapes others are using.

[Brad W]

From REI’s site

” Note from the vendor:  These tents are not for everyone. Our Carbon Series products were designed to push the weight boundaries in tents. They feature some of the lightest weight and most technologically advanced materials on the market. Special care during setup and extended trips is important, as rough handling, long-term abrasion, exposure to sharp objects or rocky campsite selection may result in fabric punctures and tears.”

 

I imagine the floor being very delicate. Not the tent for me.

[Dan @ Durston Gear]

That’s a lot better than how Nemo is marketing their DCF:

[J-L]

Blurbs like that from Nemo, and Big Agnes’ fabric choices, makes me wonder what kind of product validation or testing they do. It’s hard for me to trust Big Agnes after last year’s debacle of rating their Insulated AXL air pad as good to 15F.

The only way I could see the floor fabric choice as justifiable is that many normal consumers seem to use groundsheets now no matter what their tent floor fabric is. It will be really interesting to see how these tents do in the real world. It would be great if they actually work.

[Monte Masterson]

Carbon tents will be available in April according to the Big Agnes website. Actually the Scout 2 intrigues me more than the poled tents. 11 oz without stakes or footprint for a 2 person tent! It’s only $700. I’d use a groundsheet 7′ long, 4 feet Tyvek ( for upper body) and 3 feet polycro taped together (2.5 oz).

[Franco Darioli]

I like all those BA photos where to give the impression the tent is freestanding the two stakes at the back are edited out…

 

[Monte Masterson]

The pole design of the Fly Creek tents is beyond pathetic, I know from experience. Trekking pole tents are much more solid in strong winds than the Fly Creek, no matter how many stakes and tie-outs you use.

[James Marco]

Monte, that sounds like a plan to me.  Thanks!

[Matthew / BPL]

.34 DCF sounds like a profoundly bad idea for a mass market shelter to me. I’m guessing they will have lots of very unhappy customers.

[Monte Masterson]

I can still see a market (however small) for the Scout 2 among adventure racers and FKT’ers who are in drier climates They would just have to pray they didn’t get caught out in a hail storm.

Well heeled adventurers wouldn’t balk at the price. Some might even want to be able to tell their friends how much they paid for it.

I applaud Big Agnes for really pushing the envelope with their Carbon tents. Too bad they didn’t produce a Copper Spur carbon. The CS pole structure is a thousand times better than the Fly Creek. I don’t know, the Tiger Wall 2 doesn’t look much stronger.

[JCH]

Andrew Skurka reports that Big Agnes is using 0.34 oz/yd2 DCF for the fly and 0.51 oz/yd2 DCF for the floor.

Those material choices are the definition of “stupid light” and IMO border on criminal in that they appear to have been chosen for no other reason than to claim the lowest possible total shelter weight regardless of any other parameter.

[James Marco]

In the heavily forested NE, there is a real need of a good uL tent. A REAL UL tent that lives up to all the promise that cuben (now DCF) made. A UL tent that is not compromised by much of anything. The Scout seems to fit this bill.

The fly is light. .34 fabric is the lightest you can possibly get short of using a single plastic film. Yes, it requires some delicate handling and will not support heavy snow loads, nor, impacts from ice covered branches.But, it WILL turn rain and moderate winds up to 30mph, with an occasional gust up to 40…perhaps a bit more. Good enough for my camping needs.

As a ULer, I normally use a tarp. It has NO floor. Any floor is better than no floor. I usually bring a small piece of plastic and use my rain gear under my pad. This has worked well for the last 8-10 years. I don’t see handling a .51floor all that different. And it is a floor. It will define the shape of setting up a tarp easily. And it will supply some moisture/condensation control. Will it stand up to a gravel bed, roots, or sand. No. It is highly likely I will need a 4’x7′ piece of polycro as I usually bring with my tarp. I would much prefer a silnylon floor that can be patched and rewaterproofed as needed, rather than the special treatment that DCF requires.  If I need to bring that to bring the total weight up a couple ounces to 13oz for two people, I will NOT be displeased. Nor will I be upset when I finaly spring a leak. I know, UP FRONT, it was not designed for 5000mm head of water resistance but rather to provide condensation infiltration relief.  And, even with a 6’x8′ tarp, the Scout becomes the same weight as my existing tarp setup, yet far more versatile for two people.

[Monte Masterson]

I don’t know what the waterproof rating of .51 DCF is, but I’d be willing to bet that it’s better than all 7d and 10d polys and nylons. It’s probably more waterproof than most  15’s and 20’s too. People say that a Dyneema floor doesn’t stand up to abrasion, but who cares if you have a groundsheet that’s 57% Tyvek  (area) and 43% polycro. A 4′ X 7′ sheet would weigh 3.85 oz. I know packing a groundsheet that heavy somewhat defeats the purpose of spending more on DCF, however, the Tyvek let’s you get away with an XUL pad like the Uberlite without worrying as much. In the mean time you have a floor that’s not going to wet through, as long as you don’t puncture it. And a hole in DCF is easily repaired with tape.

[Dan @ Durston Gear]

Under light abrasion, DCF gets a million pin holes that are too small to see but leak everywhere and are impossible to patch. Leaks on woven materials can be fixed through re-coating, but a worn out DCF floor is unrepairable.

I never understood the argument that you can fix DCF by patching it, because yes you can, but by the time it comes to that it’s usually leaking everywhere. Read some articles on Duplex floors leaking and you can see many accounts where it’s just coming in all over. I’ve experienced that first hand with many DCF products.

And the Duplex uses 1.0oz DCF that has the 0.18 mylar and twice as much dyneema as what Big Agnes is using for their floors. BA’s floors will be several times less durable. The amount of dyneema in a floor isn’t that important, but using the thicker 0.18 mylar is crucial to have a floor that will last for any reasonable amount of time. Instead of 0.5oz DCF (CT1K.08) Big Agnes could spec CT1K.18 which is the same thing but with .18 mylar. That’s a penalty of 0.2oz/yd or about 1/2 oz for the entire tent and it would be a vast improvement.

If you had a 20D polyester floor in this tent, it would be lighter than 0.5oz DCF + a groundsheet, plus it would be simpler and still longer lasting because 0.5oz DCF as a floor is going to develop holes in a few dozen nights even with a groundsheet.

[Michael Gillenwater]

I second and confirm Dan’s assessment. DCF floors eventually start leaking even from long term abrasion (even very light abrasion that occurs from general use). And the leakage is more of an floor wide seep, especially under pressure, such as occurs when on very wet ground.

[JCH]

I made a “double-thick” polycro groundsheet from the large sliding glass door Duck brand window sealing kit sold at W*lm*rt, and have used it religiously with my Duplex since I received it in Nov of 2013.  The floor is still perfect without a single leak or any damage.  Did I take exceptionally good care of it?  Yes I did!  And while I fully expect the floor to fail at some point, it *IS* possible for a 1.0 CF floor to last if you treat it right.

[Michael Gillenwater]

not to split hairs, but for JCH, if you have only used it with a groundsheet, would you know if it leaked under pressure?

for example, i have an older Hexamid Twin with the netting floor, and DCF bathtub.  even with the protection of the netting to inhibit abrasion, that floor still leaks. Not a lot, but it does when pushed. Simply the repeated action of folding and unfolding, my guess is, will eventually lead to micro abrasion on DCF.

and I say this as not against DCF, a most of my shelters use it.

[JCH]

not to split hairs, but for JCH, if you have only used it with a groundsheet, would you know if it leaked under pressure?

Oh yeah I would!  Many times I’ve had quite the river running under the tent floor but over the top of the groundsheet (I’ve survived a few monsoons in that thing), not a drop of leakage.  My point is, you can minimize the abrasion to a DCF floor by using a 2 oz groundsheet.

[Author]

Posts