Erica,
Re: “Almost all the tents made these days are side entry, which means the ceiling of the tent is apt to be less than 12″ from your head when laying down.”
I much prefer side-entry tents because they are usually so much easier to get in and out of, and the tent itself offers a larger wind barrier when using a stove in front of it. That’s assuming the rear vestibule of the tent is guyed facing the wind of course.
Side entries can have as much room at head and foot as the manufacturer wants to design into the tent. But you are right, and some designs leave a lot less than 12″ over the head and feet. These extremes arise from a concern about wind deflection and resistance, and to some degree, weight. But I think that the wind issue is paramount.
A side entry tent that has gradually sloping walls on each side presents a more aerodynamic surface to wind coming from either side direction. However, this does mean that there will be less space above the head and feet; so designers often use arched poles to increase the height above head and feet, such as MSR Hubba designs, and two pole, single pole-crossing designs often called ‘wedge’ domes. But if the tent uses only straight vertical poles, trekking or otherwise, the sides will slope in a straight line to the ground, which becomes a concave line given catenary force; sagging of nylon when moist, and any narrowing in the floor design of the tent as the ceiling approaches the end of each side; all of which add up to very little space above the head and feet.
So the Hubba and wedge side entry designs are popular because the ceilings above the head and feet are convex. Some times this gets overdone, however, so the poles approach the vertical over the head and feet, and the benefit of aerodynamics is lost. This may be in part what Mark V. was getting at when he said, “I would vote against the Copper Spur. I love it in mild conditions… but if you are expecting extreme weather it’s not up to the job. I have had the fabric tear and had one of the poles crack in a surprise storm.” There are a number of side-entry tents like this that approach a rectangular box shape, and are easy pickings for high winds. One from REI was recently reviewed on BPL. Manufacturers even boast about ‘near vertical’ walls, completely forgetting that those walls present barriers to high winds that make tent damage and collapse more likely.
With the above in mind, I’d like to suggest that a side entry tent with convex arched sidewalls is not overly confining when around 12″ above forehead and toes, considering the benefits of their aerodynamic profiles: 1) Less resistance to high winds; 2) Less weight; 3) Greater height above the center of the tent; and 4) How quickly the ceiling rises when sitting up from lying down. The seat of my MYOG camp chair is about 4-6″ off the ground, and when sitting in it with legs projecting into the vestibule, the arched ceiling, around 4′ high at the peaks, provides plenty of cover and room to cook and eat with a stove planted in the vestibule outside the tent floor. I could not do this comfortably in any concave wall tent I’ve seen.
I once took a front profile of the TT Moment on their website and superimposed an arched line over it from peak to ground with the same floor length and peak height, and was surprised at how much ceiling space was added to most of the tent. Having said that, I’ll now retreat not into a tent, but into a reinforced concrete bunker
So please consider that reduction of space over the head and feet that is only used when sleeping is a small price to pay for a tent that with proper guyouts is much more wind worthy, and uses less yardage of fabric resulting in lighter tent weight. Thanks.
.
