@idester At 5’10” with a wife who’s several inches shorter, we can both sit up comfortably, but with one shoulder touching the mesh and it’s too tight to do any moving around when you’re both sitting. And neither of us is bulky in build. However, at the risk of being called silly again, this is a good size tent for two people if like us you never both sit up at the same time.

Also, I wonder how it works if you sleep head to toe? The door system seems to suggest it’s intended to be used like this.

“This looks like a nice, spacious single-person shelter, not really a two-person shelter. But it’s heavy, and it’s really expensive. Other than fit and finish and a bit better wind performance, I’m still struggling to see what it has over the Duplex, which is lighter and much less expensive.”

We also have a Duplex. We added the Dirigo partly because we expect it to be better and quieter in the wind but also because of the pole set up. Not having apex guys means it’s easier to fit into small places and the apex guys on the Duplex really need to be in firm as they take a lot of strain. We’ll still keep the Duplex for some trips – after all, it is lighter.

@tundra-thrasher-ouch-man-2 “I’d like to think there are smart Guyline enhancements to my 0.74 dcf duplex that might lead to lower decibels and more Rigidity. ”

Half way along the bottom edge at the head and foot end is a good place to start. We got our Duplex with them added as custom, back in the days when Zpacks did custom. We’ve added the same to the Dirigo with a stick on 1.3 oz cuben patch for reinforcement and a stick on loop.

If you like to keep the doors open, they can be noisy in wind so we added stick on loops and toggles so each door can be fastened up in two places (and have done the same to the Dirigo). I saw someone who added magnet tie backs – that would be cool.

But for getting the Duplex quieter in wind, I think there are two problems. Firstly, the ridgeline vibrates in strong wind coming at the head or foot end. No matter how tight the apex guys (and we pitch the Duplex tight, not like some of the flappy pitches you see in some photos), it still happens. The second problem is that closing the doors seems to skew the geometry of the rest of the tent and leads to some slackness in the main side seams of the fly. Perhaps tie outs here would help? I’ve seen somewhere about someone who guys out from the door toggles.

Edited to add: Yes, it’s expensive but have you looked at the cost of any of the 2-person mids in cuben with cuben floored inners?

Thank you Ryan for your review of the Dirigo. I have great respect for HMG, and use and am highly satisfied with a number of their products. But as I observe in several posts on the separate thread on your video of the Dirigo in extremis, in my opinion this product has a serious structural flaw. Like most ‘mids, the structural system of the Dirigo consists of a tensile skin that stresses a compression frame, somewhat akin to using a Duomid or a Khufu with a two-pole arrangement, e.g. using a Locus DPTE to pin-joint two poles at the apex, together with a tensile tie at the base at ground level. In that Duomid/Khufu + DPTE + base tie, the compression frame is in effect triangulated – the slopes of the two poles mean that their bases are not going to collapse inwards.
In the effort to provide more headspace, the Dirigo introduces the CF ridge bar that separates and connects the tops of the two poles. This assembly is structurally equivalent to a truncated triangular 3-pole structure that again, functions as a compression member. It is pretty obvious that if the two joints between long poles and the short horizontal ridge “pole” were pin joints, the structure would quickly collapse under applied stress. The structural integrity depends upon the two joints being rigid, as in the elbows of a portal frame (common in factory structures). In the 3-pole Dirigo structure, those two joints need to provide rigidity firstly in the plane of the poles (that vertically slices the ‘mid space into two); and secondly in torsion about the long axis of the ridge pole, so that one joint will not rotate relative to the other. I.e., the 3-pole compression structure needs to not deflect, and also not twist (rotate), so that it no longer forms a planar structure.
If the first rigidity constraint is not met, the frame will distort in the 3-pole plane, with one joint angle increasing while the other decreases – in effect, swaying side to side as the ridge pole rotates within that vertical plane (so the apex moves forward and backward relative to the front and back (other front) of the mid).
If the second rigidity constraint is not met, the ridge pole will rotate in the horizontal plane as one joint moves to the left (looking at a front of the tent) while the other moves to the right. So the top of the frame twists back and forth, as the (tops of the) long poles sway side to side.
I find hard to imagine that the handles of the long trekking poles can be adequately secured in that system to offer satisfactory rigidity under strong and blustery wind loads.
Contrast this with the stable triangulation provided in the 2-pole system using a single pin-joint at the apex (Duomid/Khufu with DPTE,  presupposing that the DPTE makes an adequate junction with the pole tips (poles are inverted in that case), and not a sloppy junction).
While the Dirigo 3-pole structural system will work – provided always that conditions don’t get too bad – it is rather like developing a one-legged chair. Yes, it will work, but… only until the cat jumps on your lap, spilling your hot tea and causing your to drop your laptop and knitting, shortly before striking the floor head-first. Four legs good, one leg bad.
How then can better headroom be provided in ‘mids, while still providing structural integrity? My suggestion for a rectangular ‘mid is to have a short pole some distance below the apex, which is horizontal, and at right-angles to the long axis of the rectangle. Messner designed a number of dome tents that have such a feature, and they work well (I have several). In those domes, the short pole is not curved, and just takes compression. But for a rectangular ‘mid, the short cross-pole will have to avoid the two main poles, while having its ends in their plane. So it might consist of two gently bowed sections, joined at both ends, and passing either side of the long poles. In such a case, the short compound pole would not touch either long pole, making a form of tensegrity structure. Or it could consist of two separate straight short poles that do not touch, are parallel, and pass either side of the long poles (another tensegrity).
I think also, as others have pointed out, the lack of a solid base for one pole in Ryan’s storm video contributed to that structural failure. The (long) pole takes compression; if it does not have satisfactory resistance from the ground (being on snow), it will slide down, allowing the other long pole to slope more as the apex moves to the front of the ‘mid (the long side having the faulty base condition). This will contribute to the tent “rolling” about the long axis of the ‘mid, which effect can be seen in the video.
Just my thoughts, kindly forgive my ramblings, and God bless HMG.

Great video and thorough review. .I like it when BPL really gets into things. More please.

I don’t have enough time in the Dirigo in bad weather to add significantly to your judgements but watching the video,a few comments and questions came to mind. In random order:

What do you think was the causing the line to slip in the linelocs? Would a different line have held better or was it because of the strain being put on them? The line is about the same diameter as the line that MLD uses, for example. Switching out the line would be easy to do if it were going to make a difference.

Would using poles on the mid-panel end guys have helped in the storm? In the video it looks as if the wind is able to push the guy downwards. Using poles here also flattens the Event panel (less concave) and slightly steepens the slope of the side triangular panels.

I think the main reason for the mitten hook is so that you can unfasten the door without having to reach out to the stake. One solution to it’s weakness would be to use it on the door you wish to use for entry/exit and have just a guyline through a lineloc on the other door panel (easy to mod yourself with a lineloc on a loop). Then you can unhook the mitten hook when you need to use the door, but the strain is also taken by the other guy. It also lessens stress on the zip. The old style Zpacks double hooks also work (but not the new style), but I don’t know how strong they would be.

How much strain would apex guys need to take? Stick on loops from Zpacks would make an easy way to attach them. I don’t know how much strain they’d be able to take but presumably they’d be able to some help to the shell.

Edited to add a gratuitous photo of the Dirigo under the excuse that it shows it pitched with an end pole.

Excellent video.

On side note, I think you should do a video trip report of some of the BPL Trekking courses.

Regarding set up, I’ve found the doors toggled closed and ridge-line set up first before the four corners provided a tight pitch and no door distortion which I struggled with year one.

I would find it very difficult to set a Duplex up corners last in windy conditions. Have you tried to set it up the “new” way z-packs recommends? I changed to this way to get a less wind sensible way to set it up. Doors can be closed during setup but it is the last step to tension them.

The vestibules pitches quite a bit higher from the ground than the rest of the tent though, and that is one of the problems with Duplex when it is windy. But it can help on uneven ground. I still use it above the treeline but it is not the tent I would buy today for that.

Many at this point are saying to themselves…. “Hyperlight should have done more R &D  testing/usage like what you, Ryan Jordan and others did prior to the Dirigo 2 – Ultralights introduction.

Big thanks for your posting.