Mountain Laurel Designs TrailStar Shelter Review

Maybe there was no wind :-)

2-3 months for further testing, maybe more
1-2 months to write up the article
2-3 months or more for editing, review, publication scheduling

July?

Cheeky, Stephen :-) For months this winter there was nothing but wind in the Rockies.

Mary, those timeframes make sense for traditional publishing (especially writing/editing/scheduling). Maybe the internet gives us unrealistic expectations in this instant gratification era. Either way, it would help for subscribers to know whether the rolling reviews are likely to be quarterly, semi-annual, annual, or 'as new information comes available'. Any staffers care to comment?

Sure I am a cheeky Paddy :-)

Call me cynical, but my initial impression when hearing that BPL was doing rolling reviews was that it was a convenient excuse to lower the quality of the published articles. Now reviews which are not conceptualized or finished can be published anyway, and there is little motivation to finish the review to make it more comprehensive afterwards. I expect that many of the rolling reviews will stay pending for much longer than it would have taken to write a complete review; I hope I am proven wrong.

+1 with Andrew.

It comes down to two options:

A) Evaluate a product for 6+ months, and then publish a complete review with long-term(ish) data. The problem is the product is likely no longer relevant (winter bag reviews published in the middle of summer, etc.) or may even no longer be available at the time of publishing.

B) Publish an initial review followed up later with long-term data. The initial thoughts are published while the product is relevant and the product can still be evaluated over a longer term for durability, etc. This is how it's done on at least one other review site exclusively.

Do you prefer reading about something irrelevant or unavailable? Or reading an initial review and having to wait on durability testing?

How about publishing an editorial schedule like you guys use to? So we can know when to expect something instead of everything here getting sucked into an editorial black hole.

I've honestly never seen an editorial schedule published, but then I've only been around for 5 or so years. I'll bring it up regardless.

Last on the thread drift. How abut just a line at the end of part one stating, Look for part 2 00/0000.

Thanks for chiming in, Chris. I appreciate the feedback and your willingness to bring up the suggestions in your editorial meetings. It's the 'not knowing' that has folks wondering. Sorry to have caused the thread to drift. Let's get back to discussing the gear at hand… Even though I'd heard of the Trailstar before, it wasn't till this review that it grabbed my attention. I scoured the internet for more details, and finally completed my search for one this evening.

So july has passed and Aug soon to be done – should we expect an update on this?
Mike

Nothing on the upcoming editorial calendar that Chris and everyone else can find here.

http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/editorial_calendar.html

"A) Evaluate a product for 6+ months, and then publish a complete review with long-term(ish) data. The problem is the product is likely no longer relevant (winter bag reviews published in the middle of summer, etc.) or may even no longer be available at the time of publishing."

I'll take option A.

The Trailstar is one of the shining achievements of the cottage industry being a truly no-compromise, ultralight shelter. As such, it seems ludicrous that this shelter continues to go unreviewed.

I haven't re-upped my membership because, since it ended two months ago, there hasn't been a single article that adds value to my outdoor adventures. The windshirt SOTM is a good first step but it's like the Trailstar review—only the easy part is done. BPL should be congratulating the successes of the cottage industry with coverage when a sterling example of innovation like the Trailstar comes out. BPL should focus on products that will improve people's day to day backpacking experience, not delve into a five part treatise on water danger and filtration.

Finish rolling reviews, review more cottage gear, be more transparent, and you have a subscriber back.

In one of his newsletters Ryan mentions not being quite such a fan of the Tstar any more. Can't quite remember why now. I think he has gone back to std mids.

I think it is a great shelter for open terrain where high winds are a possibility. For below the bush line I am finding it to be a bit of an over kill for a solo shelter, so will looking for something lighter here. Probably a Hexamid or a Cricket. The large covered area of the Tstar is great though for managing gear in wet weather.

Michael,

Search online and you will unearth an extensive collection of reviews on the Trailstar from active and knowledgeable users. The Trailstar was a late bloomer, many adopters picked it up within the last two years coming off the praise of vocal outdoor bloggers expounding its capabilities as a lightweight shelter (I did!), yet it has been around for several years now and paid its dues. What exactly are you looking to gain from Ryan's "johnny come lately" perspective on the Trailstar?

I think there is more than enough quality beta out there on this shelter for anyone to make an informed decision as to whether or not it would be an asset in their outdoor quiver.

I liked mine and used in a lot a couple of years ago (I was an early adopter). However, I had difficulty finding spots for it below treeline and a Mid proved better for my needs.

A mid is best all rounder for most it seems. I've seen a couple of TrailStars and they do take up some serious real estate.

"I think there is more than enough quality beta out there on this shelter for anyone to make an informed decision as to whether or not it would be an asset in their outdoor quiver."

http://www.christownsendoutdoors.com/2012/03/trailstar-wars.html

http://www.summitandvalley.com/2011/07/is-trailstar-best-lightweight-shelter.html

http://sectionhiker.com/mountain-laurel-designs-trailstar-long-term-review-by-dave-lintern/

http://www.stevenhorner.com/?p=1003

http://goinglighter.blogspot.com/2011/04/first-impressions-mld-trailstar.html

It seems like a mid and a trailstar have about the same footprint.

Mid – 8 or 9 or 10 feet square

Trailstar – 7 feet on a side – it depends how you pitch it

I just don't like the open side – I'de rather have it extend to close to the ground and have a zipper – but that takes away some of the simplicity

Forgot to add that Chris Townsend gave the Tstar a rave review in the latest TGO magazine. Also gave the Duomid a good review. I started with the Duomid, but figured for the same weight I could get much better high wind performance. Also with a std mid if it is raining, even in calm conditions, it seems to me that you need to close the door.

Jerry, specs aside, the TS takes up a lot mor real estate than the DuoMid. One easily fits on tent platforms, the other doesn't.

Experience trumps all.

I've never done it, but I'd assume there are a few pitch options for the TS, like the narrow 4 sided pitch that someone posted on here somewhere.

Idester, you are now going head-to-head with "Link" O'leary. Watch out, she could rip you to shreds…

"Watch out, she could rip you to shreds…"

And as we learned from another thread, she's got a mean side. I take back all my links! I'm sorry Anna! I didn't mean it!