Tunnel Tents Tutorial and State of the Market Report – Part 1: Definition and Pitching

Great article, and great debate from everyone. This is the sort of honest, evidenced (and sometimes opinionated!) discussion that keeps me coming back to this site.

I have had the honour of owning both a Macpac Olympus and a The North Face Mountain 25, which are (I think most would agree) popular benchmarks for tunnels and geodesic dome/pop-ups respectively. Whilst hardly a hardened mountaineer I have had the good fortune (or misfortune) to use both in reasonable anger. So a personal perspective can be added.

The older Olympus was similar in weight to the current Mountain 25.

From my experience the Olympus was definitely easier to set up generally, in high winds and by oneself in trying conditions. I don’t agree with the off-cited idea that the freestanding tents are easier to move about and place. I found the tunnel design actually easier to set up in tight places. Once you are accustomed to the tent it is very easy to estimate where it will sit and pitch accordingly. At worst a slight rearrangement of the end pegs gets the tent into perfect position.

Going against the grain now though but I prefer the Mountain 25. Some of that is due to features that exist in other tunnels but not the Olympus (like the really big vestibule of the Mountain 25 for cooking and preparations). I was never left wanting when I had the Olympus. Having said that – the biggest storm I have experienced was in the Mountain 25 and both me and my climbing buddy felt that the Olympus likely would not have survived (we were worried at several points about the Mountain 25 surviving but it performed well).

Main issue with the tunnel is that you are very dependent on the pegs. Setting up on boggy soil, soft sand or fluffy snow and I would be nervous a peg would pull and the whole thing would come down like a pack of cards. Also setting up on rock, without peg options, it can be hard to get an acceptable pitch (in terms of wind security) with the tunnel.

I accept that a good tunnel may be resist wind really well due to an ability to flex. I always tried to pitch mine with a vestibule end pointing into the wind. But that flexing puts some major strains and shocks on the guylines/pegs. Again – I think you need bomber pegging for tunnel tents in more extreme situations. And the guylines to hold up. I have experienced some of the Kevlar guylines on the Mountain 25 being eventually cut by (I think) constant flying ice. I think a tunnel would have suffered more for the loss of those guylines with the all directions gusts we were experiencing.

The Mountain 25 can be a b#$ch to set up. There is a technique to it in rough weather to avoid damage to the poles and tent but it is never as easy as the Olympus. Two people helps. But once up it is not coming down, and it is a lot more comfortable to wait out a storm (for days if need be). Even if the guylines and the pegs on the ends pull, I doubt the main body is going far with a couple of people and their gear inside. Once a bit of snow has settled the tent is sort of seated in and I expect would hold up in a good wind even without any pegs. I believe (no data to prove) that the Mountain 25 tolerates gusting swirling winds (from all directions) better than the Olympus. The geodesic can be internal guyed as well – something I have never needed to do.

It is much quieter in a big wind which is nice, and the tighter inner means less frost falling on sleeping bags from the flexing inner tent. It still moves about and flexes a fair bit in big wind – but in a more consistent and controlled manner. Maybe not a fully rational perspective, but the geodesic dome feels more secure and so is more ‘relaxing’ to wait out a storm. This is not such an issue for an overnight – but on the third day in a tent and still waiting it matters.

I prefer the fight for 20 minutes setting up knowing that there is little to worry about for the (potentially) days tent-bound after that. However I really wish that the likes of the Mountain 25 could be designed with an easier, integral pitch.
If we can discard some laws of logic and engineering all I ask is a slightly simplified, spacious two-man, geodesic dome type tent, with a simple integrated pitch system, and about 2.0-2.5 kilos ;). I am sure someone here can knock me up something like that!

Despite the above – I agree with what I think is Rodger’s central thesis – that the tunnel tent is a much ‘misunderestimated’ and underappreciated design by many outdoorspeople. And those Hilleberg’s sure look good :)

Hi Thorbjorn

> The older Olympus was similar in weight to the current Mountain 25.
My old Olympus was 3.6 kg; the current M25 is 4.34 kg. But both weights are HEAVY.

> Main issue with the tunnel is that you are very dependent on the pegs.
I agree. In particular, the two windward end anchors are critical.

That said, two of my Ti deadman anchors (170 mm x 80 mm) held my tunnel for the whole night with 100+kph wind in dry snow with no movement at all. I think boggy soil would hold similarly, but in soft sand I use large dead sticks instead. For the Ti anchors, see
http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/make_your_own_gear_titanium_snow_stakes.html
and
http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/myog_ti_snow_stakes_part_2.html

> The geodesic can be internal guyed as well – something I have never needed to do.
Same with a tunnel. I have used internal guys at times. They work well.

> If we can discard some laws of logic and engineering all I ask is a slightly
> simplified, spacious two-man, geodesic dome type tent, with a simple integrated
> pitch system, and about 2.0-2.5 kilos
:-)
It's getting the poles into the sleeves in a storm which is the BIG problem, isn't it? The weight … would be tricky.

Cheers

"It's getting the poles into the sleeves in a storm which is the BIG problem, isn't it?"

We were doing an overnight ski tour, and we got to our tent site a little past dark. There were three of us skiers, so I pulled out my three-man geodesic dome tent and we started to erect it. There are three segmented poles. The first two slid through the fabric sleeves properly. The third one was hung up on something, but it was getting dark enough that I couldn't see the problem. We were putting more and more force onto the third pole as we tried to force it along. All of a sudden, the pole shot through with such force that one end came out of the sleeve in a hurry. Unfortunately, I was standing there, and it hit me squarely in the chest just above the sternum. I felt like I had been hit by a bullet. I had a terrible bruise for the next three weeks.

Moral to the story: Don't stand squarely in the direction that the pole is aimed.

Alternative moral: Don't aim it at somebody unless you intend to kill them.

–B.G.–

Hi Sam

> longitudinal side netting under the canopy
Um … I though that was what I posted in this thread at 04/14/2012 05:04:10 MDT
If you mean something different, I would love to understand.

Cheers

It's nice to see a rediscovery and appreciation of a vintage concept.
…..
… hmm, the more things change, the more things stay the same.

Maybe that's because it is a Scotty thing?

Are you going to twist Roger's arm to get the original designs and layouts? I believe since he produced them he should have all the cutting dimensions etc ready to go.

I think they sound excellent, my only concern is cost. Roger often addresses the fact that the cost of a tent is relative to its quality and ability. As a terrifically cheap person, the value is key to me, but low relative cost is an important factor.

Alas, I suspect that doing this properly may put it out of my price range.

But I am excited to think that these are coming back to the market – should I suddenly have mad money to get one. :)

Roger, one late question I forgot in due time about the elbowed pole and sleeve insertion, as it is in your tents: sleeve insertion/extraction is easiest with the pole already assembled and this matches your description of the process but do the sleeves admit those angles in between straight pole sections? Are the sleeves oversized in diameter for this?

Hi Roger,

Sorry for not replying sooner.

Re opening:

I had a Minaret and now have a Second Arrow. The Second Arrow is more liveable across a range of conditions, in part because of the flexibility of the door. I think the Hilleberg Nammatj also has a side opening door. I much prefer that style. The Arrow goes a step further.

This is not my tent and it's an old model, but shows the flexibility of the entrance:
http://outdoors.webshots.com/photo/1239407401043166172MjFrLR

This is an old model – door can be opened either side from top or bottom, including almost completely:

Basically getting into and out of the tent is much easier than a door designed like the Olympus or Minaret. (Although you can simulate the side opening with those tents it's not the same — the zip needs to be located near the pole arch for best convenience).

When I said modify, I guess I mean redesign.

Disclosure: I own this tent and have corresponded at some length with the designer.

Hi Roger,

The current Second Arrow has no change as far as the flexibility of the vestibule goes. I would be very surprised if the First Arrow had changed in that regard.

It makes a significant difference as far as I'm concerned (especially if you have stuff in the vestibule you're not forced to crawl over it). But as you say, each to his own.

Re sitting up at the far end:

Yeah, that's not something I miss being solo (haven't tried First Arrow, it is a lot larger). Both those tents have a reasonably heavy taper – they are designed for room at the shoulder where it is needed.

Re bulk, I don't find it too bad but you could reduce bulk by leaving bags or replacing with lightweight ones:

They give you 2 pole sleeves where most give one, proper pegs which are MUCH stronger than is usually provided (but bulkier) and the tent and poles bag (fabric is plenty strong enough for poles to be carried outside the pack through thick scrub without damage to the bag)are significantly heavier than for most other manufacturers (as is the ground fabric). At 30D for the fly (siliconised version), the fabric is on par with many others for "weight" but not in the same league (for better or worse — I would argue that 30D is "better" for most people) as some of the gossamer fabrics available (eg. some manufacturers are now using 15D which obviously requires more care and is not as long wearing – all things being equal – as 30D).

Cheers
Stuart

In 1972 Norrona had the Ravnskar, the first 3 pole tunnel tent with front and back opening , I think.

looks familiar, doesn’t it ?

Bill Moss was indeed a genius and prolific

Seems the Eureka Caddis first came to the market in 1978

Yes, the Minaret is a tunnel. However, with only two poles the fabric span between poles is huge, so it won’t take side-on wind very well. My minimum is 3 poles.

Cheers