Lightweight problems

[vagrom]

2 items: tent inners with large portion mesh and 200gms weight canvas. Opinions and experience please.

1) In the bid to make things lighter, tent inners are now much more mesh than solid. Doesn't that mean less warmth retention and more chance of wetting inside? (See Macpac Apollo) Essential aspects for Tasmanian walking.

2) The new One Planet lightweight 2kg/65kg packs, called WBA(Weighs Bugger All) are made of lighter weight "200gms" canvas. As their normal Waterlock fabric is twice that weight, i'm guessing canvas' water repelling properties are quite reduced in the lighter version, the answer being to spray it occassionally with a water repelling agent.

First item reminds me how good it is to get into a tent at the end of a day when it's cold and wet outside and be suprised just how quickly you feel warm and feet become dry out of socks.

[Maelgwn]

1) In the bid to make things lighter, tent inners are now much more mesh than solid. Doesn't that mean less warmth retention and more chance of wetting inside? (See Macpac Apollo) Essential aspects for Tasmanian walking.

Agree about the consequences but not entirely about the rationale. Look at the MSR Hubba Hubba and Hubba Hubba HP as an example.

The HP is lighter but the main difference from the Hubba is MORE solid fabric, which actually weights less per square metre than the mesh.

The increase in mesh I believe is driven by the American market, who see it as more of a feature for warm nights than a hindrance.

[vagrom]

So I shouldn't conclude that mesh is being used as a lightener? Or, don't be too hasty to think it. Appreciated. But you agree that if Tassie walking's intended then an all or large part mesh inner is always going to supply less comfort when bad weather closes in. It seems obvious enough and has probably been commented on before. i'll do a search back.
An associate used her new Hubba on a Wyperfeld trip last year. We had much more rain than expected and the sand may have been of a water shedding variety. The tent cost her a mozza and she got quite wet through the floor. This is where the Macpac tent floors shine, or their best ones, for Tassie conditions. Thanks.

[Maelgwn]

So I shouldn't conclude that mesh is being used as a lightener? Or, don't be too hasty to think it. Appreciated. But you agree that if Tassie walking's intended then an all or large part mesh inner is always going to supply less comfort when bad weather closes in. It seems obvious enough and has probably been commented on before. i'll do a search back.
An associate used her new Hubba on a Wyperfeld trip last year. We had much more rain than expected and the sand may have been of a water shedding variety. The tent cost her a mozza and she got quite wet through the floor. This is where the Macpac tent floors shine, or their best ones, for Tassie conditions. Thanks.

Yes basically.

The Hubba has a very light floor (30 dernier?) so would need another ground sheet or very careful site choice in very wet weather.

Roger Caffin has a good gear guide for Australia, including tents.

Look here:
http://www.bushwalking.org.au/FAQ/FAQ_Shelter.htm

And specifically at the "Un-desirable Tent Features" Section

[Franco]

1) In the bid to make things lighter, tent inners are now much more mesh than solid

As pointed out that is a wrong assumption.
For example the Hilleberg Nallo standard inner is 730g , the mesh version is 690 g.
A similar weight difference is true for the Akto and the TT Scarp.
So yes it is marginally lighter but not enogh to be justified by weight alone.

The reason all of the above exist is because customer (yes particularly US based folk) want a cooler inner.
BTW, the fly of the Hubba HP is lighter (but stronger) than the standard Hubba and that is the main weght saving.
Franco

[vagrom]

Yes. An excellent site. Comprehensive. Not too little, not to much, just right. But I didn't catch mention of mesh pro's and con's.
I was going to ask your opinion of the Macpac Microlight which seems to have stood the distance. His "Single Hoop Tents" does it no favours at all. And yet they remain (?) very popular amongst Tassie walkers and stand up okay in my experience, to a bad night at Shelf Camp, on the Anne Circuit. Their small footprint make them pitch friendly in the pokiest spots.

[Maelgwn]

From http://www.bushwalking.org.au/FAQ/FAQ_S ... ndesirable

You can buy imported tents here in Australia, but many of them are not suited to our conditions. The current American fad, a 'tarp tent', basically reverts to an idea we abandoned 100 years ago. It has no insect proofing and has to be pitched very low to the ground to keep the rain out when the wind blows. It may be light, but so what if you get bitten to death and then soaked? In another aberration, the Americans seem to regard the inner tent with the insect proofing as the "tent", and the outer tent as a "fly". They lay out the inner tent on the ground, erect the poles, hang the inner tent from the poles (or thread the poles through sleeves attached to the iner tent), and then throw the fly over the lot. Actually, one often reads about them not even bothering to take the fly on a trip. Their weather is different from ours! In many regions they 'know' they will get no rain for six months of the year, and that is when they go walking. Windows in the ceilings of the American tents are routine - for looking at the stars they say.

I understand where he is coming from a lot of the time, but can find it a bit over the top. There are certainly plenty of opportunities to camp under just a tarp in SA.

Yes, the Microlight seems to be a very capable tent. I think his point is that many of the aspects of the design are not optimised. Like a pole that long is weaker than a shorter pole for a tunnel. Space is limited also by the single pole ... Just because a design is not optimal doesn't mean it can't work? Not really sure ... But the microlight is very small. Probably not recommended for over 6 feet tall.

[photohiker]

Roger is very experienced and also a member of this site, perhaps he will come along and support his opinion.

I'm not sure which specific tarp tents he is referring to, but there are many versions, and his opinion appears to only apply to a single style, so its not really fair to blanket reference them all like that. Especially since there is now a brand called 'Tarptent' which makes both tarps and tents. I'm reasonably confident that Roger would be aware that you can easily find tarp tents with insect screening and/or non-mesh inners, and that there are US based tents that do not pitch inner first. Perhaps that section of the faq needs updating?

[Franco]

Roger did make some good points there and the description fitted the situation about 10 years ago but of course the market changes.
It is still correct that the term "tent" in the US refers to what we (and the rest of the world) call the inner. Check out the product pics for tent brands on their US and European sites to verify that.
Curiously the brand Tarptent has a different approach to the usual inner pitch first used by US brands by making the 2 wall tents (Scarps and Hogback) as an integral pitch ( or fly only if you like) , and that will remain the same for future shelters.
Tarptent also started to popularise the fully enclosed (floor and net attached) version of the tarp tents, something that most of the others also do now.
In fact there are no Tarptents now that are not fully enclosed.

To go back to the OP line of thinking, the reason why even a fairly specialised brand like Tarptent has 12 shelters ranging from single wall 3 season specific to double wall with mesh or solid inner 4 season versions , is simply that it isn't possible to make a shelter that works best for everybody in all situations.
Franco
BTW, the other day I posted some comments about Frank (Paddy) Pallin on a US forum.
There someone was asking (telling...) about the non practical non lasting value of LW gear.
So I pointed out that Paddy made his own gear and in particular his "tent" ( a tarp made from very light weight material from the UK) was pretty much the same as the stuff sold to UL folk today.
The gear at Paddy Pallin ( the store) started to get heavier and heavier when Paddy started supplying not just his mates and experienced (confident, knowledgeable) walkers but to the general public
But LW gear is not really that new...

Last edited by Franco on Mon 06 Sep, 2010 10:22 am, edited 2 times in total.

[ollster]

2) The new One Planet lightweight 2kg/65kg packs, called WBA(Weighs Bugger All) are made of lighter weight "200gms" canvas. As their normal Waterlock fabric is twice that weight, i'm guessing canvas' water repelling properties are quite reduced in the lighter version, the answer being to spray it occassionally with a water repelling agent.

I dry sack everything that's important to keep dry in my packs, so wouldn't bother me. The lightweight material on the other hand would. Last thing you need during a multi day off track trip is your pack getting disemboweled. Still, horses for courses, I'd probably take something like that on a tracked trip.

[photohiker]

It is still correct that the term "tent" in the US refers to what we (and the rest of the world) call the inner.

If you look at old tents, there was a tent, and a fly for wet weather. The fly was an open tarp pitched parallel and above the tent roof.

We used one of these when basecamping with the scouts when I was just a wee lad. It was probably ex-army, *&%$#! heavy, and relied on some stout wooden poles to maintain structure. It had no floor, and water free floor area was created by digging channels around the perimeter of the tent. My first hiking tent followed the same philosophy. I'm not sure when the inner and tent actually appeared, but the design is different and justifies the change in description, but I do think the tent and fly are historical hangers on.