WhiteBlaze Pages 2024
A Complete Appalachian Trail Guidebook.
AVAILABLE NOW. $4 for interactive PDF(smartphone version)
Read more here WhiteBlaze Pages Store

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 28 of 28
  1. #21
    Registered User
    Join Date
    08-30-2006
    Location
    Bozeman, MT
    Age
    62
    Posts
    613
    Images
    6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by connolm View Post
    Maybe someone can compare-o with a Z-packs Duplex?
    Well, they’re sort of different animals, aren’t they?

    Back to materials, the lightest Dyneema the Duplex is available with is .51 oz, but is also available in .67 and .74 oz.

    Many folks that that have been around Dyneema want more than .51 for floor material, let alone a gossamer .34 for the fly. For instance, the new Tarptent Dyneema tents use .51 for the fly and 1.0 for the floor. That strikes me as real-world thinking.

    Some get carried away counting grams and lose sight of function... I suspect BA is in for a steep learning curve here. If there is some “there, there” I’m not beyond spending 1k for a tent. But I think this creation is in the fools errand category.

    We shall see...

  2. #22
    Registered User
    Join Date
    08-30-2006
    Location
    Bozeman, MT
    Age
    62
    Posts
    613
    Images
    6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vince G View Post
    Man, your right about this. I was paranoid about my .51 Duplex, and this thing is gonna seem like tissue paper. Also, bear in mind that the fly will be subject to abrasion as the poles shift in the wind. Now, the fly may have a thicker Mylar coating but, in any case, this is not my cup of tea.
    I’m with you there Vince. A friends .51 Duplex made me nervous too. I’ll pass on the BA...

  3. #23
    Registered User 4eyedbuzzard's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-02-2007
    Location
    DFW, TX / Northern NH
    Age
    67
    Posts
    8,143
    Images
    27

    Default

    It's definitely pushing the limits of materials engineering. I have to wonder, after reading Skurka's review and the many comments from that and other sources regarding ultra lightweight Cuben/Dyneema, what the real-world expected lifespan is? Can it survive a complete AT or PCT thru-hike, say 150 uses without failure to at least adequately perform before being "retired"? If so maybe there's a place for it. Unlike things like pots and even sleeping bags (not exposed to elements), tents are more like packs and clothing. They just wear out. For a well enough financed thru-hiker it can be a considered a throw-away "cost of doing business". And while the thru-hiker market is relatively small, it's significant enough to to support a lot of cottage industry, so granted, there is money to be made there. But thru-hikers, while important, are ultimately a very small part of the larger market. BA's more geared toward the mass market. And for the masses, the casual users, say someone who spends only two weeks a year hiking, 150 use lifespan could represent a ten year lifespan, five years for someone who spends 30 bag nights a year - which is way above the average for most recreational hikers. This is more realistically the target audience I would think. The reality is that most of these tents (like all tents) will get at most a few uses a year - and see a lot of closet time. Personally, I think it's up against and even likely past the "point of diminishing returns" from a cost vs weight comparison. It just doesn't save enough weight over nylon for the mass market given the trade-off in durability. But, I guess we'll see. Discounting / clearance sales next fall / winter will be an indicator of how well these are accepted by consumers.

  4. #24
    Registered User
    Join Date
    01-03-2010
    Location
    Windham, Maine
    Age
    56
    Posts
    1,166

    Default

    I found somewhat interesting the extreme light weight combined with a purpose of packing the mesh inner separatey from the fly and the ground sheet. In rain, pitch the groundsheet and the fly and get in and dry off to a point where pitching the mesh inner would reduce the amount of 'wetted stuff' and then get in. But this all crumbled when I realized the tent is not freestanding. The flapping one pole side would reduce the vestibule operating space as well as introduce more rain inside. I mean, this is really marginal nitpicking and given the fact that I have too many tents already I only look for additional tent if it serves a particular niche or if it solves a very specific logistic use for me.
    Let me go

  5. #25
    GSMNP 900 Miler
    Join Date
    02-25-2007
    Location
    Birmingham, AL
    Age
    57
    Posts
    4,861
    Journal Entries
    1
    Images
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 4eyedbuzzard View Post
    It's definitely pushing the limits of materials engineering. I have to wonder, after reading Skurka's review and the many comments from that and other sources regarding ultra lightweight Cuben/Dyneema, what the real-world expected lifespan is? Can it survive a complete AT or PCT thru-hike, say 150 uses without failure to at least adequately perform before being "retired"?
    So I decided to check on Big Agnes's Warranty Policy.

    Their products are "guaranteed against manufacturing or material defect" and "do not warranty products damaged from normal wear and tear".

    Even REI's 100% Satisfaction Guaranty "doesn't cover ordinary wear and tear".

    So, yeah, if this material is a fragile as everyone is thinking and tons of tents are getting tears in the 1st year of use, it should be interesting to see how these guarantees play out.

  6. #26
    Registered User
    Join Date
    06-10-2008
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Age
    42
    Posts
    398

    Default

    i have to roll my eyes at the industry's harping on the whole free-standing, not free-standing crap. are there any backpacking tents out there that don't require stakes to be fully functioning tents? I can't think of any. is there a distinction that I'm missing? or is it just a way to distinguish themselves from the cottage industry that's making better tents at competitive prices?

  7. #27
    Registered User
    Join Date
    01-03-2010
    Location
    Windham, Maine
    Age
    56
    Posts
    1,166

    Default

    well, depending on the conditions outside...if I'm getting caught by a monsoon then the last thing I want to do is to be circling my freestanding tent with stakes in hand. In such situations I pitch it 'freestanding', throw my stuff into corners to keep it relatively spread out, inflate my mattress, change into dry clothes and pull out my (hopefully) dry sleeping bag and don't go out unless I'm ok getting wet. For such eventuality I do have tents that are freestanding, with the exception of a vestibule which can be staked from within the tent and theoretically the footprint stakes as well
    (it's all fun and games as long as the outdoor situation corresponds to the glossy outdoor ad :-) )


    Quote Originally Posted by Ashepabst View Post
    i have to roll my eyes at the industry's harping on the whole free-standing, not free-standing crap. are there any backpacking tents out there that don't require stakes to be fully functioning tents? I can't think of any. is there a distinction that I'm missing? or is it just a way to distinguish themselves from the cottage industry that's making better tents at competitive prices?
    Let me go

  8. #28

    Default

    For what it's worth, mountain laurel designs offers their DCF shelters in .5 thickness....and they make it clear that when you choose this option you dont get a warranty...I think that speaks volumes for what's going to happen with these BA ricepaper shelters....

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
++ New Posts ++

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •