Advice required on choice of 2/3 person lightweight tent

[pjclinch]

Helsport's 2 person Lofoten Pro Camp is a similar size and weight and uses very similar fabrics and poles yet costs £459!

Interestingly, if you buy it in Norway at Helsport's RRP of 7,495 NKr that comes in at just shy of £700... So it looks like someone has decided to take a hit on the margins for export.

Annoyingly, Hilleberg do similar in the US, but not in Europe. So looks like it might be a pretty good reason to lean to Helsport if they have something that ticks all your boxes as well as a Hille.

Pete.

[willem jongman]

Some of this is, of course, a function of volatile exchange rates. And yes, Hilleberg are significantly cheaper in the US. As for the various Helsport models, I think their main line sits roughly in between the Hilleber Black and the Hilleberg Red series. In design a Fjellheimen 3 Camp is very comparable to a Nammatj 3gt, but is some 500 gram lighter. Fabric and poles seem of Nallo weight. So if you fancied a Nammatj shape with a Nallo weight (plus some extra interior length, here is your chance.

[bikepacker]

Just noticed Uttings are doing the Vango Galaxy 300 at £169 it may be a bit larger than you want but that is a bargain.

https://www.uttings.co.uk/p122543-vango ... 3XPahNwbcs

can't help but say that is one ugly looking tent.

Didn't buy mine for looks but for functionality. Hopefully it will allow me to continue cycle camping for a few more years.

[Jezrant]

I think their main line sits roughly in between the Hilleber Black and the Hilleberg Red series. In design a Fjellheimen 3 Camp is very comparable to a Nammatj 3gt, but is some 500 gram lighter. Fabric and poles seem of Nallo weight. So if you fancied a Nammatj shape with a Nallo weight (plus some extra interior length, here is your chance.

I'm not sure where the current line of Helsport tents fits in relation to Hilleberg's, but I would say that anyone considering a Super Light Helsport tent (part of their Pro range) should make doubly sure they see one in the flesh before buying. When Helsport was still making their tents in Norway, the SL tents used a heavier, stronger fabric for the outer. The current SL tents use a fabric that is really too light IMHO. They have also made a few other questionable design decisions in the SL tents such as removing the guy line from the rear vent on some of these tents (my guess is this was done to remove the risk of tearing the fabric at this high stress point). The poles for the SL tents are also less strong than they used to be for the sake of lightness. Always a balancing act, lightness vs strength, but I think with the current SL tents, they sacrificed too much strength to save weight. On the other hand, I think they've got the balance between lightness vs strength spot-on with the non-SL Pro tents.

[Sweep]

Just noticed Uttings are doing the Vango Galaxy 300 at £169 it may be a bit larger than you want but that is a bargain.

https://www.uttings.co.uk/p122543-vango ... 3XPahNwbcs

can't help but say that is one ugly looking tent.

Didn't buy mine for looks but for functionality. Hopefully it will allow me to continue cycle camping for a few more years.

Fair point. Enjoy your trips.

[willem jongman]

I could not agree more about the Helsport Superlight Series, even though I know some happy users. I am planning to get myself a RIngstind 2 next year for my solo trips, and I did hesitate for a while, but have concluded that the Superlight is too risky for my taste. That same RIngstind 2, however, is a good example of a model you cannot get from Hilleberg but that makes eminent sense as a robust and spacious solo tent.

[andrew_s]

Tiso are selling the Lofoten Pro 3 at £480, and the Pro 2 at £430 at present.

[Jezrant]

Tiso are selling the Lofoten Pro 3 at £480, and the Pro 2 at £430 at present.

I'd be careful about that. The fabric specs on the Tiso listing do not match Tamarack's (and Helsport's), which are heavier and stronger. The fabric specs Tiso lists for the 3 are also different than the ones they list for the 2.

[willem jongman]

Until about three years ago Helsport also had a´Light´ series that was lighter than the current pro series, but not nearly as light as the current Superlight series. Those advertised tents could be such older models, or the shop may just have used incorrect older descriptions.
Yesterday I unpacked my son´s current Lofoten 3 Camp Pro, and discovered that the central section of the middle pole was bent beyond what I think is normal. He told me they had had a bad storm on an exposed hilltop ridge on the Scottish West Coast (chosen for the magnificent view). The soil had been so loose and sandy that they had been unable to peg the guylines securely to support the poles. This was, of course, a pretty extreme situation, and the tent had not collapsed or anything. Maybe Helsport should have specified a 10 mm pole (as on the Hilleberg Black series) for the middle rather than the current 9 mm (as also on the Hilleberg Red series). But I was not there to see how bad the conditions had been precisely. It did convince me once again not to go too far down the ultralightr road.

[andrew_s]

I have considered upgrading my Akto with a spare pole from a Nammatj, which is the same length, but 10 mm rather than 9.

or the shop may just have used incorrect older descriptions.

Not unlikely, as they quote the Lofoten 2 as 3.1 kg (in the description), and the Lofoten 3 as 3.0 kg (in the specs)

[willem jongman]

The German shop Extremtextil sells DAC featherlite parts, and you can see there that the weight difference is 6 grams for a 40 cm section: https://www.extremtextil.de/dac-zeltges ... e-nsl.html By the way, it is a very interesting shop for all sorts of other hard to get components.
I was talking to a Hilleberg representative some time ago, and he said they had considered going for even lighter poles for their then new yellow label tents, but had decided against it.
Do we know which of the three poles in a typical tunnel tent with porch is stressed most? I would guess the central one, certainly if it is longer as in the Lofoten, but perhaps also in case all three are of equal length. Am I right?

[pjclinch]

Do we know which of the three poles in a typical tunnel tent with porch is stressed most? I would guess the central one, certainly if it is longer as in the Lofoten, but perhaps also in case all three are of equal length. Am I right?

Shortest answer, "no" (as in "I don't know"), Short answer, "it depends...", longer answer follows.

Middle poles are often greater curvature radius when pitched (not always, e.g. Hille Black Label tunnels) and that gives a stronger arch more resistant to deformation. On the other hand a bigger arch will catch more wind, so be subject to more force. Tunnels are typically pitched end-on to wind which will stress (I'd guess) the windward one more. Of course, winds move around and you then get hit on the side where I wouldn't want to hazard a guess whether more freedom to flex (in the middle) or less (ends) will mean less or more stress, or possibly a changeover as wind speed increases. My assumption there of more freedom to flex for the middle pole will depend on guying, which I'm guessing will usually be pulling end-poles to the end quite tightly.

Don't know about Helsports but all Hilles can be double-poled. I don't think I'd want to be out on a bike tour in conditions where I felt it was prudent to carry another set! I've been in a gale on an exposed dune crest in the Kaitum and the poles were hardly moving at all, but the tunnel fabric was moving enough to create tangible breezes inside. My geodesic Tarra (an early one with sub 9mm poles) has been completely untroubled by gale force winds, though the relatively large amount of unsupported fabric in the porches and external poles did make it quite a bit noisier than the Quasar next door.

Pete.

[philsknees]

I don't have any knowledge of Helsport tents but notice that their tunnel tents have internal pole tunnels as opposed to Hilleberg's external ones.
I'd considered the practicality of double-poling my Nallo after a couple of severe gales where the wind shifted from astern but came to the conclusion that doubling the poles & supporting them with tight guylines would probably only serve to transfer the stresses onto the fabric which might not be a good idea in view of the lighter 1200 weight fly material (as opposed to 1800 weight in the tougher Nammatj & similar models).
In conditions where things are inevitably going to break I'm sure replacing a damaged pole is preferable to the cost of repairs to the fabric & the loss of subsequent structural integrity which may result. In short, allowing single poles to flex will share the stresses more equally between the guys, poles & fabric, though at the cost of some discomfort to the occupant! I think that Hille regard their poles in this way, hence the provision of a spare section.
I've great faith in my Nallo but agree with the earlier poster that anything that may warrant double poling surely calls for a hostel or b&b. That said I might be tempted into trying it if I owned one of their heavier 1800 fabric tunnels.
I understand that Aktos have stood up to Antarctic icecap storms despite their lighter fabric.

On the subject of Hille pricing, both my Akto (sold on as I found it too small for extended use) & Nallo (my near perfect one-man cycle tour tent) were acquired new some years ago from a South Manchester dealer at substantial discount. Hille later threatened to cut off supplies if they didn't adhere to the manufacturer's pricing policy, though the trader seemed quite content with the mark up from the discounted price.
How refreshing to find a dealer/enthusiast with a real interest in giving a good deal. Of course, that business has now closed.....but the tent goes on for ever.

[horizon]

http://www.robens.de/en/Products/tents/ ... oyager-2ex

If you look on the right hand side of the page it gives wind tunnel test results:

Max 168 km/h
Avg 160 km/h

Isn't that enough?

On the other hand the Osprey, the (much) more expensive but lighter tent has the following results:

Max 160 km/h
Avg 140 km/h

Any thoughts?

[pjclinch]

http://www.robens.de/en/Products/tents/trail/voyager-2ex

If you look on the right hand side of the page it gives wind tunnel test results:

Max 168 km/h
Avg 160 km/h

Isn't that enough?

On the other hand the Osprey, the (much) more expensive but lighter tent has the following results:

Max 160 km/h
Avg 140 km/h

Any thoughts?

Much like riding your TT bike on a turbo in a wind tunnel, the Real World turns out to be a bit more complicated than that...

The main problem with very high winds isn't only a tent sitting there taking it in an optimum situation where it's been perfectly pitched, but actually getting it pitched (or struck) without damaging it. There is the point between flat on the deck and fully pitched (or vice versa) that makes everything more vulnerable to ripping and snapping, and this can be made more festive by having uneven ground and/or stony/sandy soil you can't get the pegs in to properly etc.
There's also getting in and out which will put a lot more strain on door areas (particularly the zips) than just sitting there buttoned up.

And while many (most?) tents have an optimum wind direction which is how they tend to be pitched for wind testing, and most of us pitch tail-to-wind by choice, sometimes a pitch won't let you, and/or the storn tracks over during the night and the wind direction changes substantially.

Which is not to suggest that the above tents won't take a proper blow, but in actual use they probably won't do quite as well as the above suggests.

Pete.