Cycling UK Forum

My wife and I have just done our first camping off-roader, and much as we like our Kaitum 3 for touring on the roads we wanted something a bit less bulky and heavy for the mountain bikes. Ideally I'd have liked a Hilleberg Rogen but I couldn't justify that level of spend for something that if I'm honest isn't going to see very heavy use. We would have used our Hubba Hubba, but have given that to our daughter, and while I think it's a good tent there are various things I'm not keen on to the point of not wanting another (particularly the very thin groundsheet, poor guying options, high cut of the fly, and I prefer full silicone coatings on flys and a minimum of joints in poles).

What we got was a Bach Guam 2, see https://www.basecampgear.co.uk/shelter- ... ent-p16762
Note the sale price! (we had ours from Ultralight, but as far as I can tell that's effectively the same outfit as Basecamp and we paid the same, Bach's own website says £800)

Bach don't have much UK presence but are an established brand on the continent (a very tall friend was looking at their packs back in the 90s and I've seen their kit in Bever in NL dating back to the Noughties, so they're not here today, gone tomorrow). They seem to have taken the tents over from a Dutch brand Nigor rather than start from scratch, but these designs do appear relatively recent.

Here's some "action" shots, out in the wilds around Cairn o' Mount...





We were pretty pleased at that price.
It's got loads of room (the occupant in the pics is 1.78 and had loads of headroom) with enough space in the inner to take and end and/or side each according to preference. The inner has good pockets for stuff and there's an optional gear loft, which with the height wouldn't get in the way. The porches are a decent size too, big enough for cooking in.
The groundsheet isn't as meaty as a Hilleberg one, but it feels a lot more substantial than typical American offerings and has a much greater HH value too, suggesting that's more than just feel (10K, a Hille Yellow Label is 15 IIRC). The poles are also a bit slimmer than a Hille, but not stupidly so and they appear well made.
Pegs look like the (good) one you can get from Clamcleat https://www.cleats.co.uk/cl622-alloy-y- ... -of-6.html only yellow. They give you 10, though there are 12 pegging points... 2 of those admittedly are half way along the doors so you'd not typically deploy them, but if you're going to give me 12 pegging points then on a high-ticket tent, give me 12 pegs!
The guys seem decent, but are black, so unlike the traditionally easy to trip over ones you usually get, these are incredibly easy to trip over. Daft, I'll probably replace them with 2mm Hille red and white stripy.
There are 4 vents that can be propped open with a semi-rigid bar very much like the ones MSR have. These seem to work well. The fly isn't cut to the ground, but it's closer to it than the Hubba Hubba where we had things get pretty wet in the porches in wind-blown rain. Though it was a rainy night there was no obvious condensation problem.

We tested the waterproofing c/o some overnight rain, didn't seem to be a problem.

Things I'm less keen on... it's inner first pitching, and while obviously not a deal breaker (or we wouldn't have bought it, or the Hubba Hubba) I do prefer an all-in-one with dismountable inner. While the porches are a good size the door position is at one end of a side so you have an easy access half and the other half is a bit of a cave. I'd have preferred the door coming to the ground at the porch apex rather than the corner. The way the poles are attached to the fly with velcro tabs is quite awkward at the "cave" end of the porch compared to the other. Separation between fly and inner isn't great at the ends, but it didn't make for problems and it could be with more pitching practice (particularly the corner tensioners and velcro tabs to link poles to fly) we'll sort that.

In summary, I think at the sale price we got it's a good value, well executed tent. At 800 I'd be much less tempted, not so much that it's unreasonable but I'd be happier to pay the extra for the Hille which though a little smaller and heavier is stronger and (assuming it's like all their other tents I've seen in the flesh) has their attention to detail which seems to eliminate niggles.

This is only based on one brief trip so subject to revision, but I wanted to put it out there as I don't know how long that sale price will stay...

Pete.

Looks good, not a manufacturer I'd heard of. I'm a fan of traverse sleeping, though I'd prefer a flatter roof and two doors, maybe if I was off-roading I'd be less prepared to pay the weight penalty for them. I also prefer inner pitch first tents, not for some perverse pride in being able to get the fly on before the inner is wet, but it makes them easier to pack separately and that results in a drier inner more often than pack together or clip in designs. Plus I hate flapping tents, and although it might be possible to get non flappy outer first pitches, it's more likely on an inner first.
I'm still a fan of my TN Solar 2.2, was lucky enough to get a replacement fly for it a couple of years ago, so it'll probably be the only cycle touring tent I'll ever use. I know such things come down to personal preferences, it's still a mystery to me why TN dropped it, particularly the square door design, and no one else copied it.

PH wrote: ↑14 Jul 2023, 12:34pm Looks good, not a manufacturer I'd heard of. I'm a fan of traverse sleeping, though I'd prefer a flatter roof and two doors, maybe if I was off-roading I'd be less prepared to pay the weight penalty for them.

It is two doors, a symmetrical (rotationally, not mirrored) design where there's a decently large porch each side. At 2 Kg it's not a weight-weenie choice, but we do insist on comfortable space for camping and our version of comfort does involve a bit of spreading out.

PH wrote: ↑14 Jul 2023, 12:34pmI also prefer inner pitch first tents, not for some perverse pride in being able to get the fly on before the inner is wet, but it makes them easier to pack separately and that results in a drier inner more often than pack together or clip in designs. Plus I hate flapping tents, and although it might be possible to get non flappy outer first pitches, it's more likely on an inner first.

I don't see it's easier to pack separately just because you put the inner up before the fly. There's nothing stopping you using an all-in-one the same as you would a fly-first, you just don't leave the links in place.
Whether it flaps is really a matter of how it's implemented, and an inner-first with lots of relatively unsopported fabric will be just as prone to flapping as its fly-fist or all-in-one equivalent.

I think the "put it up out of the rain" factor of an all-in-one is over-rated, to be honest, but a dismountable inner makes it a lot easier to get extra space under cover, so if you need to e.g. fiddle about with a chain out of the rain you can get the whole inner tent out of the way and do the dirty work under cover. It's also better if you have several friends over for tea.

Pete.

pjclinch wrote: ↑14 Jul 2023, 1:34pm [It is two doors, a symmetrical (rotationally, not mirrored) design where there's a decently large porch each side.

I'm not sure what that means, I may have misinterpreted the photos, I couldn't see a second door in the fly! Weight wise, I went with the 1.7kg headline, which is about half a kg less than my TN.

I don't see it's easier to pack separately just because you put the inner up before the fly. There's nothing stopping you using an all-in-one the same as you would a fly-first, you just don't leave the links in place.

You do then have to crawl around inside the erected fly detaching and reattaching the inner, usually on wet grass, no thanks.

PH wrote: ↑14 Jul 2023, 1:51pm

pjclinch wrote: ↑14 Jul 2023, 1:34pm [It is two doors, a symmetrical (rotationally, not mirrored) design where there's a decently large porch each side.

I'm not sure what that means, I may have misinterpreted the photos, I couldn't see a second door in the fly! Weight wise, I went with the 1.7kg headline, which is about half a kg less than my TN.

It's 1.7 without pegs, so not actually 1.7. Didn't weigh it (will do) but we didn't bother taking the bag so it would have been a little less than the 2 Kg full weight quoted.

See the floor plan here...


By "rotational symmetry", I mean that the doors open from the 2 o'clock/8 o'clock corners on the above diagram, rather than the 2 o'clock/4 o'clock corners, so on that diagram one door is near a sleeping bag foot and the other near a sleeping bag hood.

PH wrote: ↑14 Jul 2023, 1:51pm

I don't see it's easier to pack separately just because you put the inner up before the fly. There's nothing stopping you using an all-in-one the same as you would a fly-first, you just don't leave the links in place.

You do then have to crawl around inside the erected fly detaching and reattaching the inner, usually on wet grass, no thanks.

You could do that... but why wouldn't you do it using the inner to keep you off the wet grass? That's what it's there for!

Pete.

I'm not sure I understand that last bit. How are you going to attach/detach the inner to/from the already erected fly, while you're standing on that inner?

pjclinch wrote: ↑14 Jul 2023, 11:25am (we had ours from Ultralight, but as far as I can tell that's effectively the same outfit as Basecamp ...

That was my immediate thought on seeing the linked page. But I can't find the Bach on ULOG and some of the other categories are different. I expect they are the same company with mostly the same items, but presented with different emphasis and with some items only found on one site. FWIW.

Bmblbzzz wrote: ↑14 Jul 2023, 7:40pm

pjclinch wrote: ↑14 Jul 2023, 11:25am (we had ours from Ultralight, but as far as I can tell that's effectively the same outfit as Basecamp ...

That was my immediate thought on seeing the linked page. But I can't find the Bach on ULOG and some of the other categories are different. I expect they are the same company with mostly the same items, but presented with different emphasis and with some items only found on one site. FWIW.

We had the last one from ULOG and then it was no longer on the site, so seems they have good stock control!

Pete.

Bmblbzzz wrote: ↑14 Jul 2023, 7:31pm I'm not sure I understand that last bit. How are you going to attach/detach the inner to/from the already erected fly, while you're standing on that inner?

To unhitch... sit inside inner by door and unzip it. Reach up and unhook over the door, work around taking any hooks out until they're all done. Use the open inner door to let you collapse the inner around you while still sat on the groundsheet.

To hitch... lay inner roughly in place with the door at the fly door. Unzip inner door to reveal groundsheet, sit on groundsheet. Work around hitching inner to fly/poles starting away from the door(s) and working towards it.

Pete.

pjclinch wrote: ↑14 Jul 2023, 8:45pm

Bmblbzzz wrote: ↑14 Jul 2023, 7:31pm I'm not sure I understand that last bit. How are you going to attach/detach the inner to/from the already erected fly, while you're standing on that inner?

To unhitch... sit inside inner by door and unzip it. Reach up and unhook over the door, work around taking any hooks out until they're all done. Use the open inner door to let you collapse the inner around you while still sat on the groundsheet.

To hitch... lay inner roughly in place with the door at the fly door. Unzip inner door to reveal groundsheet, sit on groundsheet. Work around hitching inner to fly/poles starting away from the door(s) and working towards it.

Pete.

Yeah... I think it depends on where the hitching points are relative to the door(s) and how long your arms are. For myself, I can see it leading to a big mess and the danger of catching the inner (particularly if mesh) on something (buttons, watch straps, whatever). I tend to just leave the inner connected to the fly.

I don't think I've ever had a tent that needed to be pitched inner-first but if I did, I expect I would find that easier than disconnecting from the inside. Having said that, I do know someone with a Trekkertent Stealth and he says it's the easiest tent to pack up, partly because he just sits inside it, packs up his gear, then takes the inner down, all the while under the fly, before just removing the poles, rolling up the fly and off he goes.

Bmblbzzz wrote: ↑14 Jul 2023, 9:00pm
Yeah... I think it depends on where the hitching points are relative to the door(s) and how long your arms are. For myself, I can see it leading to a big mess and the danger of catching the inner (particularly if mesh) on something (buttons, watch straps, whatever). I tend to just leave the inner connected to the fly.

So do I, but it is worth considering if you want to pack the two bits separately, which especially if you have a bikepacking setup with half a dozen different wee bags and no rack may be quite a consideration.

Bmblbzzz wrote: ↑14 Jul 2023, 9:00pmI don't think I've ever had a tent that needed to be pitched inner-first but if I did, I expect I would find that easier than disconnecting from the inside. Having said that, I do know someone with a Trekkertent Stealth and he says it's the easiest tent to pack up, partly because he just sits inside it, packs up his gear, then takes the inner down, all the while under the fly, before just removing the poles, rolling up the fly and off he goes.

Not dissimilar from my Spacepacker, which is fly-first rather than all-in-one. There are only two hanging points, each above a door, and it's trivial and quick.

But as our successful recent trip with an inner-first pitch tent shows, it's certainly a workable system even if it's not my personal preference.

Pete.

Bmblbzzz wrote: ↑14 Jul 2023, 7:40pm

pjclinch wrote: ↑14 Jul 2023, 11:25am (we had ours from Ultralight, but as far as I can tell that's effectively the same outfit as Basecamp ...

That was my immediate thought on seeing the linked page. But I can't find the Bach on ULOG and some of the other categories are different. I expect they are the same company with mostly the same items, but presented with different emphasis and with some items only found on one site. FWIW.

On the Basecamp site (in "About us")...

BasecampGear' is a subsidiary venture to Ultralight Outdoor Gear.
We 'created' BasecampGear more than ten years after we created Ultralight Outdoor Gear, we did it because we kept seeing great kit that wasn't 'ultralight', especially camping gear that was built for comfort rather than light weight