 After selling my Microlight over ten years ago Im thinking about getting another one but Im unsure about the actual weight as every website seems to have differing weights between 1.5 and 2.00 kg does anyone have one or can tell me the weight of a newish version Cheers
|
 |
 Mine's about 2 years old and I just weighed it at 1753 grams. Not sure if it's changed in the last 2 years. Hope that helps. Edited to add, that includes pegs, guy lines, stuff sack (and the separate little bags for pegs and pole) - everything that came with the tent.
|
| Edited: 13/06/09 15:20 |
Thanks Craig, Im seriously thinking of getting a new one as I always remembered feeling safe and secure in a storm in that tent, unlike my Laser Comp now gone to a new home via Ebay.
|
|
 Mine's older - 10 years?? and comes in at 1953 grams. As above - that's everything.
|
|
Is that a solo tent? If so, that is a huge weight for the size. I have also heard of serious condensation problems in that shelter. Is that the case?
|
|
Dave, are you trolling by any chance? I wouldn't say it's a "huge weight for the size". It's pretty spacious for 1 person and you could fit 2 in it if you really had to; OK then, 2 fairly small people. Something you'd have no chance of doing in a more modern ultra-light tent like a Laser Comp. It's also very strong - how often have you heard of a Macpac tent getting destryed by wind. Sure there are lighter tents available, especially those designed more recently that use more modern light-weight materials, but there's always a trade-off between high strength, light weight, low price, good durability, etc. There's no tent that offers all of those attributes. Macpac's reputation is for sturdy, reliable, long lasting gear - not necessarily the lightest or most technologically advanced on the market. Horses for courses. As for condensation,what are you comparing it to? All tents produce condensation in the right conditions and with the right people inside. I find if I pitch the thing properly then condensation is usually minimal to non-existant. It depends how you use it.
|
| Edited: 13/06/09 17:29 |
Trolling? Not at all. Trail magazine indicated that it was short on room, had ventilation issues, and was heavy in comparison to other solo (comparable) shelters. I just wanted owners perspectives.
The Hubba or Hubba HP has more room, is better ventilated, just as sturdy and rainproof, and is considerably lighter. So is the Big Agnes SL1. I won't even mention the Scarp.
Just curious, that is all.
|
|
 Trail magazine? I thought you were being serious for a moment Dave. 
|
|
Ha!
Mike - I like reading about what you can get across the pond. Maybe it is my Scottish heritage? Nah.
|
|
Ure is definately a Scots surname Dave. I stopped buying Trail a while ago. It is part of a larger group of magazines, (i can't remember the parent companies name) and the journalists who write for it tend to rotate between the different publications. I don't think they have to be 'outdoors folk' to write for the magazine. Some of their reviews have been downright silly, if not dangerous.
One review sticks in my mind. It was a review of winter sleeping bags. One bag was recommended to the 'ultralight' crowd because of its light weight, even though it had been independently tested to be a bag that wasn't suitable for below 0C! Travel light and freeze, yeah!
|
| Edited: 13/06/09 18:14 |
We have a couple of those types of mags over here as well. Outside Magazine is one of them.
Actually PTC did the reviews on the shelters (a poster here as well; and has his own blog) - I like his reviews.
I do find that (and I am guilty of it) latching on to certain ways of doing things or in this case, a type of tent. My point was simply that there are alternative shelters now that do more for less. I should have simply said that at the beginning - I seem to be having some trouble lately with that!
|
|
Totally agree Dave. Loads of choice these days. The Microlight is a popular tent though. I couldn't comment on it as i've never used one. Too heavy for my liking.
|
|
 Their last solo tent review came out around Feb. I didn't buy it, but got the article as it was done by ptc*, who posts a bit here and has his blog, and is defintely someone who gets out and actually uses the test kit. The Macpac came middling out of the 15 tents tested, but actually got a pretty favourable review - strong, reliable, stable, easy-pitching, will weather a storm etc. - with only weight and internal height (not space) mentioned as the drawbacks/trade-offs. Condensation was never mentioned.
|
|
Thanks for that Matt. I didn't realise ptc* was doing reveiws for Trail these days. The last time i looked, he was just doing a small 'lightweight' column. I would take his reviews more seriously. As you said, he gets out there in all conditions.
|
|
ptc* just reviewed (on his blog) the Big Agnes Copper Spur 1 and it was favorable. So there is another option for the OP.
|
|
 I've just read ptc*'s review of the Copperspur as it is about the only currently available tent that interests me and yes the review was favourable. One thing to consider when talking about weight is pegs, what type and how many. Given the number of people who swap out the supplied pegs for something else it might be an idea if reviews gave the weight of Fly/Inner/Poles only or at least the weight of the supplied pegs and how many there are, I know they do trail weight but that still includes pegs, usually only including the minimum amount required to get the tent to stay upright. For example if a tent needs 12 pegs and comes with 2g skewers = 26.4g, change them for Camcleat Y's and you'd be up to 192g, even Hampton Works Toughened Alloy V's come in at 10g each, Blacks alloy skewers at 15g each, Vargo Nails 12g, and my favourite light pegs TN 5.5g (Voyager Type) skewers.. Then there's the groundsheet, will it need a footprint after a few outings or from the start to protect the groundsheet or will it be tough enough to use long term without a footprint? even a light footprint could be 150g+ It might not seem much but if you're looking at a 200g difference between 2 tents based on the specsheet then it is important.
|
|
 I had a MP Microlight and used it well for many cycle-touring years - great tent; might be considered 'heavy;' these days...but stood up to some very serious Alpine weather. Condensation - similar to all tents - these 'condensation free' dreamers are fooling themselves I used a BA Copper Spur 3 for three weeks last summer and thought it a great tent; huge, entrances a little low, ...no condensation
|
|
Just been checking out the BA Copper Spur seems like a good alternative to the usual Laser/Akto/Scarp designs, , MSR Hubba HP looks good also but less space than the Copper Spur.
|
|
I really like the bit in PTCs review 'As you can see above, the pole attaches to the inner and makes for a self supporting structure that you can pick up place wherever looks the best. I’ve really grown to like this idea as it’s simple to work with, in fact it’s almost impossible to pitch this kind of tent badly.' After 2 years of high level faffing with a Laser comp this sounds fantastic!
|
|
But all self-supporters are like that ... ...and a classy tent (like for example a Hilly Unna ) pitches in 2 minutes and is way better than anything else ever invented on the whole planet now or in the future... I have no interest in that genre BTW 
|
|
