Gear

how very dare you !!!!

Just been looking at the Lightwave site, and while it costs more I'd sooner have a G2 Ultra than a Voyager.  Not much in it for weight, but the Lightwave has a bigger inner and a bigger porch with the same general pole layout.  If you don't have the extra cash then that's that, but if you do you'll be glad you sepnt it every time you're inside.

Only thing that spoied things for me when I looked at a Lightwave was it pitched inner first rather than all as one, but if you're otherwise choosing between a Tadpole and a Voyager I guess that's a bit of a moot point!

Pete. 

Peter Clinch wrote (see)

A Spacepacker Plus has more usable space IME than the likes of a Voyager.  While the inner slopes in more to give less lateral space, the floor plan is bigger for sleeping and having stuff about the place, and you have two porches rather than one, and either one is bigger than the single one on a voyager and each has 2 separate entrances.  In nice weather you can roll back all 4 doors for excellentthrough venting, impossible with a Voyager. 

If you compare any geodesic with a hoop tent it's hardly surprising which comes out better on the criteria you've chosen.  I bought a new tent this year, the Spacepacker was on my shortlist, the comparable tent from TN was the Solar 2.2 and from Hilleberg the Allak.  I'd have been happy with any of the three, though I chose the TN as the best compromise on weight, living space and price.

Interesting

I have owned TN, Hilleberg and Saunders, I guess we all make our choices for different reasons. But I have to say that bottom of my list for weight living space and price would be Terra Nova.

Top of my list (the same three key areas) would be Saunders.

And top of my list if price is taken out of the equation would be Hilleberg. With space and weight at the top of the list geodesic would not be the favourite for me either. I have owned a TN Quasar and a Hilleberg Nallo - the Nallo is half the weight and has SOooo much more space.

Anyway, the long and the short of it is - I now have a real hankering to buy another Saunders - probably the Satellite plus, for two man use. For solo use I would stand by the Akto and say that really is a special little design.

For whatever reason, my choices would not go in the direction of TN on most occasions. However if faced with  a Tadpole or a Voyager I have to say that Voyager would be the cookie for me.

Cheers FB, as they say, horses for courses. Not that im calling you a horse mind... well actually your avatar is more like a dog... oh .. not calling you a dog either...

lol

nice comments man

for your inteest, there are a couple of saunders singlehooped tents on the auction site right now. might interest you

Glenn

Thanks Glenn

After making that post I did scan ebay and saw that.

However the Satellite plus (I still have a very old one) has a single pole arch and two stabalising upright poles - one either end. My old one lasted around 20 years before giving up the ghost.

Regarding waht I said just now it didnt look that encouraging, it wasnt meant to be rude toward TN - just not my choice.

chill my friend!!! I was just making light banter. I hope was was not the one offending you.

Always nice toread othes opinions re gear. No one is right, and at the same time we all are. Forums are for passing comment, not being judgmental, and noone here hsa been... Right??!!!

Hello.

I have both (smug git aint I!) admittedly the voyagers a 2000 model but it still rocks. I too got a tadpole cheap it was the mesh un. I bought the tadpole cause it was half a kilo lighter than me old voyager but this has changed and the voyagers alittle lighter. For some reason the tadpole is stiffer in the wind(oo er misses) and can really take a pounding where me ol voyager used to bounce around alot.

Even though they look the same they dont flex the same. The floor on the voyager is far better than the tadpole. the porch is bigger on the tadpole but only opens one side.

So to conclude.

 I bet that was no use at all!

sorry if ive missed any letters when spelling, i spilt pot noodle on my keyboard yesterday.

wohoo!! lucky you!! I too am trying to negotiate to get both cheap, but the tadpole has a nylon inner (better for uk conditions) and am looking at a 2007 voyager.

Ill want both so I can take wife and 2 boys on a wild camping weekend. Ive been shaving the grammes off every thing recently, so I want to show wife how we can be comfy without having to carry the house up hill and down dale. Will even get the dog his own pack, and folding bowls.

There is definitely a place for the 3 bedroomed all singing all dancing tent on a site with all mod cons. Then we even get to take the kitchen... well bowl, not sink.

But wild is so much more of a rush... a real adventure!!!

Fossil Bluff wrote (see)

Interesting

I have owned TN, Hilleberg and Saunders, I guess we all make our choices for different reasons. But I have to say that bottom of my list for weight living space and price would be Terra Nova.

Top of my list (the same three key areas) would be Saunders.

The Saunders model being suggested is the Spacepacker Plus, weight 2.2kg, best price I could find £285.  The TN Solar 2.2 is slightly lighter at 2.1kg and available for £255 from cheaptents or £238 direct from TN if you have any old tent to trade in.

Space is more subjective, having been in both I found the steep end walls of the Solar offered far more usable space than the slope of the Spacepacker and the shape of the porches made them seem bigger.

They are personal choices, my point was that comparing geodesic with non geodesic makes no sense, they're designed to fulfill different needs.

Paul H 68 wrote (see)

They are personal choices, my point was that comparing geodesic with non geodesic makes no sense, they're designed to fulfill different needs.

So you look at the needs of the person and see what will do it.  And if a non-geo will do it (in this case I think it will), then why carry extra the extra weight?   If the non-geo will do the job it makes perfect sense to compare the two, because you'll see what you get as an alternative.

Pete. 

Having sailed around this buoy several times myself with tent purchases I would tend to agree with Pete. We could enter the debate of Geo v Tunnel again and again....

and still not get anywhere

Edited to add: They arent designed to fulfil diferent needs really.... Not for most folk in the UK - you can make like for like comparison on most occassions I am sure. Surely the primary need is that you want a shelter?

i was actually asking about tadpole v voyager. however, i did ask for your opinions, and i do value them, really do. but also, i take them in context of my original enquiry.

 i do not believe single poles to be as strong as semi geo, so would happily have the weight penalty to achieve what i think is a happy medium........

btw. just got a brand new tadpole with all nylon inner for 110 ob fleabay... woohoo!! now looking for... either a voyager or a... single hoop 1 man... akto perhaps.G

Glen, on the one hand, if all else is equal, a geo will be stronger than a single hoop.  But all else is not always equal, and a Voyager has 8.5 mm poles and a Spacepacker has 10 mm poles, and broken poles are often what knocks a tent down.  You also need to look at the fabrics of the main tent, and with a PU coated fly inner a Voyager probably has lower tear strength than a Spacepacker too... But beyond that what is important is not which is stronger, but is a particular example strong enough: as long as whatever you get will stand up to what you're camping in, whether something else is stronger is a moot point.

Pete.

Like Ray's Voyager, my Spacepacker has done the weeble thing (it wobbles, but it won't fall down) in gales.  What that demonstrates is that neither is an unassailable fortress but OTOH both will take a lot of punishment and see you through most things.  Which is more relevant IMHO than "what is the pole configuration?"

Pete.