Gordon Meiklejohn
Summit Camper
Me too
Tarptent Dipole 1 DW
- Thread starter el manana
- Start date
Alfie
Trail Blazer
And me, I have the original drop xmid 1p.
BogTrotter
Section Hiker
My immediate dislike of this tent. The inner door arrangement doesn’t provide the versatility it could do. There’s no way to pitch the inner to suit how you want to lie and orientate the door you want to use in the direction you want to. A simple change on the inner would improve this immensely.
That alone prevents me from buying one.
Ditto... trying to decide between Dipole and a few other options!!
As you are well aware, we had this "discussion" in a direct email chain you sent me and I will reiterate here that your assessment is incorrect. You complained that the Dipole 1 DW was not designed for right handers and it most certainly is. Furthermore you can most certainly sleep with your head at either end and have full access to the adjacent door.
BogTrotter
Section Hiker
It was ‘head up’ I required, not forced into sleeping with my legs higher than my head to fit the layout of a tent.
The opposing doors on the inner of the Dipole1 DW makes it impossible for the user to decide which side ‘up’ the opening can be placed. There’s no choice, you just get what’s given. That’s despite the slope of the land or direction of wind or preference for view. Simply no choice for the user.
So whilst juggling with avoiding the pole placement - there always is only a left hand opening when sat. I’ve discovered too, that where no pole exists as an obstruction, as in the Rainbow Lithium with an unobtrusive cross pole the problem still persists. Only left side access when sat.
As a ‘right hander’ why would I want to restrict my right hand with no access to the vestibule? And why if I preferred, why would I be restricted the choice of placing the vestibule door access wherever I - as a user - decided I wanted to place it?
I enquired with you about the possibility of a ‘T’ zip which you are unprepared to supply, yet mirroring one panel in the inner, which you already have templated and would provide a user the necessary options, you are unwilling to consider.
The post I quoted here by @Jamess made a specific point about the opposing doors, and I agree entirely. Fortunately, from experience of using such restrictive entrances, and finding them obstructive, I wouldn’t buy into such a layout again.
The Dipole 1 DW is an attractive proposition for a lightweight tent, but not for me unless the inner tent problem was addressed and the layout was changed.
Last edited:
I too had a similar email conversation with @hshires about the design of the inner.
The scarp inner has both entrances at the same end which I too feel would be a better design giving the user choice about how they wish to orientate the exits. However, the notch inner follows a similar pattern and there's a lot of notch fans on this forum.
A couple of use cases to consider...
On a rough night in an exposed pitch I would pitch foot to wind so that the wind is hitting the narrow end of the shelter but my head is out of the draughts.
As currently configured with the inner, to exit the shelter, either have to pull my legs right up to exit at the head end, or if I exit at the leg end, I have to open the upwind door, so the downwind door is going to catch the wind as I exit.
As currently configured, as a left hander, short of hunching down into one half of the inner, there's no way I can lie on my right hand side, leaving my left hand free to pop a brew on on a cold morning.
I'd be interested to hear from others who prefer the configuration of the entrances as they are so I can understand the merits of the current design.
As it is, I too feel as the design a would be better if the doors on the inner were at the same end.
The scarp inner has both entrances at the same end which I too feel would be a better design giving the user choice about how they wish to orientate the exits. However, the notch inner follows a similar pattern and there's a lot of notch fans on this forum.
A couple of use cases to consider...
On a rough night in an exposed pitch I would pitch foot to wind so that the wind is hitting the narrow end of the shelter but my head is out of the draughts.
As currently configured with the inner, to exit the shelter, either have to pull my legs right up to exit at the head end, or if I exit at the leg end, I have to open the upwind door, so the downwind door is going to catch the wind as I exit.
As currently configured, as a left hander, short of hunching down into one half of the inner, there's no way I can lie on my right hand side, leaving my left hand free to pop a brew on on a cold morning.
I'd be interested to hear from others who prefer the configuration of the entrances as they are so I can understand the merits of the current design.
As it is, I too feel as the design a would be better if the doors on the inner were at the same end.
Mole
Thru Hiker
I remember talking about this years ago (wrt the Notch and Moment).
I think there's maybe one major reason to the current arrangement.
i.e. It's significantly cheaper to produce as both sides use the same pattern. Cutting and construction for each side is the same. No need for 2 patterns and cutting procedures, and more straightforward to construct, as a side panel is the same for both sides.
I'd definitely prefer T zips both sides of the inner. I do find it constraining and a little claustrophobic not being able to reach into the inner on my right whilst lying down. And It would be nice to be able to open up a whole side of the shelter on good weather.
J zips suck, even on a mid like a Solomid or Lunar Solo. Just quite limiting, preventing the option to open up all the inner, or choose an end depending on wind direction.
But I'd still rather that design than the "Rainbow" zips that some use, which are even more limiting apart from when fully open and dropping the door into the dirt.
BogTrotter
Section Hiker
Am I missing something? Both side panels are identical using double sided zips. Why could the panel not be stitched in the ‘wrong way around’ to provide a solution? Even though a ‘T’ zip would be the preferred option.
Skogstoken
Summit Camper
Interesting points about the orientation. I probably wouldnt have thought about it but now I do =). I too, prefer, a T-zip generally but maybe its the most expensive solution to produce (and heaviest too maybe?). Interesting discussion nonetheless.
Mole
Thru Hiker
Every step and material of the construction would be the opposite way round, so it's a whole new stage in the building process.
I don't see what's so hard to understand about that. It will make the shelter cost more.
Tarptents are competitively priced and good value for what they are and the quality of materials used.
I accept why it is done (other companies do the same with many of their 2 sided models). And how it is is optimised for a right handed user as best as it can be. i.e. If lying on your left side, you can use your right hand to attend to things in the porch. If sitting in a doorway then a covered porch is to your right. It's only when you are sitting facing your feet inside or lying on your back , that you cannot access the porch area to your immediate side on the right. It's no deal-breaker, though in a small tent (with solid inner especially) it can be irritating.
BogTrotter
Section Hiker
The side panels are identical sizes. Switching the short ends would only mean the finished seam on the zip would be the wrong way around. Nothing more.
Just smiling to myself at my own illogicality above. If I'm foot to wind I'll need to fold myself in half to exit the shelter at the downwind end irrespective of the door configuration.
I'd still suggest for flexibility:
- t-zip best if heavy.
- entrances both sides at the same end of the inner, 2nd best.
- doors at opposite ends as current Dipole/ Notch config - least flexible... but cheapest to manufacture.
I'd still suggest for flexibility:
- t-zip best if heavy.
- entrances both sides at the same end of the inner, 2nd best.
- doors at opposite ends as current Dipole/ Notch config - least flexible... but cheapest to manufacture.
Last edited:
Re: door orientation and zippers etc., everything is a tradeoff. T-zips are heavier, fail faster, and can't fully close at the junction. Yes, on even slopes and when windblown rain isn't a concern then having both sides open at the same end is nice. However, that also means that you have to stop and think about which way to orient the tent in the wind so as to keep wind-blown rain from directly entering on either/both sides when you exit. It also means that you have to stop and consider the ground slope so that your head is (for most people) on the uphill side and hopefully that isn't into the wind because now you're screwed when getting in and out in a windy rain.
Last edited:
BogTrotter
Section Hiker
Having the doors open at the same end isn’t the objective. If that’s a consequence of a design change, then it’s an added benefit.
The objective is get the tent pitched, sleeping head up, with easy access to the vestibule and out of the wind.
Yeah, you need to think about it, and set it up in the way which suits the conditions best, but if you restrict the options as in the current setup the objective will never be achieved.
Yes and that's exactly what the Dipole 1 DW does without thinking about it.
BogTrotter
Section Hiker
But it doesn’t.
Says the guy who neither designed it nor has ever used it. As the person who has done both let's just say I hold a different opinion.
And those are exactly the factors that I do consider when pitching a shelter.
I can understand that the Dipole was designed to work well for users with little experience of pitching a tent.
I get that this is about market share Vs the X-mid, and that customers deciding which one to go for will read this forum, and in that context any criticism from customers is seen as negative. The X-mid (good shelter) didn't work for me and for me the Dipole is the better design for the conditions I expect to use the shelter in. For my use, the inner on the X-mid also has the same issues, albeit the offset poles reduce that a little, but the usable porch and inner space on the Dipole is better in a smaller footprint (no doubt @hshires objective and imho he's succeeded.)
Having said the above, for those of us with the experience, who know how to orientate a shelter to get a better night's sleep, is it a bad thing to have potential customers who might be prepared to pay a little more for the option of getting an inner that can be used a little more flexibly?
BogTrotter
Section Hiker
Apparently not. Since that’s why I enquired as a customer about changing the inner to something more suitable.
However unsuitable it might be, don’t ask, there won’t be any improvement coming.
The Dipole is the perfect shelter for pitching on platforms where it’s more suited and not challenged by any incline.
Last edited:
el manana
Thru Hiker
See this post
Dipole handled the incline as well as any tent I've owned, worst pitch I've had for a few years.
That said, it's probably as good as any other twin pole mid in that respect.
On the plus side, the symmetry is an aid to the person pitching the shelter. Get the pegging points right and it gets it's better structural rigidity. Get them 'off' and it's no better than another twin pole mid.
Robert P
Thru Hiker
I'm left handed and personally have found the arrangement of the inner doors works well for me in the Notch, StratoSpire and Dipole.
In theory it is probably a bit better for those who are right handed, but I find I can roll on one side and prop myself up on my left elbow and still be able to use both my left hand (a little more restricted) and right hand to operate my stove in the vestibule to my left. If I need to use my left hand more freely I just sit up temporarily.
I pitch to have the head end slightly elevated, enter at the head end having the door positioned on the lee side / end of the tent.
If the inner doors were both at one end then you'd need to remember which end of the tent had the entrances, to pitch the tent where you want it relative to the wind, etc. I guess another advantage of the current configuration is that it provides the maximum protection against a 180 degree change in wind direction, with entrances at opposite corners of the tent?
There are lots of trade offs, and it is always difficult to please everyone all of the time (especially where ergonomics are concerned, as we all find different arrangements more natural).
Robert P
Thru Hiker
Yes, I'd been looking at the Dipole for a while and following the positive reviews; but not sure if I could justify another tent. But I've spent around 60 nights camping in each of the last couple of years so I'm getting good use of my tents...
I was tempted because the Dipole 1 DW offers StratoSpire-level strength in wind with greater headroom at the ends of the inner due to the strut arrangement. After Henry Shires answered a couple of queries I was convinced it was time to get the tent.
I'm a big fan of twin trekking pole tents with struts and/or offset poles to increase liveable space. It was really the Notch (back in 2015) that was the game changer for me - finally a light tent that was a pleasant space to spend time; not all lightweight tents needed to be cramped, with the inner draped over my face...
I think we are very fortunate at the moment to have such a choice of outstanding tents of this type.
BogTrotter
Section Hiker
@el manana
“Dipole handled the incline as well as any tent I've owned, worst pitch I've had for a few years.”
It does, Head up left hand door.
It doesn’t, Head up right hand door.
Although circumstances forced your hand the view of the wall wouldn’t have been the pitch of choice.
“Dipole handled the incline as well as any tent I've owned, worst pitch I've had for a few years.”
It does, Head up left hand door.
It doesn’t, Head up right hand door.
Although circumstances forced your hand the view of the wall wouldn’t have been the pitch of choice.
Last edited: