solar minor versus hilleberg akto

Scott wrote:
> Hi, I've owned a solar minor for about six months now, and ever since I
> brought it I have been wondering why the hilleberg akto is considered to be
> a better tent. I ahev never seen an akto up close so I'm not very familiar
> with the construction.

My personal preferences based on paper specifications are that the Akto
pitches in one rather than inner first (why anyone ever thought inner
first pitching is better continues to mystify me, and Terra Nova finally
seem to have abandoned that line themselves) and appears to have a
rather better class of porch for gear storage and cooking.

> one of the main differences that I'm interested in is why the akto is
> considered to be better in strong winds?

I would guess people sat inside them find they get blown about a bit less!

However, this is not to say that the SM is in any way a bad tent.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

"Scott" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hi, I've owned a solar minor for about six months now, and ever
since I
> brought it I have been wondering why the hilleberg akto is
considered to be
> a better tent. I ahev never seen an akto up close so I'm not very
familiar
> with the construction.

It took me six months to put the damn thing up! The Akto is fairly
easy in comparison. Neither are as easy as my Phreerunner which is the
easiest tent in the world to put up but isn't made any more. Shame.
>
> one of the main differences that I'm interested in is why the akto
is
> considered to be better in strong winds?
>
Who says it's better? I wouldn't have thought it was as streamlined.

Graham

>Hi, I've owned a solar minor for about six months now, and ever since I
>brought it I have been wondering why the hilleberg akto is considered to be
>a better tent. I ahev never seen an akto up close so I'm not very familiar
>with the construction.
>
>one of the main differences that I'm interested in is why the akto is
>considered to be better in strong winds?


I would have thought the question would be to compare the Akto to the
Laser/lite.

I bought an Akto over the Solar minor because whenever I saw them
(Solar m) pitched they looked unstable (yes it could have been the
people who pitched them, but it was on a number of occassions)
especialy in wind, and the Aktos usually looked very strong and
streamlined. Akto seems less fidely.

If the Laserlite had been out then it might have been a diffrent
purchase. although a freind of mine just bought an Akto over a
Laserlite, I have a feeling it was due to nhim not wanting to be an
early adopter / gear tester

Scott wrote:

> one of the main differences that I'm interested in is why the akto is
> considered to be better in strong winds?

From memory, it's because the Akto is lower to the ground and more
streamlined, isn't it? The pole goes across the tent in a different
way. The Solar Minor is probably fine if the wind is blowing end on,
but side on it would act more like a sail. The Akto is better in both
directions, more streamlined end on, lower and with good pole support
side on.

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk

Carl wrote:

> I would have thought the question would be to compare the Akto to the
> Laser/lite.

Indeed.

> If the Laserlite had been out then it might have been a diffrent
> purchase. although a freind of mine just bought an Akto over a
> Laserlite, I have a feeling it was due to nhim not wanting to be an
> early adopter / gear tester

Well I've decided to take that risk (Laser), but I'm wary of excessive
wind. I gather the Akto is better in strong winds but I have no
experience of either. Perhaps stronger construction in the Akto than
the Laser? More guying points?

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk

"Peter Clinch" <[email protected]> wrote

> My personal preferences based on paper specifications are that the Akto
> pitches in one rather than inner first (why anyone ever thought inner
> first pitching is better continues to mystify me, and Terra Nova finally
> seem to have abandoned that line themselves)

From the tents I've used it seems to me the one advantage of outer first
pitching, ie keeping the inner tent dry when it's tipping down, is of use
only rarely because with a quick pitching inner first tent it'll stay dry
enough to not be a problem even in moderate rain. The advantages of inner
first pitching on the other hand are apparent every time you use the tent.
The advantages of inner first pitching for me are being easier to put up
because you don't have to crawl under the flysheet and mess with fiddly
attachments and producing a more pleasant living environment because the
inner is held taut by the poles and doesn't sag all over the place. That's
just my particular likes from the particular tents I've used but you did say
you were mystified. Generally I'm pretty sceptical about "all in one"
pitching. I had use of one that you could do that with but figured
separating the inner and outer was less hassle and better to pack that way.
Do people find that the best way with Aktos or do they take them apart?

On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 21:58:48 -0000, "AndyP"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>I had use of one that you could do that with but figured
>separating the inner and outer was less hassle and better to pack that way.
>Do people find that the best way with Aktos or do they take them apart?

I'd never even considered taking my Akto apart until people started
suggesting it here .... and even then I could see no need to.

It's easy to pitch all-in-one, so that's what I do. If I repitch the
tent after taking it down wet then, yes, I do find that the inside of
the groundsheet is wet. This is mildly unpleasant for a short time
but this only really happens when the rain is persistent. In which
case, I'm glad to be inside the tent anyway and am probably pretty
damp myself.

Judith

On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 21:58:48 -0000, "AndyP"
<[email protected]> wrote:

[...]
>Generally I'm pretty sceptical about "all in one"
>pitching. I had use of one that you could do that with but figured
>separating the inner and outer was less hassle and better to pack that way.
>Do people find that the best way with Aktos or do they take them apart?

I don't take mine apart, although I did almost manage it in the garden
recently, just to see how easy it was. I like the convenience of
chucking it all up together, but I'd like to be able to pack the inner
and outer separately if the conditions were particularly wet.

I also prefer the more rigid design that comes from an inner first
tent, like my Terra Nova Voyager, and if I was in the car, or walking
with someone else, I'd probably take that one instead. It's a really
lovely tent


Best wishes,
--
,,
(**)PeeWiglet~~
/ \ / \

the pole on the solar minor is thinner than any I have seen before. is the
one on the akto of a similar size?.

Scott

"Scott" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hi, I've owned a solar minor for about six months now, and ever since I
> brought it I have been wondering why the hilleberg akto is considered to
> be a better tent. I ahev never seen an akto up close so I'm not very
> familiar with the construction.
>
> one of the main differences that I'm interested in is why the akto is
> considered to be better in strong winds?
>
> thanks
>
> Scott
>

when I used it in a strong wind I actually put it up side on to the wind to
stop it blowing in to the tent when I cooked. it did ok, the back did blow
in quite a bit but there was a guide line were it was most effected. the
inner is what caused a bit of a problem as it is quite loose, from the tent
being single poled and it billowed in at the larger end more than I would
have expected. there might also be a problem if the wind blows onto the
lower end in the rain, as there is only a few inch's between the outer and
inner.

when I first brought it I did miss the large porch that I could cook in, my
old tent, and wondered how the akto could have such a large porch and be the
same weight. but thinking about it now the one end being larger and higher
in the solar does make it possible to sit up inside more comfortably. and
there is room to cook and store my rucksack.

The vent that makes up half of the door needs a way of being closed, but
does add a feeling of space when the door is closed. which I think they can
be on the akto. that's about it for what I have noticed when using it so
far.

Scott

"Paul Saunders" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Scott wrote:
>
>> one of the main differences that I'm interested in is why the akto is
>> considered to be better in strong winds?
>
> From memory, it's because the Akto is lower to the ground and more
> streamlined, isn't it? The pole goes across the tent in a different
> way. The Solar Minor is probably fine if the wind is blowing end on,
> but side on it would act more like a sail. The Akto is better in both
> directions, more streamlined end on, lower and with good pole support
> side on.
>
> Paul
> --
> http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
> http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk
>
>

Scott wrote:

> there might also be a
> problem if the wind blows onto the lower end in the rain, as there is
> only a few inch's between the outer and inner.

The Laser has the same problem.

> when I first brought it I did miss the large porch that I could cook
> in, my old tent, and wondered how the akto could have such a large
> porch and be the same weight. but thinking about it now the one end
> being larger and higher in the solar does make it possible to sit up
> inside more comfortably. and there is room to cook and store my
> rucksack.

I sat in an Akto once and found the headroom too low for my liking. The
Laser is a little higher, which influenced my purchase. Not by much,
but enough.

> The vent that makes up half of the door needs a way of being closed,
> but does add a feeling of space when the door is closed. which I
> think they can be on the akto. that's about it for what I have
> noticed when using it so far.

Don't know about the Akto, but my Nallo has a double door, one is a
vent/midge net, the other proper inner tent material, so I have a
choice, which is nice, but that undoubtedly adds to the weight a little.

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk

AndyP wrote:

> From the tents I've used it seems to me the one advantage of outer first
> pitching, ie keeping the inner tent dry when it's tipping down, is of use
> only rarely because with a quick pitching inner first tent it'll stay dry
> enough to not be a problem even in moderate rain.
That's one. Another is being able to take down the inner and get twice
as many muddy people inside for a chinwag without your gear getting
filthy. Another is the option of leaving the inner behind and using the
outer alone as a ground hugging tarp with its own poles and guys.
Another is taking the tent down and packing all your gear in the dry
over as long as you want if it's raining when you want to strike.

> The advantages of inner
> first pitching on the other hand are apparent every time you use the tent.
> The advantages of inner first pitching for me are being easier to put up
> because you don't have to crawl under the flysheet and mess with fiddly
> attachments and producing a more pleasant living environment because the
> inner is held taut by the poles and doesn't sag all over the place.

This rather misses the point that the Akto is a fly and inner pitch
/together/ tent though, so the above "problems" are moot in any case.
My Tarra pitches both together and I spend zero time clipping up the
inner and the inner is nice and taught. So once again, how would it be
better if it pitched inner first?
My Snowcat has to have the inner clipped up separately, but I don't go
"crawling under the flysheet", I just sit inside the spacious flysheet
once it's been pitched and clip some clips. And since the clips are
along the pole sleeves the inner is held taught and doesn't sag all over
the place.

> you were mystified. Generally I'm pretty sceptical about "all in one"
> pitching. I had use of one that you could do that with but figured
> separating the inner and outer was less hassle and better to pack that way.

Works very nicely on the Tarra, which is much quicker and easier to
pitch than a Quasar btw. Especially on those occasions where people are
trying to thread the poles while the flysheet's piled on top of
everything so it stays out of the rain, but even without that the
external poles and clip system are much easier to use than the sleeve
system used on most inner pitch tents.

Most of the issues raised aren't fundamental to the fact the tent
pitches fly, inner or both first, it's design touches beyond that. And
since you /can/ have non-saggy space in a fly first or both together
pitch, and more flexible use of inner space too, I'm still mystified as
to why people think inner first is a fundamentally better idea...

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Peewiglet wrote:

> I also prefer the more rigid design that comes from an inner first
> tent, like my Terra Nova Voyager, and if I was in the car, or walking
> with someone else, I'd probably take that one instead. It's a really
> lovely tent

You need to have a look at a Hilleberg Tarra or Saivo. Or rather, you
probably don't, as being an insatiable gearhound you'd suddenly get a
lot poorer...

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

> I sat in an Akto once and found the headroom too low for my liking. The
> Laser is a little higher,

I'm only 5ft7 and I find the height in the Akto to be low, a little
bit nore space would be great. although if I slouch its OK, and at the
end of a day I often feel like slouching.

> Don't know about the Akto, but my Nallo has a double door, one is a
> vent/midge net, the other proper inner tent material, so I have a
> choice, which is nice, but that undoubtedly adds to the weight a little.

The Akto door has a corner that is mesh, with a cover that has velcro
attachment.
the door is a triangle and it is the top of the triangle that forms
the mossie-mesh, you pull the cover from the velcro and let it hang to
make use of the ventilation.

> erhaps stronger construction in the Akto than
> the Laser? More guying points?

The Akto has 6 guy points
one for each corner, and one on each side of the pole,
each is doubled as you will understand from the Nallo.

On 8/11/04 10:12 pm, in article [email protected],
"Judith" <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 21:58:48 -0000, "AndyP"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I had use of one that you could do that with but figured
>> separating the inner and outer was less hassle and better to pack that way.
>> Do people find that the best way with Aktos or do they take them apart?
>
> I'd never even considered taking my Akto apart until people started
> suggesting it here .... and even then I could see no need to.
>
> It's easy to pitch all-in-one, so that's what I do. If I repitch the
> tent after taking it down wet then, yes, I do find that the inside of
> the groundsheet is wet. This is mildly unpleasant for a short time
> but this only really happens when the rain is persistent. In which
> case, I'm glad to be inside the tent anyway and am probably pretty
> damp myself.

Agreed. There is no need to worry about pitching with any of the Hilleberg
tunnel tents.

--
Andy Howell
Birmingham, UK