X-Mid Pro 2, Duplex, Triplex or Stratospire Li: a Tent Comparison Review for Duo Hikers

Which is the Best DCF Non-Freestanding Tent for Two?

Duplex and Stratospire Li on a rare hike with three - Investigator Trail, South Australia

You’ll find many reviews about these four excellent tents, but few comparing all four and none comparing all four specifically for use by couples or duos. The Duplex and XMid Pro 2 especially seem to be used and reviewed by solo hikers rather than by twosomes; now that we’ve used the Pro 2 for a year, we can add it to this review. Two people sharing a tent has significant implications for ease of setup, space, condensation and liveability that don’t apply to solo users. This comparative review is for hikers who intend to use their tent primarily with another person, rather than solo.

X-Mid Pro 2 in Western Australia

Dyneema Composite Fabric (DCF) is not woven like silpoly or silnylon, but a grid of very strong fibres sandwiched between layers of mylar (a polyester film). It is extremely strong for its weight, doesn’t stretch when wet — you won’t need to tighten guylines in the middle of a rainy night — and is completely waterproof, absorbing zero moisture. No draping saturated flys over bushes at lunchtime, because you wipe dry a DCF fly with a microfibre cloth each morning; it simply requires a change in condensation management. DCF does have disadvantages: it is expensive, less durable and less puncture and abrasion resistant than conventional tent materials. Nevertheless, we think it deserves its popularity: hikers who understand how to manage DCF’s limitations and maximise its strengths have an exceptional ultralight shelter.

We have had the Zpack Duplex for longest, then bought the Zpacks Triplex, followed by Tarptent’s  Stratospire Li in 2020 and the Durston XMid Pro 2 in 2022. As a couple, we have used all of them in hot, cold, stormy, wet and windy weather; the Duplex and Stratospire Li above the treeline, the Triplex in the tropics, but none in snow – we’d love to hear your experiences of the latter in the comments. We use Neoair Xtralites/Xtratherms, and down twin quilts (-7C, -15C). The four tents each have strengths and weaknesses, so here is our summary of

• Innovations in DCF tents

• Price

• Build Quality and Customer Service

• Weight

• Ease of Setup

• Ease of Pack Up

• Footprint and available space

• Packed Size

• Stormworthiness and how they handle different weather conditions (excluding snow or prolonged sub zero conditions, which we have yet to experience).

Geoff’s and my thoughts on the tents are based on our experiences in specific terrain and climates; although this article includes numerous objective comparisons, many of our conclusions are subjective, so yours may differ. Again, please share your experiences and constructive observations in the comments, which we encourage readers to also consider.

Innovations in DCF Tent Design

All tent manufacturers stand on the shoulders of others. MYOG guru Bill Fornshell was experimenting with DCF as early as 2000-2005 for all kinds of outdoor gear including tents and packs, whilst Mountain Laurel Designs and ZPacks were amongst the first cottage companies to begin selling DCF products around 2006. MSR used mesh gutters on its single wall Fling in 2006. Nordisk and Tarptent beat Zpacks and Durston Gear to magnetic door tiebacks. Other cottage manufacturers may have been earlier with offset doors/poles, such as Sierra Design’s High Route, or Yama Mountain Gear’s Swiftline.

Today, a number of cottage companies around the world sell DCF tents; they include Gossamer Gear and Seek Outside (USA), Locus Gear (Japan), Bonfus (Italy), Terra Nova (UK, freestanding models) and One Planet here in Oz. The only large company making DCF tents is Big Agnes in the USA; their tents are freestanding with a much lighter, flimsier weight of DCF than used by all the cottage companies, and reviews reflect this.

All four tents in this review use two trekking poles or substitutes. They are non-freestanding, meaning they require stakes to tension the fly and won’t support themselves as do freestanding dome tents that stay up once you’ve inserted poles into the sleeves. Zpack’s Duplex and Triplex tents and Durston Gear’s X-Mid Pro 2 are light and reliable single wall tents; they’re sometimes called hybrid tents because although side walls are single, mesh doors separate inners from vestibules. Despite their names, the Duplex is popular with solo hikers; the Triplex with couples.

The Stratospire Li differs from the other three in that it is a double-wall tent, with a fly and a separate inner. Its fly is more evenly hexagonal than that of the Duplex and Triplex.

Although X-Mid tents appear at first glance to be no different than other non-freestanding rectangular tents with offset poles like the High Route, the addition of a floor diagonal from both poles and walls is a true (patented) innovation, creating vestibules and more useable space for the same amount of tent material, and bringing poles further inside the rectangle so that triangulating lines of tension in the fly itself can replace apex guylines in moderate conditions:

A rectangular tent with offset poles is not new. The poles are towards the outside of the fly and the inner or sleeping area is parallel to the walls.

The X-Mid tent design is new because by also skewing the sleeping area it creates vestibules, storage areas and more useable space. It also allows the fly to support the poles.

As happens with all clever leaps of innovation that seem so obvious in hindsight, Dan Durston has already adapted his concept for freestanding tents, along with at least one other manufacturer. Adaptations are not despicably identical knockoffs that constitute intellectual property theft. Please support the creative cottage companies who shoulder the risk in creating new designs. Realise also that knockoffs using different material — say, silnylon vs silpoly or DCF — often perform less well than the original because the latter is designed around specific strength and stretch parameters.

All three manufacturers regularly improve their tent models. Unlike our old Duplex, newer models include lighter but stronger, circular rather than triangular reinforcements, different tape adhesive, and caternary curves on tent body and door edges for a lighter tent that also pitches more tautly. Newer XMid Pro 2 models have pockets, stronger door magnets, and different guyline and floor options. Later models of our Stratospire Li have different zips.

Regardless of where we stand on which manufacturer was ‘first’, it is consumers who win: Geoff and I have been thrilled to see the innovation that strong competition has engendered. Zpacks and Tarptent have released upgraded or modified versions of older models (Offset Duo, Triplex Zip, Stratospire Ultra); Tarptent has revised its Saddle 2 to create the improved and simplified Dipole. Consider them in addition to the four tents in this review.

A Quick Summary

For those who want a quick overview, below are dimensions, taken from manufacturers’ websites and setup videos. However, these numbers don’t tell the whole story: as we’ll see later, they don’t necessarily designate useable space, because tent shape and wall steepness influence how close you can get to the edges. And of course the Stratospire Li is double-walled, accounting for its extra weight.

Click on the table to toggle between metric and imperial measurements.

Price

There’s no avoiding it: all of them are expensive. But if you’re going DCF, every tent, around the world, costs about the same.  You’ll need a mesh and/or solid inner for the Stratospire Li. If you buy the freestanding Flex kit for the Duplex, you’re adding 20% (at time of writing).

However, buying a tent for two, especially one light enough for solo use, is more cost effective than a solo plus a duo tent. If you’re careful with DCF tents, they have a good lifespan, but don’t expect them to last like Hillebergs. Using footprints to minimise abrasion, rolling rather than stuffing, keeping tents clean, appropriate storage and care when setting up, all extend lifespan. If you camp a lot, you’ll get good value for money.

Build Quality and Customer Service

All four tents are unlikely to fail due to a manufacturing fault. However, various issues plus close inspection of seams suggest that, at our times of purchase, Tarptent and Durston Gear have superior quality control. Both Tarptent and Durston Gear manufacture their DCF tents in the one overseas factory that makes DCF tents using a hot bonded (with some seams sewn/taped as well) construction method that is very strong, waterproof and durable. Zpacks uses sewn and taped seams; regardless of differences in construction techniques, reports of seams failing under stress on any of our three manufacturers’ tents are so rare as to be almost non-existent. Zpacks manufactures onshore, employing many people in its factory, and this is an important consideration for some US buyers.

You’ll find impeccable bonding and taping on both the the Pro 2 and Stratospire Li

More impeccable workmanship, here the inner sewn to the fly and the magnetic toggles on the Pro 2

Our Duplex has a manufacturing fault. The door flaps are mirrored, so that in rare situations where you can pitch in only one orientation, such as a tiny site or tent platform, it is impossible to pitch with the overlapping flap on the windward side. When we contacted zpacks about this, well outside the warrantee period because we hadn’t noticed it until that first time in a restricted pitch, they immediately offered to take the tent apart and re-sew it, reassuring us that this would not in any way weaken it. At the time we declined, concerned (incorrectly) that restitching, even with re-taping, in such a high stress point, would inevitably weaken our tent. We were wrong: when patched with two or more layers of DCF tape, the area becomes stronger than the original torn or cut single layer.  In any case, since then we have always been able to orient the tent appropriately, but it may happen again.  Our first Triplex with an incorrectly sized door panel was immediately replaced when we sent a video illustrating the problem.

We’ve therefore had excellent customer service from Zpacks long before we established this website and, although you’ll always find grumblings in forums, we have never had issues. We gather that they have improved quality control since our purchases.

Tarptent and Durston Gear have stellar reputations and we’ve had prompt and helpful replies to queries from them, too. Our Stratospire Li was missing its repair kit on arrival and, when I mentioned it in passing during a separate query, Henry Shires immediately offered to ship a kit (to Australia!). We didn’t need one as we already had tape and patches from Zpacks, but it was an indication of great customer service.

We recommend close inspection of any expensive tent upon receipt regardless of manufacturer because faults can happen. Some of these, such as pinhole flaws in the DCF itself, can be extremely difficult to spot and are not the fault of the tent manufacturer but of the DCF manufacturer. Sometimes flaws are cosmetic, but others can reduce the strength or waterproofness of the tent. Tarptent and Zpacks sell cosmetically blemished tents at a modest discount.

This shouldn’t need saying, but always approach the manufacturer to resolve an issue before spraying bile in forums and groups.

Weight

These are from websites; when comparing tents, check weights carefully as optional cordage and stuffsacks may or may not be included. Those below exclude stakes but include stuffsacks:

• Duplex 525g/18.5oz in .55 oz dcf (610g/21.5oz in .67oz dcf, no longer available; 680g/24.0oz in the new .75 oz dcf)

• Stratospire Li 799g (fly 430g/15.15 oz in .55 oz dcf, mesh inner 362 g/12.75oz, solid inner 352 g/12.4oz bag 17g/0.6oz)

• Triplex 612g/21.6oz in .55 oz dcf (682g/24oz in .67dcf, no longer available; new material is .75dcf)

• X Mid Pro 2 2024 model is 523g/18.2oz (our earlier model is 580g/20.5oz in .55 oz dcf)

The Duplex was the lightest in our list at the time we bought our first release Pro 2, but is now pipped — by 2g/0.07oz— by the current 2024 Pro2 model and we use the latter weight in comparisons. The difference between weight in the current Duplex and Pro 2 is, in our opinion, insignificant.

We use a condensation barrier in our Duplex and also have the stronger, slightly heavier spruce green dcf, so weight differences between it and the Stratospire Li are negligible for us, especially with the solid inner.

We also had a condensation barrier sewn here in Oz for our Triplex. However, although the weight differences of around 100g between the three standard single wall .55 DCF tents might determine a choice by solo hikers, at 50g pp for couples this difference is minor unless you’re gram weenies. The Stratospire Li is double walled, so weight comparisons are somewhat unfair.

Our own Duplex plus anecdotal reports about the heavier DCF option offered by zpacks suggest that this material is not only stronger but more durable than the lighter grades, succumbing to pinholing and delamination later. If this is important to you, consider the .75oz options for a relatively small weight penalty.

Adjustable hiking poles weigh:

280g/10oz for two Gossamer Gear LT5s,

310g/11oz for our two Locus Gear CP3s  and

>530g/18.6oz for two heavier ones such as Black Diamonds.

If you don’t carry hiking poles, you have to add

carbon poles from zpacks (148g/5oz for two fixed length poles)

Tarptent (244g/8.6oz for two fixed length poles and 193g/6.8oz for two adjustable poles) or

DurstonGear (186g/6.6oz for two adjustable poles)

The Zpacks Flex upgrade for the Duplex adds 290g/10oz grams.  Even the lightest adjustable poles, Durston Gear’s zflicks, add almost 200g/7oz. Therefore, if you don’t use hiking poles, and especially when shared between two people, the weight savings of these DCF tents shrink again compared with conventional freestanding tents, and the latter might suit you better.  DCF tents have many advantages but, if weight is your primary concern and you don’t carry hiking poles, those few hundred grams saved over an ultralight freestanding tent will be expensive ones. 

Tent stakes also add to the total weight of your shelter. Only Tarptent regularly includes the weight of stakes on its website. Durston Gear’s Pro 2 really does pitch securely (if not quietly!) with just four stakes in even moderate wind of up to around 15 knots (28 kph,17mph,8m/s), but most couples will use six — and six are implied in the pitching video — to hold door panels at zips, so we consider six stakes as standard. However, in stronger wind the X-Mid Pro 2 has provision for an astonishing fourteen stakes, a not inconsiderable weight that also creates significant improvements in wind performance. Alternative anchoring techniques are worth learning to minimise the number of stakes you need carry when anticipating harsh weather.

The Stratospire Li and Duplex also both pitch securely with six stakes, eight if you use the peak guylines on the former and the pullouts on the side panels of the latter. The Triplex ostensibly pitches with twelve stakes but we often bring the two side panel tie-outs together and use ten stakes as seen below, or eight by staking the pullouts to the centre perimeter stake (we don’t recommend this):

Triplex in Gammon Ranges, South Australia. This angle on the side pullouts is incorrect; the guylines should be at a flatter angle to the fly to prevent deformation of the latter, and pulling inline with the fibre.

Tents protect from the elements in combination with your sleep system. In cold conditions, you need to up your bag or quilt rating in the breezy Duplex and Triplex, so weight savings are compromised a little more than in the Pro 2 which pitches to ground level, and a lot more than in the Stratospire Li, which is warmer with the solid inner. Counterintuitively, the solid inner weighs less than the mesh one.

We originally had Tyvek groundsheets, then tried polycro (available in Australia here) with all our DCF tents to maximise their life: DCF is very strong but not very abrasion or puncture resistant, and we camp regularly on Australia’s notorious limestone, bauxite gravel and granite as well as amongst our ubiquitously spiky native plants.

Polycro groundsheets are extremely light, about 35g/1.2oz, but when they get wet both the unbranded polycro and the ‘Heavy Duty Duck’ stuff we bought scrunched annoyingly, tore easily, and did not prevent damage to tent floors on the worst terrain: we returned to Tyvek. The Durston footprint is similar in weight to our Tyvek footprint, but the former connects to the tent floor so is easier to use; you can leave it attached. It is not as resistant to puncturing as Tyvek.

Tyvek footprint clearly visible through the 15D Pro 2 floor.

The breathable unbranded Tyvek we bought from an outdoor supplier in Australia allowed soil moisture vapour to pass through, resulting in an annoying wet layer between the floor and the Tyvek; it was of a less suitable standard to the Tyvek we bought from the US. The latter material was noisier and stiffer, but also fully water and vapour proof, keeping the underside of the tent floor completely dry. Enquire before you buy.

In wet or cold conditions, we sometimes deploy vestibule triangles or rectangles on which to place our packs or to minimise ground condensation inside the fly. Some people have adapted rectangular footprints from other manufacturers to fit inners plus vestibules of their Pro 2.  A dry spot outside the sleeping area is handy, but all these things add weight, sometimes a lot of weight. Once you add too many things to your ultralight tent, you have negated its raison d’etre.

Ease of Setup

The Pro 2 (with two important exceptions) and Duplex are simplest and fastest, followed closely by the Triplex and then the Stratospire Li.

Like all the DCF tents in this review, the Pro 2 has its quirks but once you learn them — stake in a perfect rectangle, tension the edges, and only THEN insert the poles — you will be fine on level tent pitches. Those who can make a rectangle by eye have an advantage!

The Duplex and Triplex are also fast for two. And experienced hiking duos quickly learn the Stratospire Li quirks – within eight or ten setups we could pitch it tight (even without peak guys) and correctly oriented with just one or two stake tweaks, or none.  If you’re camping solo, this is likely different but, on flat ground, all four tents are easy to set up with two.  Orient the offset Stratospire Li correctly by first laying out the floor as desired, or for the X-Mid Pro 2 by angling your rectangle a little to the right to counteract the left skew of the inner.

Here is a great video for an alternative Stratospire setup (the example is not a Li but the design is the same) to try if you’re having issues.

Very uneven Ground

With almost no stretch, all DCF tents are less forgiving of uneven ground than silpoly or silnylon tents. However, we’ve pitched all four without water ingress on somewhat uneven ground. Rather to our surprise, the Stratospire Li seems easiest to pitch well because the outer floats above the lumpy terrain below it, while the inner sits semi-independently (adjustably) on the ground under the fly, whereas the Zpacks and Durston tents are all-in-one.

Much is made of perfect pitches on social media to show off those elegant Pro 2 lines, but 99% of the time this is purely cosmetic and a sloppier one will be just fine — it is only in strong wind when you need a taut pitch, and especially in rain, that issues arise with the Pro 2 on uneven ground. Because the Pro 2 is so widely lauded for its “ease of pitch with only four stakes”, we thought it important to elaborate.

Although easy on flat ground, we find the Pro 2 the most difficult of the four to pitch well on very lumpy or very sloping ground because that clean geometric shape has such tight tolerances, especially when you need a lower pitch due to rain. Altering corner tie outs and pole heights as described here in Durston Gear’s pitching video sometimes absorbs the irregularities, but not always.

Just one lump or hollow in the wrong place can mess with those elegant tolerances. On the above pitch on the Grampians Peaks Trail, Victoria, with the tent ridgeline inline with wind, we couldn’t work out why the bucket floor was so low and saggy with a perfect outer fly until we realised the tent pad was slightly domed, just enough to lift the centre. A large hump at one corner of a small pitch on the Cape to Cape Track was tricky, too.

Other times, you’ll see a puzzling loose section not caused by any of the usual culprits. Australia’s alpine button grass plains would be nightmarish for a good pitch — again, no problem in dry weather, but you will struggle to stay dry in rain.

The Durston and Zpacks DCF single wall tents rely on their mesh gutter, bucket floor and fly overhang to keep rain, splashback and condensation out of the sleeping area. The mesh must slope down and away from the bucket floor to the edge of the fly, not only to prevent condensation running into the bucket, but also to prevent rain flowing or wicking down the mesh from the outside of the fly. The Zpacks tents maximise protection via a deep bucket floor combined with a relatively narrow but steeper mesh gutter and less overhang, whereas the X-Mid Pro 2 utilises a shallow bucket floor with a wider but less steep mesh gutter and more overhang.

You can see here how effectively the high buckets of the Zpacks tents prevent splashback from entering the tent even with a relatively narrow overhang (from this angle, you can’t see the mesh except for a little edge at left). This pitch was bare compacted dirt and we spent a day and two nights in bucketing rain. The mud you see is all on the outside of the bucket floor, with a few splatters on the outside of the fly. Not one speck entered the tent.

Both the Zpacks and Durston tents are equally effective on flat ground but, in our experience, on lumpy ground it is not easy to create a consistent downslope in the Pro 2 mesh because there is not enough height in the bucket floor to absorb the hollows and lumps, whereas the deeper buckets of Zpacks floors are more forgiving. Of course, the Zpacks tents don’t offer a to-the-ground pitch at all. With practice you do get better at ameliorating these issues and we reiterate it matters only in heavy rain or soggy pitches with standing water when you need a perfect pitch.

We’ve pitched all the tents on sloping ground too. Although floors of recent models now attach to the trekking poles, you and the bucket floors can still slide down the slope overnight while the fly remains fixed in position. In the Zpacks tents, this results in the bucket extending beyond the fly and catching rain. This is less likely with the Pro 2 because the overhang is wider and lower, but the floor and mesh on the high side can completely flatten, or the mesh reverse its angle, as they are pulled downhill. Again, this is only an issue in rain or on terrain with puddles; even when the Pro 2 mesh sags on the ground, water doesn’t enter the bucket floor unless it too is flat on the ground. Some people add additional stakes to uphill corners of the floor to help hold it in place.

On sloping ground, aim to pitch the Pro 2 so the bottom edge of the fly is level rather than flush to the ground all the way round ( ie a gap on the lower side). This sounds difficult but don’t overthink it because it is actually easy, even automatic, in practice — you’ll find yourself cinching down the upper corners more, and/or lengthening the two bottom corners. None of these are dealbreakers unless you plan to regularly pitch on very lumpy or sloping terrain.

X-Mid silpoly on a sloping pitch on the Sheltowee Trace, Kentucky. As a double wall tent with separate inner and outer, this model has the same flexibility of pitch as the Stratospire Li. The owner confirms that pitching on a slope is a no-brainer, noting that he “pitched that without any corrections after 40km and in desperate need of a burrito and hydration salts!”

However, you can visualise the reversed angle of the single wall Pro’s mesh connecting the fly to the bucket floor at both the lower and upper ends of the tent, a potential problem in heavy rain. (Image Credit: Bennett Miller)

Pitching In Rain

All four tents can be easily pitched in rain without getting the interior wet, the Zpacks and Pro 2 because they are single-walled, and the Stratospire Li because it is double-walled but can be pitched fly first or all-in-one.  This feature is absent from numerous popular double-walled freestanding tents (with the exception of European and especially Scandinavian brands, for obvious reasons) so, if you expect to pitch often in rain, this could be a useful deciding factor in favour of these trekking pole tents.

High and Low pitches

All four can be pitched lower to bring flies nearer (for the Pro 2, to) the ground in inclement weather. For a couple lying side by side with the poles set at the recommended standard 122cm/48”, the width of the duplex puts a lot of strain on door zips: higher poles raise the bucket floor and simultaneously narrow it. Setting poles at around 117-118cm/46” is a sweet spot for us; YMMV depending on your mats, your shoulder widths and how you sleep as a couple (backs, spooned, etc). 

In the Stratospire Li, pole height is less relevant for interior space because inner height is easily adjusted independently via straps attaching inner peaks to the fly.  So the outer can be set high or low, without affecting the width of the inner.

This width difference is irrelevant in the Triplex for two people: you will have buckets of space either side at any practical pole height.

No space problems arise with the Pro 2 set high or low. When pitching it low, you shorten the corner guys leaving just a little to cinch down. We found that the corner linelocs add enough length that the tent can’t be pitched completely to ground level, so we added a second set of non-stretch loops just large enough for a groundhog stake. People clever with knots could attach linelocs with a loop between it and the corner to use for closer staking.

The mesh can touch the ground with a low pitch but in itself this doesn’t let water into the tent. If pitching to ground level, check for any rocks or sharp, rough objects that could abrade the fly edge or mesh (the other tents don’t pitch low enough for this to happen). Staking directly into the tieout point is inadvisable because if it fails through abrasion there is no way to reattach a guyline.

Setup time

With two people erecting the tent, we now find no significant difference in set up time between them either – perhaps a minute extra for the Stratospire Li? – not enough to be hugely obvious, anyway. On flat ground, the Pro 2 is marginally faster, but on lumpy ground it definitely takes longer than the others. However, the differences are, in our opinion, negligible when setting up with two people in half the time, and perhaps shouldn’t figure signficantly when couples are deciding between these tents. It may be more important for solo users. 

Tent Platforms, Rock, or Sand

Setting up on rock, sand or platforms takes significantly longer for all non-freestanding tents than for freestanding ones, but is perfectly doable. The techniques for setting up non freestanding tents on platforms are identical for all four; line extensions and a few deck hooks are useful when expecting to camp on platforms. All vestibules can be folded in for a more compact size.

The 12 night Grampians Peaks Trail in Australia is nearly all on platforms. Many of these new but poorly designed platforms lack consistent or any gaps in the timber. Other platforms lack wire around the edges and only provide chains. Nevertheless, using line extensions and/or a few anchor deck hooks, we were able to pitch the X-Mid securely and quickly every time. One particularly windy pitch, racing to beat a rain squall and with uncooperative gaps in planking, we still had it set up in under five minutes; it would have been even faster with consistent gaps.

Staking

An understanding of good staking techniques and the effectiveness of different stakes for different substrates is essential to keep all non-freestanding tents soundly anchored in extreme conditions: it is even more important than for freestanding tents. Depending on substrates and tieout position, a mix of tent stakes rather than one set of identical stakes, plus extension lines of varying lengths provides the most flexibility.

Stratospire Li on bare rock, Lake Chalice, Tasmania.

Stake positioning, particularly at the strut corners of the Stratospire Li and the corners of the Pro 2,  is much less flexible than for the Zpacks tents. Line extensions let you tweak when there is a rock in the way.

A quick and dirty fix with two extra stakes when the corner red groundhog pulled out during a stormy Tassie night.

Omitting the ground hog and using two stakes and an extension works if there is a rock where the groundhog would go.

Guys and perimeter corners of all four tents can be attached to trunks, branches, rocks and shrubs when you carry line extensions.

On one trip, paddling for half a day before hiking to our campsite, it wasn’t until we arrived that we realised we’d forgotten our poles:

On a paddle and hike trip on the Pieman River in Tasmania, we forgot our poles. A fire had been through the area with little regrowth but we whittled beach driftwood to size and placed folded cloths to protect the tent apices.

Ease of Pack Up

All DCF tents last longer when kept clean (clean fly = less abrasion) and when rolled rather than stuffed. All manufacturers strongly recommend rolling rather than stuffing to maximise the lifespan of DCF tents. Whichever folding and rolling technique you use, aim to have the bottom of floors touching only themselves rather than the fly. This is less crucial if you use a footprrint and the floor is free of dust and grit.

The zpacks tents can be stuffed or rolled, with rolling recommended. When packing up with two, this is what works for us. Have one person at each of the long ends and arrange the fly and vestibules so they are within the floor area, with the doors neatly closed and flat, apex in the centre of the tent. Next fold the long sides into the centre. Bring the long sides together again so the tent is folded into quarters lengthwise. Roll tightly from one short end.  Brush off debris, if any, as you go – there won’t be much with a footprint, and you’re rolling up on it. We often lie our peg bag along the starting end and roll around it.  Unlike stuffing, the above rolling technique means that the wet or dirty tent floor can’t wet or dirty the mesh doors or fly – your fly stays much cleaner.

The Stratospire Li is definitely best packed rolled.  This is what works for us. Have one person at each end. Arrange the fly so it is completely within the footprint of the inner.  Close the struts and align them along the short end of the footprint. Fold into the centre, then fold again so the tent is in thirds lengthwise.  We fold again by bringing the struts together, then roll tightly from the strut to centre. 

We use a similar technique for the X-Mid 2 Pro; the little bathtub and vent struts can be aligned when you fold the tent. When we use the attached footprint, we fold it lengthways into the centre and then fold again so the bottom is touching only itself before rolling.

When tents are packed rolled rather than stuffed, they are also more compact. We also fit into the supplied tent bags:  a stake bag with extra stakes, repair kit and extension lines, microfibre cloth, and polycro or Tyvek footprint and vestibule sheet (not in our Duplex bag which has shrunk). These are folded and slide into the side of the bag after putting in the tent.  Be careful of sharp stakes.  Some people roll around the stakes so that the DCF is less tightly creased at the centre.

We find packup for all is fast but, if you are a committed stuffer rather than roller and don’t mind your tent wearing out faster, you’ll prefer zpacks tents.

When storing these DCF tents, it’s also best to pack them loosely rolled to slow delamination. And all of them are backpacking tents, rather than ones to leave set up for days in harsh UV sunlight that hastens deterioration.

Size

Outer Footprint (including vestibules)

• Duplex 220cm/87” x 254cm/100” vestibule tip-vestibule tip x length

• Triplex 257cm/101” x 254cm/100” vestibule tip-vestibule tip x length

• Stratospire Li 282cm/111” x 248*cm/97” (approx.*) vestibule tip-vestibule tip x length.

• X-Mid Pro 2 254cm/100” x 203cm/80”

The outside footprint indicates how much ground a tent takes up, but all have skinny pitch options to reduce the space needed. This diagram is not perfectly to scale but is close enough to illustrate differences in tent size and shape.

For tight spaces, the Duplex is the easiest to fit, and in our opinion it’s the best choice if you regularly camp in dense forest or scrub with limited options, or in steep regions where flat spots are hard to find. In fact, comparing outer dimensions, it’s clear the two-person double-wall Stratospire Li has a similar footprint to the three-person single-walled Triplex!* However, we’ve had no issues squeezing the bigger three tents into relatively tight spaces; the Pro 2’s long straight side can be difficult in some instances. And remember, all four tents have ‘skinny pitch’ options that significantly reduce their footprint size by pulling in the vestibules: here is the Stratospire Li in skinny pitch mode, and here is the Pro 2 in skinny pitch mode .

Vestibules of all four tents can be reconfigured to fit tight spaces, like this skinny pitch with the Duplex where we left space for a second tent.

Some reviewers include peak guylines in the area that a tent requires, arguing that the Pro 2 therefore takes up less space than the Duplex, but that’s somewhat disingenuous because you’ll still use the Pro 2 peak guylines in wind.

Stratospire Li in a tight space - it fitted nicely in the end but took some lateral thinking!

*Tarptent give only the inner dimensions for length on their website but I estimate the fly sits about 15cm beyond the floor at each end, adding 30cm to the length. Happy to be corrected.

Interior Size: W x L x H

• Duplex  114cm/45” x 228cm/90” x 122cm/48”

• Stratospire Li 114cm/45” x 218cm/86” x 111cm/44” (inner height)

• Triplex  153cm/50” x 228cm/90” x 122cm/48”

• X-Mid Pro 2 117cm/46” x 228cm/90” x 117cm/46”

Image Credits: Tarptent, Durston Gear and Zpacks.

Interior size is oft quoted as one of the biggest differences between the tents but, in many cases, the impact of those differences are not as great as you’d expect from the numbers. Zpack’s very high bucket floor and Tarptent’s struts provide similar improvements in useable space. Let’s take a closer look.

Plan view of tent interiors

Width

None of the tents except the Triplex will fit two wide pads side by side. This will be a deal-breaker for many couples. Due to better and/or excess nutrition, people are taller and wider than they used to be, and perhaps expectations of comfort have changed. Back sleepers also prefer wider mats. All three manufacturers have recognised this, with Tarptent’s Stratospire Ultra, Zpack’s Offset Duo, and the X-Mid 2 Pro Plus all accommodating two wide pads.

The Duplex, Pro 2 and Stratospire Li have almost identical floor widths on paper but, with two people, we find we have to lower the Duplex pole height to prevent pressure on the door mesh and zips. With this adaptation and in practice, the Stratospire and Duplex feel the same in use width-wise to us.  The Pro 2 does feel marginally wider but we wouldn’t call those 3cm/1.2” hugely significant. However, the Triplex is palatial for two people, with room to bring packs completely inside if we want.

Hiking twosomes who are not couples will almost certainly be more comfortable in the Triplex. Some people sleep head to foot in snug tents, as do those with wide shoulders, but this doesn’t work when sharing a quilt or on sloping ground. Duos where at least one person has wide shoulders, or where one or both are wide folk, should consider the Triplex or the wider models of each tent as mentioned above.

The width of the Duplex together with its high bucket floor below the door in weather conducive to condensation is problematic for sweaty old gals like me.  Where our twin quilt touches my side, condensation wets the bag, just like it wets the toebox of sleeping bags in tents when they touch the foot end of the tent.  Condensation happens much less on Geoff’s side, not at all in the Triplex (we are miles from the sides), and negligibly in the Stratospire Li and Pro 2 with their much lower side floors. 

Laying dry daywear along the side, tucking it between the pad and the wall, is sufficient to eliminate condensation on the quilt in the Stratospire Li; this doesn’t work in the Duplex as the floor is too high.  When the Duplex is used by one person this isn’t an issue, but it might be for couples.

Plenty of room either side of our puffy winter quilt in the Triplex (the quilt is spread much wider than it normally would be with us under it). Note height of side bucket floor.

Length

On paper, the Stratospire Li inner is significantly shorter than the Duplex and Triplex but, in our experience, the differences have less impact than we expected for us as a couple of average height.

However, tall couples may find that the foot end of their bags (especially high loft down winter bags) get damp against the bucket floor of the Stratospire Li, so the longer Duplex, Triplex or Pro 2 may suit them better. Tarptent has other models especially suited to taller couples, and Zpacks now have a DupleXL (extra long), with a useable floor length of 2.4m (8’) for hikers to 2.13m (7’) tall. Tarptent’s Dipole, Stratospire Ultra and Zpack’s Offset Duo tents are all longer. The XMid Pro 2+ is wider and, although not longer, the steeper sides provide more useable space at head and foot.

More than a handspan of space, minimum, above Geoff’s face on the ‘low’ side of the Pro 2, more space if he scoots down further. Princess Helen has miles of space on her side.

Because the inner is diagonal in the Pro 2, Geoff and I find there is plenty of length. Due to the mirrored symmetry, and lying with both heads at one end, whoever sleeps on the left of the bed (Princess Helen) has more vertical space above their face than the one on the right. However, because of the Pro 2’s astonishing spaciousness, even the person on the right has no significant reduction in clearance when compared to the Duplex or Stratospire Li because the sleeping mat of the person on the right is scooted down a bit; Geoff stores his fleece and stuff sack at the head end, and I store mine at the foot end.

Two regular xtralite mats in the Stratospire Li; the pillow above the mat indicates clearance.

Note lower bucket sides of floor and tiny triangular rather useless mesh pocket.

Two regular xtralites in a Duplex.

Two decent sized pockets at head and foot end.

Apex Height

All manufacturers measure height from peaks. However, due to tension and cut, zpacks tents are actually significantly lower at centres than peaks, as can be easily seen from any photographs.

Triplex: The caternary cut means height is significantly lower at the centre than at the poles.

The Pro 2 has lower peaks 117cm/46” but the less strongly curved ridgeline means there is also much less difference in height between the apices and the centre of the ridgeline. The Pro 2+ has significantly taller peaks 124cm/49".

You can see that the very slight ‘smile’ in the ridgeline of the Pro 2 has less loss in height between the apices. It feels extremely spacious.

The Tarptent fly has virtually no sag either, but of course the inner tent is suspended inside it: it’s lower than what you see on the outside. Hubby and I are of almost identical average height (about 173cm) and all four tents are comfortable for both length and height.  

The Stratospire Li’s inner is suspended from the fly apices. Shortening the straps is a simple adjustment that raises the height of the inner, and reduces the distance between fly and inner.

The Stratospire Li’s handle down pole configuration means it doesn’t sink into soft soil; the zpacks and X-Mid Pro 2’s handle up configuration means the points occasionally sink a few centimetres, but this is simply compensated with adjustable poles or a flat stone.

Tall people should watch the videos as well as animations on manufacturers’ websites to decide whether length and height are sufficient for them. All manufacturers have other models especially suited to tall people.

This website is also useful to see how you’ll fit into various tents.

Overall Interior Space

Frankly, we are mystified by one or two reports that, because of its geometry, the Pro 2 has less space for two than does the Duplex. We have had many nights in all of these tents and only the Triplex exceeds it in spaciousness. Despite the Pro 2’s asymmetry we can sit up, get changed etc without brushing the inside of the fly as we move about: a useful and practical litmus test for hiking couples! Geoff, who sleeps on the right, simply scoots down 30cm so we ourselves are offset when performing tasks. This is not the case in the Duplex, where both of us sit in the highest part of the tent, and it doesn’t matter in the Stratospire Li, where you are only touching the dry inner. And the Triplex is huge.

The Duplex and Triplex have side panel tie-outs that increase the interior volume of the tent. If these are repeatedly pulled out too far as we have done (you can see it in our images, our bad!), the DCF panel permanently deforms due to user error and you will always have to use the tie-outs. It’s important to apply less tension, and apply it more inline with the face of the material to avoid deformation.

The Pro 2 also has side panel guyouts but the tension is aligned along the fibres and on a taped seam, so there is no deformation of the material, but it should still be pulled out inline with the apex and on the same plane as the upper fly. Although the zpacks mid panel tieouts increase interior space, the tieouts on the Pro 2 are to reduce deflection in wind so you will only use them then. The new Zpacks Offset Duo and Offset Trio have panels aligned and sewn differently so panels are less likely to deform.

Floors

South Australia’s limestone

Tent floors must be sufficiently strong, abrasion resistant and waterproof to protect you from the ground. Here in Australia, our substrates are often dry, hard and rough. Most plants are spiky with small, thick-walled pointy leaves and many scatter numerous sharp woody nuts, pods and cones: everything is out to poke holes in your floor.

Conversely, other than in desert environments, plants in the Northern Hemisphere have softer foliage; pitches are often mossy or grassy. Australian tent manufacturers like Mont and One Planet recognise this difference with floors that start at 40D nylon; the floors of some of their ultralight tents are 70D PeU-coated nylon. In wet, cold Scandinavia, where plants are soft but pitches are soggy, Hilleberg’s triple-coated PU nylon floors start at 70D rising to 100D for their black label tents.

The Stratospire Li’s floor is (now) 20D nylon Sil/PeU, while the X-Mid Pro 2 floor is 15D Sil/PeU nylon. Although we’ve seen that different coatings confer different strength and waterproofness to material, and we’re to some extent comparing apples and oranges, we think the denier difference between the Australian and US manufacturers is significant.

As mentioned earlier, we use footprints for all our tents. The Pro 2’s 15 denier floor is simply too thin to resist puncturing on many of our substrates. Tarptent’s is better, but still not ideal. When kneeling in the Pro 2 on saturated ground, we’ve noticed that the hydrostatic head is insufficient to prevent water seepage. This issue disappears as soon as mats are inflated and point pressure reduces.

The Zpacks tents use DCF floors and the Pro 2 is also now offered with a DCF floor option. Some hikers and manufacturers are wary of DCF floors due to their bulk and lack of abrasion resistance, but Geoff and I like them, not least because we carry a footprint anyway so abrasion won’t wear out our tent floor. DCF floors are incredibly light, waterproof — no seepage, ever — and any punctures can be perfectly, permanently and easily repaired in the field.

Vestibules

Cooking in the Pro 2

Dimensions:

• Duplex and Triplex 53cm (21”) depth from pole

• Stratospire Li: 84cm (33”) depth from pole

• X-Mid Pro 2 58cm (23”) depth from pole

All four tents have big vestibules, with the Stratospire Li’s being huge.

Cooking in the Stratospire Li – the image is deceptive: there is much more room around the cooker than it appears.

And no pole in the way!

Although cooking in tents isn’t recommended for safety reasons nor by us, in inclement weather we’ve cooked in all of them because the vestibules are so large and ventilation excellent. Pro 2 and Stratospire Li’s offset pole design means you can tuck packs upright or even horizontally against the smaller side of the vestibule, and cook on the larger door side. Our ideal Stratospire Li would have a slightly wider inner and slightly smaller vestibule (the new Stratospire Ultra meets this requirement with both being larger!). Tarptent also offer a sidecar for the vestibule of their Stratospire Li, ideal for a dog or young child.

Although it’s a little more cramped in the Duplex or Triplex, compared to other tents all four have plenty of vestibule space. 

Cooking in the Duplex.

Note annoying position of the pole (but it is the only location structurally for it). The image is deceptive – there is a lot more room around the cooker than it appears.

Outer Doors

The Duplex and Triplex have an overlapping design that looks flimsy but which in our experience keeps out extremes of wind and rain, especially when pitched low. However, the hook closure system, whilst light and the ultimate in reliability with no zip to ever fail, can be a bit finicky, especially in icy weather with clumsy fingers. Zpacks now offer zippered versions of both the Duplex and Triplex which this hiking couple would prefer to our originals; YMMV.

However, these zippered models and the Pro 2’s zips are YKK #3 AquaGuard whereas Tarptent, who has been making zippered models for longer than either Durston Gear or Zpacks, now uses YKK #5 AquaGuard zips on the bomber Stratospire Li (the Dipole Li still has #3). Zips are a proportionately heavy component in two-door DCF tents so the #3 offers considerable weight savings, and this is why it is used in these superlight tents. Both zips are of the highest quality so it won’t be an issue for most hikers but, for those of us who regularly camp in dry, dusty environments, the additional strength and durability of the #5 may be worth considering: the zips on our Pro 2 began to jam quite quickly. Cleaning and graphite spray help but are impractical in the wilderness. Zpacks seem to be tacitly acknowledging this potential issue by providing not one but two replacement sliders with each zip model of tent. When asked, Tarptent send replacement sliders too, free of charge. In windy conditions, the structural integrity and strength of trekking pole tents is greatly improved by closed doors, so zip failures are more consequential than in freestanding tents.

When set up, considerable tension occurs at the bottom of the zips, particularly on the Pro 2. Angling the stake line towards the centre reduces this tension. Other owners attach buckles to the bottom or loop both tieouts on either side of the zip to the one stake. Dan Durston recommends replacing the bungee at the zips with static cord.

We love being able to zip the Stratospire Li outer doors open from the top as well as the bottom (see Condensation) and wish that the Pro 2 and Zpacks tents had this feature too, but it is more difficult to incorporate into a single-walled shelter.

The magnetic door toggles present on all Tarptents are every bit as good as everyone says. Rarely do the flaps blow open – when it’s that windy we zip the vestibule anyway, as condensation isn’t a problem. Our first iteration Pro 2 has magnetic door toggles too; the magnets have since been strengthened for improved hold, and the current Pro 2 has magnetic toggles for the inner doors as well. The two straps can be used for either door, so you can double strap the fly door or use one for each. Zpacks has now also adopted magnetic door ties for its Duplex and Triplex tents. Rolling up doors inwards rather than outwards makes for neater rolls and a stronger hold.

Inner Doors

The Pro 2 and Stratospire Li’s offset pole design and J-shaped inner doors are two things we think are far superior to the Zpacks Triplex and Duplex. Offset doors are much bigger and easier to enter and exit and this is an important consideration for creaky folk like us. However, Zpacks have introduced offset versions of the Duplex and Triplex, the Offset Duo and the Offset Trio, which are also more spacious than the originals. Consider them in addition to the Pro 2 and Stratospire Li if a larger door is important to you.

As well, when not tied back, the Stratospire Li and Pro 2 inner doors hang like curtains, whereas the Zpacks doors fall to the ground, zipper teeth collecting grit and letting in bugs. Make the effort to stash the door neatly inside the tent and the zip will stay much cleaner.

Pockets

The Stratospire Li’s tiny, shallow triangular pockets are in our opinion one of the few design flaws of this tent. They are just too shallow for anything other than light, tiny things like tissues or lip balm: everything else – spectacles, headlamp, you name it – just falls out. Tarptent sell a 12g/.42oz gear loft for those who want more space; it would fit most trekking pole tents. Duplex and Triplex pockets are much more practical. Our first iteration Pro 2 has no pockets at all, but later versions do.

Packed Size

We have reluctantly included this image as a rough guide, but it is somewhat misleading. Our Pro 2 has a footprint that remains attached (tied rather than clipped at the poles), so the illustrated pack is bulkier than the tent alone, and none of the other sacks have footprints inside. Our aged Duplex stuffsack has shrunk: it is very tight and there is no room for a footprint in it now. In reality and with a normal, not overly-tight roll, the Pro2 with woven floor packs smaller than the Duplex. The Stratospire Li and Triplex bags are plenty roomy. Not only a stake bag, repair kit and microfibre cloths fit inside all four bags in addition to the tent, but a bulky tyvek footprint (seen on right) also fits into all but the Duplex bag.

As single wall tents without inners or poles, all four tents pack down small. The Pro is particularly small too due to its woven floor; new models have a choice of woven or a DCF that is laminated more thinly on the inside, reducing its bulk. The Stratospire Li with its inner and struts is a longer, narrower shape. This means that it won’t fit horizontally in packs, a dealbreaker for many hikers who scramble or scrub-bash.  However, it is narrow enough to fit the side pocket of some packs; hikers who prefer this even buy a long narrow bag to repack their Zpacks or Durston tent to fit the side pocket.

However, we wonder whether those hikers who find the Stratospire Li length dealbreaking are solo, which means they need to fit more inside their one pack than do twosomes, who share a kitchen, tent and often quilt for significant space savings inside their two packs.  Geoff has carried the Stratospire Li vertically inside his 58L Osprey Exos, outside the liner bag, without issue. At the start of very long trips when his pack is full of food, I carry the tent rolled in my 3mm closed cell foam sitpad on the bottom outside of my Zpacks ArcHaul. The foam protects the bag and nothing has been damaged even on tough hikes such as scrub-bashing in the Tassie highlands.

Carrying the Stratospire Li wrapped in a 3mm closed cell foam sit pad. The pad is marginally wider than the pack, the tent about the same. The sitpad protects the tent bag whilst scrub-bashing, and also when I take off the pack and place it on the ground. Our sitpads are long enough for two people so, when we carry the tent like this, I share Geoff’s pad at lunchtime.

The Stratospire Li and sitpad fits (just) within the Zpacks raincover  on the ArcHaul  (choose the large size).

Ease of Field Repairs

This field repairability of DCF is one of its most underrated features because accidents do happen. Knowing your repair has not weakened your expensive tent is highly reassuring!

When we bought our first DCF tent, we also bought a length of repair tape and some patches from Zpacks. Durston Gear also sells DCF repair kits, as does Tarptent . Other than one tiny puncture in a floor, we haven’t needed it and have carried it in our line extension/repair kit bag (itself inside our stake bag) for all these years. But then, user error:

After a particularly strenuous week’s hiking in spring 2023, one knee screamed refusal and I fell onto the tent instead of into it; I’m no waif and my bum hit the fly with my full weight. Fortunately the resounding CRACK! was the tent rather than me. The fly instantly sagged as the force tore through a hot bonded seam, a sewn fly edge and more. Although my bum was nowhere near the corner, it’s clear this is where the forces concentrated, as they would in extreme wind.

This happened to the Pro 2 but it is of course 100% user error and no reflection on the tent design.

Between rain showers, we lowered the pole, laid the torn fly flat on a dry towel, dried both sides thoroughly (those who use alcohol stoves can use a little diluted to clean and help dry the area) and taped the torn and deformed sections on both sides. In fifteen minutes we were done. The repair is not perfect but it will hold for the life of the tent, and we recommend that anyone using DCF tents carry repair tape as well as a patch or two. The yellow cord is an extension line left attached to the stake end of the guyline from the previous night on a tent platform.

This damage incidentally demonstrates why that insanely strong (295kg/650lbs) Lawson ironwire isn’t necessarily the best choice: you really want your guyline to fail before the tent material. Even Hilleberg, makers of very strong tents indeed, use two and three millimetre guylines with breaking strengths of 60kg/130lbs and 80kg/176 lbs respectively. This probably wouldn’t have happened with 2mm Hilleberg line.

Repairing punctures on non-DCF floors is possible in the field too but you need to know what you’re doing. The Pro 2 (woven floor option or older models) and Stratospire Li floors require one kind of patch, on the silicone coated side, whereas the polyurethane coated side can be patched with Tenacious Tape. You can also use various SeamGrip glue products, available at outdoor shops worldwide, to make your own patches but this is less practical when you need an instant fix.

Performance in different weather conditions

(excluding snow or temperatures well below freezing, which we haven’t yet experienced in these tents).

Condensation

Like most people new to dcf tents, we were initially concerned about this but, after our first trip, it became a non-issue. Condensation on the fly of the tent has never been a problem for us in any of them even on still, clear, cold nights beside lakes. We quickly stopped expecting the DCF to function like silnylon, and realised our gear would still stay as dry or drier than in a conventional tent. This may not apply to those in very wet, humid environments.

When we wake in the morning, we each wipe dry the inside of the tent on our side, squeezing out the cloth in the vestibule a few times. It takes perhaps 90 seconds, less in the Duplex. It’s also possible to dry the inside of the Stratospire Li’s fly without removing the inner: you just reach around it from each side and do the last bits from the vestibule.

Previously, we’ve used light sheets of ventum, a vapour permeable but droplet impermeable sleeping bag material to make condensation barriers in both the Duplex and Triplex, though it’s rarely useful in the latter. Sadly, ventum is no longer sold by Zpacks but substitutes like argon are sold by MYOG shops.

Black ventum barrier in the Duplex, here after a still, cold rainy night beside a lake with the ventum “stuck” to the inside of the tent.

An hour later, we unclipped it, shook off the water droplets on its top surface, and the material was dry.

Certainly for two people in a Duplex, rather than the one that most people seem to use it for, the amount of condensation is, well, doubled, but we haven’t noticed drips on us. Occasionally we’ll see a few droplets on the upper surface of the ventum barrier so it must happen. For us, the real purpose of the ventum barriers is not to prevent drops falling, but to prevent us brushing against the wet interior of the fly. When we do, the ventum sticks to the fly, but the droplets don’t seep through and we just pull it away. In the morning, we either use a microfibre cloth to wipe down the inside of the fly and top surface of the ventum, or unclip the latter and shake dry. One morning, we even wiped ice from the inside of the fly!

Ventum condensation barrier in our Duplex being used by a solo hiker friend.

Zpacks no longer manufacture these barriers.

For those wanting a DIY barrier, the Duplex one measures 105cm x 278cm, with centre tie outs corresponding to the side tie outs 36cm from the short edge. It weighs 85g. The apex seam has a thin line of spectra sewn in to prevent it stretching under tension. The corners, apices and centre tie outs require eight elastic loops. We used the lightest weight Argon fabric for our DIY one.

You can reduce the weight with thinner elastic; the factory one uses Zpack's flat elastic as seen in their DCF stick-on loops. You can either sew the elastic loops onto the liner, or use stick on elastic on the fly. Then attach mitten hooks or toggles on the corresponding opposite. It depends if you want the mitten hooks on the tent or the liner: We suggest the latter ie stick on elastic loops on the tent except for tie outs where the elastic loop can go into the existing mitten hook.

We also made a barrier for our Triplex though it is much larger than the Duplex and condensation is rarely an issue. The barrier is the same length but wider and with four tie out points. Because of the extra width, a caternary cut on the apex seam would be better than the straight one we used. You can also make the liner shorter so it's not above your face; if I were making the Triplex one again I'd do this.

The Argon we used is fine, slightly less hydrophobic than Ventum. Ventum is extraordinarily hydrophobic: a relative’s cat peed on our quilt, making a small puddle. It had been there at least fifteen minutes but not one drop penetrated.

DIY Ventum barrier in the Triplex.

We now use the barrier only when we expect a lot of rain

In heavy rain, we’d read that the battering may knock condensation droplets off the inside, but even in deluges this has never happened to us and even if it did the barrier would catch any droplets before they fell on our quilt. We don’t use a barrier in the Pro 2; if you feel any fine misting during heavy rain or strong wind, you could give the fly a quick wipe; we’ve never needed to do this.

One of the biggest benefits we found in being able to almost completely dry the inside of a DCF tent every morning no matter how rainy the night or day, before setting it up the next night on a multiday trip, is that everything else stays drier too. Your clothes don’t pick up additional moisture during the night, your down bag retains its loft for longer, sleeping mats don’t get damp.

Conventional silnylon tents give only the illusion of less condensation: there’s just as much, but it soaks into the fly so you have to carry it the next day. After successive days of rain, a silnylon tent gets progressively wetter and heavier; a DCF one will be the same weight on the tenth day as it was on the first.

One rainy morning when we couldn’t wipe dry the outside of the Pro 2, it weighed 1400g/49oz, so we were carrying an astonishing 825g/29oz of excess water that more than doubled the weight of the tent. It wasn’t condensation but indicates the kind of loads silnylon flys can soak up.

With any consistent breeze, no matter how light, even with rain, we’ve found that all four tents have minor to no condensation. Opening one to four doors partially or fully to ensure this through flow is key. You can open the Zpacks tent doors from the toggle halfway down, or the Stratospire Li partially unzipped, creating a plethora of combinations. The Pro 2 has vents and steeper sides than the other tents, shedding condensation effectively.

It’s usually only during heavy prolonged rain, when we close all four doors all night, or cold, still nights with particular ambient temperature and moisture conditions, that significant condensation occurs; it can even form on the top of our sleeping bag before we’ve entered the tent.

We initially doubted whether the Stratospire Li would breathe as well as the Zpacks tents but yes, it does. In fact, contrary to expectations, we think it has significantly less condensation, but that’s subjective. This may be due to its size with one of the biggest footprints, the vent (easily enlarged using the top zip) at each peak, absent in the Zpacks tents, or that the solid inner traps more heat, reducing the temperature difference between the inside and outside surfaces of the fly.

Opening the zips from the top enlarges the Stratospire Li’s vents. This is an outstanding feature, and we would recommend this tent over the Triplex and Duplex if you camp primarily in terrain/climates that promote condensation.

When pitched low, the Pro 2 of course has more condensation than when pitched high or with a door open. However, we don’t notice more or less condensation than in any of the other tents except perhaps the Stratospire Li, which stays relatively dry.

If the moisture droplets underneath them are any indication, our polycro triangles in the vestibules also reduce condensation in tents on damp ground.

Polycro groundsheets in the vestibules reduce condensation.

Unfortunately, polycro is not durable when used on rocky or abrasive ground.

Stormworthiness

The stormworthiness of a tent is how well it withstands wind and rain (snow as well for four-season tents), and its ability to do so is dependent on countless features: shape, materials (weight, coatings, type), pole material and diameter, staking, guylines and size are just a few. Tent manufacturers solve the same problems in different ways, some compromising size or weight to get the best results to meet their goals. All four tents in this review are 3 season ones that prioritise weight and — to varying degrees — spaciousness/comfort. They are therefore not built specifically to withstand extreme winds as their highest priority in the same way as are the strongest mountaineering tents… but that’s not to say that they perform poorly. The strength of DCF means that they are unlikely to tear in strong winds, and the trekking poles under compression are much stronger than sleeved poles in freestanding tents. The bucket floors in all tents are also unlikely to flood.

As long as they are properly guyed and oriented, all these tents withstand the kinds of storms that flatten numerous freestanding ones. Nevertheless, although you’ll read reports of these tents surviving 96+km/hr (60mph or 27m/s) winds just short of hurricane force and more, the key is ‘surviving’ and we remain somewhat skeptical of the accuracy of these anecdotal reports without seeing photographic or video evidence of an anemometer beside a tent or a wind tunnel test. And a gust or two differs greatly from sustained wind or turbulent wind, both of which can abrade or fatigue essential ultralight components to failure.

Some manufacturers claim even higher wind resistance but, with the exception of Hilleberg and a scant few others, you will not see corroborating video or photographic evidence displayed on their websites. Dan Durston suggests that although these tents may survive such strengths, 64km/h (18m/s or 40mph) is a more appropriate number for them and we would agree this is the kind of ballpark figure you could plan for. Yes, many of us have had them in stronger wind than that (see below) but although they can survive they are not designed for it and things are more likely to fail.

A taut pitch is one of the most important aspects of a non-freestanding tent’s wind resistance. This is because a flapping tent places sudden, repeated, large accelerative forces on all components, just as you would yank rather than pull on a string to break it. The DCF may not fail but a tieout loop or guyline is likely to as they abrade against each other, a stake or a rock that has been placed to hold them. The tugging also loosens stakes, and just one pulling out can have a cascading catastrophic result in these tents.

Because humans are notoriously poor at judging windspeed and wind force, we’re concerned that inaccurate reporting of what these tents supposedly withstand creates unrealistic expectations. They are not designed for above the treeline winds or heavy snow, though people have taken them to both with varying results. Expecting them to perform like a black label Hilleberg could lead to hypothermia or worse.

We explore the wind resistance of different tents, including these four, in great detail in our three part series: Tents in Strong Wind. They include comments and pitching suggestions from Joe (Zpacks), Dan (Pro 2) and Henry (Tarptent): we recommend that you read all three articles to maximise any of these tents’ performance in tough conditions.

Strong Winds

Duplex prepared for a forecast storm in the Icelandic highlands in an exposed campground. Forecasted wind coming from halfway down left side of image, left rear corner of tent directly into wind. Note rocks around (not on!) fly on windward side to help deflect wind upwards, extra guys, and pack inside vestibule, cover outwards, to further deflect and slow wind. We didn’t even need to get up during the night to tighten the guylines.

We have had all four tents in strong winds, the Duplex in measured 42.8 kt winds (22m/s, 79kph, 49mph) and the XMid in measured 30 kt (35mph, 15.5m/s, 56kph) at the tent; the wind picked up during the night but we don’t know by how much because rain was also bucketing down and our dedication wasn’t up to it! With none of them did we ever feel that the DCF would fail, and of course hiking poles in triangulated structures are many times stronger than the same number of poles in a simple two-pole domed tent. Both the Duplex and Stratospire Li pitch drum tight, with little of the vibration that loosens pegs and abrades guylines to failure. We believe that our silpoly X-Mid is much more likely to fail in those winds because it’s just not as strong as DCF.

The wind came up during the night on this ridgetop and we were unable to get a sufficiently taut pitch on the Triplex to prevent significant flapping; pegs loosened several times.

However, we find that we can’t pitch the Triplex with its big flat expanse of wall as tautly as the other three tents, and it has much more movement in strong winds. We would not choose the Triplex above the treeline in extreme winds, or for any trip where we anticipated strong winds in exposed sites.

With all fourteen stakes deployed, we can confirm that the Pro 2 performs well in wind at 30 kts despite its relatively large sides and steepish walls. We deliberately took it out on a forecast strong wind overnighter and although pitched in the most open area we could find, the wind was extremely turbulent as well as strong. We pitched to ground level, kept all doors closed for structural integrity (condensation isn’t a problem in these conditions!) and used every stakeout and guyline.

The tent was originally oriented correctly with ridgeline parallel to wind but, as often happens, the latter swung during the night to hammer the tent broadside. We had to restake one perimeter stake that pulled out from the now sodden ground: it was bucketing rain as well. A tiny amount of sideways rain blew in through one vent and trickled down the mesh a short distance; we’d attempted to seal it but the small velcro square patch was too small to hold it closed. At one point the fly loosened because the pole tips had sunk into the now sodden ground; we simply extended them from inside and everything from guylines to fly became taut again. It was not a relaxing sleep, but that is the case in any of these tents in strong wind.

Storm testing the Pro 2 with anemometer mounted beside the tent

The Pro 2 pitches more tautly than the Triplex because of all those stakes but, in our experience, the tent flaps more than Stratospire Li and Duplex both when correctly oriented and broadside. However, we noticed that although the sides of the Pro 2 flapped, the pole and ridgeline didn’t budge, indicating the integrity of the pitch (you are in trouble once the pole starts to bounce around). When the wind is this strong broadside without all stakes deployed, it can flatten and displace the fly so much as to also flatten the bucket floor, which is potentially an issue in sodden ground.

It’s essential to orient the Duplex correctly with the overlapping door pitched corner into the wind; with its many-angled shape and zippered fly, the Stratospire Li is more flexible, but should be pitched vestibule into the wind.

For both the Duplex and Stratospire Li in open areas, a log or low wall just a rock or two high on the windward size helps deflect wind over the tent, rather than catching under the fly.  We also lie our packs with covers on and facing outwards in the vestibule near the edge on the windward side to further deflect wind. The Pro 2 pitches to ground level and wind catching underneath is negligible.

In strong winds, the only point of failure in our DCF tents has been pegs pulling out: user error. In our experience, the most likely pegs to fail have been on the apex guys of the Zpacks tents, the corners of the Pro 2 and the strut corners of the Stratospire Li, where multiple forces are concentrated. If we anticipate strong winds, we now double peg or use rocks at these points on the windward side.

Rain

We have had all tents in heavy and consistent rain. All have kept us completely dry. None have leaked significantly. The main potential for rain ingress in any of them is if you slide down on sloping ground to push against the foot area, so that the inner bathtub extends outside the fly. We have had the latter happen in dry weather and can see how rain sheeting down the outside of the fly would quickly collect in the bucket floor.

We’ve had no rain ingress through splash back – the vestibules, overhang and height of bucket floors is sufficient. We check the position of the Stratospire Li inner at the pitchlock corners, and ensure the latter are tightly closed.

Even with standing water (top left) around the tent, the Pro 2’s relatively low bucket floors prevent water ingress. This is the floor with the black Durston footprint underneath, with a little water between the floor and the footprint: you can see the latter has already punctured in one spot lower right on its second use.

In our opinion, the Triplex is the most comfortable of the four tents in extended rain — but only in otherwise benign conditions – strong winds negate that. Equal second in our opinion are the Stratospire Li, because of its dry separate inner that keeps you away from the walls, its huge vestibules and drum tight pitch, and the Pro 2 because of its interior spaciousness. The Duplex has been bearable for us inside for a day of rain, especially when there’s enough wind to minimise condensation. In still conditions with heavy rain and holed up during the day, you have to wipe the inside of all these tents occasionally.  Nearly all reviews I’ve seen about holing up in rain in the two person tents – be it the Stratospire Li, Duplex or Pro 2  - have been written by solo users.  Few two person tents, freestanding or otherwise, are truly roomy for two average-sized people: in our opinion, the Pro 2 is an exception.

Hail

We include hail only because there was one report in 2022 of five DCF tents getting smashed by hail (this tent suffered about 40 holes, one had eight, and the remaining three had two or three holes) whilst silnylon and silpoly tents beside them were fine. Certainly, DCF is less puncture resistant but, unless you live in a place that regularly receives golfball-sized hail, there is no need to worry. This happened in Alaska (!), the tent with multiple holes was not only old but had a superseded inferior DCF, and DCF hail damage is simply not something that we hear about with any frequency. With tens of thousands of DCF tents in use around the world this suggests they are much more robust than you might think. The few holes in four of the five tents could be repaired in the field with tape and patches.

Dust

The drafty Duplex and Triplex are dreadful in blowing dust – it goes straight through the mesh and you’ll end up with a layer of grit over everything. We haven’t used either tent in snow but understand that spindrift is similarly problematic.

The fine bulldust in Aussie arid areas can pass through the mesh of all these DCF tents

The Stratospire Li solid inner is significantly better with dust, though a small amount still passes through the mesh at the top. We initially bought it for alpine camping in Australian summers because it handles spindrift better than the Zpacks tents; the new Stratospire Ultra pitches to ground level and would be better again.

When pitched right to ground level and in our experience, the Pro 2 is better in dust than the Zpacks tents and about the same as the Stratospire Li with solid inner. Australia’s fine bulldust gets through even no-seeum mesh, leaving a fine layer over everything in strong wind.

Cold

One of the biggest differences we found when first changing from conventional freestanding double-walled tents to a Duplex was just how much colder it was. A breeze passed over us with the slightest puff of wind – welcome in hot areas, not so much in cold. We had to up our bag rating, so the weight savings of DCF tents are not as great as you might think in cold conditions. The Stratospire Li with a solid inner is in our opinion much, much warmer than the Duplex and Triplex, but not as warm as a conventional double skinned freestanding tent.   The Pro 2 is definitely warmer than the Duplex and Triplex. Comparisons with the Stratospire Li are trickier; we believe the Stratospire Li with solid inner to be warmer but have no empirical evidence to support this.

However, the moment the sun strikes any DCF tent, the temperature inside rockets up many times faster than in a silnylon tent. This is great after cold rainy nights, when a damp down quilt dries faster left inside the hot tent with doors open, than draped over a bush.

Heat

The four doors of all four tents can be opened simultaneously, allowing a pleasant breeze. The great advantage of the Stratospire Li is that the inner can be pitched alone and independently of the fly in dry weather; a useful feature and a definite advantage over the Zpacks and Pro 2 tents. We used our airy, spacious Triplex in the tropics and it was excellent in those conditions.

Triplex on the gobsmacking Thorsborne Trail, Hinchinbrook Island, Queensland

Conclusions

All four tents are outstanding and we will continue to take three of them — the Stratospire Li, Triplex and Pro 2 — on different outings. They have different strengths and weaknesses and which tent suits you best depends on the conditions in which you use it.

The sheer simplicity of the Duplex is a joy; a cycling friend told us that, for some, adding things – bells, chain guards, mudflaps, lights – to their bicycle is everything, whereas for others beauty lies in stripping away every extraneous thing. The Duplex is in the latter category. It pitches anywhere easily but, because of the condensation I experience as a sweaty old lady on my side of the tent and the lack of space for two, we no longer use the Duplex and choose one of the other tents instead. We emphasise that this is, of course, irrelevant for solo users.

In our opinion, the Stratospire Li is excellent in wind, followed closely by the Duplex and then the Pro 2. Cold wind, the Stratospire Li with solid inner excels. And of course all tents can be left with several doors open even in light rain.

For us in mild conditions, in sheltered sites not at elevation, it’s the wonderfully spacious Triplex.  For cold, windy hikes, or anywhere we expect dust or a sprinkle of snow, the Stratospire Li.  Cramped or sloping ground, the Duplex, with the smallest footprint, excels (but it’s just too cramped for us now we’ve tasted more space). Most other places, we choose the Pro 2… but there are some environments we wouldn’t take any of them because they are not 4 season or mountaineering tents.

They’re all great tents so we usually choose the tent that best suits the specific hike we’re doing!

Experienced hikers will have no problem setting up the Stratospire Li but, if you are new to hiking, all four tents are trickier than freestanding ones, with the Stratospire Li being trickiest unless on very sloping or uneven ground in rain, when we think the Pro 2 is the most difficult to pitch well. The X Mid Pro 2 deserves its accolades, but it does not win on every parameter: no tent does. Our title was somewhat tongue in cheek because nobody should choose a tent because it’s ‘the best’. Ask instead, best at what? And is that what I need?

We’re not being cute or evasive when we say: the answer is it depends, because it’s absolutely essential to select a tent based on the weather and terrain you expect to hike in most of the time, and what is most important for you, rather than assuming one tent is best for everything. Forget the hype: regardless of which one you choose, you can be confident that, within the ultralight tent sub-genre, each of these tents is truly exceptional.

---