MSR Missing Link

Field Report

Report Date: May 5, 2004

Reviewer Information

• Name: Edward Ripley-Duggan
  
• Age: 50
  
• Gender: Male
  
• Height: 6' 1" (1.85 m)
  
• Weight: 215 pounds (98 kg)
  
• erd@wilsey.net
  
• Catskills, New York State
  
  

Reviewer Background: See end of report

Product information

• Manufacturer: MSR (Mountain Safety Research)
  
• Address: 4000 1st Ave S, Seattle, WA 98134 USA
  
• Tel: 801-278-5533
  
• E-Mail: info@msrgear.com
  
• Year of Manufacture: 2004
  
• URL: http://www.msrcorp.com
  
  

Testing environments and field-specific notes: I used the Missing Link first pitched on frozen ground in late March at an altitude of 600 ft (180 m). Conditions were somewhat challenging, with a rolling ground fog. I noted some condensation on the floor in the morning, but I'm of the opinion that this would have been the case with most tents, given the high humidity and ground chill.

In early April I used the tent in the mountains at 2490 ft (760 m). Setting the tent up proved quite easy on the rock & duff surface, but I noted that the relatively short needle stakes had a tendency to pull out and I tied the tent off to branches etc. where feasible, and achieved a reasonably taut pitch. Pitching took a little time under these circumstances (a lot more than three minutes), which was largely a function of the less-than-perfect campsite (one of the few that are legal in the notch where I was situated).

A Tyvek groundsheet proved effective, and is generally better suited (and lighter) than a plastic sheet, which was rather slippery against the nylon floor. Temperatures were down to sub-freezing off and on, but at 34 degrees F (1 degree C) in the tent when measured around midnight. There was a fairly heavy rain at various times during the night. The tent remained dry, so far as the walls & floor went, but the ceiling of the tent (including the lower surface of the front awning, on the exterior) was wet. I noted no spray-through from the rain and I'm reasonably certain that this moisture was not seepage but condensation (the top vent discharges into the awning). The rain was wind-driven sufficiently that I kept the main door tightly shut, reducing overall ventilation.

One minor problem that was noted was a tendency for my back to brush the low point of the awning when getting in and out of the tent (in part because of my height). The result, until I threw a waterproof jacket on, was slightly uncomfortable. I could doubtless have affected a more graceful exit. The low clearance over the door is a small issue that may be amended by the use of a removable prop of deadwood. A small loop sewn at the center of the lip of the awning with a guy off to a branch might be a more effective solution, allowing maximum clearance, although it would break the elegant lines of the tent.

I have taken the step of placing a forked twig under the guy that holds the flap protecting the rear vent, so it is open to the fullest extent, allowing unimpeded passage of air. I've found from past experience with similarly protected vents that this trick appears to improve airflow considerably. Though the vents on this tent are substantial, the better the airflow in the tent, the lower will be the levels of condensation.

Headroom for one is excellent. I have tested the headroom for two by lying along the rear wall, and provided a guy is attached to the loop in the center of the roof panel, raising it up (which required a suitable-placed branch) the headroom is adequate. In practice, the dimensions of the tent are such that various configurations of two sleepers are possible, some of which offer superior comfort.

General comments: The claim for a fast pitching time–MSR asserts three minutes–is not unreasonable. I have certainly been able to meet this criterion under controlled conditions, but only when in an ideal location such as a meadow. Pitching on rock and duff demands a little more time and ingenuity.

I found that, predictably, the tent does not pitch that well on snow – the need to have four secure anchor points at the corners necessitates the use of snow stakes, and both the use of hiking poles (which have a tendency to sink progressively into the snow under load, altering the pitch) and the requirement for good tie-off points for the front guys present challenges.

In the issued bag, the tent is really rather unrealistically bulky. I have found that it compresses well (approximately 40 percent) in a medium compression sack. I would not recommend prolonged storage in this manner (I keep my tents loose in pillowcases to prevent creasing affecting the quality of waterproofing etc.).

Ventilation is at least adequate, and the few problems I have noted have been in situations that would challenge most tents, both single wall and those with fly. Obtaining a taut pitch is straightforward under most circumstances, and the supplied guys have so far proven adequate–indeed, I have not had to use any other additional tie-off points other than that at the center of the rear panel.

Future testing: I have as yet been unable to test the tent in two-man configuration. This is on the agenda for the next testing period leading up to the final report. Nor have I been able to use it as a tent for family camping (as I have pointed out previously, this would seem potentially to be a good tent for kids, who seem to respond well to the unusual design, to judge by the reaction of mine). Now the weather has become mild enough for family camping, this is on the agenda.

So far as climate is concerned, I've yet to have a chance to pitch in serious wind. Nor have the elements obliged with a true "soaker"–a torrential downpour that will push the limits of the fabric and waterproofing. I consider this to be a fairly critical test. I'm looking forward to trying the tent on a multi-day excursion, and intend to use the Missing Link on a weeklong July kayak/backpacking trip that should reveal a lot more about the benefits, limitations and durability of the structure.

In my initial report, I posed a number of questions pertaining to the Missing Link that I will not repeat here. Answers to some are noted above; the rest will be addressed as testing proceeds.

Summary: The Missing Link, though not well suited to (or intended for) snow, has proven robust in a variety of settings and is a pleasing three-season tent. It is generally easy to pitch (certainly more so than the majority, as there are no folding poles to fuss with). Condensation seems to be, at most, a minor issue, though one that I will continue to monitor closely. The interior is spacious (even voluminous) for one person, and the design affords some real pleasures in terms of roominess, though the view from the front door is slightly curtailed by the front awning.

Likes:

• Elegant design
  
• Easy pitch
  
• Relatively light weight
  
• Roomy interior
  
  

Dislikes:

• Brushing into awning on exiting tent
  
  

Reviewer biography: I hike regularly year-round in the Catskills, with occasional excursions to the Adirondacks and elsewhere. A hiker since my teens, I was born and grew up in rural Hertfordshire in England, moving to the US at age 19. Given the harsh winters of the region where I make my home (and the need to keep active or perish of boredom) I make frequent ascents of local peaks on snowshoes and crampons, with an occasional foray on cross-country skis. Nothing could be further removed from the landscape of my childhood.

I enjoy walking in all its manifold forms, from a simple stroll in the woods to multi-day backpack excursions. I through-hiked the Northville-Placid trail over ten days on 2003. Though by no means an extreme ultralight enthusiast, from spring to fall my preference is to carry a packweight of 12 pounds (5.5 kg), more or less. In recent years, I've rapidly moved to a philosophy of "lighter is better," within the constraints of budget and common sense.