MOUNTAIN SAFETY RESEARCH MISSING LINK

INITIAL REVIEW

Review Date: March 8, 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

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 in 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.

Product Information

Year of manufacture: 2004

Manufacturer website: www.msrcorp.com

Manufacturer's stated base weight: 3.0 lbs (1.3 kg in literature, though correctly this rounds to 1.4 kg)

Manufacturer's stated packaged weight: 3 lb 7 oz (1.6 kg)

Measured base weight on Post Office tared scale: 3 lb 2.5 oz (1.4 kg) (weight of tent plus attached guys alone)

Measured packaged weight on tared scale: (includes main stuff sack, small stuff sack for pegs, eight aluminum pegs, extra guy, warranty card and booklet) 3 lb 10 oz. (1.6 kg)

Measured trail weight on tared scale: 3 lbs 7 oz. (1.6 kg) (as above, minus warranty card & booklet)

Bagged dimensions when received: 11" x 7.5" x 5.5" (28 x 19 X 14 cm)

Poles: none, uses trekking poles, adjustable ski poles or equivalent

Doors: one

Vestibule: the tent has a projecting awning, but not a full weatherproof vestibule

Vents: One high, protected by front awning; one low, protected by rear fly; one adjustable, in door

Manufacturer's stated interior peak height: 3' 6" (1.1 m)

Measured interior peak height: 3' 6" (1.1 m), at center of front catenary (approximately 4' 6", 1.4 m, at point of pole insertion)

Manufacturer's stated width at rear of tent: 11' (3.3 m in literature, though correctly this rounds to 3.4 m)

Manufacturer's stated width at front of tent 6' (1.8 m)

Measured widths correspond with these numbers.

Width of tent, from center of rear wall to center of door (not stated by manufacturer): 4' 1" (1.2 m)

Manufacturer's stated floor area: 37 sq. ft (3.44 sq. m)

Actual floor area (not all usable because of tent geometry): 35 sq. ft (3.25 sq. m)

Manufacturer's stated vestibule area (not confirmed, calculationally difficult): 14 sq. ft (1.3 sq. m)

MSRP: $229.95

Preliminary Information

Delivery date: March 5, 2004

The tent arrived via UPS, shipped in a small cardboard box. It was received in excellent condition. It was housed in a matching stuff sack, with instructions for pitching printed on a lightweight Tyvek-like material sewn onto the interior of the flap. Attached was a multilingual manufacturer's tag, which provided basic information on textiles and tent statistics. Also included was a small sack including an additional guy plus a metal guy-tensioner, eight well-made square aluminum pegs (these are both lightweight and extremely strong, based on results from preliminary pitching into frozen ground), a booklet on tent care and a warranty card.


Stakes, extra guy, etc.	Stuff sack with tent

The tent proved to be extremely easy to erect, with minimal consultation with the directions necessary. I used a footprint made of ultra-light Tyvek (used for kite-making, preferable to standard Tyvek on weight grounds); no footprint comes with the tent, nor does one seem to be available from MSR at this time. I used two sets of poles for initial setup trials: a pair of Leki Makalu and a pair of Leki Backcountry ski poles. Both worked fine. Provided that they are adjustable in height, any set of poles that does not have a truly oversize handle should work well. It would be possible to custom-cut poles from dead wood if desired, although this would not provide as taut a pitch as is achievable with an adjustable pole. I have not yet attempted to pitch the tent using guys only.

Description of product

The MSR Missing Link is, in effect, a modern-day, high-tech spin on what's traditionally referred to as a "baker tent." Shelters of this form have a long American history, as they were easily thrown together with sheet canvas, rope and spars. The design has many advantages, of which ease of access and the high-ceilinged vestibule and tent are paramount. It's also a close cousin to the tarp-tent, although considerably more commodious than most. It is, in fact, one of the most interesting shelters from a mainstream manufacturer that I've seen in a while, not least because the tent-weight per person is so low. Traditionally, such tents were warmed by a fire placed outside, much in the manner of the lean-to they somewhat resemble, but as an advocate of Leave No Trace (and one sensibly alarmed at the possibility of igniting my shelter) this is a pleasure on which I will pass.

The main body of this single-wall tent is made with pale orange (described in the manufacturer's literature as "Sunset Orange") 30-denier 246T Rip-Stop Nylon 66 (1.9 oz.)¹ with a 1,500 mm polyurethane coating on one side and a silicon coating on the other (this information, more detailed than that in the literature attached to the tent, was supplied courtesy of Jim Giblin of MSR). Though of the same denier, this is a weightier fabric than the silnylon that's increasingly used for ultra-lightweight shelters etc., which is normally 1.1 oz 30-denier nylon. This weight difference is almost entirely accounted for by the polyurethane coating, used to enable MSR to meet legal fire resistance standards for Canada and a number of US states. It is additionally stated by MSR's representative that it provides improved water resistance (based on standard tests of waterproofing) and further, it enables the tent to be seam-taped.

The tent floor is a strong 70-denier nylon taffeta with a heavier 5,000 mm polyurethane coating, which makes the floor seemingly impervious to water, based on the absence of seepage from the extremely wet ground on which the preliminary pitches of the tent were made. The heavier nylon fiber used should increase tear-resistance in this most vulnerable area of the tent. The same nylon is used at staking and guy points. The floor is seamless, and flush with the sides of the tent.

In form, the base of the tent is a trapezoid, 6 ft (1.8 meters) wide at the front, 11 ft (3.4 m) wide at the rear, and a little over 4 ft (1.2 m) wide. Externally, there are stake-out loops at each corner. There is a large, roughly semi-circular door in the center of the front wall of the tent, 4' 3" (1.3 m) in width, which opens to within one inch (2.5 cm) of the ground. This door has two zippers, with both inner and outer pulls attached. There is a mesh insert in the upper half of the front door, similarly equipped with zips. The zippers are smooth in operation.

This very wide opening is, at least in theory, sufficient for two campers to enter the tent simultaneously (as MSR's literature claims). However, the center of the door is at the lowest point of the front wall, and one must in any case duck to avoid the front awning, so this two-person scenario is stretching it a bit (in any case, how often is it likely to arise)? Be that as it may, this is a huge door, and the visibility out that it affords is one of the principle pleasures of the tent.


Missing Link from front	Pole pocket

Missing Link from rear	Guy loops on rear ridge

The front of the tent is protected by an awning, which extends (angled downward at about twenty degrees) along the full width and beyond. At its narrowest (over the top of the door) it is 2' 3" in width (.7 m). The front guys (intended to be used at a 7', 2.1 m length) are attached to each end of the awning, which, when the guys are pegged, extends out to either side of the front wall (see above).

The four supplied guys are a strong (possibly aramid) cord with a reflective weave for night visibility. The diameter is greater (and the guy-lines heavier) than, for example, Kelty Triptease. I feel that a lighter guy-cord is possibly more appropriate to a lightweight shelter. Having said that, these are perfectly adequate in quality and any weight differential will be fairly small.

The awning bears the MSR logo prominently. At the junctions between the awning and the wall are two sets of two reinforced pockets. The trekking pole handles fit into these (it does not seem critical which of the two pockets is used). There is a mesh-covered vent running the full length of the front wall beneath the awning.

The tent sweeps back to the wide rear wall, which is only 1' 3" (.4 m) in height. Almost this entire rear wall has a mesh panel, the low vent, which is protected by a fly 1' 10" (.6 m) in width at its center, narrowing towards the sides of the tent. At the center is a short guy-loop to tension this rear fly. There are two sturdy guy loops along the side ridges of the tent to enable a pitch without poles.

As noted, the tent has a high-low vent system to minimize condensation, aided by the door vent. Often, one pitches a tent with the high vent into the wind to force air through the tent (considering the condensation for which single-wall tents are notorious, one wants lots of airflow). Given the prominent front wall, which may create a bit of a sail effect, it is possible that this will not be feasible for this tent in anything but low wind conditions. This is something that I intend to examine thoroughly in the field and long-term tests.

Pitching the tent

The process I describe here (one of several possible pitching methods) is that suggested on the tent instructions attached to the lid of the stuff-sack. To protect the tent floor I used a groundsheet of kite-weight Tyvek, as noted earlier. I first staked out the four corners of the floor through their respective loops, trying to keep the floor as smooth as possible.

Next, I half-opened the door (manufacturer's suggestion), extended a trekking pole to the suggested 4' 6" (1.4 m) length and inserted it into one of the reinforced corner pockets. I positioned the pole tip so it fell an inch or so behind the front wall (so that the pole was almost vertical) then staked out the guy on the awning on that side. This procedure was repeated on the other side of the tent with the second pole. I staked out the fly over the rear vent and tied on the rear guy to the loop in the center of the rear panel (this provides better shoulder room internally and would do best with a pitch to a raised branch or another pole, rather than to the ground). I adjusted the lengths of the poles slightly to achieve a tauter pitch. Done.

The tent looked perfectly reputable, "purty as a picture." This procedure took me ten minutes, but only because I mislaid one trekking pole behind a tree! The manufacturer claims the tent can be erected in three, and (based on this first try) I see no reason to dispute this claim, though I will be testing pitch speed now that I'm more familiar with the tent. Erecting the tent in wind may prove a greater challenge.

Further comments

Construction of the tent appears very sound. I examined most of the stitching, which seems first rate: free from pucker, irregularities, loose thread etc. As the seams are all tape-sealed, in theory no seam sealing should be required. If a seam leak should appear, MSR recommends sealing the affected area only. Wind tunnel tests described in the accompanying brochure state that the tent has a theoretical 50 mile/hour (80 kilometer/hour) rating. This is sensibly tempered in the text with a "real world" evaluation of that number. I do know that my tent blew down in an extremely strong wind-gust on the second day, but I believe this was because I had (deliberately) not sunk the pegs far into the frozen ground.

The dull orange of the tent makes for an attractive internal light, although in conformance with Leave No Trace principles I would have liked to see a dull green or blue-gray nylon: still, the tent is by no means gaudy and should fit right into the landscape during fall leaf season! I do take issue with MSR's contention that the awning makes a good area in which to cook. One could unquestionably do so, and I may well be tempted on rainy days, but in bear country it's generally not a good idea to cook where you sleep and it's a bad idea to promote the practice. These are trifling criticisms, and, based on preliminary evaluation, I believe MSR has done a fine job of producing a tent that's close to ultra-light specs, with an innovative and attractive design.

Future testing

For the field and long-term reports, I shall be examining the following issues in a variety of camping and backpacking venues.

Pitching and ventilation

Can the tent indeed be erected in three minutes (after practice), as MSR claims? If not, how long?
Can fallen branches or guy cords indeed substitute well for hiking poles?
Are the guy-loops appropriately placed to provide a taut pitch?
Are adequate numbers of guy-loops supplied for additional guying in difficult conditions?
How stable in wind is the tent? How easy is it to erect in windy conditions?
Given the single wall construction, is condensation in general an issue?
How good is the tent ventilation (with both one and two users)? How dependent on orientation is the ventilation? How essential is the door mesh to ventilation? Does the rear fly need to be propped open to improve ventilation?
Under what conditions of rain and wind can the door be left fully open (after all, this is one of the most attractive features of the design)? This will be tested in early spring before the blackfly appear.
Can one use improvised stakes successfully? How strong does staking for the corners and guys need to be—will forest duff prove adequately resilient?
Is the tent "quiet?" In other words, when stressed under wind, does it handle the load gracefully or does it vibrate and flap?
Is the tent dry in driving rain? Are vents adequately protected? Is there an issue with seepage under the tent from the walls?
What's the optimal groundsheet? Silnylon? Tyvek? Thin-gauge plastic sheeting?

Construction etc.

Are the taped seams adequate?
How durable is the comparatively lightweight fabric?
Is the geometry of the tent adequate in terms of headroom etc?
How easily can two people (or one tall person) enter and exit?
What's the best arrangement of sleeping positions for two adults in order to provide maximum space and comfort?
Though this is clearly a two-adult tent, it seems possible that there is sufficient space for three kids (which would make it a boon for Scouting). Is this feasible? I have enlisted the aid of my local scout troop on this one.
How do kids respond to the design—is it fun to sleep in? My daughters will be the test subjects for this.

Other

As previously noted, this is an innovative spin on an old concept. Innovation is frequently not 100 percent successful at first try. Are there any areas of design weakness (not covered under the previous headings) that will emerge?
Are there minor adjustments (titanium pegs, lighter guylines, removing labels, lighter stuff-sack, etc.) that will minimize the trail weight of the tent?

My thanks to MSR and BackpackGearTest for the opportunity to test the Missing Link tent.

1. Specialized textile terms used are defined below.

Denier or ("D"): a standard of measurement, based on the weight of a continuous single filament of the fiber. The finer the fiber is, the lower this number will be. Numerically, a denier is the equivalent to the weight in grams of 9,000 meters of continuous filament fiber.

Thread count (or "T"): the number of threads per inch in a fabric.

Weight: given in ounces per square yard of textile. This figure is not generally given in metric equivalent.

Nylon 66 (or other numbers): there are a variety of Nylon chemistries leading to different polymers. 6, 11, 62, 66 etc. identify the polymer in question. 6 or 66 are most commonly used in tent construction.

Read more reviews of MSR gear
Read more gear reviews by Edward Ripley-Duggan

Initial Report