Drop + Dan Durston X-Mid 1P Tent Discussions | Drop

Free Standard Shipping in the US on orders over $99

Showing 1 of 675 conversations about:

Mar 21, 2019

Hi Dan, I've been looking forward to the drop opening for the last month. Open Sesame indeed! I'm sure you have better things to do than entertain impatient people on your massdrop page but I'd love to hear how your tent compares to the Lanshan tents which rival it in cost, if not quite in weight. Would you be willing to do one of your famous tent comparisons with the Lanshan 2 (and maybe the Lanshan 1, but that strays away into 1 pole tents)? I always learn a lot and am very interested to read them.

(Edited)

Mar 21, 2019

Vote

dandurston

5116

Dan Durston

Mar 24, 2019

GrimTuesdayHi GT, The Lanshan 1 and 2 are both hexagon based tents but they differ (as you know) in the pole structure. The 1 has a single offset pole while the 2 has two poles forming a ridgeline. So the Lanshan 1 is quite similar to a tent like the SMD Lunar Solo (except the LS is a single wall) while the Lanshan 2 is similar to tents like the SMD Haven. I'll comment mostly on the Lanshan 1 because it is a 1P tent and thus a closer competitor, but I'll follow that up with some comments on the Lanshan 2. Also please note that I've never seen or used a Lanshan, so I'm just doing an armchair comparison via the specs on the website. Lanshan 1 vs X-Mid The Lanshan 1 is basically a double wall version of the SMD Lunar Solo which I've already compared the X-Mid to, so many topics in that comparison are relevant here, such as how the single pole structure impacts wall slopes and living space. One key difference between the Lunar Solo and Lanshan 1 though is that the Lanshan 1 is quite a bit smaller. Here are these three tents to scale:

The Lanshan 1 is actually quite a small tent. The floor length is spec'd at 82.5" (versus 87" for the X-Mid) and even that doesn't really show the difference in useable length because the Lanshan has a lot more inward slope on the end walls vs the X-Mid. So it is 4.5" shorter at the ground level but likely closer to 8-10" shorter a foot off the ground where the top of your head would be. I say the X-Mid works for folks up to about 6'4, so the Lanshan 1 looks suited for folks up to about 5'8". Overall in terms of space it's really not much of a comparison. The Lanshan 1 is much shorter, has less than half the vestibule area, and is not in the same ball park for headroom because it has a single peak while the X-Mid has dual peaks spaced well apart. So you can sit up anywhere in the X-Mid, but just right at the pole in the Lanshan 1. Other advantages to the X-Mid include:

Two doors (vs one)
Two vestibules (vs one)
Two vents (vs one)
Vent is adjustable
Pole doesn't block door
Larger doorway (easier access)
No sag fabric
Better snow shedding (steeper walls)
High end zips (vs basic zips + flap that tends to snag)
Stronger fabric (20D vs 15D)
Full coverage fly can extend right to ground
Higher end materials and hardware
Higher quality construction (presumably)
Simper 4 stake pitch.

Conversely advantages to the Lanshan are hard to come by, other than it's very low price. You could argue its shape is better in the wind. Indeed it does have less wind drag since it's a tiny tent and doesn't have much headroom, but the X-Mid supports it's greater profile with dual peak guylines and a dual pole structure that spread the load. So I would argue wind performance is likely similarly good in both tents. I think it's pretty amazing that the X-Mid weighs the same (and actually less when you factor in that it needs less stakes) while being a lot more spacious and well featured (e.g. 2 doors), plus using tougher fabric (20D vs 15D , where 20D poly is stronger than 15D nylon since nylon has about a 15% strength advantage). That's really enabled by the more efficient geometry of the X-Mid. Single pole mid shapes just aren't very efficient designs because they use a lot of fabric for the volume (I wrote a post here that explains why the X-Mid has more volume than a single pole mid despite using less fabric). Plus the Lanshan 1 uses an offset pole location that is less efficient still (see my article) and it's a six sided shape which adds even more seams and stakes. So the Lanshan ties up a lot of weight in fabric, seam and stakes for its size. Efficient design is something that few companies are thinking about it, but it's a much better way to save weight that making a tent tiny or stripping away important features. Lanshan 2 vs X-Mid The Lanshan 2 is obviously a 2 person tent, so it's quite a bit larger and heavier than the X-Mid. Actually the X-Mid has a pretty comparable amount of headroom because both tent have dual peaks. The Lanshan 2 peaks are slightly higher (47 vs 46") but also closer together (43" vs 50") so there is likely at least as much headroom in the X-Mid as the Lanshan 2. That would feel a bit tight for two in the Lanshan 2, but quite generous for 1 in the X-Mid. The Lanshan 2 is quite a small 2P tent. The floor is only 43" wide which is about as small as it gets for a 2P tent. The length is also quite short like the Lanshan 1 at only 82.6". Considering it has a lot of inward wall slope at well, it's certainly not a tent for tall people. I'm actually at a bit of a loss to explain why the Lanshan 2 is so heavy. Consider that the X-Mid 2P when it arrives will be much wider (50" vs 43"), much longer (~92" vs 82.6") and have a lot more headroom (peaks ~60" apart vs 43") - so it is a much larger tent all round - and yet it will weigh appreciably less (roughly 36oz vs 40oz) while being more fully featured. Dual pole hexagon designs like the Lanshan 2 are more efficient than the Lanshan 1, but still only average, whereas the X-Mid is the most efficient geometry that I'm aware of, as I've explained here. So you can expect when the X-Mid 2P arrives that it will be lighter, more spacious, more fully featured and simpler to use, in addition to advantages unrelated to the geometry such as the use of non-saggy fabric, higher end materials and hardware, adjustable vent designs etc.

(Edited)

Mar 24, 2019

Flyfishermanmike

Mar 29, 2019

dandurstonAwesome response! I used a Lanshan 2 all last season, mostly solo and really liked it but there's certainly room for improvements. I'll be purchasing a X-mid 2 when available!

Mar 29, 2019

GrimTuesday

Mar 29, 2019

dandurstonThanks for the detailed response! As others have said on the drop, it was your detailed and informative responses to questions like this that convinced me to buy your tent. I would disagree with only one thing you said above, that the LS1 is the competition to the X-Mid 1. I think many people would consider the LS2 to be a 1.5 (1.75 maybe?) person tent and therefore competing for customers who want more space than a Big Agnes coffin but also want to keep a low(ish) weight and low price. In that regard, it is competitive with the X-Mid 1 in that it has more floor space and a lower price, albeit at much more weight. You bring up a very interesting point about the LS2 being heavy compared to the X-Mid 2. It can't all be from the hexagon shape, can it?

Mar 29, 2019

dandurston

5116

Dan Durston

Mar 29, 2019

GrimTuesdayNo it can't all be the hexagon shape. Especially because we aren't even including the additional stake weight (6 vs 4) in these weight specs. It's hard to say without seeing one in person, but there's gotta be more to it. One possibility is that the hardware is heavy. To get the price that low you need to use the highest volume/cheapest hardware rather than the lightest, so it appears to have unnecessarily heavy hardware in quite a few places (e.g. the door toggles look heavy). Collectively this could add 1-2oz if they've got heavier than necessary hardware throughout the tent. Also the fabric might not be a 15D. I'm not saying they are untruthful because I have zero evidence of that, but 30D fabrics are much cheaper since they have been around longer and are produced in higher volumes. Since the weight is oddly heavy for a 15D tent and more in line with what you'd expect from a 30D tent, I would entertain the possibility that it's not a true 15D fabric. Sometimes companies call something 15D but it's really half 30D (e.g. 15D on one orientation, 30D on the other) while other times the specs are simply wrong because the fabric mill claimed it was 15D to sound more impressive. It's hard to believe their fabric really as light as a typical 15D. If the X-Mid 2P was shrunken to be the size of the Lanshan 2 then it would be about 32-33oz (tent only) whereas I think the Lanshan 2 is about 40oz (tent only and it's hard to say since there are so many different specs flying around). Of that 8oz difference, my speculation is it is about 1/3 the "design efficiency", 1/3 the hardware and 1/3 that the fabric is heavier. I'd love to do a 1.75P version of the X-Mid that is about 40" wide and 32oz, but there's only so many projects I can work on at once.

(Edited)

Mar 29, 2019

amandasandwicch

Mar 30, 2019

dandurstonI would love a 1.5 or 1.75 version, especially in dyneema.

Mar 30, 2019

Woodpecker

Apr 19, 2019

dandurstonYES PLEASE 1.5 or 1.75- my only observation so far is that my linebacker shoulders place my arms against the mesh perfectly for the mossy's to bite me through it! Guess I'll have to wait on the 2P unless Dan would let the drawings slip out and I'll sew one myself LOL . A slightly wider version would be greatly welcomed!

Apr 19, 2019

View Full Discussion

Company

About Drop Studio Student Discount Privacy Policy Terms of Use Cookie Settings

Drop Refurbished

Like-new products you can trust

Drop Rewards

Get $5 for every 500 points you earn! Learn more

Drop Keyboard Club

Become a member and expand your keycap collection

Collaborate With Us

For Brands & Designers

Support

Contact Community Guidelines Help Center Sitemap

Follow Drop