Dan Durston/Massdrop X-Mid

Jamess said:
Dan. Can I suggest an improvement on the x-mid solid please.

The small clips at the bottom of the doors are so small that I find them difficult to use and Impossible in gloves.

The much larger clip I have on my duomid is easy to use in comparison.
Click to expand...
I do agree that the clips are a bit of a fiddle.
 
We are certainly watching the grams on those buckles. We used to originally not have buckles and then we added them along with other things like dual zipper pulls, but in a bid to not add too much weight they are small 10 mm ones. Those are plenty strong but aren't as nice to use as a larger one.

I'm personally not a huge fan of using the buckles with an offset door, because most of the strain comes from the smaller side (because the corner seam is less parallel and thus less able to help with loads), such that if you deploy the door stake at an angle it takes the bulk of the tension off, and then that stake is present 100% of the time, so you have lasting stress relief whereas the buckle has to be done up/undone every time and often people don't really use it (e.g. they might deploy it after the door is closed, rather than before to take the stress off).

I'm not against buckles, but do see the angled stake as a better solution for most cases. So we've been improving that function by angling the design of the door stake to make it more obvious. Then for the regular X-Mid 2 we are dropping the buckle in a month or two and instead upsizing the zipper back to a #5. It was #5 for a lot of years, went to #3 for ~1.5 years, and soon will go back to #5. We only added the buckle when it dropped to #3, but I think a #5 with no buckle but an angled stake is pretty bomber setup. The buckle is staying on the X-Mid Solid though, so that'll have #5 (which never left), angled door stake, and buckle. Actually upsizing the buckle I'm hesitant to do though because I do feel like if someone is angling that door stake and has a #5 then there's not a lot of additional benefit to using it.
 
dandurston said:
Then for the regular X-Mid 2 we are dropping the buckle in a month or two and instead upsizing the zipper back to a #5. It was #5 for a lot of years, went to #3 for ~1.5 years, and soon will go back to #5. We only added the buckle when it dropped to #3, but I think a #5 with no buckle but an angled stake is pretty bomber setup.
Click to expand...
Given the choice between a #3 zipper plus buckle versus #5 zipper alone I personally would choose the latter for robustness and long life (there is a weight penalty of course), so that seems a good balanced decision for durability of the tent. With the caveat that it might be overkill of course as it is so difficult to quantify durability.

I sewed a buckle on my original X-Mid 1 because I felt it would help, but in the end found I didn't really need or use it with the #5 zipper, and I pitch my tents tight. I think in the early days I got the balance of tension a bit off and excessively tensioned the perimeter before inserting the poles. With my v3 X-Mid with #3 zipper I am more likely to use the buckle, but the zip is rarely under too much tension at the end off its travel due to the angled stake.

In the last 3 years my backpacking tents have gone from all #5 zippers to all #3 zippers, the latter performing perfectly well, but they do feel noticeably less robust. One thing I've noticed in that time is that water (from rain, condensation, humidity) can freeze overnight inside the zippers and with the #3 zippers it can be quite difficult to free them up without applying quite a lot of strain (I don't recall issues with #5 zippers), so I try to take care in that situation. Dust and grit are rarely an issue (at least for me) in the UK!

Forgetting the size of the buckle, I appreciate the design of its attachment - the buckle is held in position so it is easy to grip with fingers, in contrast to the buckle I sewed into my X-Mid v1, which was held tight against the inside of the door and awkward to use!
 
With regard to #3 zippers, the main thing we see is that the sliders can wear out on the #3. The teeth are normally fine because as the slider moves the wear is distributed across all of the teeth, whereas the slider is wearing with every bit the slider moves. How fast the sliders wears depends on if there is sand/grit in the teeth, and how much tension is across the zipper (how hard things are rubbing). What can happen is that people use the zippers in dusty conditions, and don't relieve tension by staking the door at angle, and then after 50-100 nights it might wear out the #3 slider. We don't see this much in the UK, but we do see in dustier areas like California and Australia.

Those slider are actually fairly easy to replace. That can be done by making a small incision at the top, popping the old one off, and popping the new one one, but customers don't love the experience of swapping the slider because it can be a fiddle and people feel like they shouldn't have to. Whereas a #5 slider has a lot more surface area and less sensitive tolerances, so it is very rare for a #5 slider to wear out within the lifespan of a tent.

Much less common is that the teeth on a #3 zipper can be damaged from a high force accident like tripping over the tent or forcing a zipper closed after tightening the tent when the door was open. This is rare and user error, but a #5 does provide more of a safety margin here.

Ultimately I think #3 can work well, but it is a more skilled type of thing where a skilled user can save weight with #3 by using it properly and being willing to swap the slider after a couple of years (especially in dusty conditions), whereas a more average user likes the lower skill requirements of a #5. So we are continuing with #3 on the Pro series tents, while going back to #5 on the regular X-Mids.
 
I'm thinking of ordering a regular fly and solid inner - I think the regular fly seems plenty hard enough for fair conditions? Thought to check if I've missed a reason why this might be a bad idea!
 
Yeah that's a great combo. The solid inner is nice, yet the regular fly is quite capable, so saving the weight over the 'Solid' fly is a nice option. You go from 20D fabric to 15, #5 zipper to #3 (at present) and lose the 2 way zipper, but save a nice chunk of weight.
 
dave_g said:
I'm thinking of ordering a regular fly and solid inner - I think the regular fly seems plenty hard enough for fair conditions? Thought to check if I've missed a reason why this might be a bad idea!
Click to expand...
That is the option I went with for the V3 - happy with the choice I made and I use it in a wide range of conditions.
 
2026 X-Mid 1 updates per Dan:

We have some updates happening which are in effect as of a couple of weeks ago for USA customers, and will go into effect for everyone else in about 2 weeks. This includes tougher #5 fly zippers and more durable floor fabric.

Anyone knows what new floor material is? 15D nylon or 20D?
 
The new floor is a 15D nylon - similar to what we've been using for years in the Pro tents.

This 15D nylon is mildly stronger than the 15D poly, but the main advantages are:

1) The PE coating can impregnate better, which isn't an issue for a fly, but in a floor application abrasion can be hard on the PE coating on the 15D poly.

2) The main difference is that the nylon has more stretch. The 15D poly is designed to be very low stretch, which is ideal for a fly as it gives great wind performance, but in a floor application this low stretch can be a hinderance because it can't stretch over pokey objects on the ground to disperse the load as much. So the nylon is only slightly stronger in theory, but in the real world the stretch helps be substantially harder to tear because it distributes the stress more.

The floor and stuff sacks are this material, while the fly is still the excellent 15D silpoly of course. The zippers are also back to #5 on the regular model. We have omitted the buckles on the regular model with the change back to #5. That is because angling the door stake is more effective at taking tension off the zipper (since it's always in place) and because the #5 zippers are more rugged, so there really isn't much need for a buckle with a staked door + #5, but the buckle is still present on the solid version for those who prefer it.

With all that said, we are just transitioning to these updates over the coming ~2 weeks, so tents ordered today may not have these updates yet. If someone is keen for them, it would be best to wait about 2 weeks.
 
I saw a regular Xmid 1 (solid, newest version) in the flesh for the first time this weekend. A friend had his pitched next to my pro 1, and it was hard to believe it's only 2" bigger in each dimension. It seemed quite massive in comparison.
Maybe the much more opaque fabric also played tricks on the sense of scale.

Nice tent, but it made me a bit less keen on the Xmid 2 solid I've been eyeing.

He was struggling to fit it between the trees (we were in a small pine forest), but I'm pretty sure that was more lack of experience than actual lack of space. It was only his third time pitching it, and there was a lot of faffing about.
 
The X-Mid 1 is 5cm wider and 5 cm longer than the X-Mid Pro 1, so the footprint size differences are pretty slight.

What I think can be a challenge for some people is visualizing where the floor will go, and thus having it fit. Normally you stake out the fly corners and then the floor is within that area, but when the site is tight it is better to switch to staking out the spots on the fly that correspond to the floor corners. That will be the 2 fly corners that are lined up with floor corners, and then instead of the other 2 fly corners, you stake out the end panel stake points that are at the floors other 2 corners. So you end up staking out the parallelogram that is the floor shape and are able to define exactly where it goes.

From there, hopefully you can stake out the vestibules too and fully pitch things, but if the vestibules don't fit there there are some nice ways of collapsing them or elevating them, as we should in our 'skinny pitch' video:
 
dueurt said:
I saw a regular Xmid 1 (solid, newest version) in the flesh for the first time this weekend. A friend had his pitched next to my pro 1, and it was hard to believe it's only 2" bigger in each dimension. It seemed quite massive in comparison.
Maybe the much more opaque fabric also played tricks on the sense of scale.

Nice tent, but it made me a bit less keen on the Xmid 2 solid I've been eyeing.

He was struggling to fit it between the trees (we were in a small pine forest), but I'm pretty sure that was more lack of experience than actual lack of space. It was only his third time pitching it, and there was a lot of faffing about.
Click to expand...

The XMid2 solid does occupy a big footprint, we underestimated how much space it needed on our first night on the West Highland Way last year, tried to squeeze it in between some trees and a fence on a busy campsite without success. But I have to say that right from the start I have found it to be an easy tent to pitch, the easiest that I have ever owned, in fact. And overall I am delighted with it.
 
dueurt said:
I saw a regular Xmid 1 (solid, newest version) in the flesh for the first time this weekend. A friend had his pitched next to my pro 1, and it was hard to believe it's only 2" bigger in each dimension. It seemed quite massive in comparison.
Maybe the much more opaque fabric also played tricks on the sense of scale.

Nice tent, but it made me a bit less keen on the Xmid 2 solid I've been eyeing.

He was struggling to fit it between the trees (we were in a small pine forest), but I'm pretty sure that was more lack of experience than actual lack of space. It was only his third time pitching it, and there was a lot of faffing about.
Click to expand...
I have the X Mid 2 and it is a palace in terms of space and easy to pitch usually unless you are in a tight spot. It's great for longer trips in poor weather, i.e Scotland or Northern Europe in the summer.

The X mid 1 I recently bought then sold without using it was great space wise but I got the Xdome 1+ as I wanted a bit more space, which it provides. Have you considered the x dome 1+?
 
I've never found the Xmid (pro) hard to pitch myself, on the contrary. It's just a rectangle.

From what I could tell he had plenty of space, and was just way too focused on the shape of that rectangle and getting the inner positioned perfectly, instead of working with the space.
He was quite obsessed with getting the pitch perfectly taut.
Help was offered, and he did accept a bit of it. Also offered to make him coffee to ease the prices proces (which was refused), but I think he secretly enjoys getting frustrated with stuff like this 😂
 
Last edited:
dueurt said:
I've never found the Xmid (pro) hard to pitch myself, on the contrary. It's just a rectangle.

From what I could tell he had plenty of space, and was just way too focused on the shape of that rectangle and getting the inner positioned perfectly, instead of working with the space.
He was quite obsessed with getting the pitch perfectly taut.
Help was offered, and he did accept a bit of it. Also offered to make him coffee to ease the prices (which was refused), but I think he secretly enjoys getting frustrated with stuff like this 😂
Click to expand...
I went out with my mate last week and he was using my regular X Mid. He was having a hell of a time. It was fairly windy. Quite funny really as he'd not put it up before, even though I'd told him to practice. The Pro is much more forgiving, I find. I ended up having to do it for him but it took me three times longer to pitch than the Pro. Hadn't done it for a while. 😁
Edit: Plenty of space. Maybe too much. 😁
 
The DCF and the aggressive catenary curve do seem to make the pro easy to get a taught pitch with. But we were in a forest with no wind - so long as it's standing, who cares if it's perfect (well, not me at least).
Better to get it up, take some pictures of it, then check a guide afterwards to see how to improve it. Well, better IMO. If you prefer faffing about for an hour, cursing at the tent and yourself because Dan Durston pitches it better, who am I to tell you how to enjoy your night out.
 
mlambere said:
I have the X Mid 2 and it is a palace in terms of space and easy to pitch usually unless you are in a tight spot. It's great for longer trips in poor weather, i.e Scotland or Northern Europe in the summer.

The X mid 1 I recently bought then sold without using it was great space wise but I got the Xdome 1+ as I wanted a bit more space, which it provides. Have you considered the x dome 1+?
Click to expand...
I'm interested in a two person tent for trips with my wife or daughter. I could fit my daughter beside me in the Xdome 1+ (not sure for how long though), but not my wife.

In any case, I'm getting more and more interested in trying to make a tent myself.
 
dueurt said:
The DCF and the aggressive catenary curve do seem to make the pro easy to get a taught pitch with. But we were in a forest with no wind - so long as it's standing, who cares if it's perfect (well, not me at least).
Better to get it up, take some pictures of it, then check a guide afterwards to see how to improve it. Well, better IMO. If you prefer faffing about for an hour, cursing at the tent and yourself because Dan Durston pitches it better, who am I to tell you how to enjoy your night out.
Click to expand...
He was cursing because he couldn't pitch it. Full stop. 😁
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top