MFH Schwarzenberg after a few bivouacs: a small tent for an informed user
I was looking for a small tent for trips into the woods and went with the MFH Schwarzenberg. Reviews were mixed, but it seemed to meet my expectations, so I took the risk. After a few shorter and longer outings, I can now rate it honestly.
The biggest plus is its size: packed, it's 60 x 9 x 9 cm and 1300 g, so it fits into your kit without trouble. Pitched, it's supposedly 210 cm long, but the front and back walls slope, so anyone over about 185 cm will brush against them. On the other hand, a tent like this is hard to spot in the forest and fits almost anywhere.
The floor is fairly loosely woven and stiffer plant stems can puncture it, so I recommend a small construction tarp as an extra floor and pitching while it's still light. Pitching itself is simple: two poles and three guylines. At the entrance, though, the arch is tight, and sliding the pole in with frozen fingers takes patience. The only bigger quality flaw: the shock cord in the pole is tied so that one of the clips doesn't fully seat.
Inside there's room for someone up to about 180 cm plus clothes, but hardly for a backpack, and there's no vestibule, so you need to plan ahead how to protect your pack and boots overnight. With the door closed, the mesh window at the foot doesn't do much and you can wake up with a heavy head, and in the morning there's condensation on the walls, typical of single-wall tents. A big plus for the stuff sack, which takes the tent with room to spare.
Is it worth it? If you keep its size and single-wall traits in mind, why not. It has flaws, but undeniable strengths too; it's a choice for an informed user. For a few days in Polish forests it does the job, and next time I might try a bivy out of curiosity. See you in the woods!
Source: BUSHMOT
The biggest plus is its size: packed, it's 60 x 9 x 9 cm and 1300 g, so it fits into your kit without trouble. Pitched, it's supposedly 210 cm long, but the front and back walls slope, so anyone over about 185 cm will brush against them. On the other hand, a tent like this is hard to spot in the forest and fits almost anywhere.
The floor is fairly loosely woven and stiffer plant stems can puncture it, so I recommend a small construction tarp as an extra floor and pitching while it's still light. Pitching itself is simple: two poles and three guylines. At the entrance, though, the arch is tight, and sliding the pole in with frozen fingers takes patience. The only bigger quality flaw: the shock cord in the pole is tied so that one of the clips doesn't fully seat.
Inside there's room for someone up to about 180 cm plus clothes, but hardly for a backpack, and there's no vestibule, so you need to plan ahead how to protect your pack and boots overnight. With the door closed, the mesh window at the foot doesn't do much and you can wake up with a heavy head, and in the morning there's condensation on the walls, typical of single-wall tents. A big plus for the stuff sack, which takes the tent with room to spare.
Is it worth it? If you keep its size and single-wall traits in mind, why not. It has flaws, but undeniable strengths too; it's a choice for an informed user. For a few days in Polish forests it does the job, and next time I might try a bivy out of curiosity. See you in the woods!
Source: BUSHMOT
Comments 0
Leave the first comment, in any language.
Log in to comment