Hi,
I'm in the market for a replacement for an elderly Vango Odyssey Micro 3 (maybe 20 yo), so have been looking at Vango's Nevis and Cairngorm models which clearly show their design heritage in the Odyssey - they're all 3-season single transverse pole hoop tents. I'm intending Scotland 3-season and winter 'high pressure / fair weather' use (the Micro 3 survived 'the strongest gales in 40 years' in NZ' Queen Margaret Sound in 2003 - it got flattened, but bounced back up, although the main pole was never the same since).
https://www.vango.co.uk/gb/camping-equipment/727-nevis-300.html
https://www.vango.co.uk/gb/camping-equipment/747-cairngorm-300.html
I looked online for reviews and opinions but none were particularly helpful so, I bought one of each (currently at a very nice price from Summits Outdoor in Paisley, who have great customer service).
https://www.summits.co.uk/
They arrived today, and I put them both up in the garden this evening to compare them side-by-side.
Essentially, the Cairngorm model is the slightly higher spec version of the same design, and commands about 30% higher price, the key difference being the hydrostatic head (5000mm) of the flysheet compared with the Nevis (3000mm), and the weight (2.6kg vs 2.5kg).
Here's what I found, that's not included in the sales description:
- the two short poles on the Nevis are probably 2cm too long and are really difficult to fit into place. They're 65cm on both tents, so it's maybe a manufacturing issue with the flysheet.
- the long pole on the Cairngorm has plastic nibs that fit into the eyelets on the flysheet, whereas the Nevis, and the short poles on both models, have aluminium nibs. These seem to be a potentially weak point.
- the inner door zips on the Cairngorm has two pullers, whereas the Nevis has only one, which makes for less easy ventilation control.
- the hooks that connect the inner to the fly seem a bit more robust on the Nevis.
- the Cairngorm has two, possibly useful, roof pockets and two tape loops you could hang a 50cm washing line from (!?!)
- the Cairngorm fly touches the inner; the Nevis fly and and inner are comfortably separate.
And here's some good features of the Micro3 (3kg) that are missing from both:
- the zips seemed more robust - those on the new models are decidedly flimsy-feeling.
- the Micro3 had tape running below the doors of the fly; these take the strain off the zip, and make it possible to pitch with the doors unzipped. There's no means on the new models to fasten the bottom of the doors together, so they rely on the open end of the zip.
- the Micro3 had clever dual-zipped solid/mesh doors (with double-pullers), which allowed for great ventilation with secure midge exclusion.
- the main pole could be fitted from one side - no need to fit both ends' nibs in the eyelets.
- the four main ground fixings at the extremities of the flysheet had triangular nylon runners for the pegs, and longer webbing, so greater adjustment.
- I think I prefer the Micro's zip connection between fly and inner below the main pole (compared to the toggle-and-ring connections on the new models) but generally I leave them connected between pitches, so this is a minor niggle. That said, the zip did fail (after 15 years), but was no bother to repair (and we jury-rigged it with safety-pins for at least a couple of years before getting round to that!)
- the Micro's flysheet doors were diagonally opposite (rotationally symmetrical), so one was always out of the wind (ish); the new ones are symmetrically opposite, towards one end, so you need to make sure you pitch the other end into the wind.
To be fair, they have many good points: they're fantastically easy to erect, and offer good internal space (better than the Micro3), and access.
Note: these are billed as 3-person tents - they're really not, unless you exclude adults from your definition.
In conclusion: they're both cheap tents, so I shouldn't expect too much. That said, the overlong poles and single door zip-pullers on the Nevis and the inner/fly contact on the Cairngorm have me tempted to return both.
I'd be interested to hear from anybody with 'in use' experience of these tents.
One final point - despite referring to the Micro3 in the past tense, we confidently used it last weekend, so I can afford to be picky, I guess.
Post edited at 20:41
