Click to view our Accessibility Statement or contact us with accessibility-related questions
Drop Refurbished
Like-new products you can trustDrop Rewards
Get $5 for every 500 points you earn! Learn more
Drop Keyboard Club
Become a member and expand your keycap collectionCollaborate With Us
For Brands & DesignersFollow Drop
If you include all 8 stakes, stuff sack, guylines etc, then then the X-Mid could weigh as much as 845 grams, but you don't need that many stakes and you don't need the peak guylines (11g) for normal conditions. Depending on what you carry, it's 799 - 845 grams.
This shelter is a full double wall design (fly + inner) like most tents. This style of tent provides protection from condensation in wet conditions (e.g. the inner tent stops you from contacting the potentially wet inside of the fly) so it is ideally suited to a wide range of conditions and also allows for each piece to used separately as needed (modular). If you find a lighter tent, it is likely a single wall design (basically a floor sewn into a fly). These are lighter but offer less protection so their applicability is limited. The big problem with single walls is that in wet/rainy/humid conditions you can have condensation dripping on you and getting on your gear. I'm not against single walls but they are a more specialized design that is not suited to a wide range of conditions. They can be great in dry SoCal. So yes there are lighter single wall tents but these are a very different product - and interestingly the X-Mid isn't much heavier despite offering more protection and versatility due to the efficient design. For example, the Yama Mtn Gear Swiftline 1P uses near identical materials and is only a single wall, yet the X-Mid is 0.5oz lighter. Actually the X-Mid achieves that lower weight despite have more doors (2 vs 1) and vestibules (2 vs 1). So you're getting an awful lot of tent for the weight.
The other way a 1P tent could be lighter than the X-Mid is if it uses lighter materials - either 7D nylon (e.g. GG One) or cuben/DCF material (e.g. TarpTent Notch Li) but both of these have major downsides. 7D nylon is 0.7 - 0.8oz per yard but really low durability. It's a questionable choice for stormy weather. DCF is much lighter than silpoly (0.5 - 0.7oz/yd versus about 1.2) so it could save a substantial amount of weight but it is really expensive (costs about 10x as much as silpoly). It also has other downsides (bulky to pack, less durable) so it is an expensive, specialized product. I would love do a cuben/DCF X-Mid that would only weigh 15 - 20oz - that would be awesome but it would also cost $600 - $800. So I'm starting with an affordable version and maybe a DCF version will happen in the future if there is enough interest.
A final way that a tent could be lighter is if it is substantially smaller. The TarpTent Notch is the lightest competing double wall tent that I'm aware of. It weighs 770 grams - about 5-10% less - but it is a much smaller tent and makes other compromises to save weight. For about 50 grams more, the X-Mid offers a lot more headroom, more vestibule area, fly zippers, large functional vents and many other advantages unrelated to weight such as a simple pitch and shorter packed size since there are no struts. Another example is the MSR Carbon Reflex 1. That tent is really light (about 700g) but it uses questionable 7D fabrics plus is extremely tiny. It has a single 34" high peak, while the X-Mid has dual 43" high peaks, so you can hardly sit up in it. And vestibule area is far less.
A more comparable tent in materials and space to the X-Mid is TarpTent's StratoSpire 1, which is 1020 grams. Compared to this, the X-Mid offers similar space and is far lighter while offering a simpler pitch, much more functional vents etc. So in the best apples to apples comparison I can think of, the X-Mid is much lighter, but of course no comparison is perfect so this could be argued.
The bottom line is that the X-Mid geometry is extremely weight efficient due to the shape and minimal seams. Anything lighter is either a single wall design, using really expensive materials (cuben/DCF) or notably smaller. If you did the same with the X-Mid (e.g. built a single wall version), the X-Mid would likely be lighter.
If you compare the X-Mid to a traditional poled tent, the lightest double wall option that I'm aware of is the Big Agnes Fly Creek UL1 Platinum, which is almost the exact same weight as the X-Mid but it is a radically smaller tent that makes many compromises to achieve that weight. Comparatively the X-Mid offers way more headroom, floor area, vestibule area, proper vents, tough zippers etc. The combo of the efficient X-Mid design + trekking pole support structure lets you have a lot more capable and spacious tent for the same weight.
I guess the main possible advantage with X-mid in my view would be strength, packing size (?) and those huge vestibules. But for me, if you could come up with a design of 2 person size without much of a weight penalty, that would be sweet.
I'll do a quick armchair comparison to the Copper Spur UL1 since that's the only 1P you list. Both of these shelters are double wall, 1P tents, but of course the X-Mid is trekking pole supported.
The CS UL1 is 964g for the fly + poles + inner, while the X-Mid is 795 grams for fly + inner. The CS UL1 has the advantage of being freestanding, so you should still stake it, but it's easy to shuffle around if you find you're pitched on a lumpy spot and easy to shake out dirt. It also has a little more floor area. So freestanding + larger inner floor. Conversely the X-Mid is 170 grams lighter, offers radically more headroom (41 - 43" tall across most of the inner, versus a peak of 38" and much lower elsewhere), about twice the vestibule area (dual vs single vestibuiles), higher waterproofing, no sag fabric, dual doors, pitches fly first so the inner doesn't get wet during setup in the rain, and the X-Mid has higher quality water resistant zips instead of basic zips + snag prone flaps. The X-Mid would also pack smaller and into any shape since there are no struts or poles. I quite like this as it allows the tend to be packed horizontally in a pack.
So overall, the X-Mid is a lot lighter and generally more spacious and functional. The CS is a nice tent though if you're looking for a freestanding design.
I would like to do a 2P version eventually. It kinda depends if there is enough interest in the 1P to make it worth while. I think a 2P would be about 4-5oz heavier. Might be possible to do 32oz for the fly + inner.
Conversely the inner in the X-Mid has 43" high peaks near both ends and it doesn't dip below 41" in the middle. So you've got 41-43" of height over most of the inner and can sit up basically anywhere without hitting the roof.
The CS is a fine tent but I went with the x-mid, not just because it uses poles, but because it is integral pitch (i.e. with the CS you have to pitch the inner first which is awkward and wet in rain and strong wind), the x-mid will be better in snow (in the rare occasions that I go snow camp in Australia) and the x-mid has better tie down points (the CS has no guyline for the front of the tent - a weakness in my opinion) - most of my walking is in the Australian Alps and Tasmania so storm resistance is a plus. Also, the two door configuration of the x-mid will mean better ventilation in hot weather and as condensation management in rain. Lastly - the zip on the CS gets caught in the zip guard in the rain (a lot!) and snow freezes it together. The zip on the x-mid is designed by someone who has backpacked in the rain.
That's a lot of pluses but the Copper spur is also very expensive in Australia and the x-mid is extraordinarily well priced by Australian standards. it is creating quite a buzz on the australian bushwalking forums.
That said there is nothing wrong with the CS - it is a robust, lightweight easy to erect tent that is very roomy and liveable for its weight.