GoLite Shangri-La 3 Tent Review

Just like with backpacks, I don’t do a lot of reviews of shelters simply because I do not test a lot of them, so it is hard to do good comparisons. In this post however I want to go over what I currently use as my shelter.

As a bit of background, the first time I went into the woods here in the US, I had with me a Kelty Gunnison 2 tent. It was a good tent, but I used it only once. I just hated being inside a bubble while in the woods. For my next trip, I switched to a tarp and donated the tent. I used a tarp for a long time, but started having issues with it in winter. It just offered very little wind protection, and the closer to the ground I pitched it to compensate for that, the less usable space I had. It doesn’t matter what type of pitch I used, as long as there was a side opened, the wind would get in and make things miserable. So, eventually I switched to the GoLite Shangri-La 5. It offered the best of both worlds. Just like a tarp it had no floor, so I could run a stove, not worry about snow or mud and generally do anything that I would do under a tarp. On the other hand, it offered great wind protection much like a tent.

I used the Shangri-La 5 for quite some time, but about six months ago I switched to the Shangri-La 3. This was done for only one reason. The Shangri-La 5 was just too large. The extra space was great, but in my area I was having a very hard time finding open spaces large enough to pitch it. I went with the Shargri-La 3 because it was an identical tent, simply with a smaller footprint.

To be more precise, I only use the Shangri-La 3 flysheet, pole and tent pegs, the same way I did with the Shangri-La 5. Both tents actually come with a nest, which includes mosquito netting and a floor that gets inserted under the flysheet. Not only do I have no use for it, I find that it creates just a regular tent which is exactly what I don’t want. It’s extra weight that in my opinion gives me a worse shelter. It used to be that GoLite sold the nest for both tents separately, but these days they are sold as a set. Not to worry though, the price has not gone up at all. GoLite moved their distribution in house, so they managed to keep the costs down.

Now, for some details. The GoLite Shangri-La 3 sells for $250. They are currently out of stock, but they will have new ones in a few months. The full tent, together with the nest weighs 4 lb 5 oz. However, with the set up that I use (the flysheet, pole and tent pegs) it weighs 2 lb 3 oz. The pole itself weighs 11.2 oz.

Since you guys have seen me use the GoLite Shangri-La 5, I figured I would give you some side by side stats on the two tents. If you want to see more details about the Shangri-La 5, check out this post.

	GoLite Shangri-La 3	GoLite Shangri-La 5
Weight (with nest)	4 lb 5 oz	5 lb 9 oz
Weight (as used by me)	2 lb 3 oz	2 lb 14 oz
Height	62 inches	73 inches
Floor Area	59 sq. ft.	90 sq. ft.
Material	15 Denier Ripstop Nylon with PU 1200mm Waterproof Fire Retardant Coating	15 Denier Ripstop Nylon with PU 1200mm Waterproof Fire Retardant Coating
Cost	$250.00	$300.00

For comparison purposes, here are two pictures with me next to the Shangri-La 3 and Shangri-La 5 respectively.

As you can see from the pictures, the Shangri-La 3 is significantly smaller than the Shangri-La 5. In fact, that seems to be the main difference between the two shelter. Yes, the Shangri-La 3 is a bit lighter, and a bit cheaper, but for me it’s not enough to make me chose one over the other. The reality is that if I had the space to pitch it, I would still be using the GoLite Shangri-La 5. It is much larger and much more comfortable as a result. It is also easier to pitch. The reason for that is that it has much more of a rectangular shape while the Shangri-La 3 has a hexagonal shape. It is much easier to lay out and pitch a rectangular shape than a hexagonal one.

The GoLite Shangri-La 5 is much more of a home that you carry with you into the woods, while the Shangri-La 3 much more closely resembles the size of a regular tent. People are always shocked by the size when I pitch the Shangri-La 5. They are even more shocked when they find out it weighs under 3 lb. Unfortunately, it was just too hard finding suitable locations to pitch the Shangri-La 5, so I decided to sell it and stick with the Shangri-La 3.

Now, that being said, the GoLite Shangri-La 3 is an amazing shelter. It has all of the great features that drew me to this design. It has an open floor so it can function much as a tarp. I can run a stove inside in bad weather, I can get it without taking off my shoes, I can carve inside, etc. It offers great wind protection, and because there is no floor, it deals very well with condensation. Even when you do get it, it just rolls down the walls and into the ground. I’m 6 foot tall, and the shelter is large enough (just) that I can sleep inside without touching the walls, which keep the condensation off my sleeping bag.

This is the best shelter design I have been able to find, and I am extremely happy with it. I use it for all seasons, and so far the shelter has stood up to anything I have been able to throw at it. I just wish GoLite would go back to selling just the flysheet. They could really bring the cost down making it very affordable.

REI Flash 62 Backpack Review

I generally don’t like to do backpack, or tent or sleeping bag reviews simply because I don’t use enough different ones to be able to give you a good comparison. The only reason why I am writing this review is to show you what I currently use on most of my trips and why I chose this particular pack.

As the name of the post indicates, my pack is the REI Flash 62, more precisely the 2012 model. It is an internal frame pack. It weighs 3lb (1.36kg) for the medium length one, which is what I use, and it has a volume of 62L (3,787 cubic inches). The pack retails for about $190. For those of you not familiar with the manufacturer, REI is actually a store that sells outdoor gear. From time to time they make some of the gear themselves. This is one of those examples. The pack is available only through their stores.

I’ve had this pack for almost six months now, and I have been using it both as my three season pack as well as my winter pack (down to 0F). I actually stumbled onto this pack by accident. What happened was that I was looking for a large winter pack. As some of you may remember, I was using an old CFP 90 pack for my winter trips. It was large, heavy and uncomfortable. Well, I saved up some money, and decided that I’ll get a new winter pack, since my three season one (the Rio Grande 45) was doing fine. So, I went into REI, looking for a pack in the 70-75L range. However, after looking at my gear, I saw that it would all fit (with some care) into a smaller pack. I looked as some light weight packs in the 65L range, and it came down to the REI Flash 62 or the Osprey Atmos 65. I decided to go with the Flash 62 because it was half a pound lighter and more importantly, it had the floating front pocket, which I’ll discuss later.

Once I went home, I quickly noticed that the Flash 62 will function well as a three season pack as well. If I simply didn’t fill up any of the pockets, in particular the large front floating pocket, the rest of my gear fit rather well in the main compartment of the pack, which appears to be about 50L in volume. So right off the bat, I started using the pack. The pack also has an adjustable (and detachable) top lid, which allows you to expand and compact the pack quite a bit.

The first time I used the pack with about 30lb of gear, I ended up being rather unhappy with it. The pack uses a frame that is composed of an aluminum tube that runs along the pack and connects to the hip belt. This was creating some pressure at the location of the hip belt where the frame connected. I contemplated returning the pack, but after trying some of the other packs in that weight range, it seemed that they suffered from similar problems. The second time I used the pack, I was very happy with it. All I did was simply loosen the hip belt a tiny bit. Maybe it was that or maybe it was that the pack was more broken in, but I have had absolutely no comfort issues since then even with weights up to 40lb.

When the weather cooled down, as expected, I was able to use the pack for my winter trips as well. The trips I would use this pack for are ones where the temperature is above 0F (-18C). Anything below that requires a larger sleeping bag which is too big for this pack to handle along with all my other gear.

Above you can see the pack with my full winter gear including crampons (inside the bag), ice axe, and snow shoes. It also includes a Western Mountaineering Antelope MF (0F) sleeping bag and my Patagonia DAS Parka, which is stored in the front floating pocket for easy access. The floating pocket, which I have mentioned several times now is the large pocket you see in the front. Most packs have a pocket in this area that is attached to the body of the pack. The problem with such a design is that once the pack is full, it tends to take up most of the space inside the pocket as well. The floating pocket is attached to the pack only at the bottom and is held to the body of the pack with straps. This allows you to use the full volume of the pocket, and it also creates a space between the main body of the pack and the pocket which allows you to store other items. In the above picture you can see my closed cell foam sitting pad nested between the pocket and the pack.

Some down sides of the pack…well, I already mentioned the initial comfort issue. The pockets on the hip belt are also uselessly small. The most I have been able to put in there was a compass. Also, when fully loaded, the side mesh pockets get stretched out too much, making it hard to put a Nalgene bottle in them. It’s doable, but it’s just too much of a hassle.

Overall, I love this pack. Again, I am not a big pack guy. I don’t sit and test many of them, so I am sure there are people who would be able to make better comparisons for you. For me though, this is the pack I am sticking with.

Dave Canterbury’s Military Record and Other Background Notes

I can not stop being amazed by how much interest there is in this topic and the drama surrounding Dual Survival. Since there is interest, I figured I would post some more details about the issue. For those of you not already knee deep in the drama, the brief summary is that Dave Canterbury started as a guy on YouTube, making videos about the outdoors, and the then emerging subject of bushcraft. He put out a lot of videos, and became popular. Eventually, he auditioned for Dual Survival on the Discovery Channel, and was hired as a counterpart to Cody Lundin. Soon after being hired, people started accusing him of lying, in particular about his military career. After season 2, he was fired by Discovery. Recently he released an apology, admitting that he exaggerated his military credentials. You can read about it here. 

Unfortunately, his apology didn’t give much information, so people are continuing to ask questions and speculate as to what he actually lied about. I’ll try to point out some of the things here, to the best of my knowledge.

Now, I must admit, that there was a time when I was very involved with different bushcraft related forums. As such, I unfortunately have some first hand knowledge of the drama those places generate. Some of it involved Dave Canterbury, so I will recount what I know about it here.

The reality is that the apology and confession released recently by Dave Canterbury is old news to those who have been around for a number of years. Dave already had confessed, in much more detail, to his wrong doing years ago. Back when I was a member on Bushcraft USA, there was an altercation with Dave Canterbury that brought many of these issues to light. At the time, Dave Canterbury was a member at Bushcraft USA. He was confronted by several individuals about his military record. After some back and forth, he admitted to several things. The most significant, from what I remember was that he had claimed to be a ranger, which he was not. His explanation was that he had worked with rangers, so he felt like he was one of them. :/

I used to just link to that thread when people asked for info. I found that the thread shone a light on the character or lack thereof, of a number of the people involved. Unfortunately the thread has been removed, or at least can’t be accessed. I was however able to find the posted details of the claimed qualifications by Dave Canterbury, as compared to his actual record. This was compiled by a person on Bushcraft USA. While it’s no secret that there is no love lost between me and the moderators there, I have no reason to doubt the truthfulness of the research. Here is the relevant part of a screen shot I was able to save:

Each one of the points states the claimed qualification, followed by the actual qualification as confirmed by a search of Dave Canterbury’s military record. As you can see, some of the issues are more technical, and would be meaningful to people familiar with military ranks and specialty qualifications, while others are outright falsehoods.

I of course understand why people are upset about his lies, especially ones who have served in the armed forces. To be honest however, my interest in Dave Canterbury has always been strictly related to his outdoor videos. As such what type of military career he did or didn’t have changes my view of him as a person, but not as an instructor on outdoor activities. 

That being said however, in recent days there has been a lot of hype about Dave Canterbury. Ever since his removal from Dual Survival, it seems that a legend has started to grow about him as a greatly skilled woodsman who lied about his military background. People seem to assume that he has been a survival expert and living in the woods for decades before starting his YouTube channel. Since this is the part of his career that I am actually interested in, I figured I would also mention what I have observed of Dave Canterbury in that respect in the time I have been around. 

Maybe five or six years ago, Dave Canterbury started posting videos on YouTube. The early videos are now gone. I looked back on his channel, and the oldest videos he has up go back only about four years. In the early days, his videos were indistinguishable from those of any other person posting about buschraft, which back then was not as large of a pursuit as it is these days. His videos were very regular “here is my canteen cup”, and “look at my gear” (the Coleman backpacker special). He did not appear to spend any more time in the woods than any of the other guys posting, nor did he appear to have any special knowledge. In fact, the gear and approach he discussed were old news to any self respecting backpacker. If you want to see a fair representation of his skills in the earlier days (although still quite some time after he first started posting) have a look at his “Winter Camp IN THE SNOW” video, where he “makes it” through the night in conditions under which a regular backpacker wouldn’t even bother noting, yet he feels the need to capitalize. It appears that this was one of the first nights he had spent in the woods that wasn’t in summer.

He did appear to have knowledge as a hunter, particularly a bow hunter, but being that I am not one, it was hard for me to evaluate his skill level in that respect.

Now, that’s not to say that Dave Canterbury does not have skills, or that you shouldn’t learn from him. Since those early days, he has spent what he calls a lot of “time in the dirt”, and as a result has become very experienced at certain things. My point is that he did not just appear on the radar with years of experience under his belt.

Because it is very easy to track his learning progress and development, which I consider a good thing, one can note in which areas he has gained most of his experience. The reality is that if you want to learn skills about living in a stationary dwelling for an extended period of time, he is your man. His “Yurt” series was very interesting, and he has several more in that line. However, if you want to know how to move through the woods for extended distances with gear you can carry on your back, his experience and knowledge is just not there. Cody Lundin has made several remarks to that extent while on Dual Survival. If you look at his videos on clothing and “portable” gear, it will be obvious to anyone who has done any backpacking that he is not familiar with what such movement requires. There are some basics there that are simply missing, most likely as a result that this is not an outdoor activity which he practices.

So, Dave started out just like any other guy who grew up camping and hunting. Other than the fact that he had good and numerous videos, the early days did not show any particular skill or experience. By the early days I mean five to seven years ago. These were the days before sling bows, 10/20/30 piece kits, Pathfinder schools, three and a half “C”s of survivability, accounting principles for bushcraft, or any of that. Since that time he has picked up great skills in certain areas while remaining much less knowledgeable in others.

Please remember that I don’t write any of this to take away from what Dave does, or the education he promotes. I respect the fact that he continues to provide free information and education while so many others care about nothing but the bottom line. I still find his videos interesting, even though I disagree with him on many points. There are certain issues on which his channel is one of the first places I would check. However, I think we need to keep things in perspective. The last thing we need is another celebrity who will then go on to sell $120 belts.

Anyway, that has been the information I have encountered about Dave Canterbury in the time I have been around. I hope it helps those who have been curious.

Teddy Roosevelt – A Self Made Common Man

Theodor Roosevelt, our 26th president is beloved by many of us. His courage and character are beyond reproach both as a soldier riding with the Rough Riders, and as a statesman, taking on the most powerful men in the country at the time. Most importantly however, many of us like him because of his love of the outdoors, although be it with a certain expedition style approach that lead to everything in sight being shot.

Few however know that Teddy Roosevelt, despite his image a a tough woodsman, soldier and man of the people, actually started out as nothing of the sort. Roosevelt in his younger days was a well to do New Yorker. When in the 1880s as a young man he decided to start his political career, he made a determined effort to portray himself as a hunter/woodsman even though the majority of his trips outside of New York City were to travel to Europe. Clearly it is an image that not only emulated, but aspired to.

In the above picture, taken in 1885, you see a staged photograph of Teddy Roosevelt where he is wearing a prop costume equipped with a $100 engraved knife from Tiffany’s.

The appealing thing about Roosevelt is that he actually went on to live up to that image. He took on the character as an embodiment, not just as an image. The rest of the story, we already know.