Originally Posted by
travgott
yeah, the weight is somewhat close to the more expensive brands. maybe slightly heavier, but realistically, as we all know, if you are backpacking or bikepacking a lot of times your tent is wet in the bag on some days so the weight savings is negligable imho. plus im not a weight weenie so i don't trifle over such matters. somebody a long time ago in this thread mentioned difference in poles, but the eurekas have always had good aluminum poles with them. and i've never had a bungee fail in a pole or had one bend for no reason.
i think a lot of the reason cheap tents get a bad rap is that the people who buy them typically dont have a lot of experience, and as a result don't treat their tent with the proper care. thus, when they pull it out of the bag the second or third time there are mildew spots, or something is ripped or broken. then they go onto the wallyworld website and leave a crap review. folks who drop a lot of money on a tent tend to look after it better so of course they report that they last longer. but it seems that for the most part my eurekas have been constructed with the same materials and quality construction of high-end brands, so it stands to reason that with proper care they would perform as well and last as long. also i always dry my tent out and clean thoroughly after any trip.
Some years back I was surprised to learn that nylon degrades significantly with UV exposure, not that I tour enough to wear a tent out that way. Another thing about tents is that there's so many different features, it's not as if paying more automatically checks off all the boxes. IE free-standing vs staked for one. The Eureka I mentioned was semi-stealth olive drab. Many of the fancier tents are brightly colored which makes sense for back-country backpacking but not great for stealth-camping bike tourists.