Vango Rosewood Tipi 2-Person Tent

As an experienced glamper I have had bell tents, tipi tents (with a centre pole), a yurt dome.(geodesic wigwam) and the Lotus Belle.I look at a tent for pack size/weight, setup time and effort, pack down time and effort, quality, space, performance, aesthetics and value for money.In terms of pack size/weight and pack down it is best in class.In terms of value for money it is well worth £500 the price here on Amazon and, also, in a sale, at Go Outdoors (where I purchased it). I would not buy it for £800. You also need to include the cost of the carpet and either buy or make a footprint. At £500 plus a discounted carpet at £75, it is great value for money,In terms of setup it is equal to a best in class bell tent or tipi tent but different - far fewer pegs but a more fiddly non-central pole. It can be done by one person in 20 odd minutes once you know how to insert the last aluminum pole into the steel A frame - only keep a peg on the opposite side and not the near or centre pegs on that side to relieve tension on the outer/upper roof fabric.The quality is high getting a high performance set of modern features and whilst the fabric is thinner and poly cotton not cotton (or shingled tarp in the case of the yurt dome) but that is fine, indeed a positive producing the best in class pack weight and size.The groundsheet does feel minimal compared to the usual 540g/m^s but is a bathtub and insect protector unlike basic bell tents and yurt domes and works fine with the footprint and carpet with no need to provide additional rugs that are usual in the other aforementioned structures and increase load size and volume. Still the groundsheet has no weight, dernier, layers info nor hydrostatic head rating unlike its predecessor - the Appleby 500 - which had a 120 g/m^s PE 10000 HH groundsheet. The fact that the equivalent information is not provided for the Rosewood is concerning. The groundsheet is fine but I recommend that the footprint and carpet must be used - if you want the groundsheet to last.In terms of space it is equal in class to a yurt dome and better than a lotus bell having no central pole. That is it is fantastic! It is more like those than a traditional tipi tent since the walls are more vertical and the ceiling more horizontal - an excellent piece of design and a huge plus.My first qualm is performance. I have only use it once in both fairly windy and reasonably hot conditions and it performed fine. Still it unsurprisingly feels less solid and robust than any of the aforementioned structures.However this design is based on identical - apart from materials - the now withdrawn Appleby 500 - which did have an 'Weather tested to the European standard EN5912 by certified test centre' which is omitted in the specs for the Rosewood. Whatever this certification means - I cannot see if it is, say, equivalent to wind speed tests by Robens - it is a fact that just about all most Vango tents have it, whereas this does not. That is concerning.Full guying is recommended at all times I would say. They recommend taking down the sun canopy in high winds and whilst that makes sense that would also make water ingress into the tent in bad weather far worse.That brings me to the first design flaw - the doors should unzip from the centre out rather than as they do, as even with the sun canopy up there can be some small water ingress into the tent upon entering and exiting.Now knowing this is identical in structure, with just with different materials, to the Appleby 500, it is very surprising that inevitable feedback from that did not lead to a design change here. I fear that, unlike Robens, Vango have not embraced nor understood this market and are just trying it on with this, at its core, amazing design but are skimping on important details.Second the canopy either needs redesigning to be wind proofed or changing just to a wind proofed weather protection entrance way and then maybe the doors do not need changing.Also the guys for the canopy - unlike the Appleby 500 - are not night reflective, these cause many trip ups and you will need to replace those guys or make sure they are always lit.I have not used this in intense sun yet. On the one hand the double roof is a natural sun shade but inexplicably not emphasised in the marketing literature. That is a great feature. There are no air vents in the sleeping area and that might be an issue. The unexplained dark inner ceiling and wall make it easier to lie in but, I suspect, would create a hotter experience than the tan or white material used pretty by everyone else - for sure better than any nylon tent but those are not its competitors. Then again why is the window shade a light material ruining the blackout effect of the dark material elsewhere? (Yurdomes need sunshade as well as ventilation sunshade but perform well given that).There is no need for the ceiling to be the chocolate brown (or nutmeg as they call it) of the walls it could be the same light colour as the upper/outer roof. That would still provide sunshade and make it easier to light at night.This brings me onto the the final criterion of aesthetics. The dark ceiling means I need far more lighting and gimmick lighting such as lasers and projections have a far poorer aesthetic. The dark wall and ceiling mean that open windows or open doors are essential during the day with a potential loss of privacy. The brown colour makes the internal space more oppressive and less welcoming during the day.Outside the tent looks better without the sunshade up, why are there no promo pictures of that? I think the tent would look better all in the same light colour and then no windows would be required.Not one of the aforementioned tents has ever earned 10 stars in my view, as I have yet to find an ideal tent.This earns 7 out of 10 stars as I regard pack size/weight, setup, pack down, quality, space and value for money (at £500) as very important and it still has great aesthetics compared to most glamping tents but ...There are some design flaws including; in my view, the colour; for everyone, the canopy and doors; stupidities like non-reflective guys; and a serious question mark over weather performance - given the omission of what is standard for other Vango tents in their specifications.So those concerns it loses 3 out of 10 so I will round it up to give 4 out of 5 stars here, considering that my ratings appear to be more harsh (realistic in my view) than others.UPDATE:Having used it again this summer I have revised my issues on aesthetics. The colour is great during the day and at night using rgb leds through the wall loops creates a great cross lighting affect. The tent design has shade for overhead sun with light from the centre.The main and now only flaw is still the way the doors open. When it is hot and wet you cannot keep the doors open because of rain ingress. I have a solution - not yet tried - to use the internal wall dividers over the the outside awning, with something like grip clips to guy it down. If this solves that water ingress issue that would be great, still it would remain 4 stars since I should not have had to come up with this solution. Plus maybe there is a reason they provided a roof only (no wall) awning. Needs a test in high winds. Will keep you posted.

There is a lot we love about this tent so we are gutted that this time two poles have broken in windy weather, this time one of them ripping the awning as it went. We managed to get a replacement pole out of Vango when this happened a couple of years ago but aside from the big rip that has been made, we have come to the conclusion that we are likely to be replacing poles almost every time we use this tent, even in fairly standard British summer weather. Additionally, we find ourselves lying awake in windy weather stressing about whether the tent will survive the night,even after we have rolled up the awning (which is no fun in wet and windy weather at night, let me tell you). It is lovely in many ways, but the design is flawed as it catches the wind and places too much strain in a couple of places.