Here is how these two tents compare on the numbers. The Hogback takes a modest overall edge, led by low weight, but the Hubba Hubba LT 3 has its own case.
| Tarptent Hogback | MSR Hubba Hubba LT 3 | |
|---|---|---|
| GearScore | 80✓ | 73 |
| Capacity | 4 | 3 |
| Packed weight | 51.7 oz✓ | 70.0 oz |
| Floor area | 51.4 sq ft✓ | 47 sq ft |
| Space-to-weight | 15.9 /lb✓ | 10.7 /lb |
| Peak height | 48 in✓ | 42 in |
| Doors | 2 | 2 |
| Vestibules | 2 | 2 |
| Price | $549✓ | $650 |
| Type | Ultralight | Backpacking |
Highlighted cells mark the better spec: Hogback in blue, Hubba Hubba LT 3 in amber. A blank spec is never counted as a win. GearScore is the overall rating (0 to 100); re-weight it on the full tent comparison. Prices are current MSRP.
The Tarptent Hogback against the MSR Hubba Hubba LT 3 is a study in priorities. The Hogback wins on low weight and floor space, and the Hubba Hubba LT 3 pushes back on value.
The Hogback is 1.1 lb lighter, more floor area (51.4 vs 47 sq ft), and better space-to-weight. On the default GearScore the Hogback leads 80 to 73.
Pick the Hogback if you care most about low weight and floor space, which makes it the better call for counting grams on long miles. Pick the Hubba Hubba LT 3 if you would rather save the difference.
The Tarptent Hogback. It is 1.1 lb lighter than the Hubba Hubba LT 3.
The Tarptent Hogback. It is more floor area (51.4 vs 47 sq ft) than the Hubba Hubba LT 3.
The Tarptent Hogback, 80 to 73 on the default algorithm. You can re-weight the factors to match your trip.
It depends on your priorities. Go with the Hogback for low weight, or the Hubba Hubba LT 3 for the price. The spec table above shows exactly where each wins.