I have never really given up backpacking. The first few years after I married my wonderful wife, our outings became mostly day hikes that could be done in the area. I still managed an overnight trip occasionally. I took my young son on several trips where he carried a small day pack, and I carried everything else. I still remember our first overnight trip. I was so worried that he have a good time, and that I was prepared for any emergency. I carried an 85 lbs. backpack. Of course my son was about 5 years old at the time.
When my son entered scouting in the mid 1990's and I was ask to tag along as one of the "dads", I began to inventory my gear. Several years at a desk job had convinced me that I was no longer willing to carry an 85 lbs. backpack. One of my first gear changes was, once again, a stove.
Doing some research and visiting several outdoor stores, I discovered MSR stoves. There was a very limited backpacking stove selection in most stores, and most of the stoves being sold were canisters stoves. Not the canister of today, but canisters that had to be pierced when attaching the stove, and could not be disconnected until the canister was empty. Very few liquid fuel stoves where on the shelves in my area.
MSR was well represented, and as I did some investigations, I was impressed by the ability to field maintain the stove. A maintenance kit could be purchased and carried. The fuel container could be attached, detached, refilled for each trip. I decided that I liked the Whisperlite International stove. I thought the ability to use kerosene was important since it was less volatile that white gas. I soon purchased the Whisperlite International stove.
Two decades later I still have that original stove. I have never had any field issues with my Whipserlite. I have used it in sub-zero weather, altitudes about 12,000, and one week long outings using less that 5 oz. of fuel. I have learned that using kerosene is not something I would recommend. It is messy. Priming the stove is difficult because kerosene need a higher temperature to vaporize. It leave a heavy soot on the stove. I would only use kerosene if no other fuel was available!
Until recently I had great faith in MSR and their product line. In recent years it seems that the product quality and product selection has diminished. I have no hard facts to back up the decline in quality, other than several product failures I have had in the last couple of years with new gear. I must note that MSR has been quick to replace the failed gear, but that didn't help much when my new water filter failed on the second day of what was supposed to be a four day outing! I like to blame this on their acquisition but a larger company, and on more worry about the bottom line as big companies seem to do. Don't get me wrong, their equipment is still better than almost any other equipment that I have compared it to. Just maybe not, in my opinion, what it once was, or still could be.
Would I recommend a MSR Whisperlite International stove? Yes, I would. The stove meets and/or exceeds expectations and is still my "go to" stove. At about 15 oz. (in the pack weight) it is not my lightest liquid fuel stove, but neither is it my heaviest, and I am not counting my Peak 1 stove.
3 1/2 minutes to boil 500 ml water using 1/2 oz. (15g) of white gas in a MSR Titan Kettle.
Note: Some time ago I started tracking my fuel use by weight, not volume. I made things simpler for me. I could weigh the fuel bottle or canister on any scale and know how many boils (meals) I had in the bottle and how much weight I was adding to my pack. No conversions to specific weight and volume required. So when I say 1/2 oz. of white gas, that is by weight!
Monday, February 9, 2015
Sunday, February 8, 2015
Learning from mistakes
As I was putting away my alcohol stoves, I began to reminisce. Sitting on the shelve were the stoves that I have acquired over time, beginning in the mid to late 1970's.
My first backpacking trip should have soured me to backpacking. As a scout, I was not involved with the planning, but as I recall we were supposed to hike every other day. Fishing on the off days. The first night out, the plans changed as the adults talked with people on the trail. We ended up hiking every day from daybreak to dusk. We went down a wrong fork for most of a day.
Instead of vowing to never go backpacking again, I realized how unprepared I really was for the trip. My pack was home made, and very heavy (without gear). Cooking on an open fire after extremely long tiring days was a bad experience. Heavy sleeping bag. No map or idea of our planned path. The list could go on and on.
We lived in a small town and, looking back, I realize how tight money was for our family. Even then my parents were able to get me a new pack for Christmas. Later they contributed a better sleeping bag, and even added backpacking tent. I still have all that gear. The bright orange pack never fails to remind me of the many trips I took as a youth.
Since water filtration was not a necessity at the time, the most important problem for me to solve was the cooking over a fire. It took significant time, blackened cook ware, and left a scare on the land. Without any knowledge of backpacking stoves and without ready access to any data to do research, and with only one sporting goods store in town, my choices were limited. The local store catered more to fishing and hunting than anything else. Everything in the camping section seemed to have the Coleman label. My older brother, by nearly a decade, was into scouting as a leader and had just purchased a Coleman Peak 1 stove. So I did as well, mostly because the Peak 1 was the only stove available to me at the time. The stove is heavy (1 lbs 14 oz. or 837 g) and bulky. But this stove solved my dilemma at the time. The attached fuel chamber and pump work flawlessly. The Peak 1 also has a built in jet cleaner. The folding legs make a steady platform. Liquid fuel so I could use the stove in the winter
Coleman still sells a version of this stove today as the Sportster and markets it as a backpacking stove. While I bought this stove in my youth, I cannot recommend it for backpacking today. There are too many better choices and over the course of the next few post I hope to explore them.
My first backpacking trip should have soured me to backpacking. As a scout, I was not involved with the planning, but as I recall we were supposed to hike every other day. Fishing on the off days. The first night out, the plans changed as the adults talked with people on the trail. We ended up hiking every day from daybreak to dusk. We went down a wrong fork for most of a day.
Instead of vowing to never go backpacking again, I realized how unprepared I really was for the trip. My pack was home made, and very heavy (without gear). Cooking on an open fire after extremely long tiring days was a bad experience. Heavy sleeping bag. No map or idea of our planned path. The list could go on and on.
We lived in a small town and, looking back, I realize how tight money was for our family. Even then my parents were able to get me a new pack for Christmas. Later they contributed a better sleeping bag, and even added backpacking tent. I still have all that gear. The bright orange pack never fails to remind me of the many trips I took as a youth.
Since water filtration was not a necessity at the time, the most important problem for me to solve was the cooking over a fire. It took significant time, blackened cook ware, and left a scare on the land. Without any knowledge of backpacking stoves and without ready access to any data to do research, and with only one sporting goods store in town, my choices were limited. The local store catered more to fishing and hunting than anything else. Everything in the camping section seemed to have the Coleman label. My older brother, by nearly a decade, was into scouting as a leader and had just purchased a Coleman Peak 1 stove. So I did as well, mostly because the Peak 1 was the only stove available to me at the time. The stove is heavy (1 lbs 14 oz. or 837 g) and bulky. But this stove solved my dilemma at the time. The attached fuel chamber and pump work flawlessly. The Peak 1 also has a built in jet cleaner. The folding legs make a steady platform. Liquid fuel so I could use the stove in the winter
Coleman still sells a version of this stove today as the Sportster and markets it as a backpacking stove. While I bought this stove in my youth, I cannot recommend it for backpacking today. There are too many better choices and over the course of the next few post I hope to explore them.
Monday, February 2, 2015
Stove preferences
The last few days as I have posted about some alcohol stoves causing me to reflect on how my stove preferences have changed, yet remain the same.
When I first started using a stove, I did very little research and chose a stove because someone I knew had the stove. Selection was limited at the time, research difficult (no Internet), and funds were tight. My selection was a Coleman Peak 1, now marketed as "Sportster II dual fuel™1-burner stove". Other than color, mine is black, the stove appears identical. Now the Peak 1 is heavy and bulky, but after much use and many trips I began to get an idea why a stove was a basic backpacking necessity.
Cooking over a wood fire may sound fun, but it really is messy, difficult, and time consuming. While a backpack stove is none of the above. Of course today, fire restrictions are in place in most, if not all areas.
My next stove was another liquid fuel (petroleum) stove. I enjoy winter camping and the liquid fuel stove alternate, a canister stove, was not a viable option for temperatures at or below freezing. Canister stoves also did not perform well at altitude, and I backpack at or above 10000 ft regularly. I also regularly enjoy winter camping. So I bought a liquid fuel stove that has a remote fuel reservoir. Today almost all liquid fuel stoves utilize a remote reservoir. The obvious exceptions being the Coleman stove mention above, and the Optimus SVEA. The stove I bought was the MSR Whisperlite International. My Whisperlite is several decades old and I have never had an issue. I bought the stove because of the ability to use kerosene. The reality, after using kerosene a few times, I went back to white gas because it was less hassle to prime.
After years of using liquid fuel, I was planning a trip into the Grand Canyon (Havasupai) with some friends. I was looking for something small and light, for a warm climate. As a result, I purchased my first canister stove on the recommendation of the local shop. It was the Optimus Crux, and it folds and stores in the concave bottom of a 8 oz. canister. The ease of use and convenience of the canister stove had me wondering if I should change from my liquid fuel stove. Some investigation showed me that canisters still had low temperature problems and some minimal altitude issues. FYI, the fuel in a canister stays a liquid at following temperatures, butane 31º F, isobutane 11º F, propane -43º F. So in a mixed fuel canister at 0º F, only the propane will be available to burn, leaving butane and isobutane in the canister. If you do the math, you see that an 8 oz. canister has very little fuel available to burn even though the canister seems almost full. Some vendors have started making a remote canister where the canister can be inverted. These stoves use the propane pressure to push liquid butane to the stove. The stove then functions as a liquid fuel stove. Of course you still need to be able to light them before inverting the canister. The MSR Windpro II and the Optimus Vega are two such stoves.
Then came my alcohol stove phase. These stoves have absolutely no moving parts. Nothing to break down in the field. Their drawback is the heat to fuel ratio, which translate to weight you must carry in fuel. More fuel is required to boil than either the liquid petroleum, or canister stoves. And alcohol stoves are very sensitive to wind since the flame burns without pressure. Think candle flame. The slightest air movement deflects the flame (heat) from your pan. Ultralight, fun to build your own, but ultimately for me, not my go to stove.
Then came my stove system phase. The JetBoil, MSR Reactor are examples. Both stoves are great systems. My testing showed that the JetBoil suffers from wind. In fact, I have had this stove blow out on me multiple times. The Reactor does not suffer from wind, but is more difficult to light. Both stoves have a regulator, that makes the stove work on a much lower canister pressure. This helps the stove perform better in colder weather, and higher altitudes. It is my understanding that both stoves have an over-heat kill mechanism that is a "one and done" system. If the over-heat triggers, the stove will no longer work and needs to be replaced. Both stoves are extremely fuel efficient. But I continually worry that the stove will kill itself during one of my extended "no resupply" trips. So I always carry a backup canister stove. I have become enamored with the Reactor, and I prefer it to the JetBoil. The new MSR WindBoiler reminds me of the JetBoil, only without the wind issue. I actually dislike the bayonet connection of the JetBoil. I backpack and this feature is just in the way for me. So the WindBoiler does not really have a place in my pack. However, I must note that the WindBoiler contains the same kill mechanism as the Reactor, but with one difference. You can reset it, once. My pack configuration with the Reactor is to carry the Optimus Vega as my backup since it is small, light, and with the inverted canister has some cold weather capabilities. Why not just carry the Vega. My 1 liter Reactor boils water in about 70 seconds, wind screens are not allowed. The Vega, three minutes, and the use of a wind screen is almost required.
What does all this mean?
My preferred stove, especially for extended trips and all winter camping, is still a liquid fuel (petroleum) stove. It just gets the job done! I always have a fuel bottle with enough fuel for my trip. No need to carry a second canister, and then need to carry out the empty canister. FYI, for an 8 oz. canister, the empty canister weighs at least 5 oz.
For shorter trips, only a couple of days and not in the winter. I may grab the Reactor with the Vega as backup.
For overnight trips in the summer. I may grab the Crux because it is small and light.
I almost never take an alcohol stove. Not by any conscious decision that there is something wrong with them. I normally carry either a liquid fuel (Petroleum) stove, or the Reactor, so I seem to just take either one of those stoves and my alcohol stoves sit idle. The reason may be that I use my liquid fuel stove so often, that I feel more comfortable with it than any other stove and the Reactor still has me enamored.
Habits are hard to break.
When I first started using a stove, I did very little research and chose a stove because someone I knew had the stove. Selection was limited at the time, research difficult (no Internet), and funds were tight. My selection was a Coleman Peak 1, now marketed as "Sportster II dual fuel™1-burner stove". Other than color, mine is black, the stove appears identical. Now the Peak 1 is heavy and bulky, but after much use and many trips I began to get an idea why a stove was a basic backpacking necessity.
Cooking over a wood fire may sound fun, but it really is messy, difficult, and time consuming. While a backpack stove is none of the above. Of course today, fire restrictions are in place in most, if not all areas.
My next stove was another liquid fuel (petroleum) stove. I enjoy winter camping and the liquid fuel stove alternate, a canister stove, was not a viable option for temperatures at or below freezing. Canister stoves also did not perform well at altitude, and I backpack at or above 10000 ft regularly. I also regularly enjoy winter camping. So I bought a liquid fuel stove that has a remote fuel reservoir. Today almost all liquid fuel stoves utilize a remote reservoir. The obvious exceptions being the Coleman stove mention above, and the Optimus SVEA. The stove I bought was the MSR Whisperlite International. My Whisperlite is several decades old and I have never had an issue. I bought the stove because of the ability to use kerosene. The reality, after using kerosene a few times, I went back to white gas because it was less hassle to prime.
After years of using liquid fuel, I was planning a trip into the Grand Canyon (Havasupai) with some friends. I was looking for something small and light, for a warm climate. As a result, I purchased my first canister stove on the recommendation of the local shop. It was the Optimus Crux, and it folds and stores in the concave bottom of a 8 oz. canister. The ease of use and convenience of the canister stove had me wondering if I should change from my liquid fuel stove. Some investigation showed me that canisters still had low temperature problems and some minimal altitude issues. FYI, the fuel in a canister stays a liquid at following temperatures, butane 31º F, isobutane 11º F, propane -43º F. So in a mixed fuel canister at 0º F, only the propane will be available to burn, leaving butane and isobutane in the canister. If you do the math, you see that an 8 oz. canister has very little fuel available to burn even though the canister seems almost full. Some vendors have started making a remote canister where the canister can be inverted. These stoves use the propane pressure to push liquid butane to the stove. The stove then functions as a liquid fuel stove. Of course you still need to be able to light them before inverting the canister. The MSR Windpro II and the Optimus Vega are two such stoves.
Then came my alcohol stove phase. These stoves have absolutely no moving parts. Nothing to break down in the field. Their drawback is the heat to fuel ratio, which translate to weight you must carry in fuel. More fuel is required to boil than either the liquid petroleum, or canister stoves. And alcohol stoves are very sensitive to wind since the flame burns without pressure. Think candle flame. The slightest air movement deflects the flame (heat) from your pan. Ultralight, fun to build your own, but ultimately for me, not my go to stove.
Then came my stove system phase. The JetBoil, MSR Reactor are examples. Both stoves are great systems. My testing showed that the JetBoil suffers from wind. In fact, I have had this stove blow out on me multiple times. The Reactor does not suffer from wind, but is more difficult to light. Both stoves have a regulator, that makes the stove work on a much lower canister pressure. This helps the stove perform better in colder weather, and higher altitudes. It is my understanding that both stoves have an over-heat kill mechanism that is a "one and done" system. If the over-heat triggers, the stove will no longer work and needs to be replaced. Both stoves are extremely fuel efficient. But I continually worry that the stove will kill itself during one of my extended "no resupply" trips. So I always carry a backup canister stove. I have become enamored with the Reactor, and I prefer it to the JetBoil. The new MSR WindBoiler reminds me of the JetBoil, only without the wind issue. I actually dislike the bayonet connection of the JetBoil. I backpack and this feature is just in the way for me. So the WindBoiler does not really have a place in my pack. However, I must note that the WindBoiler contains the same kill mechanism as the Reactor, but with one difference. You can reset it, once. My pack configuration with the Reactor is to carry the Optimus Vega as my backup since it is small, light, and with the inverted canister has some cold weather capabilities. Why not just carry the Vega. My 1 liter Reactor boils water in about 70 seconds, wind screens are not allowed. The Vega, three minutes, and the use of a wind screen is almost required.
What does all this mean?
My preferred stove, especially for extended trips and all winter camping, is still a liquid fuel (petroleum) stove. It just gets the job done! I always have a fuel bottle with enough fuel for my trip. No need to carry a second canister, and then need to carry out the empty canister. FYI, for an 8 oz. canister, the empty canister weighs at least 5 oz.
For shorter trips, only a couple of days and not in the winter. I may grab the Reactor with the Vega as backup.
For overnight trips in the summer. I may grab the Crux because it is small and light.
I almost never take an alcohol stove. Not by any conscious decision that there is something wrong with them. I normally carry either a liquid fuel (Petroleum) stove, or the Reactor, so I seem to just take either one of those stoves and my alcohol stoves sit idle. The reason may be that I use my liquid fuel stove so often, that I feel more comfortable with it than any other stove and the Reactor still has me enamored.
Habits are hard to break.
Sunday, February 1, 2015
Alcohol Stoves (Fuel bottles)
Whether you use a canister stove, a petroleum fuel based stove, or an alcohol fuel stove you must transport your fuel.
Years ago, I purchased two red Nalgene fuel bottles, a 500ml and a 1000ml bottle. The year was 1978, and I had just purchased my first stove and I was looking for a way to carry fuel for that stove. The Nalgene fuel bottle label states "You can safely store white gas, kerosene, gasoline or stove alcohol in this fuel bottle". The bottle has a pour spout that stores inside the bottle mouth. Nalgene no longer produces these bottles which to me is sad, because they make excellent alcohol fuel bottles.
Apart from the now unavailable Nalgene fuel bottles, I have never seen a fuel bottle labeled for alcohol available in my area. In my area I can purchase MSR fuel bottles or Optimus fuel bottles.
Trangia makes a plastic bottle specifically for alcohol. The Trangia bottles come in 300ml, 500ml, and 1000ml sizes. What makes the bottle different than the Nalgene bottles, (besides the fact that you can still purchase them). The pour spout. Every time you use your alcohol stove, you must pour fuel into your stove. The ability to pour without spillage is extremely important. The Nalgene bottle was great because of the included pour spout. The Trangia bottle is better. For the Nalgene, you opened the bottle and pulled out the spout, reversed it, and placed it back in the mouth of the bottle. You always got some fuel on you hands. With the Trangia bottle you turn the top nob, to pour you depress the top. When the stove is filled, you release the top, and turn the top nob to tighten the seal. No spills, no mess.
Note that the opening of the Trangia bottle is the same thread pattern and diameter as the MSR and Optimus bottles. I have never broken the Trangia cap, but for the more paranoid you could use a more rugged cap, and carry the Trangia cap for pouring. Plastic is the way to go, find what works for you. For me, I will use a Trangia bottle.
Years ago, I purchased two red Nalgene fuel bottles, a 500ml and a 1000ml bottle. The year was 1978, and I had just purchased my first stove and I was looking for a way to carry fuel for that stove. The Nalgene fuel bottle label states "You can safely store white gas, kerosene, gasoline or stove alcohol in this fuel bottle". The bottle has a pour spout that stores inside the bottle mouth. Nalgene no longer produces these bottles which to me is sad, because they make excellent alcohol fuel bottles.
Apart from the now unavailable Nalgene fuel bottles, I have never seen a fuel bottle labeled for alcohol available in my area. In my area I can purchase MSR fuel bottles or Optimus fuel bottles.
MSR fuel bottles
First, alcohol and aluminum do not mix well. Alcohol causes the aluminum to corrode to a white powder. MSR bottles are unlined aluminum. Do not use MSR fuel bottles for alcohol!Optimus bottles
While made of aluminum, these bottles are lined, much like soft drink cans. For an experiment, I placed some alcohol in one of the fuel bottles and left it for six months. When I opened the bottle, there was white powder around the O-ring seal, and the green outside paint was bubbled around the mouth. Apparently there is a gap between the interior coating, and the exterior paint. I would not use Optimus fuel bottles for alcohol.Plastic
I have seen disposable water bottles used to carry alcohol. While this works, those bottles are now so thin that I would not feel comfortable using them. I suppose that you could use sport drink bottles since they are a bit more sturdy. But I have found a bottle and a cap that I like better that any alternative that I have found, and the cap is the reason.Trangia makes a plastic bottle specifically for alcohol. The Trangia bottles come in 300ml, 500ml, and 1000ml sizes. What makes the bottle different than the Nalgene bottles, (besides the fact that you can still purchase them). The pour spout. Every time you use your alcohol stove, you must pour fuel into your stove. The ability to pour without spillage is extremely important. The Nalgene bottle was great because of the included pour spout. The Trangia bottle is better. For the Nalgene, you opened the bottle and pulled out the spout, reversed it, and placed it back in the mouth of the bottle. You always got some fuel on you hands. With the Trangia bottle you turn the top nob, to pour you depress the top. When the stove is filled, you release the top, and turn the top nob to tighten the seal. No spills, no mess.
Note that the opening of the Trangia bottle is the same thread pattern and diameter as the MSR and Optimus bottles. I have never broken the Trangia cap, but for the more paranoid you could use a more rugged cap, and carry the Trangia cap for pouring. Plastic is the way to go, find what works for you. For me, I will use a Trangia bottle.
 |
| 300ml, 500ml, and 1000ml bottles placed on a 8.5" x 11" carbon felt to show relative size |
Friday, January 30, 2015
Alcohol stoves, buy or build
Would I buy an alcohol stove, or build one? The answer depends on my use.
BSA (scouting)
For BSA (scouting) you must purchase a stove. The BSA regulations for stoves explicitly prohibit "Equipment that is handcrafted, homemade, modified, or installed beyond the manufacturer’s stated design limitations or use. Examples include alcohol-burning “can” stoves, smudge pots, improperly installed heaters, and propane burners with their regulators removed." Notice how the BSA explicitly calls out "can" stoves. Because of the screw lid and snuff ring I would favor the Trangia or Esbit stoves, and add a separate wind screen and stand. The Trangia Triangle being very good candidate for a stand. I would add an aluminum wind screen similar to the ones that come with MSR stoves. You can find instructions on making your own wind screen on the web.
If I had the funds, I might consider purchasing the pricey Evernew stove set. I would have to weigh the ability to conserve fuel to the lighter titanium stove. I am impressed with this stove system.
If I had the funds, I might consider purchasing the pricey Evernew stove set. I would have to weigh the ability to conserve fuel to the lighter titanium stove. I am impressed with this stove system.
Use not including BSA
I would build a soda can stove, solve the pot stand problem, and use an aluminum wind screen.
To solve the stand and wind screen issue I am experimenting with the Vargo Hexagon Wood stove as combination wind screen and pot stand. The Hexagon works great as a stand. I believe the wind screen should shield past the division between stand and pot. This keeps the wind from deflecting the flame away from the pot. Since the pot sits on top of the Hexagon, there is no protection at the division. I need to field use the Hexagon to validate the wind screen aspect.
There are other stands and wind screens, you can even make you own. I am still experimenting with the pot stands and will update this post when I reach a conclusion.
One of the reason I really like the Trangia 27 stove system is the stand, wind screen and pot design. The stove actually seems to perform better in a breeze than in absolute calm. The Trangia 27 is just too bulky and too heavy for me to want to carry.
To solve the stand and wind screen issue I am experimenting with the Vargo Hexagon Wood stove as combination wind screen and pot stand. The Hexagon works great as a stand. I believe the wind screen should shield past the division between stand and pot. This keeps the wind from deflecting the flame away from the pot. Since the pot sits on top of the Hexagon, there is no protection at the division. I need to field use the Hexagon to validate the wind screen aspect.
There are other stands and wind screens, you can even make you own. I am still experimenting with the pot stands and will update this post when I reach a conclusion.
One of the reason I really like the Trangia 27 stove system is the stand, wind screen and pot design. The stove actually seems to perform better in a breeze than in absolute calm. The Trangia 27 is just too bulky and too heavy for me to want to carry.
Thursday, January 29, 2015
Alcohol Stove (Vargo Triad)
Pros
- Integrated pot stand
- Lightweight
Cons
- Difficult to fill
- Difficult to light
- Small flame
- Long boil times
This small lightweight stove solves one of the problems with alcohol stoves. That problem is where to set my pot. The built in stand and the light weight are the only good things about this stove. When filling the stove you must take care because the alcohol enters the small filling hole at a very slow rate. You must always fill the stove to capacity (2 oz or 60 ml) in order to light the stove. You fill the stove until a small amount of fuel remain at the bottom of the concave top. You then light this small pool of alcohol and wait (and wait) for the stove to bloom.
I have devised a work around for faster lighting which I will explain. But you will still need to completely fill the stove in order to boil 2 cups (500 ml) of water. In order to facilitate lighting the stove, I created a small "pre-heater" (inspired by the Trangia winter attachment) from one of the left over pieces from constructing a soda can stove. I use the cut out, concave bottom to hold several drops of alcohol which I light, then push under the Triad, this starts the stove very quickly. The concave "flash pan" then stores on top of the stove, being held in place by the folded pot supports.
On my one and only field use, the stove failed to boil water with one filling. I had to refill the stove in order to achieve a boil. Under ideal conditions, (no wind, 72° ambient), the stove took 9 minutes to boil 2 cups (500 ml) and consumed 1.8 ounces (50ml).
|
|
||||
|
|
Wednesday, January 28, 2015
Alcohol Stove (soda can)
Pros
- Lightweight
- Low cost
Cons
- Easily damaged
With an abundance of empty soda cans, I made so many stoves that I started giving them away. I experiment with the number of burner holes, the size of the burner holes, placement of the burner holes. I even made some side burner soda can stoves. I experiment with all the different variations. My observations were a little surprising in light of my expectations. I found that burner count and holes affected the boil time and fuel consumption. Larger holes burned more fuel, but did not decrease the boil time proportionately. Same with more burner holes. I finally just arrived at what I thought was the "best" combination. More to do with ease of construction than science.
For my top burner stove, my boil time (using the Trangia Mini pot) were
| Number holes | Boil time | Fuel |
| 32 small | 6 minutes | 1oz. (30ml) |
| 24 small | 6 minutes | 1oz. (30ml) |
| 24 large | 5 1/2 minutes | 1.2oz. (35ml) |
| side burner | 5 minutes | 1.6oz. (45ml) |
Soda can stove suffer the same drawbacks as other non Trangia stoves. No way to snuff the flame, no way to conserve fuel from one use to the next use within the stove, no pot stand, and no wind screen. I must note that the stoves are sturdy enough to support a pot with 500ml of water. Of course the only stove that will actually burn with a pot sitting on it is the side burner. But the flames of the side burner, with the pot sealing the stove, shoot so far from the stove that most of the heat is lost past the width of the pot.
You will need a pot stand and wind screen for this stove. I am currently using the Vargo Hexagon Wood stove for a combination pot stand and wind screen. The jury is still out on the the Vargo Hexagon. It flexes with the weight of a pot on it, but it has never failed.
You will need a pot stand and wind screen for this stove. I am currently using the Vargo Hexagon Wood stove for a combination pot stand and wind screen. The jury is still out on the the Vargo Hexagon. It flexes with the weight of a pot on it, but it has never failed.
|
|
||||
|
|
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)