Stove Comparison - "Real World Use"

Some of our favorites!!!!
User avatar
Mags
Posts: 228
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:28 am
Location: Boulder, CO
Contact:

Stove Comparison - "Real World Use"

Postby Mags » Wed Sep 12, 2007 1:11 pm

There are many backpacking stoves available for the consumer now. Lightweight alcohol stoves, canister stoves and white gas stoves are the most popular now for general use. But what stove is "the best"? The true answer is: NONE OF THEM.

The article below will go into the pros and cons of the various stoves for "real world" (not marketing) use depending upon your needs.

The "best stove" depends upon what your use is for. Boiling a lot of water? Backpacking as a couple? Doing "real" cooking in the back country? Long time without resupply? Winter camping? These are all questions that need to be asked when considering a stove for backcountry use. Just as you would not use a screwdriver to put in a nail, certain types of stoves are suited for different type of tasks than another stove.

Here is my rough guide (and I do mean rough!) to the different stove uses.

First the baseline for my personal stove use. Most of my backpacking is for solo, three season use. When thru-hiking on the Western trails, tend to do about 25-30 MPD. Do some winter backpacking in Colorado. Resupplied every 5-7 days on average for the PCT, CDT and the Colorado Trail. Resupplied 3-5 days on the Appalachian Trail and Long Trail thru-hikes. My longest stretch without resupply was 10 days in the High Sierra.

Also, I define a meal as enough for the standard two Lipton's and enough water for a hot drink. For me, that equated one ounce of alcohol for most of my cooking. Never had to use more fuel than that, but I've used my stove enough where I make it work with a min. amount of fuel.

A quick note on Chemistry 101: In case your 10th grade chemistry class was forgotten (and remembering the cute blonde who you had a crush on when you were sixteen does not count!), here is a quick reminder: Fuel volume and fuel weight are not a one for one ratio. One ounce of fuel by volume does not weigh one ounce. One ounce of alcohol (by volume) weighs approx. .8 oz. A 10 oz of bottle of fuel weighs about 8oz (not counting the weight of the bottle). White Gas weighs slightly less per ounce; 10oz of fuel weighs about 7.5 oz. And so on...

On to the stove comparison!

ALCOHOL STOVES: For solo, three season use, this stove works very well. A homemade alcohol stove is light (less than half an ounce), easy to use, inexpensive and runs on fuel that can be found in most towns.
As a base , here is my alcohol stove setup:

2 qt. Alum. Pot w/ tinfoil lid 4.500 oz
Soda Can Stove .250 oz
Windscreen / Potstand 1.00 oz
Ziplock Bag .375 oz
12 oz. Mountain Dew Bottle (Fuel) .625 oz

Total: 6.75 oz

The major disadvantage of an alcohol stove is that after about 10 meals (10 oz of fuel), you lose major advantage of the weight savings. My alcohol stove setup weighs 14 oz with 10 days of fuel. If I were to go longer, an MSR PocketRocket (see below) would be more efficient for longer use. For cold weather temps (below 15F, the raw edge of three-season hiking IMO), a white gas stove would be much more efficient. Alcohol and canister stoves (rated to 15F by manufacturers), perform poorly for winter use.

From Mechanical Engineering Magazine, August 2004 issue:
Once a trip extends beyond a certain duration, the advantage of the homebuilt's near weightlessness bogs down in alcohol's low heat content,compared to white gas or isopropane (11,500 vs. 20,000 Btu/lb.). Hikers relying on alcohol end up paying a fuel-weight penalty if they can't resupply every four to five days.

(The above figure is for two meals a day)

Altitude has NOT been a factor for me with alcohol stove use. Have used it as high as 13k feet in October when it has been snowing out. Feel that is a good representation of what I consider the "raw edge" three season hiking.
Another advantage of the alcohol stove is that as you use more fuel, your weight becomes less and less than that of a canister stove. An empty metal container weights about three ounces by itself! If I go out for a weekend, two ounces of fuel weighs 1 oz a the most. So, my setup is would be about 7oz for a weekend vs 21oz or for the popular canister stoves.


ALCOHOL STOVE SUMMARY: The alcohol stove is suited best for three-season, solo use. The light weight, ease of use and easy resupply makes it a solo thru-hiker favorite. If you need to do "real" cooking, long term resupply (more than 10 meals worth), or share a stove then you may better off with a canister stove. Two people can use alcohol stoves efficiently, but more planning is needed. Though alcohol stoves are not hard to use, they are not as convenient as canister stoves. That may or not be a factor in your decision.

More info on alcohol stoves http://zenstoves.net/Stoves.htm

CANISTER STOVES: A good alternative for those whose needs are more than typical, three season solo backpacking. A canister stove is easy to use, more fuel efficient in the long term than an alcohol stove, an is better for couples/partners/families. "Real cooking" is also done easier on a canister stove.

You do have to pack out the empties and resupply is not as convenient as alcohol or white gas stoves. You often have to mail yourself containers on longer treks. Whiteblaze has a good thread on mailing yourself fuel containers at http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/showthread.php?t=8311. As with alcohol stoves, canister stoves are not meant for winter backpacking. The canisters are rated to 15F by the manufacturers. They perform slightly better in cooler temps than alcohol, but not by much. In other words, for real world, three-season backpacking, the temps are not a factor for white gas vs. alcohol vs. canisters.

Jetboil

A very popular canister stove system in the past two years is the Jetboil system. It is popular because it is a "system". Small pot, fuel efficient stove, easy to use. Boils water very fast. It is expensive and heavy though! The integrated cup is meant just for boiling water and not cooking in, so it is of less use for partners (unless you are doing Mountain House type meals). Still, the convenience makes it an attractive stove for some.

Here are figures from some Whiteblaze Jetboil. users. Thanks to Sdwoonek for compiling the data that I copied and pasted. ;-)

[Originally Posted by Just Jeff
So a total of ~21 oz with a full canister.

Originally Posted by hopefulhiker
Old style Jetboil new snowpeak canister (21.6oz)

Originally Posted by joel137
Jet boil and one small full canister is...21.7 oz

Originally Posted by SoundWitness
total with new fuel canister....21.1 ounces.

Skeemers data is obviously thrown off by the addition of the "small cloth", but since it was weighed and posted, I had to include it....

Originally Posted by Skeemer
26 oz with a small cloth and a couple of uses


So that's about 21oz for the average Jetboil user. As the Jetboil people themselves advertise the stove for personal use (and the setup make it inconvenient for more than one person), it takes a longer resupply stretch to make the extra weight of the Jetboil more efficient than an alcohol stove over the long term. This weight penalty is more pronounced on shorter resupply stretches typically seen by most backpackers. It is a system as well, so it is hard to use with other cooking stoves or pans. Again, not very friendly for multiple use. Still, the convenience and ease of use does make it attractive for some users. It is $80 though, and I think there are lighter and less expensive alternatives for canisters stove use if convenience and ease of use are not your main purchasing points.

Other Canister Stoves

The MSR Pocker Rocket and SnowPeak Giga Power stoves are roughly the same weight, price and performance. Google them to find more thorough reviews.

In short, these stoves weigh about 9.5 oz with a full fuel container and stove. Add in my 4.5 oz pot and windscreen and it is about 15 oz. If I hiked with a partner (my main use for this type of stove), I'd take a bowl to eat out for myself or my partner. Call it one ounce for a Cool Whip bowl. So that is 16 oz total. for the setup I would use. These stoves are very fuel efficient; getting about 25 meals with a full fuel container! Wow!

A "real world" caveat is that people tend to pack in extra canisters because they are afraid of running out fuel. A more experienced canister user tends to gauge fuel use more accurately. If you pack an extra canister in "just in case", you are adding 3-6 oz of weight, ruining the overall efficiency of the stove.

Lighter canisters are also sold with less fuel capacity as well. The 4 oz fuel canisters, from what I've seen, last about one dozen meals. The canister stoves work best for couples due to not being able to hold more than a 2 ltr pot without tipping over. For larger group use, a white gas stove with a more stable base would be best.

CANISTER STOVE SUMMARY:


Jet Boil: For ease of use and quick boil times, but for a high price and weight, the Jet Boilstove may be a good choice for some people. It is not a good choice for couples or group use. Jet Boil is coming out with a stove that is designed for more people in the near future.

MSR Pocket Rocket/Snow Peak/Others: For more than ten meals, couples use and longer resupply, the canister stoves would be a good solution. If I ever hiked with a partner, I'd lean towards the Snow Peak because it is more stable for pots than the the Pocket Rocket (based on reviews I've seen). If I ever did a trip with longer resupplies (like the Yellowstone to Yukon corridor ), I might take a canister stove.

All the canister stoves do have the resupply disadvantage which could be mitigated with careful planning. As with alcohol stoves, canister stoves are not meant for winter backpacking. Their performance is somewhat better in colder temps than alcohol stoves.

More info on canister stoves

Jetboil http://www.jetboil.com/
MSR Pocket Rocket http://www.msrcorp.com/stoves/pocket_rocket.asp
Snow Peak Giga http://www.snowpeak.com/gears/gst100.htm
Canister Stove Reviewshttp://www.backpackgeartest.org/ ... ar/Stoves/


WHITE GAS STOVES: Heavy, complicated to use, noisy, expensive. For most three-season backpacking, there is no real reason to use this stove. Though it is more fuel efficient than the other stoves, the heavy weight outstrips the weight savings by overall fuel efficiency. If you are cooking for more than two people at one time, a white gas stove makes more sense because they have a more stable base (in general) and can boil lots of water quickly. Winter camping and high altitude mountaineering is where these stoves shine. It was the original use of these stoves after all! They work much better in cold weather than the other stoves and can melt snow quickly; an important chore in winter camping. The white gas stoves do have a bit of learning curve and can be finicky to use. Most of the white gas stoves also have two settings: "Blast furnace" and off! If you want to do "real cooking", be sure to get a stove with a simmer function.

White Gas Stove Summary: For true winter camping/high altitude mountaineering and large group use, it is the stove of choice. Otherwise it is too heavy for three season backpacking use.

Popular White Gas stoves include: MSR Simmerlite, MSR Whisperlite, MSR XGK, Coleman Feather 442, Svea 123 and many, many others!

White Gas Stove Reviews http://www.backpackgeartest.org/reviews ... ar/Stoves/

ZIP STOVES: (Note, the data for the zip stove was provided by TerraPin. Thanks!)
Zip Stoves are an an interesting stove. They are a battery operated stove that burns wood, twigs, cones, etc. With a single AA battery, up to six hours of burn time can be achieved. A fan is powered by the battery to achieve an efficient burn.

Advantages

* No need to carry fuel
* burns almost anything (pine cones, knots, etc.)
* Infinite cooking time (make elaborate meals)
* personal campfire" on cold, wet days
* generally reliable
* very high BTU output, once it's going (boils water quickly)

Disadvantages

* tough going when it's been raining for days (solution: carry fire-starter materials)
* requires fire-starting skills
* requires constant attention while cooking (feeding more fuel into stove)
* time required to gather fuel, start the stove, and cool it after use
* your cookware will be covered with soot (and most likely so will you...)
* Needs AA battery
* Works best in a forest environment; Obvious limitations in desert or alpine environment.
* If there is a fire ban, the Zip stove may be banned for use
* Weighs 18 oz, including battery

Zip Stove Summary: The Zip stove offers the advantage of needing no fuel other than that which you collect at camp, off the forest floor.

It uses a small fan, powered by a single AA battery, to create a very hot and surprisingly clean-burning wood fire. Fuel is reduced to pure ash. One battery provides several hours of cooking time.

Its main disadvantage is that it's fussy and dirty. It takes time to collect fuel and start the stove, and once it's lit, you must feed more fuel into the stove every couple of minutes. This stove will help hone your fire-starting skills!

If you spend a lot of time in camp and like to do a lot of cooking, it's not a bad choice.

The "personal campfire" feature is not to be dismissed, and really needs to be experienced. No other stove offers this.

There is now a Titanium version of this stove that weighs 10 oz, but it is $129!

If you look at the Zen Stoves article, there are links to DIY type stoves as well that are a bit lighter and less expensive.

More info on Zip Stoves http://www.zzstove.com/
Zip Stove Reviews
http://www.backpackgeartest.org/revi...20Zip%20Stove/

SOLID FUEL STOVES
(I've only used the stoves a handful of times. Thanks to Sgt. Rock and Ken aka "Big Cranky" for first hand research!)
Solid fuel stoves use tablets that are lit to boil water. They are lighter than even alcohol stoves (because of the fuel themselves), are more fuel efficient and make the overall lightest setup for all lengths of hauls. The disadvantage depend upon which solid fuel you use Esbit (hexamine) or Trioxane tabs.

Esbit (Hexamine):

First, let's discuss Esbit. Though you can buy a special stove [1] for them, there is no reason. A home made alcohol stove turned over works well. Some people even use tent stakes as a pot support with the tab in the middle. Though this method can work, in inclement weather you are S.O.L. Probably worth it just to bring a cut off soda can bottom as your "stove" and a light weight pot support.

[1] http://www.campmor.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?memberId=12500226&productId=1055

The major advantages of the Esbit tabs are similar to alcohol stoves; even more so. Lighter than alcohol and more fuel efficient. If an alcohol stove is less efficient after about 10 + meals, doing some rough math the Esbit stove is not as efficient as the canister stove at about the 21 meal mark. That's a long time between resupplies! If you are out for a long or short haul and want something light, Esbit is a great option!

The major disadvantages? Price and resupply!

An esbit tab is about .50 each. Even with bulk discounts, it is still much more expensive than other fuels. If you do a retail resupply of .50 per tab, that's $5 for 10 meals. Multiply that figure by a thru-hike! Even a discount rate of "only" .25 each makes Esbit expensive compared to the other fuels.

Resupply on a long haul can be problematic as not many places stock Esbit. As with canisters, careful planning can mitigate this problem. Unlike canisters, Esbit is safe to mail. No special forms or packaging needed. Since Esbit can eat through plastic, a foil lined ziplock is suggested to carry the fuel. The ziplock also helps prevent the smell from permeating through your pack. The smell has been described as "rotting fish". Mmm...rotting fish.

Esbit has been reported to be hard to light. In my limited use, found the Esbit hard to light as well.

As with alcohol and canisters stoves, Esbit does not work well for true winter camping. Esbit is also for "boil only" meals as well and is a bit slower than the other stoves. This stove is best for solo use.

Trioxane

As with Esbit, do not need a special stove. Trioaxne can usually be found at Army surplus stores (online and local). The fumes are toxic, but not usually a problem unless you use in a poorly ventilated space (you should not use ANY stove in a poorly ventilated space!). About the same weight as Esbit for a quarter the full retail price. Because it is surplus, quality can differ. Trioxane burns hot, but not very efficiently. Not really suggested for general use. May not be bad as a backup to another stove.

Solid Fuel Summary: For the lightest system, you can't beat Esbit. With careful planning, can avoid the resupply issue. The major disadvantage of Esbit is the price per tab. Trioxane? Last resort only!

Esbit reviews http://www.backpackgeartest.org/reviews ... ves/Esbit/

Trioxane (really, I would not use it personally!) http://www.buckshotscamp.com/Trioxane-Fuel-Bars.htm

CAMP FIRES And let's not forget the first "stove" humans' used: A campfire!

Steep learning curve, can be hard to light in wet weather or snow, can't always be used when there are fire bans as well as in alpine or desert environments. For the absolute lightest way to go, a camp fire is still the best..with major disadvantages. But how many people tell ghost stories around an alcohol stove? In all seriousness, a camp fire is best when you can use one, don't mind waiting a bit and want ambience. I find it best, personally, to just cook dinner on a regular stove and build a small campfire later. No stove will replace a camp fire for a great atmosphere!

ABOUT "DAILY AVERAGE HAUL"

"Daily Average Haul" is a concept Two Speed (a White Blaze user and a civil engineer) and myself came up with via e-mail exchanges. Sgt. Rock, one of the main admins at Whiteblaze, has also done much research on this concept. I shamelessly used some of his data for this section.

What this concept essentially means is that a stove system (stove, fuel and cooking system) has an initial starting weight, but also a weight that decreases over time due to fuel use. The weight of a stove system has a differing average depending over the time a stove system is being used. Hence the term "Daily Average Haul".

For example, the initial weight of an alcohol stove is very light. But, if many meals are cooked without a fuel resupply (over ten), the weight savings of a an alcohol stove is mitigated. More fuel means the "daily average haul" weight increases.

Conversely, a canister stove system's weight does not differ much over time. A 4 oz canister is good for about 12 meals or so. After the fuel is used, you are still left with a canister that weighs 3oz and can no longer be used. On a weekend outing, 4 oz of alcohol weighs about 2.5 oz. The empty 12 oz Sprite bottle weighs .625 oz. Taking the first example, the "daily average haul" for the alcohol stove is noticeably less than a canister stove (never mind a Zip or White Gas stove) for a shorter period of time.

If you are a canister stove user who packs another canister "just in case", the weight penalty for "daily average haul" is even more pronounced.

If you are out for a REALLY long time without a fuel resupply, some stoves (e.g. an MSR Simmerlite or a Zip Stove in the appropriate environment) will have an "daily average haul" weight that is lighter than other stoves.

When thinking about which stove is lighter, "daily average haul" is a useful concept to keep in mind. Depending upon your time out without a fuel resupply, one stove system may be more efficient than another.

Naturally, there are are other reasons to use one stove system over another besides weight (convenience, time of year, availability of fuel, etc). but "daily haul average" is still a useful concept to keep in mind when determining what type of stove system best suits your needs.

OVERALL SUMMARY

There are many stoves to choose from. Which one is the best depends upon your intended use.

If you are resupplying for less than ten meals, solo and three-season backpacking: Alcohol Stove
If you are a couple and/or going long time between resupplies: Canister Stove other than Jet Boil
If you are solo and want a convenient all in one solution: Jetboil
If you are winter camping/high altitude mountaineering OR doing 3+ person meals: White Gas Stove
Doing lots of "real cooking" in a forest environment and not hiking far: Zip Stove
Want the absolute lightest stove and price/resupply is not an issue: Esbit


There are other stoves as well that can be best called "specialty" stoves. These stoves are less used, but can prove a viable option for some people. Zen Stoves has a great summary of these different types of stoves.

OTHER RESOURCES
Sgt. Rock's Stove Comparison http://hikinghq.net/stoves/stove_compare.html
Zen Backpacking Stove Comparison http://zenstoves.net/StoveChoices.htm
Mechanical Engineering Magazine article about stoves (has my PCT picture in it! Woo hoo!) http://www.memagazine.org/backissues/au ... tsink.html
Thru-hiker.com Stove Comparison http://www.thru-hiker.com/articles.asp?subcat=2&cid=57
Lightest Weight Backpacking Stove Calculator
http://www.kzpg.com/Backpacking/Stove/Stoves.htm

Posted on bpLite.com on 9/12/07
The true harvest of my life is intangible.... a little stardust caught, a portion of the rainbow I have clutched
--Thoreau
http://www.pmags.com
http://www.redbubble.com/people/pmags/art

walkin wally
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 11:44 am

Re: Stove Comparison - "Real World Use"

Postby walkin wally » Wed Sep 19, 2007 11:54 am

Lots of info here thanks

Nightwalker
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 1:47 am

Re: Stove Comparison - "Real World Use"

Postby Nightwalker » Thu Sep 20, 2007 3:56 am

Great article.

Two things, just to nit-pick. I've used a Pocket Rocket for many, many meals before I converted to alcohol. Maybe hundreds. I've never had even a little issue with stability, and I'm a real big-footed klutz. The second is that I've tested a Pocket Rocket next to a Giga Power stove and found there to be a difference in efficiency, reasons unknown to me. I tested three times each with equalized pot temps (put tap water in the pot for 90 seconds between tests) and used water that I had set on the counter overnight to let it get room temp. With 70 degree ambient temp and 70 degree water, a Pocket Rocket used 4 grams of fuel to heat 16 ounces of water compared to the Giga Power's 5 grams. This was using Snow Peak fuel and a Jet Boil GCS pot. Even though this pot weighs 12 ounces, the fact that it cuts the fuel use almost exactly in half makes it a good choice.

Though 5 grams compared to 4 sounds like not much difference, the difference over a 110 ml can of fuel is noteworthy. 13.75 liters compared to 11. That's about 1.5 days more on a can.

Using the 110 ml can of fuel, I could go for a week between resupplies. The empty can weighed 3.1 ounces and the stove weighed 3. The GCS pot weighed 12 ounces, as I've already said. The Heineken pot, stove, stand and container for them all weigh 5.9 ounces. That makes the beginning penalty 12.2 ounces. I used 16 grams of fuel per day (.571 ounces) with that setup, and 3 fluid ounces of alcohol per day to do the same thing (2.4 by weight). Given the weight penalty, I'd catch up at about 6.5 days, right about when I'd have a half day or so of fuel left in the canister. I occasionally go that long between resupplies, because I like to spend my time in the woods, not town!

The pros of the Pocket Rocket and GCS setup were ultra fast boil times and no hassle cooking. I seem to fiddle with my alcohol stove more while it's cooking. The cons are that I hardly ever get to spend a week in the woods between resupply, so I hardly ever catch up on the initial penalty. When my wife goes with me, I always take the canister setup. When I'm by myself, I always take the alcohol stove.

I don't mess with other folks about what they use, but this is just how my tastes run. HYOH, etc.

Thanks again for the good article, Mags, and I hope that my little bit of additional info helps.

Frank
(Weeks, not months, lol.)
Last edited by Nightwalker on Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
Just Hike!

User avatar
zelph
Posts: 15751
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 1:53 pm

Re: Stove Comparison - "Real World Use"

Postby zelph » Thu Sep 20, 2007 9:57 am

Nightwalker wrote:Great article.

With 70 degree ambient temp and 70 degree water, a Pocket Rocket used 4 grams of fuel to heat 16 ounces of water compared to the Giga Power's 5 grams. This was using Snow Peak fuel and a Jet Boil GCS pot. Even though this pot weighs 12 ounces, the fact that it cuts the fuel use almost exactly in half makes it a good choice.

The GCS pot weighed 12 ounces, as I've already said. The Heineken pot, stove, stand and container for them all weigh 5.9 ounces. That makes the beginning penalty 12.2 ounces. I used 16 grams of fuel per day (.571 ounces) with that setup, and 3 fluid ounces of alcohol per day to do the same thing (2.4 by weight).

I seem to fiddle with my alcohol stove more while it's cooking. The cons are that I hardly ever get to spend a week in the woods between resupply, so I hardly ever catch up on the initial penalty. When my wife goes with me, I always take the canister setup. When I'm by myself, I always take the alcohol stove.

Thanks again for the good article, Mags, and I hope that my little bit of additional info helps.

Frank
(Weeks, not months, lol.)


1. How many times per day were the stoves used?

2. Wow!!!! the Jet Boil GCS pot cuts fuel consumption almost in half. How does it fare using an alcohol stove under it? Have you done comparisons?

3. The set-up that you use for alcohol(Heineken pot, stove, stand and container for them all weigh 5.9 ounces.0), what kind of stove do you use and what container do you use to contain the kit?

Nice comparisons Nightwalker, thank you.
"Nothing Ventured Nothing Gained" stove store = http://www.woodgaz-stove.com/

Nightwalker
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 1:47 am

Re: Stove Comparison - "Real World Use"

Postby Nightwalker » Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:54 am

zelph wrote:1. How many times per day were the stoves used?

2. Wow!!!! the Jet Boil GCS pot cuts fuel consumption almost in half. How does it fare using an alcohol stove under it? Have you done comparisons?

3. The set-up that you use for alcohol(Heineken pot, stove, stand and container for them all weigh 5.9 ounces.0), what kind of stove do you use and what container do you use to contain the kit?

Nice comparisons Nightwalker, thank you.

1. At the time, I cooked 3 meals and had coffee or tea 2-3 times. Now I cook once and have tea 2-3 times.

2. I tested it last week with a Tin Man Pepsi stove. It boiled 16 oz. of water in 4 minutes using 3/8 oz. of Heet.

3. I'm using a low-pressure Red Bull stove and a mixed-nuts can for the container. The container could definitely be lighter, as it's thick cardboard. I'm going to try to remember to get a Lysol Wipes canister, as it's light, but it's kinda big and the stuff will slosh around in there.
Just Hike!

User avatar
zelph
Posts: 15751
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 1:53 pm

Re: Stove Comparison - "Real World Use"

Postby zelph » Fri Sep 28, 2007 10:43 am

Thanks a lot Nightwalker.

When I saw 3 ounces of alcohol per day I recalled Sgt. Rock and Mags saying to figure on 1 ounce of fuel per meal.

How many of you would agree on that? Would be nice if all that view this would respond, kind like a poll :)
"Nothing Ventured Nothing Gained" stove store = http://www.woodgaz-stove.com/

Nightwalker
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 1:47 am

Re: Stove Comparison - "Real World Use"

Postby Nightwalker » Sat Sep 29, 2007 1:05 am

zelph wrote:Thanks a lot Nightwalker.

When I saw 3 ounces of alcohol per day I recalled Sgt. Rock and Mags saying to figure on 1 ounce of fuel per meal.

How many of you would agree on that? Would be nice if all that view this would respond, kind like a poll :)

I figure on 20 ml. (2/3 oz.) of alcohol per 16 oz of water boiled. I always take about 1 oz extra for any trip that lasts longer than a couple of days. I usually have some left over, but just a little. An extra 3/4 oz. in my pack isn't a show-stopper. :)
Just Hike!

User avatar
zelph
Posts: 15751
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 1:53 pm

Re: Stove Comparison - "Real World Use"

Postby zelph » Thu Jun 05, 2008 5:51 pm

Has anyone ever bench tested a canister stove to see how many times it could boil 2 cups of water?

The test being performed in the same day, same temperature conditions etc.

Many times I have tested alcohol stoves during the course of 8 hours and got 2 cups to boil with 1/2 ounce of fuel.

The Trangia came to mind when thinking of this article and also the Fancee Feest. Both hold 3 ounces of fuel to be used for couples.
"Nothing Ventured Nothing Gained" stove store = http://www.woodgaz-stove.com/


Return to “Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests