View Full Version : Just got in a Brasslite Turbo II
I just received my Brasslite Turbo II. Only had to wait a couple of weeks.
Very pretty stove and light as a feather, but still feels substantial enough. I'm looking forward to trying it out. Maybe I'll cook my lunch over it tomorrow.
Do the flames come out of the center hole, or the side holes? Is there an inner wall, or is it just a single walled stove?
Yesterday I received the Turbo 1 that I had ordered. Ran a couple of quick tests with it last night. With a snow peak 600 cup it reached a rolling boil in 5 minutes 40 seconds. This compared to 6 minutes even, and 5 minutes 55 seconds for two tests with a brasslite micro. There were some flames up the sides of the cup, but not an extreme amount. With the small pot from a msr set (about .8 or .9 liter) a rolling boil was reached in 6 minutes even. This compares with 5 minutes 40 seconds, and 5 minutes 45 seconds for two tests with the micro.
The above tests were with a half liter of cold tap water, and no lid, or wind screen. They were inside. The test with the snow peak 600 cup compared favorable with the micro and previous tests I've done with photon stoves. With the larger diameter msr pot the boil times were slower than with the micro, and also slower than with a photon. the photon boil times are between 5 and 5 1/2 minutes. The burn times with the turbo were 10 minutes 55 seconds and 11 minutes 5 seconds with an ounce of denatured alcohol.
I normally use the cup when packpacking, so the results look good for my usage. I have to qualify things however since I have only used it for the two tests. Will have to run more to find if these are representative.
An answer to an above question is that the flames are primarily from the center hole, but did see some from the side holes also, particularly during high heat just after start up.
I will run some more tests at home, and then a field test in two weeks when I have a weekend backpack trip scheduled. I'll further report then.
I have just run a very preliminary and very unscientific test on the Turbo II. I filled a Peak 1 Solo, 2 cup stainless steel pot with cold tap water and fired it up with the Turbo II using 1 ounce of denatured alcohol. I used a windscreen and a lid. Fiercely rolling, top-rattling boil was achieved in about 7 minutes. I was not using a stop watch so the time may be a bit longer or shorter than that. Some flames were leaping up the sides, so I am thinking the pot was on the small side for the stove, since the stove is designed as a 2 person unit, or one water loving person.
I am in the middle of preparing for closing on a house tomorrow, or else I would try with a larger pot, more water and an accurate timer.
My preliminary feeling is that this stove would be an exceptional choice for a thru-hiker or solo backpacker. It is quiet, super light, reasonably sturdy, and damned near foolproof once you gt your windscreen and pot size adjusted for maximum performance. I am looking forward to a field test.
I could NEVER get my Trangia to boil water that fast. It performed on the order of TWICE that long, though I have a feeling that the POS stand I have for it and a non-adjusted windscreen are contributing to those times.
Good stove so-far.
I could NEVER get my Trangia to boil water that fast.
Thanks for the info, I've REALLY been wondering how this stove would do and...I was wondering if the stove was worth the $70....so I appreciate the feedback.
FWIW I have a Trangia and it typically take me 7.5 minutes to boil 2 cups of water, my pepsi can stove (which weighs less than an ounce) takes even less time. I think the Brasslite would DEFINITELY hold upa whole lot better than a pepsi can stove but for now I'll keep what I've got and save the $70.
Ann - Yes, I agree with you. My pepsi can photon stoves are every bit as good as the brasslite stoves with regular pots. In the first test the turbo did do well using the cup for a pot, but just marginally better. For weekend, or week long trips I use my photon stoves. I only bought the brasslite because I plan to thruhike next year. I've heard that a photon won't hold up to a full thruhike. The brasslite should be more durable, and last a full thruhike. One other thing I like about useing a photon stove is the satisfaction from using something I made, particularly something from empty soda cans.
Yesterday I tested the TurboII with 1 liter of cold tap water.
2 ounces of fuel (didn't need that much by a long shot)
MSR Alpine 1.5 liter pot, stainless steel with black painted exterior
MSR windscreen, cut down to about 2/5ths the width and perforated every inch or so along the bottom edge for airflow. windscreen was within 3/4-1 inch of the pot all the way around. No heat reflector was used beneath the stove.
Time to full boil from lighting the stove was 10 minutes 29 seconds. The stove ran at full boil for at least 5 minutes after that.
better or worse than a brasslite pressureised micro/duo??. i have the older solo version.
Can't say how much faster or slower the TII is compared to the Duo since I don't own a Duo. Aaron tells me it is faster and even a touch more fuel efficient. It is significantly lighter.
I'm actually impressed as all get out that a little alcohol stove can boil water that fast. Pretty cool. It's my new 3-season backpacking stove.
I have done some more tests compareing the Turbo 1 with the Micro. The tests are all with 16 ounces of cold tap water, and no lid or windscreen. They are all with one ounce of fuel. They results are all consistant, with one exception.
With the Snow Peak 600 Cup the boil times for the Turbo 1 are: 5:35, 5:25, and 5.40. The Micro times are 5:50, 6:00, and 5:55. With the MSR small pot, the Turbo 1 times are 5:20, 5:25, and 6:00 (the 6:00 seems to be an anomaly). The Micro times are 5:50, 5:45, and 5:40. The Turbo 1 burn times are all between 9:15 and 11:05. The Micro burn times are all between 7:55 and 9:35.
Analyzeing these results the Turbo 1 is faster than the Micro, but just marginally so. I didn't find as much of a difference as Aaron reported. A real benefit though was that the Turbo 1 did have longer total burn times with an ounce of fuel than did the Micro. This combination of faster boil times and longer burn times should make for less fuel required. Instead of useing an ounce per meal which I have in the past, I will now try to cut back to 3/4 ounce per meal (boil).
I also have test results for photon stoves and kiwi stoves that I have made, if anyone is interested.
I'd be interested in seeing them--post away!
These tests are again for 16 ounces of cold tap water using one ounce of fuel. The tests were done inside, and without the use of a lid or windscreen.
I made 6 photon stoves. The results of one of them is well outside the parameters of the other 5, and will not be included here. Not sure what I did wrong with it, but it just wasn't right. I did two tests with each of the 5 photons. One with the preheat pan as in the instructions, and one with a smaller preheat pan. The results with the different size pans were almost identical for each stove, and I won't differentiate the different size pans here.
Stove 1 had boil times of 5:10, and 5:10, and total burn times of 9:40, and 9:25. Stove 2 had boil times of 5:00, and 5:15, and total burn times of 9:35, and 10:00. Stove 3 had boil times of 5:20, and 5:30, and total burn times of 10:10, and 10:00. Stove 4 had boil times of 5:35, and 5:25, and total burn times of 9:45, and 9:35. Stove 5 had boil times of 5:25, and 5:00, and total burn times of 8:45, and 8:20.
The above Photon stove results are very consistant. They all boiled a pot of 16 ounces of water in about 5 to 5 1/2 minutes. The total burn times are also fairly consistant, although some stoves definitely burned longer on the same amount of fuel than others did. All of the above tests were with the small MSR titanium pot.
Two of the above Photon stoves were also tested with the Snow Peak 600 titanium cup. The boil times were 5:55, and 6:10. The times are consistanitly longer than with the larger diameter pot. With the cup there is a lot of flame spillage up the sides of the cup. The diameter of the burner hole circle seems to be too large for optimum results with the cup.
I made a kiwi stove, and tried to pattern the burner holes specifically towards useing it with the cup. Made all of the burner holes tightly near the center of the stove. The three tests with the kiwi and the cup were 5:40, 6:05, and 5:50, and the total burn times were 9:30, 9:40, and 9:00. The kiwi stoves are really easy to make. There drawback seems to be since they are made of steel instead of aluminum like the pepsi cans, the steel takes longer to heat, and it's longer for the alcohol to vaporize, and the burners to light. It requires more preheat fuel, and then it's almost two minutes for the burners to fully light. After I made the kiwi stove, two of my grandchildren wanted to make one like it. I told them I did have two more kiwi cans, but they both still had shoe polish in them. They would have to empty them first. You should have seen the mess they made emptying the cans before we made the stoves.
The quickest boil times in all of my tests are with the photon stoves and the MSR pot. Realizeing this I still prefer to use the cup when backpacking. I only boil water in my cup or pot and then pour it into a quart freezer bag with my meal in it and let it cook wrapped in my camp towel. With the cup I can then put the bag back into the cup, and holding the cup by the handles eat out of the bag with the cup giving it some structure. If I use the pot I have to just eat out of the bag itself. Either way I have no dirty dishes except my spoon. I just find it easier to use the cup.
Useing the cup, the best test results are with the turbo1 stove. The micro, photons, and kiwi then all followed with about the same results. Useing the pot the photons give the best boil times with the turbo close behind, and then the micro. I didn't test the kiwi with the pot.
Warning: This stove thing is addicting. I have enjoyed making and testing the stoves, and know I have done very little compared to the time and effort expended by many stove builders and testers.
Hope you may find this information useful.
Back to the subject of the Turbo II, is it a singled walled stove? Or is there some sort of internal wall as well. Can't tell from the pictures?
Single walled, non-pressurized, holds about 2 ounces and burns hot.
Great results. Thank you for posting.
Just curious--how wide is the pot compared to the cup?
The cup has a diameter of about 3 1/2 inches, and the pot 4 5/8 inches. The cup is about 4 inches high, and the pot 2 5/8 inches high.
I just got my Brasslite Micro and tested it over the weekend in my garage. Used a walmart grease pot and 3/4 ounce of fuel for a rolling boil of two cups room temp water in five minutes. Also scorched the top of my work bench (note to self--use heat reflector next time!).
My windscreen was fashioned from an oven liner and two paper clips. I don't have a hole punch, so instead cut triangles at two inch intervals along the bottom. My heat reflector is a leftover scrap of the oven liner.
This stove's a keeper!
What's a pespi can stove?
There are thousands of variations, but here (http://www.pcthiker.com/pages/gear/pepsistove.shtml) is one.
I used my Turbo 1 while backpacking over the weekend. It performed as well in the field as it did in testing at home. The Turbo 1 and Snow Peak 600 cup are now my cooking gear of choice for lightweight backpacking cooking gear.
I notice that many of you are performing accurate boiling time tests on the various stoves. This is a worthwhile endeavor, since we all want faster boil times than a trangia. However, I've become much more concerned with fuel efficiency in my alcohol stoves. I'm currently using a Red Bull can stove very similar to Sgt Rock's "Ion". With my windscreen, this stove will bring 2 cups (16floz.) of 75F water to 212F in 7:30 using 18mL of methyl alcohol (HEET). The testing was done indoors, but I've been able to get consistent, rolling boils from 22.5mL of fuel (3/4 floz. or 3 capfuls from my fuel bottle) when backpacking, even with moderate winds and cold water. I would like to get down to a 15mL (1/2 floz.) boil with methyl alcohol, since I've heard from others that have done so, but thus far I've only achieved this when using isopropyl. I've heard of a number of alcohol stove users that use 25-30mL (1floz = 30mL) of fuel for each meal. When some people can cook their meals with half as much fuel, that kind of efficiency makes a big difference in fuel consumption over the course of a long trip (week or more). Boil times don't matter to me much, as long as they don't go over 10 minutes or so, since I'm rarely rushed for time on the trail. However, there are also a number of people (search back through Sgt Rock's forums for Pepsi Can Stove in the Homemade Gear forum) that have their cake and eat it, too. They set their pot at different heights in their windscreen so that the lowest setting gains the best fuel economy and the highest setting gains the shortest boil time. I highly suggest finding out how much fuel is required for your brasslite (or other stove) to bring a typical meal to a boil without excess fuel remaining to continue boiling. The extra boiling time is usually unnecessary, especially if you use a cozy, and allows you to find out the least amount of fuel you can use on the trail. Most of us don't have the cool weather right now to really reproduce 3-season trail conditions outside our homes, but you can still get a general idea of warm-weather fuel consumption, even in your own kitchen. On the trail, I add just a bit more fuel than I think I'll need, depending on water temperature and weather conditions. It's better to use too much and get a good boil than to use too little and run out too soon. When testing for boil times, try to reduce the amount of fuel you start with until you are just reaching a full boil (212F at lower elevations).
I've done very little testing with isopropyl (Iso-HEET) thus far, but I can get to a full boil in 5:30 with 14mL of fuel. The flames are yellow, quite large, blacken the pot nicely (very sooty), and also smell very bad (make your eyes water if you hold your head over the pot like dummy-me did once). Despite the disadvantages, the 25% lower fuel consumption (thus far) is a compelling reason to take isopropyl on extended trips where every ounce of fuel matters.
I don't think there's a real problem with pepsi can stoves lasting for a thru hike, though the photon may get dented a bit due to the way the bottom of the stove extends past the burner portion. The double-wall soda can designs can easily hold up to trail use (I can stand on mine). For a long-distance hike, I would make an extra stove and either throw it in my bounce box or have it sent in a resupply when/if I needed it. I do admit that a Brasslite is virtually indestructible (though the pot support could probably be bent), but I see little reason to spend $50+ that could otherwise go into the food fund for my hike. All of the Brasslites, past and present, are beautiful stoves and I would like to have one, but I prefer my homemade cheapies. My cheapies are lighter, too ;). There's something very satisfying about using gear that you've made yourself, too.