PDA

View Full Version : .9L vs. 1.3L pot?



gmu
03-01-2004, 22:09
Any suggestions on titanium pot size?
I'm debating b/w the .9L and 1.3L Evernew titanium pots.
Thanks.

SGT Rock
03-01-2004, 22:45
Go for the .9L. It is plenty big enough for a solo hiker.

chief
03-02-2004, 00:11
agree with sarge. the .9 is perfect for my noodles and coffee.

Sniker
03-02-2004, 05:56
I currently use a Snow Peak Mini Solo Cookset (titanium .9 L pot and mug set). My brother and I usually hike together and we each have our own stove and cookset. This works fine, but we're each carrying more weight by ourselves than if we shared one cookset with a larger pot. (Besides, I'd no doubt be carrying it - little brother thing.)

Anyway, I've been outfitting my girlfriend with her own supplementary kit, so I've been seriously considering upgrading the pot to an Evernew 1.3 L for the two of us to share. My understanding from performance tests is that wider pots are more efficient than taller ones, so that evernew seems like the best option out there (the Ultralite Titanium model).

chris
03-02-2004, 08:41
Get the 1.3 L one. The .9 isn't big enough for jumbo dinners, like a double Lipton's with a log summer sausage tossed in, and olive oil on top.

nazdarovye
03-02-2004, 13:36
Or, you can go really minimalist.

I'm now using a 450 ml Snowpeak ti cup to boil water, and "cooking" in ziploc bags and a Reflectix cozy.

I put drinks in a gatorate powder container "bowl" (thanks, Sgt. Rock, for the idea).

Everything, including the alcohol stove, windscreen, spoon and matches, nests into a really tiny package. No clean-up of the pot afterward - just seal up the ziploc and pack it away, rinse out the drink container, and I'm set.



Any suggestions on titanium pot size?
I'm debating b/w the .9L and 1.3L Evernew titanium pots.
Thanks.

foodbag
03-29-2004, 17:07
If you have a big appetite, which you probably will, I would go for the 1.3 L, IMHO. I like it for smaller meals too so that the contents won't slop over the side when vigorously stirring. If you are just boiling water a .9 L would do the trick.

Footslogger
03-29-2004, 17:30
Made it all the way with the .9L Ti pot. Never found that I needed more.

weary
03-29-2004, 23:23
It really depends on whether you are cooking or just boiling water to warm convenient stuff. Because I hike on a budget, I need a big pot. You can spend a dollar a pound for real rice (20 minutes cooking and cozying time) or spend $4 a pound plus for instant that requires 5 minutes. The same holds true for breakfasts and lunches.

But cooking requires stirring your pot. Stirring requires a bit of space. I personally use a two quart pot. I figure a couple of extra ounces for a decent pot is worth it.

It's not weight that keeps most from finishing the trail. It's running out of money.

Weary

bunbun
03-30-2004, 16:57
Any suggestions on titanium pot size?
I'm debating b/w the .9L and 1.3L Evernew titanium pots.
Thanks.

If you're gonna be a weekender or a section hiker, get the .9L pot. But if you're gonna thruhike, get the 1.3L pot. Going with the lightest gear isn't "always" the smartest thing to do.

So --- why?

Because Weary's not quite right. It ain't money that's keeps "most" people from finishing - time and money are somewhere down the list - about #4 or #5.

What's more likely to get you is lack of energy - just plain running out of steam. Most (but not ALL) males will lose a significant percentage of their initial body weight. In my case, for my last thruhike, it was 25%. Not a lot of hikers lose that much - but it doesn't take that much for the weight loss to affect your energy, your mileage - and your attitude. And if your attitude takes a dive, then so will your hike.

A long time ago, someone wrote this about thruhiking:
"We all get tired - and some just get tired of always being tired. A surprising number of people quit at Gorham, NH. Some even quit at Monson. Think about it --- 5 to 6 months on the Trail. How many mountains? How hot was it? How much snow and rain? How hungry are you? By the time they get to Maine, some people can't carry enough food to keep their bodies going. Some of them don't keep going. Most of the time a couple days in town, resting and eating well, is all it takes to rekindle the desire to keep on hiking - but not always."

We even talked about this at the PA Ruck this year. And the solution is - eat more, eat better. If you're thruhiking, you'll be hungry. Period. That's a given. But if you're using a too-small pot, then you don't even have the option of adding enough extra food to the pot to keep you from getting the "midnite munchies". Waking up at 3am cause your stomach is telling you it's mealtime is no fun - it affects your sleep, which then also affects your attitude. AND - it means your body isn't getting enough calories to keep you going, so you're eating muscle mass. All of which puts you one step closer to "going home early."

You should listen to your mother's advice - take the bigger pot - fill it - and mange, mange. You CAN'T eat too much when you're thruhiking. :)

FatMan
03-30-2004, 22:15
FatMan needs a big pot. 1.3L no brainer.

steve hiker
03-30-2004, 22:27
I have a .85 pot and it's plenty for me. But then I'm a boil-and-eat type, no fancy gourmet meals here.



FatMan needs a big pot. 1.3L no brainer.
No you need to lose some blubber Fatso, down to a .9 for you.

weary
03-30-2004, 22:38
Weary's not quite right. It ain't money that's keeps "most" people from finishing - time and money are somewhere down the list - about #4 or #5. .... What's more likely to get you is lack of energy - just plain running out of steam. Most (but not ALL) males will lose a significant percentage of their initial body weight. In my case, for my last thruhike, it was 25%....

I don't want to debate percentages or the ranking of reasons why folks quit -- and sometimes are forced to quit. If I could find the time, I could write a book about such things. But I do think it important to recognize that occasionally at least the lack of money contributes to the loss of weight and energy.

My point is simple. Nourishment on a through hike needn't be expensive. If one takes the time to learn about food and the fundamentals of what is needed for six months of continuous vigorous exercise, neither excessive weight loss nor the cost of nutrition should be a major factor in failures.

That said. Take bunbun's -- and my -- advice and carry a big pot.

A pound of most trail foods -- things like pasta, rice, Lipton dinners -- yields just 1,700 calories or less. It takes two pounds of such stuff to meet the minimum calorie needs of a thru hike.

Do your own calculations. Borrow a liter pot and try to cook a pound of Liptons in it -- that's three or four packages, depending the variety, each of which calls for two cups or so of water. The liquid alone will overflow the pot.

Yeah, in the real world we don't cook a pound of pasta or rice at a time. But you have to come close and add a lot of oil and tuna and Snicker bars and GORP to avoid the weight loss that bunbun rightly reports.

IN honesty, Bunbun, like me, "is not quite right." Neither weight loss nor food cost contributes a great deal to most failed hikes. Failure is mostly caused by what I think of as the "Bill Bryson syndrome." The trail is a lot of hard work and a lot of AT dreamers fail to realize that and given the nature of the trail and nutrition and pot sizes and finances, those who discover they don't like to work hard can always find an excuse to go home.

What I say and what bunbon says is not terribly difficult to figure out. There's nothing like an empty stomach to convince most of us that we need to eat more and that a less than a liter pot won't hold the food that's needed. But sometimes truth is difficult to admit -- especially if we are secretly looking for an excuse to get off this trail.

Weary

AYCE
04-01-2004, 22:21
Start with the 0.9 and swap out to the larger if needed.

You can just fit a 7.25 oz box of Kraft Mac n Cheese (the Dinner, not the Spirals which are only 5.5 oz- don't get ripped off by the marketing) in a .9L pot. Sometimes noodles spill out, but you can just pick those up and eat them. You're a thru-hiker, after all...

Two of the standard 4 oz Lipton Noodles or rice are too much volume for a 0.9, but there's nothing stopping you from cooking 1.5 liptons. I carry a bag of egg noodles and top off a lipton with an extra few oz of noodles every night. Very cost effective and widely available at even the smallest trail resupplies.

The 'you'll be really hungry' crew are right, of course. But on the other hand there's nothing stopping you from cooking another dinner and eating more. *That* is only limited by how much food is in your foodbag, a decision you made at the grocery store, not the size of your pot.

If you find that the 0.9 is a pain in the neck because you're always having to cook twice to get enough food, swap it out for a bigger one. I guarantee that someone in your crew will want to pick it up from you- esp if you sell it cheaply. Also, any extra stove fuel you're burning by running the stove twice instead of just boiling twice as much water in the first place is easily offset by the smaller carry weight of the 0.9 oz pot vs the 1.3.

AYCE

Percival
04-01-2004, 22:59
The 0.9 lite would easily boil enough for a Mountain House double (20 oz), if you eat those. Only need 16 oz water for them.