Is an alcohol stove ok for cool weather? [Archive]

Moose2001

01-10-2005, 11:11

The Solemates

01-10-2005, 11:40

You should be able to use an alcohol stove with a Feb 27 start date. There are two issues with using alcohol vs white gas. (1) Alcohol is less volatile than gas. That means that as the temp drops, it gets harder to get alcohol to light. At some point, you’ll find it almost impossible to get it to fire. Where does that happen? Not sure. I’ve seen alcohol stoves light off in the 20 degree range with no problems. If you have problems or concerns, the answer is simple. Stick your fuel bottle in a warm spot for a while and let the fuel warm up (like inside your coat or sleeping bag). This will make it easier to light. Once it’s burning, all is OK. (2) Alcohol contains fewer BTU’s per ounce than white gas. So, it takes longer to bring water to a boil. Again, not a big problem as long as your not doing something like melting snow for water. So, if you want to use an alcohol stove, I’d say go for it.

We started Feb 1 on our thru and we personally witnessed a thru-hiker try to use an alcohol stove to cook dinners. The problem is not getting it to light. The problem is that it takes 5X longer to boil water than if you were using a white gas stove. We saw temps from 30F all the way down to 0F at night. At these temps, the alchohol stove took a good 20-something minutes to boil water. If there was any cooking involved past just boiling water, you can forget it. That is no exaggeration. In fact, I remember one night when this particular thru-hiker could never get it to boil.

bailcor

01-10-2005, 12:22

Buy a 2 oz bottle of Mountain Suds Soap. Empty the contents, rince and dry it out. The container is flat and can be put in a pocket next to your body heater. Just remember to refill it. I also use the 8 oz container for my mother lode.

Footslogger

01-10-2005, 12:29

My experience is consistent with that of Moose. Alcohol stoves work well in cold weather. We use the Trangia out here in Wyoming at elevations > 10,000 feet and at temps well below what you'll run into on the AT. Just keep your stove and alcohol somewhere out of the cold and you should have no problem. If your alcohol gets really cold it will tend to vaporize a tad slower than normal and yes, it may take a little more to heat your 1 - 2 cups of water for a meal. But ...the advantages of alcohol stoves on a distance hike are worth it. I guess there is a chance that part of my success is attributable to the model of stove (Trangia). I did see plenty of hikers with the "soda can" stove types who did seem to have issues on the AT in 2003.

For the record ...butane/propane fuel (while readily available along the trail) doesn't work very well in the cold. That's not a cheap shot at the cannister stove industry ...it's a fact. I own at least one of every type of camp stove made (used to work for an outfitter) and I've tried them all in just about every conceivable weather situation. All things being equal, About the only REAL advantages of cannister stoves is their ability to "simmer" and that they burn hotter. If you're considering melting snow as a water source then you probably want to go the cannister route.

Either stove/fuel type will work for you in February on the AT. You just need to decide whether you want to carry those cannister(s), which are non-refillable, or a small flask of alcohol which IS refillable and much less expensive.

Happy Trails ...

'Slogger
AT 2003

Youngblood

01-10-2005, 12:39

Will an alcohol stove handle cold weather? A lot of that depends on the alcohol stove design. All alcohol stoves are not equal and that becomes painfully apparent in cold weather. An alcohol stove for winter should be more than just a burner and a pot stand. I have tweaked my home made design during cold weather backpacking trips (20ish degrees F) and know first hand that things that don't seem to make much difference in warm weather are critical in cold weather. I've used tea light candle tins as burners for years and take three with me. Depending on how much water I'm using and how cold it is I will use either 1, 2 or 3 of the tins as burners. I also have a fully wrapped wind screen (about 1/4" gap) that covers most of my pot and a preheat pan/ground reflector to extract and retain as much of the heat from the burners as I can. If I wanted to push it to lower temps or improve what I have the next thing I would try is insulating the burners themselves from the cold ground. You still have to use body heat to warm the alcohol fuel and butane lighters when the temps get into the teens. It gets to be more of a challenge at low temperatures for any stove, but I would guess that the white gas stoves are probably the standard cold weather stove because of their BTU output, especially the ones with isolated fuel bottles (Whisperlites, etc) that allow for reflectors below the burner and a fully wrapped wind screen... the folks that don't mess with those little aluminum dohickys will find out what they are if they try to use their stoves in colder weather.

Youngblood

Fiddleback

01-10-2005, 12:42

Boiling a certain amount of water at a certain temp requires a certain amount of BTUs. Breezes, cool ambient temp, winter-chilled water all add to the BTU requirement. But the water doesn't care what fuel is used. If you need a lot of BTUs in a short amount of time carry a BTU-dense fuel, e.g., white gas. If you don't, I'd go for the lighter stove and fuel combination. Which gets right back to your original question. Next week we'll ask the question; Apple or Windows.:jump

FB

Tha Wookie

01-10-2005, 13:00

I've been in many cold nights (-5 to 30's F) with an alcohol stove, and never had much of a problem. The cannister stoves aren't necessary at all. Start with the alchohol stove, finish with it. You don't need anything else.

I think the people who have poor success in the cold must have poorly made or designed stoves. Mine takes an extra several minutes if it's below freezing, but it gets there and the meal is hot. To me, I don't mine waiting another 120 seconds in the wilderness every once and a while. Why carry extra bulk and weight for a trivial amount of efficiency increase?

Remember -It's relaxing out there! two minutes is nothing!

Footslogger

01-10-2005, 13:05

To me, I don't mine waiting another 120 seconds in the wilderness every once and a while. Why carry extra bulk and weight for a trivial amount of efficiency increase?

Remember -It's relaxing out there! two minutes is nothing!=========================
You tell em Wook ...

'Slogger
AT 2003

The Solemates

01-10-2005, 14:59

Most of the people we have seen using have been using the regular old soda can stove. I guess if you made some modifications and knew just how to operate it to maximize its performance, they may be ok. Personally, Ive never messed with em. I carry the Simmerlite. My pack weight is still around 25 lbs in the summer with 3 days food/water.

baseballswthrt

01-10-2005, 15:02

We've used our Trangia down into the teens and had NO problem lighting it. I may take a few more minutes to get the water to boil, but not enough to bother us. As for cooking after that, we don't. Everything we eat starts with boiling water and ends there! We have used a cozy for additional wait time.

NICKTHEGREEK

01-10-2005, 15:21

I enjoy reading the old alcohol vs cannister vs white gas discussions- Lots of mention that "I had no problems with...", but no one ever seems to mention the real variables- How much water are you tryng to boil, how much surface area does your pot have, and how cold was the water to begin with? You can muddy the water even more by considering how well your pot transfers and retains heat.
The Jetboil system is really interesting to use as a model for an efficient cooking SYSTEM. Very little heat loss radiated away from the pot, flame well controlled and directed where it does the most good, and the BTU output is scaled back to match the capacity of the pot. Matched with the right blend of cannister fuel, I think it would be very hard to beat. Too heavy? Costs too much? Suit yourself, but consider the systems approach when you assemble your cookgear and you may come out ahead.

Alligator

01-10-2005, 15:54

I have both a Trangia and Simmerlite. Based on personal fuel consumption, the two models, each with fuel, equal each other in weight at about 3 nights out. I cook a lot, mostly homemade dehydrated foods with some prepared foods thrown in. I don't carry the Trangia much anymore because three nights is my typical trip length. I would hazard a guess that you will not need to melt snow for water at your start date, so you should be fine with tips mentioned. One other is to carry wooden matches. I dip the match in the Trangia after lighting the match. I find it a lot easier than holding a lighter when the fuel is cold.

Footslogger

01-10-2005, 15:59

I have both a Trangia and Simmerlite. I don't carry the Trangia much anymore because three nights is my typical trip length.=====================================
Hey Gator ...what is the whole "three night" thing about in terms of the Trangia ?? Just curious because I carry the Trangia on all my hikes, regardless of duration.

Thanks in advance ...

'Slogger
AT 2003

The Old Fhart

01-10-2005, 17:03

Footslogger

01-10-2005, 17:10

The Solemates

01-10-2005, 17:14

I think what is being said is that a Trangia will be certainly be lighter but the heat output from its alcohol fuel is about half that of white gas so you need twice as much fuel. So for cooking the same way with each stove there will be a point where if you are going to be out "X" number of days, the weight of the Trangia plus the fuel will equal the weight of the heavier white gas stove plus fuel. After that point, the white gas is more weight efficient. I don't know this would be 3 days but it sounds reasonably.

Precisely. Very well put. Being an anal retentive Biomechanical Testing Engineer, I know about testing and analysis. I messed around a lot doing a bunch of different tests with different types of stoves before embarking on my thru-hike, and I came to this same conclusion. And because the white gas stove is quicker and less finicky than alcohol, I decided to take that. I believe that you only save weight with an alcohol stove if you are doing a shorter trip.

However, I would propose that the "X" amount of days is a little higher than 3 days out. Upwards of 4-5 days seems more logical, giving that you cook twice a day like I do. So if you plan on resupplying every 5 days on the AT, there really is no weight savings of alcohol over white gas. The only caveat to this is that with a white gas stove, you are always tempted to fill the thing to the brim when filling up, even if you do not need that much fuel. Thus, doing this adds a few ounces, but it is hard to estimate exactly how much fuel you need, and you do this with alcohol anyways. Furthermore, from my tests, I found that you may save a few (ie, on the order of 3-6 oz.) ounces if you carried a canister stove, but the hassle of trying to find one every week seemed to be more than it was worth to me.

Alligator

01-10-2005, 17:26

=====================================
Hey Gator ...what is the whole "three night" thing about in terms of the Trangia ?? Just curious because I carry the Trangia on all my hikes, regardless of duration.

Thanks in advance ...

'Slogger
AT 2003
Ok, you asked. Alcohol and white gas have different efficiencies, so even if the alcohol stove is lighter, eventually, the white gas stove makes up for weight by being more efficient. At what point does this happen? Is this point reached in a practical amount of time (1 day, 3 days, 7 days, a month)?

I set up a spreadsheet using three stoves, my old Coleman Peak I (for fun), a Trangia, and a Simmerlite. Then, I added a bunch of fuel bottle weights and fuel capacities to it. Two of those stoves store fuel inside, so when you first need a fuel bottle is different. I then estimated the amount of fuel I used daily for each one from past use. Using those fuel rates, I set up the spreadsheet to indicate how much fuel I needed for X amount of days, and how much the stove, fuel, and containers weigh for a trip of that length. The Simmerlite beats out the Trangia at three days, in general three season use, based on my personal consumption rates.

Now, I lean towards the high side in the number of things I cook. I have not fine tuned very much. I use a lid and a windscreen and I measure my water. I have not changed pot-to-stove height, pot size, the diameter of my windscreen, nor do I use a cozy. Basically, all of these factors go into my fuel consumption rates.

So, for me, the weight of the Trangia, fuel, and bottle vs. the Simmerlite, fuel, and bottle equal out (at depearture) for a trip of three days (full days).

Food for Alligator.
Breakfast
2 cups of tea
hash browns or cream of wheat

Lunch may include:
nature burger or hummus or refried beans

Dinner
usually 1 or 2 hot drinks-cider or hot chocolate
soup or mashed potatoes
dehydrated dinner (homemade) Typically requires a second firing, more water or boil some off.

Wildebeast, hyena, or zebra when in season.

Alligator

01-10-2005, 17:31

Yes, I think most folks eat less hot food than I do :) . Us cold blooded reptiles need alternative fuel sources:banana .

The Solemates

01-10-2005, 17:34

Ok, you asked. Alcohol and white gas have different efficiencies, so even if the alcohol stove is lighter, eventually, the white gas stove makes up for weight by being more efficient. At what point does this happen? Is this point reached in a practical amount of time (1 day, 3 days, 7 days, a month)?

I set up a spreadsheet using three stoves, my old Coleman Peak I (for fun), a Trangia, and a Simmerlite. Then, I added a bunch of fuel bottle weights and fuel capacities to it. Two of those stoves store fuel inside, so when you first need a fuel bottle is different. I then estimated the amount of fuel I used daily for each one from past use. Using those fuel rates, I set up the spreadsheet to indicate how much fuel I needed for X amount of days, and how much the stove, fuel, and containers weigh for a trip of that length. The Simmerlite beats out the Trangia at three days, in general three season use, based on my personal consumption rates.

Now, I lean towards the high side in the number of things I cook. I have not fine tuned very much. I use a lid and a windscreen and I measure my water. I have not changed pot-to-stove height, pot size, the diameter of my windscreen, nor do I use a cozy. Basically, all of these factors go into my fuel consumption rates.

So, for me, the weight of the Trangia, fuel, and bottle vs. the Simmerlite, fuel, and bottle equal out (at depearture) for a trip of three days (full days).

Food for Alligator.
Breakfast
2 cups of tea
hash browns or cream of wheat

Lunch may include:
nature burger or hummus or refried beans

Dinner
usually 1 or 2 hot drinks-cider or hot chocolate
soup or mashed potatoes
dehydrated dinner (homemade) Typically requires a second firing, more water or boil some off.

Wildebeast, hyena, or zebra when in season.

Excellent work. The test I conducted was similar in format, and I too set up a spreadsheet type data base. On the other hand, I do not cook as much as you do. Typically, boiling 2 cups water in the morning and 3 cups at night (which was my test, at about 60F, no wind, etc.) does it for me. However, I hike a lot with my wife and am not sure about this test when cooking for 2, or for when I cook less/more than the prescribed protocol.

Footslogger

01-10-2005, 17:47

The Solemates

01-10-2005, 18:02

===================================
I think the big difference is in how much we cook and the resulting fuel consumption. I hiked the entire AT in 2003 using no more than an average of 2 oz of fuel (denatured alcohol) per day with my Trangia. I carried a 10 oz plastic flask that weighed 2 oz empty. That carried me from 4 - 6 days which was about how often I resupplied. Also, I generally carried the Trangia full of fuel which gave me about a 3 oz safety margin. So, at least for me, the Trangia was the winner.

Thanks for the info though. Now I understand how you arrived at your conclusion.

'Slogger
AT 2003

Even so, carrying 6 days of fuel in your canister would be 12 oz. Add the weight of the Trangia stove (which best I can find online is about 9.6 oz if you include the windshield and that it comes with..maybe this is too high?) and you are looking at 21.6 ounces. The simmerlite, with stove and 11 oz. fuel bottle (full) is 23.2 ounces. Where is the weight savings here?

Alligator

01-10-2005, 18:09

===================================
I think the big difference is in how much we cook and the resulting fuel consumption. I hiked the entire AT in 2003 using no more than an average of 2 oz of fuel (denatured alcohol) per day with my Trangia. I carried a 10 oz plastic flask that weighed 2 oz empty. That carried me from 4 - 6 days which was about how often I resupplied. Also, I generally carried the Trangia full of fuel which gave me about a 3 oz safety margin. So, at least for me, the Trangia was the winner.

Thanks for the info though. Now I understand how you arrived at your conclusion.

'Slogger
AT 2003I used to cook even more LOL, often from scratch. I've settled into a happy medium with my dehydrator.

Footslogger

01-10-2005, 18:15

Even so, carrying 6 days of fuel in your canister would be 12 oz. Add the weight of the Trangia stove (which best I can find online is about 9.6 oz if you include the windshield and that it comes with..maybe this is too high?) and you are looking at 21.6 ounces. The simmerlite, with stove and 11 oz. fuel bottle (full) is 23.2 ounces. Where is the weight savings here?============================
Hmmmm ...no way the Trangia weighs 9+ ounces, at least not the one I have. Don't want to throw out a number off the top of my head but I'll weigh it tonight and get back with you. The windshield I use is made of 2-ply heavy duty aluminum foil (household variety) with a bunch of holes punched in the bottom. It weighs a little over an ounce, if that.

But I never said it was the LIGHTEST one out there. I said that is was simple and reliable and personally, I like a stove that doesn't make noise. I'll guarantee you that I am under no weight disadvantage and I am eating just as quickly (give or take a minute or two) as other hikers in camp.

I'm not trying to convince anyone to go out and buy a Trangia or any alcohol stove for that matter. This thread was about alcohol stoves in cool weather and I was trying to offer my experience and some information relevant to that topic.

Nuff said ...

'Slogger
AT 2003

The Solemates

01-10-2005, 18:20

============================
Hmmmm ...no way the Trangia weighs 9+ ounces, at least not the one I have. Don't want to throw out a number off the top of my head but I'll weigh it tonight and get back with you. The windshield I use is made of 2-ply heavy duty aluminum foil (household variety) with a bunch of holes punched in the bottom. It weighs a little over an ounce, if that.

But I never said it was the LIGHTEST one out there. I said that is was simple and reliable and personally, I like a stove that doesn't make noise. I'll guarantee you that I am under no weight disadvantage and I am eating just as quickly (give or take a minute or two) as other hikers in camp.

I'm not trying to convince anyone to go out and buy a Trangia or any alcohol stove for that matter. This thread was about alcohol stoves in cool weather and I was trying to offer my experience and some information relevant to that topic.

Nuff said ...

'Slogger
AT 2003

I was adding the 3.0 oz of extra fuel you said that you carried inside for a safety margin to the 6.6 oz of the actual stove + windscreen combo that I found on some website. Thats where 9.6 oz came from.

I understand you arent trying to convince anyone. I am really curious about this subject because I have done some research and debated for a very long time about the best way to go on my thru. In the back of my mind, I am still debating, even though I think the simmerlite is the way to go. But Im not sure. I love all the options on the market today. And I love this site cause we can discuss stuff like this.

The Old Fhart

01-10-2005, 19:09

footslogger-"Hmmmm ...no way the Trangia weighs 9+ ounces, at least not the one I have." Footslogger is right, but only technically. Using my Ohaus digital scales which gives me 2 decimal places of resolution, here is what I get with my stove. Stove filled with fuel, with cap, snuffer, and my old style stand, 8.40oz. The entire stove with the supplied aluminum cook set is 14.60oz. My stove wasn't filled to the top.

I have never done a side by side comparison with any of my other 20 some odd stoves. Although I love this sturdy simple stove, I realize it has its place, and that isn't on one of my winter trips. Keep in mind you can't say "my stove uses less fuel" if you aren't doing controlled side by side testing under the same conditions. If you're going to heat 2 cups of water with one, put food in and use a cozy, do the same with the other. I'll believe my experiences and the two carefully done test by The Solemates and Alligator-good solid science, not sympathetic magic.

Footslogger

01-10-2005, 19:15

I was adding the 3.0 oz of extra fuel you said that you carried inside for a safety margin to the 6.6 oz of the actual stove + windscreen combo that I found on some website. Thats where 9.6 oz came from.
==============================
Well ...it's been quite a while since I prepared for my thru-hike in 2003 and I don't have all the numbers right in front of me, but I did my homework at the time and personally used and compared all the stove types. I'll have to get it out and re-run the numbers tonight. Anyway ...the result of my evaluation back then was in favor of the denatured alcohol types. I chose the Trangia for its sturdiness and reliability. It never missed a beat during those 6+ months on the trail.

Interesting, because my wife used a cannister stove on her thru-hike in 2001. The propane/butane cannisters weren't quite as available as they are now and I mailed a lot of them to her along the way. After she got home and saw me hiking with an alcohol stove (the Trangia) she packed up her Pocket Rocket and has never used it again.

But you're correct ...the variety of stoves today is nice. To each his/her own ...and to me, the Trangia has em all beat on an OVERALL basis. It ain't the lightest and it ain't the quickest but to me it's the best answer for an AT thru-hike.

'Slogger
AT 2003

SGT Rock

01-10-2005, 20:03

Well I have done SEVERAL tests side by side of various stoves. Well at least using the same criteria. Alcohol sotves can be made to be almost as fast as a gas stove, but at a huge waste of fuel. But unless you plan to go on a winter trip with a month between re-supply, the alcohol stove will save you weight. It isn't just a matter of starting weight, it is agregate weight over time...

Alcohol has about half the BTUs per pound as gas does per pound, that is true, but half the BTUs doesn't always mean it will take twice as much fuel, the beauty of alcohol is you can build a stove that wastes less heat than a gas stove. But I digress...

Figure it this way, a Simmerlite with bottle is 12ounces (give or take) empty. The fuel needed for a week of hiking would only be about 6 ounces if you plan to boil 2 meals a day, and gas only weighs about .7 ounces per fluid ounce - so 16.2 ounces total weight for fuel and stove.

A good homemade alcohol stove and screen can weigh about 1.5 ounces. Throw another 1.0 ounces for the fuel bottle, and another 12 ounces for fuel for the alcohol stove which weighs about 0.8 ounces per fluid ounce, and you have a start weight of 12.1 ounces (these weights are also not exact, but fairly close) which is still lighter. Go ahead and add four more ounces of fuel if you are worried about it and you break even with the gas stove.

But here is the trick - even if my start weight of fuel for an alcohol stove was above that of the gas stove, the base weight is a static amount. So at the end of the week I am only hauling 2.5 ounces of stove while the gas stove user is still carrying 12 ounces. The average weight per day of the alcohol stove (using just 12 ounces of fuel) is 7.3 ounces, while the average for the gas stove user is 14.1 ounces - twice the weight of an alcohol stove.

Add to that the alcohol stove never breaks, clogs, or has set up to go through, just pour in some fuel and light it. I have used mine down into the teens, and sure it took a couple extra minutes to boil a pint of water, but that was a couple of minutes I could do other camp chores while it cooked.

The Old Fhart

01-10-2005, 20:52

SGT Rock brings up a very valid point. Because, all things being equal, an acohol stove will be using fuel about twice as fast as a white gas stove that means the alcohol stove/fuel combo will be getting lighter, faster. However, this only means that the break even point as to what stove is more weight efficient is pushed forward somewhat. (Why does this sound like that problem: "If one train leave Chicago traveling 50 mph, and another leaves NY at 70mph........") If your resupply points are close enough, the alcohol stove wins on weight.

When I measured the Trangia, with cookset at about 15oz., one of my other favorites is the Svea 123 nested inside a large stainless cup at about 25 oz, and my MSR XGK also at about 25oz, all had about the same amount of fuel. If I'm going overnight, in the summer, the Trangia suits me fine. The Svea 123 has a few thousand miles on it and I am quite fond of it. The MSR XGK has done about 1/2 the A.T. and will be press back into service this spring as well.

Some of my other backpacking stoves by Radius, Primus, Optimus, and other "us"s that range in age up to 70 years old will also see use on some shorter trips. I just like collecting and using different stoves. Obviously my oldest stove wouldn't be practical for an A.T. hike and I use it because, I admit, I just like using stoves. What we have to be careful of here is that we try to be honest in admitting the pros and cons of the various stoves. SGT Rock has done a lot of good research on alcohol stoves so this isn't directed at him but here are some who take ANY critism of their stove's features as a personal insult and will ignore any evidence. By the way, I still remember the old Whisperlites. You could always tell who owned one because they were always trying to unclog them or swearing at them. I never owned one of "those" stoves but whatever stove I use, I take a stove repair kit with me, just in case.

SGT Rock

01-10-2005, 20:56

I didn't take it as critisizm, too much respect for the Old Fhart for that ;)

Weight is just one factor of any stove system. If you want variable heet, light weight, and rapid boils, then a MSR Pocket Rocket may be the best. If you want lightest weight and most fuel efficent, then my Ion stove is my choice, but that is subjective.

What I personally find slightly odd is the Jet Boil. You save .16 ounces of weight per boil at the cost of adding multiple ounce to your stove and pot system. Seems sort of counterproductive for people trying to save weight.

Peaks

01-10-2005, 21:08

Many good replies on this post. But, I'll add one more.

In cold weather you have less "margin for error." So, if asked, my advice would be to bring along what ever stove you are the most familiar with and is the most dependable for you. Some people have problems with alcohol in cold weather. Others have problems with gas stoves, and others with cartridges. I'll carry the additional few ounces everytime if it means that I can fix something hot when I need to get something warm inside me to warm up.

I think that if you need to ask the question, then you better try out your gear ahead of time.

SGT Rock

01-10-2005, 21:15

Excellent point. I, and others, can use an alcohol stove in cold weather because we know how. Some people may not have the same experience. I have seen people with WisperHeavy stoves ready to go nuts in warm weather - I would hate to see that same sort of person in cold weather when they thought that stove would be perfect only to learn something new about it while on the trail. You should be completely familiar with any stove BEFORE you hit the trail, especially in the winter.

The Old Fhart

01-10-2005, 21:38

SGT Rock-"I didn't take it as critisizm, too much respect for the Old Fhart for that" Damn, Rock, You sure know how to butter me up! :)

SGT Rock

01-10-2005, 23:07

Well I could also comment about your pics too :D Consistantly excellent, but I wouldn't want you to get a big head ;)

SGT Rock

01-11-2005, 07:53

If you are interested, in case you have never seen the stuff on my site, here is a spreadsheet based on tests of stove that crunch the numbers including start weight, average weight, fuel per boiled, etc. http://hikinghq.net/stoves/weight_time_compare.html

All stoves are compared on a 14 day re-supply scenario where a pint of water is boiled twice a day, the numbers can fluctuate a bit for pot design, weather, changes in water temp, etc - but at least it gives you a comparison to look at that is not subjective.

The Simmerlite hasn't been tested by me using this standard yet, so the weight isn't there, but based on my experience it would be something like 11.3 base weight (I think) with 11 ounce container and a fuel consumption around .4 ounces with a fuel weight of .28 per boil. Average weight would be 14.22 ounces with fuel for 14 days between re-supply.

An unmodified Trangia Westwind with screen and a 20 ounce fuel bottle comes in at 8.3 base weights and a fuel consumption of .51 ounces per boil for a fuel weight of .42 ounces per boil. Average weight would be 14.57 ounces over a 14 day scenario. Based on this info, I would say that as an average weight per day carried, a hike comparing these two stoves would have to go at least 14 days between re-supply before the Simmerlite becomes more weight efficient than alcohol. This is an upper end of weight in my experience.

You can cut a Trangia stove weight by quite a bit by changing the pot stand and windscreen. You can also make smaller stoves that are almost as efficient. My current stove with windscreen is ~0.6 ounces, and my fuel bottle is only 0.9 ounces for a 12 ounce bottle. Fuel consumption is about .6 ounces of fuel per boil at a fuel weight of .49 per boil. The average over 14 days would be about 8.5 ounces per day since I would have to switch to a 16 ounce soda bottle to go 14 days.

Something to note, BTUs for fuel are listed by pound, not volume. Ethyl alcohol has 12,550 per pound and gas has 18,400 per pound so gas does not twice as many BTUs more like 1.5 times the BTUs so if you are comparing fuels based on weight, 1 ounce of gas is equal to 1.5 ounces of alcohol. Fuels also have lower specific gravity than water, so 1 ounce of gas weighs about 0.71 ounces per fluid ounce, and alcohol weighs 0.82 ounces per fluid ounce. So BTU wise .86 fluid ounces of gas is about equal to 1 fluid ounce of alcohol. Also, when computing pack weight, don't assume that 11 ounces of gas is going to add 11 ounces of pack weight and 20 ounces of alcohol is going to add 20 ounces of pack weight. It is more like 7.8 and 16.4 respectively.

K-Bear

01-11-2005, 10:42

I started with a homemade alcohol stove and had some problems.
I bought a new alcohol stove at rainbow springs campground for 20$ and it worked like a charm. Yes it does take a little longer than the canister stoves but it weighs much less too.
*Also, in cold temps, sleep with your alcohol bottle at the foot of your sleeping bag. As long as the d-alcohol stays warm, you're good to go!

I had mornings putting on frozen solid socks while drinking the piping hot cup of coffee i made with my little alcohol stove!

highway

01-11-2005, 10:52

...
I set up a spreadsheet using three stoves,...The Simmerlite beats out the Trangia at three days, in general three season use, based on my personal consumption rates. ...
So, for me, the weight of the Trangia, fuel, and bottle vs. the Simmerlite, fuel, and bottle equal out (at depearture) for a trip of three days (full days).

That’s peculiar. I have seen many of these “studies” posted on numerous sites-comparing the relative merits & weight advantages between using gas, alcohol, tablet and canister stoves. As I recall, however, the general consensus was that alcohol was the better 'convenient' choice, at least for those desiring to carry less weight. So I am surprised that yours is an altogether different conclusion. Would you mind sharing with us your data which led you to the conclusion that gasoline was the lighter choice?

I find the venerable Trangia the better (and lighter)choice, at least for me, and the gas stoves to be heavier.

Youngblood

01-11-2005, 11:00

...What we have to be careful of here is that we try to be honest in admitting the pros and cons of the various stoves. ...I agree and that can be hard to do since everyone doesn't see things the same way. A few comments I have regarding fuel efficiency that I don't recall seeing mentioned.

1- Stoves that require priming or use some fuel to warm up without that heat being applied to boiling your water have an inherent disadvantage. This disadvantage is miniscule when boiling water by the quart but amplied when boiling water by the cup.

2- Many alcohol stoves require estimating how much fuel is required before you cook and putting that exact amount in the burner before lighting the burner. If that amount is just right, everthing is fine, if it was too much you waste fuel because you have to burn it off, if it wasn't enough you have to wait for the burner to cool down enough to handle it, re-estimate the amount of fuel you need to finish cooking, refuel and start over again hoping you have just the right amount of fuel. I think this is inherently inefficient compared to stoves where you start with plenty of fuel available to the burners, extinuish the burner when heat is no longer needed and are able to use any unburnt fuel at a later time. And I say this because water temperature, air temperture, wind speed, humidity, barometric pressure, etc are all continuously variable and at least some of these affect how much fuel is required.

3- I realize this one is contradictory to #2, but I don't think it is in all cases. Sometimes we get into routines on our long distance hikes where the weather is fairly consistant, we can judge how much fuel is required to cook our meals, we know how long it takes us to select a tent/hammock site and how long it takes us to set up our shelter. Stoves that you can preset the amount of fuel to cook the meal sometimes allows you the option of lighting the burner and leave it unattended for maybe twenty minutes while you go off setting up camp, etc and the stove burns for 10 minutes, goes out and your food cools off and is waiting for you to eat it when you return. I realise this isn't a fuel efficiency issue, but I think it is something worth pointing out because it can reduce an aw-s##t if you leave your food cooking while you go off to perform camp chores thinking you will be back in time to turn the stove off before your meal gets burnt/overcooked and you lose track of time.

Youngblood

The Solemates

01-11-2005, 11:11

I just wanted to address the "clogging issue" of white gas stoves from a personal experience. We carried the MSR Simmerlite for our thru-hike, and had absolutely no problems for 1800 miles, when it became clogged. I tried to unclog it myself, but to no avail. By the time we had reached Franconia Notch, I had to go into Lincoln, NH for resupply. I went into an Outfitter there and he gave me a entirely new stove, no questions asked. I wasnt expecting one, but he said MSR had one of the best service/customer satisfaction departments out there, so he said it was no big deal. I really wasnt expecting a brand new stove, but was very happy when I left nonetheless.

1800 miles and 4 months, using it twice a day (and for the first 1.5 months in near 0F temps), and an excellent company to stand by ain't bad. I guess you get what you pay for.

Perhaps the hikers that everyone mentions that have such bad stove problems are not treating it with a little TLC, just like any other peice of gear should be treated.

The Solemates

01-11-2005, 11:16

2- Many alcohol stoves require estimating how much fuel is required before you cook and putting that exact amount in the burner before lighting the burner. If that amount is just right, everthing is fine, if it was too much you waste fuel because you have to burn it off, if it wasn't enough you have to wait for the burner to cool down enough to handle it, re-estimate the amount of fuel you need to finish cooking, refuel and start over again hoping you have just the right amount of fuel. I think this is inherently inefficient compared to stoves where you start with plenty of fuel available to the burners, extinuish the burner when heat is no longer needed and are able to use any unburnt fuel at a later time. And I say this because water temperature, air temperture, wind speed, humidity, barometric pressure, etc are all continuously variable and at least some of these affect how much fuel is required.

Youngblood

Excellent point. I cannot believe this hasnt been mentioned until now. I have seen much alcohol wasted by hikers because of this very reason. Likewise, I have seen water that is almost at a boil and then the alcohol runs out (which is typical in cold weather hiking since sometimes it takes more than one filling to boil water below 15-20F or so). Then you must refill the stove, losing all of that heat, and practically starting over again. This becomes exaggerated if you are doing more than boiling water, ie, trying to cook noodles or something.

Footslogger

01-11-2005, 11:28

Excellent point. I cannot believe this hasnt been mentioned until now. I have seen much alcohol wasted by hikers because of this very reason. ===============================
CLARIFICATION ....

This is NOT true with the Trangia. There is no wasted fuel, short of carelessness by the user.

1. You can fill the Trangia with up to 3 oz of fuel prior to lighting it.

2. When your water is boiling or sufficiently hot enough for your meal you place the outer cap over the reservoir to extinquish the flame.

3. After a few minutes the stove is cool and you screw on the O-ring sealed cap, containing any unburned fuel.

Not all alcohol stoves are created equal. I think the readers who are not familiar with the stove to stove subtleties needed to have this information.

'Slogger
AT 2003

Alligator

01-11-2005, 11:40

Rock and TOF, you both make mention of the idea of weight per day. Without making this sound difficult, if we had a smooth function of total weight, we could integrate this problem. Rock has a very good approach IMO in that he sums all days then averages. Excellent coverage for various stoves. He clearly indicates how much is expected to be cooked and the period of resupply. Now, my personal patterns are different, so my mileage does vary. That's the nice thing about a spreadsheet though, I could just change a few cells and check the results:) .

Good points Youngblood.

1. I end up having a higher fuel use per day with my Simmerlite due to repeated firings. Giving my cook load and patterns, I estimate about 3 oz/day for me. For my Trangia, I use 5 oz/day. Although I always have any second item needing firing ready, I may still need multiple primings on the Simmerlite.

2. My dehydrated meals always have different fire times. Any alcohol stove I use needs to have a sealable reservoir. I also occassionally fry things and make pancakes.

3. I do this in the morning more often. Make tea, stuff bag. Make breakfast, stuff pack. Flame control is useful here. Also, I know this may freak the watchless folks out, but I use the timer on my watch if needed to do other tasks.

Another note I would like to make is I have had only one problem to date with my simmerlite and it was the pump cup needed oiling. I have not had clogging problems such as were common on the old Whisperlites.

The Old Fhart

01-11-2005, 11:56

Alligator-"Also, I know this may freak the watchless folks out, but I use the timer on my watch if needed to do other tasks."
The Solemates-"And I say this because water temperature, air temperture, wind speed, humidity, barometric pressure, etc are all continuously variable and at least some of these affect how much fuel is required." I hesitate to mention that my watch has a thermometer, barometer/altimeter, and timer. Having worked for the Mount Washington Weather Observatory, I'm pretty good at estimating wind speed, and I can use my palmtop to do all the calculations. Of course my meal had gotten cold after all the time I've wasted doing the math. :)

The Solemates

01-11-2005, 12:07

===============================
CLARIFICATION ....

This is NOT true with the Trangia. There is no wasted fuel, short of carelessness by the user.

1. You can fill the Trangia with up to 3 oz of fuel prior to lighting it.

2. When your water is boiling or sufficiently hot enough for your meal you place the outer cap over the reservoir to extinquish the flame.

3. After a few minutes the stove is cool and you screw on the O-ring sealed cap, containing any unburned fuel.

Not all alcohol stoves are created equal. I think the readers who are not familiar with the stove to stove subtleties needed to have this information.

'Slogger
AT 2003

Agreed. I have seen it with the soda can type stoves.

Alligator

01-11-2005, 12:32

That’s peculiar. I have seen many of these “studies” posted on numerous sites-comparing the relative merits & weight advantages between using gas, alcohol, tablet and canister stoves. As I recall, however, the general consensus was that alcohol was the better 'convenient' choice, at least for those desiring to carry less weight. So I am surprised that yours is an altogether different conclusion. Would you mind sharing with us your data which led you to the conclusion that gasoline was the lighter choice?

I find the venerable Trangia the better (and lighter)choice, at least for me, and the gas stoves to be heavier.
I have a spreadsheet that I would be willing to post. But the main point is that I have an estimated fuel use of 4-5 oz/day with my Trangia and 2-3 oz/day with my Simmerlite. See way above for cooking patterns. What many of these studies use as a base is two hot meals a day. This is very different from my menu. My fuel consumption rates are averaged over many trips with both stoves. There is a lot of variability in what I cook and the outside temperatures encountered. My rates are just that though, my own. I am comfortable that they are well estimated though. it is only for a 3 day or more trip that the initial weight is less (and only for my personal conditions). If you are interested in average weight, Rock's approach is more useful, just substitute your own parameters.

For keeping it simple, I too appreciate my Trangia. The cook set with the model 28 is perfect for my use. Small nonstick fry pan and pot for rehydrating food (6 oz. total I believe). No need to measure fuel, just add. Works down to low temps. Great 3 season stove and I highly recommend it. I just happen to cook a lot and for my trip lengths, the Simmerlite works out better.

One other note. I make my own dehydrated dinners. That is, I do not rip open a package, add 1 3/4 c. of water and boil for 7 minutes:D . I dry them until they are "done" at home in the dehydrator. In camp, I add enough water to "cover" them in the pot plus "some extra water at the top". I find that letting them "sit for a few minutes, maybe 10-30" helps before I boil them and let them "sit for a few minutes more" after boiling. At which point I may simmer them with some boullion or corn starch to thicken them up. While I weigh each dinner to "about 4 oz", I have no other specific instructions for which I could control fuel usage. Some dinners need more water than others, some need more time to cook. Sometimes I add a side of instant rice or couscous.

Alligator

01-11-2005, 12:42

I hesitate to mention that my watch has a thermometer, barometer/altimeter, and timer. Having worked for the Mount Washington Weather Observatory, I'm pretty good at estimating wind speed, and I can use my palmtop to do all the calculations. Of course my meal had gotten cold after all the time I've wasted doing the math. :)
My Vector is green and I'm not afraid to wear it in public;) , but no palmtop.

Mags

01-11-2005, 12:46

Like any tool , it workes best for what it is designed for: simple, boil water only meals.

I only cook one meal a day and use an oz of fuel per meal. The alcohol stove is very efficient for me.

If I was to cook large group meals and/or multiple meals with drinks (esp. if two people) a white gas stove would be more efficient.

Generally speaking the alcohol stove starts losing its advantage in weight if you go over 8-10 days without a fuel re-supply. (if cooking one meal a day, if two meals a day I'd say 4-5 days). Then something like a Simmerlite is more efficient.

For what it is worth, used my alochol stove at 13k on the divide when snowing out in October. For melting water in full-on winter backpacks, use my Whisperlite. (If I had to get a white gas stove now, I'd get a Simmerlite).

Just my gut feeling based on experience.

Hope this info is useful.

David S.

01-11-2005, 14:41

As far as alcohol in the cold. I have successfully brought two cups of water to a boil in 14 degree weather one morning a few weeks ago out on my back deck with a slight breeze blowing. Not only was the water brought to a boil, it was brought to a boil in under 5 minutes with less than one oz of fuel. It wasn't simple however. The alcohol would not light at first so I put the fuel bottle in the sleeping bag with me for about 30 minutes to warm it up. I had slept all night with the water bottle to keep it from freezing so the water was probably room temp. Then my butane lighter seemed to be to cold...so I warmed it up also. That did the trick. I also have finally managed to make a stove that makes flames that hit the bottem of my stove just right. That really helps. Of course, a wind screen with just enough airflow and no more also helps. I feel like my system is optimized for my Snowpeak Tit pot.

Outdoors in warmer conditions (over 50) and little wind, it will boil 2 cups of water in 3 min. and 50 sec....and sometimes 3 min. and 40 sec. but I cant yet figure out why it does it faster sometimes under seemingly very similer conditions. I know that it is more fuel efficient for a stove to cook slowly... but in winter conditions, a think fast and hot might be more effective. My logic is that the colder it is, the faster and hotter your flame needs to be in order to keep ahead of the transfer of heat into the cold air. Thoughts?

Youngblood

01-11-2005, 15:13

... Outdoors in warmer conditions (over 50) and little wind, it will boil 2 cups of water in 3 min. and 50 sec....and sometimes 3 min. and 40 sec. but I cant yet figure out why it does it faster sometimes under seemingly very similer conditions. I know that it is more fuel efficient for a stove to cook slowly... but in winter conditions, a think fast and hot might be more effective. My logic is that the colder it is, the faster and hotter your flame needs to be in order to keep ahead of the transfer of heat into the cold air. Thoughts?

First about boil time consistance. There are factors that we don't address (like humidity, barometric pressure, etc) that probably affect that.

Second, I don't know that it is more fuel efficient for a stove to cook slowly (we're talking about boiling water, right?). I think this is the case with some stoves because of flames missing the bottom of the pot or the hottest part of the flame not being where you want it. I have seen some alcohol stove designs where the burner is so powerful that you can't simply wrap a windscreen around them and the pot because the extra heat causes the burner/fuel tank to dangerously flame up... and not using a full windscreen is throwing away a lot of heat generated by the alcohol so using a lower output burner that doesn't flame up with a windscreen is more efficient, but that is not because of cooking slowly, per say.

Third, you are very right that you need to add heat faster than cold air removes it and that is more obvious the colder the air is because it removes heat at a faster rate... but the same holds true at warmer temperatures.

Youngblood

The Solemates

01-11-2005, 15:44

I feel like my system is optimized for my Snowpeak Tit pot.

Thoughts?

Sure, I have thoughts. I've never seen a Snowpeak pot with a nipple on it. :banana

The Old Fhart

01-11-2005, 17:46

The Solemates-"Sure, I have thoughts.........." I was wondering why those pots were so popular and cost so much. :)

David S.

01-11-2005, 17:52

Bwaaaaa Ha Ha....yall are funny...so what if I don't know the proper abbreviation for titanium. :D

SGT Rock

01-11-2005, 19:55

Just for the record, a couple of my numbers in a previous post were a little off, but I fixed them. This was the post: http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/showthread.php?p=78538#post78538

SGT Rock

01-11-2005, 20:11

Here is my guess for the JetBoil system based on their info from their site. Remember the pot is integrated to the system so the weight doesn't directly compare.

Stove system 21 ounceswith full fuel bottle. Fuel usage is in weight anyway, but a 3.5 ounce fuel canister should get 24 pints per their website, so .15 ounces per boil or .3 ounces per day for 12 days (won't fit to the 14 day scenario). Average weight per day would be about 19.2 ounces per day for those 12 days. A Simmerlite with a SnowPeak Trek 700 pot and a 1 ounce cozy would get in at about 20.2 ounces per day for the same 12 day scenario.

neo

01-12-2005, 00:36

i prefer alcohol stove to canister stove in freezeing weather,i use mine in the teens and 20,s:sun a little slower but still works:sun neo

bearbag hanger

01-12-2005, 03:18

My two cents worth (which is about all it's worth):

I started my through hike on Feb 28th, 2004 with a Trangia and used it until Pearisburg, VA. Never had problems lighting it in the cold, although there were a couple times I had to light a match below the stove to heat it up. I had a whole lot of problems using a lighter and therefore used matches for most of the trip. At Pearisburg, I purchased a Etowa Stove (because it was lighter in weight) and used it for the rest of the trip, which ended on Sept 11, 2004 at Mt Katahdin. The only problem with the Etowa, which has been mentioned a few times, is that I always had to waste a little bit of fuel since I couldn't turn it off or store the excess fuel. But the more I used it, the less fuel I wasted.

Since my trip, I've been experimenting with a small canister stove. Coleman has one they advertise at 2.6 oz, the one I got weighs 2.8 oz. I match this with the new 7 oz (3.5 oz of fuel) propane/butane/etc. canisters, which my testing shows will last almost a week of breakfasts and dinners. Pretty competitive with the alcohol stoves, has far better adjustability and boils water in half the time. A little bit noisy though.

I think for a week or less trip, I'll be using the small canister stove. For hikes over a month, I think alcohol is still better, regardless of the temperatures.

loansome walker

01-20-2005, 00:48

I am going to carry both at the start of the trail; think about it you carry a little less white gas and add the weight of less than an ounce to carry an alchool can stove and add back the weight of the gas plus a little to carry the alchool. This way you can test them for the conditions you will be seeing and if it gets cold and a hot cup of tea becomes and important aspect of avoiding hypotheria you can do it fast with the white gas stove and if the white gas stove fails you can fall back on the alchool stove. I tried this this fall and found that I used both stoves and had hot drinks and dinner together. I also found that I wouldn't want to rely on an alchool stove at high altitudes in cold weather trying to warm glacier feed stream water. On this trip I found I had to refuel my alchool stove three times to bring a few cups of water to a boil and about twenty five minutes later I could finally start to cook dinner. And the best thing is you can decide what works for you as you can see from this post different things work for different people. All this for a couple of ounces.

SGT Rock

01-20-2005, 10:57

Well some alcohol stoves are not equal to others, sometimes even the same design can be influenced by a slight design change. My son is currently working on his science fair experiment and he picked alcohol stove fuel efficiency (wonder where he got that idea). We have been tweaking an ION stove design with the goal of making it reliably boil a pint of water with 15ml of alcohol. We made the exact same model of alcohol stove and simply changed the primer/filler hole diameter by 1/8" and ended up with a great deal of differences in efficiency. This stove with a 3/4" diameter hole can boil water with great reliability in 50 degree weather using 50 degree water and alcohol in less than 8 minutes and burn out in nine, while the exact same stove with a 7/8" diameter hole uses up all its fuel in less than 8 minutes and never achieves a true boil temperature under the exact same conditions. Making this stove with an even smaller hole (5/8" diameter) resulted in a very long burn but a stove which could also not achieve a true boil.

What am I getting at, well testing a stove in your kitchen or warm weather may make you think the stove is good, especially when so many people base this on time to boil. Also, unless you are testing with a good temperature probe when you do this, what you observe under these sorts of tests might not be a "true boil" as I call it. What I have found is that when you see a boil, that may not be an indicator of real boil temperature evenly distributed throughout the water, but rather boiling point achieved just at the very bottom of the pot. This is not just limited to alcohol stoves, but any stove design as some have recently mentioned the problems they have had with the JetBoil stoves in cold weather.

This is why I often disregard someone's observations that their stove is better or good, or whatever. When someone says they saw their stove work better than someone else, their definition of better may not be the same. When someone says their stove achieved a boiled in X:XX time, by what basis are they determining this? If it is by eyesight, especially in a tall, narrow pot, then the data is probably wrong. It is also why I have tried to design tests on my site that accurately test these things and simply present the data. Ultimately the choice of stoves is based on a number of things such as start weight, carry weight, availability of fuel, flame control, etc.