View Full Version : Going Stove-free?
I'm 32 and have been hiking and backpacking since I could walk. I've hiked a few sections of the AT but I'm currently planning my first thru-hike. To keep weight down I'm considering leaving the stove at home. I'll enjoy hot meals in towns and do without on the trail. Any honest thoughts on this? Or what about a little wood cooking if I just brought a pot and didn't have to worry about fuel. I've done this before...but not sure how feasible it would be on the AT. Thanks for all the advice guys! See you out there!
I'm 32 and have been hiking and backpacking since I could walk. I've hiked a few sections of the AT but I'm currently planning my first thru-hike. To keep weight down I'm considering leaving the stove at home. I'll enjoy hot meals in towns and do without on the trail. Any honest thoughts on this? Or what about a little wood cooking if I just brought a pot and didn't have to worry about fuel. I've done this before...but not sure how feasible it would be on the AT. Thanks for all the advice guys! See you out there!
Thru hikes have certainly been done without a stove. I guess it depends on what it takes to make you happy. Personally, a hot meal at the end of the day and a hot breakfast when it's cold are things I really appreciate. You can bring and eat out of a pot that is less than 4 oz, cook over a stove that is less than an ounce, and carry fuel that is less than an ounce a day. So for an average carry weight of a half pound or less, you can have hot meals. For me, this is worth the weight. Camel up at water sources and carry a cup less of water, and there you go.
G-FOURce
01-07-2013, 13:30
Thru hikes have certainly been done without a stove. I guess it depends on what it takes to make you happy. Personally, a hot meal at the end of the day and a hot breakfast when it's cold are things I really appreciate. You can bring and eat out of a pot that is less than 4 oz, cook over a stove that is less than an ounce, and carry fuel that is less than an ounce a day. So for an average carry weight of a half pound or less, you can have hot meals. For me, this is worth the weight. Camel up at water sources and carry a cup less of water, and there you go.
ditto that!
Feral Bill
01-07-2013, 13:34
If you find it isn't working for you, buy a stove then.
yellowsirocco
01-07-2013, 13:39
It is not an 'exclusive or' situation. A warm meal at the end of the day is nice in the cooler weather. A hot meal in the middle of summer is not very appealing. So carry the stove in the spring and fall, but send it home for the summer. Or you can carry a minimalist alcohol setup in the summer to give you some flexibility for when you have longer sections and don't want to carry as much fresh food.
I did 2 months on the AT without a stove and didn't mind it. It helps to know what kinds of food you won't mind eating that way. When the weather is colder though, a hot meal at the end of the day is a morale boaster.
Slo-go'en
01-07-2013, 22:02
Non-cook food tends to be a heavier than cooked food (typically pasta), so the weight savings might not be as significant as you think. There are other reasons to go no-cook, like saving the time and hassle of cooking. But yes, going stove and pot less can and has been done by many.
I wouldn't rely on wood cooking on a thru hike without refining the practice on shorter trips first.
At least you're going to bring a pot. That's a good idea, especially when it's harder to find liquid water because the streams are covered with snow. I don't cook and as such, I don't hike with a pot. That was a mistake once when I was above the snow line and couldn't find liquid water. I ended up melting snow in ziplock bags and plastic bottles next to a few. It took a very long time to get enough water to quench my thirst and carry enough water to make it to the next reliable water source.
MuddyWaters
01-07-2013, 22:06
I'm 32 and have been hiking and backpacking since I could walk. I've hiked a few sections of the AT but I'm currently planning my first thru-hike. To keep weight down I'm considering leaving the stove at home. I'll enjoy hot meals in towns and do without on the trail. Any honest thoughts on this? Or what about a little wood cooking if I just brought a pot and didn't have to worry about fuel. I've done this before...but not sure how feasible it would be on the AT. Thanks for all the advice guys! See you out there!
Hot food is like fire. Its something we crave for comfort.
As pointed out, in cold weather, its beneficial to warming you up.
My stove/pot/windscreen weighs 2oz. fuel bottle weighs 1oz, and fuel for a week of dinners weighs about 4-5oz.
So, average wt for me would be 5.5oz carried for fuel and stove/pot.
Worth going without? Not really. Maybe in really hot weather when I wouldnt want hot food.
Can it be done? Yes! I have done some "stove-free" hiking myself--but on shorter hikes than a thru hike.
The real question is "Why go cookless"? (Especially on a thru hike). The savings in weight would be minimal (if at any). You already indicated that you would carry a small pot to cook on over a wood fire---"just in case". That means you PROBABLY would also need to carry something to clean the inside or outside of that soot-streaked pot (or something to carry it in--so the soot on the pot doesn't get on everything in your pack). If you are going that far, what have you saved? Only, 4-8 ounces AT BEST--over carrying a simple alcohol stove and a minimal amount of fuel.
In exchange for carrying a few more ounces, you get the option of some hot meals/beverages and a way to boil/purify water if that rare need ever arises. You also increase your meal and beverage choices.
Unless you really go "all in" with cookless meals and become "radical" about it---you may actually end up carrying MORE weight by going "cookless. (Depending upon how we choose to count any water that is collected and used at camp--and probably not ever carried in your pack).
Cookless foods can sometimes be heavier foods. (Sausage, cheese, nuts, raisins, tortillas, power bars, tuna--to name just a few). Compare that (in weight) to something that is more dehydrated (and TYPICALLY cooked) like Ramen, Mac & Cheese, oatmeal, rice, couscous etc.
"Stove-free" will only save "significant" weight--if you do "radical" things such as leave the cooking pot at home and eat dehydrated food dry or prepared with cold water. I can do that for a few weeks--but not for a few months.
Frankly, if you are already taking the pot with you--what's the big deal about carrying a few ounces more for a small alcohol stove and a few ounces of fuel?
swjohnsey
01-07-2013, 23:23
Met several thru-hikers who cooked exclusively with wood.
SCRUB HIKER
01-07-2013, 23:56
I'm one of the people (along with garlic08) who often pipe up when someone asks about stoveless hiking. I hiked 5 months on the AT in 2011 (not a complete thru-hike, but very close) without a stove. It was my first time hiking stoveless, and I'd say it was a positive experience. Someone PMed me a few weeks ago asking for my thoughts on the issue, and I ended up writing quite a lot before I even knew it. Here is a copy-paste of that:
<<Long story short, it worked out fine, but I'm not sure I would do it again.
Long story long: I did it because I liked the idea of not having to fuss over anything, and being able to eat in my tent in bad weather or as soon as I got up in the morning or whatnot. I figured that, as it stood, I only cooked one meal a day (dinner) while hiking normally, so it wouldn't be very hard to find no-cook things to eat for dinner. Those anticipated benefits turned out to be pretty much correct. I don't know what hiking you've done, but for me, being in your tent when it's raining, morning or evening, is a really nice feeling, and thinking about leaving your cozy zone and getting even a little wet is a really miserable feeling. So it's really great to make breakfast or dinner in bed while the weather rages outside, and if it's breakfast, be essentially packed up, fueled up and ready to go by the time you step out--just take the shelter down and be on your way.
It's also very nice not to have to worry about the problems attendant to traditional canister stoves, namely them malfunctioning and running out of fuel (and then having to find a place to resupply it in town). On every backpacking trip I'd taken before the AT, something went wrong with the stove at some point, and someone had to troubleshoot it, and it wasn't going to be me because I'm a ****ty mechanic. I did not want to worry about that on the AT. What I hadn't considered is that some new-model stoves like the Jetboil are incredibly reliable, and simple alcohol stoves are almost completely foolproof, and easy to resupply for fuel. I will probably use an alcohol stove on future long-distance hikes.
Some people who have never tried stoveless hiking list cons that I don't think apply. One, they say there's a psychological boost from hot food. I disagree--I've had hot soup on hikes where I'm unpleasantly cold, and I'm always still unpleasantly cold afterwards. At any rate, depending on when you start, there won't be too many times on the AT where cold is a psychological issue. Other people say that they can't live without hot coffee in the morning, which isn't a problem for me because I've never done that on a regular basis. And other people say that going stoveless weighs more because of the water weight in your food and the imprecision of resupplying when you don't have concrete meals in mind. I think that's actually true, but I don't tend to see it as a con most of the time because I'm not a gram weenie, although I'm getting there.
The big con with stoveless hiking for me is that it's hard to consistently (like for 5 months) get no-cook food that I'm happy about eating it if it's not maildropped from home. Maildropping wasn't going to happen for me on the AT because it would have been coming from Oregon, and that's way too expensive. I am a fairly mechanical eater with low standards in general, but there was still a little too much repetition in my trail diet to really satisfy me. Breakfast was a problem because I think PopTarts are gross, I can't handle granola/Clif/power/Big Colossal bars for more than about two days in a row, and reconstituted milk gives me acid reflux (although regular milk doesn't, go figure). That left me with cereal or muesli soaked in cold water for breakfast, which I'm happy with--but a lot of the time the more granola-y cereals I could find in the trail-town grocery stores were overpriced and not really that calorie-dense, all told. Most of my future hiking will be out West and I will be shipping myself my own muesli for breakfasts, which I can eat indefinitely and really fuels you for the first few hours of hiking.
Lunch food and snack food is easy to find anywhere. Chocolate bars, cheese, sausage/pepperoni, Snyder's flavored pretzel bits, jerky, Nutella, peanut butter, mustard, sometimes a bread medium like bagel-thins or tortillas--you can get them everywhere and I can personally eat all these things indefinitely and not get tired of them. You might have other foods in mind, but that's what worked for me. I ate a lot of these for dinner too. A couple of items that I specifically ate for dinners were instant mashed potatoes and instant hummus, both reconstituted with cold water. Some people can't handle the cold potatoes, and I agree that they taste better hot, but they're alright with cold water too (but just alright--after awhile I could tolerate them but not honestly look forward to them no matter how hungry I was). The powdered hummus I could only get shipped from home--good luck finding it in the grocery stores along the trail. I tried reconstituted refried beans once too, and that was good, but again, not available in trail towns.
If you're doing maildrops or if you have very low standards for what you like to eat, going stoveless can be perfect. If you're not sure how you're going to handle stovelessness, I would suggest bringing a super-cheap-and-easy alcohol stove like a Super Cat (http://jwbasecamp.com/Articles/SuperCat/index.html) and enough alcohol for a night or two of cooking. That won't weigh more than 5oz total and it gives you the flexibility to eat a cooked meal every now and then. Now that I'm familiar with what I like to eat while long-distance hiking, I think in the future I'm going to ship myself my own breakfasts (cold) and possibly dinners (for cooking ... might get a dehydrator this winter) and leave the lunch and snack food up to the vagaries of each town stop.>>
keep moving
01-08-2013, 00:48
SCRUB HIKER, as soon as I saw this thread I was going to copy and paste that exact same message.
Here is the link to Garlics trail journal. He thru hiked with Pickles in 2007 and they went stoveless. In prep posts 4 and 5 he talks about the decision. http://www.trailjournals.com/entry.cfm?id=213035
Why go without a stove? Because it is simple, easy and straight forward.
No worries about fuel. At the end of the day, you just eat and while other's are outside fidgeting with a stove in the rain, you just eat too.
Out West, alchy stoves were banned in many areas this past year FWIW.
On a hot day, eating a cold mean of cous cous and a chicken packet tastes darn good. (One of my favorite meals for summer backpacking, actually)
Is going stoveless for all situations and all people? No.
But on higher mile solo hikes it can be a good option.
Just another tool to have in the kit and make use of.
Some of you apparently lack that genetic mutation that separates us from lower life forms - pyromania.
Non-cook food tends to be a heavier than cooked food (typically pasta), so the weight savings might not be as significant as you think. There are other reasons to go no-cook, like saving the time and hassle of cooking. But yes, going stove and pot less can and has been done by many.
I looked at this a few months ago and started a thread on it. After the discussion and looking at the foods I thought would replace my cooked food (only dinner) I found that the weight saving, if any was not worth it.
One of the things that was suggested to me was soaking pasta a few hours prior to eating. So now you're carrying a Nalgene bottle full of water and pasta half a day. Where's the weight savings in that?
Of course HYOH but maybe you could give it a try for a weekend or two before you hit the trail.
Hikes in Rain
01-08-2013, 07:32
Three words: no hot coffee!
daddytwosticks
01-08-2013, 08:08
Three words: no hot coffee! Ding ding ding ding! Winner! :)
Zactly.
Where is the fun in getting lost in the woods if you can't stop and make a hot cup of tea or coffee?
MuddyWaters
01-08-2013, 09:37
Just because you have a stove, doesnt mean you have to use it ALL the time.
Keep it small, light, compact and it wont bother you.
If you dont, get rid of it. If you do, keep it.
soulrebel
01-08-2013, 09:44
I went without a stove after all the snow melted. Kept my cookpot which had a wire handle on it...I'd make a tripod with a few sticks and about 4 foot of cordage and then make a small twig fire for dinner and sometimes lunch. I always had a fire, pretty much everyday of the hike. sometimes 2 or 3 fires a day. I'm pretty good at building fires and cookin on them. It is a skill, it does take more time, it isn't as convenient. However, you don't have to spend money on fuel, don't have to find the hardware store, and don't have to carry the weight of a stove or the fuel... I do own a couple alky stoves, and a snowpeak ti burner, but actually prefer cookin on the fire considering i always build one... Currently using a handled cup.
The Cleaner
01-08-2013, 10:20
If you have teeth as good as a horse,stoveless is great:eek:.....
Good stuff. Nice thing about going stoveless is you are forced to improvise.
Important thing is to be able to make fire. Very sad when you leave it home.
bigcranky
01-08-2013, 12:42
Three words: no hot coffee!
Four words: Chocolate Covered Espresso Beans!
(Love'em. They are a staple food in my pack.)
As someone said earlier, a lot of what you hear about going cookless seems to be from people who have never given it a serious try. The visceral response to eating cold dinners often boils down to something like "yuck", but once you make the sort of mental shift it's really quite fine. Or at least it clearly can be for some people. I hiked the first thousand or so miles of the CDT stoveless, and got my stove mailed to me as pre-planned but actually had mixed feelings about getting it. More food variety, a little easier to resupply at smaller venues (gas station mini-marts and the like) but just a bigger hassle factor, to include obtaining and carrying fuel. I really like the ease and speed of going cookless. When I hiked the AT, my more veteran hiking companions went cookless and they had always finished their dinners while I was still heating my water.
"Non-cook food tends to be a heavier than cooked food (typically pasta), so the weight savings might not be as significant as you think."
I had heard this and assumed it was just a basic fact of hiking life, but I think the truth is a bit more squishy. One of the meals I regularly eat is based on potato powder. I carry exactly the same amount of food for that meal whether I heat the water for it or eat it cold.
The other thing I'd suggest is that if you want to go stoveless on a long distance trip, do so from the very beginning --- at a point where your metabolism is low and you shouldn't have to carry a lot of food weight per day yet. Couple that with the relative ease and frequency of resupply options on the AT, and stoveless from the start of that trip seems to me to have little offsetting "heavier/bulkier food instead" issue.
Starchild
01-08-2013, 15:47
The one thing I have noticed about stoveless thruhikers is it seems like the concept if a 'meal' quickly gets lost and it becomes grazing throughout the day. I'm not sure if that is better of worse, and I have never tried stoveless backpacking but the concept of a meal seems to me to be a anchor into a point of what it means to be human and loss if that may prove to be difficult but perhaps interesting to try.
Good luck
MAGS, I'm not wishing to argue with you (because, overall, we actually agree). I just want to push you a bit further regarding "WHY go without a stove?"--particularly on the AT. I don't think that anyone (thus far on this thread) has really presented a compelling case for going stoveless on the AT--other than as a matter of personal preference. Can you (or others) sell us on advantages of going stoveless--on the AT.
Why go without a stove? Because it is simple, easy and straight forward.
No worries about fuel.
Do people often experience much difficulty or hassle obtaining fuel on the AT? Is this really a significant issue that one must take into consideration on the AT?
At the end of the day, you just eat and while others are outside fidgeting with a stove
Are stoves REALLY that much of a hassle and such a time consuming bother? I usually cook while doing other things at the same time. So, I don't think that I waste much time at all on food preparation and using my stove. Of course, I tend to do freezer bag meals or dehydrated meals which just require boiling some water--and waiting for the meal to warm and rehydrate.
in the rain, you just eat too.
I will acknowledge that stoveless is VERY nice during a rainstorm. There are few things worse than waiting for a break in the rain to go out and cook--or actually cooking outside in the rain. But, I would counter with the idea that a hot meal, or hot coffee or hot soup can sure taste good (and mentally feel good) on a cold, rainy, dreary day. Seems to me, that the rain issue is pretty much a "tie" or a "draw"---between stoves and stoveless.
Out West, alchy stoves were banned in many areas this past year FWIW.
That is "out west". Generally no such problem on the AT---to the best of my knowledge.
On a hot day, eating a cold meal of cous cous and a chicken packet tastes darn good. (One of my favorite meals for summer backpacking, actually)
I don't disagree. However, nothing prevents a person (who has a stove) from eating such a cold and wonderful meal in hot weather. However, the person without a stove DOES experience a bit of a challenge in having a hot meal if/when they ever want one.
Is going stoveless for all situations and all people? No. Agree 100%.
But on higher mile solo hikes it can be a good option. I agree. However, how many AT hikers are actually doing solo hikes and high mileage days?
Just another tool to have in the kit and make use of. Agreed.
I see nothing wrong with going stoveless. I sometimes do it myself. I am just not convinced that (on the AT) going stoveless has very many clear advantages--except for a pretty small sub-set of hikers who are focused on high mileage days. (But, I am willing to be persuaded that I am might be wrong on this.)
Prain4u..you just answered your own question. :) It IS a a matter of personal preference. ;)
For the subset of hikers who do not want any or little fuss at the end the day, it is a great option. Believe me...cooking a meal CAN be a fuss when you are tired and the sun is starting to set. Raining? Ditto. Any getting fuel is not a hassle per se on the AT...but it is one more thing to do.
Heck, on a hut, muggy day in the mid-Atlantic, would I want a drink and a hot meal? :)
You may as well argue why someone would want pistachio ice cream on the AT when vanilla and chocolate is avail so readily.
Because it is an attractive option that works for some people. Many experienced thru-hikers included (on the AT no less!) like it as their personal preference.
I think your mistake is that you are " willing to be persuaded that I am might be wrong on this".
Huh? :)
Why the heck would I want to persuade you that your choice is wrong for you and your style of hiking ?
Don't like the idea? Cool.
To dismiss it an as option because it wouldn't work for you and can't see why it would work for others? Rather silly.
Some like chocolate. Some like vanilla. A few even like pistachio.
Which one is wrong for their taste? None of them! :D
Hikes in Rain
01-08-2013, 20:32
Four words: Chocolate Covered Espresso Beans!
(Love'em. They are a staple food in my pack.)
Oh, those are good, aren't they? Only real problem is they make me blur a bit around the edges as I vibrate....
I made a stove out of a fancy feast cat can that weighs .2oz http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pajkt594Ruw.
Dude, that's less than the weight of a lighter.
So, I used to cook until I met Trek (a few times) and Eric D. Asked lots of questions and changed accordingly.
One significant change was moving to no-cook mode.
Towns are pretty frequent and there are a TON of great no cook foods. To me, it makes this more about hiking than eating, camping, etc. More about calories and proper hydration - pig out in towns.
Eric D turned me onto SPAM single serving, new trail standard for dinner with pita bread and requisitioned mustard packets. (Cheese if I have any left)
The no cook list of food is extensive, new fav..............crunched up ramen with spices from home, eat without re-cooking, yummy!
The BEST camping spots have resulted from no-cook mode, as long as I have enough water to drink I am good to go, no cooking, no clean-up, less gear, simpler.
cliffordbarnabus
01-08-2013, 23:38
if you don't mind the not hot component, it's all about hydration. buy a kilo of pb, eat it, save the container. use it to hydrate whatever others are cooking....instant mashed potato, couscous, pasta, oatmeal, noodles, ANYTHING. just start the process first thing when you get to your destination and keep shaking it now and then and you're set like a jet!
I couldn't imagine not having a hot meal at the end of the day. If you want to save wt and vol, use the small esbit cooker. Weighs a few ounces and takes up no room and works as well as any cooker.
Cork alot of input to go over here and I have alot of my own pros and cons for going stove-less. Range of miles and average daily hiked makes a big difference on to stove or not. Without knowing your hike and only knowing mine I would stove-less when avg weekly miles is more then 125 in 6days a week and resupply every 3-4days. I always take a zero and a nero every 7days. When I'm early in my hike I like to go a slower pace and blend mail-drops and town supply and cook from scratch my good and hearty meals. I don't make coffee and have never made a hot meal for breakfast on the AT. Quaker Oats squares(now called Oatmeal to-go (http://quakeroats.elsstore.com/view/product/?id=623921&cid=38511)) and Little Debbie are my best friends for breakfast no matter if I stove or not.
State by state stove-less
I can't imagine stove-less in the North from Gorham on for a NOBO but don't doubt it's possible for a second. ME=not me
With good yogi skills and AMC huts south of Gorham stove-less would do well enough. NH=yep-maybe
All of New England every other Gap has a stop if you want resupply and burger and a beer comes easy with semi-easy hitch VT,MA,CT=yep
Them waters is crap but mid-Atlantic area has so much civilization you can damn near have a pizza delivered to the shelter every night NY,NJ=yep
Yuengling pours down your throat and sustains life and no re-supply needed PA=yep... I think thats what happened ;)
Lots of civilization close to every gap and quick marts too sometimes 3-4 days in a row I would be in a hostel every-everyother night MD, WV, n.VA
Options of every other gap get a bit weak from Front Royal to Waynesboro your in SNP and depending on Yogi skills but after that c.VA-GA no problem I hiked this area in cooler temps and allows you meats and cheese from the deli without worry. hostels every-everyother night that provide food or trail town with many pubs and hometown restaurants with sweet-tea that need immediate dental attention.
Wood cooking I only did twice, 1st brought Jiffy pop up from town one night and cooked it up nicely and 2nd time coming out of Hanover, NH I bought a 1lb Delmonico from the co-op and hiked it to the shelter 10ish miles up YUUMMMMY! Over all I enjoy the meals when cooking and love the efficiency of stove-less as meals prep goes to <5mins but eat many of the same things for lunch and dinner.
Everything you decide to do is trading 1 complication for another, thats why hike your own hike is the best answer.
daddytwosticks
01-09-2013, 08:15
Two or three Esbit tabs. A titanium wing stove. A small piece of aluminum foil. How much do these items weigh? 3 or 4 ounces? Keep them burried in your pack and use when needed. You are going to carry some sort of cup or bowl to eat cold stuff out of? Make it something like a ti or aluminum mug (ie: Snow Peak 600) and you are set. :)
Thank you all so much for the opinions and advice. Lots to think about..... :)
See you out there!
SassyWindsor
01-09-2013, 21:03
Not going to happen, unless it's a day hike.
SunnyWalker
01-14-2013, 09:26
Cork: It depends on what you need to be comfortable. I have done and liked both methods. Depends on your pack weight you wish to achieve and situation. Like Mags says, in hot and muggy weather I don't eat much hot food. In cold rain, snow, etc., I like hot food and beverage. The alcohol stoves are pretty light (check out Caldera Cone system). Some hikers go without so much IMO that it seems that the hike is not a fun thing but something to be endured and endured with hardship. In the end its what you are comfortable with and what you are wishing to put out for money wise. I want to go as light as I can and also have fun and have some level of comfort. This is all moho (my own humble opnion).
If it works for you fine, no problem with that approach. I've even gone "stoveless" for a week while carrying a stove and fuel. Smart? Not particularly, but I just didn't feel like cooking.
I do enjoy a cup of coffee to start the day. That is one of my favorite times, sipping a cup of coffee while observing the early morning activities of nature. Even if I didn't want to cook, I would want this option.
Also, having a stove has been quite beneficial in a couple of instances when hypothermia became an issue. Shouldn't happen very often, and hasn't, but it does give you another tool when the sh$% hits the fan.
garlic08
01-14-2013, 15:02
It looks like all the points have been covered, including even a reference to my journal--thanks.
My only suggestion is to try what I did--start your hike with a stove and hike for several hundred miles. If you get tired of eating warm, salty glop and searching for fuel in trail towns, try putting the stove in a box and bouncing it up the trail for a several hundred miles. Repeat. At the end of your thru hike, you'll have an idea of what works for you.
On my second thru hike, I decided to commit to stoveless. That decision allowed me to try frameless packs for the first time, and got me below the ten pound threshold. I haven't looked back. I ate better and had better energy and better campsites and carried less water and enjoyed town stops more.... And I never have liked coffee.
please tell me about alcohol stoves being banned out west. Where, why?
please tell me about alcohol stoves being banned out west. Where, why?
In particular, open flames were being banned in many places out West last summer due to the unprecedented amount of wildfires last year.
So this pretty much means anything that is not a canister or white gas stove.
Doesn't help that one fire outside of Ft. Collins, CO was actually started by a negligent alcohol stove user. (http://www.dailycamera.com/ci_20654312/)
You are going to get mighty hungry watching me eat a hot meal. Why not carry a small esbit cooker with the tablets, thats what I do. Only a few ounces and dont have to worry about spilled fuel and takes very little room. It works as well as any cooker out there. So it takes a couple of minutes longer, time is normally abundant.
Blue Mountain Edward
01-15-2013, 18:42
No stove and pot means no hot food, coffee or tea. Bring a pot and cook over a fire occasionaly for variety.
SunnyWalker
01-16-2013, 00:54
I have an Esbit Stove and have used them. ONE drawback on Esbit is the aroma of the Esbit tablets. Some hikers find the aroma unpleasant. It has been described as a "dead fish" smell. You can overcome this by wrapping the stove and tabs, etc., in a couple of sealed freezer type bags.
Can you go without a stove, yea. but really your talking maybe 2 pounds ? you can make a cheap can stove, or buy one for 7 bucks on the ad ticker on the homepage. their weight is only about 6oz or less.... add in a wind screen, and mug or something light to cook in and your only up to about a pound. carry it till neals gap or franklin.. by then you will know if its something you want to keep to send back home.
Better to have it and not need it--than to need it and not have it.
daddytwosticks
01-16-2013, 08:13
I have an Esbit Stove and have used them. ONE drawback on Esbit is the aroma of the Esbit tablets. Some hikers find the aroma unpleasant. It has been described as a "dead fish" smell. You can overcome this by wrapping the stove and tabs, etc., in a couple of sealed freezer type bags. ...some hikers I have met smell worse than the dead fish Esbit odor. Funny thing is, these are the type of people who will complain the loudest when you light up an Esbit tab. :)
Better to have it and not need it--than to need it and not have it.
That's called the "suspender and belt" philosophy and explains why people carry too much crap at times.
Better to gain experience and know what you really need. ;)
I hope that I never need a first aid kit, but still take one.
I have yet to need a water filter for my style of backpacking, so I don't take it.
No sure why a stove is "needed" if the five days of food I am carrying don't require it. ;)
As for hypothermia, not going to discount the psychological aspects of a hot drink, but here's a quick quiz from a WFA course I took.
Someone is suffering from the early stages of hypothermia, what is the best thing to give them?
A) Diet Coke
B) Hot black tea
C) Cold orange juice
garlic08
01-16-2013, 11:33
...As for hypothermia, not going to discount the psychological aspects of a hot drink...
...especially when served by a warm spouse, right?
In my engineering days, I did some (unchecked) calculations that showed that the heat energy contained in a quart of 140F water (the hottest you can drink) is easily exceeded by the calories in a Snickers bar. And that doesn't include the heat lost while fussing with the stove out in the rain while you're shivering. Best thing to do is get into a dry sleeping bag and eat.
I actually have warmer evenings in camp, especially harsh weather camps (you know, snow blowing across the tundra at 13,000'), since I left my stove behind. It's easy enough to try for yourself.
colorado_rob
01-16-2013, 11:33
As for hypothermia, not going to discount the psychological aspects of a hot drink, but here's a quick quiz from a WFA course I took.
Someone is suffering from the early stages of hypothermia, what is the best thing to give them?
A) Diet Coke
B) Hot black tea
C) Cold orange juice given only those three choices, obviously the answer is orange juice, as it's most important to get calories into the victim. But: hot calories are even better, as there are more, er, calories involved, hence the better answer would be: 4) hot cocoa. This assume you have a quick way of heating the water, of course.
given only those three choices, obviously the answer is orange juice, as it's most important to get calories into the victim. But: hot calories are even better, as there are more, er, calories involved, hence the better answer would be: 4) hot cocoa. This assume you have a quick way of heating the water, of course.
Not an option. :) It was given on purpose by the instructor to show what most people think is true is false.
Much like most of the assumptions in this thread. ;)
.
In my engineering days, I did some (unchecked) calculations that showed that the heat energy contained in a quart of 140F water (the hottest you can drink) is easily exceeded by the calories in a Snickers bar. And that doesn't include the heat lost while fussing with the stove out in the rain while you're shivering. Best thing to do is get into a dry sleeping bag and eat.
Exactly! :)
(Though I am not hot, I am usually the one giving Adrianna the hot drink in camp! Ah..marriage. :D )
colorado_rob
01-16-2013, 14:12
In my engineering days, I did some (unchecked) calculations that showed that the heat energy contained in a quart of 140F water (the hottest you can drink) is easily exceeded by the calories in a Snickers bar. Well, I disagree with 140 deg being the hottest you can drink, as I drink essentially near-boiling water all the time (pour a cup of tea out of a boiling pot, take a sip, take another sip, repeat). but yes, agree, the hot-liquid heat calories involved are definitely dominated by food calories. My quick/easy calculations are:
Hot drink at 190 degrees, about 100 degrees hotter than your body (available energy to absorb, though if hypothermic, this number might be higher), call it two sups = 1 pound = 100 BTU's * .25 KCAL/BTU = 25 Kcal. Assuming your body runs about 40% efficient (rough guess), that means the heat of the drink is equivalent to about 62 food calories, about what, a third of a Snickers bar? Not hugely significant. But mentally, a hot drink does amazing things, I've seen it many times in the Colorado mountain winters up high. Not quite the same situation as the AT, of course.
Back to the OP: no question, no contest, I need my morning coffee (two cups) and evening tea every day, hence the main reason I'm carrying my 8 oz stove/pot and 7 ounces of fuel on my AT thru. I could easily switch to cold food for the AT though.
This setup is a little heavy, but I get a .5 liter boil in 2 min. Saves 40% fuel. I do love a hot meal.
Better to have it and not need it--than to need it and not have it.
That's called the "suspender and belt" philosophy and explains why people carry too much crap at times.
Better to gain experience and know what you really need. ;)
I hope that I never need a first aid kit, but still take one.
I have yet to need a water filter for my style of backpacking, so I don't take it.
No sure why a stove is "needed" if the five days of food I am carrying don't require it. ;)
For me, I still stand by the philosophy of "Better to have it and not need it--than to need it and not have it" in certain circumstances. (Your Mileage May Vary)
A lightweight stove and a small amount of fuel is a minimal amount of extra weight. Yet, it greatly expands your food and resupply options--on a long hike, with multiple resupply points--where you don't know what the resupply points will be carrying in terms of food. Some people are comfortable with limiting themselves to whatever the "stoveless" food items might be at a resupply point. I want to have more options open to me. (On certain occasions, cooked food and the necessary fuel, can be a lighter option than the cookless options which are available).
I have rarely used my first aid kit in 40 years of hiking. Yet, I carry a first aid kit. "Better to have it and not need it--than to need it and not have it"
On a 3-5 day hike--when the weather forecast DOES NOT call for rain--I still carry rain gear 9and at least a tarp to sleep under).
"Better to have it and not need it--than to need it and not have it"
I have rarely needed my compass on most marked trails, Yet, I carry a small compass just in case I were to get lost or greatly disoriented. "Better to have it and not need it--than to need it and not have it"
I PERSONALLY chose to put a lightweight stove in that same category--if I am going to need to resupply--and I don't know what the resupply point will have in terms of food. I want more options open to me.
takethisbread
01-25-2013, 18:55
The advantage of going stove less is simplicity more than weight. I often like to go stove less bc I have less to think about or distract me in the evening and morning. Going for big mileage, stove less means less time stopping for meals less packing up time, less washing, less water collection needs, ect. It's a great choice for one seeking simplicity and miles
I tried going stoveless when I first started distance hiking. Eventually I learned that the experience is better knowing there is a hot meal waiting for me. A few ounces of stove and fuel were totally worth it.
MuddyWaters
01-26-2013, 14:28
Only about 1/5 of my calories require cooking, even with a stove.
Even carrying a stove, you are essentially eating cold food most of the time.
The hot food is for a bit of enjoyment.
If you dont want to cook at end of a particular day, or in rain, you have lots of other food to choose from.
Unless you are a rare person that eats only cold food at home, claiming hot food isnt psychologically boosting is ridiculous. People eat hot food, because we enjoy it.
Trying to convince others their reasons arent legit is stupid. You are only trying to convince yourself when you take that standpoint.
Why even bring a pack, why not carry everything in your arms?
Because your walk is more enjoyable, with the items in a pack.
People bring a stove , because hot food and hot drinks are enjoyable, and increase the pleasure of their hike experience.
SCRUB HIKER
Well said............as a Section Hiker I cannot comment on being out for months with no cooking
I was hiking with Trek & Eric D a few years ago, neither cook. They get up early, eat, hike all day, eat, sleep. Simple
To me its not about the weight, no cook is simpler, does not require camping near water for clean up...........pig out in town.
I also agree that I REALLY love a lot of the no-cook food options. Hummus, dried cherries, nuts, peanut butter, SPAM single, pita bread, bars, jerky, cheese, edamame, fritos, hard pretzels, ramen (fine just soaked in zip loc bag), instant mashed, oatmeal packets - soak in water, dried mango, tuna paks, pre-cooked bacon, ham jerky (check it out, amazing flavor!), carnation instant, sunflower seeds. Last hike I tried split peas, soaked them in a bit of water all day, like eating fresh peas at night.
The simplicity of no-cook mode has sharpened my focus on what I am out there to do, hike, re-connect and be out in the woods. I now hike later, more often than not to sunset.............find a great spot to tent, as long as I have enough water to drink I am good to go.
Tent up and get a bear bag hung, 5 minutes...........have a drink (or two), eat. Simple. Just open my food bag and begin munching.
Works for me...............when there is a fire I will occasionally heat up water in 6 oz titanium cup and "cook" the ramen or potatoes
Wise Old Owl
01-26-2013, 21:46
I wouldn't rely on wood cooking on a thru hike without refining the practice on shorter trips first.
At least you're going to bring a pot. That's a good idea, especially when it's harder to find liquid water because the streams are covered with snow. I don't cook and as such, I don't hike with a pot. That was a mistake once when I was above the snow line and couldn't find liquid water. I ended up melting snow in ziplock bags and plastic bottles next to a few. It took a very long time to get enough water to quench my thirst and carry enough water to make it to the next reliable water source.
I agree - takes some practice
That's called the "suspender and belt" philosophy and explains why people carry too much crap at times.
Better to gain experience and know what you really need. ;)
I hope that I never need a first aid kit, but still take one.
I have yet to need a water filter for my style of backpacking, so I don't take it.
No sure why a stove is "needed" if the five days of food I am carrying don't require it. ;)
As for hypothermia, not going to discount the psychological aspects of a hot drink,
Perhaps we are on the same page - but people pack what they are most afraid of and are willing to carry it.
Prime Time
01-28-2013, 20:13
If you're even thinking about it you should probably do it. In other words, many like me couldn't even imagine it, so we would say you should bring one. If you can see yourself satisfied with beef jerky or summer sausage, or peanut butter sandwiches, or pop tarts or candy bars for dinner or breakfast, then don't bother bringing a stove. If you get hungry for hot cooked food, then buy one.
hauptman
02-02-2013, 01:44
As long as you do not become obsessed with energy bars(expensive) this can work well. You can still enjoy the occasional hot meal with the advent of fire. Not every night, but sometimes you just want a warm tummy and the fire is a nice addition to any campsite.
stranger
02-02-2013, 02:45
I'm 32 and have been hiking and backpacking since I could walk. I've hiked a few sections of the AT but I'm currently planning my first thru-hike. To keep weight down I'm considering leaving the stove at home. I'll enjoy hot meals in towns and do without on the trail. Any honest thoughts on this? Or what about a little wood cooking if I just brought a pot and didn't have to worry about fuel. I've done this before...but not sure how feasible it would be on the AT. Thanks for all the advice guys! See you out there!
I often go stove less on long hikes, it's not going to save you weight in my view, the weight savings will be off-set or may actually increase by eating whole food, I still prefer going stove less because you can eat anywhere, anytime, no water needed, no fuel, wind and temp is irrelevant, no clean up, etc...
Plus, a 1 liter pot is so awkward to pack, if you are worries go with a 700 mil titanium mug, light windscreen and 2-3 fuel tablets just in case, coffee , ramen, soup, etc...
takethisbread
02-09-2013, 09:04
I concur with the previous post. Stove less is often equal to overall greater pack weight. The advantage more freedom to stealth camp. More hiking time, less obsession with finding water.
Carry-On
02-09-2013, 14:18
I hiked about 1500 miles of my 2012 thruhike without a stove. I was fine without it, but don't think I saved any weight over getting the stove. What I liked about it is that I enjoyed the "real" food of peanut butter, trail mix (nuts), cheese, sausage, etc. I think I got more protein eating stoveless. Also, I had much more freedom and flexibility of campsites because I didn't have to camp near water, or haul cooking water to a camp further along.
However, as I hiked in PA in October it was very cold last year and I began to wish for hot food. I found a pocket rocket stove setup in a hiker box in Delaware Water Gap, so I picked it up, along with the ramen and pasta sides that were there and the fuel canister, too. I began to use it, but didn't totally change the other foods that I always liked, so it didn't save me any weight by going to lighter food, if that makes sense. The kinds of food I like while backpacking are just heavier foods, and that didn't change once I had the stove, except for adding ramen, hot chocolate and hot coffee to my meals. In the cold, the best benefit of all for my stove was heating water for a hot water bottle at night, but that hot chocolate or hot ramen after hiking for hours in the dark, cold rain was wonderful. I never cooked in the morning.
I hiked about 1500 miles of my 2012 thruhike without a stove ....SNIPPAGE ... Also, I had much more freedom and flexibility of campsites because I didn't have to camp near water, or haul cooking water to a camp further along. .
However, as I hiked in PA in October it was very cold last year and I began to wish for hot food. I found a pocket rocket stove setup in a hiker box in Delaware Water Gap,
Thanks for providing an assessment of what worked for you.
The beauty of gear: You can swap out, change and adapt as the situation calls for. Having to use just one piece of gear (or system) would make for a limited outdoor experience. :)
For those of you who think a warm meal warms you up at the end of the day..... the hot food isn't what warms you up.
It's the calories in the food that does it. 1000 ice cold calories is better than 500 blazing hot calories for warming you up.
Carry-On
02-09-2013, 15:04
For those of you who think a warm meal warms you up at the end of the day..... the hot food isn't what warms you up.
It's the calories in the food that does it. 1000 ice cold calories is better than 500 blazing hot calories for warming you up.
I know this is true. And my next comment is not to argue, and is a little bit off topic, but may be another reason to carry a stove (or some heat generating source) in cold weather.
As an EMT I learned to remove the person (myself) from the cold, remove wet clothes (get in your sleeping bag) and apply heat (like a hot water bottle or hot hands packet) to the neck, groin or armpits because those are your largest arteries and that heats your blood, therefore your body, the fastest. Drinking/eating the heat is much less effective than applying it externally at the places I just listed.
For those of you who think a warm meal warms you up at the end of the day..... the hot food isn't what warms you up.
It's the calories in the food that does it. 1000 ice cold calories is better than 500 blazing hot calories for warming you up.
But a 1000 warm calories is better than 1000 cold ones. It takes time to digest the calories, even quick ones from simple sugars. A hot beverage... especially one with those simple sugars like hot chocolate is extremely warming. One also cannot discount the emotional factor either. There are some who eat only for calories, there are some who like to enjoy it. Just wait until we have soylent green nutrition bars.
But a 1000 warm calories is better than 1000 cold ones. It takes time to digest the calories, even quick ones from simple sugars. A hot beverage... especially one with those simple sugars like hot chocolate is extremely warming. One also cannot discount the emotional factor either. There are some who eat only for calories, there are some who like to enjoy it. Just wait until we have soylent green nutrition bars.
I get that. But I think it's a mistake to assume that there is a built in emotional advantage to eating something warm or that warm foods are better than cold folds just because the temperature is higher. A Snickers bar is just as satisfying as a cup of hot chocolate (to me...)
It's all about what you're conditioned to doing. You can condition yourself to enjoy different things - like eating something that isn't warm and being just as satisfied.
FWIW, sometimes I carry a stove and sometimes I don't. The main reason I do is because I get bored sitting around after a day of hiking and cooking gives me something to do.
I know this is true. And my next comment is not to argue, and is a little bit off topic, but may be another reason to carry a stove (or some heat generating source) in cold weather.
As an EMT I learned to remove the person (myself) from the cold, remove wet clothes (get in your sleeping bag) and apply heat (like a hot water bottle or hot hands packet) to the neck, groin or armpits because those are your largest arteries and that heats your blood, therefore your body, the fastest. Drinking/eating the heat is much less effective than applying it externally at the places I just listed.
You're an EMT and I've only had a weekend of wilderness first aid so I'll defer to you on this one but we were taught that an ice cold non-diet coke would be better to give a hypothermic person than a cup of hot coffee.
Totally agree about getting warm from the outside in. Anything you ingest very quickly reaches body temperature.
Wise Old Owl
02-09-2013, 15:37
Cooking 10-k, heating food above body temperature reduces the energy needed to absorb the calories - source - Nova PBS.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
For those of you who think a warm meal warms you up at the end of the day..... the hot food isn't what warms you up.
It's the calories in the food that does it. 1000 ice cold calories is better than 500 blazing hot calories for warming you up.
Noted that before myself.
In fairness, I think Carry-on was (initially) talking about the psychological aspect of hot food.
On a cold and rainy day, a cup of hot soup is pick me up for many people.
OTOH, a Snickers bar may have more calories and probably more effective overall.
Esp when you consider you have to get out the bag, go into the rain, light up the stove, cook your soup and then get into the bag again to eat said cup of soup. The Nova special is right on basic level..but not on a real world backpacking level. :)