BushBuddy/Bush Cooker

[myotis]

I am sure I read that the Bush Cooker by Qvist was the BushBuddy made under license because Fritz didn't want the problems of selling to Europe, but in an interview here

http://hikinginfinland.blogspot.com/2009/11/interview-fritz-handel-from-bushbuddy.html

he makes it obvious that this is not the case.

What do you think of the Bushcooker wood stove, and other wood stove designs out there? Do you maybe even own some of them?

I have mentioned the Trail stove and the Caldera cone. I do not own either of these stoves, but I think both are good stoves for wood burning, though with the drawback of charring the ground. I have not used the Bushcooker, but it appears to be very similar to the Bushbuddy. I did notice on the Outdoor Station video with Bob Cartwright that the internal construction of the Bushcooker is different, there is no ashpan below the grate. The primary air comes in through holes around the side of the lower part of the firebox wall, below the grate. This would make the stove easier to manufacture, eliminating the need to make the ashpan, and potentially lighter. There would be less shielding of the bottom of the stove from the radiant heat of the fire with this design, but that may not be as important to many people as making a good, useful stove available at a lower price.


I have tended to assume that these were effectively the same stove, and that comments about lighting/using either stove were interchangeable, but if this is correct, this is obviously not the case.

Graham

 

[JonathanD]

I have both, apart from the wording around the top they are exactly the same in terms of design and manufacture. I wonder if he is talking about another Bush Cooker that has been made. There certainly is an ash pan on both the Buddy and the Qvist Cooker.

 

[myotis]

I did think they looked the same, it looks as if Fritz has got himself confused.

Thanks,

Graham

 

[springer5]

Anyone have any experience of the BB Ultra and how it compares to the standard version ?

 

[JonathanD]

Anyone have any experience of the BB Ultra and how it compares to the standard version ?

Didn't know they did one.

 

[Paul_B]

Isn't the ultra the version designed for a trip to Alaska and the high mountains up there by Ryan somebody or other? He did a long expedition to climb some big mountain up there and needed some lightweight stove option hence wood burning stove as you don't have to carry the fuel. The Ultra IIRC is a lighter version probably made of titanium. It is an expensive stove whereas the Bushcooker is relatively a lot cheaper.

There was a lot of controversy in the BPL.com forums about the bushcooker I think. The bushbuddy designer and some others had comments to say about how the bushcooker was the same (or similar) as the Bushbuddy. I don't know how true that is but I can assume they are close enough in design to make the controversy.

There's always the honey stove as well which is better for a lower space in your bag. You can make your own stove quite easily as there are plenty of similar stove designs online using paint tins for example.

The Caldera Cone does come in titanium that allows it to be used as a wood burning stove but as I understand it this design is not as efficient as the wood gas type of stove.

Also there are several ideas as to how to load and light these stoves. One idea is to burn from the top down the other is just light the thing and get going, feeding it as you go. The top down burn means once the load is burnt out then you can only re-load it not whilst it is still burning. I think anyway.

 

[JonathanD]

The Bushcooker is an exact copy of the BushBuddy, no question. It was said that they were licenced for the European market.

 

[Toadflax]

I've said this before in other threads, but if I could only get one, I'd get a Honey Stove. It is heavier, but less bulky, than the Bushcooker (though the Bushcooker can go inside a billy).

People who like the Bushcooker /Bushbuddy seem to really like them, but I do struggle to make mine work well - it needs a lot of attention.

The Honey Stove (which some people really just class as a posh hobo stove) is, IMHO, much easier to use and doesn't need constant attention.


My tuppence worth.



Geoff

 

[Carbuncle]

Back to the OP, I think the Bush cooker stove reffered to is not this
http://www.bushcooker.com/
but this
http://www.fourdog.com/index_files/bushcooker.htm

Another wood gas stove, but a little different in design.

 

[JonathanD]

Back to the OP, I think the Bush cooker stove reffered to is not this
http://www.bushcooker.com/
but this
http://www.fourdog.com/index_files/bushcooker.htm

Another wood gas stove, but a little different in design.

Yeah, that would make sense.

 

[Paul_B]

Or this

http://www.qvist.nl/AA ADVERTENTIES/BushCooker.jpg

I think Qvist are the manufacturers of the bushcooker. Interestingly Qvist sells the honey stove which is a PodcastBob design made and sold by him at BPL-UK. Qvist also sells a few other designs of hobo or wood burning stoves. A neat design (if heavy and expensive) is the one that has hinges in the corners and the middle of opposing sides. The side hinges obviously fold inwards to create a folded stove the size of its sides and probably quite thin. i have seena better version of the square woodburner made out of flat punched steel plates. Kind of like the honey stove although that is a more flexible design IMHO and from experience of a little play with mine. The 09 honey that is that I bought to try out then decided it didn't suit my style of camp cooking. I'm not a woodburner type when backpacking. Should sell it along with my Trangia mini clone and probably other stoves I've got lying around.