on or off canister burner?
- Thread starter stooboy
- Start date
-
Hey Guest, Early bird pricing on the Summer Moot (29th July - 10th August) available until April 6th, we'd love you to come. PLEASE CLICK HERE to early bird price and get more information.
Hi folks,
No one has mentioned the Jetboil......I use it with the accessory kit ie the 3 leg stabaliser and the pot convertor. I also have the hanging kit and am more than happy with the whole thing. I use boil in the bag meals so its a great way to heat them. So for my part On canister works, just remember to put in the canister in with you wen you go to sleep so gas is warm in the morning.
pip pip
John
No one has mentioned the Jetboil......I use it with the accessory kit ie the 3 leg stabaliser and the pot convertor. I also have the hanging kit and am more than happy with the whole thing. I use boil in the bag meals so its a great way to heat them. So for my part On canister works, just remember to put in the canister in with you wen you go to sleep so gas is warm in the morning.
pip pip
John
Warthog beat me to the primus can supports. Note these fit best with primus cans but do fit others. Just note that the lip that goes over the folded lip at the base of the cans is loose with coleman and other cans but I'm guessing they are perfect for the primus ones. I always use primus powers gas whenever possible but when you leave behind your cans on a trip you have to use whatever you want. That means a cheapo, non-branded cans or colemans which don't work as well. The MSR or PRimus are the best cans IMHO.
I use can top whilst backpacking or remote can if car camping. There is no option for that. Also, I have never had a problem with a gas can with a can top stove in winter before now. They all bring water to the boil and faster than my various meths stove. As far as Naptha goes as a fuel it is not as convenient as gas or meths IMHO. Priming and weight of the burner are too much of an issue for me. It is a shame as I can get free kero for a multi fuel stove but they are too heavy.
My new preference is meths and in particular the whitebox stove. You really must try one.
I use can top whilst backpacking or remote can if car camping. There is no option for that. Also, I have never had a problem with a gas can with a can top stove in winter before now. They all bring water to the boil and faster than my various meths stove. As far as Naptha goes as a fuel it is not as convenient as gas or meths IMHO. Priming and weight of the burner are too much of an issue for me. It is a shame as I can get free kero for a multi fuel stove but they are too heavy.
My new preference is meths and in particular the whitebox stove. You really must try one.
BTW Cunninghams in Betsy in Snowdonia did sell the full brunton kit. Last summer they were selling the brunton can top stove and a UL pot for the price of the stove only! That was a v good deal but I had a v light and v good UL gas stove already. They also sold the remote feed base as well. All at v good prices. And I do not have any connection with them. The Betsy shop is much better than the local one in Ambleside IMHO as that just seems to be a Jack Wolfskin and a Paramo stockist with little else of interest.
The Brunton off canister stand...
http://www.brunton.com/product.php?id=596
Anyone know of a UK retailer?
http://www.brunton.com/product.php?id=596
Anyone know of a UK retailer?
The biggest advantage to having a remote gas supply other than stability is a safety issue, a considerable one at that. With a 'stove on can' type you need to be careful with wind screens. If it surrounds the stove too closely the heat can build up in the cartridge to a dangerous degree. With a screen around it and a pot on top a lot of the heat tends to be thrown downwards, towards the cartridge. Some designs have a reflector below the burner to recuce this effect but with the mini jobbies like the crux it's something to be aware of.
With a remote cartridge stove this doesn't matter so you can surround the stove properly, reducing boil times and saving fuel.
With a remote cartridge stove this doesn't matter so you can surround the stove properly, reducing boil times and saving fuel.
The Jet Boil is a really good stove if you are wanting to heat boil in bag meals or make up dehydrated food and hot drinks.... I like it more than my Crux TBH and it's way more efficient, I just use the bigger 230g canisters which give it a good stable base. For me on or off canister doesn't really matter gas stoves perfom well enough and are pretty fuss free and as long as your sensible with them they're safe enough... Folks tramped and camped with the old 'Bluet' for years and with a 190G pierceable canister.
The trouble with Jetboil PCS is the total package weight. It's whole purpose is to boil water fast and efficiently and when it came out it was hailed as a major advance. Since then the other stoves have got better. The question is with this is whether it saves enough gas compared with a simple light can top stove such as the crux on a trip to counter the 400g or so penalty in the PCS. My stove will use only one 100g primus power gas can in about 6-7 days the way I use it on a trip. So the can weighs 125g, the stove weighs 86g, my pot weighs 100g = 311g all in.. The PCS weighs 425g + can at125g = 550g. The question is how can you save 239g of gas in a week based on those figures? You can't. those are my figures for the amount of gas used and are taken over a few trips so for me is accurate.
It is a great stove but is not the answer if weight is the main issue and you typically only do 1 week or less per trip. Bear in mind that the PCS was all about weight saving through efficient gas use it means you need several weeks to make up such a big weight penalty. Thats just my view of it.
It is a great stove but is not the answer if weight is the main issue and you typically only do 1 week or less per trip. Bear in mind that the PCS was all about weight saving through efficient gas use it means you need several weeks to make up such a big weight penalty. Thats just my view of it.
I find it boils the same amount of water quicker than the crux and it's better in the wind and the fact the pot locks onto it means you can really prod and poke and stir the pot without fear of the pot falling off. With the crux and it's tiny trivet you have to be cautious in my experience.
I'm not sure where your 400g penalty comes from???
Your crux set up is 311g and your PCS set up is 550g so that's 239g difference so the penalty for useing a PCS over a crux is 239g isn't it?? Plus if you're counting the grams you have to allow for a method of lighting the crux as mine doesn't come with a Piezo where as the PCS has one ...
What you need is a TI Crux. Ive got one and it's very light weight but you loose the ability to fold up the burner...
Last edited:
As Johnboy said the JB is a great water boiler, but limited plus stoves like this will suffer poorer performance in the cold as the gas gets cool; this can be offset by 'flipping' the gas can on remote stoves.
I'm now a true convert to the ETA pans (similar to the JB because of the heat exchanger) but you can use them on pretty much any stove.
Talking of Bluet stoves, I was recently gifted a new in box S200 of which I have many fond memories (of this model) from years gone by.
I'm now a true convert to the ETA pans (similar to the JB because of the heat exchanger) but you can use them on pretty much any stove.
Talking of Bluet stoves, I was recently gifted a new in box S200 of which I have many fond memories (of this model) from years gone by.
Rik.. I use a JB becasue it's so dammed handy... Everythings in one handy package and it's well made ( or at least the one with the primus valve is) and it works really well.. in Cold conditions or up in the snow It's either an XGK or Optimus Explorer... More often than not the Explorer as it nice and quiet....
What I said John, its good for what is is, a water boiler (most of the time)
My lads got one and he likes it For real food then I'd go for a Nova or Omnifuel or XGK (late xmas pressie off the kids) but my favourite as I no longer hike is still a 111.
Last edited:
Johnboy - I use a primus with pz ignition weighing only 86g. I find I use whatever is to hand to create a windbreak so that isn't an issue for me. It is very easy to make it level where I use it, i.e. in the fells, where I just use my heel to create a can sized circular indentation in the ground to hold the can. This means there is no advantage to me having a pot that clips in. I use an AGG 3 cup pot which is pretty dammed close to the PCS capacity, At least it has enough room for water for a brew and to re-hydrate food in one boil. It is also a highly efficient burner so the PCS efficiency is less of a bonus that you might think.
Doesn't the PCS PZ ignition fail? I've heard bad things about it on that burner. IME my Primus PZ system (easy trigger system) has not failed once to light the burner and that is after several years use.
I reckon if I used a heat exchanger pot I could get more gas efficiency but they are heavier than my pot so for overnighters there will never be a weight saving and even for longer trips I reckon it would take maybe up to 2 weeks before the extra pot weigh is negated.
My point being that if weight is the main criteria for a cooking system, which for the PCS it is meant to save weight on trips due to less gas useage, then the whole system needs to be looked at with a very critical eye. If weight is less of an issue than say having a neat system that clips together then PCS does seem to be a good idea. Personally I think it has the hype but for weight issues it has been blown away by modern meths burner systems for shorter trips (even by more simple gas burner systems) and for longer trips (many weeks) or high altitude or colder conditions then multi-fuels can be better. Hell for long trips in the right sort of terrain a good old wood burner or even a fire is best. In areas where you can't have fires then a wood burner such as a wood gasification stove is best for v long trips.
As someone who wanted a PCS from day 1 when it first came out I find it disappointing that it fails to make sense due to weight grounds. Another nice idea that makes sense but doesn't really work.
Doesn't the PCS PZ ignition fail? I've heard bad things about it on that burner. IME my Primus PZ system (easy trigger system) has not failed once to light the burner and that is after several years use.
I reckon if I used a heat exchanger pot I could get more gas efficiency but they are heavier than my pot so for overnighters there will never be a weight saving and even for longer trips I reckon it would take maybe up to 2 weeks before the extra pot weigh is negated.
My point being that if weight is the main criteria for a cooking system, which for the PCS it is meant to save weight on trips due to less gas useage, then the whole system needs to be looked at with a very critical eye. If weight is less of an issue than say having a neat system that clips together then PCS does seem to be a good idea. Personally I think it has the hype but for weight issues it has been blown away by modern meths burner systems for shorter trips (even by more simple gas burner systems) and for longer trips (many weeks) or high altitude or colder conditions then multi-fuels can be better. Hell for long trips in the right sort of terrain a good old wood burner or even a fire is best. In areas where you can't have fires then a wood burner such as a wood gasification stove is best for v long trips.
As someone who wanted a PCS from day 1 when it first came out I find it disappointing that it fails to make sense due to weight grounds. Another nice idea that makes sense but doesn't really work.
In 2 1/2 years of regular use the piezo on my PCS is still going strong..
From all of the blurb I read on the PCS the main reasoning behind it was it was very quick to boil water, most of the reviews I've seen tended to concentrate on that. The blurb I saw for the Primus ETA was more around low gas usage and 1 canister lasting for a couple of weeks etc... MSR's Reactor talks about wind proofness and also the appliance uses an inbuilt regulator to get the most out of the canister.
I think we approach it from different angles you're looking for the lightest possible stove 'system' so overall base load weight for your bergen is low. I'm just as happy to lug a Jetboil as I am a SVEA 123 (an 'old and heavy' stove but good fun to use).
Your point on efficiency is an interesting one.. Most branded gas stoves are pretty efficient these days ie they convert the potential energy in the LPG in the canister to useable energy in the heat output with little loss. The same cannot be said for pop can meths stoves but things like vargo triads are interesting. With meths the down side is the fuel has an inherently low calorific value 30MJ/Kg vs 118MJ/KG for butane IIRC. I agree this is no problem on a short trip but on a longer one you have to lug a lot of fuel. ( 2 weeks in the Pyrenees with a Trangia is no fun from experience) Effectiveness of this heat output is what concerns most outdoors folk 'is the flame going to heat my water / food effectively' that's where a good windshield and heat exchanger and even the cooking vessel size and material come into play. What the PCS does is remove those variables and gives you a fixed solution tailored to it's burner. It's interesting to note that the patent that Jet boil hold for the PCS in most countries except NZ ( which stops copies from popping up) is the method of clipping the pot and burner together everything else is prior art..
Primus make some really good stoves, but there're thinking of shifting the Estonian production to China so it'll be interesting to see waht happens there.
Cheers
John
John, I think the 'new' 123's from Optimus are now made in China.
Stoves and weight are all relative. 40 years ago it was normal for me to take a brass Primus stove, 1 pint of paraffin, and army billy cans/Bulldog set as my weekend cook kit which was then what we all did really. Gas stoves came on the climbing scene then with stoves like the Bluet and Primus Grasshopper which cut down the weight and we all switched to them. The gas stoves could not match the heat output of the paraffin stoves but like today, we all liked the ease of use, just turn on and light a match.
To be honest, if I was a youngster now I would imagine I'd be using a gas stove and maybe a multifuel stove in winter.
Stoves and weight are all relative. 40 years ago it was normal for me to take a brass Primus stove, 1 pint of paraffin, and army billy cans/Bulldog set as my weekend cook kit which was then what we all did really. Gas stoves came on the climbing scene then with stoves like the Bluet and Primus Grasshopper which cut down the weight and we all switched to them. The gas stoves could not match the heat output of the paraffin stoves but like today, we all liked the ease of use, just turn on and light a match.
To be honest, if I was a youngster now I would imagine I'd be using a gas stove and maybe a multifuel stove in winter.
It all started in 2001 with a simple but powerful idea. Frustrated with heavy vacuum bottles and clunky stoves, Jetboil founders Dwight Aspinwall and Perry Dowst set out to make outdoor cooking easier.
They discovered that the secret to a fast and friendly design lies in increasing heat transfer efficiency. Alternating between lab and mountains, a series of designs were subjected to intense experimental and field testing. The result is a series of products as reliable as they are remarkable; as usable as they are unique.
Taken from their website. IIRC they started by banging on about efficiency and weight but now seem to be concentrating on speed and ease pf use (it all clipping together). Anyway there was a lot of hype at the beginning about efficiency and carrying less gas. I believe people back then in the UK were further back in the UL backpacking process, now a lot of us are more aware of the wieght issues and are more critical. Yet there still appears to be a perception that efficiency of fuel is the only issue. The BTU is a bit of a red herring as well. You have to assess the total fuel, stove, pots and other accessories as a whole for each trip if weight is your priority. That is all I'm saying. My view is that it is better to have the right tools for the job in hand. For me that means carrying the lightest gear that will perform the duties required of it. I have no problems with sitting and waiting for the water to boil. For me I like to reduce my pack weight. That means if the predicted conditions are suitable I will use the whitebox stove, a meths stove that is probably one of the most powerful meths burners I've tried. It boils enough water to re-hydrate a meal and make a small brew in about 7-8 minutes. Now in very cold conditions I prefer to use a remote canister gas stove with a pre-heat. Since I rarely go out in winter conditions I can often get away with the WBS or my primus without the heavy remote gas stove going. My system works for me for a range of conditions and trips. I do accept UL meths systems work well for short trips up to about 1-2 weeks. I have seen online some research into different stoves and fuels with regard to efficiency with fuel and weight. There are some variations between the results of different research but the gist of it is a UL meths up to about 1-2 weeks, a lightweight gas system (not a heat exchanger system but a simple, high efficiency,standard burner) goes from then until the petrol and multifuel burners kick in. I'm not that fussy I'll use a UL meths burner or a UL gas burner depending on my mood. Both these systems are light enough for me but the PCS is a mixture of too expensive and too heavy for my liking.
I've never used a multi fuel stove before. I can't afford to spend on it knowing I won't need it. I do however have a free source of kerosene and it is the fuel that costs the most over time. I am also aware that multi fuels are more tricky than gas and meths burners to use. I do want to try one out though.
They discovered that the secret to a fast and friendly design lies in increasing heat transfer efficiency. Alternating between lab and mountains, a series of designs were subjected to intense experimental and field testing. The result is a series of products as reliable as they are remarkable; as usable as they are unique.
Taken from their website. IIRC they started by banging on about efficiency and weight but now seem to be concentrating on speed and ease pf use (it all clipping together). Anyway there was a lot of hype at the beginning about efficiency and carrying less gas. I believe people back then in the UK were further back in the UL backpacking process, now a lot of us are more aware of the wieght issues and are more critical. Yet there still appears to be a perception that efficiency of fuel is the only issue. The BTU is a bit of a red herring as well. You have to assess the total fuel, stove, pots and other accessories as a whole for each trip if weight is your priority. That is all I'm saying. My view is that it is better to have the right tools for the job in hand. For me that means carrying the lightest gear that will perform the duties required of it. I have no problems with sitting and waiting for the water to boil. For me I like to reduce my pack weight. That means if the predicted conditions are suitable I will use the whitebox stove, a meths stove that is probably one of the most powerful meths burners I've tried. It boils enough water to re-hydrate a meal and make a small brew in about 7-8 minutes. Now in very cold conditions I prefer to use a remote canister gas stove with a pre-heat. Since I rarely go out in winter conditions I can often get away with the WBS or my primus without the heavy remote gas stove going. My system works for me for a range of conditions and trips. I do accept UL meths systems work well for short trips up to about 1-2 weeks. I have seen online some research into different stoves and fuels with regard to efficiency with fuel and weight. There are some variations between the results of different research but the gist of it is a UL meths up to about 1-2 weeks, a lightweight gas system (not a heat exchanger system but a simple, high efficiency,standard burner) goes from then until the petrol and multifuel burners kick in. I'm not that fussy I'll use a UL meths burner or a UL gas burner depending on my mood. Both these systems are light enough for me but the PCS is a mixture of too expensive and too heavy for my liking.
I've never used a multi fuel stove before. I can't afford to spend on it knowing I won't need it. I do however have a free source of kerosene and it is the fuel that costs the most over time. I am also aware that multi fuels are more tricky than gas and meths burners to use. I do want to try one out though.
I think that BTU being a red herring is a bit of wishful thinking or an inconvenient truth when it comes to meths stoves and pop can stoves in particular.
Ive made a few meths 'pop can' stoves and used the Trangia and Clickstand and optimus trapper all of which I like a lot. Meths leaves a lot to be desired as a fuel and if youre chasing grams in the Bergen I dont see how it makes sense TBH.
Lets compare 2 lightweight stove setups. Lightweight gas and Pop Can meths.
Ok system weights:
LW Gas
TI Crux = 48g ( weighed myself)
Alpkit MyTi cup / pot = 110g ( from Alpkit website including lid)
230g 80/20 butane propane gas canister = 336g
System weight = 494g
Pop can
Stove= 20g basic 2 piece construction holes in rim.
Pot support wire type= 15g ( you could use tent pegs or nails but 15g is representative I feel)
Alpkit MyTi cup pot = 110g
System weight = 145g
But the above does not include the fuel for the meths stove. So lets do some work on that.
Ok Methanol has a energy value of 23mj per kg and Butane ( the main constituent of a LPG canister) has an energy value of 118mj per kg
For our LW gas stove set up above we have a canister with 230g of LPG (lets use butanes value for this)
So 118 divide 1000 = 0.118 mj/gram x 230 = 27.14 mj of potential energy in the canister of 230g of butane.
What quantity of methanol do we need to equal this energy output?
So 23 divide by 1000 = 0.023 mj / gram I want to equal 27.14 mj so 27.14 divided by 0.023 = 1180 grams of meths required to give 27.14 mj or the same energy as is in 230g of butane.
The SG of meths is pretty much the same as water so thats over a Ltr of meths.
So the LW gas set up total weight 494g with 27mj of potential energy
Pop can set up total weight 1325g with 27mj of potential energy
Based on that calculation would you use a meths stove to reduce your pack weight?
The above is hypothetical in as much as it talks about potential energy in a given fuel. To release that energy we need to burn the fuel. That is where the efficiency of the burner comes into play. Most decent quality gas stoves will run at 90+% efficiency. Ive made a few pop cans and Id predict the efficiency to be at best 70% the yellowing on the flame is soot ( hence black pots on your Trangia) particles this is called incandesance and the soot is unburnt fuel so not all the fuel is getting converted to heat energy.
Then youve got to take the stove out into the real world and get it to perform. We could call this effectiveness. Its no use creating lots of heat energy if its lost or wasted. The Alpkit TI mug is to a degree a poor choice if were chasing joules ( opposed to grams) as Ti is not a good conductor of heat when compared to Aluminium for example so perhaps the grams we save on pot weight are lost in fuel weight carried and not conducted to useable heat. Then you have to factor in wind performance and heat transfer. So a good idea would be a stove that used an aluminium pot with a heat exchanger and was adequately shielded from the wind with gas as a fuel source.
food for thought....
