Feb 20, 2013 at 8:11 pm #1299515
Does one stove have a micro regulator? Why does the one stove remain lit and not the other.
Is there fraud involved?Feb 20, 2013 at 10:27 pm #1956731
@rcaffinLocale: Wollemi & Kosciusko NPs, Europe
The test is comparing two stoves with different internal designs. This is not fraudulent unless the intent is to fool the viewer.
An alky MUST have the alcohol boiling to get the flames out the side. No boiling, no pressure, no flames. That applies to any alky.
The White Box stove has the alcohol touching the bottom surface of the stove: sitting on the bottom. When you add cold water, the alcohol at the bottom is cooled to below boiling point. Since this is most of the alcohol, the stove dies.
The Cobalt stove does not die. Flames continue coming out. Therefore the alcohol cannot ALL be sitting on the bottom; some of it must be up the side and near boiling, to create the vapour and the pressure. This is a simple logical deduction (Jim). This can most easily be done with some sort of internal wick.
Comment: this much was obvious from the video. So then I checked around to see whether the Cobalt has an internal wick as predicted. Yes, it does.
Which is better? First, define 'better'.
Would the user normally wory about floating his stove in a bowl of water? Doubtful.
CheersFeb 21, 2013 at 6:56 am #1956789
Jim's thread about the Soto Microregulator made me think of the double wall stove and cold water video. A small change in design can make a big difference in performance of a stove in cold weather. The cobalt has wicking material within the walls that make it's jets light so quickly(fuel efficiency) The Soto regulator was surrounded with cold water just as the Cobalt and WBS. We surely don't do that out in the field. A small internal change in design can make a difference in performance.
It was indicated that the Soto video may have been fraudulant. Just wanted to say that a small change in design can make a difference.
The internal fiberglass wicking makes a big difference in "priming" time and the ability to remain lit when a cold pot of water is placed on the stove.
Not sure, but I think the WBS eventually switched to the internal wicking to improve performance. Maybe we can get Bill B. to chime in on his improvement.Feb 23, 2013 at 9:13 pm #1957946
The new model White Box Stoves have internal wicks. After adding icy water the White Box Stove did not go out. We added 7/8" of 36 degree ice laden water to the pan and the stove floated and continued to burn. Please people be smart.. do not do something foolish like this just to badmouth other stoves. Use common sense when you are using a stove.
There is nothing in nature that is equivalent to that except placing a stove in water and no one in their right mind (thinking personal safety here) would do that.
My guess is that most any stove with a wick will do the same thing. Don't get caught up in off the wall and possibly dangerous experiments like this.
Buy a stove, build a stove, whatever. It doesn't matter what brand or model just get out and have some fun. Enjoy the great outdoors. But do it safely!
Bill @ White Box StovesFeb 24, 2013 at 12:41 pm #1958174
The Cold Water and Fire demo worked for both of us. Just a way to show how a small modification to a stove could make it more efficient.
The stove makers in Japan must have made a small improvement to the Soto Micro-regulator. Now we have to ask why they would use the cold water ice cube demo :-)
Bill duplicated the internal wick design of the Cobalt and the ice water demo and is now ahead of the game. I'm flattered :-)
Dan @ zelphs-stoveworksFeb 25, 2013 at 6:03 am #1958410
Bill and others are invited to watch these videos that describe the procedures for imploding cans and just how safe the procedure is. Not saying this will ever happen if you did the experiment that Bill and I did with the WBS and Cobalt stove.
Keep in mind that Bill felt it safe enough to do the same experiment. If it works for Bill and myself it's safe. These are not off the wall and dangerous experiments as Bill might want you to beleive. Bill means well. Watch the videos:Feb 25, 2013 at 7:46 am #1958449
@jonfongLocale: FLAT CAT GEAR
A typical pressure regulator requires a higher source pressure than what is delivers (think about the pressure regulator on your house water). The original design is an open loop system. You crack the valve and the gas that is delivered is dependent on the fluidic drag. As the pressure drops (ice water), the output flow drops. With the regulator adding ice will reduce the source pressure, but as long as the valve is open above a certain threshold, the output would remain pretty steady. And like all regulators, as the pressure drop below the threshold, the output would drop like the unregulated system. I suspect that the system would work fine on a new canister, the questions is will you get the same response when the canister is only half full? Below is a diagram comparing their designs. JonFeb 25, 2013 at 8:30 pm #1958736
Quote from Zelph: "Keep in mind that Bill felt it safe enough to do the same experiment"….
Please do not assume that because it is not so. I did not feel safe doing this experiment. I will never do it again and I will tell everyone I know to not do it. The "what if" factor is to great. "What if" factor like the cans in the links Zelph shows above… what if the stove I was working with did that… man you would have burning fuel all over the place. After seeing the videos above I am wondering if the stove I used to do the experiment is still in good enough condition to use or if there is metal fatigue or something that would make it explode or implode next time I use it. I am gonna retire that one for sure just to be safe.
No more fooling around with cold water and hot stoves for me. All the rest of you should heed the same…. safety before senselessness.
Bill @ White Box StovesFeb 26, 2013 at 6:20 am #1958796
Thanks Yon for the diagram. seeing is beleiving. We can clearly see the Soto has a complex flow regulating system compared to the common regulator on the right.
Soto states that 1/2 turn on the common regulator opens the valve to max output. It takes 1 to 1.5 turns on the Soto just to get the flow started.
Looks like the common regulator has a screw thread that governs the movement of a needle valve to control flow. The Soto has a complex spring tension system that regulates flow. Soto gives us the ability to micro-manage our fuel via the regulator. Much more user friendly.
The ice cube video has a place where Soto uses the word "almost" when describing "output" of the two stoves. we can speculate that the Soto has less output at maximum valve opening. (smaller orifice at valve assembly) Not positive but the Soto valve looked like it took 7 turns to get the valve wide open and fewer for the common valve.
Soto also states that the burner head is concave for max efficiency. Makes me think the head design can give a "visual" appearance of larger flame than the common stove burner. If the orifice of the Soto is smaller, the speed at which the gas flow hits the burner head is higher. Does that make the visual difference in the Soto video, dunno. Lots of things to consider before we start yelling wolf as seen by Hikin_Jim
Years ago Tony Beasely taught us it's more efficient for a stove to heat our water slowly. The Soto Microregulator gives us that ability in a more user friendly manner. The Soto has the manual micro adjusting feature on the valve. In Jim's thread the word "automatic" adjusting was being used by some. No such claim by Soto.
The internal design of the Soto and the Coblat stove is what sets them apart from the rest. The differences equate to more efficient fuel usage. The Soto gives the ability to micro manage our fuel. The Cobalt needs no priming to get the jets to ignite in 15-20 seconds so we can put the pot on. Other stoves like the WBS and the Bios need that priming for faster jet ignition. Faster ignition means more efficient, less fuel expended before putting the pot on.
I agree with Bill. Don't do the cold water test with the Cobalt, WBS and Bios stoves or any other stove that you might make in a DIY project. My "living on the edge" days are over. No more "pi$$in contests" for me.Feb 26, 2013 at 1:34 pm #1958962
That's a really nice looking fish you've got there. What kind is it?
Regards,Feb 26, 2013 at 2:19 pm #1958979
First off I like your web site. Lots of good information out there.
The fish is just a carp. We bowfish a lot in Montana where they are a non-native species to our waters. This one weighted in at just under 30 pounds. They are also great fun to catch on a fly rod. Largest I've taken is 39 pounds.Feb 26, 2013 at 2:50 pm #1958993
Carp, eh? I caught one when I was little kid and my grandpa took me fishing up at Big Bear. It was 10#, 3oz. Darned near as long as I was tall. Grandpa had to help me land it. Ah, memories. Good times.
Take care,Feb 26, 2013 at 3:53 pm #1959015
Bill, are there any real fish in Montana :-)Feb 26, 2013 at 10:15 pm #1959137
There are real fish in Montana: trout, pike, walleye, bass, greyling, etc. Other than a few carp left to bowfish we sent the rest of the trash fish to Washington DC to spawn with the rest of the suckers in their own self polluted cesspool of politics.Feb 27, 2013 at 5:04 am #1959159
Bill, got any photos of some real fish you've caught? That goes for Jim also, any photos? Any real fish in California?Feb 27, 2013 at 10:29 am #1959263
Nothing but cute little minnows like this:
McLeod Lake, Sierra Nevada Mountains, California
The darned minnows here expect you to warm them up after you land them. Odd little fish. ;)
Feb 27, 2013 at 10:35 am #1959267
Of course my wife wan't much better than the "minnow" (that's my SMD Gatewood Cape she's wearing).
Pretty spot though.
Feb 27, 2013 at 5:15 pm #1959464
No good fish pictures but here is a picture of a mule deer whitetail deer cross buck I harvested last fall.Feb 27, 2013 at 9:15 pm #1959566
They cross? I didn't know that. How the heck does one tell?Feb 27, 2013 at 9:30 pm #1959569
Usually it is the whitetail buck mating with the mule deer doe. Ways to tell are from DNA testing and sometimes the body parts especially the tail will be different. In this case the cape coloration, facial features and big ears says mule deer and the horns and tail look like a whitetail.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.