Alcohol vs. Cannister Stove

I think given the trip duration and cooking style your choice would be more a matter of personal preference and convenience.

Personally, I'd take the canister stove if my hike was going to be one with long days or high mileage, (assuming you are cooking at the end of the day and not earlier), where you will arrive at camp really tired and don't want to fuss with the alcohol setup. The convenience of the canister stove would be nice in that situation. Also, if I thought the weather would be bad and I was going to be cooking in a tent vestibule, I'd give the edge to the canister stove.

Also, if I was going to stop in the afternoon for a cup of tea or coffee, I'd rather take the canister stove for a quick brew than have to setup an alcohol rig.

Good point about the potential need to cook inside the tent in bad weather — a canister stove provides much better flame control.

Any other scenarios where one would opt for a canister stove over an alky?

I'm a recent convert from canister to alcohol stoves. On shorter trips, in particular, there's no comparison. At first I believed that alcohol stoves would be a big hassle compared to the JetBoil, and yes they are not quite as quick… but the overall weight savings are worth the slightly longer time to prepare meals. I've never been that short on time that a minute or two would matter, but a pound of extra weight does matter… at least to me.

>>Any other scenarios where one would opt for a canister stove over an alky?

In times of high fire danger, a canister stove is safer. There is no possibility of spilling the fuel.

I've gone round and round with canister, alky and Esbit. In the end, I think it just comes down to personal preference. Leaving aside the weight of the fuel, the weight of the Snowpeak canister fuel container plus small stove is about 6 oz. vs. about 2 oz. for alky stove, windscreen, stand, and fuel bottle. So there's only about a 4 oz. difference here. Esbit is the lightest, but you have to be willing to deal with the residue on the pot.

"Any other scenarios where one would opt for a canister stove over an alky?"

The only times I choose canister over alky are due to convenience. I bounce back and forth between the two here in TN, but if I was spending any time in high heat during the summer, I'd definitely choose alcohol. When I lived in Ft. Lauderdale, I had a can of compressed air explode in my truck one summer. Fortunately I was not in the truck when it happened. I believe it also had butane or isobutane in it. If there is any risk of high heat for an extended period, I would definitely avoid any gas under pressure.

>>If there is any risk of high heat for an extended period, I would definitely avoid any gas under pressure.

Christopher, I had never thought of that. Do you think there is a possibility of a canister exploding in the field (as opposed to inside a vehicle)due to hot weather?

Dondo,

"Cars parked in direct sunlight can reach internal temperatures up to 131 F-172 F when outside temperatures are 80 F-100 F." (A DoT paper)

The highest recorded outdoor temperature is 134°.(NASA)

Warning: Wild Speculation –

Primus and Snowpeak know this and build in significant safety factors. I would guess their canisters are engineered to withstand 200°. That would give them a factor of 2 over a 100° temperature encountered in a hot outdoor situation.

(Roger – how about a little test? Say, drop a canister into boiling water?)

Caveat – not every manufacturing cycle is perfect. (Christophers's canister.)

So, unless you're in the desert at 130° you'll probably be OK.

My experience involved this:
http://www.chemtronics.com/products/product.asp?r=1&m=2&id=1
After looking at the can, it is 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane. I got it mixed up with something else from work that uses butane as a propellant.
It has still made me gunshy about pressurized gas in extreme heat. As George said above, temperatures in a vehicle will get hotter than the usual ambient temp (due to glass magnifying the sun's intensity). I also know that depending on where said can may be left could get hotter due to reflective heat from what it's resting on: sand, stone, dark colored items, etc. I can deal with an alcohol spill of a few ounces, even on fire, much easier than I can an explosion.
Vehicle roof and dashboard damage, along with a shattered winshield will teach a valuable lesson in physics and chemistry.
Chris

Yeah, rare freak incidents aside (not that they don't ever happen), I don't think I would worry about a canister self exploding.

The reason I posted my question… I am a minimalist at heart and hate clutter. If I have a piece of gear that I will rarely if ever use, I dislike keeping it in my gear closet. What for? Maybe sell it so somebody else can put it to good use. But I want to be sure I won't have "seller's remorse" down the road.

I am one of those folks that have had a canister explode. I have also had one discharge in my hand, losing all it's fuel at one while basically freezing my hand.

I still carry a canister in some circumstances. Car camping, two person luxury camping, severe weather forecast trips…but mostly I find alky or Esbit to be more than adequate provided you have decent wind protection and it's notlikely to be well below freezing.

> Primus and Snowpeak know this and build in significant safety factors. I would guess their canisters are engineered to withstand 200°. That would give them a factor of 2 over a 100° temperature encountered in a hot outdoor situation.
> (Roger – how about a little test? Say, drop a canister into boiling water?)

Argh! Read our published articles first!
http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/exploding_gas_canisters_the_hazard_of_overheating.html

Yes, canister heated in water until it blew, which happened just about boiling point.
Note: ALL screw-thread canisters must withstand 50 C (122 F), by law, without hazard.

Cheers

I am planning another long walk, but this time it'll be above the shrub and bush line, and I need warm food/drinks – at least i think I do — I guess I could go without, but would rather not.

In any event, suppose I have to carry all my fuel for a month. Would the upside-down jet boil be the most fuel efficient?

I am thinking in terms of total stove+fuel+cookpot weight needed to, say, heat to near boiling at sea level 2 gallons per day for thirty days.

It seems that a heavier but more efficient stove would win out on a long trip. Are the most efficiently burning stoves alcohol or cannister? And if it's cannister, are they sufficiently more efficient to justify the high weight costs in cannisters?

I looked around a little on these pages, but see no reference to the upside down cannister stoves which seem likely to burn every last gas droplet.

Do they?

Here's an old post from Skurka:

"The Jetboil may be convenient and a fuel miser, but I figure that I would need to boil about 43 LITERS OF WATER before the Jetboil's superior fuel efficiency would make up for its inferior weight relative to my own cooking system.

43 liters of water…When I am out I boil 1-2 cups per night, which means I would need to be out for at least 86 nights without resupply before I would ever reach this break-even point. By that point, a white gas stove might be more efficient than both stoves, so even after 43 L it still might not be the lightest stove.

The (presumed) fast boil time of the Jetboil does not weaken my argument: there are about 3-4 minutes between the the times required for a Jetboil to boil a half liter of water and an average performing alcohol stove to boil a half liter of water. In those 3-4 minutes I can be stretching out, starting a journal entry, looking over my maps for tomorrow's hiking, etc. — the minutes are completely irrelevant."

43 liters is about ten gallons, so this would mean Jet boil outdoes alcohol in any trip longer than 5 days or a week at my 2 gallons a day hot water consumption rate?

Roger,

"Argh! Read our published articles first"

There is so much good stuff buried here…
I would LOVE to be able to an intelligent search of BPL.

Please let me know when that is possible ;-)

And— Great article. I'm glad you did the testing. I'm sure I would have gotten hurt.

My guess would be that the race here is between an upside down canister gas stove and a white gas stove.

MSR XGK might be the best bet. Or a simmerlite

It looks like Skurka used an alcohol stove on the Great Western Loop…

GWL Gear List

I should have read Roman’s post fully. Two gallons a day..whoa. For that it’d definitely not be an alcohol stove for me. I see nothing wrong with a canister stove of any sort. The Jetboil would seem fine.

Roman,

Based on my memory of information from this site, cannisters will be more efficient. I don't know if upside down means every last drop, but if you're looking for that kind of efficiency, Yukio Yamakawa and Tony Beasley have fabricated some ingenious and featherweight burners compatible with remote cannisters and windscreens. Yukio's posts are common in the MYOG forum. I don't know of their stove's efficiencies.

Boiling 2 gallons for 30 days will require a lot of fuel of any sort. Not sure what would be most efficient, but hopefully you have resupply points. I usually only boil 2 to 4 cups per day and chemically treat the rest. My research indicates that Esbit with a Caldera Cone is most efficient for my volume (one 0.5 oz tab per day).

I understand the reason for upside down butane/propane canisters to be so that they work below freezing when the gas mix would fall below it's boiling point and thus no longer leave an upright canister. So the upside down versions are liquid flow, and then they preheat to boil the gas with a tube through or near the flame. This may or may not result in fully emptying the canister, but it is the most reliable in cold weather.

BTW the upside-down jetboil system is called the Helios. Weighs 28 oz without fuel, but boils a Liter in 3 minutes.

Roman,

If you need to boil two gallons a day, for 30 days, forget alcohol or cartridges and go with a white gas stove. It would be difficult to boil that much water with an alcohol stove and think of how many cartridges you would need to carry. A real bummer when the cartridges are empty.

I posted the system I have been using for years for extended ski tours when I have to melt snow for water. I have also used it at the opposite end of where you are headed.

http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/xdpy/forum_thread/10910/index.html?skip_to_post=79829#79829

Last winter I researched the possibility of using a reusable carbon composite cylinder for compressed gas. My idea was I could then use a Jet Boil or Reactor on longer high latitude or high altitude trips without having to deal with a bunch of canisters. Many roadblocks. The canisters are easy to get but finding a light-weight valve and somebody willing to fill it is another story.

Forrest

>>The reason I posted my question… I am a minimalist at heart and hate clutter. If I have a piece of gear that I will rarely if ever use, I dislike keeping it in my gear closet. What for? Maybe sell it so somebody else can put it to good use. But I want to be sure I won't have "seller's remorse" down the road.

Ben, before you sell your Snowpeak you may want to check with your local land managers. I've been told by a ranger here that alcohol stoves are not allowed when fire bans are in effect. The same may hold true in southern California.

Good to know. Thanks, Dondo.

Hi Roman

> In any event, suppose I have to carry all my fuel for a month. Would the upside-down jet boil be the most fuel efficient?
Not necessarily, and it might not really suit your needs either. The Helios looks to be rather heavy.
Bear in mind that the basic Jetboil stove was deliberately designed to be low power. I got that from mthe manufacturer – Primus.
Jetboil had some outrageous claim about boil speed when it was first released, but in practice it took about twice as long as claimed. Well documented here on BPL.

It was also claimed that Jetboil were fudging the results as well: starting at a higher 'summer' water temperature and only going until they got bubbles – which can be 95 C rather than 100 C.

> I am thinking in terms of total stove+fuel+cookpot weight needed to, say, heat to near boiling at sea level 2 gallons per day for thirty days.
Before making a suggestion, I have to ask WHY you might need to BOIL 2 gallons per day? What are you doing? If you are boiling the water to purify it, that is an appalling method. If you are cooking for a group, OK. But I cannot see how a solo walker would need that much boiling water per day.

Now, fuel for a month. On our last three long trips in Europe, I used one 450 g gas canister per fortnight for two of us for all our cooking needs in the mountains. We can start with that figure.

Would white gas be lighter? No way. I have records for many years of use, and my experience is that you would need maybe 50% more white gas (by weight) than butane/propane mix. A major loss factor is the priming and the hassles of restarting during dinner. That is before you add the weight of the tank and the pump and the priming gear and …

What to use? That depends a bit on how many you are cooking for. I used a Snow Peak GST100 stove with an MSR Ti pot in Europe. You could switch to a heat exchanger pot, but I have some reservations about how much fuel weight you would save. Other stoves come to mind, but more details are needed about your trip.

Cheers

The simple answer is: when time or durability is more important than weight.
I own and recommend caldera cones and alcohol stoves, but when I need liter after liter of boiling water as quickly as possible, or I'm going to be sitting on my pack and basically stressing my gear; a canister setup has advantages.

Backing up what Roger has said my tests (independent of BPL) also show the Jetboil taking twice as long as claimed to bring water to the boil. Fuel efficiency is good – the problem is the weight of the components. If there was a Jetboil with a light aluminium or titanium pot that weighed much less than the current models then it might be a good choice. You could get a Primus EtaExpress pot with heat exchanger (available separately from the stove), which at 290 grams is the lightest pot/heat exchanger combination currently available. That's still heavy compared with a titanium or light aluminium pot however so the question would be working out at what point the weight of fuel saved due to the greater efficiency was greater than the extra weight of the pot.

I've compared the EtaExpress stove/heat exchanger/pot with a Primus Micron Ti. 2.5 (the most fuel efficient of the gas stoves without a heat exchanger in my tests). The results were that the EtaExpress should boil around 18 litres of water with a Primus 2207 220 gram canister and the Primus Micron Ti 2.5 with an Evernew 0.9 litre titanium pan and titanium windshield around 13 litres of water. The EtaExpress weighs 424 grams in total, the Micron combination 237 grams. I usually boil 2 litres of water a day so on these figures I would need to be carrying more than 6 days of fuel before the EtaExpress became a lighter option than the Micron though if I used the small 198 gram canister, which should last 6 days with the EtaExpress (I haven't tested this), the difference would only be 6 grams.

Using an upside down canister makes stoves more efficient in cold weather but not more fuel efficient. I wouldn't use a stove with this facility unless below freezing temperatures were expected to be the norm or I was boiling water for 3+ people due to the extra weight.

By the way, like Roger I'm curious as to why you need to boil 2 gallons of water a day.

Some of you likely remember the Arctic 1000. That was 620 miles (or so) in a bit more than three weeks.

On that trip Ryan used a Bushbuddy, while Jason Geck and I used a one gallon cook pot on fires. We filled that cook pot for breakfast and dinner and used every drop. At high mileage in the dry Arctic, we liked staying hydrated.

I am thinking about another high mileage trip in the high Arctic (two of us) and soupy meals and hot drinks are a key means of staying happy.

However, it could be that eating cold food and carrying more insulation would be a more efficient way to go.

I am thinking that temps will be in the 30s-40s F, sometimes cooler, rarely warmer. And windy.

So maybe the water doesn't need to actually boil, just hot enough to cook and drink. Let's say each day 8 liters of water at about 5 C has to be heated to 95 C. So that's like 90 * 8 * 1000 = 720,000 calories/day (little c).

Someone told me that cannister stoves were the most efficient at converting fuel to heat; the jetboils heat exchangers seems very clever, and at 0-5C cannister stoves seem sluggish, so the Helios' (thanks Jason) inverted system also seems clever.

Now, a bit more info: this trip is an out and back, meaning we start with everything but leave stuff, like fuel, along the way for the return. It seems leaving lots of little caches instead of a few big ones is a better strategy to going farther faster (in the limit of infinite number of infinitely small caches, the return trip is empty!), and another reason I like the cans (which we must pack out, which is why I don't like the cans).