Bushbuddy -vs- Ti-Tri Inferno

[Renais A]

Lynn,
I am very interested in your use of a canister stove with the Ti-Tri. What stove do you use? Is the fuel delivered remotely, or is it directly under the stove? Do you have any issues with the stove overheating with the excellent protection of the Ti-Tri? Are you using a pot that fits the top of the Ti-Tri exactly, or do you support the pot as if using the system in wood burning mode?
Jim

[Lynn Tramper]

Jim

I have used both a SnowPeak Giga idrectly under (I leave the cone slightly open at the dovetail, away from the wind so I can monitor canister temps and adjust flame), and an MSR WindPro remote with the Ti-Tri. In both cases I put the stove on the cooker pot supports, which puts the pot up higher than the top of the cone, but the cone still blocks the wind brilliantly. It also stabilises the stove. When using the Giga I put two stakes into the ground either side of the dovetail to keep it all in place. With a remote canister there is no issue closing up the dovetail completely. This is with a cone sized to fit the pot exactly. I imagine a smaller pot it would work just as well, with less chance of canister overheating when used with a top canister stove.

[Tom Clark]

I thought Dan did a good job summarizing. I have the Bushbuddy & an alcohol based Caldera, not the wood-buring one.

I enjoy Frank's posts, but I have to disagree about his Bushbuddy wind statement. Even the original BPL info states that you need to block breezes with that stove. I have run into that problem, but it took me a little while to realize what the problem was.

For 1-3 nights, I am deciding that a wood-burning stove is not the best choice.

[Lynn Tramper]

The BushBuddy is, IMHO, a very poor choice for windy conditions if you can't find a sheltered spot to use it. I've done a Reader Review of the SideWinder, and a comparison of it with my impressions of the BB here:
http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/reviews/display_reviews.html?forum_thread_id=38277

[Brad Groves]

Major advantage of Inferno, there's no fuss with fuel loading. I put in one big batch load, light it, and call it good. If I want to make something later, or am enjoying having a fire, I can add a little wood. BB-style stoves seem to require more continuous feeding which I didn't like. Can take just the Ti Tri, or w/Inferno… good versatility.

[Kevin Kerstens]

After two years of using the Bushbuddy and a couple of very long frustrating nights in the rain I decided that I am an alcohol guy who likes to have a wood backup and not a wood guy who likes to have an alcohol backup.

I was using a simple Trangia burner inside the Bushbuddy and I could get it to the right hight by resting the burner on the simmering ring. It worked well enough but seemed to burn a lot of fuel without a proper wind screen and with the simmering ring now utilized I had a hard time extinguishing the burner to recoup my unused fuel.

In the end I bought the Ti-Tri Inferno and have been very happy with it. The pieces are a bit finicky but this is a very good (efficient) alcohol stove that lets you burn wood as well. Like other readers have said the larger capacity of the Ti-Tri lets you fill it up which gives you a bit more time between loads to get other work done.

The only gotcha with the Ti-Tri is don't touch the sides – after using the bushbuddy which you can easily pick up and relocate, you will be unpleasantly surprised when you try the same maneuver with the Ti-Tri. I can only say the experience is so memorable that you will probably only ever do it once.

[Dennis Hiorns]

"After two years of using the Bushbuddy and a couple of very long frustrating nights in the rain I decided that I am an alcohol guy who likes to have a wood backup and not a wood guy who likes to have an alcohol backup."

X2 – after using wood-burning stoves (although not a real BB) and the Ti-Tri, the above quote is a perfect summary of how I feel.

The Ti-Tri provides an excellent alcohol stove, and for mere grams I can take three small pieces with that will allow the stove to burn wood if necessary (or desired).

[Hikin’ Jim]

Lynn Tramper wrote: > I have been using the Ti-Tri SideWinder for a few months now. The outer cone weighs 44g (1.5 oz) for the 2 litre version, and is all we need for burning anything (including canister stoves). No need for the inner cone and mesh unless you are worried about fire scar. More stable, very wind worthy, more versatile and much lighter than the BB…and it fits in your pot if your pot has the right dimensions. Same for the standard Ti-Tri too, except it doesn't fit in your pot. Anyone want to buy a slightly used BushBuddy?

Lynn,

Did your WindPro's hose suffer any ill effects from the heat? Were you using a heat reflector of any type that would protect the hose?

HJ
Adventures In Stoving

[Mark Rash]

I would really like a Caldera Cone system, but I can't figure out which one to get. On the Ti-Tri there is the Classic, Sidewinder, and ULC.

Does one of those models work better than the other in wood-burning mode? Is the lower height of the Sidewinder a disadvantage?

[Bob Gross]

The Sidewinder packs tighter into a pot. The ULC is shorter, so you can't fill it with so much wood, assuming that you are trying to burn wood.

I just went for the Classic.

–B.G.–

[Dan @ Durston Gear]

" I can't figure out which one to get.

I personally like ULC cones because of the way they store. I can get the cone and stove in my pot, plus a mug and my spoon and the alcohol bottle…so it's all right there. It's a beautiful thing. With the Sidewinder, you might get the stove in there too but that's it. You often need to have your stakes, spoon mug etc stored elsewhere. ULC cones are also lighter typically, since they work with narrow/tall pots (smaller circumference), while the Sidewinder works with wider pots.

The wide pots that work with the Sidewinder are more efficient than a narrow pot, which is a plus with alcohol, but if you're using wood then efficiency isn't that big of a consideration.

With the regular Ti-Tri, you've got to find a way to store it, which is probably going to end up being heavy and less convenient. IMO, if you're set on a full height cone for whatever reason, then contact Trail Designs and get a Fissure so you can still store it in your pot.

[Hikin’ Jim]

I would really like a Caldera Cone system, but I can't figure out which one to get. On the Ti-Tri there is the Classic, Sidewinder, and ULC.

Does one of those models work better than the other in wood-burning mode? Is the lower height of the Sidewinder a disadvantage?

Mark,

If you've got a wide pot, the Sidewinder is a great way to go. It's a little more low slung, but its width more than makes up for its lack of height. If you saw my recent The Ti-Tri Caldera Cone — The Ultimate Ultralight Stove System? blog post, that's a Sidewinder Cone I'm using. Plenty of room for wood. I've also tested it on alcohol. No diminution of efficiency.

If you've got a tall, skinny pot, then the ULC is a good option, however, a ULC is not as efficient with alcohol or hexamine (e.g. ESBIT) since part of the pot extends above the cone and is unavailable for heat transfer.

For other pots or if you just want a more efficient system, the "classic" cone is the way to go. Yes, you do have to figure out a way to carry the cone. I use a Ziploc container to hold a rolled up classic cone. It packs pretty well, and I use the Ziploc as my bowl. See What "Color" is Your Caldera?" for some packing options on "classic" cones.

You can also get a custom "Fissure" Cone. A Fissure cone is basically a classic Cone that comes in two sections that stack together to form one Cone. You'd have to talk to Rand at TrailDesigns about one of those. He's been remarkably responsive (and patient) all the times I've bugged him lately for information for my blog posts. The beauty of the Fissure is that you get a full cone but you can still store it inside your pot since it breaks down into two sections for packing.

HJ
Adventures In Stoving

[Hikin’ Jim]

Here are some cones just for reference. The cones on the sides are "classic" Cones. The cone in the center is a Sidewinder Cone that fits in the 1300ml pot shown.

HJ
Adventures In Stoving

[Dan @ Durston Gear]

What sidewinder pot is that, where you don't need the stakes? That's awesome.

[Eugene Smith]

^ Dan,

I'm pretty certain Jim has the 1.3L Evernew Sidewinder setup- killer system I must say.

[Dan @ Durston Gear]

Hmm…I have an Evernew 1.3L Sidewinder too but it requires stakes. Maybe Jim is just cheating a bit on the gap between the stove and the pot.

Edit: I just checked and the 1.3L Evernew is about 3/4" away from the rim when using the sidewinder properly with the stakes. I imagine it burns okay without the stakes, but the gap between the pot and stove is cut in half so it wouldn't burn as well. A shorter stove might be a better option.

[Rand Lindsly]

Quick answer on a few questions here:

1) Sidewinder sitting all the way down in the cone – That is actually an approved configuration for esbit mode…..the first stake holes up are for alcohol…..top holes for wood burning.

2) Wood burning efficiency – All titanium cones (ULC/Sidewinder/Classic) are designed to support the pot all the way at the top of the cone in wood burning mode. This is for several reasons…..larger wood box…..opens it up for airflow…..and clears the handle cutout as a wood feed. Now, with the pot all the way outside the cone, the only surface area that "sees" the wood fire, is just the bottom of the pot. Consequently, the wider pots will always be more efficient in wood burning mode….narrower pots like those supported with the ULC will always be less efficient. As noted, efficiency may not be as important with wood because the fuel is so plentiful. Now….as to alcohol/esbit efficiency….

3) Alcohol/esbit efficiency – With the pot down inside the cone, the heat coming off the stove/esbit not only hits the bottom of the pot, but is held next to the sides of the pot very well….and you get really good heat transfer. So, wider pots have a larger bottom, but short sides…..taller pots smaller bottoms but larger side wall surface area. For full size cones, where the whole pot is down inside the cone, pot geometry doesn't make that much difference. The Sidewinder up on stakes in alcohol mode exposes very little of the pot to the outside and essentially all of the water is down inside the cone, so we haven't seen any difference with a sidewinder over a full cone. The ULC however, exposes so much of the pot outside and so little of it inside the cone, that it is less efficient in alcohol/esbit…..and much worse in severe weather (cold/wind) where it can really suck the heat out of the exposed pot.

Hope that helps!

Rand :-)

[Hikin’ Jim]

Dan Durston wrote: >What sidewinder pot is that, where you don't need the stakes? That's awesome.

Dan,

That's a 1.3 liter Evernew pot. I don't think there's anything special about that particular cone. I just wasn't using wood the day I shot that photo. For wood burning, of course I use the stakes. Take a look at the photos in this post: The Ti-Tri Caldera Cone — The Ultimate Ultralight Stove System?

HJ
Adventures In Stoving

[Hikin’ Jim]

Rand Lindsly wrote: Hope that helps!

Rand :-)

Rand,

That was extremely helpful (as usual). I particularly appreciate the remarks on efficiency in particular modes. That's really helpful to me to understand what's going on.

Now, off on a Hikin' Jim tangent, just for fun I ran a 1300ml Evernew pot with a Sidewinder Cone on alcohol without the stakes. It actually worked really well. I notice also on my classic cones (I have two) that the pot height above the burner varies.

How much does pot height above the burner matter in a Caldera Cone set up? I assume it is not as important since both the sides and bottom are heated within the Cone. But there must be some minimum, yes? And the stakes for use with alcohol on a Sidewinder Cone are perhaps intended to reach that minimum?

HJ
Adventures In Stoving

[Jim Colten]

How much does pot height above the burner matter in a Caldera Cone set up? I assume it is not as important since both the sides and bottom are heated within the Cone.

May or may not be a factor affecting heating performance but it IS a factor affecting carbon monoxide production.

[Hikin’ Jim]

Jim Colten wrote: > [Pot height] may or may not be a factor affecting heating performance but it IS a factor affecting carbon monoxide production.

Yes, but how significant is that in a slow speed flame like that from an (unpressurized) alcohol stove?

HJ
Adventures In Stoving

[Dan @ Durston Gear]

The put is supposed to be 3" off the ground when using the alcohol burner. I believe the stove is about 1.5" tall and then the optimum gap is 1.5". If you don't use the stakes, you cut that 1.5" gap between the burner and the pot down in half to 0.75". I imagine at the least, it's slowing your boils down but some testing will answer this. At worst, it's hurting your boil times, fuel efficiency and emissions (monoxide et al).

[Hikin’ Jim]

Dan,

I didn't see any change in boil time or efficiency when I put the the pot in the handle slot instead of using stakes with alcohol, but I was just experimenting that particular time, and I only did it once. Maybe I'll run some more quick tests.

HJ
Adventures In Stoving

[john hansford]

I have had a Al Classic for a some time, and get on fine with an AGG 710 ml pan, but am considering getting a Sidewinder Inferno with the Evernew 600 ml pan for solo use to save an ounce or so and less pack space. Is a 600 pan going to be large enough for 2 cup brews and meals when considering stirring and the times when the cone is not sitting level?

[Hikin’ Jim]

John,

I haven't used a 600ml pot, but I've used a 500ml. The 500ml works and is very light, but it boils over when I do two cup boils, and it's a water boiler only; there's no room for stirring and such. I find myself using my 850ml pot much more frequently. It's nice to have a bit of extra capacity every once in a while if a friend comes along. Again, I haven't used a 600ml pot, but just speaking for myself, I might stick with the 710ml pot for the very reasons you've mentioned.

HJ
Adventures In Stoving

[Author]

Posts