Oct 8, 2012 at 3:52 am #1294792
Browsing the Fire-Maple website i saw this:
They are known for the very light FMS-116T (48g) (AKA Monatauk Gnat), but…
The new FMS-300T weighs 41g!Oct 8, 2012 at 4:36 am #1919085
@mikmikLocale: Brisbane AUSTRALIA
Because its performance is HIGHLY wind affected the 'true' weight would have to be compensated with extra stove fuel unless you cooked in your tent.Oct 8, 2012 at 5:25 am #1919093
MSR micro rocket?
…..Oct 8, 2012 at 5:52 am #1919098
Every time I see the phrase "World's Lightest Canister Stove", I translate it in my head to "World's Lightest Heavy Stove".Oct 8, 2012 at 6:22 am #1919107
Doesn't that depend on trip length, group size etc.?Oct 8, 2012 at 7:21 am #1919126
"Every time I see the phrase "World's Lightest Canister Stove", I translate it in my head to "World's Lightest Heavy Stove"."
Conveniently leaving out the word "canister."
So when you hear, "Worlds lightest tent" you actually hear, "Worlds heaviest tarp" ?Oct 8, 2012 at 7:28 am #1919131
"So when you hear, "Worlds lightest tent" you actually hear, "Worlds heaviest tarp" ?"
LOL!Oct 8, 2012 at 7:52 am #1919138
I have a snowpeak litemax that weighs 1.9oz. Not quite as light but pretty close. I use it as part of a 2 person cook system. I carry less fuel than alcohol stoves and my water is ready much faster and im eating sooner, which is worth the weight(wait?lol). The only downside is that we ocassionally have to carry a second cansiter, but the wife can carry that.Oct 8, 2012 at 9:19 am #1919155
@m-lLocale: W-Never Eat Soggy (W)affles
Every time I see the phrase "World's Lightest Canister Stove", I translate it in my head to "World's Lightest Heavy Stove".
Bringing the exact amount of fuel you need is also nice, that's very hard to do with canisters.Oct 8, 2012 at 9:34 am #1919158
@retiredjerryLocale: Oregon and Washington
I've tried Esbit stoves.
They get bottom of pot dirty with some weird chemically stuff
I remember backpacking with someone. They had canister stove. It took forever to get water boiled with my Esbit. I probably should have used a bigger piece which would have helped.
I switched to canister after that.
I bet the BTUs per ounce for butane is bigger than Esbit, so if you do enough days canister will be lighter. Also, depending on how much water you boil per day.Oct 8, 2012 at 9:46 am #1919162
That is where my thought went for my Long Trail hike.. 1 100g canister went the whole way. 16-18 boils and still has some left. equivalent of alcohol would have been heavier, slower, and more finicky. a few more ounces for a canister stove is worth the aggravation for sure.Oct 8, 2012 at 10:41 am #1919180
@eagleriverdeeLocale: Eagle River, Alaska
Thanks for the heads up. I am a fan of canister stoves and like seeing their overall weight come down.Oct 8, 2012 at 11:33 am #1919193
@apathyLocale: Great White North
Interesting, I had just grabbed up a SnowPeak Ti at REI. But I think I prefer the design of the SnowPeak over this one.Oct 8, 2012 at 12:17 pm #1919209
Look up BPL contributor Tony Beasley if you want to see a canister stove that makes an alcohol stove look grossly overweightOct 8, 2012 at 12:24 pm #1919213
Rub the bottom of your pot on the ground for 5-10 seconds. Sand, grass, whatever. That gets rid of the residue. I love Esbit. Trail designs GVP is a great kit.Oct 8, 2012 at 12:35 pm #1919217
@b-g-2-2Locale: Silicon Valley
"Rub the bottom of your pot on the ground for 5-10 seconds. Sand, grass, whatever. That gets rid of the residue."
Maybe. Maybe not. I've used three different brands and packages of Esbit fuel this summer, and I found each one to be different. With one, the black residue would rub off easily. With another, it was more persistent. With the third, it was tough. Part of that has to do with the height of the cook pot above the Esbit, the metal texture of the cook pot, and the air temperature. If you rub it off quickly, it will come off easier. If you let it harden, it is tougher. I got to where I would not even try to clean it off in the field. I would just throw it into a produce bag (to keep the black from rubbing off onto everything else) and clean it at home.
–B.G.–Oct 8, 2012 at 12:45 pm #1919224
Ah, I use an aluminum Fosters can and the traditional Esbit brand. I have never had an issue with it rubbing off. Good to know.Oct 8, 2012 at 2:18 pm #1919257
"Thanks for the heads up. I am a fan of canister stoves and like seeing their overall weight come down."
I'm glad it's appreciated Dena.Oct 8, 2012 at 2:46 pm #1919268
I have been field testing the FMS-300 for some time. I took it with me for our 2 month walk in Europe. It's a strange beast: it makes a noise like an XGK for some weird reason, and the airholes are tiny. To get full power you have to turn it up so it roars. But it does work well, and preliminary testing says it has low CO emission.
CheersOct 8, 2012 at 2:51 pm #1919271
@retiredjerryLocale: Oregon and Washington
It seems like the weight of the stove would be less important than the efficiency, if there's any difference between stoves.
If a stove weighed an ounce more but you needed a couple ounces less fuel, it would be better.
If, on the other hand, a stove weighed an ounce less and you also needed less fuel, it would be great.Oct 8, 2012 at 2:55 pm #1919274
@b-g-2-2Locale: Silicon Valley
"it makes a noise like an XGK for some weird reason"
That's a multiple purpose item. It doubles as an alarm clock.
–B.G.–Oct 8, 2012 at 2:58 pm #1919275
> Because its performance is HIGHLY wind affected
Not really, in my experience.
CheersOct 8, 2012 at 6:21 pm #1919329
@danepackerLocale: Mojave Desert
It appears the Fire-Maple stove is a "torch" with that small diameter burner that does not even angle its flame outward. This creates a hot spot.
That's particularly bad for those with low heat radiant Ti pots who actually want to cook, as opposed to merely boil water. Ti pots need all the flame spread they can get from a backpacking stove.
I went with a Brunton Crux and gifted my lighter Vargo Jet-Ti stove B/C the Crux has a wider burner ring.Oct 8, 2012 at 6:32 pm #1919334
> It appears the Fire-Maple stove is a "torch" with that small diameter burner that
> does not even angle its flame outward. This creates a hot spot.
That's the funny thing. The burner looks as though it should focus, but it seemed to spread out a fair bit under my Ti pot. It's very different from a conventional burner.
CheersOct 8, 2012 at 9:02 pm #1919397
"That is where my thought went for my Long Trail hike.. 1 100g canister went the whole way. 16-18 boils and still has some left. equivalent of alcohol would have been heavier, slower, and more finicky. a few more ounces for a canister stove is worth the aggravation for sure."
I did the Long Trail too, with my Esbit stove (admittedly the 3 oz version before I switched to the 0.3 oz titanium. Restocking every 4-5 days, which is necessary because of food, meant carrying a max of 70 g of fuel at any given time, usually less. My total stove+fuel kit, when restocking every 5th day, weighs 78.4 g on the first day and 8.4 g on the way out, which is significantly less than a canister stove could ever weigh, until they come up with a new kind of canister. Admittedly, if you're in a situation where you can't restock except every 16 refills, the Esbit option would weigh 232 g. However, at that point you've got over 30 pounds of food on your back, so you'd probably not notice.
Not to say that canister stoves don't have their place, which they do. I have one within arm's reach at the moment. It weighs much more than the 41 g of this new device.
I was mostly just making a wisecrack. And for the record, my interpretation of the phrase "World's Lightest Tent" is actually more like, "Extremely heavy poncho-tarp (without the poncho)".
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.