StarLyte Burner With Cap

For those of you that want to use a Clickstand, I could send along an empty burner container that weighs 2 grams to be used as a shim. Total height of the two would be 2″. The Clickstand is 3″ so that would give you the 1″ spacing needed to the bottom of the pot. Place the shim on the ground and then the burner on top of it.

Sometime today I’ll calculate what an average cost will be to ship International and then include the paypal button. The same evening I listed the modified burner I received 3 International orders and then I had to send emails to them asking for additional money to cover the postage. I then had to put up the notice of no Internationl orders. I shipped those orders yesterday over the counter at the post office. Customs forms have to be filled out. I have to drive 8 miles round trip in foul weather…boohoo, boohoo, sniffle sniffle :)

<center>


</center>

Side note:

In all of my testing I use a 2.5 cup capacity aluminum pot that is 5.5 inches in diameter. It has a bail handle for lifting. I use denatured alcohol as my fuel. I test in ideal conditions.

"boohoo, boohoo, sniffle sniffle…"
But we really appreciate it, Dan.

WilliamC3, Thank You. Guys like you are the reason I continue to ship International. Your burner went all the way to Turkey, the other 2 went to the UK. I watch Downton Abbey every Sunday. I keep informed on British history that way;) I'm still waiting to see them doing some backpacking :)

The regular and modified burners are a good companion to the Caldera Cone and other light weight pot supports.

Reasons:
1. A few grams less.
2. No need to prime stove in cold weather.
3. Small in size for compact storage in pot.
4. Will not become deformed by heat.
5. Remaining fuel can be left in burner and capped for fuel efficieny.
6. User friendly

I've added the International paypal buttons to my stove store site.

http://www.woodgaz-stove.com/starlyte-burner-with-lid.php

Dan – I placed an order for a modified and an unmodified Starlyte Burner a few days ago with the idea of using the modified version with a Caldera Cone and trying to use the unmodified version with a Clikstand. If you haven't shipped that order yet, would like to accept your offer to have an empty burner included for use as a shim like you suggest for the Clikstand. Very much appreciated!!!

If the order has already shipped so that the empty burner can;t be included, I'll fiddle with the Clikstand/Starlyte to achieve the 1" gap some other way.

Hi Richard, they were shipped yesterday. I'll put a shim in the mail today, no charge. Customer appreciation day ;)

Richard, I made a mistake, that was not your order I shipped yesterday. it was for Nick in California. oops. I'll modify your order and ship the shim today.

Wow! That's really nice, Dan. Much appreciated.

Makes me want to go on a shopping spree with cottage outfits to show how much I appreciate them all!!!

Note to self: Gotta be strong; resist the temptation; don't do it, don't do it . . . at least for right now. Maybe tomorrow.

I don't really like posting hard data because there are so many variables that fair comparison is tough, but here's my typical results for a normal Starlyte in a Caldera Cone.

Setup
– Caldera Cone with SKINNY/TALL 750ml Pot (Evernew ECA278)
– 8 extra hole punches around the base of the cone (not shown)
– Starlyte stove (not restricted version) with pot held 1.8 – 1.9" above ground

Note that a wide pot can be 10-20% more efficient, and that you're considering starting water temp, water volume and fuel type when comparing any numbers.

Typical Results
Methanol:
500ml of 40F Water: Boil in 9:40 using 15.6g (0.67 fl oz @ 23.3g/fl oz (29ml))
473ml of 70F Water: Boil in 8:20 using 11.4g (0.53 fl oz)

Ethanol:
500ml of 40F Water: Boil in 9:30 using 13.2g (0.57 fl oz)
473ml of 70F Water: Boil in 7:50 using 10.8g (0.46 fl oz)

Performance Notes/ Restricted Starlyte Stoves
When I vary pot height, the performance changes along a predictable curve. Putting the pot lower is slower but more fuel efficient, while raising the pot is faster but uses more fuel. So it's a trade-off between fuel economy and speed. My thread below goes into this with graphs.

In my setup, the restricted Starlyte stoves land further along the curve towards fuel economy than the regular Starlyte. So everything else being equal, instead of boiling in 9min using 0.6oz, it might boil in 10min using 0.55oz. It's not a bad trade off, but I can achieve the same thing with the regular Starlyte by lowering my pot down 0.2". So because my pot height is easily adjusted on the fly with my silicone band, I can choose whatever trade off I prefer and then is no need for the restricted stove as I can simulate its performance. By using the regular Starlyte, I still have the full potential for speed should I desire (ie. winter use).

So my experience is that people with non-pot height adjustable setups should choose the regular Starlyte if they value speed more, or the restricted one if they value fuel efficiency more. With either, you'll likely need to add a few air holes to your cone to get enough air. You can simulate this by setting a few stakes under the cone to create an air gap under the cone. Also see this thread for more discussion on this:
http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/forums/thread_display.html?forum_thread_id=71861

Full info of my setup (pg 2-5)
http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/forums/thread_display.html?forum_thread_id=57721&startat=20

Thanks Dan, lots of good information there. I'll be sure to read what you have in the links.

Here is some data that Tony Beasley documented a while back:

http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/reviews/display_reviews.html?forum_thread_id=20958&skip_to_post=167837#167837

Here is a partial quote from Tony Beaselys' testing of the StarLyte. You'll notice he snuffs out the stove after each test to calculate fuel usage by weight. So by snuffing out your burner, then waiting for it to cool and placing the air tight lid on it you'll be able to experience some very efficient fuel savings.

(quote)
Testing

Test condition was in my garage at 600 meters elevation, the ambient temperature was around 170C, I used Australian denatured alcohol 95% ethanol content. In each test I place 20 grams of fuel in the stove and after reaching 950C as quickly as possible I placed a tin over the stove to put the flame out, this was the same for all tests.

I ran four tests on the starlyte stove (heating rates can be seen in graph below) in each test I heated 0.5 liters of water from tap temperature to 950C and then normalized the results to grams used to heat water 800C (g/800C). As the stove was sitting directly on my test bench and the test surface was warming up between tests I placed a cooled piece of 3 mm ply under the stove before each new test.

Results

1/ 14.0 g/80.0C
2/ 16.0 g/80.0C
3/ 13.1 g/80.0C
4/ 12.3 g/80.0C

Average of test 1,3 &4 = 13.1 grams or about 16.4 mls

Note test 2: while doing the test I noticed that the pot was not central on the stove, I must have knocked the stove off center while placing the pot on it, I decided to leave this incorrect placement until the end of the test, this non central placement showed more fuel being used than the other tests.

Notes test 1&3: in these tests the windshield was left slightly open so I could look at the flame, I suspect this might have some effect on the efficiency.

Notes test 4: in this test I had the windshield full closed, as can be seen in the results this was the most efficient test. (end quote)

More can be found here:
http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/reviews/display_reviews.html?forum_thread_id=20958&skip_to_post=167837#167837

Thanks for the test results and data Dan. Looks like you've got a very efficient stove/cooking setup.

p.s. It looks like all of your temperature numbers are missing a decimal point. I'm assuming 800C should be 80.0C etc.

Thank you Richard for the heads-up. I made the correction and now all is well:-)

No deal.

Is it just me, or does this entire thread not belong under Gear, instead?

"Is it just me, or does this entire thread not belong under Gear, instead?"

Bill, no deal!!!! :-)))

Just checking in to see how everyone is doing on their experimenting with the burners.

Got one persons email saying their boil time has increased with the modified burner. That's normal. I asked if he was able to get 2 cups to boil with 1/2 ounce of fuel while using the 10-12 stove. So far no answer from him.

I suspect most folks are using titanium pots and are expecting longer boil times.

In my test with the aluminum grease pot purchased at kmart, I was able to get the boil with 1/2 ounce in 9 min.

I did not get a boil (189degrees) with 14.5ml, but it is 44 degrees outside and my water is only 43 degrees. With just 16 ml I get a boil at 13 minutes and out at just under 14 minutes. With 20 ml I got a 9 minute boil and out at almost 16 minutes. with my trail designs I only reached 170 degrees and out at just over 8 minutes. I like my modified starlyte! unfortunately, I have given up on simmering with it. It just burns too hot, even when I cover 90 percent of the top!
Thanks Zelph!
Cary

Forgot to add that I used a 1.3L evernew in a caldera cone

Thanks a lot for the feedback Cary.

That’s a lot of Ti to heat up.

No!!!!! don’t give up on simmering with it. Try one of these older methods:

<center>


</center>

<center>

</center>

<center>

</center>

<center>



</center>

International Orders have been suspended for all items due to a unreal increase in United States Postal Rates rates.

As an example, I shiped an order for a esbitmizer to Canada today. Actual shipping cost for the 2.5 ounce envelope was $7.35

5.5 ounce box to Israel cost $12.75

7 oz box to Switzerland cost $12.75

I'll resume shipping International orders once I've determined a flat rate price. I'll announce it here when they resume.

Dan – how depressing; getting to be like UK postage rates :-(

I've used my cone-adapted Starlyte (in the wilds of the back yard – a windless place that has been hovering around zero centigrade for the last week or so).

Using the 1.3 Evernew with 500ml I can get a gentle 'rising bubbles' with 15ml ethanol. About 17ml and it boils. About 13 minutes.

Using such a big pan is probably not useful for 2 cups, but it was to hand. I'd guess the efficiency might rise with a 600/900 pan…?

I tried the cat food can, but I got a smelly burnt can. Do you remove the inner BPA material? I tried putting a foil aluminum tin ( not the cupcake liners) with just a few holes punctured on top and once it got hot, it still burned really hot. Also, I put a lg metal washer on top, so that only a couple of mm hole remained in the middle, but once the metal heated up, the stove reverted to a lg hot flame. All my efforts at simmering seem ineffective once the metal heats up. In fact, it seems to almost make it hotter! I had flames shooting around the sides of my pan and I couldn't put it out in my usual way ( by smothering with an upside down foil tin, or even with a pot lid ).

Cary

Cary, did you cut the cat food can down to approximately the same height as in the above video?

BPA in all lined food cans is leached out into the food during the heating process while the food is in the can. That info comes from a research institute in the United Kingdom and can be found on my website.

Even though the cat food can smelled burnt, did it simmer the StarLyte?

Try it again in the cat food can with only 1/2 ounce of fuel. Under normal cooking procedures you will use 1/2 ounce to boil the water/product and then snuff out the burner and refuel it and then put it into the cat food can to get the reduced flame height. Center the burner in the can.

Using Everclear in the unmodified Starlyte with my Caldera KegF I get the following:

16 ozs of cold tap water to a rolling boil in 8:15. 1 oz of Everclear in the Starlyte and the burn continued to 12:32. If I was quick about it I could have done another 8 ounces for coffee!

Fred, that's great feedback, thank you. Everyone using the keg and the unmodified StarLyte should be able to get the same results. I'll try it in my keg setup sometime this week. Thanks again Fred!

THE GOOD NEWS FOR INTERNATIONALS:

International Orders have resumed. Postal rates have increased world wide. Striking postal workers are to blame, not the unions. Unions want to cut back on benefits and wages.

Well I'm glad I ordered mine before USPS charges went up…not that I blame workers wishing to protect their rights…

I tried a couple into my Checkout – $24 apiece….$48 for two…$96 for four – there is no postage adjustment built in for ordering multiple stoves – pity as I guess they would all be sent in the same box?

I did want a couple more :-(