Topic
Become a member to post in the forums.
Can someone please make a titan canister that is refillable at the nearest propane supplier!? You could even have one designed for butane (lighter) and a sturdier (heavier) one for propane. That way we would not have to involve the big manufacturers.
Another thought brought up by this and another thread: Use a bimetall heatconducter on an upright stove! Voila! A safe, ultra light weight, KISS – solution to the problem! No need to use remote stoves even in winter!
> I take more of a risk because I don't know anyone that sells a good windscreen.
I'm still using some from Trail Designs. I now prefer the plain ones without the 'holes' at the bottom.
That review was written when TD were just starting, before they got their Caldera system going. Millenia ago …
Cheers
Yeah, a ti reusable container would make things far better, as far as canister use goes. The cans are heavy and the waste is quite high given the contents, not quite doubling the weight of fuel. The gadgetry in the valves is also wasted labour, well at least for robotics. Far simpler to use a refillable propane bottle of around 240g capacity and eliminate the need for butane and isobutane cans. (But, this would also eliminate the need for getting rid of the butane – generally a byproduct from the petrolium refineries, often just burned off with excess methane, et al.)
All this waste is my primary objection to canister stoves. The cans need not be ti, and could be aluminum, as Roger pictured in the article. And, useing propane prevents the winter "freeze up" that is common with toppers. Titanium is actually a heavier material than aluminum, is far more expensive, and, is more difficult to work with (spinning/shaping.) It IS a bit stronger, though.
As far as stove systems go, there are three primary components to all stove systems. 1) some sort of heat source. 2) Some sort of heat target or pot. Some sort of energy conduction/radiation to get the heat from 1) to 2) with resonable efficiency. Optimizing any one component is sort of a worthless ocupation. All three need to be optimized together, ie, balanced together. This is, perhaps, why I find the 300t so interesing. It utilizes the pot as part of the stove. That is, the heat target is integrated into the heat source. It lacks a heat exchanger, IR absorber, wind screen, but there are potential solutions out there.
Maybe stove companies don't like windscreens, because if it's warm and the windscreen is designed or used properly, the canister can overheat and explode?
Don't trust users to put their hand on canister to make sure it isn't over-heating
This is, perhaps, why I find the 300t so interesing. It utilizes the pot as part of the stove.
Yes, indeed. And not only that, they’ve got it working before you put the pot on. That’s no small trick to get the stove to work both during start up (without the pot) and during cooking (with the pot). Most intruiging. And what genius to use the pot as the flame spreader. Very impressive. And maybe a bit scary for other stove companies. The Fire Maple engineers appear to really know what they’re doing. They’re thinking “out of the box” on things like the connection to the stove and using the pot to control flame dynamics. What will they come up next? Surely they can do better in the remote canister department. I’m still not very impressed by the Volcano stove (FMS-118). Too bulky and a bit crude. But Fire Maple is clearly very capable. A bit of a make-over to bring up the level of sophistication, make it a bit more packable, and lighten the stove, and they’ve got a winner.
I found a good source of aluminum for a windscreen or for a heat shield above a canister.
At the so-called dollar store, there were oval aluminum food platters for that price. I got one, then cut off the oval edges to produce one long rectangular piece of aluminum sheet metal. My piece is too large for just a windscreen, so the remainder can be made into a heat shield. The texture is embossed and the thickness seems similar to roof flashing metal.
The advantage is that I didn't have to buy a whole roll of roof flashing.
It's hard to find good stuff for a buck these days.
–B.G.–
Great article Roger. I’m looking forward to what new in winter stoves (my supply of Powermax canisters will run out sooner than I’d like)
I too am looking forward to that article. I wonder though if they will be all Roger’s specially constructed stoves. Don’t get me wrong; I (very much) want to see them — but I suspect that none of the stoves will be available for purchase. Still, Roger’s stoves may presage what is to come.
I wonder what the effect, beneficial or not, upon the flame pattern and performance of the little FM 300 stove would be with a Heat Exchanger Pot like the one(s) Fire Maple and Optimus make? With a stove that light, and pots that heat/boil that fast, it could be a match made in heaven.
Interesting question. On some HE pots, the bottom is elevated which might preclude the use of the bottom of the pot as a de facto flame spreader. On other HE pots, the exchanger might cause the fuel/air flows to alter. Probably not a problem, but I can’t say for sure. You could also have increased CO production if the exchanger caused flame quenching.
Hmm. Maybe I need to get one. lol. Just what I need. Yet another upright canister stove.
Its a pity there is no removable Piezo on these super light ones. If I remember correctly a normal piezo weighs in at 10 grams and if they put some effort in making it really light it might drop to 5 grams. That would easily be saved in gas usage since you never hesitate to turn off a stove with piezo where as one without you (me) are always a bit hesitant when changing pots or pouring the hot water. And the most important is that it is veeeery conveinant! Since it is removeable it would be up to everyone to choose.
If it is a hindrance in the race for having the lightest stove it could be supplied unattached and fire maple could still present the lowest weight in the marketing.
Finally since fire is such an essential part of safety and well being I always carry two sources of ignition/fire and the one on the stove counts as one so for me it would not be extra weight, just super convenient! Fire maple, please make the addition of removeable piezo in the next upgrade!
Actually, Tord,
That’s just the approach that MSR has taken with the MicroRocket. The piezo and the stove are separate. Leave it at home if you like.
I see that MSR is selling the handheld ignighter separately now for $9.95.
http://m.rei.com/mt/www.rei.com/product/849683/msr-handheld-piezo-igniter
This is a question I have wondered about too. Is a flat bottomed pot better than a HE pot when it comes to the FM Hornet? I do not know enough about the way the Hornet flame spreads to determine which is the best option. Maybe there is no answer …
Well, they’ve got the stove designed such that it will operate with no pot on at all (i.e. at startup), so it will run with a pot that be raised up due to a heat exchanger. The question is how well will it run, and I think that’s just going to take some experimentation. Quite interesting to sell a stove which uses the pot as part of the system but not to include the pot. Jetboil has obviously been using the pot for some time — but they include the pot when you buy the stove. Fire Maple’s new Hornet must therefore be able to accomodate any reasonably sized pot, including (one would hope) a heat exchanger pot. That’s a pretty good trick.
Roger states "the pot is shaping the flame like a splash plate." now a flat bottomed pot will provide a certain shape flame, but my guess is that a HE pot will provide different shape flame, is this better, or worse, or makes no difference? Whilst FM and others are selling HE pots are they intended for the Hornet or for other burners is my question?
… a flat bottomed pot will provide a certain shape flame, but my guess is that a HE pot will provide different shape flame
In all probability you are right (some wider HE pots might have no change).
…is this better, or worse, or makes no difference?
That’s what we don’t know until we’ve experimented a bit. It think it will vary by pot. For example, a narrow HE pot like the Jetboil will certainly affect the flame pattern but a wide pot like a 2.1L Primus HE pot will probably have no effect at all. Will those pots that affect the flame pattern have a positive or negative impact? That remains to be seen.
Whilst FM and others are selling HE pots are they intended for the Hornet or for other burners is my question?
Unknown at this time (but a very good question).
Hi Jim
I have one of those (exact) ignitors, but it is branded Kovea. I wonder where MSR got theirs … :-)
And I found the spark was barely adequate to light a stove at sea level.
Cheers
"And I found the spark was barely adequate to light a stove at sea level."
It probably needs new batteries ;)
I have one of those (exact) ignitors, but it is branded Kovea. I wonder where MSR got theirs… :-)
Indeed, they do look “somewhat” similar, don’t they?
I found the spark was barely adequate to light a stove at sea level.
Interesting. I’ve had good success up to 8000’/2400m (haven’t tried it higher). I found that it worked will with a fairly “concentrated” burner head like on a MicroRocket but significantly less well on a broader like an Optimus Crux.
With the MicroRocket, I would stick the tip of the ignition into one of the “corners” formed by the little “windscreen” on the top of the burner head. So long as I put the tip into the “pocket” that the corner of the windscreen offered I had nearly 100% successful ignitions.
With the Optimus Crux (and similar burner heads), I found I had to tilt the burner head downward and then apply the ignition to the downhill side. Butane and propane are heavier than air, so I assume that the concentration of gas is slightly higher on the downhill side. This is a bit counter-intuitive (at least to me) since one would expect to need more oxygen not more gas at higher elevations, but I found that by tilting the burner head to slightly increase the concentration of gas, I was able to get a far higher 80+ percent success rate with a wide burner head.
That said, I find myself leaving it mostly at home. It’s just one more piece of gear to carry. I’m going to carry a butane lighter anyway, and it doesn’t take much butane to light a stove.
"And I found the spark was barely adequate to light a stove at sea level."
I tried one of these a couple weekends ago on a 2 day trip with the Gnat. Didn't work even one time. I tried multiple flame levels and tinkered with it quite a bit. Nothing. I got it replaced but haven't tried out the new one yet. Hard to count on it at this point based on first usage….
Tanks for the input on the igniters however they do not appeal to me at all!
They look as heavy as à mini bic.
They are not attached to the stove with screws.
Based on the feedback they are pretty useless at lighting a stove!!
I was talking about à standard piezo (preferably made as light as possible). My experience from SOL and à Kovea is that they work great. (I dont have much altitude here). If you know that you are going to an area with high altitude you just unscrew it and bring whatever you prefer for lighting.
I tried one of these a couple weekends ago on a 2 day trip with the Gnat. Didn’t work even one time. I tried multiple flame levels and tinkered with it quite a bit. Nothing. I got it replaced but haven’t tried out the new one yet. Hard to count on it at this point based on first usage…
That’s exactly the kind of burner head the Kovea/MSR piezo struggles with. The Gnat’s burner head is almost an exact copy of the Optimus Crux’s burner head. I had to tilt it over about 45 degrees and then apply the ignition to the downhill side.
Works well on a small burner head. Doesn’t in my experience work well on a wide burner head.
BTW, it also works pretty well on alcohol stoves — if you’re getting good vaporization (i.e. in warmer weather). In colder weather when the alcohol is struggling to vaporize, it’s tough to get the alcohol to light.
Since I always bring a mini Bic and a book of matches on every trip, a built-in piezo lighter would be redundant and unnecessary weight. I have never bought a stove with a built-in lighter.
Yeah, but if you’ve got a windscreen that is suspended from the pot it is so nice to set everything up, turn on the gas, and push a button to light. On a lot of such set ups, there’s no way to get a match or a lighter in there once things are set up.
If you had a stove with piezo the idea (for me at least) is to leave one of the other two out. So you would not have any additional redundancy.
Become a member to post in the forums.
advertisement
Discover under-the-radar ultralight gear from small brands.
© Beartooth Media Group Inc.
Loading...
