Fire Maple Petrel QuickBoil Pro System

I’m wondering – their Instagram marketing shows a different stove & pot gap / interface than their website shows.

The Instagram (top photo) shows the burner head more “buried” into the bottom of the HE pot – the Firemaple website photo (bottom photo) shows it further out.

I wonder, which is it?

It’ll be interesting to see how it does in the wind. I’d not want it at its current Jetboil-esque weight. But, if it performs, I could see cutting it down and ditching the lid/handle like my G3 mod.

A unique burner design.  And a bargain compared to JetBoil’s offerings.  It also looks weight competitive even with my (long out of production) JetBoil Sol Titanium.

Jon – I’m not sure whether you plan to acquire one and do some wind performance testing, but if you do, I look forward to seeing that.

AliExpress had them for $49.95 and only had one left; I could t resist so I bought it.  It won’t arrive until late July

I’d be interested to see what the weight is without the canister base legs. The plastic three-piece seen by Philip Tschersich in the thread ‘Gas canister stabilizer legs’ is a lighter alternative.  Mine, pictured here …

https://backpackinglight.com/forums/topic/gas-canister-stabilizer-legs/page/2/#post-3826693

is 6.1g

Just ordered one. Prices spiked on AliExpress so I checked the FM store, spun the spammy “deal wheel” for 20% off and got it for $47 shipped.

You can get free shipping and save $10 if you spend $64, but that’s how they get you lol.

Looks like a cool integrated stove concept, but one of the few cases where I think it could use a piezo with the burner buried up into the pot base.

I really love HX pots that have the elevated exhaust exit ports. I have been accumulating various pots like that. @bradmacmt, I noticed the different burner interface as well. I’ll bet they tweaked it to improve air intake. One of the few testers on YouTube showed a boil outside in a gentle breeze of 600ml in 1:45. Fast, but I don’t care about that. I’ll haul it up to the Wind Rivers in a few weeks and put it through its paces and report back.

Can’t wait to hear your reports Jon!

Edit: not sure why the formatting is weird on the paragraph above. This forum is a wide mystery to me some times.

DirtNap – bonus points if you come back and post an action photo of the stove with the Winds in the background!

Bought one – $46.28  shipped.

I already have Gear Acquisition Syndrome pretty bad, and y’all are killing me!  :-)

Just got mine in and tested it out. It’s gonna be the second photo.

Stove: 54.1 g

Pot and lid: 182.5 g

Canister stand: 22.6 g

I received mine a couple days ago but I am out of the country.  Looking at their specifications, I have concluded that their Marketing Department should be fired.  Look at their graph below.  The curves indicate that the slower you burn, the more fuel is consumed!  In reality, the slower the burner rate the less fuel will be consumed.  1 user already tested it at over a 2 minute boil and the fuel consumption was 5.3 something grams.  In addition, look at the Y-axis labeling, it’s not in ascending order!  Rookie mistake.  Horrible, misleading graph.  My 2 cents.

Actually, that whole ‘graph’ is a total fraud.

It is not just the inverted vertical axis, which can only be designed to deceive, but the lines drawn to the three data points. They have zero meaning, and can only be also designed to deceive.

As for quoting times to the second – also fraud.

Or maybe, as Jon has suggested, it is not deliberate fraud but just serious ignorance and incompetence on the part of the Marketing person who drew it. Very sad. Fire Maple should know better.

Cheers

.

OK, here are some quick performance results from the new Fire Maple Petrel QuickBoil.  My initial impressions are fairly positive.  That being said, there are a lot of nuances that need to be explained.  A full video will be out next week some time.

Fuel consumption looks great, performance in the wind looks very good.

Good stuff Jon. With the variables of our different elevations, and starting water temp, our results are essentially identical.

OK, as discussed: here is our evaluation and observations of the Fire Maple Petrel QuickBoil Pro (could the name get much longer?).  Overall, it is high performing cooking system with respect to fuel efficiency.  Given the integrated windscreen, I am surprised that the performance is not exceptional.  As a first-generation concept, it sets the bar pretty high with lots of room for improvement.  I do have concerns about the robustness of the bayonet system, but these can be easily resolved by the manufacture.  Overall (with care) I think that it is an excellent buy at $50.

Good stuff Jon. I did the same “smoothing” to the QB pot before I “modified” mine. The gritty interface is a drag, but is an easy enough fix. However, as you point out, the flimsy nature of the stove, and precarious mating of the stove and pot are more of a concern.

OK, I spent some time looking at past test data. While the QuickBoil looks good, it performs about the same as a Petrel G3 and either a Soto WindMaster 3 Flex or the cheaper Fire Maple Greenpeak stove.

Fuel usage data for boiling 500 ml water: calm / 8-mph

QuickBoil:       5 g / 10 g
Petrel/Soto:    6 g / 10 g

While the QuickBoil has the right concept, wind robustness is not there yet. As a reference, by adding a windscreen to the Petrel/ Soto, wind consumption can be reduced to about 7.5g. I expect that the QuickBoil could evolve into a much better product, at this time, I would stick to the Petrel/Soto or Grrenpeak configuration. My 2 cents.

Wow I’m surprised to see what seems like poor wind protection in 8 mph winds on the Petrel Quick Boil. I mean, it has a windshield, the soto/g3 does not, and fuel consumption was the same. Does the heat exchanger on the g3 function as a bit of a windscreen?  Thanks for doing the testing.

 Does the heat exchanger on the g3 function as a bit of a windscreen?

Well, they both have heat exchange fins though the ones on the QuickBoil do not extend out radially as far (smaller outside diameter if that makes sense).  It goes to show that wind does wicked things that are hard to predict.  Abrupt interfaces can create vortexes that cause the wind to move in unpredictable ways.  Blocking more wind from coming up from the bottom helps a lot (like the Soto Burner Head in the  G3 mug).  We are doing this on some of our Ocelot 2.0 versions and have seen 15% – 20% improvements in fuel efficiency.

The most astounding thing to me is that recently, companies have been making bold claims about performance (TOAKS Ti stove, QuickBoil, etc).  They do not seem to bother with verifying these claims.  Coming from high tech industries, we spent a LOT of time testing and verifying performance.  WRT Wind testing, I can get solid results in less than 2 hours, I don’t know why they don’t do the same.  It would save them a lot of credibility.  My 2 cents.

Thanks for those comments.

Agree on testing. It shouldn’t be difficult as you’ve shown and could go a long way with prospective buyers.

I still prefer the stability of the Fire Maple Blade 2 remote canister/invertable canister stove for its stability.

Plus I get very good efficiency with an MSR heavy duty foil wind screen adjusted to my 3 cup wider-than-tall anodized aluminum Open Country pot. That pot has better thermal efficiency than a tall Ti mug, both in the shape and the material.

The stability is still the main selling point for me.