Winter stove, reactor?

[Jenny A]

Roger, not sure what your point is.  I am not aware that any substantial change have been made to the stove, so the answer to your question is probably, “Yes, it will still emit CO.”

For my purposes this stove fits the bill admirably.   There are certainly other choices for those whose needs differ.  Different strokes and all….

[Roger Caffin]

Yes, different people have different needs. That’s true.

My point? Since bad weather can make cooking inside the shelter of my tent completely unavoidable, without forewarning, I will never take a stove which can not be safely used inside my tent (or a hut). It could be fatal.

Cheers

[DAN-Y/FANCEE FEEST]

Roger, have you tested the Reactors now being sold on the market? 2 years have passed since your testing. I’m in the market for a used one.

[Roger Caffin]

MSR withdrew the V1 after I sent them our CO test results. A couple of months later they released a modified version: V2. It was a little but not much better. I have not looked at the Reactor since then, but somehow I doubt they have changed it from the V2.

A detailed photo of the valve region would help if anyone has such.

However, I have to point out that it may be impossible to improve the combustion in the Reactor as the basic design is inherently prone to producing CO. Run flat out it is not so bad (a relative comment), but at low to medium power – dangerous.

Cheers

[David Gardner]

No similar issues with the Windburner?

[Roger Caffin]

The MSR Windburner is essentially a rebadged Reactor. It will have exactly the same CO problems.

The problem lies in the design of the burner. As implemented by MSR (and copied by others), the stove simply can not get enough oxygen into the flame before the flame is quenched. Result: high CO.

Cheers

[David Gardner]

I thought the burners were slightly different. Reactor with a porous ceramic vs. Windburner with layers of mesh. But it sounds like the burner surface isn’t the issue anyway.

[Roger Caffin]

But it sounds like the burner surface isn’t the issue anyway.
In my humble opinion.
Cheers

[Scott Smith]

Soooo

is there something out there that, among other attributes, compares CO emissions of the “ top 5 selling stoves”

 

Thanks !

Scott

[Roger Caffin]

Ah, but which are the ‘top 5’?
You could read our articles on CO emissions:
https://backpackinglight.com/stoves_tents_carbon_monoxide/
https://backpackinglight.com/stoves_tents_carbon_monoxide_pt_2/
https://backpackinglight.com/stoves_tents_carbon_monoxide_pt_3/
https://backpackinglight.com/stoves_tents_carbon_monoxide_pt_4/
There are several other parts in this series, although the URLs to them may not be working just now. Forum SW update …

Cheers

[Scott Smith]

Roger

this will work

Thanks !

 

Scott

[DAN-Y/FANCEE FEEST]

Ah, but which are the ‘top 5’?

 

You could just give us the names of the stoves ;)

[DAN-Y/FANCEE FEEST]

….Nice blue flame Roger

[DAN-Y/FANCEE FEEST]

[Roger Caffin]

Hi Dan

.Nice blue flame Roger
Well, it’s blue all right, but that sort of ‘blue’ could well be releasing some CO. It looks a little bit starved to me. Given what I know about the workings of the Reactor, I am sure it is.

For good combustion you need that region of bright light blue flame before you get to the more gentle dark blue. You can see both here. The different blues reflect the different stages of combustion.

Cheers

[DAN-Y/FANCEE FEEST]

Well, it’s blue all right, but that sort of ‘blue’ could well be releasing some CO. It looks a little bit starved to me.

It is releasing CO…..all stoves release CO.

Looks fine to me.

 

For good combustion you need that region of bright light blue flame before you get to the more gentle dark blue. You can see both here. The different blues reflect the different stages of combustion.

 

Good selling point for your stoves 

[Roger Caffin]

Actually, that photo of the Reactor with the blue flame on top is seriously wrong. A functioning Reactor should look like this:

I suspect the air intake is not working properly. The jet may be blocked or something. Could be dangerous.

Cheers

 

[BlackHatGuy]

from my experience, the flame on a reactor is always blue when just lit (and from Dan’s photo I’d say that the stove was just lit, you can tell by the ‘bubbles’). it doesn’t turn red, as in roger’s photo, until it has burned for several seconds. different stages of combustion and all…

[BlackHatGuy]

dan, where do you find that add on that allows flat bottomed pots to be used with the reactor (or, in my case, windburner)?

[DAN-Y/FANCEE FEEST]

idester, I sent that info in a PM

[Roger Caffin]

You know, if that add-on Dan has shown is a solid ring of metal as it seems to be, with a flat top as it seems to be, then there seems to be nowhere for the hot gases or flame products to escape. In which case the flame inside is going to be seriously choked, and that could cause huge amounts of CO to be emitted.

Of course, it is always possible that I can’t see the exhaust holes, OR that Dan meant the pics as a joke. An example of what NOT to do!

Cheers

[DAN-Y/FANCEE FEEST]

The maker said the surface is irregular and allows air passage. When I make mine, holes will be punched in the side to allow sufficient air. 

I’ll manufacture some to be given away naturally. 

[DAN-Y/FANCEE FEEST]

from my experience, the flame on a reactor is always blue when just lit (and from Dan’s photo I’d say that the stove was just lit, you can tell by the ‘bubbles’). it doesn’t turn red, as in roger’s photo, until it has burned for several seconds. different stages of combustion and all…

Roger’s testing doesn’t always see the norm 

[J-L]

Some one better warn Ryan Jordan about using the Reactor:

[Roger Caffin]

Chuckle.
Given the sort of wind blowing the tent around, I doubt that he was at much risk. Well, not at risk from CO anyhow. There did seem to be some other risks around.

Cheers

[Author]

Posts