This is a preview of a member exclusive premium article.
Let's define what we're going to look at first:
Lightweight - Nope, no arbitrary number criteria. Just principles. Liquid gasoline stoves are out - these systems are the realm of what we call “traditional” backpacking, or “just plain heavy”. With the new wave of integrated canister-heat exchanger systems and inverted (liquid-feed) canister systems, liquid fuel stoves are all but obsolete in our community.
Wintry - We won’t necessarily use all of these systems in the dead of winter, but the cold seasons are demanding on small stoves, so they remain the seasons where groups tend to gravitate towards group cook kits. And so, we want to focus on systems that work at cold temperatures and may have to melt snow. We need some BTU’s. Likewise, we can’t be fooling around with volatile gas feeds that cause canister cooling that slows snow melting to mere pokiness.
Groups - Your group may be 2 or 6 or 12. You can sort out what you need in order to scale systems to your group size, but my focus here is on testing single systems that create reasonably large volumes of boiled water in reasonably large volume pots that can be used for groups of 3 to 6. So we’re looking at systems that pack some power. If you came here to optimize solid fuels and tin can alky stove systems, then you’ll be disappointed.
When investigating (and optimizing) the performance of lightweight equipment systems, I try to keep in the back of my mind the performance of more conventional (i.e., "heavyweight") equipment systems. In the context of this study, I have one particular number that haunts me: 5.0 oz per person per day.
This is the amount of white gas that I was trained to carry for winter expeditions using MSR XG-K stoves for melting snow. Depending on the severity of wind and cold, and my amount of water consumption, the actual amounts used on my winter expeditions have ranged from 2.6 oz/person/day to about 4.5 oz/person/day.
Multiply this by a typical four-person ski group carving turns over the course of 7 days in the Tetons, and you are talking about nine pounds of fuel!
Fortunately, we have New Stoves today. They include inverted canister (liquid feed) systems and integrated canister (with heat exchangers that minimize heat loss) systems that are a bit lighter than white gas systems. In addition, they offer safer operation for cooking in vestibules and the like, and less poison (e.g., carbon monoxide) and noxious fumes that make gasoline stoves sometimes unpleasant.
We already know that this crop of New Stoves is attractive for hikers traveling solo or with a partner, even in the winter. Most of these stoves serve up fast boil times and good fuel economy for water volumes up to about 1.5 or 2.0 liters. Climbers and hikers in larger groups, or those that depend solely on melting snow for their cooking and drinking water, however, still gravitate towards gasoline stoves.
Therefore, the primary objective of this series is to identify the range of conditions where the New Stoves might be considered viable alternatives for group travel during the winter, where water volume requirements are on the order of 12+ liters per day (a typical load for a 3-person cook group).
ARTICLE OUTLINE
- Introduction
- Scope of Part 1
- The Stoves
- Table 1. Stove Types and Operating Modes
- Experiment #1: Baseline Stove Performance
- Table 2. Baseline Performance Comparison of Stove Systems
- The Pots
- Table 3. Pot Types and Characteristics
- Experiment #2: Baseline Pot Performance
- Table 4. Baseline Performance Comparison of Pots
- How to Use This Data to Select Equipment Systems and Predict Fuel Consumption
- Expedition Planning: Baseline Assumptions
- Scenario #1: The Three Person Cook Group
- Table 5. Number of Pots Required for a Three Person Cook Group
- Table 6. Time and Fuel Requirements During a 7-Day Expedition With a 3 Person Cook Group
- Table 7. Comparison of System Weights For a 7-Day Expedition With a 3 Person Cook Group
- Hypothesis
- Summary
- Feedback
--- End of free preview ---
Member Exclusive
A Premium or Unlimited Membership* is required to view the rest of this article.
* A Basic Membership is required to view Member Q&A events
Discussion
Become a member to post in the forums.
Hi Aleksi
Then the article proceeds to report empty canister total weights for a three-person cook group in the range of 0.77 kg – 1.08 kg.
I suggest you recheck those figures. They might be right for the heavy LPG steel 1kg bottles – maybe, but the canisters we use are about 130 – 140 g for a 220 g canister. The lovely Powermax canisters are even lighter.
Cheers
Yes, the figures might be too high, but still: if you need to carry 0.5 – 1 kg of empty canisters, how a 383 g liquid fuel stove can be “all but obsolete in our community”? People don’t go on longer winter hikes?
if you need to carry 0.5 – 1 kg of empty canisters
Where or how do you get this figure?
Either you have misread something, or every canister user here has really got his scales wrong.
Walking for 2 months across the Pyrenees with my wife in alpine conditions, I was carrying one 450 g gas canister for a fortnight for the two of us. That was maybe 160 g empty – I forget the exact figure. When the canister got low I bought another one in a small town. When the canister got empty I punctured it and dropped it off at any little shop – having first shown them the hole.
So your figures make zero sense.
Cheers
Those figures are from Table 7. Comparison of System Weights For a 7-Day Expedition With a 3 Person Cook Group.
Your Pyrenees hike was probably a different type of winter hike? Not melting all water and cooking all food for 2 persons and 2 weeks with less than 450 g of gas?
My point is: liquid fuel has close to zero relative container weight in larger quantities, so liquid fuel stove systems are more lightweight when usage is high enough. They also have faster boil times at low temperatures, which is also an important advantage. That was the topic of part 3 of the article series. So I don’t see how liquid fuel stoves would be completely obsolete?
Summer: we use 30 g of gas per day for 2 people. That I can personally state.
Winter: I allow 60 g per day for 2 people, and that includes some snow melting.
Container weight for white gas – arguable. I did not write that article. The figures given may be out of date by now.
They also have faster boil times at low temperatures,
They don’t. That is a myth we have debunked ages ago. White gas stoves generally peak around 2.8 kW; canister stoves peak around 3.0 kW. A canister stove has more power available than a kitchen hot plate.
Safety: whoo hoo! I suspect a large fraction of white gas users will admit to at least one exciting episode. Tents have been burnt down, people have been burnt. Starting an XGK involves a football-sized fireball – according to the MSR instructions. Meanwhile, thousands of canister users safely light their stoves inside their tents and cook happily. In howling snow storms.
For the record: I have used kero, white gas, canister, alcohol and Esbit stoves, fairly extensively.
Cheers
With such low consumption figures, canister stoves are a clearly the best option. I guess you are not melting that much snow or then your stove system is insanely efficient?
Canister stoves are way safer and nicer, which is why I also use them for everything else except week-long winter hikes. Though using ethanol for pre-heating the liquid fuel stove makes starting it cleaner and safer.
It’s not the stove itself which is so efficient, it’s how we use them. A good windshield, a lid on the pot, not running too high – such things can just about double the effective efficiency. Cooking inside the tent vestibule gets you out of most of the wind as well.
Also, with canister stoves, we can turn them off as soon as they are not needed, whereas white gas stoves are usually left running due to priming hassles.
Cheers
Aleksi, there is a world of differences between WG (liquid fuel) stoves. Some compare vary favorably with canisters. For example, my older SVEA consistently gave me the same usage numbers as an MSR Pocket Rocket…9-12gm/L or about 11-14L per full tank. Some high efficiency tricks do not work all that well, though. The lowest setting it goes to is about the same as a normal alky stove. But, you cannot fully enclose it against wind…it overheats after about 10min of operation. Anyway, the actual fuel BTU or Kw/H is only about 7% or so less (from memory.) So, I would expect a slightly higher consumption. My canister stove gets about 8-10gm/L.
The kicker is the can. The weight of the can can kill overall fuel efficiency pretty fast. In every case, I can carry the extra 7% of WG fuel easily rather than pay for the weight of the can. About 90% of the weight of canister fuel is taken up by the can, soo, really, it is only slightly more efficient than carrying an alky stove and using ethanol. With larger cans, it gets more efficient, but, it still looses out to carrying liquid fuel in plastic bottles. This is ONLY the fuel.
Now for the big “BUT.” WG stoves are almost always heavier than alky or canister stoves. It takes a LONG time for the cans to override this.
Thanks for the interesting points! I have never really explored this area, as using a canister stove for something like a two-day trip is a no-brainer and all our longer trips involve other activities with their gear, which implies a heavy mode of travel with pulkas and a basecamp tent. Guess I’ll be needing yet another canister stove to explore the middle-ground…
About 90% of the weight of canister fuel is taken up by the can,
Well, not really.
MSR ISO-PRO screw-thread: 132 g (can) + 227 g (fuel): 63% fuel
Primus Powergas (red): 153 g (can) + 230 g (fuel) : 60% fuel
Snow Peak 230: 147 g (can) + 230 g (fuel) : 61% fuel
Coleman Powermax 300: 86 g (can) + 300 g (fuel) : 77% fuel
Primus 2202 (white) : 230 g (can) + 450 g (fuel) : 66% fuel
Cheers
I’d love to see this article finished. Or better, updated. All those TBD rows are tantalising! I especially want to see some trials of heat-exchanger systems (more relevant as it’s so easy to buy small heat-exchanger pots now, both as parts of system stoves and stand-alone ones). And hear more about how to run inverted-canister stoves below -10—just drop the canister into a water bath, as I do with my JetBoil?
@Ben: BPL has a LOT of articles on canister stoves, and they will answer most of your questions directly. Yeah, I wrote many of them.
how to run inverted-canister stoves below -10—just drop the canister into a water bath,
The typical 30% propane / 70% butane canister is good to about -24 C without any assistance. With a bit of radiation from the stove, you can push an inverted canister stove way below that. Yes, a bowl of water would work, although at -10 (C/F) I suspect it might freeze up fairly quickly.
When washing up in the winter in the snow my wife has to dry the bowls very quickly after I have washed them. Failing that, I give the bowls a bit of a whack and the ice falls off. Whatever works.
Cheers
Become a member to post in the forums.