WhiteBlaze Pages
A Complete Appalachian Trail Guidebook.
$10 for printed copy(paperback). $6 for interactive PDF. $2 for printable PDF.
Read more here WhiteBlaze Pages Store

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 25 of 25
  1. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Durwood View Post
    I'm going to ninja sneak in here and say go alcohol (visible source) or no-stove. Canisters are heavy and present another element of worry that isn't necessary. Love my MSR but when going LD I look for every bit of simplicity I can get. For short trips I don't worry and carry a big can.

    Over stressing on parts of my kit has been a major impediment for me...had to learn to go simple.
    I use alcohol, canister and Esbit, depending on the season. For shorter hikes in warmer weather I gravitate to Esbit. The complete stove kit weighs 4.4oz and with daily fuel needs at 1 oz (2x 14g tabs) it is hands-down my lightest setup. It's pretty cool to be able to do a 4-night trip with total cook kit plus fuel weight of a bit over 8 oz.

    I would quickly agree, however, that Esbit is not practical for a thru, and many people cannot stand the smell of the fuel or the crud on the pot.
    UL, because nobody ever asks "How can I make my pack heavier?"

  2. #22
    Registered User
    Join Date
    08-08-2012
    Location
    Taghkanic, New York, United States
    Posts
    3,150
    Journal Entries
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Patrickjd9 View Post
    My rule has been to begin trips only with a full canister, and mark the partial canisters to use only when car camping.
    HYOH and all.
    I usually select the canister that has the proper amount of fuel for the trip. I have a selection to chose from and can make one to my liking if needed. It would not be uncommon for me to head out with 20g or even less if the trip called for that much fuel. I figure why carry the extra weight, that 20g is already 2 l of boiled water, that's already more than double of what I may need for an overnight.

  3. #23

    Default

    Based on experience we (2 people) get 5 days of meals from a large canister. But we only boil water (coffee and 2 single pot meals), and we use a pot cozy for the food to stay hot while cooking. We always use an old (1970's) MSR foil cowling around the stove--can't find a source for new heavy metal foil that's worth a darn. But we think that a metal cowling adds a lot of efficiency to the cooking system.

  4. #24
    Registered User
    Join Date
    11-01-2014
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Age
    59
    Posts
    2,491

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Durwood View Post
    . . . go alcohol (visible source) or no-stove. Canisters are heavy and present another element of worry that isn't necessary. Love my MSR but when going LD I look for every bit of simplicity I can get. For short trips I don't worry and carry a big can.
    ...had to learn to go simple.
    I use alcohol. It has its place. BUT, I wouldn't call it simple compared to either canisters or Esbit.

    The not simple side of alcohol:
    1) Handling/poring liquid fuel whenever you use the stove
    2) Measuring fuel that is being pored
    3) Extreme wind sensitivity requiring not-so-simple windscreens and protected cooking areas
    4) Fire danger with an open invisible flame and spillable liquid fuel
    5) Low energy density, so you have to carry twice as much fuel or resupply fuel twice as often
    6) The inability to turn a knob and shut off the stove

    It's hard to beat the simplicity of a canister where you screw on the burner, push the button, adjust the flame size to your desires, put the pot on, and cook.

    I find myself using alcohol or Esbit on short trips where the weight savings is "significant" and it's fun to play with more conceptually minimalist gear.

    I find myself using canisters on longer trips where the added fuel volume of alcohol diminishes or eliminates the weight savings, where I want minimal "fiddle factor" and less hassles with my cooking, when I'm in high fire danger situations where "open flames" are illegal if not dangerous, or when backpacking with other family members that want nothing to do with managing the added complexities fiddling with alcohol stoves. Using alcohol requires some practice, and my wife, for one, wants nothing to do with adding complications to her evening cooking on the trail. The plug-and-play ease of canisters is huge for her as well as my son when he thru-hiked the PCT.

    Finally, I gotta say, there are lots of ways to "see" how much fuel you are carrying beyond just using your eyes to see the fuel. Aside from shaking, "feeling the heft" or counting the number of meals cooked, MSR puts float lines on their canisters (which are easily put on other canisters by hand with a Sharpie marker) that provide a scale to measure the fuel remaining by floating the canisters in water. And, it seems confusing until you try it and then realize how incredibly simple and reasonably accurate it is.

    I say use 'em all. They're all fun in their own way. Most of them are surprisingly effective. Now go out and play!
    I'm not lost. I'm exploring.

  5. #25
    Registered User
    Join Date
    10-17-2007
    Location
    Michigan
    Age
    62
    Posts
    4,925

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nsherry61 View Post
    I use alcohol. It has its place. BUT, I wouldn't call it simple compared to either canisters or Esbit.
    The not simple side of alcohol:
    1) Handling/poring liquid fuel whenever you use the stove
    2) Measuring fuel that is being pored
    3) Extreme wind sensitivity requiring not-so-simple windscreens and protected cooking areas
    4) Fire danger with an open invisible flame and spillable liquid fuel
    5) Low energy density, so you have to carry twice as much fuel or resupply fuel twice as often
    6) The inability to turn a knob and shut off the stove
    I agree. I am a big fan of alcohol systems, but in order for them to be effective, you do need to invest the time to develop a system the works for you. Unfortunately they are often advertised as being simple and this produces a lot of disgruntled ex-alcohol stove users. I spent years evolving a system to address specifically a lot of the issues identified above. 1) Yes I have to pour fuel into my stove, but I don't have to screw my stove onto my fuel (I see both as equally trivial). 2) I don't have to measure fuel. I chose a stove that can be easily extinguished for this reason. I pour in more than I need and when done, the excess fuel is recovered. This also maximizes efficiency of fuel use. I'm using about 15 g of fuel per meal. 3) My pot stand is also my wind screen. Stores in the pot. Nothing to assemble. An aluminum disk is a base to protect the surface. Your basic canister stove and pot system has no wind protection. 4) True I will not use alcohol in areas with fire bans, but I chose a wide pot stand to prevent tipping/spills. I always put the alcohol bottle away before igniting and I keep a water bottle on hand. Water soluble fuel is easy to extinguish. 5) My system maximizes efficiency (see #2 above) so I don't think my fuel needs are twice as much, but is more. 6) Mine is easy to extinguish, but without on on/off knob.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
++ New Posts ++

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •