Niles H.

Thanks for those numbers.

What I had in mind was, heavier in the sense of heavier to carry (an equivalent cooking ability or capacity -- for an equivalent number of days).

The almost inevitable and often substantial water content of the various alcohols that are used also contibutes -- to some extent to the weight, and to a greater extent to the cooking capacity. And to the reduced heat output and speed, which results in longer cooking times and greater heat losses, and even more fuel requirements, which increase with cooler temperatures.

[The alcohol performance times are usually switched to 2-cup boil times (quite the tactic there), and often at higher room temperatures, to help the times look closer to the boil times for other stoves, which are traditionally given for boiling a full liter. Occasionally tests are done with a level playing field, and the alcohol boil times look much worse, even worse than the 2-cup times (and even-when-adjusted 2-cup times) would suggest. And at cooler temperatures (which are common for morning and evening outdoor camp usages) they are worse still, because the temperature-related and time-related heat losses need to be replaced by burning even more alcohol (alcohol + water actually). Extra time > extra heat losses > extra fuel.]

Niles H.

Exactly so. But it is easy to overly minimize the role of the stove. The stove can play a non-negligible and even a very substantial role in safety.

Example: There are a number of accidents involving alcohol stoves that would have been minor or non-existent if a canister system had been used instead. Not everyone is equally poised and non-lumsy. Or non-clumsy. Accidents happen to (or with) all of us if we admit the truth. Oversights happen with all of us. Minor and not-so-minor mistakes, knocks, trips, falls, stumbles, stubs, preoccupations, distractions, tiredness and even exhaustion, corner-cuttings, risk-taking behaviors, lapses, misjudgments, slips, etc.

Some stoves and stove systems are more forgiving of these and other contingencies.

Niles H.

There are also overseas sources of quality multifuel, all fuel, and other stoves at about half the price, sometimes less, of virtually identical stoves sold by major domestic sources. You have to sort out some issues (parts availability, serviceability, quality, seller reliability, etc.), but that can be doable. There are some excellent stoves made in the same factories as some of the major brands, with identical and sometimes even with improved specs, performance, and quality. There is an excellent Korean multifuel stove that was around fifty dollars, and it was basically identical to a model sold in backpacking stores here for about a hundred fifty. There are stove forums that review some of these stoves.

I considered buying one from a very highly rated and established ebay seller. Some people are fine with this route, and others prefer others.

fietsbob

https://www.rei.com/product/830342/ms...kpacking-stove

this one is interesting..

a canister of a Butane, liquid under pressure, packaged that way..
that is drained out at the lowest point of the canister . .

or a Pumped up tank of Petrol.

Gravity Aided

An improvement I have seen in the cat food can, Penny alcohol, and double walled stoves is a carbon fiber fabric added to act as a wick and keep liquid alcohol from sloshing around. You could get a good deal of the carbon fabric from Oatey, the plumbing parts supplier. It's sold as a flame guard for soldering pipes next to joists. 17.89 for a 9x12 at a major box store. 15.89 at another. Might be cheap peace of mind for some folks.

staehpj1

I think that you still misstate even in that case. The alcohol option can be and usually is lighter until you are carrying largish amounts of fuel. For most that means alcohol is lighter if restock points are less than once every week to ten days. Other fuel gain the weight advantage only when larger amounts of fuel are carried. For me that means that my alcohol stove is the lighter choice for pretty much all of my touring since I can find alcohol frequently and in a 12 ounce bottle. For times when I need to carry fuel for longer periods or need to melt snow for all my water other fuels become a lighter option.


I don't completely buy all of that, but it is a bit moot for me anyway because 99% of the time if anything I want less heat output anyway and am looking to go into a throttled back mode. More heat isn't always needed and often isn't better.

My point isn't to say one or the other is better, but that it depends on the specifics of the trip and that for me that means that most often for touring alcohol is my preferred choice.

Niles H.

The fuel itself is still heavier -- over twice as heavy -- regardless of the length of the tour. It is inherently considerably heavier. Literally so.

Niles H.

More heat isn't always better; but it is definitey sometimes better. And having the option is better than not having it, as is the far better simmer and flame control of many of the other stoves.

Niles H.

You are misconstruing what I said here. I was talking about the alcohol itself.

robow

Niles,
Are you referring to alcohol is over twice as heavy as gas? But are you failing to consider the containers with which both must be kept in because a small plastic bottle weighs a lot less than an isobutane metal canister.

Any way, now that I've been converted as a disciple unto the Guru of Ultralight Touring (Staehpj1), alcohol is my friend.

Niles H.

I don't use alcohol stoves at all any more, regardless of the length of the tour.

Some people like them and use them, others don't at all.

*******
Just wanted to add here that the stoveless option has the greatest weight advantage, and the few people who actually go out and take the steps to make it work for themselves seem pretty happy with the reduced or eliminated weight and bulk (of everything -- pot(s), stove, fuel and fuel container(s), windscreen, and the rest), along with savings of time, money, fueling and refueling, meal prep and cleanup, setup, warmup, cooking times, mishaps and hassles, packing and unpacking, etc. It's definitely a small minority who make the transition, or even make a serious attempt at making it work.

Niles H.

All along I, along with Stuart, was talking about the alcohol itself.

The lightest option is eliminating it all.

One poster above mentioned the option, and a few others on other threads have made the moves and seem pretty happy about it.

There seems to be some widespread inertia or resistance, or habits to move away from, or perhaps some degree of disbelief. (--perhaps in the possibility of having it be fully satisfactory, or in the possibility of making it so.)

Carbonfiberboy 

Our last tour we didn't carry a stove and liked not having it. It's a good option, totally doable, but it depends on the tour. For tours where we would be staying for days in isolated areas and not seeing a town, we'd still carry a stove. We like our Optimus Nova Plus. It's a multi-fuel, but gas smells best.

Burton

So just for fun, measured exactly 4 cups of water into one of my SS Zebra canisters and measured 1.5 oz of bio-ethenol into a Simon SS alcohol burner. That was enough to bring the 4 cups of water to a full rolling boil. Thats enough for a small Thermos of hot water and a cup of coffee and is something I might do every other day only if its a little chilly. Otherwise the same Thermos and SS Zabra canisters would be storing ice, cold cuts and salads.

Its not just the stove and fuel that decides if something is effecient - its the combination of stove / burner size / pot size / fuel canister. Took me a while to figure out that larger diameter containers use less fuel to heat the contents then smaller, higher ones on this particular stove. Still haven't found any other fuel canisters that are available for white gasoline or kerosene that'll let you bring along only 4 oz of fuel on a weekend trip.

There's some practical information regarding different stove and fuel types available on the MEC site: https://www.mec.ca/Main/content_text....34374302887171

KC8QVO

The Internet is always full of opinions so the same rule of thumb applies here - I'm sure the OP is sifting through and building his/her ideas with the input obtained in this thread.

Speaking of opinions, here are my thoughts from the backpacking arena (not biking, I know, but the constraints on backpacking can be more stringent than biking = no wheels to roll your load)

My favorite go-to stove is an MSR Simmerlite white gas stove. I've been backpacking for several years. The early trips I went on I didn't have a stove - people in my group brought the cooking gear and we spread it around (someone carries the stove, someone carries the fuel, someone carries the pot, etc, etc). That method worked great. The stove was a classic Whisperlite - and worked very well for our 4+ group outings. My first personal stove was a Snow Peak Gigapower canister stove. It works, but by biggest gripe with it is I can't get the flame to stay low enough for the lower-temp cooking/simmering that I like to do. The Simmerlite isn't a whole lot better, but at least I can set it and it stays where I put the setting (doesn't creep up in power on its own). I also have a lot of fueling options with the white gas stove that I don't have with the canisters - I can change the fuel bottle size and gain more fuel, or I can keep the small bottle and have some spare ounces stored for refilling if I got in a pinch. lots of options.

Two other stoves I've used are the MSR Pocket Rocket and Jetboil self-contained pot/stove system. Out of all the stoves the Jetboil is by far the most innovative and has real cool accessories (like the french press for coffee - the first time I had coffee on a backpacking trip came out of one).

For weight and simplicity - the canister stoves are hard to beat.

For cooking capacity and reliability - I'll put my trust in a white gas stove.

The original question at hand here is "what are some good safe stoves". I have knocked over my canister stove before. I've over-primed my white gas stove before = fuel leaking on the ground. Neither resulted in anything more than lost dinner or a quick flame up, but as someone already mentioned on here - what makes a stove safe is the user. Accidents can always happen, but if you are smart with your stove (as in understand it's limitations and how it operates) you will be a lot better off. I, for one, in the years I've been backpacking, have never heard of a limitation on stove use. In fact, quite the opposite. I have heard of times when fires are banned in state/national parks except for those contained for the purpose of cooking (stoves).

What might be a better question is "what is a less-accident prone stove?" My first thought is stability. How stable is the set up when you have a pot on it? A single canister on the ground doesn't offer a whole lot of stability. There are some kits that have stabilizers that you can put on the bottom of the canisters to widen the footprint. These help a lot. My second thought is spill-ability. Liquid fuel is easy to spill. At the same time a canister has fuel under pressure so that could present a whole other set of challenges.

Last thought - use what you are comfortable with and trust. If you haven't used it more than a time or two don't take it on your trip. Cook on it a few times on short trips or even at home before you go out at all so you have time to acclimate to its use and characteristics. That goes for all necessary gear you take - make sure it is up to par and you are up to par with it before you put your trust in it and rely in it 100%.

staehpj1

The fuel's weight is not as relevant as the total combined weight of the stove, fuel, and fuel container that needs to be carried at any given time. Also it is time between restock that matters not trip length. That total weight works out to be less for alcohol for me for in the neighborhood of 10 days or less between restock and lighter for other fuels for longer than ten days or so between restocking. That assumes my typical usage, the time period where it advantage shifts would be different for different usage patterns.

So yes the fuel is heavier per btu, but whether the load carried is heavier is a different matter and the one that actually matters.

corvuscorvax

Which is heavier: rocks or bricks?

I give this thread another three pages tops before it has to be locked.

stephenjubb

Depends on the dimensions of each, material type and density, age, type of material, really impossible to determine.

robow

Not so far fetched, who would have thought that a duck would weigh the same as a witch?

fietsbob

Things weigh less on smaller planets.

Gravity Aided

But the touring opportunities are fewer. Yet, with the lesser gravity, one could tour with less effort.

Aushiker

I am happy to go simple and quiet and personally really don't care about the miniature of burn efficiency etc so I am currently using a Trail Designs Sidewinder Ti-Tri Calder Cone stove. I just love the ease of use, the quietness and the lack of bulk and weight.



Andrew

Western Flyer 

I think alcohol stoves are at their best cooking for the solo or perhaps a pair of campers. My biggest pot filled to the brim is 0.75 liters the other is 0.5 L, so the 2 cup boils time is meaningful for my touring comparisons. Comparing the time to boil 2 cups of water starting from pulling the stove out of my pannier and setting it up until I have a cup of hot tea in my hand the results are the canister stove is the fastest, followed by my alcohol stove and maybe a minute more time for the Coleman burning Coleman fuel. Comparing times from match (ignition) to boil the canister is twice as fast with my Trangia and Coleman in a dead heat. If your interest is from time of putting a pot of water on a flame in full bloom, my canister burner is still faster, followed by the Coleman with the Trangia trailing off my several minutes. I personally don't see the need for speed.

Despite the fact I have been cooking primarily with alcohol for over forty years, I think the little canister burners like the Snow Peak are the most practical for most solo touring cyclists in the developed world, and that's what I see most folks using. The one big drawback to all the lightweight canister burners I've seen in action is they are terrible in windy conditions. The heavier ones like the Jet Boil do fine in high winds, of course you can't cook much more than water with them.

jowilson

Off topic much?

alan s 

If you really want to save a few ounces , bring a credit card and eat out at restaurants. Just be careful not to overeat, because you'll be carrying all that extra weight in your belly.