For what it's worth, I think it's important to be aware of the two
standards that stove makers should look at when making stoves.

The first standard is the racer stove that burns really hot and fast
and heats water (or whatever) really quickly. These stoves are real
winners at the fun "stove races" that some backpacking gatherings
hold, but they are not "fuel thrifty" stoves.

The second standard is the stove that will heat water (or whatever)
well, but sacrifices blazing speed for being a "fuel mizer" which
doesn't waste any fuel. Most of the fuel goes to heating the contents
of the pot. This results in less fuel that needs to be carried by the
backpacker on an outing.

These two standards are opposite one another, one is fast and uses
lots of fuel and the other is slower but uses little fuel. It's
useful to decide in advance which you are striving for. I don't know
of any alcohol stove design which can give both fast heating and
thrifty fuel use, although such a design would rapidly become
extremely popular with stove makers and backpackers! :^)
Best, Don L.

"hacktorious" <hacktorious <at> ...> wrote:
>
> I have tested 8 - 32 holes. 24 - 32 holes seems to be best. My
> latest has 24 and can boil 2 cups in about 3.5 minutes. I think
> having a larger center hole makes a bit of a difference too.
>
> I haven't had a chance to take any pictures yet. If I have time
today
> I will shoot a quick video and take some photos.
>
> --- In BackpackingLight <at> yahoogroups.com, <mshaner <at> > wrote:
> >
> > Thanks Manny,
> >
> > I'm a current member of BPL and have viewed all of the articles
you
> referenced. I was primarily interested in your results with fewer
> than 24 holes (size dependent I know). I even made one with 44
holes
> - looks really cool, but performance is less than stellar. I've
made
> several with 24 holes in diffently locations. Nothing less than 24
> yet...on the fringe listening in since I haven't had the time to
> tinker with them the last couple of months.
> >
> > Shane
> >
>

•  15
  New Members

• Hiking and camping gear
• Hiking
• Backpacking hiking
• Hiking gear
• Discount hiking gear

You could try the evernew 1.3 L titanium pot. The lid on that one
sits inside the top edge of the pot, but is definitely not dual use
like the lid on the snowpeak. I've got one, and it works well for
two. Main gripe is that the new ones have a raised area on the bottom
that makes clean up a bit of a chore.

On the menu choices, I've totally switched over to boil in bag using a
cozy for simmering. Makes the whole issue of clean up go away. Look
at freezerbagcooking.com for recipes.

Jim

--- In BackpackingLight <at> yahoogroups.com, "James D. Marco" <jdm27 <at> ...>
wrote:
>

> Should I go back to the old 2 liter pot? Get a new one?
> Or, do you have another suggestion. BTW I will be taking the
> lid to use for frying fish. It is still the lightest fry pan I have
found.
> Aluminum is OK....yes I have heard there is a relationship
> between Aluminum and Alzheimer's.
> While I am at it, I am planning on noodle soup, minestrone,
> rice, and spaghetti for suppers. Any other Items? I still lack two
> suppers in the plan. (You cannot plan on fish, when I do, I do
> not catch them...when I don't, I catch them...'ya just cannot beat
> Murphy! But, I think the roots/greens will be out.)
> TIA
> jdm
>

•  15
  New Members

• Hiking and camping gear
• Hiking
• Backpacking hiking
• Hiking gear
• Discount hiking gear

This is a very good point that unfortunately I think gets over looked too often. While focusing on how fast a half liter of water gets boiled, good design can go down the drain. In the field, does it really matter if the water takes 5 minutes as opposed to 6 minutes? I would rather see an effort towards reporting efficiency. This could be done with careful measurements and maybe a formula that takes into account differing variables.

Allan


Don Ladigin <dladigin <at> yahoo.com> wrote:

These two standards are opposite one another, one is fast and uses
lots of fuel and the other is slower but uses little fuel. It's
useful to decide in advance which you are striving for. I don't know
of any alcohol stove design which can give both fast heating and
thrifty fuel use, although such a design would rapidly become
extremely popular with stove makers and backpackers! :^)
Best, Don L.


---------------------------------
Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell?
Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

•  15
  New Members

• Hiking and camping gear
• Hiking
• Backpacking hiking
• Hiking gear
• Discount hiking gear

Yep! Since the focus of this forum in lightening the load, we should
be looking at efficiency.

Manny

--- In BackpackingLight <at> yahoogroups.com, Allan Alessio
<allanalessio <at> ...> wrote:
>
> This is a very good point that unfortunately I think gets over
looked too often.
>
> Don Ladigin <dladigin <at> ...> wrote:
>
> These two standards are opposite one another, one is fast and uses
> lots of fuel and the other is slower but uses little fuel.
>
>

•  17
  New Members

• Hiking and camping gear
• Hiking
• Backpacking hiking
• Hiking gear
• Discount hiking gear

With the V8 cans (Red Bull, Starbuck's double-shot, etc...), you need
to be careful not to overfill to the point where you have liquid
alcohol shooting out of the jets when it starts to boil. This is more
of a concern with the side-burner designs, but can also happen with
the pressurized designs.

My experience with hole patterns is that smaller/fewer holes makes for
longer boil times but better efficiency. For me, the sweet spot is
5-6 minutes to boil 2 cups, using 3/4 oz of fuel with a 700ml Ti pot.

--- In BackpackingLight <at> yahoogroups.com, "Jim" <naphas <at> ...> wrote:
>
> V8 (or apple juice) can stoves work better for smaller diameter pots,
> such as a 450 or 600 ml cup used as a pot. Conversely, for something
> like a 1.3 L Evernew or titan kettle a wider burner pattern is more
> efficient.
>
> --- In BackpackingLight <at> yahoogroups.com, "hacktorious"
> <hacktorious <at> > wrote:
> >
> > V8 cans sound like a great idea. I am surprised they will work
> > because they are so small.
> >
> > --- In BackpackingLight <at> yahoogroups.com, "Manny" <pitta <at> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Scott,
> > >
> > > I fell of the (soda can stove experimenting) wagon again and
built a
> > > few lately. One of them is similar to yours and made from small V8
> > > juice cans. I assemble the two halves so I end up with one convex
> side
> > > (used as the bottom) and a concave side (used as the top). It's
> easier
> > > to assemble that way and, for me, seems to hold up fine.
> > >
> > > BTW, I've tried a penny stove, chimney stove (Brasslite and
homemade
> > > from V8 cans), and others with a Heineken can pot (24oz),
Evernew Ti
> > > 0.7L teapot, and the new small Walmart greasepot. I seem to always
> get
> > > the simialr results - 2 cups of water boil in about 5.5 - 6.5
minutes
> > > on 3/4 oz of alcohol. These are all with a windscreen and bottom
> > > reflector. I live at nearly sea level (San Jose) and tried the
above
> > > stove at 6000 ft + in Redwood Canyon in Kings Canyon NP. Same
results.
> > > I do have tre pots a bit high - 1.25" to 1.5" above the stoves.
Maybe
> > > I'll try going to the more common 1". Not that I'm dissatisfied
with
> > > my results so far.
> > >
> > > Manny
> >
>

•  17
  New Members

• Hiking and camping gear
• Hiking
• Backpacking hiking
• Hiking gear
• Discount hiking gear

Hello group. Thanks to all of you I have become
enamoured of stoves of all types, of late. I don't
know if this will help or not but I did come accross
one alcohol stove that looks particularly interesting.
The FeatherFire alcohol stove with flame control. From
what I saw on their website it looks to be able to
blaze up a boil and slow down to a simmer just like
your stove at home.

Personally, since I'm new to this group I've got a lot
of catching up to do with all the new gear and fancy
mac and cheese recipes everyone here mentions so I've
started at the begining, the tin can wood burning
stove. Now when it comes down to it, it sure seems the
most environmentally friendly stove would be a wood or
woodgas stove as the fuel is found everywhere, for
free. Yeah they are a bit larger then most others but
when you don't have to carry fuel on long trips they
don't seem to weigh that much. And, it looks like they
even make some of them out of titanium so the super
psycholighters can be happy as well carrying a 6-8 oz.
stove but not have to carry any fuel, until around
meal time that is.

Now all these new pots and pans are way out of my
league right now but, if you don't have a fear of
coatings then a small hard anodized aluminum pan or
teflonish type pan and a little oil is perfect for the
fisherman in your life. Yeah, I know still a bit heavy
but some luxuries are worth it. Of course if ya rig up
a spit over a wood or wood/gas stove then you'll have
a real outdoorsy style meal. Yup, I do love a good
campfire in a can.

Hope you all find happy solutions to yur dilemas,
Seamus Mills
New member

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

•  18
  New Members

• Hiking and camping gear
• Hiking
• Backpacking hiking
• Hiking gear
• Discount hiking gear

I used the Steripen recently in the Smokies. The Smokies are full of
cold clear water so it was a great choice. I never had to carry any
water. Its never more than a mile from a water source there, so I
would just scoop my bottle full if I was thirsty and near a stream,
purify it, and drink virtually all of it. With plentiful water and a
Steripen, there is really no excuse to carry any significant water on
your pack. I liked it.
The only issue I had was that it didn't work right a couple of times
but then later worked fine. Maybe I had bad batteries. Anyone else
have this happen?

--- In BackpackingLight <at> yahoogroups.com, "boardmanmw" <boardmanm <at> ...>
wrote:
>
> I have not entered this discussion in favor of the UV systems
> because the topic is "filter vs chemical", but I can tell you I've
> used both Steripen and Aquastar for several years now, and I don't
> use anything else. I hike mostly in Arizona, but have used the
UV's
> in both the Boundary Waters and the High Uinta's in Utah.
>
> Both devices work extremely well; never gotten the slightest bit
> sick, although, especially in Arizona, I've been forced to use
water
> from stagnant, very unappetizing sources. In the desert, you take
> what you can find...sometimes from a 1 inch deep seep or a murky
> cattle trough.
>
> The only limitation with UV's is the water must be fairly clear, so
> the light can penetrate. Many times I've filtered the source water
> thru a cloth or paper coffee filter to remove the larger
> particulates. Boundary Waters water is heavily stained with tannin-
-
> dark enough that I couldn't get my MSR Miox to function properly,
> but the Steripen worked great. The new Steripen "Adventurer" is
> awesome: half the size and half the weight--smaller and lighter
> than any good filter I know of. The ultralight advantage of these
> devices is you can purify a liter in 90 seconds, so you don't have
> to wait long, or carry water while a chemical works.
>
> If your routine water sources are extremely muddy or highly
clouded,
> a UV might not be the best choice, but otherwise, they are not
> only "realistic options", but for me, the system of choice. Having
> said that, I always carry a small backup like Aqua Mira tablets, in
> case something happened the UV device. But I've never had to use
> them...
>

•  18
  New Members

• Hiking and camping gear
• Hiking
• Backpacking hiking
• Hiking gear
• Discount hiking gear

Hello again everyone. Spring is already bringing some great hiking
days to us here in Oregon. Each month we give a sincere welcome to
our newest members and share this information with them. We hope we
can keep all of you excited about hiking, especially hiking with a
light load in your backpack. Here's our usual monthly message. It's
not aimed at anyone in particular.

*****************************************
We hope you will let us know all about your lightweight hiking plans
and experiences, and how you are adjusting your gear for your next
hike. We'd love to hear about which lightweight gear and techniques
have worked well (or poorly) for you. Lurking here and learning more
about lightweight backpacking is fine too!

We are fortunate to have many experienced hikers in this group as
well as representatives from several small and large manufacturers
of lightweight hiking and camping gear. We ask the professional
gear makers to please wait until a member of our group asks a
question about your gear or the subject of your products comes up
before posting about the gear you make.

Questions and answers about lightweight hiking are always welcome
here of course, and we welcome both new hikers and very
experienced lightweight hikersas well as their questions and answers.

Those new to our group (or for those who don't quite remember what
we expect from you here) please take a minute to review the following
information which will help you communicate effectively with our
group.

Our group has only two absolute requirements;

1) STAY ON TOPIC
Please only post messages about our subject, light and ultralight
backpacking. This is not a catch-all or chat group for discussing
other subjects, no matter how interesting they may seem.

2) KEEP ALL POSTS CIVIL AND RESPECTFUL
We want this to be a friendly, helpful group, even when there are
the inevitable differences of opinion. Honest, forthright, reasoned
discussion is welcomed and encouraged here because it benefits
everyone, but we do require you to be be courteous and respectful in
your replies even if you strongly disagree with a previous post.

Before sending us a message, please review your post to make
certain it is a positive contribution to our discussions. This list
thrives on cordial, useful, helpful exchanges of information about
lightweight backpacking. Rude or off-topic posts do not belong on
this list at all, and will cause the offender to be immediately and
permanently removed from the group!

**********************************
Thanks for participating in the Yahoo Backpacking Light group!
Your input helps make this group a useful resource for other
lightweight backpackers. We hope our discussions will continue to
interest you and will help safely lighten the weight of your pack.
Please help us keep our discussions interesting and the quality of
all our messages high.

Your moderation team wishes you great lightweight hiking!
John O'Mahoney, Listowner,
Stephen Reed, Moderator,
Don "Photon" Johnston, Moderator,
Don Ladigin, Moderator

•  18
  New Members

• Hiking and camping gear
• Hiking
• Backpacking hiking
• Hiking gear
• Discount hiking gear

At 10:31 AM -0500 2/10/07, Raphael Bustin wrote:
>The good news about the MSR filters is that the ceramic filter
>elements are indeed field-cleanable, with relatively little effort.
>Classic MSR design... built like a tank, but not much thought
>to keeping it light.

The classic Katadyn ceramic filters (the ones they made originally,
before they bought Pur) have these same qualities. I've used my
original Katadyn "Pocket Filter" for 24 years on some of the most
unpalatable-looking water I could imagine. I've never suffered
illness from it.

I consider these original Katadyn filters drastically superior to the
disposable-cartridge, Pur filters:

Katadyn Mini filter:
http://products.katadyn.com/brands-and-products/produkte/Ultralight_Series/Katadyn_Mini-2.html

Katadyn Pocket Filter:
http://products.katadyn.com/brands-and-products/produkte/Endurance_Series/Katadyn_Pocket-3.html

Katadyn Camp filter:
http://products.katadyn.com/brands-and-products/produkte/Endurance_Series/Katadyn_Camp-1.html

I don't have any complaint with the MSR's, these are just additional, and equally effective alternatives.

•  18
  New Members

• Hiking and camping gear
• Hiking
• Backpacking hiking
• Hiking gear
• Discount hiking gear

Loved hiking that area of the AT, Alex. Most of the shelters were just
being reworked when I was there a few years ago. Some I stayed in were
really in dismal shape! Now I imagine they're really nice....

I agree that the Steripen rocks! Especially the Adventurer and
Traveller units. (The smallest ones.) Originally I had reservations
about the technology because anything with batteries can have battery
problems (duh!)and I wasn't sure their electronic microprocessors
would be tough enough to withstand the abuse gear often experiences
when backpacking. It seems they are indeed tough enough, and now I
have full confidence in mine.

I've noticed that the silver contacts have to be below the level of
the water you're purifying in order for the unit to work. Could that
have been the problem with your unit? I carry a xerox copy of the
original instructions with me in case someone else has to use the unit
and isn't familiar with it. So far whenever those instructions were
followed exactly the unit has worked like a charm.

I think ultraviolet water purification units will be one of the fun
things to observe in the future as they change and the technology
evolves. Eventually they'll probably be really tiny! It would be nifty
to drop a glowing UV unit the size of a thimble into a liter or two of
water, shake it for a few seconds and have clean drinking water! :o)
Best, Don L.

"alexdrewreed" <alexdrewreed <at> ...> wrote:
>
> I used the Steripen recently in the Smokies. The Smokies are full of
> cold clear water so it was a great choice. I never had to carry any
> water. Its never more than a mile from a water source there, so I
> would just scoop my bottle full if I was thirsty and near a stream,
> purify it, and drink virtually all of it. With plentiful water and a
> Steripen, there is really no excuse to carry any significant water on
> your pack. I liked it.
> The only issue I had was that it didn't work right a couple of times
> but then later worked fine. Maybe I had bad batteries. Anyone else
> have this happen?
>

•  18
  New Members

• Hiking and camping gear
• Hiking
• Backpacking hiking
• Hiking gear
• Discount hiking gear