Canister Stoves in Summer Conditions: How Many Days Before Heavier, Efficient Stoves Make Sense?
(This post may contain affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links and make a purchase, I’ll receive a small commission at no extra cost to you. This helps support the channel and allows us to continue to make videos like this. Thank you for the support!)
Four stoves:
… each with their pros and cons. Now, the video is really about fuel efficiency and how much extra weight in fuel we would need to carry on an extended outing. I was wondering when a low stove weight could no longer make up for a higher fuel weight. How many days would we have to be out there. So, take a look at the video for the result.
But as I mention at the video’s conclusion, there are lots of things that might tilt us towards one stove or another, not just the carrying (stove, pot, and fuel) weight. Here are a few of my additional thoughts on each stove after three weeks of daily testing:
Yes, it is magically light. It is also rather insanely cheap. That’s a rare combination unless we are also getting junk. But this stove isn’t junk (at leas tin the summer conditions in which I tested it). It lagged behind the MSR Pocket Rocket 2 in terms of efficiency, but not by a lot, something link 1 gram of additional fuel per 240ml water boil. It tended to spout a bit more fuel when making the canister connection. It was a bit on the loud side, reminding me more of the sound coming from liquid fuel stoves. It kept a surprisingly sturdy base for the 750ml pot, but I wouldn’t want anything much bigger on it, and it did perform noticeably worse on the couple of days we had wind. That being said, it’s really hard to beat its weight and price for a solo hiker out for a week (between resupplies) or a twosome out for a few days.
I thought of it as sort of the opposite side of the BRS 3000T spectrum. It was a little heavier. A little less loud. A bit sturdier. A bit more pricy. I can see why it’s a standard amongst those who go into the outdoors. I found it incredibly consistent across differing conditions, and that reliability at a still pretty darn low weight made it feel like a great option if you were worried about wind, storms, or exposure to the elements above treeline.
What the heck. This thing was just all over the place in terms of performance (as I note in the video). Being an alpinist and winter climber, I had been using one for years because of its ability to turn large amounts of snow into water. Well, this test cured me of that, and convinced me that my new go-to stove would be…
I am rarely out by myself. As such, I need to boil more water for more people. The bigger pot, far superior fuel-use rate (more than twice as efficient as anything else in this test), and imperviousness to wind or other elements (at least in the summer) make it a great option for me. The weight is worth it when we consider that weight divided by multiple people. It packs up smaller than the more vertically oriented stoves that have an integrated pot an burner, too, and is a pretty light option within that category, too. I also liked how the lower frame of the actual stove was not heat conductive, allowing me to unscrew it from the canister immediately after use, helping me pack up more quickly. In the end, though, it was like cooking with a Swiss watch. I could count on 52 to 60 seconds per boil, every time, no matter what was going on.