|
|
|
|
kimgraves
Dec 14, 2005, 6:09 PM
Post #1 of 56
(11332 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 13, 2003
Posts: 1186
|
Hi Gang,
My partner, Matt, and I are going up to Mt. Washington this weekend. My first time in the Presidentials in winter since 1979. We need a stove for melting snow and my old winter stove is missing a crucial part: so I need a new one.
http://www.rockclimbing.com/...p.cgi?Detailed=66281
That's a Phoebus 625 on the left (missing a support) and a tried and true Svea 123 on the right. Both were heavily used back in the day. These stoves are dead simple and idiot proof. The Phoebus has a pump on it to prepressurize the tank but both the stoves work by priming the stem so that gas is vaporized as it ascends into the burner. The only moving parts in both stove are the valves. There is nothing to break or repair in them. They could clog, but didn't. Both stoves are adjustable - just turn the valves open or close. The Phoebus weights 28oz empty. The Svea 19oz full. These stoves are both +30 years old and work fine - there is nothing to wear out - just irreplaceable parts to loose to the vagaries of the "Missing Objects Vortex" (MOV).
So I replaced the Phoebus with a new MSR DragonFly.
http://www.msrcorp.com/...images/dragonfly.jpg
I chose this stove because it's supposed to burn even hotter than the expedition stove and it's adjustable - not to mention $30 cheaper (I got a deal). But this stove is vastly more complex than the Phoebus. The pump is plastic and has two O ring, two springs, and at least 15 parts when you take it apart to loose to the MOV. The stove itself has two O rings another 15ish parts to loose. Then there is the repair kit with all it's parts. It weights about 20 oz with all the components and dodads - not including a bottle.
The MSR stove works fine - it took me a couple of minutes of scratching my head - the instructions are so poorly written - but I got it going. It's more complex to start than the old stoves because you have to attache the stove to the pump and because of the second valve on the pump - but nothing too bad - unless you were hyperthermic of course. :? It also flared up during the priming even though all the valves were tightly closed - something to be careful of. :? Despite all the protests in the gear reviews I found the stove relatively quieter than what I remember the Phoebus or Svea being. :roll:
I did a test: dumped four trays of ice cubes into a 2 quart pot. It took 22 minutes for the MSR to rolling boil producing 9 cups of water. Thinking that a long time, I then dumped 4 ice cube trays into the same pot and put it on my home stove: result 17 minutes and 7.5 cups of water (our ice cubes are not uniform in size). So roughly equivalent. Wish I could test it against the Phoebus - anyone have an old part?
My question though, is what have we gained by adding complexity to stove designs? The MSR is field maintainable, but needs to be because of it's complexity. The old stoves can be cleaned in the field, but unless you drop them and puncture the canister they'll just keep working.
Is the MSR really safer? It seems to me that with all those valves and connections there is a larger not smaller, chance of a fuel leak.
If someone would make the Phoebes with a titanium tank it certainly would be as light as the MSR and include the tank as well.
Am I missing something? What have we gained?
Best, Kim
Edited to add embedded images after system migration
(This post was edited by kimgraves on Dec 31, 2006, 5:46 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
koko
Dec 14, 2005, 6:43 PM
Post #2 of 56
(11332 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 15, 2003
Posts: 139
|
good post...I agree that simplicity is a blessing in any outdoors sport, and this shoud go for stoves as well. One thing to think about: how does each stove handle different types of fuel? on some expeditions you have to use what you got, not what is ideal. My guess is that the older simple stove would fair better, since the tolerances are not as tight (less valves to clog up etc).
for the replacement part you're looking for-why not go down to the hardware store and pick up a length of copper (or some other metal) tubing of the right diameter and make a new support yourself?
|
|
|
|
|
jaybird2
Dec 14, 2005, 6:56 PM
Post #3 of 56
(11332 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 9, 2004
Posts: 163
|
One of the main benefits of the technology is that the new stoves are much lighter. The Dragonfly is a car-camping rig, so I wouldn't use that as the basis of today's benchmark. The International for liquid fuel is HALF the weight of the Pheobus. The Superfly weighs a scant 4.1 ounces. I have had no problems with it at 12,000 in 10F weather. You said that the Svea weights 19oz with fuel. Than thing looks pretty small, how much fuel you talking about there?
All in all though, those stoves rocked pretty hard if they are pushing 30+ years of use. That is quality. Good post.
Another feature of today's stoves is that they use a satellite fuel source. It isn't one huge clunky piece, it breaks down for better storage or transportation. This is a huge benefit.
|
|
|
|
|
redtail
Dec 14, 2005, 7:13 PM
Post #4 of 56
(11332 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 3, 2004
Posts: 48
|
Great post! I've been using an Primus stove since1977 and except forusing the wire needle to clean the nozzle, it has never needed a single repair. It's biggest drawback is not being user friendly (def: pain in the a##) in windy conditions.
If I read your post right you were looking for suggestions on a replacement mainly to melt ice/snow. I finally broke down and bought a new stove and I'd highly recommend the Jetboil! It packs conveniently and will melt ice and bring it to a boil (just as the name implies) faster than anything I've ever seen or used.
|
|
|
|
|
sweetchuck
Dec 14, 2005, 7:16 PM
Post #5 of 56
(11332 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 18, 2005
Posts: 151
|
I used a Dragonfly thru-hiking the AT. We got it because it was supposed to be able to simmer much better than the whisperlite. I think that's why it is more complex. It worked fine for us, but I am sure we could have went with something lighter. I have a wisperlite from 1989, and it is still going strong. It's dead simple, but the plastic threads must be handled with care. One thing I like about the bottle being separate is that I can bring a big honking one for long trips and a small one for weekend trips. We are going to VA this weekend to backpack, freeze, and cook on my trusty little stove! Love it!
sc
|
|
|
|
|
hereandthere
Dec 14, 2005, 7:24 PM
Post #6 of 56
(11332 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2005
Posts: 70
|
why don't you just make a new support out of an old coat hanger or something so you can try out your old stove and compare.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
kimgraves
Dec 14, 2005, 8:34 PM
Post #8 of 56
(11332 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 13, 2003
Posts: 1186
|
I’m uncomfortable balancing a pot full of water on a coat hanger (in a tent) and I don’t have the tooling available to bend something thicker – getting it the same length, etc. So I’m resigned to the Dragonfly as a replacement. Hell, I’m looking forward to using it out in the field and not just in my kitchen.
I just finished running the same test using the Svea. Result: 26 minutes to melt and boil 4 trays of ice cubes yielding 9 C of water.
So the difference in performance between the Svea and Dragonfly is a little less than 20%. Not bad for a self-pressurizing 30 year old summer stove competing with a new state of the art pressurized stove! Of course the fact that the Svea is self-pressurizing makes in unusable when it gets really cold. I’ve used it in the low 30’s but wouldn’t take it down below that.
I did try to lite the Phoebus. It lit, but apparently the leather seal in the pump was dried out from being in storage for all these years and I couldn’t get the pressure up enough to get the stove to really cook. I tried putting Vaseline on the seal and that helped a little, but only until the Vaseline melted. But my point is that if the Phoebus had a titanium tank, it would be lighter than the MSR and be a much simpler stove to use and maintain.
What’s been gained by the added 50odd parts of the MSR?
Best, Kim
PS: the Phoebus is going in the garbage unless someone wants it.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Dec 14, 2005, 8:38 PM
Post #9 of 56
(11332 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
I know this is blasphemy to some, but calling those MSR stoves modern is funny. They are pieces of shit.
I like the heat exchanger apprroach with truly modern cannister stoves.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
sweetchuck
Dec 14, 2005, 8:53 PM
Post #10 of 56
(11332 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 18, 2005
Posts: 151
|
Alright Dinkus, that crosses the line! You can eat cold milktoast (whatever that is) my MSR is going strong, and your hurt my feelings!
sc
|
|
|
|
|
pastprime
Dec 14, 2005, 9:20 PM
Post #11 of 56
(11332 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 7, 2005
Posts: 251
|
Svea 123, what a gem. I got mine for $7.95 in 1959, mail order from Gerry Cunningham, when his catalog was 4 typewritten sheets and he was selling from his house in Ward or Golden. I replaced the wick and switched to the cap that takes the pump in the mid '70's, and it still works wonderfully.
They are phenomenally fuel efficient. If the operator understands them, they will boil a quart of near freezing water in 3 1/2 to 4 minutes, and their 4oz tank will run at full throttle for nearly an hour, much longer at lower outputs. Even before I got a pump, 3 of us did a 12 day ski mountaineering trip in winter in Canada where we were melting at least as much of our water as we were getting from streams, and cooking most meals, and we went in with a quart and a half of fuel and had some left when we came out. I've been with a lot of people who go through a pint or more in their MSR's on a weekend in summer.
Good to know is that running the stove at high heats when it runs out of fuel will scorch the wick and lower heat output forever after. Don't let the stove run till empty; shut it down when you can tell it's getting low. And if it's red hot and rocking when you shut it off, immediately open the valve again to let fuel vapor pass through with the flame off for maybe 10 seconds to cool the stem, because it is heat from the stem that scorches the wick.
Empty the tank when you get home, because fuel that's been hot deteriorates much faster and gums or varnishes the works.
Overfilling the tank doesn't damage anything, but restricts heat output because there isn't as much air to expand to pressurize the tank. Just fill to the bottom of the little pipe that lines the filler hole.
Use clean fuel that smells like it is supposed to, not like varnish; that means it has gone bad. I've seen problems with other fuels than Coleman, always used it, never had a problem. Coleman also has additives that keep it good in storage much longer than others, too.
It has been a long, long time since I've seen or heard of a Pheobus 625. Holy cow. Where do they put the time after it goes through here?
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Dec 14, 2005, 10:16 PM
Post #12 of 56
(11332 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
Let me just say that as complex as the Whisperlite/DragonFly/XGK look they are rediculously simple. I mean the whisperlite is basically a coat hanger with a burner. Just a step up from an Esbit or alcohol stove.
The pump? It looks a little complex. Take it apart and it looks a bit more complex (there are balls, pump cups, o-rings, springs, ect.) but not much on it will instantaneously fail.
If you keep the pump cup oiled and wet, and check the o-rings every now and then I doubt the stove will ever fail. As a interesting repair tip, the O-Ring on the fuel bottle top is the same as the O-ring on the pump. If that ring fails on a trip you automatically have a replacement.
I got pissed for some reason and tossed my whisperlite pump against the kitchen wall. It exploded and took me 3 hours to find the ball and spring. I put it back together and it worked just fine.
On longer/colder trips I carry a second pump rather than a second stove. When melting snow for water is more than just a creature comfort you cannot have a complete stove failure and the only thing to fail on the Whisperlite is the pump. Yes, they make a $20 repair kit, but the pump is about the same price and doesn't weight all that much. Alternately you can just carry the rebuild kit.
I've had my Whisperlite for 8 years. I've probably used it over 200 days in that time and it's never clogged and never failed. The closest I came to not having a stove was when I hadn't used it in a few months and the pump cup dried out. spit on the cup and although it was deformed it still worked well enough to cover me for 5 days on the Northville-Placid Trail.
My only recomendation is DON'T over pump it. It will leak like you wouldn't believe and create a real fire hazard. Also, be gentle on the gas valve, they are made of soft brass and tend to deform if you crank it down. The stove takes a few seconds to respond. Keep that in mind.
Finally, prime white gas stoves with denatured alcohol. It conserves your fuel, keeps the stove cleaner, and prevents nasty flare ups. An ounce of denatured alcohol can last 2-3 days of winter use allowing you to melt an extra few quarts of snow during that time.
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Dec 14, 2005, 10:28 PM
Post #13 of 56
(11332 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
In reply to: I've been with a lot of people who go through a pint or more in their MSR's on a weekend in summer.
They clearly don't know how to use the stove. 4oz/person/day is the winter rule for me.
In summer my wife and I use an 11oz fuel bottle about 3/4-full at the start and usually come home with fuel every weekend but since we're usually paddling I don't particular obsess over carry 2 extra ounces home with me.
Last spring my brother and a friend used 11oz over 3 full days cooking 2 dinners for 3 people and 2 breakfast...plus, boiling water to clean pots, and for hot drinks (it was in the low 20's at night) and hot waterbottles for those pusses.
|
|
|
|
|
delcross
Dec 14, 2005, 10:45 PM
Post #14 of 56
(11332 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 5, 2005
Posts: 46
|
:)
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Dec 14, 2005, 11:12 PM
Post #15 of 56
(11332 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
In reply to: In reply to: Svea 123, what a gem....They are phenomenally fuel efficient. If the operator understands them, they will boil a quart of near freezing water in 3 1/2 to 4 minutes, and their 4oz tank will run at full throttle for nearly an hour Pastprime, I think time may have clouded your memory a bit. It is not physically possible to raise 15 quarts of water (full throttle for an hour, 4 minutes boiling time) from near freezing to boiling with 4 fluid ounces of white gas. Even if your Svea could transfer all of the heat from the flame to the water without any losses the best you could do is about 9 liters at sea level, or 12 liters at 8000 meters. But your stove probably was no better than 50% efficient in the field, maybe worse. In reply to: The pump? It looks a little complex. Take it apart and it looks a bit more complex (there are balls, pump cups, o-rings, springs, ect.) but not much on it will instantaneously fail. That cheap little plastic piece of sh it busted in the field one time on me. It was brand new. Listen to Dingus.
I've definitely heard stories of the MSR pumps breaking, but I assume/d that this was anti MSR marketing. 8 years 1 pump, although I've switched to a new one and use the old one as a backup. that stoves been good to me so bad mouth it I will not.
|
|
|
|
|
pastprime
Dec 14, 2005, 11:45 PM
Post #16 of 56
(11332 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 7, 2005
Posts: 251
|
Delcross- Thanks for putting it politely. Those numbers do sound kind of like the legendary 200 mpg cars, but they are pretty firmly imbeded in my memory. I'm tied up for the next couple of days, but I'm going to fire the thing up and get some numbers with the stopwatch.
Numbers I am sure of: After reading the raves about Jetboil, which is reported to boil a pint; pint, mind you; the standard has generally been a quart or litre; of water in 1min. 30 sec.(I've seen longer times to,but I'll use the shortest) ; I pulled out my MSR pocket rocket with about a 2/3 full canister and started boiling pints of very cold Salt-Lake-City-in-winter tap water in my 1 1/2 quart pot, and got times of 1min 35-45 seconds to rolling boil. I could have cut at least 10 seconds off if I'd stopped the clock as soon as boiling began, but before it reached full force. This stove weighs 4 oz in its nifty little container, the pot weighs 4 1/2 oz with lid, and the pot is easily stirred with a normal spoon, so it can be used for cooking and eating. There must be a reason Jetboil owners love the things, but I don't feel any urge to rush out and buy something heavier and less useful for all around usage for maybe, if the most favorable reports are right, a time savings of 10 seconds for a pint.
Again, these times are a for sure. I will run some less than decades old numbers on the Svea. The 1 1/2 quarts in 12 days for 3 people figure is correct though, according to my trip journal.
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Dec 15, 2005, 2:32 AM
Post #17 of 56
(11332 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
In reply to: .... But my point is that if the Phoebus had a titanium tank, it would be lighter than the MSR and be a much simpler stove to use and maintain. ....
Not all metals stand up so well to temperature cycles and pressure cycles. I know that the elite submarines of the former Soviet Union once had pressure hulls of titanium which afforded a much deeper crush depth for similar amounts of thickness. But those hulls also had a shorter life because cracks developed after significantly fewer dives/surfacings than with conventional materials. As far as I know, the US Navy never used titanium in its submarine pressure hulls.
Of course a stove does not reach anywhere near the pressues of a submarine. But the pressures are expansive and not compressive which can be factor against the stove. There are also other issues to compare from metal to metal besides failure under cyclic loading like strength of bimetallic joints (if needed) - a metallurgist or some such could answer.
Perhaps not too unrelated, I also recall the titanium is more expensive ... or at least it was until the Soviet Union dissolved and lots of titanium scrap metal flooded the market for a while.
Bill
P.S. I loved my SVEA - sigh; yes, noisy like a blow torch but still a heartening sound when the feet are damp and the tips are cold. My sister did not like hers but I suspect it was the wick that got scorched in her case - didn't know that could happen by letting it burn out of fuel. But we've always use her whisperlite on all our more recent week-long backpacking trips where weight was an issue.
|
|
|
|
|
ryanb
Dec 15, 2005, 3:28 AM
Post #18 of 56
(11332 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 4, 2004
Posts: 832
|
The only thing i have seen break on a wisper lite pump is one of the littel plastic tab that keeps the pump plunger in the pump body. the pump in question was quite old and still kind of functioned.
|
|
|
|
|
delcross
Dec 15, 2005, 3:38 AM
Post #19 of 56
(11332 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 5, 2005
Posts: 46
|
:)
|
|
|
|
|
wetrocks
Dec 15, 2005, 4:04 AM
Post #20 of 56
(11332 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 22, 2002
Posts: 102
|
Well after 15 years of good use my old stove finally packed it in. I managed to bust off a main screw and drilling it out etc didn't pan out too well. It had the same design as the Phoebus 625 and I loved that thing. I've been forced to rebuild it everytime I need to use it....kind of touch and go.
Time to say good-bye it to though. I've been real reluctant to get a new stove because all the ones I've tried out just don't feel like they'll hold up. I've tried my friend's Whisperlite, DragonFly and XGK. Didn't really take to any of them, not to mention it's easier to have a conversation behind a lit F16 than it is around those stoves. Lots of things annoyed me about the MSR stoves i.e. pump design and it's hose connection (eke, urk, eke, urk, eke trying to get if off), occasional flare ups, set-up time etc etc).
Ahhh but then I found the Brunton Nova. I've had it for 2 weeks (AKA 2 trips) and so far it's been great in the cold. It's not the lightest stove out there, but its materials are all metal (no weak plastic here) and it looks like it will last at least as long as my last stove. There's more stoves out there than MSR.
|
|
|
|
|
pastprime
Dec 15, 2005, 7:54 PM
Post #22 of 56
(11332 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 7, 2005
Posts: 251
|
delcross; I will run a test on my Svea; should be fun to fire it up again.
Whatever the results, it's amazing how much energy is in gasoline. Think how much work it is to push your car 100 feet, at less than 1mph and with no wind resistance; then realize that 4oz of fuel will push a Toyota Corolla for a mile at 70 mph. We take a lot of amazing things for granted.
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Dec 16, 2005, 1:52 AM
Post #23 of 56
(11332 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
In reply to: ... but then I found the Brunton Nova. I've had it for 2 weeks (AKA 2 trips) and so far it's been great in the cold. It's not the lightest stove out there, but its materials are all metal (no weak plastic here) and it looks like it will last at least as long as my last stove. There's more stoves out there than MSR.
If I were going to purchase a backpacking stove then I would probably get the Brunton Nova. It looks durable.
However, it isn't very efficient with kerosene which maybe someone mentioned was because it has one port for all fuels. Anyway, if one compares the Nova with MSR's Whisperlite Internationale (data from REI):
performanc - [Internationale]
burn time (1 pt)
white gas - 84 / 92
kerosene - 108 / 60 (!)
water boiled
white gas - 7 / 6.57
kerosene - 6.3 / 3.6 (!)
If I wanted to burn kerosene efficiently then I wouldn't get the Nova.
|
|
|
|
|
pancaketom
Dec 16, 2005, 2:16 AM
Post #24 of 56
(11332 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 9, 2002
Posts: 391
|
My very back of the envelope calculations give me under 10 liters of water for 4 oz of white gas from 0 to 100 deg. C. (icy cold to about to boil) with 100% efficiency.
One nice thing about the new stoves is the removable fuel canister allows you to remove the fuel bottle for flights. If they balk, at least you don't lose your whole stove. If you use the fuel canister as a water bottle, then they are unlikely to take it away from you, but it probably shouldn't say "white gas" on it or something like that. I also like being able to take different sized fuel bottles, or a little aluminum one and another plastic bottle of fuel that gets crushed after it is emptied. (make sure it is one that doesn't leak or dissolve).
In any case, when you are melting snow, it takes a lot more fuel than just heating up instant foods. This is especially true when it is cold and windy.
I haven't busted my almost 10 year old whisperlight yet, but I have had to replace a few O rings when they started to crack. I have heard some horror stories about the plastic shattering in extreme cold though.
|
|
|
|
|
delcross
Dec 16, 2005, 3:00 AM
Post #25 of 56
(11332 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 5, 2005
Posts: 46
|
:)
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
