[pct-l] Re: Alcohol vs. Gas stoves

[Paul.C.Griffith at bankofamerica.com (Griffith, Paul C)]

You might also consider a butane cannister stove for your 3-person 1-week hike.  The disadvantages for thru-hikers (surface-mailing fuel, properly disposing of containers) don't apply to your 1-week hike.  Coleman has introduced a 2.7oz model priced at $40 (end of the road for the $100 titanium Giga!).  Heat output is similar to a Whisperlite and they are quicker, easier, and SAFER.  During the 2001 fire season in the North Cascades I saw signs saying that ONLY cannister (not gasoline) stoves were allowed!  One "16oz" or two regular cannisters should be more than enough.  But, yes, I converted to the Robinson Cat Stove for solo hiking, too.  Also, MSR now sells a 8oz "Simmerlite" - but it costs $90. 

-----Original Message-----
From: ron M smith [mailto:ronyon@lycos.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 10:44 PM
To: pct-l@mailman.backcountry.net
Subject: [pct-l] Re: Alcohol vs. Gas stoves


Most thru-hikers likely reflect Roy's sentiment towards alcohol stoves. I do. I used a cat-food stove exclusively during a month-long solo tour of northern California with no complaints. Denatured alcohol was readily available at grocery, camping, and paint stores, and frequently showed up in hiker boxes. I also included a bottle in my re-supply box, just in case (I never needed it.) The stove itself was very easy to use, and boiled my water faster than my WhisperLite, if you consider the whole process of assembly and priming.

In September I'm taking a week-long thru-hike in the Sierras with two others. Now the scale will be tipped in favor of the gas stove weight-wise, since the weight of the Whisperlight will be shared among three people, while only requiring half as much gas as we would alcohol. We haven't made a final decision yet, but we will undoubtedly be debating the multiple-hiker weight-saving merits of the gas stove against our fondness for alcohol. (Yes, we'll take some of that too!)

-Ron

>Message: 15
>Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 17:33:00 EDT
>From: ROYROBIN@aol.com
>Subject: Re: [pct-l] Alcohol vs. Gas stoves
>To: Steven.Setzer@Colorado.EDU, pct-l@backcountry.net
>Message-ID: <5f.3b93cef2.2c2a1d8c@aol.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
>Unsubstantiated estimate by others, which I think is fairly accurate:  About 
>50 percent of thru- or long-distance hikers on the AT in 2002 used an alcohol 
>stove.  On the PCT, the percentage was probably close to 70 percent.  
>
>Fact:  A gas stove produces about twice as much heat per ounce of fuel as an 
>alcohol stove.  So why does anyone carry an alcohol stove?  
>
>Fact:  An alcohol stove of efficient design is adequate to heat water for the 
>typical long-distance hiker's meals.  (If you're cooking pasta for eight, use 
>an Optimus 111B, or similar.)  
>
>If either a gas or alcohol stove will do the job for a thruhiker, then it 
>boils down (sorry) to weight.  The weight of an alcohol stove plus fuel for a 
>week is less than the weight of a gas stove plus fuel for a week.  (Thruhikers 
>will normally resupply about once a week.)  Either fuel is available along the 
>trail now and, if necessary, alcohol is less of a hassle to ship.  
>
>Add that an alcohol stove has no moving parts to lose or break, and that you 
>can actually carry on a conversation while cooking with an alcostove, I wonder 
>why anyone still packs a gas burner.             
>_____



____________________________________________________________
Get advanced SPAM filtering on Webmail or POP Mail ... Get Lycos Mail!
http://login.mail.lycos.com/r/referral?aid=27005
_______________________________________________
pct-l mailing list
pct-l@mailman.backcountry.net
http://mailman.hack.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l