New cook stove on the market

[schwaf]

There’s no controversy except in your mind.

It’s just different.
That’s all just different.

Neither way is good or bad.

Like men or women.
Pepsi vs Coke
Etc etc

It’s just different.

So there for what you want in a stove maybe different then what other people want.

But believe it or not I highly doubt I’ll starve to death if my stove goes down and I can only eat my non hot water for x amount of days.
Sure it may not be quite as enjoyable. But I’ll sustain life none the less.

Right, that's my point. If there's no context we can't actually agree with what is better for the situation. I'm not worried about starving to death, I'm concerned with being too miserable to stay out there. I've also been stormed in solo for 2 days longer than I planned for in a mid season hunt, and I was legitimately concerned with my supplies running out. My gear was also soaked and frozen. If I couldn't make fire, that would have been a legitimate life threatening situation.

 

[schwaf]

I’ve got enough fat, long as I have water. I should be good for an extra 3 weeks no problem.

And if your water is frozen? Or your filter freezes? You need to boil. Melting snow and ice takes a LOT of fuel.

 

[mtnwrunner]

I think the two of you should let this thread get back to it's original premise. If you want to keep going back and forth, do it via DM.

Randy

 

[schwaf]

I think the two of you should let this thread get back to it's original premise. If you want to keep going back and forth, do it via DM.

Randy

Fair enough. Sorry to keep hijacking and going off with tangents. Just wanted to give some context with why I felt it was so important to use a pot design that withstands fire. I'm done now.

 

[Dobermann]

At risk of this being seen as off-topic ... because the topic of sporks vs spoons came up, here's a good existing summary of the issues. Offering within this thread as part of the new company's market research / user feedback.

From: https://www.adventurealan.com/best-long-handle-spoon-backpacking/

Why spoons are better than sporks​

The backpacking spoon vs spork debate is settled, and spoons win in a landslide. Let us count the ways:

1. Spoons are better for eating wet food. Most backpacking food that requires a utensil is comprised of small pieces in a wet sauce. There are not large chunks to be speared. But there is always leftover sauce or bits to be scooped out. The fork portion of a spork is essentially wasted on backpacking food.
2. A spoon’s bowl end holds more volume than a spork, which squanders some of its carrying capacity on pointy tips.
3. Sporks are prone to poking things. They can tear a whole in your ditty sack, puncture a freeze dried meal bag, rip through polyester, and all sorts of other minor calamities
4. Because of the shallow ending points, sporks aren’t actually good at spearing anything, even if there were things to spear. We estimate that 95% of spork-based action is just using it to be an inferior spoon.
5. Sporks are worse than spoons at spooning and worse than forks at forking, they’re bad at everything and good at nothing.