Scared to move on from my Jetboil?!

[backcountry_hunter]

for those that left a jetboil for a pocket rocket did you notice a major, disproportionate use in fuel? I went with a PR2 this year (1st year leaving the beloved jetboil) and was close to burning through a 250 in a 5 day hunt. Burning once in the morning and once at night. Seemed like about 2x's as much as a JB, maybe more even....

 

[AK Troutbum]

for those that left a jetboil for a pocket rocket did you notice a major, disproportionate use in fuel? I went with a PR2 this year (1st year leaving the beloved jetboil) and was close to burning through a 250 in a 5 day hunt. Burning once in the morning and once at night. Seemed like about 2x's as much as a JB, maybe more even....

That sounds about right. I did a bunch of testing a couple years ago, comparing fuel consumption of the JB SOL, MSR PR, BRS 3000T, and SOTO Amicus (using a Toaks 650 pot for the PR, BRS, and Amicus). Although my testing wasn't super scientific, I did it in a controlled setting with everything being as equal as I could make it. Testing was done in my kitchen, using the exact amount of water (16 oz.), and starting off temperature of the water. I used the same new fuel bottle for each test and weighed the bottle before and after each test. Once the water was brought to a rolling boil, the fuel was turned off and the bottle was weighed prior to removing it from the particular stove. The after test wt. of the particular set up that I was using was deducted from the initial wt. of that set up, in order to get the amount of fuel, in grams, that was burned. I can't remember the exact numbers (although I do have them written down somewhere), but the Jetboil SOL was almost twice as efficient as the other three, which were all pretty close, but the second most efficient was the Amicus.
When I did my testing, I also recorded times it took to bring to a boil, but efficiency was my biggest concern. I found that when the stoves were turned up the highest/hottest (not including the JB), the boil times would go down a little, but the fuel consumption would be greatly increased. So, keeping the flame down a little, and having it take a minute or so longer to bring to a boil, is definitely worth the several grams of fuel savings IMO.

 

[backcountry_hunter]

^^^^thank you for that. I thought something was maybe wrong with mine but doesn't look that way.

I don't mind the boil times. Typically at night I'm in no hurry but do worry about the PR2 on a lengthy trip with only 1 can of fuel.

 

[AK Troutbum]

So, I’ve been playing around a little with comparing a couple different pots, mainly comparing weight vs. efficiency. I used the same stove (BRS 3000T), and same bottle of fuel. I compared two pots, a 650ml Toaks titanium with lid at 2.7 oz. and a 32 fluid oz. Olicamp XTS with lid at 8 oz. obviously there is a big difference between pot sizes and weights but I wanted to compare my absolute lightest pot to the Olicamp which is supposed to be one of the most efficient pots available. I used well water at a temperature around 45°F, and all testing was done inside with the ambient air temperature being 68° F. After attaching the stove to the fuel canister I weighed and recorded it in grams, then I would set the pot on top, with the specific amount of water, fire up the stove and record the length of time it took to bring the water to a rolling boil. My main objective was to determine which pot was the most efficient and burned the least amount of fuel to get the specific amount of water to a rolling boil. So the time that it took to accomplish the task was not really important to me, although I went ahead and recorded that anyway. When boiling the water in the smaller Toaks pot, I kept the flame lower because I have found from past experience that, although it takes longer to bring the water to a boil, that pot is much more efficient in regards to fuel consumption when keeping the flame from wrapping up around the sides of the pot. So, that being said, here’s my results:

Olicamp with 16 oz. water took 3min. 15sec. to boil and used 4 grams of fuel.

Toaks with 16 oz. water took 6min. to bring to boil and used 7 grams of fuel.

I also tested the Olicamp with 32 oz. of water, and it took 4min. 5sec. to boil and used 11 grams of fuel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Currahee13]

The MSR is great and you’ll be fine.

 

[Beendare]

................... here’s my results:

Olicamp with 16 oz. water took 3min. 15sec. to boil and used 4 grams of fuel.

Toaks with 16 oz. water took 6min. to bring to boil and used 7 grams of fuel.

I also tested the Olicamp with 32 oz. of water, and it took 4min. 5sec. to boil and used 11 grams of fuel.

>>>>>>

I had a feeling my super light Ti pot wasn't as efficient, just a gut feeling

.....thanks for that info....I'm going to pick one of those up.

The other thing that test shows is the pot is as important as the stove.


_______

 

[snowcamoman]

Good information AK, thanks for doing some testing. Have you done a break even point on overall weights? For example, at how many days does it take for your lighter pot and less efficient/lighter stove to become equal with the more efficient/heavier pot system? Should be pretty easy to back into the math I think. I've been using my cut down Jetboil Ti cup with the Soto Windmaster for several years and it works great. I haven't compared it to just running the Jetboil though in terms of fuel consumption weights over time.

 

[deadwolf]

I picked up a Soto windmaster as well now, my curiosity got the best of me. So far I am really liking the small bit of testing I’ve done with it, I like it more than the pocket rocket deluxe 2. I also bought a Toaks pot that is wider than the older pot I was using. I’m curious to see boil time and fuel consumption on both the stove and that new pot combo. I’ve been told the wider pot will get the water boiling more efficiently due to less heat rolling up around the side.

What I really do like is that my cook kit weight is cut from around 15ozs for the jerboil, to right at 6.5 ozs for the Soto and Toaks. Those numbers are off the top of my head and not exact.

 

[deadwolf]

Good information AK, thanks for doing some testing. Have you done a break even point on overall weights? For example, at how many days does it take for your lighter pot and less efficient/lighter stove to become equal with the more efficient/heavier pot system? Should be pretty easy to back into the math I think. I've been using my cut down Jetboil Ti cup with the Soto Windmaster for several years and it works great. I haven't compared it to just running the Jetboil though in terms of fuel consumption weights over time.

When I did this testing last summer, there was a definite break over point somewhere around the one week mark, where the extra fuel you had to feed a smaller stove was no longer worth the weight savings over the jetboil. I’d also like to buy one of the comparable to jetboil MSR drives to compare against the JB, as mine is more than ten years old.

I plan to do all that testing again in the not to distant future.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[snowcamoman]

Here's my lightweight (9 oz) system that I've come up with. Includes an older MSR Windburner cup, Modified Titanium Jetboil cup, Soto Windmaster, Custom Coffee drip system (makes a super cup of Java), Rota Locura Carbon Lid, MSR Spork. The velcro works great to keep the lid on while traveling and then I added some velcro spots to use it as a lid handle too.

 

[AK Troutbum]

So, in an attempt to try and get a little better efficiency out of the Olicamp, I did another boil with 32 oz. of water and kept the flame turned down. Doing it in the same controlled environment as before, using the same 45°-50°F water, it took almost double the time to bring to a rolling boil (7min. 15sec.), but only used 1 g less of fuel (10g used). I found it odd that while even running the stove at a lower setting, to conserve as much fuel as possible, I still burned more than twice as much fuel to heat 32 oz. of water as opposed to 16 oz. of water (10g vs. 4g). I went ahead and did another test of boiling 16 oz., with no regard to fuel consumption. With the stove turned up fairly high, but still not maxed out, I got 16 oz. of water to a rolling boil in 2min. 15sec. and burned 6g of fuel.

So from all of this I think that, if I were to be going solo for say a week or less, I could more than likely get by using the lighter weight Toaks pot and a small, 100 g fuel canister. Theoretically, I could get 2-16 oz. boils/day and still have just a few grams of fuel left at the end of a week long trip, although I’m sure that wouldn’t be the case because of fuel loss with removing the stove etc.
That would put the total weight of my cook kit at 11.5oz. to include, 100 g fuel canister, long handle titanium spoon, BRS stove, mini Bic lighter, and Toaks titanium cup/lid.

If I was going with a partner, and planning on just bringing one cook kit, the Olicamp pot would be the better option, coupled with the same BRS stove and a 230 g fuel canister. If I averaged burning 10-11 g of fuel/32 oz. boil, theoretically we could boil enough water for two meals, 21 times. That’s two boils/day=4 meals/day (2-breakfasts and 2-dinners), for 10 days. Obviously that doesn’t take into account any creature comforts like coffee, or any other hot drinks, etc.
The total weight of that system would be 22.6 oz.(or 11.3 oz./person), and would include the Olicamp pot/lid, medium 230 g fuel canister, two long handled titanium spoons, and mini Bic lighter.

I think that’s all pretty accurate, but I could’ve screwed the numbers up somewhere along the way, so please feel free to critique this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Beendare]

In my experience, you are dead on with your comments. I can get 5 days no problem with the small canister and my little pocket rocket type stove- can't remember the brand- and a Ti pot. I typically have enough for another few boils.

It would make sense to have the larger pot for 2 people...overkill for one man.

_____

 

[snowcamoman]

Great information, thanks AK! One key thing I've tried to do out hunting in the mountains is not use cold water. I'll try to store it in my bags and let that water get as warm as possible before boiling. On sunny days, a bag of water laid out on a dark, flat rock does wonders to cut boil time and fuel consumption down.

 

[208backcountry]

What is the break even point as far as length of trip? At a certain amount of days, it seems like stoves like the jetboil and windburner are always going to win out weight-wise due to the lack of efficiency and extra fuel required by the other options.

 

[deadwolf]

What is the break even point as far as length of trip? At a certain amount of days, it seems like stoves like the jetboil and windburner are always going to win out weight-wise due to the lack of efficiency and extra fuel required by the other options.

If I’m remembering back, when I did this last summer, that right around 8-9 days would be my personal break over point where the extra fuel needed would outweigh the weight savings over a jetboil or bigger MSR. That was boiling 2 cups of water twice a day. Now if you were doing anything where you needed to melt snow or were boiling for more than two people, the super light stoves wouldn’t be the way to go.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[208backcountry]

If I’m remembering back, when I did this last summer, that right around 8-9 days would be my personal break over point where the extra fuel needed would outweigh the weight savings over a jetboil or bigger MSR. That was boiling 2 cups of water twice a day. Now if you were doing anything where you needed to melt snow or were boiling for more than two people, the super light stoves wouldn’t be the way to go.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

thanks! If that truly is the breaking point, it gives these lighter stoves a lot of advantage, especially on the trips in nicer weather.

 

[AK Troutbum]

What is the break even point as far as length of trip? At a certain amount of days, it seems like stoves like the jetboil and windburner are always going to win out weight-wise due to the lack of efficiency and extra fuel required by the other options.

A couple years ago I did some Jetboil testing against several of the UL wt. stoves (Soto Amicus, MSR Pocket Rocket, and BRS 3000), and determined that the JB was much more efficient than all the others, although I can't remember to what extent. I do remember that all the UL stoves were pretty much equal in terms of efficiency though. The Jetboil Sol (the lightest Jetboil I have), weighs 12 oz. by itself, which is 0.5 oz. heavier than my UL cook system I have listed above, and that wt. includes a 100g fuel canister and spoon. So, assuming that my numbers are correct, I could take the complete UL cook system and a 230g fuel canister (12.4 oz.), for a total wt. of 17 oz., and theoretically get about 33-16 oz. water boils/meals (under real world conditions, probably more like 28-30 meals), or say 14 days worth if you are having two hot meals/day.
Total wt. for the JB Sol, titanium spoon, and 100g fuel canister is 19.5 oz. So, hypothetically, if the JB was twice as efficient as the BRS 3000, you should be able to get approx. 28-16 oz. boils/meals (under real world conditions, probably more like 24-26 meals), or say 12 days worth at 2 meals/day.
Again, this is all just a bit hypothetical because I can't remember the fuel usage with the JB, but with this comparison, you could get two weeks worth of use out of the UL system (two days longer than the JB), and still be 2.5 oz. lighter than the JB. So according to that math, the break even point would be two weeks because that is when another canister of fuel would be required for the UL system.
So, the way I figure it, if wt. was the biggest consideration, and you needed a cook system that would last longer than 2 weeks, your starting point should be the JB and a 230g fuel canister.

 

[ElkSlayer2]

Alright folks, I have been using a Jetboil Flash for my water boiling needs....it's tried trued, tested, and proven. 15.6 ozs on my food scale, and in addition to that I carry a Snow Peak 600ml cup at 4.5ozs for coffee in the mornings. So my setup for cooking and coffee with those two is 20.1ozs. I decided I wanted to get my cook set lighter, so I picked up a 750ml Toaks cup/pot at 3.6ozs, and an MSR Pocket Rocket Deluxe at 2.9ozs, essentially eliminating one cook pot and lightening the load by 13.6 ozs. Nothing but GREAT reviews on the MSR PR2 so I'm excited about the prospect of this being a good change. I have to admit though, I am pretty nervous about stepping out of my comfort zone all in the name of saving some weight. Looking for input from those that might have made the swap from Jetboil to something lighter, either positive or negative. I NEED to know I can trust this setup on a 12 day sheep hunt and not get "burned"!

Love my Jetboil. Never change. Stacked against MSR it’s worth an ounce or 2

 

[Dave0317]

I am curious is the efficiency of one pot or another a matter of shape or materials?

I have noticed the advantages of titanium are probably over-exaggerated in marketing. Lots of aluminum pots seem to be about the same weight and half the cost.
With that said, the shape of my Evernew pot was one of the main reasons I got it. It is the .9L pot, and it is wider than it is tall. It is probably just over 2.5 inches deep and about a 5 inch diameter, vs the 3.5 inch diameter that a lot of other pots seem to be. I think it really does help the heat spread over the bottom and absorb into the water instead of having flames run up the sides and just cook your handles.

anyone have any insight to the question of shape vs material? Is aluminum or steel better than Ti? Or is a wider diameter simply better than taller pots?

 

[deadwolf]

I am curious is the efficiency of one pot or another a matter of shape or materials?

I have noticed the advantages of titanium are probably over-exaggerated in marketing. Lots of aluminum pots seem to be about the same weight and half the cost.
With that said, the shape of my Evernew pot was one of the main reasons I got it. It is the .9L pot, and it is wider than it is tall. It is probably just over 2.5 inches deep and about a 5 inch diameter, vs the 3.5 inch diameter that a lot of other pots seem to be. I think it really does help the heat spread over the bottom and absorb into the water instead of having flames run up the sides and just cook your handles.

anyone have any insight to the question of shape vs material? Is aluminum or steel better than Ti? Or is a wider diameter simply better than taller pots?

From an unscientific standpoint, I’ve found that less heat escapes around the sides of my wider Toaks pot vs the skinnier one and will boil the same amount of water a little bit quicker, which translates to a little less fuel. I can also fit a 100g fuel canister and my stove inside that pot that that’s a plus for me as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk