Thread: stoves
View Single Post
Old 12-02-12 | 08:58 PM
  #165  
Rowan
Senior Member
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,767
Likes: 85
Originally Posted by cyccommute
Fine, you like the simplicity and making something. I have zero problem with that. However my 'technical mumbo jumbo' isn't addressed at the simplicity of commercial or the homemade qualities of can stoves. My 'technical mumbo jumbo' addresses the wild claims made by others about the effectiveness of the fuel...and that is applicable to bicycle touring. You can claim all you want that the stove heat just as well as a pressurized fuel stove but you would be absolutely and totally wrong. We know through science...you know that 'technical mumbo jumbo'...what the heat content of various fuels are. We use stoves to heat things so heat output is an important quality of the stoves. If you have a fuel that contains twice as much heat as another fuel, you can heat things twice as fast. On the other hand, if a fuel has half the heat content of another fuel it takes twice the fuel to heat something to the same temperature. Once you have to carry twice the fuel to do the same job, it adds up. Sure, you could carry the same amount of fuel and just refuel more often but you are just trading one problem for another.
You still don't get it do you?

Many of us aren't interested in heating things twice as fast as with another fuel source. Do you cook at home with your stove's hotplates/burners turned up to the maximum, all the time?

The fact that we might carry around another half pound of fuel for a given period doesn't make a jot of difference, when we are happy with the fuel source, its performance, its smell, its availability, its safety, and a number of other factors... like you're happy with whatever fuel source you choose to do your camp cooking.

The OP has made a choice. Why don't you just leave it at that?
Rowan is offline