Originally Posted by
Western Flyer
I don’t think I am breaking any of the laws of thermodynamics, but who knows perhaps I am on the edge of creating cold fusion (Silliness). We are comparing fuels and not stoves. There are lots of variables that I am assuming to be neutral. Things like complete combustion, similar flame patterns and size relative to the pot and optimum height of the pot off the flame which I have found changes with different stoves. I don’t have the expertise, the equipment or the desire to pin everything down to exact scientific results, just want see what the general trends are.
I bought the expensive Evernew Appalacian Stove seta while ago and did some tests. It can be set up in numerous configurations and they are all less efficient than just sitting the pot directly on the stove. By efficient I mean how hot a set volume of fuel will get 2 cups of water.
0.25 fl oz (2 to 3 squirts from my bottle) will heat 2 cups to 189F which is almost too hot to drink. In other configurations with more flames and the mug held above the burner the burn time is a lot shorter, flames lick around and outside the base of the mug and the water gets up to 151F.
This actually points out the flame regulation advantage of canister stoves, but most people seem to crank them all the way up to boil water quickly.....slow and steady is often the most efficient use of fuel.