ultralight stoves

I am trying to choose a light weight stove/pot set and I wanted to know if anyone has any advice. My two main options are Snow Peak starter kit and the MSR Pocketrocket kit. The main use of these would be to heat up water for my wife and I.
Thanks for your input. Also does anyone know if the Snow Peak cooksets are non-stick?

Not sure what you mean by "starter kit," but Snow Peak makes a number of kits in different sizes, including some non-stick titanium ones. http://www.snowpeak.com/
I have a Primus Micron canister stove and a Primus pot (not titanium) that holds the stove,a small canister and a few misc. things. I take the pot on day hikes for heating water. I also have a cheap aluminum cookkit that I will take for something longer where I will be cooking a meal.

Jonathan -

You do know, I presume, that you do not need to "match" stove and pot brand. For that matter, you do not need to match stove and fuel canister brand. Snowpeak canisters are by far the most expensive per gram of fuel, and burn no differently than MSR, Primus, Markill, Coleman, or generic Slovenian. Just make sure to get the canisters with the standard industry thread coupling. Well, ok, there is one difference - in cold weather, the MSR and Markill isobutane canisters work to much colder temperatures than anyone else's. But for most use, they are all the same performance.

As a stove, I would get the Pocket Rocket over any of the Snowpeak stove tops on the basis of performance alone (heat at max, controllability, heat distribution, and pot stability on a given canister).

For the pots, the GSI anodized aluminum sets will clean just as well and easily as any of the "non-stick" pots from anyone, plus they will heat a pot to a full boil faster than any othe pot I have used (including the new pots with welded-on heat exchangers). We have had ours as our primary pot set for something like 7 or 8 years now, and it has proven as durable as any stainless pot set we have. One thing about titanium, no, several things, are 1. it is incredibly expensive, 2. it does not conduct heat very well, hence won't spread the heat well (why do you think it was chosen for high-speed aircraft?), 3. it dings pretty easily (part of the reason Ti pots are so light is that they are very thin).

Some aluminum pots are not very strong, and do dent easily. But the anodized aluminum ones are quite strong and almost as light as titanium. The GSI ones are cheaper than ones from MSR, Snowpeak, and others, but appear in my 6 or so years of hard usage to be at least as durable as stainless.

And yes, my collection of pots includes stainless (including an MSR kit), aluminum (3 or 4 different brands of soft stuff, plus the GSI anodized), titanium, and then there is the gourmet cookware (including a backpackable wok). And, as I said in another thread, I have carried in dutch ovens, cast iron skillets, and, oh yes, at high altitude, a pressure cooker (that was a waste of weight!)

Bill, I didn't even think that it might seem that my Primus stove and pot were a kit or match of some kind, but it sounds that way. The pot just happened to be the right size for what I wanted. Unless you have a "system stove" like the Jetboil (my terminology), like Bill said, it doesn't matter what you set on it. There are quite a number of canister stoves that have the Lindal valve (the screw on valve). A few, Camping Gaz for one, have a different valve, so make sure whatever canister you buy that it fits your stove. My Coleman, for example takes a proprietary canister that fits only the Colemans as far as I know.

Tom mentions his Coleman taking only a Coleman canister. Turns out that Coleman has at least 5 different types of fittings -

1. industry standard threaded fitting (lindal valve)
2. Camping Gaz (subsidiary of Coleman), similar size and construction to the lindal valve, but not threaded
3. Camping Gaz "puncture" canisters (for the 100 and 200 series stoves).
4. "X" series for the Xpedition, Xponent, etc.
5. standard propane stove fitting, similar to the lindal valve, but different diameter, thread pitch, and sturdier for the higher pressures that propane requires.

The first will fit any industry standard stove top. Only one stove that I am familiar with will fit both 1 and 2, namely the MSR Superfly. I think that Tom's stove is one of the X series, which only takes the one series of canister. The X series canister is a very clever design that allows use at much lower temperatures than other butane canisters, although the price per gram of fuel is very high (almost as high as the Snowpeak canisters).

Bill-yes, it's an Xtreme, one of the 3 Xponent series stoves. Jim Shaw wouldn't stop raving about it until I bought one-hehehe. We used Jim's 2 burner model in Yosemite two winters ago. Works great. I'd be leery about taking it out of the country, although I got mine off eBay and the instructions and box markings are all in Japanese, including what looks like the warranty card. I think Lindal valve canisters are pretty much available anywhere.

My recommendation would be the MSR PocketRocket. I can't say which of the two you asked about is better as I have the PocketRocket and not the other. Yet as for performance of the Pocketrocket, it hasn't let me down yet. If your main purpose is boiling water it will make you happy with its performance. Although it isn't as known for simmering and what not, I have found it gives fairly good control over temp. if you need that.
As for gas, I have used various brands for gas and have not yet spotted a difference between them, besides in price. I've never used it in really cold temperature's either, yet like I said before, for the thirty bucks I got it for it has served me quite well.

-Daniel

Thanks for you input. I had thought that I read on REI.com that the Pocketrocket only takes Isobutane. And other brands like Snow Peak take Isobutane or butane/propane. Colemen only takes butane/propane.
The Pocketrocket kit comes with the stove plus a their Titan kettle (28 oz and $80) and the Snow peak kit comes with the stove, their sprok and their Trek 700 titanium pot(24 oz & $69) For the money...how makes the best stove? I also saw that Northern Lights makes a piezo stove for $45. And colemen makes their F1 stove, does anyone know anything about it?
If anyone has any more thoughts they would be welcome.

Jonathan thought he read "I had thought that I read on REI.com that the Pocketrocket only takes Isobutane. And other brands like Snow Peak take Isobutane or butane/propane. Colemen only takes butane/propane."

If you read that on REI.com, then someone made a serious mistake in posting it (not the first time REI has given out erroneous information, but rarely on their website).

To repeat, The Pocket Rocket and all stove tops that have the industry standard threaded fitting (called a Lindal valve) will burn any of the mixtures in the canisters that are primarily butane or isobutane, mixtures of both, and with a certain amount of propane (isobutane is sometimes called isopropane). There used to be canisters of pure isobutane and pure butane available, but currently the available canisters are mixes of butane/propane, isobutane/propane, or all 3 of the gases. It doesn't matter what brand is on the canister label, as long as the threaded fitting matches.

The manufacturers all say in their brochures "use only OUR brand", but it does not matter for most purposes. The place where it makes a difference is at colder temperatures. The MSR and Markill canisters that have no butane, just isobutane and propane, will perform to lower temperatures than the butane/propane or butane/isobutane/propane mixes without resorting to the special procedures.

As previously stated, the big difference among brands is the cost per gram of fuel, with Snowpeak being by far the most expensive (especially in their smallest canister) and the Slovenian-produced ones being the least expensive.

I would not advise getting the kits, mostly because the pot size does not necessarily match the way you will be cooking. Get the stove and pot separately. As others have suggested, the Pocket Rocket is the better performer of the stoves you mention. Based on experience, I would also advise against getting a titanium pot, primarily because of titanium's poor heat conduction and spreading, and second because of the exorbitant price. If you do more than boil water, sooner or later you will scorch a spot in the titanium pot bottom the size and shape of the flame of your stove's burner. And it will flavor the food for a long time after (really foul taste). I suggest a 1-liter pot as a minimal cook kit (that's more like 32 ounces than the 24 or 28 of the two titanium ones you mention), and anodized aluminum. Anodized aluminum is a better non-stick than teflon (which is suspected of leaching into the food, though that's arguable, as Chumango will probably note). And the difference in weight between the 28 ounce Ti and a 1-liter anodized aluminum is in the couple of ounce range, not enough to worry about.

Yeah, titanium is the IN thing to have, but it really is not as good in field use. Save yourself some money, and mix and match.

Are piezo auto-starting stoves a lot better than the manual kind? I had heard from one reviewer(at thebackpacker.com) that Piezo starter can sometimes not work. Is that true? Is the quality of MSR and GSI cooksets about the same, or is one better than the other?

Yes, piezo lighters can fail, and ultimately will wear out. They are very nice when working. But eventually you will have to start using matches or a Bic.

As for whether a piezo stove is "a lot better", what do you mean "a lot better". The stove works the same whether you light it with the piezo lighter, a Bic, a paper match, a wood match, flint and steel, or a splinter pulled out of the campfire. The piezo doohickie is just a way of lighting the gas, and has nothing to do with the performance of the stove. It is just another fancy thing to be a "selling point" that really has no critical function, just like the current fad of having plastic windows in tents (which fog up, gather frost on cold mornings, and get scratched quickly to become transluscent rather than transparent). Would Nike running shoes work any differently if Nike left the "swoop" off? Of course not.

Oh, wait, I forgot. I have watched young scouts over the years lose the capability of lighting matches. Even the pyros don't seem to know how to light matches anymore. So maybe the piezo lighter compensates for that lost "skill". And, it does guarantee that you will have to buy a new stove in a couple years when the piezo unit wears out (or breaks off, as I have seen them do). Naaaahhh. Just learn to light a match in damp conditions and strong winds.

Since I have both MSR and GSI cook pots, my experience is that if there is any difference, I can't tell after 5 or 6 years of use. Now, if having the MSR logo is worth the extra price, go ahead and spend the extra money. I personally don't care whose label is on it, as long as it does the intended job dependably over a long time and hard usage.

Bill, you had said that Snow Peak Canisters are more expensive. Yet after looking at REI.com I might have to disagree. MSR IsoPro Canister - 113 grams at $4 or .035 cents per grame. The Snow Peak Giga Power Fuel Canister - 110 grams at $2.95 or .0268 cents per gram. Primus Power Gas Canister - 110 grams at $4.5 or .045 cents per gram. I can't find any info on Colemen or Brunton canisters.

REI.com doesn't list the 225 and 450 gram canisters, which are much less than the 100 gram per gram of fuel. But it looks like some of the other companies have discovered the huge markups they can charge for the small canisters. Although that's less for the Snow Peak than I recall. My last 2 were a Primus 450g @ $7 (0.016/g) and a Markill 227 g @ $5 (0.022/g, but that's a more expensive isobutane mix, with my last Primus 225 g costing $4, or 0.018/g). At 2 ounces/person-day (summer usage, mostly heat water for rehydrating freezedry plus a couple cups of coffee), that's $0.62/p-d for the Markill half-pounder, $0.45/p-d for the Primus one pound, and $0.76/p-d for the Snow Peak tiny quarter-pound canister, getting awfully close to double the cost of the 450 g canister for the same amount of fuel. In terms of carry-out weight, the larger canisters are also less weight as empties per person-day.

For comparison, buying white gas in the much more expensive quart containers, the liquid fuel equivalent is about the same as the half-pounder canisters in cost per person-day, but drops to about half that if you buy it in the gallon containers. Plus the fuel bottles are reusable, and weigh less per person-day, and are easy to judge at the start of the trip for amount of fuel needed. (No, don't ask why MSR "superfuel" costs as much as a gallon of regular old Coleman fuel - I have no idea, other than it having the MSR label).

Another consideration is that the tiny canisters are basically 2 person-days, the half-pounder is 4 person-days (or 2 people for a weekend trip), and the full pound (450 gram) is close to 8 person-days. You can be conservative on your fuel usage and cut that to somewhere between 1 and 1.5 ounces per person-day. But you have to have a good idea of how much is left in that partially used canister (I weigh the canisters after each trip and mark the weight with a grease pencil, subtracting off the empty canister weight, so I know whether to take a spare canister).

I love my optimus nova, really is quite adjustable in flame size. Could never simmer with my msr's.

I have a primus (70 or 71 series gas? - all the identifying marks wore off years ago) - I bought it sometime in the late 1960's - early 1970's - it's a brass stove in a tin box (which serves as a windscreen and pot support) - and it's never let me down. Starting it is either dodgy or dramatic (depending on how daft you are when you place fuel in the primer depression to pre-heat the capillary tubes)- it weights a bit more than a pound, including a pint of white gas, which lasts me three or four days of boiling water for breakfast (coffe / oatmeal) and dinner. I also have an MSR Whisperlite from the mid 1980's - it's more stable and more compact BUT it's not as reliable (the jet is prone to clogging) - neither are canister stoves - but it's also true that I'm not throwing away the canisters - or trying to find a place to recycle them - when I'm hiking. I just need to find a source of white gas when I run low and refill my (equally ancient) Sigg spun aluminum fuel bottle and every once in a while toss a fresh bit of "T" shirt rag into the funnel to filter the gas -
I can boil, simmer or just warm to my hearts content on the primus - sorry to say the MSR doesn't allow for quite as fine a flame adjustment. In addition, I do seem to be able to boil a pot of water faster on the primus than on the MSR - so I suspect I use less fuel with it.
Just some observations from an old fart -

Steve -

Your Primus is a 71L. I have one as well, of similar era.

Anyway, from your description, your Primus and Whisperlite both are in serious need of maintenance. If the Whisperlite takes longer than 3m30s to boil a liter of water, it needs cleaning of both the fuel line and the jet. The jet is best cleaned by removing it. The needle cleaning tool used from the outside just pushes the accumulated carbon back into the fuel line, where it will come back to clog the jet. Also, doing it that way enlarges the jet over time (same with the 71L), which sooner or later will require replacement. That's why MSR went to their "shaker jet". It also sounds like you need to learn how to properly prime both the 71L and the Whisperlite (don't worry - 90 percent or more of users of liquid fuel stoves have no idea how to properly prime them. If you have a priming flame more than 3 inches high or can't get it lit on the first try at any temperature above -20F, you aren't using the right technique).

The full cleaning procedure for the Whisperlite is as follows:

Undo the nut on the bottom of the burner assembly and remove the hose and jet assembly.

Using a phillips screwdriver, undo the burner plate assembly, clean the carbon deposits between the plates, and reassemble.

Remove the jet from the fuel line assembly, clean it and set it aside (those with shaker jets, don't lose the tiny needle "thingy", and don't bend the needle - and remember it goes back in with the needle pointing up toward the jet).

Next, pull the cable out of the fuel line. If the stove is regularly cleaned, you can use the MSR multi-tool by inserting the end of the cable through the hole in the multitool that is just larger than the cable diameter, twisting sideways and tugging. If that doesn't do it, then get some needle-nose pliers, maybe with the help of a bench vise. If that still doesn't do it, soak the inside of the hose overnight in a solvent like mineral spirits (which means you have superserious clogging). After you get the cable out, clean it with a solvent like mineral spirits (don't use white gas, even outdoors with lots of ventilation - white gas is too explosive if there is any flame or spark anywhere close, beside which mineral spirits just works better). You may need to use a wire brush to get the dark stuff cleaned completely off. For the fuel line itself, run some of the cleaner through the hose, then use the cable like a pipe cleaner, running it back and forth in the fuel like. Again rinse with the mineral spirits.

When the cable is dry, look at the ends. Often the end that was at the jet has a ball of solder. This will also block fuel flow. Use a file to file the solder ball down to the same diameter as the cable. Be sure to clean off all filings.

When all is dry, put the cable back into the fuel line, making sure you get it all the way in (it is sometimes hard to get around the bend in the line. With a full fuel bottle with the pump in place, attach the fuel line to the pump, and pump up pressure as if you were going to cook. Outside, in plenty of ventilation, run about a cup of new, fresh, clean fuel through the line (catch it in a can and dispose of it properly). This does a final rinse of the fuel system.

Finally, reassemble the jet (don't forget the shaker needle, if you have the shaker jet type), making sure you put the correct jet in place (white gas and kerosene jets are different diameter openings if you have the international version). Then reassemble the full burner assembly.

Once everything is back together properly, fire it up. You should have a better performing stove now. Oh, yeah, did you replace the O-rings and little ball in the pump recently? If not, these lose pressure from the fuel bottle, and thus lose performance.

It isn't really hard to do this, even in the field. Other liquid fuel stoves are very similar in their maintenance needs.

Last week I did 67 miles in the Smokies (AT), and most of the time the weather was cold (one morning was 10-15 F, I estimate). I broke tradition on this trip and took a canister stove. I had my Superfly, and my son brought his Snowpeak Gigapower. I have a Jetboil GCS pot that I used with both stoves.

For 3 people over 5 days (4 cooking days - 4 breakfasts, 4 dinners) we used only 5-5/8 ounces of fuel, confirmed on my scale. I was astounded at how little we used. Less than one canister for 3 people over 5 days. In my testing in the kitchen, I find that the Jetbboil pot uses 20-25% less fuel to boil water than my Evolution pot.

Breakfast was simple - boil 1 liter for oatmeal plus cleanup. Dinner was rice or pasta dishes with the exception of one night which was a freeze dried meal, plus heating water for cleanup. I estimate the quivalent of 3.5 liters boiled/day.

We used Snowpeak fuel when it was coldest (generally mornings) while I was trying to finish off an old Gaz canister which we used when it was warmer. I had to warm that canister a few times to keep it working (by the end of its life it was mostly butane).

Snowpeak, Jetboil, MSR, and Brunton have essentially the same fuel composition, a mix of isobutane and propane. The latter two are the same, while the Snowpeak and Jetboil are a little different %.

It was my daughter's first backpacking trip. She's 13, and she did a great job and never complained, despite the long days, lots of up and down on the trail, and the cold weather. I have another excuse to go backpacking for the next several years!

Lest it sound like we did it all in 5 days, it was supposed to be a 6 day trip through the Smokies, but when we got 3.5 miles into the first day, we notced that the sole of my daughter's boot was delaminating. She was using my wife's boots, which fit her. We had to retreat and get boots (Wal-Mart). Both soles were completely off by the time we got back to the car. We returned the next morning and caught up with our reservation schedule (via a different entry point) and finished out the hike through the park in 5 days. 7 miles first day, 60 miles over the next 5.

Chumango, you are much more conservative of fuel than the vast majority of people. Just a half ounce of fuel per person-day! Well, you didn't drink coffee, tea, or hot chocolate (at least didn't mention it), and you used fast-cooking rice and pasta. And no gourmet dishes.

I think I mentioned somewhere on this board that on our last Denali climb, we used 9 gallons (54 pounds, or 864 ounces) of white gas for 6 people for the 19 days on the mountain (114 person-days), or 7.6 ounces per person day. Of course, this includes melting snow and ice for all our water for drinking as well as cooking. Part of the time (6 days) was spent sitting out a storm at 14,000 ft with 50 knot winds at times (measured at the rangers' campsite at 14k) and temperatures sometimes down to -40 (more like +30 to +40 on the lower glacier). Much of the time, the cooking was done at temperatures below +10.

The recommendation of 2 ounces per person-day is to leave a reserve, especially for less experienced backpackers and for scout groups, who are a lot less efficient in their fuel usage. If you keep track of fuel usage (just as keeping track of what gear you actually use on a trip and how much it weighs), you can (1) learn what you actually use and (2) learn to be more efficient, with the result being a much lighter pack. And as Chumango has noted before (as has Tom, Ed, me, etc), it's sure a lot easier to carry a lighter pack and you can go farther with less effort.

Then again, if you cook gourmet-style (as Jim S and I sometimes do), you better plan on using more fuel.

We did not have hot drinks, just hot dinners. And this was significantly less fuel per person/day than I have ever used before. The rice and pasta cooked fairly easily (for example, the rice was something like Lipton cheddar/broccoli rice, then we added a foil pack of chicken). Heat to boiling, then low flame for about 10 minutes.

It was a lesson to me to see how little fuel is possible. I was conservative with how much water I heated for various tasks to minimize fuel usage. But it was not all just boiling water for freeze dried food, either. Given the mileage (two days over 13 miles, one almost 16 miles) and elevation changes (16,000 ft gain over the trip) I wanted to go as light as possible. I was not expecting to use this little fuel. In fact, we had 3.5 canisters with us, which I arrived at by calculating 2 oz per person-day. In the past with white gas I have used 2-3 fluid oz/person-day with similar menus, although I would often use the Outback Oven to bake something at night. This typically does not involve melting snow, which would dramatically increase fuel usage, as would cooking in strong wind.

CAVEAT to Readers: Don't use this fuel usage as a basis for calculating how much to carry unless you know your own usage patterns well.

This is something that everyone should keep track of and gain experience so they know how much fuel they actually use for their style of cooking and weather conditions. I know in the last 8-10 years my fuel estimates have been steadily declining based on experience and on evolving cooking habits. I still always end up with extra fuel at the end of the trip (better than the alternative) but the excess amount is shrinking.

MSR cannister stoves are best but for ten years as alternative I relyed on Trangia alcohol stove for solo use. The cook-set and stove weighs eleven ounces and works good into the 20s F.

Fuel consumption is very high and stove isn't optimal beyond a couple of days. Also dubious for more than solo cooking. Maybe delux Trangia windscreen set-up improves performace but also adds weight.

Bill -

My 71L starts easily - I have, however, had rather dramatic flames when starting it in really cold (below zero) weather - that MAY have been the result of my being very anxious to get some water heated - and FAST. It has, however, never failed me.

The Whisperlite - I tear it down and clean it with fair regularity - I'm going to do so again(it's not a shaker jet model - it's old school) before my next trip as I suspect I got some "old fuel" last time I used it (when you cannot recall what year you refilled your "spare supply" bottle, then the fuel is old) which just might have varnished the internals a tad.

As an aside - I see that a company is now selling wood-burning backpacking stoves - they're advertising on the backpacker magazine website - somehow they got the contraptions to weight a full pound. I recall using peach cans with holes punched into 'em for a wood burning stove - worked pretty well - cost a lot less than 60 bucks and only weighed near to a pound when the peaches were still in it - technology marches on!

Steve

Of course - the lightest stove is no stove - if you can adapt to living without hot food or drinks - say - you're a rawist vegan - then you can dispense with all cooking stuff and just munch on dried fruit, nuts and other stuff. I have a friend who backpacks (and lives life in general) this way - while I admire his Vegan position and will admit he's a lot healthier looking than I am - dispensing with my cup of hot tea in the morning - along with some oatmeal - just doesn't appeal.

Sir Folkie (is the "Folkie" because you do folk music?) -

Yes, the 71L, like its brethren the Svea 123 and some others, is very dependable and can take lots of abuse. That's why it was so popular for so long. I think one of the historical stove websites said that those stove models date from the 1920s or 1930s, and were certainly popular in my experience from the 1940s through the 1970s or 80s.

Anyway, if you are getting a priming flame more than 3 or 4 inches above the burner, you are overpriming. You only need the priming cup about half full, even in very cold weather. After I got a bit tired of the hand-warming technique prescribed in the manual, and before the tiny Optimus booseter pump, I used to use an eyedropper to measure out the fuel for the priming cup. With both my 71L and Barb's 123, we would put the stove back into its steel box/windscreen or the brass cylindrical windscreen for the 123 before lighting the priming fuel. This helps to heat the fuel tank more quickly in cold weather and with less priming fuel. The 71L and 123 do not have as much problem with the varnish deposit problem as current stoves probably because they use a wick to help get the fuel into the fuel feed/generator stem. So the fuel is largely dispersed and easy to vaporize in the heated stem/generator. Current stoves have that long fuel line that can hold a fair amount of fuel after shutoff unless you make an effort to clear the line. Even Coleman's backpackable tank-top stoves have a long generator tube, although they have the internal cable/cleaner that you are supposed to operate every time you light them.

The wood-burner - I assume you mean the Sierra stove that has the small battery-powered fan. It does indeed work very well, but it depends on (1) not running out of battery (efficiency drops way down when the fan isn't running) and (2) finding the appropriate-sized twigs, leaves, wood chips, and other woody pieces. There are a couple competitors becoming available. However, since it is a wood-burner and sometimes generates flying sparks like any wood-burner, it is subject to the same restrictions as a campfire. If campfires are not permitted, but stoves allowed, you can't use the Sierra. You have to use a white gas or butane stove. There are, of course, times when even gas stoves are restricted.

The Coleman Snow Peak and MSR Pocket Rocket aren't substantially different. Many people like the SP because it might be a tiny bit lighter. I like MSR because they've never made a truly awful product that I know of, and Coleman has made dozens over the years in the form of back packs, ice chests, and god knows what.

PS --Don't get a gasoline stove unless you're with a large group in the winter, or it is truly far below zero.

Ummm, seward, SnowPeak is not a Coleman brand. It is a different company.

I think in the "old days" I carried a 22 oz bottle of white gas per day for two people while winter camping with a sled. Often we consumed most of it. On one trip I boiled 7 gallons of snow water - why? Because we were "boiling bag cooking" and it is really inefficient because the heat has to go into water that was melted from snow through the plastic to melt/cook the food, then we poured out the "cooking water" and melted more snow for coffee. Anyway I've used 3 times more gas than "normal" because of my oral fixation on hot beverages.

Hi guys - this is my first post since January.I hope everybody is well. I was saddened this week when I learned of 2 friends who have passed on - by searching for them on Google. My climbing partner/friend John Zazzara, a noted free solo ice climber who climbed an incredible number of mountains, climbed Mt Shasta 85 times! He died of a heart attack climbing Mt McLoughlin in Oregon not far from here. I thought he had died years ago in a crevasse - so I'm glad to put that to rest.

As TomD alleged - my favorite stove is a Coleman Xtreme, and I also have the two burner version which is especially great if you have a sled to put it in. Its so awesome to be able to instantly light a stove at most any temperature with my priming, and then it simmers and shuts off cleanly with a valve. It is so fine for cooking and melting snow in a tent.

As to the original question on this thread - go buy or take any aluminum pan with you - take a good one from your kitchen. Now that I own just about every pan made I only carry two of them and often both in Winter. I like a 1 liter Titanium sauce pan/eating bowl and a Titanium 2 liter pot with an MSR heat exchanger on it. I like the new wide bottomed jet boil pan, but I think the foam around it is stupid as it would melt if your windscreen was close to the side of the pan.

Jim S

Long time no contact, Jim. We have been wondering about how things are going. The AAC annual meeting will be in Bend sometime in March, so I will be up your way then.

As you probably have noted, you have been referenced a number of times in the stove and pot discussions. We need your input more often, so please join in.

Hi Bill
Thank you.
I hope to see you if you come to Bend.
I'll chide in more now - couldn't ever remember my password. I spend my time on another forum and I think many of the people here read my posts on the other site. But then I often disapear for a while and reappear latr.

We were sitting around waiting for Winter to hit last night, but so far we haven't gotten but an inch of rain from the whole storm system. Today the temps will drop and in a week Mt Bachelor will open. I've lost a lot of weight and got new downhill gear. This will my first season of serious skiing, and its 19 miles to the ski resort and the lifts are 2000 feet above the level of my house.

I hope to start ice climbing this winter and I'm thinking of making my own frozen waterfall on the cliff out back. I need some ice tools though.
Jim

I own and like very much the Vargo Jet-Ti canister stove.

2.7 oz
Sturdy! Simple.
Decent simmer.

In fact I gave one to my buddy for his wedding present. Shiny...