Forum Index » Gear Lists » Ryan Jordan's SUL Winter Challenge


Display Avatars Sort By:
Ryan Faulkner
(ryanf) - F

Locale: Mid atlantic, No. Cal
Re: Re: stove choices on 12/07/2005 18:24:28 MST Print View

I am confused by the grams.

if RJ dose bring the windpro, will he bring a 4 or 8oz canister, and what is the weight of an empty canister?

kevin davidson
(kdesign) - F

Locale: Mythical State of Jefferson
Canister weights on 12/07/2005 18:51:10 MST Print View

Ryan, check out this link on Canister weights--

http://zenstoves.net/Canister.htm#CanisterWeights

I've been advocating a larger canister for the Wind Pro---if that were used. Grams is usually referring to fuel capacity, I know, it's confusing. Just refer to the chart.

Edited by kdesign on 12/07/2005 18:59:14 MST.

Ryan Faulkner
(ryanf) - F

Locale: Mid atlantic, No. Cal
Re: Canister weights on 12/07/2005 19:13:34 MST Print View

I changed my list to my 5.7oz stove and 4.6oz canister(my measured weight for an empty 8oz canister)

just so you know, I added more holes to the stand, and it works mucho better. before when you put the pot on the stand, the sound of the burn changed from the jet engine sound to a sizzle sound, because it was not getting enough oxygen, but now there is no sound difference when I put on the pot.

Ryan Faulkner
(ryanf) - F

Locale: Mid atlantic, No. Cal
Xtreme stove on 12/07/2005 19:33:07 MST Print View

will the Xtreme 170g canister be enough?

if so I think I should stick with the modified xtreme because the windpro only saves .1oz because of heavier canister and may not work as well.

I just want to know the final Xtreme weight with stand

Edited by ryanf on 12/07/2005 19:33:49 MST.

kevin davidson
(kdesign) - F

Locale: Mythical State of Jefferson
Stoves on the gearlists on 12/07/2005 19:37:31 MST Print View

I've knocked out the Simmerlite as an alternative consideration to the Xtreme and now have the Wind Pro as the suggested alternatve.

I'm still hoping a modified Xtreme can be taken on the trip.

The next step in the development of the Wind Pro is to convert it to use Powermax canisters ( ya gotta love those lighter weight Powermax's--2.2 -2.8 oz. empty compared to say the MSR cartridge empty weights of 4- 4.65 oz.).

Roger Caffin seems to think the smaller Powermax cartridge will be enough---he's the resident expert on all things Xtreme. We will have to wait for modified Xtreme final weights.

Edited by kdesign on 12/07/2005 19:40:34 MST.

Ryan Faulkner
(ryanf) - F

Locale: Mid atlantic, No. Cal
Re: Stoves on the gearlists on 12/07/2005 19:47:05 MST Print View

I agree Xtreme on list and windpro alternative.

I will change back

Ryan Faulkner
(ryanf) - F

Locale: Mid atlantic, No. Cal
final gear lists on 12/07/2005 20:05:58 MST Print View

Ryans sub 5 list

Kevins sub 6 list

Michael Martin
(MikeMartin) - BPL Staff - MLife

Locale: North Idaho
Re: Stoves on the gearlists on 12/07/2005 20:42:44 MST Print View

KD writes:

>> The next step in the development of the Wind Pro is to convert it to use Powermax canisters ( ya gotta love those lighter weight Powermax's--2.2 -2.8 oz. empty compared to say the MSR cartridge empty weights of 4- 4.65 oz.).

Kevin. Have you read my stuff?

Xtreme vs Windpro
Powermax Windpro
.xls Fuel Weight Comparison
HTML Fuel Weight Comparison

The large powermax empty can weighs 3.5oz and the small one weighs 2.8oz. Your weights may be valid if they are filled with helium. :-)

I've weighed regular empty canisters at 3.2, 5.3, and 6.9oz for 110g, 220g, and 450g canisters respectively.

IMO, converting the windpro to powermax operation is not worth the weight -- except maybe if Bill F. wants to mass produce his beautiful milled/polished mag housings. The windpro itself has tremendous opportunity for weight reduction as Ryan F. has shown. Using some Ti legs could easily get the Windpro weight down to 5.2oz or so.

Cheers,

-Mike

Edited by MikeMartin on 12/07/2005 23:14:29 MST.

Michael Martin
(MikeMartin) - BPL Staff - MLife

Locale: North Idaho
Jordan/Caffin fuel discrepency on 12/07/2005 20:57:53 MST Print View

Hi Guys-

This is sheer speculation, but it occured to me that the different fuel consumptions measured by Roger and Ryan may differ due to water use, rather than fuel use.

Ryan's figures assume producing all his water from snow, and avoiding "cameling up" with 3+L at the traihead. He also boils his water to prevent freezing, and to augment the warmth of his sleep system.

Roger seems to rely partially on finding liquid water, cameling up, and perhaps merely melting rather than boiling the water. (I'm not sure about that last one. Roger, I'd welcome any comments you might have.)

I suspect that the fuel efficiency per liter melted and/or boiled is similar for both Ryan and Roger. They just have different water usage routines. So, do we want Ryan to use his normal routine, or do we want him to try a scheme more similar to Roger's?

Also, Roger has mentioned increased efficieny with reduced stove heat output. I've observed this as well and usually operate my stoves at reduced output. But, if Ryan really is going to melt/boil all his water, then time becomes a factor at the expense of fuel efficiency. The power output (directly related to fuel consumption rate as Roger mentioned) of the stove then becomes relevant -- hence Ryan's preference for not using the very efficient but slow Jetboil.

Cheers,

-Mike

Edited by MikeMartin on 12/07/2005 21:36:40 MST.

kevin davidson
(kdesign) - F

Locale: Mythical State of Jefferson
Canister weights and Fuel Consumption controversy on 12/07/2005 21:33:12 MST Print View

Michael, in regards to the Powermax weights ( which I have not personally weighed) I used empty ( and full) cartridge weights that came from both Zenstove.com as well as ( I think) a Roger Caffin review on the BGT site. So, what can I say? I believe you---changed specs?, production variability?

As to the Caffin/Jordan discrepency-- I can add that one doesn't have to throttle back all the way to realize fuel savings nor does one have to run full throttle to realize time savings.

I wish that tests could be run to find the optimum balance to these stoves.

All in all, you are probably right in your surmise on different water usage regimes. Yes, in the interest of weight saving we should ask RJ to modify his routine to something like Caffin's.

I read your posts re. the Wind Pro w/ great interest. The only thing that doesn't seem to have been done is to use the Powermax cartridge and fuel line mated to the Wind Pro. I know you seem dubious--still.

A Wind Pro weight reduction programme does seem easier for more people w/ lesser skills than Bill F. to perform than on the Xtreme. RF certainly made a good start.

Edited by kdesign on 12/07/2005 21:50:55 MST.

Michael Martin
(MikeMartin) - BPL Staff - MLife

Locale: North Idaho
Re: Canister weights and Fuel Consumption contreversy on 12/07/2005 21:44:17 MST Print View

Thanks for the note, Kevin.

>> one doesn't have to throttle back all the way to realize fuel savings nor does one have to run full throttle to realize time savings.

Sure, I didn't mean to suggest that a simmer was optimum.

>> I wish that tests could be run to find the optimum balance to these stoves.

The optimum throttle setting would depend on (at least!) pot and windscreen configurations, burner geometry, ambient temp, and wind. Slower is not necessarily better as the pot loses more heat to the environment during a longer heating time.

>> The only thing that doesn't seem to have been done is to use the Powermax cartridge and fuel line mated to the Wind Pro.

The windpro should operate identically with a powermax or inverted standard canister. Only the weight of the components is at issue.

>> in the interest of weight saving we should ask RJ to modify his routine to something like Caffin's.

This may not result in a net weight savings. Roger may use a heavier sleep system if not relying on a hot water bottle. He may also use some kind of insulation (not on the SUL list) to keep his water from freezing. Also, the weight penalty for cameling up at the trailhead would certainly exceed the extra fuel used with Ryan's methods. Finally, we would need to ask Ryan about the availability of liquid water on his route.

Edited by MikeMartin on 12/07/2005 21:51:02 MST.

kevin davidson
(kdesign) - F

Locale: Mythical State of Jefferson
Variables, variables, and then some on 12/07/2005 21:49:17 MST Print View

>>The optimum throttle setting would depend on (at least!) pot and windscreen configurations, burner geometry, ambient temp, and wind.

Nothing an Engineer couldn't handle. ;-)>

Weight savings would only be reflected in Base Weight and Pre-consumables SKO weight.

Want to make a stove proposal?

p.s. Your fuel comparison link gives me a file I cannot open. Could you post it?

Edited by kdesign on 12/07/2005 21:59:09 MST.

Michael Martin
(MikeMartin) - BPL Staff - MLife

Locale: North Idaho
Re: Variables, variables, and then some on 12/07/2005 22:25:45 MST Print View

>> Your fuel comparison link gives me a file I cannot open. Could you post it?

Sorry, try this html version. [I also edited the above post to include this.]

Edited by MikeMartin on 12/07/2005 22:48:53 MST.

kevin davidson
(kdesign) - F

Locale: Mythical State of Jefferson
Stove final thoughts--analysis on 12/07/2005 23:27:02 MST Print View

If fuel quantities need to be larger to keep Ryan alive--
An unmodified Xtreme w/ a 300g Powermax cartridge would weigh 25.1 oz. ( 11 oz. stove + 14.1 full powermax cartridge) and provide 14K BTU per canister. The smaller 170 g cartridge provides
almost 8K BTU total.

An unmodified Wind Pro w/ a 220 ( 8 oz. fuel) MSR cartridge would weigh 19.425 oz. and provide 10.3K BTU per canister.

The Wind Pro also looks good in the base weight figures which don't reflect the total weight of the system ( 10.8 oz vs. 14.5--stove + empty canister).

BTU figures courtesy of Michael Martin

Edited by kdesign on 12/08/2005 00:36:52 MST.

Michael Martin
(MikeMartin) - BPL Staff - MLife

Locale: North Idaho
Re: Stove final thoughts--analysis on 12/07/2005 23:41:30 MST Print View

KD writes:

>> windpro sucks... [well, ok, I paraphrased a little.] ;-)

I guess we just have to agree to disagree.

My numbers show that a stock windpro system would weigh less than 20oz with a 220g (Giga) Cartridge. I haven't weighed an empty MSR 220g Can, but by my calculations it would have to weigh an inconceivable 10.8oz to reach your 25.45oz figure.

What am I missing?

Cheers,

-Mike

Edited by MikeMartin on 12/08/2005 00:07:17 MST.

kevin davidson
(kdesign) - F

Locale: Mythical State of Jefferson
Windpro w/ 220 canister on 12/08/2005 00:25:16 MST Print View

Michael, a Full MSR 220 cartridge I have in my hand weighs 12.625 oz. plus the stock weight of the Stove -6.8 oz. = 19.425 oz. my mistake and corrected on the post above ( don't even ask). This changes things of course and means comparing apples and oranges because the fuel canister weights and fuel amounts are so dissimilar.

I think what it all means is that the Xtreme would win at certain consumption levels/ trips of a certain length and the MSR at others, particularly shorter trips.

I do like the Windpro, Michael--- perhaps the ideal version , besides being stripped to the bone, would be the capability to convert between the Lindahl valve cartridges and the Powermax so I could dial in just the right fuel requirements. Well, one can wish.

To wrap this sucker up-----
So, I guess that means we don't disagree, after all.
I think the 220 cartridge will (barely) meet Ryan's needs ( in the style to which he is accustomed) and that means the Wind Pro--stock or modified w/ canister inverted, is the best bet for the Winter Challenge. How's that for a quick 180? Slicker than I could pull off on the slopes.

The End.

Edited by kdesign on 12/08/2005 00:45:20 MST.

Roger Caffin
(rcaffin) - BPL Staff - MLife

Locale: Wollemi & Kosciusko NPs, Europe
Re: Jordan/Caffin fuel discrepency on 12/08/2005 02:19:26 MST Print View

> occured to me that the different fuel consumptions measured by Roger and Ryan may differ due to water use, rather than fuel use.
Very possible. Ryan mentioned melting a certain amount of water per day. The amount is more than I ever use per day. But I should add, I seem to use less water than many Australians. I do NOT use a 'hydration system' to drink on the run. I learnt walking back in the days when you drank at breakfast, lunch and dinner, and not in between. Curiously, it never did us any harm, and i come back from trips about the same weight I went. OK, Ryans J's needs may differ.

> Ryan's figures assume producing all his water from snow, and avoiding "cameling up" with 3+L at the traihead.
I would normally set off with one or two 1.25 Litre PET rocket bottles of water. But that is for myself and my wife. In this case, I might take 2 bottles with me at the start.

> He also boils his water to prevent freezing, and to augment the warmth of his sleep system.
No, I do not do this. I get the water to about body temp and leave it at that. If I want to put some in the SB overnight, that is an OK temp as long as it is insulated from the snow. It does not drain heat from me if it is at the same temp.

> Roger seems to rely partially on finding liquid water,
True, and really worth while. Can Ryan J do this where he is going? I don't know.

> cameling up,
Not really: I just drink less. I don't mind a slightly dry mouth - it never hurt anyone. Teaches you to keep your mouth shut too! The Bedouin do this in the desert.

> and perhaps merely melting rather than boiling the water.
I can't see any need to boil water from snow????

Some else asked about sleep systems. I assume this is a fancy name (you Americans!) for a sleeping bag and a mat? I use 700 g 700 loft SB as a quilt, but I have to admit I also use a Therm-a-Rest Deluxe airmat under it. At 60 years of age, I reckon I am entitled to it!
I wear thermals if it is cold, or light silk pyjamas or a silk liner anyhow. The SB has a hood - I would NOT buy one without a hood!, and this goes over my head when I am sleeping. A warm head makes for warm toes. All those ads for extra down at the feet are marketing crap. These days I sometimes take a light 200 polarfleece ski hat to bed when it's really cold too, and maybe a dry pair of socks to pad my toes off the deck.

The coldest night I have used this gear at was -17 C (1.4 F), but I only had the thermals on - no extra clothing. The night was OK, but the wet ski boots in the morning were ... :-) I think we wimped out that morning and warmed up the milk for the muesli.

Cheers
Roger

Ryan Faulkner
(ryanf) - F

Locale: Mid atlantic, No. Cal
final list on 12/08/2005 18:28:46 MST Print View

the due date was yesterday.

when and how will the final gearlist be chosen?

Ryan J, I think it is up to you

good luck

Edited by ryanf on 12/08/2005 18:29:23 MST.

kevin davidson
(kdesign) - F

Locale: Mythical State of Jefferson
re. final list selection on 12/08/2005 18:37:08 MST Print View

I concur w/ RF--- sub5 sub6 or a blend. We also don't know if a modded Xtreme is available for your journey. The Wind Pro w/ inverted canister operation is certainly an option ( with or without modification).

Do let us know. The masses were largely silent (and burnt out) at the end.

tschuss.
KD

Ryan Jordan
(ryan) - BPL Staff - MLife

Locale: Greater Yellowstone
Ryan J's SUL Winter Final List Review on 12/08/2005 23:42:38 MST Print View

OK, everyone, I will look this over and get back to you shortly. Both are awesome lists. It will be tough. I suspect I'll come back to you with a blend. My trip will likely be either Dec 28-30 or in early January, weather permitting of course ;)

Needless to say, we have plenty of snow everywhere. Montana is buried, there was 9 feet in the area I'm planning to go back to for this trip a week ago.