Subscribe Contribute Advertise Facebook Twitter Instagram Forums Newsletter
Ti-Tri Without The Tent Stakes
Display Avatars Sort By:
Kenneth Jacobs
(f8less) - F

Locale: Midwest
Boil Times on 03/13/2013 11:18:45 MDT Print View

Does anyone have boil time comparison data of the original Starlyte w/ lid vs. the new modified Starlyte w/ lid when used with the Sidewinder Ti-Tri w/ Evernew 0.9L? I have the original Starlyte w/ lid and am interested in how much of an improvement this new modified version provides.

TIA

KJ

William Chilton
(WilliamC3) - MLife

Locale: Antakya
Re: Boil Times on 03/13/2013 11:27:05 MDT Print View

The modified Starlyte won't give you an improvement in boil times. The modified Starlyte gives slower but more fuel efficient boils.

KEN LARSON
(KENLARSON) - MLife

Locale: Western Michigan
Starlyte Stove Terminology Clarification on 03/13/2013 12:04:19 MDT Print View

To get the terminology in my mind correct the ORIGINAL (stove pic right) and MODIFIED (stove pic left)?

StarLyte Comparision

Jennifer Mitol
(Jenmitol) - M

Locale: In my dreams....
My modified starlyte on 03/13/2013 12:26:00 MDT Print View

Not sure about the previous poster about modified vs non modified...

I get a great rolling boil of 2 cups cold tap water at 6-7 minutes in my kitchen with the modified Starlyte and a half ounce of alcohol, whereas Ken can't get any boil with the original.

I have the evernew .9L pot and the caldera cone Ti-Tri sidewinder. With the modified starlyte I did not use the stakes.

The starlyte is quite a bit more efficient than the 12-10 for me, as I needed at least 3/4 ounce to get a boil, sometimes a full ounce.

But I also don't know at all what I'm doing. So there's that.

Edited by Jenmitol on 03/13/2013 12:27:58 MDT.

William Chilton
(WilliamC3) - MLife

Locale: Antakya
Re: My modified starlyte on 03/13/2013 14:27:50 MDT Print View

I spent a large part of last weekend avoiding what I should have been doing and instead testing the modified Starlyte against the standard lidded Starlyte, including some against the 12-10 stove, with various pot and windscreen set ups. There were 36 tests in all. In every set up except one, the modified Starlyte used less fuel but had a longer boil time than the standard. In the exception, the modified used a minute amount more fuel (0.16g), but still had a longer boil time. (400ml of water was heated from 14 to 98 degrees C.)
Both Starlytes were more efficient than the 12-10 stove when used with a 1/2 inch shim (in a Keg-F and a Sidewinder with wide 0.6 liter Evernew). What did surprise me was that in the Keg-F, the standard Starlyte had a faster boil time than the 12-10 as well.

Jennifer Mitol
(Jenmitol) - M

Locale: In my dreams....
Re: Re: My modified starlyte on 03/14/2013 09:02:56 MDT Print View

Do you guys have any idea how happy I am to have found a community of such nerds??!!

Dan Yeruski
(zelph) - MLife

Locale: www.bplite.com
Re: Re: My modified starlyte on 03/14/2013 17:24:41 MDT Print View

That was a great deal of testing William. Thank you very much for your time.

(Both Starlytes were more efficient than the 12-10 stove when used with a 1/2 inch shim (in a Keg-F and a Sidewinder with wide 0.6 liter Evernew). What did surprise me was that in the Keg-F, the standard Starlyte had a faster boil time than the 12-10 as well.)

Based on that info I'm going to make some Foster kegs with support ridgeline in the appropriate place so the StarLyte Burner can be resting on the ground. No need for a support under it.

Edited by zelph on 03/14/2013 17:26:30 MDT.

William Chilton
(WilliamC3) - MLife

Locale: Antakya
Modified Foster kegs on 03/15/2013 07:16:18 MDT Print View

With the ridgeline placed slightly higher, it would mean that there would be a bit more pot inside the cone. Sounds like a win-win to me. I hope Dan will ship to Turkey;)
Incidentally, the most efficient set up of the ones I used was the modified Starlyte with 1/2" shim in the TD Sidewinder with 0.6l Evernew wide pot, with the standard Starlyte in the same set up nearly as fuel stingy. Very close behind was the modified Starlyte in the Zelph "Titanium Titan-3" windscreen, which used 0.63g more fuel to heat 400ml from 14 to 98 degrees C.
I was testing at about 70 metres above sea level. I'd be interested to know how the Starlyte stoves do at higher elevations.

Max Dilthey
(mdilthey) - M

Locale: MaxTheCyclist.com
Re: Re: Re: My modified starlyte on 03/16/2013 07:13:09 MDT Print View

"Do you guys have any idea how happy I am to have found a community of such nerds??!!"

You'd love the club at my college. Everyone's a gearhead. :)

Edited by mdilthey on 03/16/2013 09:14:07 MDT.

A W
(lost_01)
related "?" on 03/16/2013 23:09:52 MDT Print View

Just to check, as I've seen it mentioned before:

Has anyone noticed different boil times (with their Tri-Ti) using the Ti floor or a foil floor?

*Just been curious if that makes any noteworthy improvement...

Daniel Fish
(daniel@fishfamilypdx.com)

Locale: PDX
... on 03/24/2013 16:05:59 MDT Print View

...

Edited by daniel@fishfamilypdx.com on 06/23/2013 11:34:27 MDT.

William Chilton
(WilliamC3) - MLife

Locale: Antakya
Re: Ti Floor vs Foil Floor on 03/25/2013 04:22:40 MDT Print View

I haven't tested this in a Ti Tri, but I've just done a few test boils with a Fosters can, an unmodified Starlyte stove paired with Zelphs Titan-3 windscreen, and a slightly shorter MYOG screen in a similar style.
Using a Ti floor, boil times decreased by between 30 seconds and a minute and fuel efficiency actually improved (very slightly). Using a foil floor knocked another approximately 30 seconds off the boil time, but was slightly less efficient. I guess the Ti floor hit a sweet spot where it was reflecting enough heat to improve the boil time, but not enough to overheat the stove and decrease efficiency.
I doubt you generalise these results to different stoves and set-ups, though.
BTW, the Starlyte and Titan-3 seems to be an incredibly efficient set up for the Fosters can, at least at low altitude. I'd still love to hear from anybody with experience at high altitude.