Okay here's updated graphs with some labels for you guys. There's more info on all of this in my original thread
Don't pay too much attention to the actual numbers, as they're dependant on a lot of test variables (water temp, water volume, fuel type, indoor/outdoor etc). It's the trends/relationships that are important (these tests were 500ml of 40F water inside using methanol). The main point is that there is a trade off between boil speed and fuel use, and if you find yourself disappointed with either of these measures you can likely improve it by changing the height. If overall efficiency is lacking then you may want to consider extra holes.
As mentioned, I did add some more holes (via hole punch) to the bottom perimeter of my cone, as discussed and shown in my original thread. You can simulate the results of this before committing by jacking up the cone on some stakes (laying flat on a table) to create a gap under the cone for extra air. You can shim up the stove as well to preserve the same stove:pot gap. Through a test like this, I found I could achieve faster boils with the extra air and fuel efficiency improved as well, so I think I was getting a better air fuel mix. This may partially explain my lack of soot and may explain why some prefer the restricted stove.
My pot is a tall/narrow 750ml pot (Evernew ECA278). I discuss the ideal attributes of a pot for this system in my original thread, however since that discussion I've also learned that you can create a really neat setup with a short/wide pot and a sidewinder cone. Here the pot rests directly on the cone instead of using my wrist band idea. The downsides are a loss of storage space inside the pot and no pot height adjustability, but the upside is no fiddle with the silcone band and wider pots tend to be more efficient.