Snow Peak μGiga Stove (Outdoor Retailer Summer Market 2007)

At 2.15 ounces this new stove from Snow Peak sets a new weight record for canister stoves.

Print Jump to Reader Comments

by Ken Knight | 2007-08-11 00:05:00-06

Snow Peak μGiga Stove (Outdoor Retailer Summer Market 2007)

Snow Peak has raised the bar (and lowered the weight) again for canister stoves. The as yet unnamed new stove tips the scales at a mere 2.15 ounces. This represents a weight savings of 20%. The stove remains capable of producing 11,000 BTUs.

  • The lightest canister stove yet, weighing 2.15 ounces.
  • 11,000 BTUs output.
  • Aluminum and titanium construction.
  • Pot supported by 3 fold-out struts.
  • MSRP $55 (available May, 2008)

Snow Peak μGiga Stove (Outdoor Retailer Summer Market 2007) - 1
folded form.

Snow Peak μGiga Stove (Outdoor Retailer Summer Market 2007) - 2
ready for use.

The new Snow Peak canister stove weighs 2.15 ounces and burns at a maximum output of 11,000 BTUs.


Citation

"Snow Peak μGiga Stove (Outdoor Retailer Summer Market 2007)," by Ken Knight. BackpackingLight.com (ISSN 1537-0364).
http://backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/snow_peak_microgiga_stove_orsm07.html, 2007-08-11 00:05:00-06.

Print

Reader Comments

You must login to post comments.

New Visitors: Create a new account
Username:
Password:
Remember my login info.

Snow Peak μGiga Stove (Outdoor Retailer Summer Market 2007)
Display Avatars
Sort By:
Kenneth Knight
(kenknight) - MLife

Locale: SE Michigan
Snow Peak μGiga Stove (Outdoor Retailer Summer Market 2007) on 08/11/2007 16:09:11 MDT Print View

Companion forum thread to:

Snow Peak μGiga Stove (Outdoor Retailer Summer Market 2007)

Ben 2 World
(ben2world) - MLife

Locale: So Cal
uGigapower on 08/11/2007 18:22:47 MDT Print View

This one reminds me of the other UL canister stove -- the Coleman F1 Ultralight. Hopefully, this one doesn't require disassembly to pack down and re-assembly to use -- like the rather awkward two-piece F1.

Doug Johnson
(djohnson) - MLife

Locale: Washington State
Re: uGigapower on 08/11/2007 21:23:49 MDT Print View

Gosh, it's almost a dead ringer for my Primus Alpine Titanium. However, it's less than 1/2 the price of that no-longer-produced stove.Primus alpine titanium

Looks pretty sweet!

Joshua Mitchell
(jdmitch) - F

Locale: Kansas
Re: Re: uGigapower on 08/11/2007 22:00:08 MDT Print View

This actually looks just like the Snowpeak Gigapower MicroMax Stove that I posted a while back.

Ryan Jordan
(ryan) - BPL Staff - MLife

Locale: Greater Yellowstone
Re: Re: Re: uGigapower on 08/11/2007 22:05:22 MDT Print View

@Joshua: Yeah, interesting observation. But this one is more than an ounce lighter.

Joshua Mitchell
(jdmitch) - F

Locale: Kansas
uGiga vs Giga MicroMax on 08/12/2007 16:30:00 MDT Print View

Yes Ryan, but the uGiga is sans auto-igniter... which by SP's stats weighs 0.6 oz. Now, I'm not saying they haven't made an upgrade to the MM to create the uGiga, but manufacturer's stats have been off by .4 oz or so...

Also, since the launch of the MicroMax hasn't had much fanfare, I wonder if SP isn't simply deciding there is a better name than MicroMax...

Of course, looking closer at the pics, it looks like SP may have trimmed some weight in the valve and stem...

Ultra Light Stove

Oh, and something just occured to me... I wonder how stable it would be for smaller pot (SP600 or smaller... BL600, BPL500) if one were to drill out those that extend the legs...

Edited by jdmitch on 08/12/2007 20:16:48 MDT.

Jason Brinkman
(jbrinkmanboi) - MLife

Locale: Idaho
Re: uGigapower on 08/13/2007 16:00:13 MDT Print View

Is there some reason beyond 10 grams and 1000 BTU's that this is better than the Titanium GST-100? Pot support looks good on the uGiga - is this an issue with the GST?

Adrian B
(adrianb) - MLife

Locale: Auckland, New Zealand
Re: Re: uGigapower on 08/14/2007 02:25:14 MDT Print View

What do you mean beyond 10 grams :)

No I think the pot support on the GST is great, it has 4 supports & it's pretty stable.

Brett .
(Brett1234) - F

Locale: CA
Snow Peak μGiga Stove on 08/14/2007 11:35:47 MDT Print View

I hate to sound like a heavyweight, and I own many SP products, but for 10 grams I'd stick with the four-support GST-100 series. Big difference in stability with a big pot, in winds, on uneven ground, while stirring contents, etc.. It's a tragedy to dump 800 grams of food in the mud when you are on a calorie budget.
And just an off-thread suggestion; carry the legs from a jetboil for additional stability.

Edit; oh, and did someone from BPL actually touch the stove? Can you verify the valve folds for stowage while in the CLOSED position?

Edited by Brett1234 on 08/14/2007 11:41:44 MDT.

Joshua Mitchell
(jdmitch) - F

Locale: Kansas
Re: Snow Peak μGiga Stove "Stability" on 08/14/2007 12:10:55 MDT Print View

Actually, I have to disagree with you there... I suspect that the three leg uGiga is actually going to me MORE stable than the GST (which I love mine...)

Why?

1) Three Point Contact - Given similar leg lengths (really total diameter of pot support), three point contact is more reliably stable than four point contact. It's geometry. If one of the four legs is a bit 'off' it throws the whole thing off balance. a bit 'off' means nothing for three point contact.

2) Much more aggressive pot supports / grips. This, and the whole valve not closing flat thing, is really the only gripe I ever hear about the current Giga.

An additional thought: the uGiga may LESS expensive than the Giga... why do I say that? Ultra Light Stoves

However, I do have to agree that the extra 1000 btu is kind of meaningless. Though, it appears to me that the burner 'tilt' on the uGiga will be more effecient for use with smaller diameter pots.

Needless to say, I plan on buying a uGiga when it's realeased...

Edited by jdmitch on 08/14/2007 12:13:13 MDT.

Ben 2 World
(ben2world) - MLife

Locale: So Cal
Less Can Be More on 08/14/2007 12:24:44 MDT Print View

Be it table legs or pot stands, three are often more stable than four...

Good question from Brett - SnowPeak is famous for both clever and quirky designs. When compacted down, does the valve jut out incongruously like the Gigapower stoves?

Edited by ben2world on 08/14/2007 12:27:34 MDT.

Ryan Jordan
(ryan) - BPL Staff - MLife

Locale: Greater Yellowstone
Re: Less Can Be More on 08/14/2007 16:43:05 MDT Print View

I can't speak to the "valve closed when folded issue" but I do have to say that I found a pot sitting on the μGiga to be more stable than on the GST, because the μGiga pot supports grabbed the pot better - the serrations were sharper. The GST, in my experience, allows pots to slip off if the stove isn't pretty level. Also, I think 4 supports creates a platform where all of the contact is in a flat plane where pots can slide (because the supports on the GST are not single-point-of-contact supports), vs. the μGiga where the three "points" of contact grab and don't create a sliding surface. Of course, some of this will depend upon pot type.

Kenneth Knight
(kenknight) - MLife

Locale: SE Michigan
Re: Snow Peak μGiga Stove on 08/15/2007 01:40:44 MDT Print View

I touched it. I folded and unfolded it. the only thing I did not get to do was light it (a SP rep did that for me). The photos you see are what I shot.

** Ken **

Joshua Mitchell
(jdmitch) - F

Locale: Kansas
μGiga Burner Orientation on 08/15/2007 07:58:15 MDT Print View

Ken / Ryan (or anyone else who's actually touched one),

Am I seeing the SP's Ultra Light Stove Pics right, does it appear that the jets are pointed more effeciently UP towards the pot?

Kenneth Knight
(kenknight) - MLife

Locale: SE Michigan
Re: μGiga Burner Orientation on 08/15/2007 16:49:07 MDT Print View

It seems that way, yes. The real proof will come when someone really get a chance to observe the flame spread. It looked decent, but of course this was hardly under field conditions.

Jim Sweeney
(swimjay) - MLife

Locale: Northern California
wind screen on 09/02/2007 12:08:52 MDT Print View

With the Giga Power, the real killer is the windscreen, at 2 oz! Why don't they make that from titanium? In all but the calmest air, some kind of windscreen is necessary, or one winds up huddling behind a boulder, backpack just barely out of ignition range, hoping for the wind to die down.

Adrian B
(adrianb) - MLife

Locale: Auckland, New Zealand
Re: μGiga Burner Orientation on 09/03/2007 01:47:18 MDT Print View

Joshua:

>Am I seeing the SP's Ultra Light Stove Pics right, does it appear that the jets are pointed more effeciently UP towards the pot?

From memory, Roger Caffin felt that the vertical orientation of the GST's jets (pointing sideways/outwards) contributed to it's very low carbon monoxide output.

Roger Caffin
(rcaffin) - BPL Staff - MLife

Locale: Wollemi & Kosciusko NPs, Europe
Re: Re: μGiga Burner Orientation on 09/03/2007 02:37:04 MDT Print View

> >Am I seeing the SP's Ultra Light Stove Pics right, does it appear that the jets are pointed more effeciently UP towards the pot?
> From memory, Roger Caffin felt that the vertical orientation of the GST's jets (pointing sideways/outwards) contributed to it's very low carbon monoxide output.
Yep, that was my opinion.
But I have to *disagree* that pointing the jets more upwards will be more efficient, at least for pots of a decent width. There is no good reason for this to be true imho. For beer cans though, all bets are off. :-)

Joshua Mitchell
(jdmitch) - F

Locale: Kansas
Re: Re: Re: μGiga Burner Orientation on 09/03/2007 11:04:25 MDT Print View

"For beer cans though, all bets are off. :-)"

Ah, but pots such as the SP600, BPL550, etc the diameters are very similar to beer cans. So, burner orientation becomes an issue. Obviously if one is comparing an AGG 3Cup to an Evernew 0.9L there's really not much difference in burner orientation.

Also, to address Adrian's question directly CO production is ONLY an issue if one is cooking in an enclosed area.

Also, reduction of CO productions does not equate to better heat transfer efficiency (though it does indicate better combustion efficiency). They are two completely different (and if anything generally inversely related) criteria.

Edited by jdmitch on 09/03/2007 11:05:11 MDT.

Roger Caffin
(rcaffin) - BPL Staff - MLife

Locale: Wollemi & Kosciusko NPs, Europe
Re: Re: Re: Re: μGiga Burner Orientation on 09/03/2007 16:05:45 MDT Print View

> pots such as the SP600, BPL550, etc the diameters are very similar to beer cans.
Fair enough. The heat transfer with those pots is far less efficient than with wider pots, so I don't use them myself.

> reduction of CO productions does not equate to better heat transfer efficiency (though it does indicate better combustion efficiency). They are two completely different (and if anything generally inversely related) criteria.
Better combustion efficiency usually suggest a bit more heat available.
But I cannot see any reason why the two should ever be inversely related. What reasons?