New Ridgeline Pot coming this month

[SSGHawk]

I was really going to buy all five but thought that would not be fair to my fellow forum members.

I really think they would be good presents to my grown children to add to their disaster kits.

Regards,
Paul

[zelph]

Disaster kits also known as "drag and run" Our disaster kits were originally "grab and run" kits. we added so much stuff to them they had to be "dragged"

You're out there in tornado country where you need to be prepared for sure.

A pint of "everclear" or equivalent is a good multi purpose fuel for emergencies. Esbit solid fuel tablets are also nice for emergency kits. Iso91 is good also.

[zelph]

Just a note of interest about the large StarLyte stove included with this kit. It is more efficient fuel wise than a regular size StarLyte stove. Tests have shown me this. I can only think the reason to be is the fuel is spread out more and thus evaporates at a more efficient rate in the enclosed environment of the windscreen being 1/4" - 3/8" away from the pot.

[Ridgerunner]

Just a note of interest about the large StarLyte stove included with this kit. It is more efficient fuel wise than a regular size StarLyte stove. Tests have shown me this. I can only think the reason to be is the fuel is spread out more and thus evaporates at a more efficient rate in the enclosed environment of the windscreen being 1/4" - 3/8" away from the pot.

That is hard to believe since there is a larger burner surface, one would predict fuel would burn at a higher rate. I have to wonder if there is a factor that we are missing such as the density of the absorbent material used in each stove? Would that have any determining factor on the rate of flow of fuel the the surface of the burner?

[zelph]

Yes, I know. I found it hard to believe also. I did three tests and all were within the same boil times using the same test parameters. In my initial testing I wanted the Modified StarLyte to be the stove included with the kit. I was not satisfied with the efficiency/time to boil 3 cups of water so I did some tests with the large StarLyte. Designing a system is sometimes challenging when we change the windscreen hole pattern and closeness it's held to the sides of the pot. And also we have to take into consideration that this kit has a larger pot design that holds 3 cups of water. Lot's of variables going on here.

The density of the fuel absorbing material remains fairly constant from the manufacturer. I don't fluff it or compress it. I just cut it and place into the container.

[WanderingStovie]

I have heard that a fully saturated StarLyte boils the same amount of water faster than one with only enough fuel to boil the water. A larger diameter burner with the same amount of fuel and same thickness of absorbing material would be less saturated. At a lower saturation level, perhaps the top surface partially dries out and acts like an insulator, or maybe there is less circulation of fuel and therefore less convective heat flow.

[zelph]

I have heard that a fully saturated StarLyte boils the same amount of water faster than one with only enough fuel to boil the water. A larger diameter burner with the same amount of fuel and same thickness of absorbing material would be less saturated. At a lower saturation level, perhaps the top surface partially dries out and acts like an insulator, or maybe there is less circulation of fuel and therefore less convective heat flow.

Yes, fully loaded will get it it done fast with less efficiency if were concerned with amount of fuel usage.

Using a StarLyte Burner with cap to conserve remaining fuel works well. Fill burner, light, when water boils snuff out burner, wait a short time to cool down and then put cap on. Burner can flipped upside down while cooling to prevent evaporation.