Stove of the Week: The Borde Stove

[Dave G]

Pretty cool, HJ! I actually saw one of these gems in action once. If I remember correctly, the guy sort of nested it on the edge of a rock upside down to do the priming sequence. No wonder it's no longer made; the product liability coverage these days (if you could even get it) would be a bit spendy.

Did Borde ever provide a pot support, or were you supposed to just hold it in your other hand?

Hi, Dave,

The Borde stove has a real following among European climbers from what I've read. There's very little to go wrong with them. They only ceased production in the last year or so.

There were a couple of different pot supports that were put out with Borde although I wasn't particularly impressed with either of them. The Westwind stand that is designed for the Trangia burner is the best I've seen.

Question for you: Did any of the four lightweight snow melters I featured appeal to you? Those were my picks (although #4, the Borde, is admittedly a little esoteric).

HJ

Watin' for your Reactor review .
I kinda like the WindPro. What is the weight penalty over the Simmerlite?
What would you think of a Reactor that had a generator tube and/or remote cannister? It's already a bit heavy, though.

[Hikin_Jim]

Watin' for your Reactor review .
I kinda like the WindPro. What is the weight penalty over the Simmerlite?
What would you think of a Reactor that had a generator tube and/or remote cannister? It's already a bit heavy, though.

This week's review will be the XGK and the Reactor review will immediately follow. A Reactor with a pre-heat loop/generator might be interesting, but that's beyond my ability to rig up, and MSR isn't considering one, so I won't try to address that here. It would be interesting to experiment with but might be dangerous Very dangerous. As in you could die dangerous.

Simmerlite weight vs. WindPro weight
OK, now to the question of the Simmerlite vs. the WindPro. First, fair warning: Weight comparisons between stoves that use different types of fuel are somewhat problematic as we shall soon see. That being said, here I go plunging in.

The Simmerlite weighs 6.25 ounces. The WindPro weighs 6.8 oz (both on my scale at home). However, you have to carry a pump with the Simmerlite, another 1.9 oz, for a total of 8.15 oz. So the pumpless Windpro has a slight edge by 1.35 ounces.

Now for the tricky part: fuel. An empty 230g SP gas canister (steel) weighs 5.2 oz. An empty 11 oz MSR fuel bottle (aluminum) weighs 2.8 oz without the cap (I never carry the cap in the field; I just leave the pump in the bottle).

So now were at:
WinPro 12 oz.
Simmerlite 10.95 oz.

Assuming that you're carrying equal weights of fuel, the Simmerlite comes in at about 1 oz less.

Of course you have to prime a Simmerlite with some fuel and some fuel is wasted when you detach the fuel bottle. With a Windpro you must also "prime" (allow the stove to fully heat) before you go to inverted canister mode and some gas gets wasted when you disconnect the canister. As a practical matter, more fuel is used in priming and disconnecting with liquid fuel than with gas, so really the weights between the stoves are amost a wash.

Of course with a liquid fueled stove, if you don't need a full bottle you can bring less whereas you're kind of stuck with whatever sizes of gas canister are available (usually 4oz/113g, 8oz/227g, and sometimes 16oz/450g). If you have to bring a second gas canister, that's usually fairly weight inefficient whereas bringing the next size larger MSR bottle is usually increases weight efficiency, weight efficiency being the ratio of "dead" weight (packaging) to fuel.

In conclusion, the stoves are roughly equal in terms of their weight. The real weight advantage or disadvantage arises out of the amount of fuel that you need for a given trip.

Three scenarios:
1. If you have a trip that will use almost exactly one 8oz canister of gas, then the two types of stoves will have rough parity in terms of weight with a slight edge going to the WindPro since more fuel is wasted with liquid fuel when priming and disconnecting.

2. If you have a trip that will use less than one 8oz canister of gas, then you're carrying some dead weight in terms of gas that you didn't really need to bring whereas with a liquid fuel stove you can bring only what you need. This difference would generally be relatively small and is partially offset by the fact that it's better to bring a little bit extra fuel. Again, you have rough parity but this time with the Simmerlite having a slight edge.

3. If you have at trip that will use more than one 8oz canister of gas, then you'll have to carry a second gas canister which will generally be weight inefficient. The Simmerlite will probably be lighter in this scenario.

In the last scenario, if you can find a 16oz gas canister, this inefficiency would be ameliorated or eliminated, but relatively few retailers carry them. A16 might. I believe REI has stopped carrying them. Big Five and Sport Chalet, last I checked, only carried the Camping Gaz brand of 16 oz canisters which are not compatible with MSR stoves.

Kind of complicated, but there's my analysis of the weight penalty between the two stoves.

Cost, cooking type, and convenience
In terms of cost, white gas wins hands down. For about $12.00, you can get an entire gallon of Coleman Fuel. A gallon of fuel will last most people several years. For that same $12.00, you can only get about two 8 oz canisters of fuel. For winter trips, it's not uncommon to use an entire 8 oz canister in one trip, more if it's a longer trip.

For the type of cooking you do, if you're just melting snow, re-hydrating foods, etc, then the Simmerlite will work fine. If you want to do "real" cooking, then the WindPro is the way to go. This contrast isn't true of all liquid fuel vs. gas stoves, but it's generally true when you're talking about the Simmerlite vs. WindPro.

In terms of convenience, I think most everyone would go with gas. Liquid fuel, for those of us who have used it for many years isn't that big of a deal, but still gas is cleaner, requires much little or no priming, and starts/stops on a dime.

HJ.

[Dave G]

Great info, HJ. My question about the Reactor pre-supposed that MSR would be the ones making any modifications or offering a new model. It is definitley not a DIY project

This discussion has been educational. I can't tell you how many times I've heard people on trips say, "When is JetBoil going to get around to offering a windscreen accessory (for the Flash stove)?". They likely won't and now I know why!

[Hikin_Jim]

Great info, HJ. My question about the Reactor pre-supposed that MSR would be the ones making any modifications or offering a new model. It is definitley not a DIY project

This discussion has been educational. I can't tell you how many times I've heard people on trips say, "When is JetBoil going to get around to offering a windscreen accessory (for the Flash stove)?". They likely won't and now I know why!

On the low end of the scale, a windscreen with a jetboil might melt the cozy and the plastic parts underneath the burner. On the high end, it might cause the canister to overheat in which case you'd have a Jetbomb not a Jetboil. I'd ease into using a windscreen on a Jetboil very very carefully.

HJ

[Norris]

Hi HJ, a belated thanks for this interesting series of articles. I looked into the Coleman Xtreme (sp?) a couple of years ago but was put off by the end-of-life situation. Having read your review, I wish I had bought one. I have seen the Coleman fuel for sale in plenty of places. I have an MSR reactor, but I don't like a) the difficulty of achieving a simmer, it tends to boil over a lot in warm temps and b) the so-so performance in very cold temps, which I now understand better having read your reviews. I may just go hunting on Ebay for a Coleman Xtreme.

[Hikin_Jim]

Hi HJ, a belated thanks for this interesting series of articles. I looked into the Coleman Xtreme (sp?) a couple of years ago but was put off by the end-of-life situation. Having read your review, I wish I had bought one. I have seen the Coleman fuel for sale in plenty of places. I have an MSR reactor, but I don't like a) the difficulty of achieving a simmer, it tends to boil over a lot in warm temps and b) the so-so performance in very cold temps, which I now understand better having read your reviews. I may just go hunting on Ebay for a Coleman Xtreme.

Hi, Norris,

I'm glad people are getting something out of my "stove chats." If one were to just listen to manufacturer's claims, one would have a totally bass akwards view of stoves. A bit of understanding of the underlying physics sheds stoves in a whole new light.

The Coleman Xtreme is viewed by many as the "gold standard" of cold weather gas stoves. Kind of a shame that it has been discontinued although it still has a popular following. They usually don't want for attention on eBay. Part of their problem is that they were introduced by Coleman which people don't normally associate with high end back country applications. If MSR had introduced the stove, they'd have probably done fine.

If you can't find an Xtreme, let me know. I can hook you up. I've got a little stock pile. You can also find the Xpert, which is the four legged version of the Xtreme, usually for less. It is a couple of ounces heavier though.

HJ

[Norris]

Thanks HJ! I'll let you know if I have a problem finding one.

[Norris]

Just read your Reactor review. I like the adapter you show in your movie on simmering with the Reactor, where did you get it? Hey, I have an idea: you need to partner with Dave G (a mechanical engineering genius who frequents this site) and invent a liquid feed adapter for the Reactor. I guarantee huge profits. Another idea: some kind of heated cozy for the 8oz fuel canisters that keeps them warm, but not too hot. Not sure exactly how this would operate, probably the same technology used in those hand-warmers that slowly burn a tablet of some kind of combustible. By the way, I can also simmer my Reactor the way you demonstrate, but it is WAY too fiddly a process for me. They need to improve the valve a bit to provide some kind of tactile feedback in the "almost closed" range of the valve.

[Hikin_Jim]

Just read your Reactor review. I like the adapter you show in your movie on simmering with the Reactor, where did you get it?

I got it on eBay. It's amazing what's on eBay, some of it good, some of it crap, and some of it down right dangerous.

Hey, I have an idea: you need to partner with Dave G (a mechanical engineering genius who frequents this site) and invent a liquid feed adapter for the Reactor. I guarantee huge profits.

I guarantee a huge disaster. Seriously. If you feed liquefied petroleum gas into a burner that's not built for it, you'll at a minimum have a dangerous flare up. You could also have a rapidly expanding cloud of boiling petroleum vapor undergoing combustion. Rapid as in the blink of an eye or less. Uh, let's just say that this could just ruin your whole day.

Another idea: some kind of heated cozy for the 8oz fuel canisters that keeps them warm, but not too hot. Not sure exactly how this would operate, probably the same technology used in those hand-warmers that slowly burn a tablet of some kind of combustible.

Markill does make a canister warmer of sorts. I haven't tried it. Chemical hand warmers could be used as well. But why on earth go to all that hassle? If you're going to go out in really cold weather, get a stove to match. If you just absolutely hate white gasoline type stoves, get either a gas stove that can run with the canister upside down ("inverted mode") or get a specialized cold weather gas stove like the Coleman Xtreme or Xpert.

By the way, I can also simmer my Reactor the way you demonstrate, but it is WAY too fiddly a process for me. They need to improve the valve a bit to provide some kind of tactile feedback in the "almost closed" range of the valve.

Yeah, they pretty much figured all you'd want was "thermonuclear" on the heat setting. It's really not made to simmer.

HJ

[Hikin_Jim]

There are devices out there like the one in the link below. The copper or brass rod sticks into the flame. The base of the rod is fitted into a collar that sits on the fuel tank. Heat from the flame travels down the rod and warms the tank, allowing your fuel to vaporize, but this in my opinion is a desperately dangerous thing to do. Too much heat, and that canister will blow. Bits of hot steel and combusting gas will be blown all over heck and back. That nice stuff that keeps all of your insides in place (skin) could really have a bad time with this. There's no control, no safety, and no warning light.

http://www.alva.ne.jp/alva3/alva2/cart/list.cgi?cmd=img&category=05krk&goods=1232871746&filename=20090125172444.jpg

Again, if you're headed out into really cold weather, get a stove that'll do the job. Kludging a stove into doing something it's really not meant to do could wind up costing you in a big way.

HJ