Thread: Improving the Camping Experience

Originally Posted by slug_burner

I would like to know why metho is considered safer than gas.

Not sure if that is really the case but if so, perhaps it is because metho (methanol, CH3OH) contains some oxygen so probably burns cleaner.

Originally Posted by slug_burner

All fuels if not burnt correctly will produce CO, it is what happens if insufficient oxygen gets to the point of combustion. I would like to know why metho is considered safer than gas.

On the flip side...
Metho (ethanol with a tainting agent) burns clear, I'd be more concerned that a fire would not be easily identified from a metho spill before it started to burn other combustibles.
Methanol is similar, there have been numerous cases in motorsports of fires in the pit areas where people have been burning, but the flames are clear, making fighting them (and keeping them under control) difficult.

Your right. My mistake, it's mostly ethanol

Originally Posted by austastar

Hi, I find the metho Trangia stove soots the bottom of what ever is being heated.
Trangia is better in windy conditions than gas stoves.
Gas is easier to adjust the heat.
Decanting the required amount of liquid is more convenient some times than fuel in canisters.
Cheers

Typed with bananas

Adding a bit of water to the metho in the Trangia stove reduces the soot significantly.

Although a nicely sooted Trangia pot is a badge of honour in many camping circles!

Originally Posted by slug_burner

All fuels if not burnt correctly will produce CO, it is what happens if insufficient oxygen gets to the point of combustion. I would like to know why metho is considered safer than gas.

The only thing I can think of in the context here, is that with a gas cylinder you can potentially burn a number of litres of LPG, with a metho stove we are probably talking much smaller amount 100-200ml ?? therefore the total potential quantity of CO is much reduced. (sound feasible/reasonable)

Martyn

That could be the reason. I think there are people that are very comfortable with liquid fuels, others very comfortable with gaseous fuels. Some with both. I have used both and also solid fuels and am most comfortable with gas, no spills no smell just a a metal cylinder. Weight is probably an issue for hikers so carrying a a pressure vessel might put people off Gas.

We used LPG stoves and lanterns for years. Reliable enough and worked. When the cylinders reached their "sorry we can't refill that" date, I changed the stove and lanterns over to Coleman Shellite/ULP powered units (2x 533 single burners stoves and a northstar lantern). The 533's leave LPG stoves for dead. Way way more BTU's. The lantern also was way superior to the LPG units we'd used previously .... And the bonus was if you ran out of Shellite all it took was some ULP and you're away ! Bit hard to fill and empty 3.3kg cylinder in the bush.

The new Kamper came with 2x LPG cylinders, and stove/grill/wok burner, diesel fired HWS and LED lighting .... Yes to the LED lighting ... Have to live with the LPG .... Still prefer the Coleman stoves by far. Diesel fired HWS gets a huge thumbs up (and it doubles as a space heater for the Kamper tent) !!! That improves the camping experience

Sent from my iPad using Braille

You're the one that made the ridiculous statement about where or what to carry as fuel for camp cooking, then you have a shot at someone who disagrees with your view, Fair Go, Regards Frank.

Originally Posted by bacicat

Out on a holder on the back of the vehicle, up on top or leave them at home IMO. I don't put gas cylinders in my car personally, but in reality there are very few incidents and hundreds, if not thousands of people do it.