Canister vs Camp Stove for 2 People

Hello all. I am in the process of buying some new equipment after a 4yr hiatus of hiking and camping. My fiance and I are going to start hiking again and are in the market for a new camp stove. I am debating buying us each a MSR Reactor vs 1 MSR XGK with 2 Titanium MSR tea pots. We like the XGK because of the range of fuels it uses and its ability to be more flexible. This combination would pack down smaller for the two of us as well. However if we each had a Reactor there would be some redundancy incase one of the stoves broke or ran out of fuel. Any ideas on which route to go? Thanks for any opinions.

If you backpack together, why carry two stoves?

Personally, I believe a single stove is plenty. However, I can see another argument in favor of two stoves and pots: if you become separated (voluntarily or involuntarily), you'll each have a way to cook.

If you insist on carrying two stoves and absolutely want a Reactor, how about a Reactor for one of you, and a Pocket Rocket and Titan kettle (teapot) for the other? It's lighter and cheaper than two Reactors. Both stoves use the same canister, so you've got fuel redundancy in case one stove malfunctions or one canister fails. You've also got one large pot for cooking, and a teapot for beverages. This also opens up the possibility, if one of you decides to go solo, of taking the Pocket Rocket and Titan kettle to minimize weight.

A single-stove possibility is a Pocket Rocket, plus a Titan Mini-solo cook set - the lid can function as a plate for one, and the other eats from the pot; the smaller pot gets used as a tea pot. If you absolutely insist on two stoves, but want to minimize weight, I'd carry two Pocket Rockets and I'd probably prefer two Titan kettles to the Titan Mini-Solo, unless you plan to do "real" cooking where the extra pot capacity is important.

I've never had the first hint of a malfunction with my Pocket Rocket or an MSR canister until it got very cold (below 25 degrees, at which point I usually stay home.) Personally, I believe one stove is adequate; I've toyed with the idea of getting a Reactor, but always rejected it because it's just too heavy.

With your plan, you'll need to carry two cups if you want a beverage (unless you carry two Titan kettles.) Personally, I've mostly stopped taking tea bags or cocoa mix and simply drink water. It saves significant weight: the weight of the beverage, the weight of the separate cup, and the weight of the fuel needed to heat the beverage. (Sometimes, in cooler weather, I might slip in a tea bag - but I enjoy that after my meal, and simply re-use my Titan kettle instead of a different cup.

I agree with Paddy (bet ya' never thought you'd hear that!). Two stoves are redundant. How about a pocket rocket for one, an esbit or alcohol stove for the other person as a " just in case"?

<img src="/forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

The only problem I see with carrying a canister stove with an alcohol "just in case" stove is that you have to carry two types of fuel: enough canister fuel for all the cooking you plan to do (which may mean carrying more than enough, if you don't have a partially-used cylinder available), plus enough "emergency" alcohol fuel (without it, the alcohol stove becomes dead weight.) If one stove fails, you can't use its remaining fuel to power the backup.

I still think two stoves are unnecessary. However, if you're going to carry two, I'd prefer they use the same fuel.

I didn't think of it in my previous post - why not two alcohol stoves? Maybe a Trangia/Clikstand (great stove, but a tad heavy), Brasslite, or similar for primary use, with a pop-can stove backup.

Hey, you can't be wrong all the time. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day... <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

The MSR Ti Kettle is way overkill. I had one I used for a year or so and went back to HAA (hard anodized aluminum). I personally do not like drinking out of metal - it goes from lip welting hot to cold too fast. I carry either a HAA tea kettle (I have both a Primus and a GSI) to boil water for food/drink and a GSI cup/sippy lid/neoprene sleeve or I carry a GSI Soloist pot set that comes with a cup/neoprene sleeve.
I am one who loves drinking cup after cup of hot herbal tea and I usually boil enough water (3-4 cups at once), make tea, prep my dinner and while it is in its cozy I drink cup 1, then I drink cup 2 with the left over water sitting in the pot.
Then again, I am not one for doing dishes ;-)

I own an XGK, and use it only for heavy spike camps making lots of hot water from melted snow and ice using kerosene. it's the only time I use the stove. it's very reliable, but it's kinda heavy and
not what I want to take backpacking, since "muti fuel" is of little use to me when backpacking. If I'm taking a big stove like that in the winter white gas is much easier to deal with.

I have a small canister stove that I do use backpacking for multi-person trips in non-winter weather. it's a snow peak, very similar to an MSR pocket rocket. Either of those small canister
stoves is ok and reasonably light. The only thing I've ever had be a problem is the canister itself.
Were I going with two people I wouldn't take two stoves, but rather, an extra canister. You might
try an MSR pocket rocket before those other two - just to try it. they're cheap anyway, and
reliable.

Most of the time I don't carry either of them. I carry an alcohol stove made from a beer can, which if you search back for more than a week on this site, you'll find plenty of discussions about
them because many of us use them.

It sounds like you guys like the Pocket Rocket with your pot/cup of choice over the MSR Reactor or Jetboil? Would this be a true assumption? If so, why? Both the Jetboil and Reactor get such good write ups. I am leaning towards just getting us one stove, but with 2 cups/pots. I want to keep my stove and cooking supplies as light as possible because the tent that we use is a little on the heavier side. We purchased a 3 person tent which is a little more advanced than we need for the type of hiking we do, but we liked its stability and living space. Because the tent weighs a little more than our old tent we are trying to cut weight buy changing our stove/pots. Any more advice / recommendations? Thank you.

Check your weights. It might actually be lighter and more convenient to carry one pot and two cups (light weight plastic) than to have two pot/cups.

I tried the Jetboil and, for the additional weight over the Pocket Rocket and Titan kettle, the Jetboil just isn't worth it. I boil water and add freeze-dried food. If a 3-ounce stove and 4 ounce pot will boil water in two or three minutes, why carry an extra half pound or so to use a Jetboil that will save me, oh, about 30 seconds. I've got nowhere to go. Carrying that extra weight, especially when you purposely added weight for your tent, makes no sense.

It's also hard to keep crud (like food that dribbles down the side when you pour) from soaking into that pot cozy - and makes it real hard to keep clean.

Sorry, but I think the Jetboil and Reactor are both overrated. I'll take lighter weight.

Subsequent edit: a post by Jasonlivy reminded me that I should have said, "the Jetboil and Reactor are both overrated for my needs." I eat a cold breakfast and lunch, and only prepare a freeze-dried supper. I drink water, not hot beverages. Therefore, I can't justify the weight of either the Jetboil or Reactor for the minimal use I need. However, if I were cooking for several people, or cooking several times a day, and beverages were involved, I might very well choose the Reactor. I generally prefer MSR gear, and I think the Jetboil's pot cozy is overly fussy and the utensils a little flimsy; the angles and sliding feature of the utensils and absorbent cozy material made it a little too hard to keep clean for me. Also, the Jetboil was pretty tipsy unless I used the pot stand; the Reactor uses an MSR cartridge with a wider-based canister that makes it more stable.

> why the pocket rocket, etc. over the jetboil or reactor?

not really the pocket rocket, as much as *any* small canister stove. I have a snow peak gigapower,
the brunton crux, etc. all of them are fine. they're all pretty much the same.

Simple. weight. those complicated things are heavy. While the jetboil and reactor will use less fuel to boil than my little thing, the extra weight of the stove outdoes the weight of the rest of the rig.
A small canister stove with a hunk of aluminim foil cake pan or flashing for a windscreen is lighter. keep it simple.

As for other suggestions? get a lighter tent- you'll save more weight than you ever will on your stove, (although do not discount the fact that by going with a simpler stove and therefore tending
to lighter dehydrated meals you will carry less weight in food too)

I carry just one pot and a small plastic cup.

I'll pipe in on why a Reactor is worth the money and possibly the weight...

I would be the first to acknowledge that a stove should meet the persons needs. I will never be a proponent of recommending a DragonFly to someone who will only be doing weekend backpacking trips in the summer.

As well, someone who is used to an alcohol stove's weight and boil times would most definitely find the Reactor a huge overkill. Often those using alcohol stoves (unless they are willing to accept it's major deficiencies in the winter and majorly adverse weather) are using them in relatively mild weather. The Reactor is way too much of a stove in this type of weather. An XGK in the same scenario is laughable...

I've used the Reactor in some horrible conditions that definitely warranted the weight. I often find myself in the Wind Rivers, Tetons, Uintahs, and my local mountains. For a mountain stove, it works very well. It's also the only winter canister stove I would recommend.

One thing that should be noted is the new pot (inline change) now shipping is about 3 oz. lighter than the first generation pot. The way you can tell is how the 'shroud' (lower section of the pot) is welded on. If you see 5-6 spot welds, it's the old pot. If you observe many very small (laser) welds, then it's the new pot. I haven't experienced any performance differences between the two.

The whole system weighs (w/o fuel), about 16 oz. Not bad if a liter needs to be boiled at a time and if efficiency and performance are paramount. It is truly a revolutionary stove!

The only commonality between the xgk and the reactor is the high price. The stoves are intended for different purposes in my opinion. If you are at 15,000 feet the xgk would be nice to have - but other than that it would be noisy, heavy stove. The reactor is a fancy canister stove that might have enough fuel efficiency to offset its own weight, maybe. I think there are better options as far as stoves go - but I am a cheapskate and my suggestions would most likely be laughed at.

Just cant let it slide jason, sorry.. The OP *isn't talking about needing a stove for those kind of conditions*, which is why I'm saying "hunh" to the thought of a reactor and/or xgk and reccomending something more normal.

don't get me wrong, I *like* MSR gear, (maybe I got your dander up by dissing the dragonfly in
another post) but the right tool for the right job, and imo for general backpacking, the reactor
ain't it - there are better choices.

As for boil times, I'm convinced the entire industry is focused way too much on it because a bunch of alky stove freaks started publishing data for "mine's bigger than yours" envy contests on whose stove was better - it's relevant when calculating fuel consumption knowing a canister and a burn time. Trouble to me seems to be that people have translated that into that it's worth carrying an extra pound on my back just because I'm so impatient when boiling my litre of water that my trip ill be ruined if it takes more than three minutes. Anyone who is that uptight over how long dinner takes could probably make a correct lightweight decision by taking the slower lighter stove, and a zoloft a day, wich will weigh a lot less than the pound you save on the stove. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> (I leave the calculation of could you carry enough zoloft to take one a day on an AT thru hike in under 10 oz to the reader) if my boil time is over a half hour I might care. beyond that I don't give a hoot.

My advice is do not buy an XGK. Given your scenario, I have no idea why you would want one. I own one and consider it one of the finest stove designs ever made. BUT, it is not a stove for general camping. It is a mountaineering stove. Mine is the older, round one and looks nothing like the new ones, but I don't think there is much operational difference. Jason can correct me if I am wrong on this point.

MSR is a great company that supports their products, even the old ones like my stove. The XGK does one thing and does it well. It runs at full blast and sounds like a small jet engine. It will burn any flammable liquid you are likely to find (including stuff they tell you not to use, but listen to them, not me). However, if you want to do anything that resembles actual cooking, it is not the stove for you.

If you want a multi-fuel stove, both Primus and Optimus make them. I have an Optimus Nova, which may be more versatile, but I don't consider it as reliable as the XGK. I also have several other stoves, including two canister stoves.

I've seen the Reactor, but know nothing about it, so no comment on it.

What I usually take on my trips is my Nova and a Primus Micron canister stove as a backup and day hiking stove. I see little point buying two of the same thing unless you are in a big group.

As for your reasoning for carrying two stoves, the solution to running out of fuel is carrying more of it, not another stove. I can field strip my Nova and have done it in freezing cold weather to fix a problem. The only thing likely to actually break on a stove is the pump unless you do something really bad to it. The more likely scenario is a clogged fuel line or frozen fuel filter. Canister stoves don't have this problem-no pump, no filter.

When I first saw the Reactor stove, the thought that crossed my mind was, 'it's too heavy'. I remember not being that excited over it. I, like most everyone on this post, wanted MSR's new stove to be super light, super packable, have amazing pot supports, no maintenance issues, didn't use canisters, so on and so forth. I essentially didn't aline myself with the powers-that-be at Cascade Designs. This resulted in my disappointed reaction.

However, that has drastically changed. I'm convinced, having kicked the tires of most of the stoves currently on the market, that the Reactor is the best performing stove, 0°F and above, of any on the market. I've been at extreme altitudes (15,000+ ft. in Ecuador), extreme temperatures with extreme wind, very low fuel levels, super high winds, and the Reactor has not even flinched...

I know many avoid these types of conditions for good reason. That's ok. In fact, that is why MSR makes so many stoves because there isn't one that will fulfill everyones needs.

I was also like everyone else who didn't care about how fast my water boiled-- until I got the Reactor. Now, instead of trying to be patient waiting for my water to boil, I have water almost immediately and can then relax and enjoy the scenery/outdoors while I eat! It's so nice to be able to fill my stomach and relax than to wait endlessly, starving, while my water is laboring to boil. Because of this and many other reasons, I love my Reactor!

I know most of the folks on here who post have a very good grasp of what stoves are good in what conditions. I have no doubt that there are as many opinions as there are stoves. I also know that many feel that weight and packability are the two most important attributes of a stove because most of them perform similarly. I have since left that train and will take my Reactor while donning my 2lb pack, carry my 1.5lb sleeping bag, sleep on my new NeoAir Pad (14 oz), and stay in my MSR Carbon Reflex tent (2lb 12oz). The extra weight of the Reactor is totally worth it and I simply can't do without it. It has totally spoiled me... <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

In another post, I made the statement that "the Reactor is just too heavy." You've just reminded me that I should have said, "too heavy for my needs."

If I were hiking in a group of two or more, or if I prepared meals from scratch, or if I cooked every meal, I'd probably consider the Reactor; given my general preference for MSR gear, I'd choose it over the Jetboil.

However, I hike alone (mostly), and the only meal I cook is supper - it's a freeze-dried meal that I dump in my Titan kettle after the water boils. I don't need extra capacity for tea water, because the only beverage I drink is water. For such simple cooking, the Reactor is simply overkill for my needs.

Agreed.

Does anyone know if you can use a gigapower stove with a jetboil cup? I was wondering if you removed the fins where the gigapower would sit if it might be possible to use the two together? I like the jetboil cup but like the gigapower stoves flexibility.

Jetboil, from what I've seen, offers added cost and very little flexibility.

It's designed for cooking up a meagre meal for two
Hanging from ceiling of very small tent. I'd never get one.

Liquid fuel stoves are heavy, and finicky and dangerous if not fully respected.

I primed a Svea once, realized I'd forgotten to screw back on the fuel tank cap, and tossed the thing nearly into a nearby and fully occupied tent at three a.m. NOT good.........

Several amusing, though less alarming conflagrations with Whisperlight.....And I'm supposed to know about this stuff..........

Buying cannisters can be troublesome and expensive.
I've used them down to slightly below zero with no trouble at all.

Thank you all for the input. I am learning a lot through your experiences. I am starting to lean away from the XGK, however I really like the ability to use any fuel that is available. Therefore I am now considering the Optimus Nova. But im not sure if there is much difference between the Nova and XGK. Can somebody explain the difference between these two stoves for me? It sounds like they are both made for extreme conditions. I have looked into getting a MSR Pocket Rocket and storing it inside a GSI Dualist system. So far this looks like the best option. I just wish MSR made a small multifuel stove. ANy info on the Nova?

Why is multifuel important? If most of your trips are international, that may be a consideration. Get a different stove when that develops.

Otherwise, you buy what fuel you need here, then store the extra at home. Before each domestic trip, take as much as you need plus a little extra.

What is the situation where a tank of one fuel is followed by a tank of another fuel, all on the same trip with mid-trip access to the second fuel but no ability to carry any of the first fuel? Just how often is that scenario expected?

I agree. Don't worry about multi-fuel options. Many years ago, when I bought a whisperlight, I really liked the fact that I could use white gas, or auto gas, or switch out the nozzle and use kerosene. Over fifteen years later and I've never used anything but white gas <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> So, pick the fuel option you want - liquid, either white gas or alcohol, or canister based, and then find the lightest stove you can afford that does what you need.

The nova is pretty much just like the XGK - a good dead of winter snowmelter or mountaineering stove. I'm really wondering about *why* you need "multi-fuel" - if you're planning on going on an extended expedition to the remotest corners of the world where you are resupplying locally I could
see doing this. So, my question is as per the others - aside from the fact that it sounds cool - why do you think you need multi-fuel - I know I don't. If you're planning a multi-month third world expedition, please tell us and we'll all change our tune.

Hey, Jason - I've been reading in a lot of reviews that people are disappointed that the apparent volume of the Reactor pot is not the real volume - they're constantly pointing out that the max fill line is about 1 quart, and only allows the pot to be filled about half full.

Any comments?

That is partially true. The 'recommended' fill line for boiling water is 1L (not one quart) and has a total capacity of 1.5L. Cascade Designs recommends the user only boil 1L at a time to avoid potential burns. However, this is entirely up to the user. The pot does say that the 'max fill' is 1L.

This is also similar to JetBoil recommending boiling only 16 oz. (2 cups) at a time verses the 1L capacity of their cup.

Although I've not used the Reactor, I figured it was something like that. Seems like you'd especially want excess space in the pot for food that needs boiled. I know that I tried cooking a Lipton rice side dish in my Titan kettle once or twice, and found that if I didn't watch it like a hawk, it tended to boil over pretty easily because the pot was pretty full before I added any heat.

Sounds like, for a group that was adding boiling water to freeze-dried food in the foil pack, you could boil more than a liter - but you'd better be paying close attention to the boil, and to spillage from a too-full pot. (Tell those folks not to hold the bag while you pour the water in, huh?)

Just wanted to give you a chance to reply to the general tone of "we're getting shortchanged" that I was picking up from those reviews.

The Nova simmers, the XGK does not.

Go for the pocket rocket.

I own 2 Novas, 3 MSRs, a Coleman and a Primus - all liquid fuel stoves. Also a SnowPeak and a JetBoil, a BushBuddy and a number of alcohol stoves, plus a Primus Grashopper propane stove. 90% of my non-winter trips I use the SnowPeak, otherwise the JetBoil (heavy and finicky in cold). In winter it's almost exclusively the Nova+, though some experiences last winter with a remote canister stove and a heat exchanger pot will have me trying that more this winter.)

Again, all in all I highly recommend a simple canister stove - it will cover the vast majority of what you want for great convenience and minimal cost. The only reason to go for the liquid fuel stoves is if you're going on an expedition or melting large amounts of snow for water in winter. Even there I'd look at a remote canister stove, for convenience...

So, do you have a list of stoves you don't have. I bet it is smaller.

The XGK is a simpler design than the Nova. I'm not sure why the XGK won't simmer, but it doesn't. I presume it's the valve design, but I've never bothered to find out. The Nova is more of a general use stove than the XGK for that reason.

I have both, but agree that for the average camper, a canister stove is much easier to use. I have a Primus Micron and a Coleman Xtreme. The Coleman is an orphan. You can still get them online, but one of these days the cartridges will be also be discontinued, so I can't really recommend it. My XGK is over 20 years old and I can still get parts for it from MSR.

LOL! Yeah, probably. Between gifts, stoves I've been given to review, and some sort of addiction, I have quite a pile of them.

Time for a garage sale, I guess...

<img src="/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> Psst! DooDad Box . . . 'nuf said. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />