Trioxane vs Alcohol

Posted by: Cstolworthy

Trioxane vs Alcohol - 06/03/10 12:16 AM

Has anyone done a comparison of Trioxane tablets and Alcohol stoves? I had my first experience with trioxane on my last trip and it seems like it does a pretty good job. They are light weight, wouldn't have to worry about them leaking out of a container, etc.

I am interested in a BTU to weight ratio comparison, and also what your thoughts are between the two.
Posted by: Howie

Re: Trioxane vs Alcohol - 06/03/10 01:37 AM

I am not sure if they are the same as Esbit, but the Esbit tablets work very well. Some hikers here don't like Esbit because of its smell, and because it blackens the bottom of pots. It was not a problem for me, and I liked the fact that if necessary I could add a tablet while the other one was still burning. They are light, compact and fairly hot burning. (As I remember I boiled a cup of water in 7 minutes). The only downside I see is the cost. Where I live I can only get Esbit at model engine stores and they are relatively expensive. They use Esbit to fuel small steam engines.

Howie
Posted by: Cstolworthy

Re: Trioxane vs Alcohol - 06/03/10 10:32 AM

Well after a bit of googling I found out a few things.

Cost wise Trioxane is roughly 3/4 the heat output of esbit.
When you factor the difference in heat vs the cost, trioxane comes out at roughly 1/2 the cost of esbit.

Apparently the fumes from trioxane are fairly noxious, so cooking in the open is ideal. Esbit fumes are not noxious. Many people have said (and this is my experience) that if you are cooking outdoors you probably won't notice the fumes.

Apparently esbit is Non-toxic, where as Trioxane is toxic.

Apparently Trioxane lights much easier than Esbit. I can vouch that Trioxane does light extremely easily.
Posted by: finallyME

Re: Trioxane vs Alcohol - 06/03/10 12:32 PM

Originally Posted By Cstolworthy
Well after a bit of googling I found out a few things.

Cost wise Trioxane is roughly 3/4 the heat output of esbit.
When you factor the difference in heat vs the cost, trioxane comes out at roughly 1/2 the cost of esbit.

Apparently the fumes from trioxane are fairly noxious, so cooking in the open is ideal. Esbit fumes are not noxious. Many people have said (and this is my experience) that if you are cooking outdoors you probably won't notice the fumes.

Apparently esbit is Non-toxic, where as Trioxane is toxic.

Apparently Trioxane lights much easier than Esbit. I can vouch that Trioxane does light extremely easily.


Yeah, trioxine is toxic. Use esbit or something similar.
Posted by: PerryMK

Re: Trioxane vs Alcohol - 06/03/10 12:58 PM

Here are a couple of links that might interest you.

Old Post

Sgt Rock / old post

Posted by: Trailrunner

Re: Trioxane vs Alcohol - 06/03/10 01:47 PM

I dabbled with Esbit and Trioxane a couple of years ago. I went back to alcohol because it's easier to use.

Sometimes one tab isn't enough to do the job, sometimes it's too much. Sure you can save unburned remnants of used tabs but that gets pretty messy pretty quickly. Alcohol allows me a greater degree of precision.

I also got tired of cleaning my pot after each Esbit burn. Not necessary with alcohol.

Alcohol can also be used as a hand cleaner. Esbit cannot.

Esbit is harder to light than alcohol.

Esbit cannot be spilled and it won't leak out of its container so it has an advantage in that regard.

All in all, alcohol works better for me. Some day I'm going to try that 180 proof Everclear. Stove fuel that you can drink. Now that's my idea of multi-use!!!!!

Posted by: taM

Re: Trioxane vs Alcohol - 06/04/10 12:20 AM

I used trioxane in a fold-up stove a solid 10+ years ago. The fumes are pretty terrible, like knock you on your butt if you catch a whiff terrible. I only used it outside and most certainly still noticed the fumes.

Trioxane also degrades quickly once opened, so it's difficult to save any unused bits if you only burn a portion.

I also remember it leaving a hard stuck-on goo, like a black plasticky crust, after being burned. This stuff would eventually build-up if you burned it on any sort of stove surface.

I used it only for camping, not backpacking, I don't think I'd consider it for a backpacking fuel. Plus the packaging, as I remember it, was somewhat heavy...like some sort of aluminized sort of packet. Non-burnable, so you'd have to carry that with you too.
Posted by: Franco

Re: Trioxane vs Alcohol - 06/04/10 08:38 PM

"They use Esbit to fuel small steam engines"
As a kid in Italy we used to play with Meta (Metaldehyde) made by a Swiss company and sold in hobby stores.
I do not recall any smell but of course I have no idea what the BTU is . Looks similar to Trioxane (IE: solid white small tablets)

I tried both Esbit and Trioxane as well as a couple of generic brands. Good results with the Caldera Cone , not otherwise. However since I can snuff my burner and recover unused fuel I find
using that easier and more efficient for me.
The smell is also off putting for me, at times I cook in the vestibule.
We buy 1 L of 95% Ethanol here for about $3 US.
Franco
Posted by: Cstolworthy

Re: Trioxane vs Alcohol - 06/04/10 10:00 PM

Originally Posted By Trailrunner

All in all, alcohol works better for me. Some day I'm going to try that 180 proof Everclear. Stove fuel that you can drink. Now that's my idea of multi-use!!!!!


Yeah, I have bought and consumed everclear. On that note, I can safely say that drinking it is ABSOLUTELY a bad idea laugh
Posted by: 300winmag

Re: ESBIT vs Alcohol - 06/19/10 12:17 AM

Trioxane is not a preferred solid fuel. Noxious fumes.

German ESBIT or U.S. made FireLite tablets are far better and hotter W/O teh nasty fumes of Trioxane.

I have tried alky in a few stoves but much prefer ESBIT/FireLite tabs for many reasons. Their only downside is the residue left on pot bottoms. A light coat of Bonner's or CampSuds soap helps it was off readily.

Eric