MSR Heat Exchanger Revisited, Was I wrong? Is it worth it?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 авг 2024
- In this video I take a second look the MSR heat exchanger to see if it is worth the weight or cost.
I discover that I was using the heat exchanger wrong. It needs to extend below the bottom of the pot for the best efficiency. My best results finally approached the efficiencies advertised by MSR.
But still I discover that the weight and cost of the heat exchanger still doesn't make it a reasonable option unless you are using the stove a lot.
My Amazon Stores
USA www.amazon.com/shop/kevinoutd...
Canada www.amazon.ca/shop/kevinoutdoors
Where you can find lots of the gear that I use.
Follow Me…
Facebook: / kevinoutdoors1
Instagram: kevin_outdo...
Olight Flashlights
CA Link: caolightstore.idevaffiliate.c...
US Link:olight.idevaffiliate.com/idev...
Disclaimer
Any opinions expressed in this video are mine and mine alone and are not related to my employer or any other organization or individual. I have not been paid to make this video or to endorse a product. If I am ever paid for an endorsement or provided other compensation, I will state it clearly in the video. Any advice or demonstration I provide is just advice. The viewer should take responsibility for their own actions, follow any manufacturers warnings and directions and act safely and responsibly when travelling in the backcountry.
Finally someone who really tests and talks by numbers and not gut feel. Love it. Please more content like that!
Thanks so much. I try and make the kind of honest content that I like to watch.
A couple of things which blew my mind about heating water was
• Turn the heat down, slow down. It's far more efficient by a significant margin.
• Boiling water isn't necessary to kill any hazards, and unless you're making fancy expresso, there's no point going beyond 70% of a boil.
Source: GearSceptic, RUclips channel.
i don't boil my water. i have it filtered and get it hot enuff to do what needs to be done. place my pot inside a cozy i made to finish cooking...i use at least half of the fuel many people do. also, i slow heat my stuff. anytime i see people crank their stoves to high i cringe. it is so wasteful. no need to do that. the heat is gone before the water gets it. just take your time and use common sense. also, i prefer remote stoves...it lets me use windscreens for better heat retention...another thing is i use pots with their own heat exchanger ring along the bottom. no need for the separate huge heat exchanger.
One of the best reviews I have ever seen. The model to be followed by all those reviewers who are talking a lot without giving you any info. Very professional. Thank you
Thanks so much. That is exactly what I am striving to do. Provide info rather than chit chat and speculation.
Nice review. I've had mine since around 2000, and it was sold by MSR as a kit. I figured out the lowering ring in thing pretty early on , as you can feel the heat escaping off the side.
I don't however agree with the fuel use testing procedure. You will always consume more fuel if you turn it up to full Blast. Full blast creates heat faster than the pot can transfer into the water.
There is a diminishing return on speed as you go higher and higher on the heat.
My best fuel consumption rate for a pocket rocket with this setup was around 65 percent flame, and about 70 percent with an apex 2. If you throw in some wind and colder weather the lower heat ring actually helps keep the canister warmer, helping it perform better. The 65 percent flame also keeps the canister from getting too hot.
Thanks Rick for the thoughtful reply. The reason I like to do these tests is because I like to dispel many of the myths that exist out there. The fuel testing procedure is solid as I have also tested the dial position. I have found that running the stove at different burning intensities makes no difference to fuel consumption. A hotter flame will use the same amount of fuel but less time. I didn't try this with a very heat resistant metal such as cast iron and the results could be different with a different stove.
No doubt the heat exchanger also protects from the wind, but cold temperatures do not affect the performance of the stove. I have done this test too and found very consistent boil times and fuel consumption from +20 to -20C.
The most efficient setting depends on the wind as well. In higher wind higher settings become a little more efficient, because the flame isn’t blown away. It also depends on the size of the pot. A very narrow pot is wayyy more efficient on a low setting, whilst a big pot can be still quite efficient with a stronger flame because not as much heat is lost going up the sides of the pot.
Great review! Love how thoroughly you conduct the test, break down the data, and explain the numbers. Not something I feel compelled to backpack with. Thank you, Kevin.
Thanks April! Glad you liked it!
Thanks for a comprehensive break down most of all the cost to fuel savings to weight .
Glad it was helpful!
I did my own investigation into the use of a heat exchanger many years ago. The only realistic reason for using a heat exchanger is in cases where you have limited fuel or the effort to get fuel to you is difficult to impossible. In my research there were basically some cases that it could be justifiable. One of those is high altitude mountain climbing. In those cases, fuel for the stove is fairly limited. Not only that, but all drinking water comes from melting snow, which uses significantly more fuel than just a pot without a heat exchanger. Second case is someone who is isolated with little or no way to get additional fuel. Last case is Extreme trips where water will be derived from snow are situations where the heat exchanger will shine, especially when water is being melted from snow and ice for many people.
Thanks Rick, for the great insights. I have been planning on doing yet another revisit of the heat exchanger by melting snow and ice. Ice rather than snow will likely give me a more consistent approach as I can measure the exact amount of water and freeze it. Snow presents a lot of problems in getting exactly the same amount for different trials. Thanks again for commenting!
@@KevinOutdoors I look forward to seeing that video. Your content is great and I look forward to seeing more...
@@rdh2059 Thanks!
Thanks for circling back when you were informed of new information about the MSR. Good thorough analysis!
My pleasure!
80$ for that is crazy. At that cost you're better off ordering one of the specialized pots with built in heat exchanger, no doubt.
The math at the end was just 👌You showed that this is not a gimmick, but it is not exactly worth it. Unless you cook with it too often. That said, you could use it on pots at home as well to make up for the cost of it.
What's happening with the heat exchanger at that low height isnt just heat transfer from the copper to the pot (though that is significant as show by the slower initial temperature as shown), but also a windshielding effect that it has.
You can most likely get similar benefits with a tight fitting windscreen. Just get a windscreen that you can adjust and leave a small gap between it and your pots. The trangia stormcooker is a good example of this. Potstand and windshield all in one.
Awesome video, brilliant execution and conclusion. Sorry for the negative comments you got/get. You are very much appreciated!
Thanks for the great comments! Glad you liked the video.
Great experiment, analysis, and conclusion. As cool as the heat exchanger is, it's dubious for small groups. Thanks for doing this!
Thanks for watching Andrea! Glad you liked it.
One of your best instructive videos yet!
Wow, thanks!
Entertaining review video. Thanks for putting the work in, really interesting. I love how you make people accountable for their comments. 👍
Thanks Adam, I try to. :)
Good Review. Seems to me from taking the results of your test if I were to buy one of these I would use it car camping and think if I were making a stew or chili it would alow mee to use a lower flame to slowly simmer an all day meal cooking. Thank You for the revisit as it seems there were no instructions on how to use this from the Factory when purchased. Thanks for sharing your video with us.
That would be an interesting application. The more you use this the more it will save you and a long simmer might be thing.
Thanks for the testing and information Kevin! One piece of gear I can’t see myself getting.
Thanks Teunis!
Good review, thanks. Can’t see you winning a sponsorship deal with MSR 😄
LOL, probably not. I like MSR and I find the heat exchanger to be a great design and well made. It just shouldn't be this hard to get the advertised efficiency and when you do that added efficiency should mean something to you beyond a number. Next, I am going to melt some ice, I believe that is where this thing will shine.
Thanks for the review with detail data !
No problem 👍
thanks for always being so clear and complete. I like how you get "lab test" accuracy on your picnic table and then give an honest opinion. I was going to make a windscreen out of a tin foil oven liner but I never thought of the fuel can heating up. What are your thoughts/experience with a windscreen to save fuel. The only criticism I would add is the hat....need a Toronto hat..
Thanks Stephen, in all my playing around with stoves I've learned that windscreens are the most important factor in saving fuel. Wind can quickly steal the heat from your stove. If you are using a canister stove you do need to be careful not to heat your canister. I have a few windscreens that were designed to clip onto the lip of the canister and protect the stove but these have been discontinued for safety reasons. A number of stoves have shields that clip or rest around the burner. Regarding the hat... nice isn't it! 👍🏒
Wow, amazing review and scientific approach!!!
Thank you! Cheers!
Great review. Thank you !! 👍
No problem 👍
Great review. I have the HE as well and don't believe it is worth it. Much prefer a full wind screen instead. (Not good for a cannister type stove though.) I agree they don't provide good instruction on the HE. Also by lowering the HE below the pot, it works like the Jetboil pots, which have been optimized specifically this way for years. The flip side to HE, with all the extra surface area, is that it also releases heat faster. Think of the heat sink on a CPU. If you wanted to optimize this setup, I would use a full windscreen around the HE.
EXCELLENT, well thought out, coherent, timely, & informative video. The heat exchanger weight & space required inside a backpack aren't worth it at any price.
Warm Regards from Reno, Nevada.
Thanks for watching!
Thanks for revisiting your review when you found out new info - for solo camping check out Jet Boil (built in heat exchanger, very light, fast boil)
Thanks Will, I really want to test out a Jet Boil. I am not sure I want to fork out the dough for a test though.
Hey Kevin, I'm surprised that the fuel savings were not greater given the quicker boil time. Very interesting results, thanks for sharing the info and great video.👍
Thanks Wade, yes I thought once we got into the 25% efficiency range that I would be able to build a good case for the heat exchanger. Despite getting there, I still have trouble justifying it.
Thanks for the revisit of this heat exchanger. I watched your previous video and commented that I thought it should hang down a bit.
Good, concise testing.
It's not always just about the weight and the cost though. I've been on long trips where we ran out of fuel. And I'm wondering if there would be enough fuel savings to get a few extra days out of a canister of fuel, offsetting the weight of another canister of fuel?? Or just bring an extra canister of fuel.
I'm going to make one out of aluminum to fit my titanium pots. Probably a lot lighter and will conduct almost as well. I happen to have a sheet metal shop.
That sounds like a cool idea. FYI the MSR exchanger is brass not copper. I think in the first video I called it copper by mistake. Let me know if you need someone to do testing 😃
That was great, Kevin. Thanks!
Glad you liked it!
Great video, But how does it perform aka efficiency in windy, cold, high altitude conditions? Melting snow?
Great info. Thanks Kevin 👍
No problem 👍
I love the extrapolated data, it puts everything in perspective!!
Thanks Ian!
Excellent experiment, Kevin. Very clinical. For me, it is counter-intuitive to fit any type attachment in a what appears to by jerry-rigged fashion, to any device. Stove or not. Better off with a wind screen perhaps? I am still pretty old school with this stuff. I have a 3 fuel Peak One (2lb fully fueled) and a Trangia. Carry them both, every time I am out for more than one night, but I am not an ultralight dude.
Thanks Craig, those are both good reliable stoves. The Peak One is probably becoming collectible. ATB
Hahahaha. Great video Kevin. I'm running to the MSR site to order a heat exchanger. Wait I'm 60 damn now it's not worth it. LOL
LOL, well I am trying to be fair. I think this will shine when I try and boil water with a big chunk of ice. I suspect winter camping and melting snow or ice is where it rocks.
I wonder how much this compares to using a tallish wind screen close to your pot.
I have experimented with one of those folding screen wind screens, and what I can say that at least in colder climates there’s not a problem with overheating, even with the stove on top.
One thing is, most of the heat goes up while cooler air is drawn in near the bottom. The top of the can has an insulating layer of gas, the first gas to go out of the box at that, and the can itself is cooled by the boiling of liquid gas from the inside. So I have experienced near freezing temperatures at the bottom of the can even when the can and the burner is almost fully enclosed. I won’t guarantee anything like that in hot weather but the effects of your canister getting hot is easily noticeable at any rate: The pressure in the can slowly rises, and along with that the output of your stove. So if your stove works hotter over time than when you started it, there’s danger. (And yes, I have tried heating cans at g to be side of the fire in cold winter as well, so I know: Never leave that dangerous thing alone, for sure!)
At any rate, it would be fun to see that heat exchanger compared to just a wind screen enclosing the pot, forcing warm air up along the sides of the pot.
Great break down and analysis. Be curious what those numbers are with white fuel. Don't forget weight of canister not just the fuel
Yeah, I am curious too. White gas is tricky to do tests with because the burner needs to be pre-heated before the gas vaporizes. I have very little way of controlling how much gas is used in each pre-heat. Perhaps I could just add gas from another source for the pre-heat? Humm, you got me thinking...
Thanks.
Your review of your prior review was interesting/thoughtful/coherent in terms of the MSR Heat Exchanger. However, I do believe the vast majority of your subscribers will be looking at, using, or considering a Jetboil Stash or an aftermarket pot/heat exchanger.
I'm going to copy & paste the results of my experiment with an aftermarket pot/heat exchanger & the 750ml Titanium cup that I've been using:
I rec'd my Fire-Maple 1L Aluminum heat exchanger pot this afternoon.
I ran 3 complete comparison tests between the new heat exchanger pot & the one I've been using which is a 750ml Titanium Toaks.
I have & used my Soto Windmaster stove. For all tests, I turned the stove's heat output control wide open. Yes, I added the same volume of water (24oz) that was the same temperature to both pots in all 3 comparison tests.
Boil times & fuel consumption between the 2 pots were infinitesimally inconsequential.
I'm planning to return the new heat exchanger pot to amazon tomorrow that I paid $32.75 for.
Not what I was expecting. Adverting/Promotion claims of 25%-30% lower boil times & fuel savings have no more substance to them than the tooth fairy. Definitely not worth the added cost or weight.
Curiously, Soto hasn't marketed any Heat Exchanger type of pots to compete against the Jetboil Stash system which is specifically designed for solo hikers/backpackers/thru-hikers. Considering that Soto is THE company that first introduced fuel-efficient stoves with "Regulators" you'd think if heat exchanger pots actually resulted in lower boil times & significant fuel savings they would have been one of the first companies to introduce heat exchangers on their pots. That SHOULD tell you something. Just a thought/observation.
I'm hoping others will compare the pot they've been using with an aftermarket Heat Exchanger type of pot. I eagerly look forward to their test results.
Problem with the Jetboil is you can't put it over a fire after you've run out of fuel.
@@UguysRnuts Not putting heat exchanger pots on a fire if or when you run out of fuel is a limitation that I'd never thought of. Good one!
I've had the heat ring for over 2 decades. It definately works, but you get lower efficiencies the higher BTU you try and put in. It's the same as home heating systems, they could just push massive amounts of flame through it, but then it wouldn't be efficient.
That said, the msr reactor is also a type of heat exchanger but its design has a longer dwell time by having fins thought the bottom and encompassing the lower part of the pot, and exhausting through the side of the pot a few inches from the bottom. The materials are mostly the same. Thus it comes down to who has the most surface area and longest contact time, without external wind forces causing the heat to escape.
@@UguysRnuts oh you can. It might just not be the same after. Lol.
Soto posts a warning in Japanese to "never" use the stoves with heat exchanger pots, because of the increased carbon monoxide production. If they are serious, then they cannot produce such pots themselves for obvious reasons.
I might suggest Boulin line of camogear,You can get a stove and 11/2 ltr. Pot,both with heat exchage tech ,less than 50$!
For high altitude and for winter camping I always take my MSR heat exchanger but it stays at home on summer trips.
great video. This is a good subject. How about comparing the MSR heat exchanger to a cheap windscreen? Isn't this the heat exchangers real competition? Also, I think adding up time saved in your comparisons would be interesting. I know people like to get hot food in their tummies fast when outdoors. the 30 seconds you save though with the Exchanger is offset by the 30 seconds it takes to set it on the pot...a bust?
Thanks Being Aware, I'll give the windscreen test some consideration. In a previous test I did with a fan I came to the conclusion that wind is likely the most serious factor in reducing stove efficiency. But what kind of a test is interesting? I have no doubt the MSR heat exchanger is a good windscreen but testing against nothing isn't much of a test. Testing it against another windscreen will basically pre-determine the results. A good windscreen will likely do equally fine a poor windscreen will give poor results.
Thanks Kevin!! That was alot of info on the subject. We agree, not worth it.
Glad you enjoyed it!
great vid god bless ya kev
Thanks!
thanks for the great research! perhaps a metal disc under the pot will give the same result.
Well this works, it just doesn't provide enough efficiency to offset the weight. I am not sure that is possible.
Good job
Thanks
this design might even increase fuel consumption on windy days. under pot fins + side insulation is much more reasonable solution.
Sounds like another vote for me to test a Jet Boil? :)
Thank you for a very informative video! This made me decide NOT to buy the MSR heat exchanger. A windshield provides far more benefit and is much lighter.
Thanks Anders, I am glad this video was helpful in your choice.
Was the wet cloth significantly warmer when lowering the heath exchanger ?
I ran the stove with the heat exchanger in that position for a bit before doing the actual test. It was getting quite hot near the canister. It probably wouldn't have been a problem but I wanted to err on the side of caution and not get a flood of comments telling me how dangerous that was. :)
@@KevinOutdoors thanks
Probably best for cooking in cold, or snowy conditions.
Cold ambient temperatures don't really change the game much. Fuel gives off a constant temp when it burns, and any stove creates a pocket of heat that isn't really impacted by the air around it. The efficiency should make a difference on longer burn times for such things as melting snow or ice.
in my opinion, and maybe a little experiance the corragations shouldn't be open at the top. They arent getting much advantage from using copper because the heat is passing through as quickly as its going in, the copper doesn't have much opportunity to conduct the energy its trying to transfer. copper is very heavy compare to other material, even heavier then stainless. extreemly conductive but they aren't getting the advantage of the heavy, conductive material because the heat passes through faster then it can be transfered to the pot. the design would have to capture the heat a little better and still there's very little contact between the copper material and the container, so in the way copper would have conductive advantage over other materials, it still has to have way more contact with the pot in order to be beneficial. Otherwise your just trying to hold the hot air against the pot and they're not doing that either because its just passing through, the heat needs to be trapped in order to use it. a ring around the top would make it work way better and you might as well use titanium, that doesn't conduct much at all (why you can only boil water with it) because there is no use for copper in this design because there are only small contact points. aluminum is cheap compared to both of the other materials mentioned but it is also extreemly conductive and light, so it is the best material to use for this but still the mechanism isn't conducting much itself because its not contacting the pot enough to make any difference. the only thing you can do with that is try to trap the hot air better it would be significantly better. so again with what you have there just covering the openings at the top of the corrugations with a ring, you could try it with aluminum foil just to see if it works... just sharing thoughts here, thanks for the video you are very helpfull:)
Thanks for the thoughts. I might try the aluminum foil as an experiment. Just so you know the material is brass not copper. But still very heavy for what it can transfer to the pot. Someday I will try this again and melt a large block of ice and see if a longer burn shows any additional benefits. Lots of winter campers have commented that it is more efficient when melting snow and ice. I doubt it, but experimenting is fun.
👍🏻
Thanks Llama!
Any thoughts about effect of altitude on boil?
Yes, good question. With increased elevation the boiling point of water decreases.
So the water will boil sooner but it will be at a reduced temp. At 2000ft water will come to a boil at 98C instead of 100C and you will start to notice about a 20% increase in cooking time. At 5000 ft water boils at 95C and cooking times will increase by 50%.
@@KevinOutdoors I liked your video bc got me thinking. In Sierras (CA), on average camping around 10000ft. Even if boil will take twice as long, you still have to be out a long time (80+ boils).
Thanks.
@@marcbatchelder6891 Yes, cooking will take a longer time. If you are rehydrating meals then they will boil faster and your soaking time (no fuel consumption) will be marginally longer ~5min. So if you are rehydrating (not cooking) the value of the heat exchanger will be even less.
normally you would use such a fat Heat Exchanger in Winter Conditions (to melt Snow), so you would use a white gas/Gasoline/Kerosine Burner with something reflective under the Stove and a Windshield wrapped very tight around the Burner, Pan, Heat Exchanger, so it would be maximal effective and bring some benefits instead using a normal Cooking System...
I might give that a try. You do describe a relatively complex set of specific circumstances that isn't described in any of the published material related to the heat exchanger.
@@KevinOutdoors Definitely! I know, but when i see this bulky Thing, for me it is clear this is not for a Summer Weekend Hiking Trip (but that`s me, others may think other). When you can drive and don`t have to carry it for a long time it is another Story. I would use something like that only in extremer Conditions like in Winter when it is not so easy to get enough Water. So when you can make a nearly closed System with Reflector under the Stove, Windscreen wrapped tight around the hole System, it will trap, collect and guide most of the Heat along the Pot Walls (like a Windburner, Jetboil System). The Heat Exchanger will help to guide the Heat and increase the Area that can be heated up. Melting Snow also need some experience, it takes a lot of energy to heat up the Cold Pot and starting Water, once going don`t pour to much Snow at once in it to not cool down the hole Thing too much, so scoop it in slowly. A Pot that has allready integrated Heat Exchanger on the bottom combined with this Heat Exchanger should also bring benefits.
@@Omniverse_ Thanks for that. I have had plans to do this test with snow for a couple of years now. Perhaps this year I will get to it.
I've watched both of your videos, you just exposed some "Corporation" scam, in a very scientific and neat manner. 👌
Thanks Sam, I like to think that they are just good people trying to make something better. The heat exchanger is more efficient and save some fuel just not efficient enough to matter in terms of weight or cost. I do like to expose these concepts :) All the best!
@@KevinOutdoors I like the way you think positively, yes good people. All the best Kevin
Yeah the expense and extra weight is not worth it for me either. I fabricated my own windscreen from a dollar store aluminum pan and used that until someone told me of the dangers of completely enclosing the fuel canister and burner. I no longer use that because the wind kept blowing the windscreen around too much.
So use your windscreen with a stove with a remote tank. Works for me.
Just a heads up but I found it online for $39-59 US. I wouldn't think it was worth the investment even at those prices or the extra room it would take up. Hard to pack up as I have read and probably gets really dirty.
The low range of $39 US is a good deal. $59 US is approaching $76 CDN right now. Yeah, if you are messy (like I am) they would be hard to clean. This one does fit nicely inside the pot set.
@@KevinOutdoors That space is already occupied with things that actually merit owning.
Go Leafs Go!
LOL.
Fantastic, magnanimous when defeated, but proved you weren’t!
However, I will criticise one element. Are you absolutely sure that hat is big enough? ;)
LOL, thanks for reminding me of my giant head. I really appreciate that! :)
@@KevinOutdoors
No worries pal, I’ve got your back.
Great information... bad hat...LOL
Thanks, yes I do get the occasional hat comment. Lots of folks out there with bad taste in hats 😛👍🍁🏒
@@KevinOutdoors ....or bad taste in teams lol
@@Winter8R1 Ouch, don't go there :)
So, heat exchangers are only worth carrying in a car/van, not backpacking. Saving fuel alone is irrelevant except for long term - very similar to why energy efficiency enters the picture in vehicle efficiency and home heating situations, in large populations. In brief, whatever backpackers do or don't use will have zero effect on climate change - aside from what they drive to or from the trailheads.
Great comment. Yeah, if you are backpacking my assumption is that weight efficiency matters most, especially on longer trips. If you are car camping then there is no penalty to bringing a heat exchanger and it will save you some fuel. I really like your observation that the little bit of fuel saved while camping is irrelevant to the global carbon budget :) I am a big proponent of reducing fossil fuels but your camp stove is the last place to worry about. :)
The instructions crom MSR say half an inch
Thanks, this one is so old I didn't have the instructions and I couldn't find them online.
Thanks im not buying this now lol😅
You will save >50$ and your pack will be lighter. :)
@@KevinOutdoorslol i guess no one is buying these i just found on on sale for 30 bucks 😂 brand new!
It’s cool, but more of a gimmick than anything. MSR equipment is very good quality overall though.
Absolutely, I love most of my MSR gear. I do like to explore these areas of the camping unknown. Most folks will say that 25% efficiency is great without taking in the big picture. If you are car camping with a stove then great this saves you fuel, if you are winter camping and melting snow and ice for many long burns then this probably makes sense too. In between, not so much. Thanks for watching and commenting!
I strongly disagree that you "were doing it wrong". If they now are suggesting extending it below the bottom of the pot, they should have made it taller, because, let's be honest here, sliding it down reduces the contact between the exchanger and the top third of the pot. Robbing Peter to pay Paul is not my idea of a practical solution or good design.
Thanks for the feedback. What I find interesting is that it is obvious that 1" below the bottom is optimal but they still recommend only 1/2" which doesn't provide nearly the efficiency that they claim. This is what makes me think they are holding back for safety reasons - but that is pure speculation. I agree there might be a better design solution that would hold the pot better and still extend down even lower.
@@KevinOutdoors The principle is: by increasing the surface area, more heat can be directly conducted to the cooking vessel, however, by sliding the heat exchanger down the amount of contact area is reduced, thereby reducing the conductivity. Sliding the exchanger closer to the heat source will increase the temperature of the device at the expense of transmitting that heat to the pot. It will bring the heat exchanger into contact with BTU's that were otherwise being misdirected into atmosphere, but it is an unnecessary compromise and a workaround intended to compensate for a flawed design. I'm not going to spend crazy money for glaring flaws and mediocre performance. I do appreciate your in depth analysis. Thank you
Msr didn't get back to u as thay no its a fad rubbish
No they haven't said much. Somewhere in my previous video one of the guys who partly developed this offered some comments and that triggered this second test. Bottom line, these things do save a bit of fuel but not so much that you would save any weight in your pack. They aren't cheap either.
Optimum, It would be a personal opinion. If you like using it then so be it, Whats the big deal.
and not very professional with the sunglasses.
Know what? It is a big 'inter-web' if you don't like it, then simply go watch something else. Have a nice day!
............... Very entertaining video.
Glad you liked it.