Caffin on canister stoves in deep cold

Teori-Praktik; English In my quest for the optimal stove for my upcoming ski trip through Sarek National Park I have turned to Roger Caffin. Roger, living in Sydney, is the Senior Editor for Technology at Backpacking Light.com and also an editor of BackpackGeartest.org. Roger started walking in the Boy Scouts and, like myself, started going "lightweight" as he got older - around 2000. Roger has written more indepth articles on stoves, with a scientific bent (he's a PhD), than anyone I know. His articles on these subjects at http://www.backpackinglight.com/ are a recommended read, well worth the subscription fee alone. By the way, all photos below are by Roger and all are from Australia. Maybe not what the Crododile Dundee movies has made you prepared for?
By Jörgen Johansson


Jörgen: Roger, as you know from my article the ground rules are deep cold and two fairly similar stoves. Both have a burner on legs and a hose connecting the burner to the fuel container. The containers are filled with butane/propane mixes or white gas/petrol. No top-mounted gas canisters. Of course the pots and windscreens should be identical and therefore of no importance to this comparison. And since I from my own experiences considera canister stove to be quite practical down to minus 18-20 C (provided I keep the canister in my pocket or sleeping bag when not using it), let's keep in mind that we are talking about temperatures below that.
To start with I listed six factors that I considered relevant for the comparison:
-Weight
-Fuel consumption/weight
-Ease of use (lighting up, shutting down etc)
-Usability in tent/vestibule-Mechanical reliability
-Works well even in extreme cold

I will ask you to comment on all these factors in turn, but first; would you like to comment on the selection? Have I missed some important factor?



Roger: Well, I would add user safety to the list..

Jörgen: Fine, I'll add it and we'll get back to it. Let's first talk about weight. To begin with let's look at the hardware. I've put down the canister as a winner, but the difference might not be that big. What do you say?

Roger: No hesitation here. There are quite a few stoves today which can take either white gas or canister, so the actual stove weight is the same. But the weight of a fuel tank and pump is always greater than the weight of a canister. In addition, you have to add the weight of cleaning and repair gear to the white gas stove - stuff you rarely need with a canister stove. Mind you, many white gas stoves are far heavier - compare the XGK with the almost any remote canister stove.

Jörgen: A comparison of canister and white gas stove weights would have to include fuel consumption and transport vessels etc, which means that one kind of stove could be lighter on short trips and another on longer. My own mpression is that, generally speaking, a canister stove comes out ahead. What are your experiences?

Roger: Well, the fuel tank and pump are always heavier than the canister. If you carry extra fuel you need an extra container of some sort. But there are several more factors here to consider. The first is that butane/propane mix has a higher energy content than white gas, by weight. What's more, in the field you end up using a lot more white gas than a simple calculation would suggest. Part of the reason for this is that you use up a surprising amount of white gas when priming the stove to get it going.

Another reason relates to the ease of relighting a canister stove. This means there is no hesitation about turning it off, while the hassles of restarting a white gas stove mean that users
often leave it running at low power even when not actually doing anything with it. Over all, it is quite common to find that white gas consumption runs between 50% and 100% heavier than butane/propane. That extra weight starts to add up over a few days.

Jörgen: OK, what about ease of use. To me the canister stoves seems toc ome out as winners. What do you say?

Roger: All I can do is laugh. The hassles of running a white gas stove compared to 'connect, turn on and light' with a canister stove make it a complete walk-over. When the canister stove has a piezo-lighter as well, the mismatch becomes ridiculous. Canister stoves are just so easy to use in comparison.



Jörgen: To me cooking inside the tent in winter is of paramount importance to my comfort. Both morning and night I want to be able sit in my sleepingbag with the stove beside me and melt snow as well as cook. My top-mounted canister stove has worked great for this. How do remote canister stoves compare to gasoline stoves in this aspect?

Roger: Oh, I hear you about sitting comfortably inside your tent! We often get bad weather up in the mountains here in Australia, and I always cook in the vestibule of my tent.
My wife lies in her sleeping bag further inside the tent and demands to be fed. This while the storm howls outside...

Let's first compare ease of use between a top-mount and a remote canister stove. Basically, there is very little difference between the two. In fact, one of the things I like about the remote canister stove is the fact that it is lower to the ground than a top-mount. Otherwise, it is still just 'connect, turn on and light'.

I had better add a point here about inverted canister stoves. Basically they are just remote canister stoves, but they include a preheat tube similar to that found on white gas stoves. (Not all remote canister stoves have the preheat tube: check!) The preheat tube allows you to start with a dead-cold canister and cook happily down to about -25 C. That is a huge advantage.

The only thing you have to do is to start the stove at a low power for maybe 10 - 20 seconds - but you can start the stove with the pot already on it. In many cases you can start with the canister upright and then invert it after that time.

One really major advantage of remote canister stoves is that the operation inside the canister is quite different. With an upright canister the energy used to vaporise the fuel come initially from the liquid gas inside the canister. As a result the liquid gas cools down, possibly to the point where it no longer evaporates enough to drive the stove.


This can be dangerous in the cold. Even if it continues to work, the evaporation will be preferentially extracting the propane and leaving the butane. It is quite common for users to complain that their canister is 2/3 full but nothing is coming out of it. Butane boils at -0.5 C: if the propane has been used up and the butane is sitting at -5 C, you have a dead canister.

But when you invert the canister the evaporation of the liquid happens in the preheat tube at the stove, using energy from the flame. The canister does not cool down. The pressure used to
drive the stove comes from the static vapour pressure of the fuel in the canister - a pressure which stays constant as the static vapour pressure stays as constant as the temperature.

The other really major advantage of the inverted canister stove is that the fuel extracted from the canister is the original liquid butane/propane mix. This means that the percentage of propane left in the canister stays constant, all the way to empty. You don't end up with a canister 2/3 full of non-boiling butane. In effect, the propane provides the driving pressure which is given by the pump in a white gas stove.

Jörgen: Another factor of importance in deep cold is mechanical reliability. Are there screws, gaskets, springs and stuff that can fall out or break? Is it recommended to bring tools and spares? Fixing stuff like that in bitter cold is not what I want to do. It seems to me that the canister is a simpler construction with fewer things that can go wrong. What do you say?

Roger: Servicing a stove as the sun goes down and the temperature drops way below freezing can be a bit worrying. I've done it for both sorts of stoves. In the case of the white gas stoves it was always a messy job. I was not always successful either, so it was biscuits and chocolate for dinner.

In the case of the remote canister stoves I have serviced in the field it was all pretty simple. I removed the valve and wiped it clean and screwed it back in place. Then I removed the jet, cleaned it with a proper little bit of jet-cleaning wire (a careful poke and a wiggle) and replaced it. That took only a couple of minutes and then we had the stove roaring away for dinner. But having to service a canister stove in the field is pretty rare in my experience.

Jörgen: You wanted to add safety for the user to my list. What are you thinking of?

Roger: I've used many white gas stoves in the past and been rather close to some scary incidents. I've lost parts of a sleeping bag and a pack when someone else mishandled white
gas, a long way from civilisation. I've seen the safety valve on a stove release and a huge flame shoot out of it. I know some people who ended up with huge amounts of plastic surgery after a white gas tank exploded. So white gas frankly scares me a bit. It's even worse when you are clumsy with gloves on. I don't see canister stoves presenting those sorts of risks.

And that does not cover the risks of starting a stove in a tent. With a canister stove there is no flare-up at the start, so you can light one even in a small vestibule or even an emergency bivy quite safely. But priming a white gas stove can easily involve a fireball of flame - MSR actually mentions this with the XGK stove. Very few people are willing to risk that inside a tent vestibule! But if there is a howling storm outside or you are in an emergency situation, your options are not great.


Jörgen: To sum it all up; since the issue for me is not if canister stoves work in winter, which I already know that they do provided you keep the canister reasonably warm, but will they work in really, really deep cold. Can I trust them to melt my snow and boil my food under almost any circumstances. On this I give the victory to the gasoline stoves out of, Iguess, tradition and hearsay, since I haven't tried any of them in bitter cold. What do you think?

Roger: That's a lot more complicated. A standard 70% butane / 30% propane canister will give off fuel down to -25 C. An 80% iso-butane / 20% propane canister is almost as good. Canisters with less propane are not so good, and should be avoided. (They are aimed more at the family camping market.) But what matters here is the temperature of the fuel in the canister, not the ambient temperature. As you have indicated, if you can warm the canister up beforehand then you can use it to considerably lower temperatures.

The next thing to consider is how you run the stove. If you put the canister out by itself sitting on the snow it is going to drop down to ambient fairly quickly, and that could kill the stove. On the other hand, if you insulate the canister from the snow and let it pick up a bit of radiant heat from the stove - through a gap in the windshield for instance, then you can keep the contents warm enough. Obviously you do NOT let the canister get too hot for safety reasons, but as long as you can put your hand on it (ie <40>

If you are going to be travelling at -30 C for some time you will inevitably be carrying more gear than a summer walker. You may well be using a pulk or sled to carry some of this gear, and that allows you to carry a bit more weight. At the same time, finding water is going to be more difficult, so you may need to melt a lot of snow. Doing so can literally double your fuel consumption. Under these cold condition it may be worth while considering the use of small LPG containers such as those made by Coleman. These containers hold a larger weight of fuel, and the LPG or propane will work down close to -40 C - without being warmed.

Anyone contemplating travelling below -20 C should be careful to test their stoves and other gear fairly thoroughly close to home. Grease and O-rings may need to be changed for these temperatures. Cheap O-rings can go very hard and leak at -20 C. Viton O-rings are good between -26 C and +200 C, Nitrile O-rings are good between -40 C and +105 C, and PU
O-rings are good between -50 C and +105 C. It's a pity that Viton cannot go lower in temperature; the +105 C upper limit for Nitrile and PU is really a bit low for safe use near
the stove. (But these materials are OK when used on the remote canister connection.) More esoteric rubber are available - at a price.

Many plastics can shatter at the lower temperatures, and can be even more fragile if they have been soaking in fuel for a while. That applies especially to plastic pumps in fuel
tanks: you may need to change them to all-metal ones. I have heard of some pumps reliably disintegrating below -20 C. Below -40 C is (to quote a friend) 'freaking cold'. It requires extremely specialised gear and skill, and I don't have enough experience there to comment.

Jörgen: By the way, all the photos show a Powermax canister från Coleman. Does this mean that those are the only ones that will work under the circumstances you've described? As you're probably aware, Primus and Optimus are Swedish companies and very popular here.

Roger: N-butane is n-butane, iso-butane is iso-butane, and propane is propane.
Lindal valves are Lindal valves from Lindal Group (except for Chinese rip-offs) Canisters are all US Dept of Transport (DOT) approved.

The only thing that matters is the fuel composition - eg 70% butane / 30% propane. There are small variations in the odorant used, but they all have to meet DOT specifications. The reality is that the paint and the brand on the outside of the canisters means NOTHING.. Most canisters of gas are made and filled by one (or two) companies in Korea. That includes Primus. I am not sure who fills the Powermax canisters though - possibly an American company.

Most stoves are made by one Korean company or one of a couple of Chines companies, and that does include Primus and Optimus. And of course, the Chinese rip off the designs and sell clones real cheap. The clones do sometimes have bad variations though.

Jörgen: Thanks Roger. I'll have to sit back and digest all this for a while and weigh my different options. I hope to give my conclusions in an upcoming article soon. And anyone that wants to dig deeper into the tests and research Roger has done on stoves should check at http://www.bushwalking.org.au/FAQ/

Discuss in Swedish here at Utsidan and put comments in English here below.

Canister vs white - gas in winter

Teori Praktik; English I've used a top mounted canister gas stove for several winters, down to minus 18-20 C. It has worked fine. However, for really deep cold, say below minus 25 C or so, it is undisputed that white gas or kerosene rules. Or is it?
By Jörgen Johansson
My question is simply; do I really need something else than a gas canister stove even for deep and bitter cold?

So I thought I'd simply list some of the pros and cons, for these types of stoves as I see them. It will be a combination of my own experiences and what I've read and heard. I will then lean back and wait for the response from people reading what I've written. Maybe then I can write a second article on this subject where I formulate some of the opinions and experiences that will have surfaced after this process.

I will look at a number of factors that I think are important for any stove in deep cold and then give my verdict on what I think performs best. The ground rules are, as mentioned, deep cold and two fairly similar stoves. Both have a burner on legs and a hose connecting the burner to the fuel container. The containers are filled with butane/propane mixes or white gas or petrol. No topmounted gas canisters.

Examples of the canister stoves could be Primus Spider or MSR Wind pro. White gas could be Optimus Nova+ or Markill Pheonix. Of course the pots and windscreens should be identical and therefore of no importance to this comparison. And since I from my own experiences consider a canister stove to be quite practical down to minus 18-20 C, please remember that we are talking about temperatures below that.

The factors I feel to be relevant for my own way of operating in the winter are the following. Feel free to comment on my selection:

-Weight

-Ease of use (lighting up, shutting down etc)

-Usability in tent/foretent

-Works well even in extreme cold

-Fuel consumption/weight

-Mechanical reliability

Factors like availability of fuel in all corners of the world as well as price I will keep out of this discussion. Let's just assume that for this particular trip in deep cold both fuels are just as available and that differences in price is of no importance since we have unlimited funds. At least when it comes to backpacking gear. At least according to our spouses....

Looking at the above factors and trying to appoint a winner for each factor when choosing between canister gas and white gas I come up with the following:

-Weight = canister

-Ease of use = canister

-Usability in tent = canister

-Works well in extreme cold = white gas

-Fuel consumption = canister

-Mechanical reliability = canister

So far it seems ridiculously simple. The canister stove wins on all counts excepting one. However, let's not make the common mistake of thinking that all the above factors have equal importance.

Since we are talking about extreme cold this factor is obviously more important than for instance weight. If a stove doesn't melt your water and cook your food in extreme cold it's obviously useless and the fact that it's ligth doesn't really matter. In fact, all the above factors except reliability in extreme cold is of course the reason for many people to use canister stoves when it's not that cold.

However, if a canister stove could be considered to be reliable, if not super, in extreme cold, then all the other factors would give the canister stove a landslide victory. And to me it seems that it does. That is, work, if not optimally, in deep cold.

In order for a canister stove to work reliably in deep cold there are as far as I can see two tricks that does the trick:

-You should do your best to keep the canister warmer than the surrounding air

-You should turn it upside down while using it

Since both these are easily accomplished it seems to me that the canister stove wins hands down even in deep cold. But I could be wrong. Please give me your take on this.

Comments in English below, comments in Swedish at this link at Utsidan.se.

Fjäderlätt at Swesport 2010

New gear Last sunday we visited Swesport - the Swedish sports industry fair. It's mostly an exhibit of winter products, but we managed to find a few interesting news for lightweight backpacking too.
Martin Nordesjö

Marmot, represented by Granitbiten, brought two new jackets that caught our attention. First of all, the Trail Wind Hoody will replace the Ion windshirt.

Trail jacket is M, Martin is XL.

The greatest improvement is that the Trail feels less like maternity wear, mainly thanks to a drawstring. It will be a bit lighter than the Ion and a bit more expensive. But Marmot will keep their aggressive pricing, so we can still count on it being less expensive than many competitors.

The other interesting jacket is the new Essence rain jacket. It's a 2,5 layer jacket with Marmot's own Membrain Strata laminate. It weights 195 grammes in size M, and the price will be 1500 kronor. There will also be a pair of Essence pants, at around 140 grammes.

There were quite a few newcomers at the fair.

Carsten at Akzo helps
Jörgen fit an Aarn bodypack

Aarn packs may not be the most ultralight backpacks around, but they are definitely an alternative for those who have to carry heavy gear but want to do it comfortably without the heaviest pack. It is Akzo, former importer of Gregory and Bask, who will bring Aarn packs to Sweden. The thing that separates Aarn packs from the rest is the way they put weight on your chest, not only on your back, thus creating a better balance.

Another newcomer is British shoemaker Inov-8.

Recolite 190 and Roclite 288
made Jörgen a happy camper.

They actually appeared on the Swedish orienteering and trailrunning market last year, but I don't think Jörgen and I are the only ones to have imported other models more suited for walking. So we really hope the Nordic distributor will realize that there is a market here for those. Jörgen actually started beaming when he laid eyes on the new Recolite shoe/sandal hybrid. 190 grammes per shoe is not bad at all, even though they are intended for "recovery" use. We hope to lay our hands on a pair to see if they are good for "real" use too.

A third newcomer is Canadian apparel brand Westcomb. It looks mostly like a skiers' brand, but we did see an interesting lightweight padded jacket with unknown weight. There seemed to be an abundancy on the fair of lightweight jackets with down or synthetic filling, so it will probably be easier and easier to find good, warm jackets.

In the same stand as Westcomb we found a new Esbit stove.

Is it possible to
burn firewood in this?

A lightweight meta tablet stove that might just work with small firewood too. Anyway, the pot had a nice small size for the solo hiker who only wants to heat a cup or two of water.

Canister stoves in the cold - insulated or not?

Teori Praktik Niklas Lagström is product manager at Primus. When I talked to him I figured he was the right person to solve all my wintertime gas canister problems. Like; Can you use canister stoves in deep cold? And should you try to insulate the canister from the cold or not? As usual it turned out that there are no simple answers.
By Jörgen Johansson

Jörgen: Niklas, could you tell us something about who you are and how you've become product manager at Primus?

Niklas: I have always been using outdoor products since I grew up and was early interested in scouting, climbing and sea kayaking. One of my other interests are technical product development and how to improve the things I used. While I studied to master of science I started to work at Naturkompaniet (the largest outdoor retailer in Sweden) and later on, I got picked up by Primus when they where looking for a product manager. Now, I can use all my interests during my work, which is a fantastic position!

Jörgen: When we met recently we talked about using canister stoves in winter and whether to use insulation on the canisters or not. So I thought it would be interesting to get some advice on how to use my canister stove optimally for winter trips. For several years now, I've been amazed at how well my top mounted canister stove Primus Micron works even when it's really cold. In winter I wrap a piece of cell foam around the canister, which you've told me sometimes is really stupid and sometimes work really well, depending on the outside temperature.

Niklas: Well, it can be both a good and a bad idea to insulate the gas cartridge. As I guess you all know, gas cartridges work worse and worse the colder it gets. In addition to that, the physical basics about gas are that it needs heat to get from liquid to gas. The heat normally comes from the surrounding air but if it is really cold outside, or the cartridge is insulated, all heat must be taken from the liquid. Colder liquid means less pressure and soon there will be NO pressure.

On the other hand, if the container is much warmer than the surroundings, it will lose less heat to the surrounding air if it is insulated – and this heat can be used for keeping the pressure up!

Is it good to insulate the cartridge? Short answer is “it depends...”.

Jörgen: Let me describe how I handle my canisters today. When I don't use the stove, the canister is in the front pocket of my anorak or in my sleeping bag. I'm guessing that due to this my canister almost never is colder than, say 5 Celsius, when I start to cook.

Niklas: This is a good start. When the gas cartridge is warmer than the surrounding air, it may be a good idea to insulate the gas cartridge. If after the cooking, the temperature in the gas cartridge is still higher than the surroundings, then the insulation helps all the time.

Table below shows how much a certain amount of liquid gas lowers in temperature if the cartridge is fully insulated. For example, if you have 100 gram of gas left in you cartridge, cook in five minuter (uses 13 gram of gas) will lead to a decrease of the gas cartridge with 22 degrees plus (or minus) the decrease of temperature given by the surrounding temperature.

Jörgen: OK, let's move on to how I cook. I never cook for long, I just bring water to the boil. Usually only 0,2-0,5 liters depending on if it's cocoa, coffee or rehydration of a freeze dried meal. However, in winter I have to melt snow for drinking water, which means producing something like 1-1,5 liters of water morning, noon and evening. This takes it's time. Let's say it's -5 Celsius where I am.

Niklas: This is where insulation becomes a bad idea. Melting snow uses a lot of gas, and this means that the gas cartridge itself will decrease its temperature a lot… If you have the half full (100-150 gram gas left) cartridge I mentioned earlier, and cooking for 10 minutes, this means that the decrease in temperature due to the use of gas will be somewhere around 30-40 degrees. Then, the -5 Celsius around is much warmer and would be much better for the cartridge.


Jörgen: OK, let's say it's -20-25 degrees Celsius, what should I do differently?

Niklas: Now, insulation becomes interesting again! Since the surrounding temperature together with the decrease of temperature due to gas use will become lower than the gas boiling point, you will have problem to get the gas out of the cartridge. If you only have the impact of the decrease of temperature made by the used gas (and starting at plus 5 degrees as you said), the cartridge will just reach the surrounding temperature and therefore, insulation is a good idea!

Jörgen: OK, so to sum this up I have to take into consideration the temperature of the canister, outside temperature and how long the burner will be running. And we've only been talking about me, travelling solo. If I'm cooking for two the burner time increases and the advantage of using isolation on my canister decreases. Is that about right?

Niklas: Yes, that is completely right!

Jörgen: Dear reader, right now I’m sitting here, hoping that Niklas has a nice Christmas vacation without any thoughts whatsoever about canisters and temperatures. I’m also trying to sum up what he told me and to see if I can formulate some practical ideas. So far these are my conclusions:

- The gas boiling temperature is -15 C. This means that below this temperature you do not get any gas out of the canister. If you turn it upside down (which you cannot do with a top mounted canister stove) you can get liquid out of it. If the surrounding temperature is lower than -15 C, but the cartridge is warmer, it is a good idea to insulate the cartridge, since no heat can be taken from the surrounding air to gasify the contents in the canister.



- If the start temperature of the gas is high, say +10 C and the ambient temperature is -10 C you start out cooking with an insulated cartridge. It will take around 5-6 minutes (depending on a lot of factors) before the use of the gas has decreased the gas temperature to -10 C. Then you should remove the insulation to slow down the continued decrease in gas temperature.

- So, if the start temperature of the gas is higher than the surrounding air, insulation is always a good idea. The problem is knowing when the gas no longer is warmer then the ambient air.

- If the start temperature of the gas is the same as the surrounding air, insulation is always a bad idea, since the cartridge itself will become colder than the surrounding air, which we want to avoid.

- And to complicate things; if I use a windscreen that totally surrounds stove and canister the heat from the flame bouncing of the bottom of my pot will add some heat to the canister, helping it to stay warmer for longer. Or forever, depending on outside temperatures, amount of gas and…

By the way, a lot of things are done with canisters that Primus really can’t recommend. Like windscreens that totally surround pot and stove, which can cause overheated canister that could explode. Some people using canisters connected to the burner with a hose also put the canister into the pot were they are melting snow or heating water in order to raise the temperature of the gas inside. I have also seen different contraptions of metal working on the principle that part of it sits inside the flame of the burner and conducts heat to the canister, around which the rest of the metal is tighly cinched.



I don’t know if I’m less confused now than before, but I suppose that I am confused on a higher level. Have to talk about this with Niklas when he’s back…

Discuss this (in Swedish) at Utsidan or in English below

Etasolo – Jetboil competitor from Primus

Gear scoop In our report from the Primus event some weeks ago we left one new product out: the Etasolo. It looked suspiciously similar to a Jetboil PCS stove. What was that all about?
By Martin Nordesjö

I felt I needed to ask Primus a few questions. How come they made their own Jetboil? It turned out that there was a connection between the companies.

— From the very beginning Jetboil bought their valves and burners from us, says product manager Niklas Lagström.

But about 1½ years ago Jetboil decided to get their parts from another source. Unfortunately the new units had problems with gas leaks (more at Jetboil). Many stoves were recalled and the subsequent delivery problems made the market look in other directions.

— Our customers asked us if we couldn't produce a similar product. Sometimes demand dictates development, and that's why we launch this stove. Etasolo is lighter and more wind-proof, with a smaller packed volume in addition. As a result of our own development we have managed to solve the problem with the piezo unit being crushed when you pack the stove up. The canister is simply placed over the burner and the piezo is shielded in the concave canister bottom.

Etasolo information
Weight:	365 g
Price:	899 kr (€86) in Sweden
In stores:	April 2010

Discussion thread at Utsidan (in Swedish)

A light day - my way

Teori-praktik Here is the second installment among the articles summarizing how I use my light equipment during an ordinary day. Of course, there are no ordinary days. And I'm not saying that my way is the best. In fact, I seem to continually change how I do things, always trying to improve on my (never ending) road to perfection. So perhaps how I do things today might give you, as well as me, inspiration on how to improve your gear and the use of it tomorrow. And since this is a forum for lightweight backpacking I've included the weights of much of my gear in the narrative. In case you wonder. An article about a "light" breakfeast is found here.
By Jörgen Johansson
It usually doesn't take me long to get into gear after leaving camp. On the average day, that seldom occurs, I'm wearing mesh watersport shoes, thin nylon "ladies" socks from the supermarket on my feet. My legs are covered with homemade synthetic pants made from a sweat pants pattern weighing around 160 gram. Under these I wear merino wool boxer shorts, preferably without a fly, like those from Backpackinglight. The lack of a fly makes me less self consciuous while using them as shorts in hot weather.


My torso is also covered in delightful merino wool, a Icebreaker Kent is a long time favourite, weighing in at 220 gram in Large. On top of this I usually need a light windshirt most mornings. I prefer one with a hood, since the hood adds an awful lot of warmth in comparison to the extra weight. The one I currently use is a Marmot Ion, which is very symphatetic to my wallet, albeit a bit short and wide at the waist.

Now, since this is a pretty chilly morning, only a couple of degrees above freezing I also wear a pair of thin fleece gloves (34 grams) and my extra merino long arm hoody. This one is from BPL and it's zipped up to my chin with the hood up. On top of the hood I have a particulary ugly baseball cap I've made myself. It is made of Pertex Equilibrium which makes it fairly windproof and very fastdrying. I handkerchief size piece of Equilibrium is usually tucked into the crown, but can be let down to protect ears and neck. On top of all this is the hood of the windshirt.

With double meriono shirts and the windshirt on top I warm up pretty fast once I start moving. After about fifteen minutes I can take both hoods of and continue hiking in my cap. After thirty minutes I take of the gloves and slip them into the belt pouch of my pack. These pouches come from Gossamer Gear.

After about fiftyfive minutes of hiking like this I'm getting really warm and it's time for my usual hourly break. Since the ground is a bit damp and cold I take the cellfoam sleeping pad from underneath it's bungee cords on the outside of my pack, and spread it to sit on. This gives me a chance to stretch my legs out with the pack for a pillow/backrest. It also gives me a chance to slip of my shoes, but only after filling my mug with water in the nearby stream.

Now it's time for the luxury of stretching out completely, relaxing every muscle that comes to mind and taking a couple of deep breaths. To empty my mind of everthing, except how the clouds are slowly drifting across the sky, and the tinker bells of the little brook. After about a minute I rouse myself and eat some chocolate, raisins and hazelnuts while I'm drinking my cup of water.


After five or ten minutes of this (after all, why hurry, I'm on vacation) I put my cup away and roll up my pad. I just slip it under the elastic bungees, which is faster than strapping it in place. The bungee cords are also lighter than ordinary packstraps.

Since the day is warmer I can take off my merino hoody and put it in the waterproof drybag at the top of my pack. There it will probably rest until I put it on before going to bed. I suspect that the windshirt will be tucked into an outside pocket of the pack in 10-15 minutes as well.

All morning I follow a valley gently sloping down towards a river. Every hour I take a break and drink at least one, sometimes two cups of water. I never carry water if I can avoid it, and in Scandinavia you can most of the time. Other areas are drier and if you have to cure your water in order to drink it you can't avoid carrying some. But water is heavy and I try never to carry more than 500 ml. With that I can take two of my hourly breaks. If I want to drink between breaks I simply dip my cup in a stream in passing, without taking my pack off.


Around noon I come to the river and after a short while find a place where I think I can ford it. But I might as well be tanked up and rested before I do that, it looks kind of deep, and the water moves swiftly.

The autumn chill in the air makes it really nice to roll out my pad in the sun and pull out my cooking gear. A short walk and I can fill my collapsible water bottle with 1,5 liters in the river. This will be more than enough.

I prefer the stove on my left side and most of my gear, except the utensils and what I'm cooking right now, on the right side. But that's not so important. A handy rock or tree trunk to rest my back against is more important, but sometimes the pack serves as well.

The piezo igniter fires up the canister stove faster than a pig winks. Half a liter of water in the pot, a piece of foil as a lid and some titanium foil as wind break are rapidly added. From my pack I dig out my spoon, cup and a plastic bag with some dried home dried meat and powdered potatoes. All set. This gives me the chance to relax, pull of my wet socks and put them out to dry, and pull my cap over my eyes for a couple of minutes.

When the water is boiling I take it from the stove and pour some hot water in my cup for spare. I then add the meat and potatoes to the pot, stirring with my spoon. It's swelling and becomes a bit too thick, so I add some of the water from my cup. Perfect. I pour out the remaining hot water on the ground and add cold water to the cup.


While munching I contemplate the river. Wonder how cold it is? If it's really cold and deep enough for me to have to swim parts of it, the chill could be risky. You loose energy really fast in cold water. Maybe there is a better place to ford upstream.

After having packed my gear I dip the thermometer into the river and it says 8 Centigrades. That is not tempting. I've waded and swimmed colder water, but only for 5-10 seconds. This river is wider and there is really no telling for how long it's deep enough to force me to swim instead of walk. Better to play it safe and follow it upstream for a while. That is in the general direction of where I'm going anyway.

I find no place to ford all afternoon. The river is getting narrower, but the water is moving faster, which is not a good combination. Every hour I take my break, eat my nuts and chocolate and drink the water I need.

Around four o'clock in the afternoon my body craves coffee. It's also time for a sturdier meal, than snacks, to last me until suppertime around eight o'clock at night. So while the water is heating I take a couple of soft mini tortillas from my pack and roll some 100 mm lengths of thin beer sausage inside. These make nice sanwiches of sorts together with coffee and snacks.


About an hour after my coffee break the threathening clouds decide to start letting down some rain. It's only a drizzle, "a nice, soft day" as the Irish say. I put on my windshirt, which sometimes is enough, but not this time, so I unfold my umbrella. This means that I have to stick one of my walking poles in the pack. So with one hand alternating between holding the remaing pole and the umbrella, I trudge on.

After a while the undergrowth thickens, so I decide to put on my waterproof-breathable rain pants so as not to get soaked from brushing against the wet foliage. This is the perfect combination, since it's a bit uphill, and not really cold. Thanks to the umbrella and the windshirt, zipped open halfway down my chest, I am able to regulate my body temperature better than with my rain jacket on.

Or at least for a while. Because the trees are thinning out, and when I get above timberline the wind picks up. I pull the windshirt hood over my head and zip it up completely. Leaning the umbrella against the wind it gives pretty good protection against the driving drizzle. One arm of the windshirt gets a bit wet, but since I'm not cold that is no problem. I know it will dry out quickly.

However, as the rain increases I realize it's time to fold up my umbrella and put on my light rain jacket. It's an Haglöfs Oz, weighing under 200 grams in XLarge, that has been with me for a couple of seasons now and has served me well. I put on my fleece gloves as well and move on.


The next hourly break is not so idyllic as the first one of the day, but I always stop and fill up with calories no matter how poor the weather. The worse the weather the more you are going to need them. Not wanting to stop and rest for a while is for me a sure sign that my blood sugar is down and that I REALLY need a break and some calories. If it's particulary nasty weather at lunchtime I sit in my tent, sometimes in my sleeping bag while I cook. But I always take my breaks and I always eat and drink. That always makes me feel better. After all, I'm on vacation.

This time I hunch in the doubtful protection of a boulder that could have been higher. I get my weight of my feet for a couple of minutes, sitting on the rolled up foam pad, while I drink my cup and eat half of what is left in my goody bag. Next stop will be camp.

Discuss in Swedish at Utsidan here
Discuss in English below

Neo Air

Prylintryck Den stora händelsen på horisontalplanet under det gångna året har varit NeoAir från Thermarest. Vad kan man då säga om denna uppjazzade luftmadrass? Är den lika bra som den påstår sig vara och är den värd pengarna?
Av Jörgen Johansson

Vad är speciellt med NeoAir?

NeoAir är alltså en luftmadrass. Det vill säga ett hölje som fylls med luft, utan något expanderande skumgummi emellan. Luftmadrasserna har en stor nackdel jämfört med cellplastunderlagen och självuppblåsarna; konvektion. Konvektion i luftrummet inuti madrassen innebär att varm luft nära kroppen rör på sig inne i madrassen och ersätts av kall luft som kommer från den marknära delen av den inneslutna luften. Detta innebär att man kyls ned när luft som kroppen värmt upp kontinuerligt ersätts med luft som kylts av vid kontakten med marken.

Mellanväggarna som minskar luftrörelserna Foto: Backpackinglight.com

Att luft isolerar är alltså en sanning med modifikationer. Stillastående luft isolerar, men för att luften verkligen skall vara stillstående behöver man låsa in den i mindre utrymmen, vare sig det är liggunderlag, sovsäckar eller andra isolerande plagg. Ett exempel på små luftfylda celelr är cellplastunderlagen (engelskans 'closed cell foam' visar vad det handlar om). Cellplastunderlagen ger som regel bäst isolering i förhållande till sin vikt av alla liggunderlag. Det finns dock cellplastunderlag av väldigt dålig kvalitet, som pressas ihop och isolerar sämre, samt lätt går sönder. Bästa materialet för cellplastunderlag brukar man anse Evazote vara.

I de så kallade självuppblåsarna (exempelvis Thermarest Prolite) pressar man ut luften när man inte använder madrassen. Innanför ytterhöljet på madrassen finns ett spänstigt skumgummi med öppna celler som expanderar när man öppnar ventilen och släpper in luft. För fullt tryck behöver man oftast blåsa in lite extra luft på slutet. Själv finner jag att jag sover skönast på självuppblåsarna om jag blåser upp dem så hårt jag kan. Sedan stänger man ventilen och har därmed låst in luften, som sedan hålls stillastående i de små cellerna i skumgummit. Självuppblåsarna är tyngre än cellplastunderlag av motsvarande storlek och isoleringsförmåga, men är tjockare, mjukare och därmed skönare att sova på.

Ett tunt cellplastunderlag är viktig del av min packning.

Sedan har vi de "luftmadrasser" som kanske varken är luftmadrasser eller särskilt självuppblåsande. Detta är stora, voluminösa underlag där man istället för självexpanderande skumgummi använt dun eller syntetvadd inuti. Detta för att skapa celler med stillastående luft. Dessa liggunderlag är mycket mjuka att ligga på, och isolerar väl, men är den tyngsta varianten av liggunderlag för friluftsbruk.

Om vi nu återgår till den rena luftmadrassen av klassiskt snitt så har den dock en stor fördel; den är mjuk och skön att sova på. Vad Thermarest har skapat med NeoAir är en luftmadrass som har ett intrikat, men lätt system av mellanväggar inuti. Dessa minskar alltså luftrörelserna och därmed förbättras isoleringsförmågan. Man har också genomgående använt extremt lätta vävar i NeoAir, vilket sammantaget innebär en enastående låg vikt i förhållande till tjocklek och isoleringsförmåga.

Bäst komfort får jag om jag inte pumpar upp NeoAir mer än så här.

Mitt eget speciella sätt att använda liggunderlag
Jag söker sovkomfort och låg vikt. Dessutom vill jag under vandringen vid alla raster kunna ha ett underlag att sitta på, som skall täcka kroppen från hälarna till axlarna. Min favoritposition är att sitta lutad mot ett träd eller en sten med skorna av och benen utsträckta. Gärna med lite vatten puttrande på köket bredvid mig. Att använda små sittunderlag eller hopvikta regnkläder ger inte min kropp den vila jag vill ha. I början på en rast vill jag gärna sträcka ut mig, slappna av i varje muskel, tömma hjärnan och bara vara.

Under årens lopp har jag utvecklat följande sovkombination som fungerar bra för mig: Ett kort, lätt och självuppblåsande liggunderlag ger mig något mjukt att ligga på när jag sover. Det räcker om jag har något mjukt under höfter och axlar för att det skall kännas skönt. Jag behöver inte ligga mjukare med benen än vad ett cellplastunderlag ger mig. Kortast möjliga självuppblåsare alltså, vilket tills nu har varit BPL Torsolite.


Ett långt, tunt cellplastunderlag ger mig sedan skydd mot kyla och väta såväl under rasterna som när jag sover. Cellplastdelen ger tillräcklig värme och tillräckligt mjuk under ben och fötter. Dessutom ligger den under självuppblåsaren vilket adderar isolering till denna och dessutom skyddar den bättre mot spetsiga föremål.

Detta är alltså mina behov, och de förutsättningar under vilka jag har testat NeoAir. Om dina förutsättningar är annorlunda så kanske du kommer, eller har kommit, till andra slutsatser. En viktig variabel kan då vara hur man sover. Jag tillhör den halva av mänskligheten som sover på sida vilket bidrar till mitt behov av att höftbenet och axlarna skall vila någorlunda mjukt.


Mina intryck av NeoAir
Den NeoAir jag har testat är Small-varianten. 120 cm långt och 50 cm brett. Den väger på min brevvåg 260 gram, vilket gör den 26 gram lättare än mitt gamla Torsolite. Jag har använt den här madrassen under den gångna säsongen i kombination med ett 150 cm långt Evazote-underlag på 5 mm från MEC. Det har varit turer i svensk skogsmark, vandring och packrafting i svenska fjällen samt vandring och packrafting i Klippiga Bergen (Yellowstone med omnejd). Än så länge inga vinterturer, men det kommer.

NeoAir är bekvämt att sitta på i en packraft.

Först och främst och viktigast för mig: Sovkomforten som NeoAir ger är överlägsen allt annat jag någonsin legat på ute i markerna. Jag har aldrig någonsin sovit så gott som på den här madrassen med en uppblåst påse från bag-in-box-vin som kudde inuti sovsäckshuvan.

För att få denna komfort blåser jag dock inte upp NeoAir mer än nödvändigt. Detta innebär att jag inte skall ha markkänning med höftbenet när jag ligger på sidan. Någon halv till en centimeter mellan mig och marken känns lagom. Detta skall då jämföras med det jag beskrev ovan; med en självuppblåsare sover jag bäst om det är så hårt och tjockt det kan bli.

NeoAir isolerar inte lika bra när det är måttligt uppblåst som när det är maximalt uppblåst. Enligt tester från Backpackinglight.com har NeoAir ett R-värde på ungefär 2,5 när det är lätt uppblåst och 3,0 när det är maxat. Detta skall då jämföras med Torsolite som är betydligt tunnare (2,5 cm) och ändå har ett R-värde på 3,5.

Men eftersom jag hela tiden har ett cellplastunderlag mellan NeoAir och marken så har jag inte haft några som helst problem med kyla underifrån. Personer som använt enbart NeoAir vid frost menar annars att det då känns svalare än till exempel självuppblåsare som Prolite Plus(med R-värde 3,8). Jag kommer använda NeoAir på samma sätt till vintern, men då ovanpå ett ruskigt prisvärt 14 mm Evazote Goodpad från Getout.

Egentligen är varianten Small onödigt långt för mina behov, eftersom inte ens jag har 120 cm mellan höfter och axlar, men å andra sidan var Torsoliten i kortaste laget för mina 191 cm. Och jag misstänker att Thermarest inte lär göra någon kortare variant. Kanske kommer detta så småningom från andra tillverkare, till exempel BPL. Men det spelar inte så stor roll, 260 gram med denna komfort är ändå oslagbart för närvarande och sannolikt är det svårt att minska detta med mer än 50-100 gram om man kortar det. När prylarna blir så här lätta så har man ju ett avtagande mervärde på fortsatta viktminskningar.

Det har varit en del invändningar mot prassligheten i tyget på NeoAir. Själv har jag inte störts av detta alls som solosovare. Nu har jag inte delat tält med någon som själv använt NeoAir eller som har hört mitt prasslande, vare sig till höger eller vänster, så jag vet inte hur störande en granne på Neo kan vara.

Backpackinglight.com har ett intressant test av NeoAir som kan rekommenderas för läsning. Deras främsta invändning är att underlaget är för smalt när man ligger på rygg. Armbågarna hamnar utanför isoleringen, och man upplever att det är väldigt lätt att rulla av madrassen. Själv har jag inte upplevt några större problem med detta. Kanske beror det på att jag är smal och sover på sidan. Det är naturligtvis så att armbågarna lätt hamnar utanför när jag ligger på rygg, men detta gäller alla 50 cm breda liggunderlag och jag tycker inte NeoAir är sämre än andra.

Vad gäller stryktålighet så har jag ännu inte punkterat mitt underlag. Känslan det tunna tyget ger är annars att detta lätt kan inträffa, men som vanligt tvingas jag konstatera att tunna kvalitetsvävar är betydligt starkare än man intuitivt tror. Jag använde även NeoAir som sittunderlag i min packraft under turen mellan Abisko och Nikkluokta utan problem. Jag pumpade det lite hårdare än vid sömn, men inte hårdare än att det gick att vika upp en ryggdel.

Vid min vandring samt efterföljande packraftingkurs i Yellowstone-området var jag en natt orolig för punktering. Detta var på en plats med väldigt torr och vass vegetation som trängde igenom även mitt cellplastunderlag. Jag rensade liggytan så gott det gick (det var mörkt) innan jag slog upp mitt Gossamer Gear The One, lade mina byxor ovanpå golvet, sedan cellplastunderlaget och till sist NeoAir. Jag sov gott hela natten utan punktering.

Min slutsats än så länge är att punkteringsrisken är ganska liten i våra blöta och mjuka svenska marker, men att man naturligtvis måste vara lite försiktig med underlaget man lägger det på. Men detta är inget som man inte klarar med normal lägerdisciplin. Vem vill sova på något vass och hårt?

Sammanfattning
Låg vikt, hög komfort, god isoleringsförmåga; vad kan lättpackaren mer begära? Tja, inte mycket.

Min summering hittills är att ge NeoAir 5 poäng av 5 möjliga. Det finns bara en baksida som jag upptäckt än så länge; priset. Det här underlaget kostar i svenska webbshopar drygt 1100 SEK och ytterligare någon hundring eller två i en IRL-butik. Men uppenbarligen har NeoAir trots detta sålt bra. När jag kollade med importören i våras så ville de inte låna ut något NeoAir till mig för testning, eftersom det "säljer bra ändå". Vad jag gjorde var då att checka ett antal engelska webbshoppar, där jag efter ett tag hittade både ett NeoAir Small och ett Terra Nova Laser Photon till bra priser. Mitt NeoAir kostade därmed 800 SEK plus en del av frakten, vilket känns betydligt mer överkomligt än när man hamnar över 1000 SEK.

Jag ångrar inte det här köpet.

Diskutera här på Utsidan