In this video I test two competing theory's about which will bring water to a boil faster. A sooty, black pot or a clean shinny pot NOTE: This video was recorded before the emergency fire ban was instituted.
My test of boiling on alcohole or gas canister stoves are always based on fuel used rather than time to boil. I think the only time the time matter is if you are in some kind of a race. For me it's far more important to know how much fuel I need to bring.
I am in total agreement. The test was not so much about about speed or efficiency but about accepting often repeated "woods wisdom" on blind faith. When I hear something that doesn't ring true for me I like to see the "proof" of it. Kind of just wanted to start a discussion. Thanks for commenting
On my deathbed I wont be worrying about how much time I wasted watching water boil in the woods. I may however recall how precious and enjoyable that time was & find those memories comforting 😊
I think in our city lives we can get caught up with “just in time logistics”, tight margins in a competitive environment and the to the minute staff meetings. Outdoors you’re trying to get away from that constant efficiency drive. So if one can of water takes a little longer to boil than the other it doesn’t really matter. There is so much fuel in the woods that you can just keep layering it on. What is really important is how much bacon that you’ve got to cook up and enjoy with a couple of eggs and some potato, camp toast and a brew.
No argument from me. I am hardly ever in a rush, unless I really need a coffee. My point which I could have made more clear was to encourage people not to blindly accept "woods wisdom" just because everyone repeats it. I actually prefer when it takes a bit longer for my water to boil so I can get other chores done and have time to enjoy the fire. Thanks for commenting
I'm 2 minutes in, personally i love the look of a blackened pot better than a shiny pot, it gives it character. Now back to the video, as always i appreciate your content. Best regards from Alberta
Well done, Mark. I think you came to a good conclusion. A shiny pot reflects radiation but emits poorly. A black pot absorbs radiation but emits it as well. I think any pot that is heated by a flame does so by conduction from the heated air. Therefore the pot that loses the most heat by radiation will boil water the slowest. I really think to get the best answer this needs to be performed under laboratory conditions. But what difference do a few seconds make when you are out in the woods? Slower might be better.
Conclusion:treat your pots the way you want to. Btw: if you are a clean pot person, try putting a thin coat of liquid detergent on the outside before you use it. The soap soot comes off easier than the plain fire soot. Thanks Mark .
A great test Mark, and great to see the Camelwill pots again, I love mine so much I use it to make coffee on my home stove. Thanks for sharing Mark, take care 🙂👍
Good stuff Mark 😄 Not sure what math or physics ever led to people deciding dark would be 4 times faster than shiny, but in any case its cool stuff to experiment with. Now that you ruined the new pot in testing, in an effort just to help out I’ll take it so you can get another new one to test.. 😄
I have tested with blackened and shiny pot, my result: inconclusive! I think the difference is certainly not even close to a 4:1 ratio, rather something like 4% time difference or so. But there is so many factors here, beyond just black or non-black, if there is a thicker layer of soot on a pot compared to a blackened but scrubbed as clean as possible black pot the scrubbed would most likely boil slightly faster even if they are both black. After watching the video to the end, it seem we come to the same conclusion. I think that regardless, the difference is fairly insignificant, and regardless, I like that my pot look trail worn, so I just scrub it on occasion so it doesn't get thick layers of soot on it.
@@MarkYoungBushcraft Thank you for the video, I like to test claims like this tested, and to test them myself. I was making my comment during my watching of the video, so most of my points and conclusions turned out to be the exact same as yours! 😀 Guess great minds think alike. 😉 Nah, I don't think myself a great mind, but it's just objectively a very small difference if the pot is black or shiny! ☺
OK let me put this issue to rest a clean pot will always boil water faster than a black soot coated pot, but the difference will always be negligible. As an Oil burner mechanic of 20 plus years the reason we clean and vacuum oil fired boilers is soot acts as an insulator. However it takes a 1/8 inch layer of soot to decrease efficiency by 8 %. We routinely see that amount of soot in a boiler after a year or 2 of use. What accumulates on a pot will maybe decrease efficiency by 1% . So clean it if you want or don't if it doesn't bother you. I clean mine just because my job is so dirty I don't want my leisure time to be as well. Hope this helps :)
I greatly appreciate the amount of work that went into testing this theory and quite enjoyed the video. I honestly thought, or perhaps hoped, that the sooty pot would boil faster. Sadly, it looked rather even. Thank you so much for the video!
Great video and good test. Yes, not too conclusive. The shiny pot definitely had the favor of the fire. A sooty or black pot I’ve been told is about 2x faster, not 4x.
Glad you liked the video. It was a famous bushcraft instructor who made the four time faster claim. The flames did favour the shinny pot but not as much as the camera angle showed. Thanks for commenting and stay safe
Mark Young - Wait, I think I listened to that famous bushcrafter you’re talking about, maybe it was 4 but for some reason I thought two. Edit - Just rewatched the video of where I heard it, he said “twice the mileage” but he also said the pot had to be black inside and out. Maybe thats the big difference?
Terrific follow-up video to your test-kitchen comparison. What you have shown is this would make an excellent conversation starter around a campfire. While on the topic of starter, the birch bark you use, not something I'm familiar with. Have you made a video about it & it's use as a fire starter?
Hey, glad you liked the video. It was not meant to be absolute proof of anything. It was meant to start a conversation about questioning what everyone says it gospel. I don't have a specific video on using birch bark but it is in a lot of my videos. I have thought about making a video on natural fire starters and may do that yet. Thanks for commenting
I have noted that people will often repeat things they read or hear without questioning them. I always wondered about this so I put it to the test. Thanks for commenting
Before I watch, I will predict, on an open fire they would be almost exactly the same. Maybe a couple seconds quicker on the dark one. However, dorkier or shiny, the one you watch will be the slowest! 😃😃 From what I saw, the dark seemed to definitely have less flame, and also less sheltered from the stones, but I agree that I don't think there would be a lot of difference. Now if you're talking a lot of loose soot, I agree also that may make a difference, it it would be tiny.
For me, I am okay with a dark pot. Not because it is more efficient but I just can't see taking the time to clean the resin off. I do wipe the pot on the snow or moss or sand to get loose soot off before putting it in the stuff sack but that is all I do. Actually, the fire did favour the shinny pot but not as much as the camera angle made it look. Thanks for commenting Jim
Mark Young For sure. No reason at all to clean them. My dad was an apprentice back in Ireland in the 40's. they used cans with a wire attached to hang over a fire for their tea. There was a clean spot where they always sipped from. One day he drilled a small hole just below the clean spot to make a dribble glass... they weren't happy. 😃
Nice video, Mark! I'd say that when you're out in the woods, bringing your water to a boil within 30 seconds of each other conclusively qualifies for "about the same time!" :)
Right on. I am never in that much of a rush anyway. More of making the point to not always accept what others say is true. Besides, it helps me justify not cleaning my pots😉. Thanks for commenting
There are two competing characteristics to consider. A shiny surface reflects radiant heat but still absorbs most, and a sooty surface is insulating but the thickness is minuscule. The two will cancel out to some extent. Either way it’s meaningless because as you pointed out once you put a new pot on an open campfire it will be become sooty anyway.
Right on. To me, it is not worth the effort to clean all the soot off. I just wipe my pots on the snow or moss or sand and put them back in their stuff sacks. Thanks for commenting
I feel the dark pot will hold the heat longer than the shiny one ,, boil times to close to call it different ,, Stay safe. Glad you’re out and enjoying life
looks great Mark, I got the same pot after you initially got your first one and I love it and you can't beat the price. Also what knife are you carrying?
Hello my friend. The knife is the Manly Drugar I have been testing. It is the one introduced in the same video I showed off your anorak. Thanks for commenting
Watching your initial setup where you hung both pots from a single strand of para-cord at the top to facilitate uniform heating, I assumed that you were going to “wind up” the rig to achieve a sort of turntable rotisserie to achieve even heat distribution between the two pots. That being said, I think your final conclusion would have probably ended up the same doing it that way.
Setting the test up to be the most fair was a challenge. Even then, the fire did not cooperate. As you say, anything I could have tried would likely ended up with similar results. Thanks for commenting
It did appear the shiny pot was well over the better hotter part of the fire for a good amount of the time, I will stand by the sooty pot as it takes time to clean the pot to bring it back to shiny every time you use is, this facts needs to be included. As such it take 4 times longer to clean the pot.
Interesting theory Mark. Too bad the damp firewood made it a bit difficult. I think that if there was 4x faster boil speed you’d notice regardless. Take care Mark!
I'm convinced that 'half way' between the two options is the most energy efficient. Because, one should factor in the scrubbing time taken to achieve a shiny pot as against leaving it a filthy sooty one. Me .. I'm Middle of the Road.
Funny theory about 4x there - that'd be a lot of additional energy adsorbed; think about it... A bit faster, yes, maybe. But not because, as you said in the video, "it insulates better". That would make timing worse, actually. Anyway, never mind the +/- 10%; a good, thick log turned into ember easily compensates for that difference. But, if you want to clean the sticky residue off the pot, here's another one (no, don't waste dish soap): After the pot is empty, put it back on the fire for a minute or 2 (not too long, it'll overheat). Without evaporating and hence cooling liquid inside, the pot will become very hot and the sticky soot will turn into ash (think pyrolysis cleaning of your oven). After cool-down, a paper towel is all that's required to even get the pot shiny again. Maybe. At least not sticky...
dish soap seems to works for me: not much needed. But I also put the water pot back on when the rest of the cooking is done. So maybe your explanation is part of it. Another experiment is in order.
Good suggestion. I am not sure I would do that with an aluminum pot but I would be okay doing it with a SS pot. For me, I prefer to leave the pot black. All I do is wipe off loose soot on the snow or sand or moss and place it in the stuff sack. Thanks for commenting
Mark Young Agree; never mind the black part. But I do mind the super sticky soot that makes your fingers stay black for a day and loves to adhere to anything it comes in contact with. No way to wipe this off with anything else than serious solvent. Well, maybe it's only my tropical wood that leaves this? Thanks for commenting on my comment 😄
I had a chance to test this on my Canway wood stove. The pot holder usually ends up sooty. Since that part fits inside the fire chamber I just turned it upside down when the coals were low enough. It came out soot free just like you said. Thanks!
I think that even if the pot was conducting heat 4X faster (or slower), the boil time would still be limited by the speed at which the water will accept the heat for the same surface area and mass. Pot insulation is mostly irrelevant, as it will become super hot really quickly in any cases. It is the surface area of the water that makes a difference. Adding some kind of heat sink inside the pot, properly connected to conduct the heat absorbed by the pot, could potentially make a big difference I think. I don't know the exact physic here so I might be wrong.
And this is why I use those fancy heat exchanger pots... They aren't meant for wood fires but who cares, they boil water FAST even with soot all over the exchanger fins.
The Myth was made up by a person who was too lazy to clean their pots. I clean my pots for the same reason you do, keep your gear clean and stop making a mess in your kit. Great video Mark 👍
Great test. I really don't think there is a tangible difference between them, maybe one boils 30 seconds faster than the other or so, which is no big deal for me. I think that what it comes down to for me is that I am just too lazy to clean the black stuff off of my pots lol
Unfortunately I'm way too OCD to allow my pots to get all black and sooty. Get though lots of Barkeepers friend keeping them clean. I have always wondered about the insulation vs absorption of sooty pots and pans. Great to have a distraction from world Events.
I am likely a bit lazy when it comes to cleaning my pots. Funny, as I always clean my wood stoves of soot. My small bit to help pass the isolation. Thanks for commenting
If you wanted to do a scientific study, you would have to be able to eliminate all variables other than the soot. Trying it again over a gas burner with a full tank (I would personally suggest a wide base single burner propane stove using a new tank, same burner unit, one pot after the other as soon as the burner returned to room temperature). It should be indoors to eliminate the wind variable.
I agree controlling the variables would result in better accuracy. You may want to take a look at my earlier video to see how I tried to do just what you are suggesting. Thanks for commenting
I think Mors helped spread the rumour of the black pots, he was right about many things but I never did subscribe to his black pots boil water faster theory. Cheers!
My brain 🧠 has always told me the blackness is only going to absorb the heat from light quicker and that the layer of carbonisation will act like an insulator. And so a clean pot will boil quicker. Glad this looks to be true.
I've routinely put a coating of liquid dish soap on my U.S. G.I. canteen cups and have let them get sooty for years between cleanings (on the outside, always clean the inside between meals) with the assumption the 'black' heats faster & the detergent makes the cups easier to clean. I've never paid much attention to the difference between sooty or clean boil times but after watching your video, I suspect that's because there isn't much difference. to be noticed
Thank.you, Mark. But I have a broader question if you don't mind. I am looking for a very light cooking system , one that can use meths / ethanol fuel and twigs. I prefer the triangia but am struggling to find a pot holder and windshield for it ( that can also serve as a wood burning stove). The triangia triangle is great...but is not really suitable for burning sticks. The lixada and tomshoo gasifier woodburners DO cater for a trangia but they are on the heavy side and need tall.( and heavy windshields). I've looked at the caldera cone but it seems expensive, fiddly and complicated and is limited to small pots. Any ideas, sir?
I will add my suggestions to the great ones made by other viewers. If money is not factor then either the full size Firebox in titanium or the smaller Firebox Nano in Ti. If you are looking for something at less cost, then the Ikea Hobo stove. Having said that, there are a good number of stoves worth considering. I have not tested them all (yet) but I do have a few videos that may be helpful. Thanks for commenting
well the difference would be obviousif they were under even radiative heating all-around them. black color usually absorbs radiative heat better, but also radiate the heat better (which helps cooling). So "Stefan-Boltzmann law" radiative heat transfer occurs (heat difference)^4 times (surface properties) . this test would be most obvious on the red burning coal bed with no flame. but the results cannot cause 1/4 time difference unless you design containers for that kind of result. but there is something you can test. under very cold conditions black pot would cool faster than shiny one :D but this is no problem we would drink it until then :D
Thank you for your well considered comments. Controlling the variables here was a challenge. What I was hoping to make a point on is not to accept often repeated "truths" without some sort of proof.
Should I boil water in my stainless steel bush pot that I use for cooking foods, I hear that will leach food tastes into my water which may not be favorable for teas and plain drinking water, I do have another container but didnt want the extra weight which isnt much, but still. What would you go about doing?
Stainless steel is safe for boiling and cooking in. It may retain some flavours but none that I can detect. The best is titanium as it will not retain any flavours. Thanks for commenting
Actually, it was a well known founder of modern bushcraft that made the statement that "A dark pot will use four times less fuel to boil water". The comment was repeated so often that it was not challenged. I just wanted to suggest we not always accept what we hear without some proof. Thanks for commenting
sorry, but this setup isnt very "scientific". you should have used a constant infrared source, like a infrared heater or even a red hot electric heating coil stove. i want to make a video about this, but even if i do nobody will ever watch it so its a bit of a downer.
You are correct. Neither test was very scientific. What I was actually trying to do with both these videos was to challenge peoples thinking. A lot of 'wisdom" is repeated in the bushcraft community without any evidence that it is true. I wanted people to not blindly accept everything they hear and test it for themselves. For me, any difference that a dark (sooty) pot has over a clean and shiny pot is not significant enough to be held up as the one true way of doing things. I would welcome anyone who could definitively prove the truth of this issue. Thanks again for commenting
