Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

ARRIVED: Vargo Triad Stove

Expand Messages
  • Emma Eyeball
    my sealed Triad stove arrived today. i was a little confused by the box, since it was shipped from Equinox Ltd. In addition to the stove, they also sent me
    Message 1 of 14 , Dec 29, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      my sealed Triad stove arrived today. i was a little confused by the
      box, since it was shipped from Equinox Ltd. In addition to the
      stove, they also sent me what i assume is a fuel bottle (a plastic
      squeeze bottle with a flip spout).

      i'll wait to hear what on earth we are doing about the test
      schedule. are we to test the fuel bottle, too?

      -colleen
    • Andrew Priest
      ... Hi Colleen Can you please refresh my memory. Was this a replacement just for you or where all testers getting a new stove? Are there significant
      Message 2 of 14 , Dec 29, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        At 04:43 AM 30/12/2004, you wrote:

        >my sealed Triad stove arrived today. i was a little confused by the
        >box, since it was shipped from Equinox Ltd. In addition to the
        >stove, they also sent me what i assume is a fuel bottle (a plastic
        >squeeze bottle with a flip spout).
        >
        >i'll wait to hear what on earth we are doing about the test
        >schedule. are we to test the fuel bottle, too?
        >
        >-colleen

        Hi Colleen

        Can you please refresh my memory. Was this a replacement just for you or
        where all testers getting a new stove? Are there significant differences
        in the new stove compared to the old one?

        As to the fuel bottle I can't see a problem re talking about it in your
        Field and Long-term Reports.

        Regards
        Andrew



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Emma Eyeball
        ... you or ... differences ... all testers were supposed to return their stoves to Vargo for sealing. we were sent unsealed stoves that tended to flame out in
        Message 3 of 14 , Dec 30, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In BackpackGearTest@yahoogroups.com, Andrew Priest <apriest@b...>
          wrote:
          > Can you please refresh my memory. Was this a replacement just for
          you or
          > where all testers getting a new stove? Are there significant
          differences
          > in the new stove compared to the old one?

          all testers were supposed to return their stoves to Vargo for
          sealing. we were sent unsealed stoves that tended to flame out in
          spots where they weren't supposed to. they sent me the same stove,
          but they sealed it with what i guess is probably j-weld or something
          similar. it's not a very neat job. frankly, i have my misgivings
          about this test but of course i'm going forward with it.

          i don't think any decision was made about whether to start the test
          from scratch again, or what the new report dates will be.

          -colleen
        • JimSabis@aol.com
          In a message dated 12/30/2004 3:13:07 AM Eastern Standard Time, apriest@backpackgeartest.org writes: Can you please refresh my memory. Was this a replacement
          Message 4 of 14 , Jan 1, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            In a message dated 12/30/2004 3:13:07 AM Eastern Standard Time,
            apriest@... writes:
            Can you please refresh my memory. Was this a replacement just for you or
            where all testers getting a new stove? Are there significant differences
            in the new stove compared to the old one?

            As to the fuel bottle I can't see a problem re talking about it in your
            Field and Long-term Reports.

            Regards
            Andrew
            ######

            Andrew,

            I'm just BIP and caught this. All the Triads were returned due to a flaring
            problem. Apparently, the stoves were not properly sealed in the manufacturing
            process. Shane is aware of this and made the initial contacts. My Triad also
            arrived just in time to go along on a multiday trip into the Dacks backcountry.
            The seal appears to be a simple application of silicon (or similar) sealant to
            the bottom stove seam. The application leaves something to be desired as far
            as aesthetics go, but otherwise seems to have cured the flaring problem.

            I'm open on the rescheduling question. We will have to poke Shane on that one.

            Jim S.

            It is the accidental and insignificant things in life which are significant.
            - Soren Kierkegaard.


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • JimSabis@aol.com
            In a message dated 12/29/2004 3:45:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, tarbubble@yahoo.com writes: my sealed Triad stove arrived today. i was a little confused by
            Message 5 of 14 , Jan 1, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              In a message dated 12/29/2004 3:45:06 PM Eastern Standard Time,
              tarbubble@... writes:
              my sealed Triad stove arrived today. i was a little confused by the
              box, since it was shipped from Equinox Ltd. In addition to the
              stove, they also sent me what i assume is a fuel bottle (a plastic
              squeeze bottle with a flip spout).
              #####

              Colleen,

              My Triad arrived in a Princeton Tec box! I suspect Brian is using whatever
              boxes happen to be available, ie: recycling!

              ; )

              Jim S.

              It is the accidental and insignificant things in life which are significant.
              - Soren Kierkegaard.


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Andrew Priest
              ... Hi Colleen Unless there is significant changes in the stoves, there should be no need to write new Initial Reports. I assume any changes can be covered in
              Message 6 of 14 , Jan 2, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                At 03:13 AM 31/12/2004, you wrote:

                >--- In BackpackGearTest@yahoogroups.com, Andrew Priest <apriest@b...>
                >wrote:
                > > Can you please refresh my memory. Was this a replacement just for
                >you or
                > > where all testers getting a new stove? Are there significant
                >differences
                > > in the new stove compared to the old one?
                >
                >all testers were supposed to return their stoves to Vargo for
                >sealing. we were sent unsealed stoves that tended to flame out in
                >spots where they weren't supposed to. they sent me the same stove,
                >but they sealed it with what i guess is probably j-weld or something
                >similar. it's not a very neat job. frankly, i have my misgivings
                >about this test but of course i'm going forward with it.
                >
                >i don't think any decision was made about whether to start the test
                >from scratch again, or what the new report dates will be.

                Hi Colleen

                Unless there is significant changes in the stoves, there should be no need
                to write new Initial Reports. I assume any changes can be covered in the
                Field Report. Once the other testers report in on the receipt of the
                modified stove, I will set a new Field and Long-term Report dates.

                Regards
                Andrew


                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Shane
                ... Agreed. Everyone should now have their newly sealed stove. If not, I need to know immediately. If so, we can go with some kind of extension on the Field
                Message 7 of 14 , Jan 3, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  > Unless there is significant changes in the stoves, there should be no need
                  > to write new Initial Reports. I assume any changes can be covered in the
                  > Field Report. Once the other testers report in on the receipt of the
                  > modified stove, I will set a new Field and Long-term Report dates.

                  Agreed. Everyone should now have their newly sealed stove. If not, I need
                  to know immediately. If so, we can go with some kind of extension on the
                  Field Report. I'm open to Andrew's suggestions.

                  Shane
                  Vargo Moderator
                • JimSabis@aol.com
                  In a message dated 1/3/2005 12:57:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, ... Agreed. Everyone should now have their newly sealed stove. If not, I need to know
                  Message 8 of 14 , Jan 3, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    In a message dated 1/3/2005 12:57:22 PM Eastern Standard Time,
                    shane@... writes:
                    > Field Report. Once the other testers report in on the receipt of the
                    > modified stove, I will set a new Field and Long-term Report dates.

                    Agreed. Everyone should now have their newly sealed stove. If not, I need
                    to know immediately. If so, we can go with some kind of extension on the
                    Field Report. I'm open to Andrew's suggestions.

                    Shane
                    Vargo Moderator
                    #####

                    I'm good. Mine came in just in time to go to the Dacks with me and I used it
                    in below freezing temps. It worked quite well, too.

                    I'll watch fo rthe new dates.

                    Jim S.


                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Andrew Priest
                    ... Hi Shane How about just setting a normal two months + four months dates for the field and long-term reports. Seems to be a full period of testing will be
                    Message 9 of 14 , Jan 3, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      At 01:55 AM 4/01/2005, you wrote:
                      > > Unless there is significant changes in the stoves, there should be no need
                      > > to write new Initial Reports. I assume any changes can be covered in the
                      > > Field Report. Once the other testers report in on the receipt of the
                      > > modified stove, I will set a new Field and Long-term Report dates.
                      >
                      >Agreed. Everyone should now have their newly sealed stove. If not, I need
                      >to know immediately. If so, we can go with some kind of extension on the
                      >Field Report. I'm open to Andrew's suggestions.

                      Hi Shane

                      How about just setting a normal two months + four months dates for the
                      field and long-term reports. Seems to be a full period of testing will be
                      needed. Thoughts?

                      I have not heard anything from Rob Patterson, so don't know if he has got
                      his new one or not.

                      Andrew


                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Shane Steinkamp
                      ... That s fair. Fire it up. ... I believe he s out, but I might be mistaken. I ll ping him if he doesn t respond here by tomorrow. Shane
                      Message 10 of 14 , Jan 3, 2005
                      • 0 Attachment
                        > How about just setting a normal two months + four months dates for the
                        > field and long-term reports. Seems to be a full period of testing will
                        > be needed. Thoughts?

                        That's fair. Fire it up.

                        > I have not heard anything from Rob Patterson, so don't know if he has
                        > got his new one or not.

                        I believe he's out, but I might be mistaken. I'll ping him if he doesn't
                        respond here by tomorrow.

                        Shane
                      • Andrew Priest
                        ... I had him being back on January 2, 2005. Andrew [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        Message 11 of 14 , Jan 4, 2005
                        • 0 Attachment
                          At 11:23 AM 4/01/2005, you wrote:
                          > > How about just setting a normal two months + four months dates for the
                          > > field and long-term reports. Seems to be a full period of testing will
                          > > be needed. Thoughts?
                          >
                          >That's fair. Fire it up.
                          >
                          > > I have not heard anything from Rob Patterson, so don't know if he has
                          > > got his new one or not.
                          >
                          >I believe he's out, but I might be mistaken. I'll ping him if he doesn't
                          >respond here by tomorrow.

                          I had him being back on January 2, 2005.

                          Andrew


                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • Banjo Doje
                          He responded today saying he didn t have it yet - he has to go back to school but he expects to have it by the time he gets back again (or however that worked
                          Message 12 of 14 , Jan 4, 2005
                          • 0 Attachment
                            He responded today saying he didn't have it yet - he has to go back to
                            school but he expects to have it by the time he gets back again (or
                            however that worked - I'll need to relook at that email)

                            Jodi


                            On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 08:33:12 +0800, Andrew Priest
                            <apriest@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > At 11:23 AM 4/01/2005, you wrote:
                            > > > How about just setting a normal two months + four months dates for the
                            > > > field and long-term reports. Seems to be a full period of testing will
                            > > > be needed. Thoughts?
                            > >
                            > >That's fair. Fire it up.
                            > >
                            > > > I have not heard anything from Rob Patterson, so don't know if he has
                            > > > got his new one or not.
                            > >
                            > >I believe he's out, but I might be mistaken. I'll ping him if he doesn't
                            > >respond here by tomorrow.
                            >
                            > I had him being back on January 2, 2005.
                            >
                            > Andrew
                            >
                            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            >
                            > To read our reviews, please visit http://www.backpackgeartest.org/
                            > Yahoo! Groups Links
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >


                            --
                            "Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of
                            arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather
                            to skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, chocolate coke in the
                            other, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming ~
                            WOOHOO what a ride!"
                          • Robert Patterson
                            Sorry for the confushion Jodi, my shipping address is my Uni address as thats there I am 90% of the time, right now I m home with the folks but I ll be back at
                            Message 13 of 14 , Jan 4, 2005
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Sorry for the confushion Jodi, my shipping address is my Uni address
                              as thats there I am 90% of the time, right now I'm home with the folks
                              but I'll be back at school sometime this weekend. Hope this clears
                              things up.
                              -Rob
                            • Banjo Doje
                              Yup - thanks ;-) Jodi On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 00:49:36 -0500, Robert Patterson ... -- Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving
                              Message 14 of 14 , Jan 5, 2005
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Yup - thanks ;-)

                                Jodi

                                On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 00:49:36 -0500, Robert Patterson
                                <robpatterson5@...> wrote:
                                >
                                > Sorry for the confushion Jodi, my shipping address is my Uni address
                                > as thats there I am 90% of the time, right now I'm home with the folks
                                > but I'll be back at school sometime this weekend. Hope this clears
                                > things up.
                                > -Rob
                                --
                                "Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of
                                arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather
                                to skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, chocolate coke in the
                                other, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming ~
                                WOOHOO what a ride!"
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.