Taylors Burners

winfarthing

Well-Known Member
Joined
24 Aug 2007
Messages
118
Location
Menai Strait, North Wales
Visit site
Does anyone know the cost of complete replacement burners for Taylors stoves? I can find mention of them by Googling but no posted prices. Also, I have heard that there is a new version that requires little or no pre-heating. Has anyone any knowledge of these?
 
I bought an extended cruising spares pack which included a new burner, sorry but I can not find the receipt, however as far as pre-heating is concerned I would recommend the little gas blow torch you use to make a creme brulee?
 
Thay are standard Primus burners. You can get them direct from www.blakes-taylors-lavac.co.uk Agree that using a blow torch to pre heat is easy, although you don't need a fancy kitchen type. The DIY units work and have other uses, although they are bit bulkier. I used one for years, but have reverted to meths which is fine when you get the hang of the exact amount for each burner
 
Apologies if this is thread drift. I posted recently to ask opinions about paraffin v gaz. Replies were all helpful;but verdict was mixed. I was thinking of converting to paraffin (to get rid of gas bottles) and wondered how current users of paraffin got on with the lighting process compared to the convenience of gas. You guys who have posted so far - are you all committed users? /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif
 
In 2006 Seasure "suggested selling price" for a complete burner (PN 65.50) was £34.99 inc VAT (£29.78 ex VAT). Trade price was £23.82 so cheaper options (than34.99) may be possible. They also offered a Burner spares kit for 29.99 inc VAT (PN 65.51)
 
Yes, it's thread drift. Yes, I'm a committed user. Lighting a paraffin stove is a piece of cake and the couple of minutes it takes should not put you off. However, for this time 'ordeal' to be acceptable you must be convinced that the benefit of getting rid of gas is worthwhile for YOU.
 
I have used paraffin stoves for 50 years and continue to do so. I use a Tilley lamp frequently. In their place I think they are excellent, economical and efficient. I don't think their place is on a boat, where they are far less convenient than gas and have no discernable benefits (including safety).
 
I think you overstate the point when you write, "I don't think their place is on a boat". I agree they're less convenient to light but this hardly warrants your emphatic pronouncement. Many sailors and boaters use them with total success so THEY would feel equally strogly that they have a place on a boat. It's a matter of personal judgement and I rest easier with one less concern of safety and maintenance. That, together with reclaimed stowage are my "discernable benefits".
 
I wouldn't have said that "I don't think their place is on a boat" was an 'emphatic pronouncement', but if that's how you saw it, here are some of my reasons.

The combustion gases have a certain smell. Over time this smell gets into soft furnishings, where it is impossible to remove. I have experienced this in two boats and three camper vans, so it isn't a peculiarity of one stove only.

A two-burner paraffin stove is considerably more difficult to clean than the equivalent gas stove. Food tends to be spilt more on a boat, requiring considerable effort to remove from a paraffin stove. The burner itself tends to get dirty to a much greater extent.

Refilling a stove at sea is fraught with difficulty, almost inevitably leading to spillage of the paraffin. The fuel smell is difficult to remove from hands, clothes and the galley. Changing a gas bottle is far easier in lively conditions.

Lighting the stove takes experience, not always available amongst the on-watch crew. Failure causes flare, sometimes producing large flames that can easily reach the deck head. (It used to be the case that failure of Mountain Leadership Certificate was automatic if the candidate lit a primus inside a tent. How is a boat different?)

Pots and pans have a shorter life with paraffin stoves. The intensity of the flame is not kind to non-stick PTFE and even cheap uncoated pans suffer to some extent. It is also easier to burn food with them.

Control of heat is far less possible with paraffin, as low heat causes blackening and less heat input, eventually putting the stove out and releasing paraffin as smoke initially and liquid later.

Priming with meths is tricky at the best of times, even with the correct bottle. In a seaway there is a high likelihood that spillage will occur. Meths can be quite dangerous stuff, as it burns with a colourless flame and runs very quickly. If any is spilt outside the stove it will flash over from the stove or a match, with possibly unpleasant consequences.

Far from less maintenance, I have always found maintenance of a paraffin stove to be considerably more than with gas. I have replaced numerous burners, replaced automatic prickers, experienced various leaks, maintained pumps, valves and piston seals. A friend was unable to eat hot food for several days on a trans-Atlantic cruise when his paraffin stove experienced persistent blockages, possibly due to contaminated fuel. His description of stripping the stove to the smalles components in a force 8 was interesting, to say the least.
 
With apologies to winfarthing for high-jacking his post.

Thanks for justifying your opinion, vyv. I'll number your paras to ID what hopefully will be reasoned comments/observations:

1. I appreciate this would be problematic but it's not something I've ever experienced in using paraffin stoves for forty plus years. Additionally, I keep all fuel out of the saloon and fill via a remote syphon so unburnt paraffin is not swilling about. Maybe ventilation and efficient burning are key - can't think of any other reason.

2 Using the simmering plate on a Taylors and foil to catch drips in the oven is a good practice. In this respect I don't consider this to be any different to gas/deisel.

3. It's easy to see the fuel level and then to pre-plan when you top-up in the light of voyaging. Otherwise I agree this could be more difficult. On the otherhand, motion amidships is less severe than in the lazarette where my gas bottles were kept! My stove is frugal and a gallon lasts a long time.

4. A much overated difficulty and easily overcome with training and a small amount of practice. Yes, understandably, that's MLC teaching but as a mountaineer many is the time I've been forced to light a paraffin stove inside a tent in arduous weather conditions. It's not difficult!

5. Sorry, this is not my experience. Maybe the Taylors' is better in this respect.

6. Agree, blackening can be a problem with Primus/Optimus stoves and have experienced this with aforesaid mountain cooking. The Taylors has a separate in-line fuel regulator that precludes over-supply and allows low simmering. That said you can 'turn-down' too much, cut out the flame and release vapour. Just directly relight the vapour.

7. Don't like meths for the reasons you stated. I've always used solid fuel for priming para stoves.

8. On reflection I think you're right, the volume of routine maintenance is greater than with gas. The point you make about clean fuel is also critical. I always pre filter from whatever source. Maybe that's why I've not suffered the hardship of your friend who although in much distress, survived. Some years ago an acquintance of mine was killed and a yacht destroyed in a gas explosion on a newly acquired liveaboard. Gas is so unforgiving.

Let's agree to differ?
 
[ QUOTE ]
It used to be the case that failure of Mountain Leadership Certificate was automatic if the candidate lit a primus inside a tent.

[/ QUOTE ]

Eric Langmuir, first Principal of the fabled SCPR Centre at Glenmore Lodge, would be turning in his grave at that calumny! I think, perhaps, you have mistranslated from the Auld Scots - for everyone who was anyone on Scottish Hills would fire up his Primus ( or Optimus ) while still horizontal, in his 'pit', in his tent. After the first big brew of the day it was slowly, slowly into the wet boots - barfit - and outside into the storm for the first big piddle of the day, sark flapping in the gale!

It's a 'boy thing'! Them wot couldn't light their Primus *anywhere* died off. Natural selection, see....


/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
 
It was when I proposed to do exactly what you say, when taking my MLC in Snowdonia one winter, that I was informed that they would fail me if I did! Having passed it I reverted to always using my Primus inside the tent, as previously. It does require some supervision though and not a good idea to leave the stove unattended, especially in a wind.
 
A belated thank you to those who supplied the requested information. I had feared the burners would be much more expensive given the cost of the stove. I guess the quick light burner was wishful thinking by who ever told me about them. No worries with the hijacking, I got the info I needed before that happened. As an ex marine surveyor, having investigated gas explosions, its not for me on a boat and I would put up with all the down sides Vyv mentions rather that have gas at sea with me. The quick start burners would have been nice though, for that first brew on a chilly morning when you want the kettle on quick and to beetle back into the sleeping bag to await the whistle!
 
Hello Bob, I guess you noted that those burner prices I quoted need updating. As far as the "quick light burner" is concerned I'm not aware of anything new. I'll enquire at LIBS. The only 'quick' method I know of is to apply a gas torch directly on the burner tubes. This is what Taylors use to test each burner assembly. On-board tis not a direction I'd take for the obvious reason. Please let me know if you discover that a secret fast light burner has been developed! My 'quick' routine for the first cuppa is to set everything up before going to bed, kettle full, cups with teabags, tank pressured etc . Using solid fuel, prime stove ready to light with 'long-stretch' from sleeping bag!
 
Top