HomeHome  CalendarCalendar  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  RegisterRegister  MemberlistMemberlist  UsergroupsUsergroups  Log in  
Share | 
 

 ZIPPO VS COMMANDER (fuel retention)

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
SPUD 15

avatar

Age : 70
Location : Winter Springs Florida
Registration date : 2011-09-07

PostSubject: ZIPPO VS COMMANDER (fuel retention)   Wed Mar 04, 2015 11:40 am











I primarily use my Corona old boy and Magie even in windy (less than 20 mph winds) conditions. I also use my Zippo and nimrod commander as both are great lighters, this test is about the latter two as the fuel does not last as long.
My beliefs before doing the test was that the commander always seemed to last at least 30% longer than the Zippo. I attributed this to the construction of the commander having the tank include the flip top and the tongue and groove design of the tank and outer sleeve vs the Zippos tank being a completely separate unit and just slipping into the outer sleeve with the flip top attached. I also always thought that the Commander had a visibly larger fuel tank than the Zippo. After measuring the fuel tanks of both the Zippo and Commander ( ZIPPO h1.30"x w .46"xL 1.43", and the Commander H 1.38"x w.46" x L1.33") the Zippo has the capacity of .855 cu in and the Commander has the capacity of .844 cu in. Very close to the same capacity the Zippo just edging out the Commander.
I conducted the test as follows. Both lighters were left out of their cases for thirty days (give or take a day or two) to completely dry out. I filled a cap from a glue stick ( it took one full squirt ) with Zippo premium lighter fluid and added one cap full to each lighters reservoir closed the lighters and set them side by side standing upright on my desk. After one day I flipped the top and lit each lighter and closed the top ( took less than a second) and set them back on my desk. I did this every morning inspecting the flame. The test took a total of thirteen days. The results follow.
The Zippo had a good flame for the first five days, on the sixth day the flame was weak, and out on the seventh day. The Commander did much better it had a good flame the first ten days, a weak flame on the 11th and 12th day, and it was out on the 13th day. The Zippo only lasted 53% of the Commander.
This was a surprise to me as I don't believe that the Commander has lasted twice as long as my Zippo in real use. Well this is some more useless info on the BOB board. MIKE

Back to top Go down
View user profile
Cartaphilus

avatar

Age : 63
Location : East Texas
Registration date : 2011-12-15

PostSubject: Re: ZIPPO VS COMMANDER (fuel retention)   Wed Mar 04, 2015 12:01 pm

That was a good test but, I would imagine it also depends on the temperature
of the day and being outside and how it's resting in ones pocket, sideways, upside down (how many of us has gotten chemical burned when this happens?) , etc. as this happens from time to time in an active persons pants pocket. Also some I've seen carried in there front pocket of the shirt, which seems a bit odd to me considering the weight of one and in a watch pocket or as I did in a lighter holster. I think all these could make a difference. But, yours does show which one lasts longer in a controlled climate and in the upright position.
Just my lousy 2 cents. Wink

I wonder if Zippo lighter fluid makes a difference also. When I've bought it, it did seems to work better in lighting but, never took notice if it really lasted longer. Ronson seems to be more available then Zippo too for some odd reason. Wink


Last edited by Cartaphilus on Wed Mar 04, 2015 12:03 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://rdpipes.briar.club/
Richard Burley

avatar

Location : North Coast NY
Registration date : 2011-04-09

PostSubject: Re: ZIPPO VS COMMANDER (fuel retention)   Wed Mar 04, 2015 12:03 pm

Decent methodology and quite interesting. Nevertheless I reject the Nimrod, the Corona, and even the Zippo equipped with pipe chimney because it looks ugly with the hole cut in the side. I use the standard Zippo, Armor chrome, because it's cool looking and cool sounding when flicked. That's the important thing, to be cool and strike a pose, as Oscar Wilde sort of said. All contrary arguments are futile.

Besides, 92.4 % of my smoking is done at home, and there I use wooden matches, the choice of real men. pig
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Cartaphilus

avatar

Age : 63
Location : East Texas
Registration date : 2011-12-15

PostSubject: Re: ZIPPO VS COMMANDER (fuel retention)   Wed Mar 04, 2015 12:10 pm

Richard Burley wrote:
Decent methodology and quite interesting. Nevertheless I reject the Nimrod, the Corona, and even the Zippo equipped with pipe chimney because it looks ugly with the hole cut in the side. I use the standard Zippo, Armor chrome, because it's cool looking and cool sounding when flicked. That's the important thing, to be cool and strike a pose, as Oscar Wilde sort of said. All contrary arguments are futile.

Besides, 92.4 % of my smoking is done at home, and there I use wooden matches, the choice of real men. pig

A REAL man must have more money and patience then me because I smoke at home OUTSIDE and it would take me twice as long if not longer to light my pipes even in a slight breeze with a match then a lighter, (and we have a breeze here 99% of the time) not to mention how scorched and burned the top of the bowl and my fingers would be. Now matches INSIDE, not a problem for those who wish to or can. Wink
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://rdpipes.briar.club/
Richard Burley

avatar

Location : North Coast NY
Registration date : 2011-04-09

PostSubject: Re: ZIPPO VS COMMANDER (fuel retention)   Wed Mar 04, 2015 12:14 pm

Smoking in a breeze sucks, man. Cigarettes maybe. Eww.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Cartaphilus

avatar

Age : 63
Location : East Texas
Registration date : 2011-12-15

PostSubject: Re: ZIPPO VS COMMANDER (fuel retention)   Wed Mar 04, 2015 12:18 pm

Richard Burley wrote:
Smoking in a breeze sucks, man. Cigarettes maybe. Eww.

Ah ya get use to it, like anything else. I can't change the weather so, Que Sera, Sera. Wink
And we quit cigs a good year ago now.....I think! Wink
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://rdpipes.briar.club/
SPUD 15

avatar

Age : 70
Location : Winter Springs Florida
Registration date : 2011-09-07

PostSubject: Re: ZIPPO VS COMMANDER (fuel retention)   Wed Mar 04, 2015 12:42 pm

Hey Cart In the good old days with your two cents and my two cents we almost have a nickel cigar. As far as smoking in a breeze I do 99% of my smoking outside and really do not have a problem until it starts to blow over 25 mph gusts. MIKE
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Richard Burley

avatar

Location : North Coast NY
Registration date : 2011-04-09

PostSubject: Re: ZIPPO VS COMMANDER (fuel retention)   Wed Mar 04, 2015 12:54 pm

Cartaphilus wrote:
Richard Burley wrote:
Smoking in a breeze sucks, man. Cigarettes maybe. Eww.

Ah ya get use to it, like anything else. I can't change the weather so, Que Sera, Sera. Wink
And we quit cigs a good year ago now.....I think! Wink

Hey, stick with it, Mr. Cart. Cigs REALLY suck. So how do you prevent the "cherry" from becoming rip-roaring in a breeze? Windscreen? Just curious. (Might as well hijack this thread all the way.)
Back to top Go down
View user profile
monbla256

avatar

Age : 71
Location : DFW Metroplex, Texas
Registration date : 2012-01-15

PostSubject: Re: ZIPPO VS COMMANDER (fuel retention)   Wed Mar 04, 2015 3:15 pm

Interesting "test" but as always, WOODEN MATCHES !! Twisted Evil
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Cartaphilus

avatar

Age : 63
Location : East Texas
Registration date : 2011-12-15

PostSubject: Re: ZIPPO VS COMMANDER (fuel retention)   Wed Mar 04, 2015 6:31 pm

Richard Burley wrote:
Cartaphilus wrote:
Richard Burley wrote:
Smoking in a breeze sucks, man. Cigarettes maybe. Eww.

Ah ya get use to it, like anything else. I can't change the weather so, Que Sera, Sera. Wink
And we quit cigs a good year ago now.....I think! Wink

Hey, stick with it, Mr. Cart. Cigs REALLY suck. So how do you prevent the "cherry" from becoming rip-roaring in a breeze? Windscreen? Just curious. (Might as well hijack this thread all the way.)

Well, beings I'm not much of a clencher I hold it in my lap most of the time or when it gets to really blow'en I cup my hand around the bowl.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://rdpipes.briar.club/
Cartaphilus

avatar

Age : 63
Location : East Texas
Registration date : 2011-12-15

PostSubject: Re: ZIPPO VS COMMANDER (fuel retention)   Wed Mar 04, 2015 6:32 pm

SPUD 15 wrote:
Hey Cart In the good old days with your two cents and my two cents we almost have a nickel cigar. As far as smoking in a breeze I do 99% of my smoking outside and really do not have a problem until it starts to blow over 25 mph gusts. MIKE

Ya got that right Mike. Wink
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://rdpipes.briar.club/
Hugo Drax

avatar

Location : Sw PA
Registration date : 2013-01-15

PostSubject: Re: ZIPPO VS COMMANDER (fuel retention)   Sun Aug 23, 2015 1:00 pm

Interesting experiment. I have carried a commander since 1995 and have been given a few zippo pipe lighters. There's no comparison for me: the Nimrod wins hands down.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
monbla256

avatar

Age : 71
Location : DFW Metroplex, Texas
Registration date : 2012-01-15

PostSubject: Re: ZIPPO VS COMMANDER (fuel retention)   Sun Aug 23, 2015 1:17 pm

Something most folks don't recognize, ALL these lighters were developed for the SHORT bursts of flame needed to light CIGARETTES!! No matter what kind of adaptation made for sideways lighting as is done for the "pipe" lighters, the amnt of fuel contained in both styles is the same and is going to be used proportionately to the length of time the flame is burning!! As Kyle used to say a Bic works best if you have to use a lighter Twisted Evil Twisted Evil Me, it's wooden matches 95% of the time Twisted Evil Twisted Evil
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Hugo Drax

avatar

Location : Sw PA
Registration date : 2013-01-15

PostSubject: Re: ZIPPO VS COMMANDER (fuel retention)   Sun Aug 23, 2015 1:30 pm

monbla256 wrote:
Something most folks don't recognize, ALL these lighters were developed for the SHORT bursts of flame needed to light CIGARETTES!! No matter what kind of adaptation made for sideways lighting as is done for the "pipe" lighters, the amnt of fuel contained in both styles is the same and is going to be used proportionately to the length of time the flame is burning!! As Kyle used to say a Bic works best if you have to use a lighter Twisted Evil Twisted Evil Me, it's wooden matches 95% of the time Twisted Evil Twisted Evil

No argument on length of burning time. For length of in your pocket time, I prefer the Commander. For length of time between the wick replacements, I prefer the cCommander.

Love matches, but the penny boxes have become incredibly difficult t o find around these parts.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
AJ

avatar

Age : 68
Location : East of the Rocky Mountains
Registration date : 2012-03-18

PostSubject: Re: ZIPPO VS COMMANDER (fuel retention)   Sun Aug 23, 2015 11:52 pm

Hugo Drax wrote:
Interesting experiment. I have carried a commander since 1995 and have been given a few zippo pipe lighters. There's no comparison for me: the Nimrod wins hands down.

I'm with you Hugo. My Zippo had to be refueled every day and a half but my Commander only once every three and half days. It amazes me that it burns so much longer than the Zippo. I wish they still made them. I'd love to have a new one and have my name engraved on it. The Zippo I carried for years was engraved and I kind of liked it for some reason. Probably vanity. Smile

AJ
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Hugo Drax

avatar

Location : Sw PA
Registration date : 2013-01-15

PostSubject: Re: ZIPPO VS COMMANDER (fuel retention)   Mon Aug 24, 2015 11:19 pm

ajn27511 wrote:
Hugo Drax wrote:
Interesting experiment. I have carried a commander since 1995 and have been given a few zippo pipe lighters. There's no comparison for me: the Nimrod wins hands down.

I'm with you Hugo. My Zippo had to be refueled every day and a half but my Commander only once every three and half days. It amazes me that it burns so much longer than the Zippo. I wish they still made them. I'd love to have a new one and have my name engraved on it. The Zippo I carried for years was engraved and I kind of liked it for some reason. Probably vanity. Smile

AJ

I'm glad to know I'm not the only one to think so. I also think the fit and finish is better by far than a Zippo. But chacoun son gut. I wish my Rolla lite or Thorens performed as well.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
AJ

avatar

Age : 68
Location : East of the Rocky Mountains
Registration date : 2012-03-18

PostSubject: Re: ZIPPO VS COMMANDER (fuel retention)   Tue Aug 25, 2015 12:10 am

Hugo Drax wrote:
ajn27511 wrote:
Hugo Drax wrote:
Interesting experiment. I have carried a commander since 1995 and have been given a few zippo pipe lighters. There's no comparison for me: the Nimrod wins hands down.

I'm with you Hugo. My Zippo had to be refueled every day and a half but my Commander only once every three and half days. It amazes me that it burns so much longer than the Zippo. I wish they still made them. I'd love to have a new one and have my name engraved on it. The Zippo I carried for years was engraved and I kind of liked it for some reason. Probably vanity. Smile

AJ

I'm glad to know I'm not the only one to think so. I also think the fit and finish is better by far than a Zippo. But chacoun son gut. I wish my Rolla lite or Thorens performed as well.

I also have a Corona Old Boy that sits in a drawer becasue of the low fuel capacity. It works just fine when it has fuel but I'd much rather use my Commander because of its ability to hold enough fuel to last three and a half days. I don't see why they can't make a lighter that will hold enough fuel to last a week. The old Scripto VU Lighters would last weeks without refueling but I was using it to light cigarettes. There used to be a VU Lighter for pipes and I have one but it leaks and I don't have the parts to fix it. Smile

AJ
Back to top Go down
View user profile
 
ZIPPO VS COMMANDER (fuel retention)
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» Scotland Yard Commander found guilty of threatening behaviour and false arrest.
» EC receives UK application for 5p off islanders' fuel
» Facts about Top Fuel and Funny Cars
» the usual idiots - from Paulo Reis
» Commander Handsome Thamsanqa Matsane...

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Brothers of Briar :: Pipes & Tobacco :: Tobacciana & Accessories-
Jump to: