This is an old thread re-posted because of difficulties with the display of the original post Produced in England by 'Camping Solutions' using Optimus Nova parts. A quote from their website: "We were established in 2003 to create a bespoke true multi-fuel cooker for use in extreme survival conditions for Shelterbox, a charity that delivers humanitarian aid to people displaced by famine, war or natural disaster. The Nomad true multifuel cooker was designed and created in house by our engineering team and has been dispatched to locations all over the world." A 111 to compare sizes. A couple of photos from Usha Gap where I field-tested the Nomad.
And still just as lovely! Great photos! They show the stove well. I had not previously realized that the regulator is offset, requiring altering/fabricating the fuel feed tube for these stoves. I'd assumed they just built the case and put the guts in. Has the multitool been modified as well? What is the approximate weight of the Nomad? Wonderful stove! It looks like something from science fiction! They must seem otherworldly while on site with the relief teams that use them.
I've been mulling it over and wondering, why would they go through the trouble of moving the regulator to the front corner, like a Campingo or 22? Is it because the spindle would protrude from the left side of the case if left unmodified? In this early example, the spindle is on the left side of the case, but they seem to have changed it when they started using the Nova burner, as seen here, and have kept the design, as seen on this example, as well as Trevor's stove up above. I can't decide if it would be more work to make the case a teensy bit larger, or to modify that fuel delivery line. Either way, I just love these rugged stoves! Wish they were available to the public!
It may simply be that rotating the burner to move spindle control forward simplified connecting a Nova burner to the tank. It makes for a short strong (-looking) connection compared to the modern flimsy-looking connecting tube of the modern Nova-burner Hiker. But, you may be right that it just makes for a more compact case. The older version you show looks like it might be a Cobra burner, so that could be connected in a more standard fashion.
Itchy, you're right! I hadn't considered how vulnerable the fuel line is! I got to thinking about it, and check this out: Wait, before I begin, I agree, that looks like a Cobra burner in the early Nomad. The components give it away, and the windshield certifies it. I just thought it pertinent to the discussion, particularly regarding case dimensions, so included it. Moving on, this stock photo of the current Hiker+ model shows that the fuel feed tube has two nuts, and the fuel feed tube can be disconnected from the tank. However, if you look at the earlier models of the Hiker+, you'll see that the fuel feed tube is attached permanently to the tank, as seen here, here and here. Optimus must have realized the vulnerability and addressed it with the newer model of the Hiker+. I figured that Camping Solutions had reached the same conclusion when designing the Nomad and decided to shorten the fuel feed tube. Then I got to looking at the spindle area, and I noticed that the distance between the spindle nut and the fuel feed tube nut is very small on the Hiker+. Now compare that to the Nomad in question: (Hope you don't mind me using the picture Trevor!) Those are two totally different pieces, right? I figured that Camping Solutions machined a new piece for some reason and fitted it. I got to talking with Berniedawg about it, and he suggested that it's actually a NOVA burner, not the Hiker+ burner! DUH! Why didn't I see that?!! Since they sourced the tank, I assumed that Camping Solutions used the Hiker+ burner as well. He pointed out that the fuel feed tube joins the Hiker+ from the top of the spindle, and it joins the Nova from the side of the spindle, further demonstrating that the Nomad utilizes a Nova burner, not a Hiker+ burner. Mystery solved! Gary postulated that the reason for utilizing the Nova burner is that it can be positioned higher up in the Nomad. Since the Nova burner has the fuel feed joint on the side rather than the top, it makes the plumbing a bit easier, and the burner can be placed above the tank. The tank will then have less heat exposure, and they can use bigger pots. When considering the conditions this stove was designed for, that all fits together, no? The Nova burner was a better choice than the Hiker+ burner, as it gave them the freedom to place the burner in a more favorable position, since they would need to fabricate a new fuel feed tube anyway. Sound like a good hypothesis to y'all? Additionally, Optimus has now addressed the vulnerable fuel feed tube in the Hiker+, and in the current model, a more robust design is utilized. With that out of the way, would someone mind posting a picture of a Nomad tank without the heat shield? I'd be interested to see how they attached the new fuel feed tube. If you made it this far, thanks for trudging through this post! Sorry for being so pedantic, but if you digested all of that, you probably are too!
When I re-posted this Topic on the Nomad, I was not expecting any contributions to be added, so I am very pleased. I will have to try and find my Nomad so I can add more to this thread. As for the Hiker/Nova debate, the very first line in the post was obviously missed . . . . .
G,,day. I am very happy with my Nomad. There are photos of it on here somewhere. Newer model? I use it mainly for cooking while 4WD-ing. Have run it on 2-stroke fuel, diesel, kero. Just to know what it can do. Cheers kerry
Robust engineering is how I would describe it. Built with ruggedness in mind. I've seen the prior posting but am still mesmerized by the lines and build of the mini-armored-tank stove. Thank you for reposting Trevor, sam
