I have two old MSR XGKs, the pre shaker jet kind from the early 80s era. They still work as well as ever, and I want to hand them down to my descendants. The problem is jets for them are scarce,(the short ones marked XG, for white gas) and not available from MSR anymore. My thoughts when I discovered this were something like: Bastards. They are only 30 years old and still good! How dare they stop making parts for useful gear like this! When I recovered my composure I started to improvise. The thread size is the same as on newer shaker type jets, and newer jets screw in fine, but are too tall by about three turns. The seat at the bottom is the same shape.It should be possible to turn down a new jet to the dimensions of an old one, with a little creativity and machinist nerd determination.It may even work as is. Just chuck one in my electric drill, and apply a file at the correct angle. Nothing fancy, its only brass. Has anyone tried using a new tall jet in an old stove? Would having the jet a couple of millimeters nearer the flame spreader make any difference in function? Will the newer jet seal well enough not to leak flame from around the threads? I will try that experiment, and report the results here. MSR guru advice is welcome. I will give it a try tomorrow after work.
Here's a start from MSR guru Snowgoose MSR Be useful to know the jet identification stamped in your 'tall jet' is. SG or SK presumably, in which case that literature from Snowgoose directs you how to date your stove from the connector block markings to check on compatibility. Anything's possible with machining. John
Hello There, Try this shop its excellent the non-shaker jets, G jet is £3.50 and the K jet is £3.20 the address is www.needlesport.com, hope this helps
If you post a picture I might have some old stock XGK jets at work most of the MSR stuff os unused / older
Thanks everyone for your helpful replies. bolexguy I have sent you a PM. Tonight I ran a side-by-side test using my 81 XGK with the taller shaker type jet marked GK. I used my 84 XGK 2 with the original shorter jet marked X G. The older stove used the latest pump, the XGK2 a black and gray. Next time I will use identical pumps to reduce confounding variables.Too bad I don't have two identical stoves, to make this a better experimental design with one less confounding factor. Both stoves used the two piece X pan wires. Preliminary first run results: The tall jet gave a much hotter flame, a much brighter red color to the burner bell and flame spreader, and a much smaller dark spot in the center, the rest being bright cherry red. The flame was a good three quarters of an inch above the pan wires. The color was a sky blue with some yellow. On the XGK 2 running the original jet, the flame was just touching the pan wires, and was the typical deep blue with no yellow. The XGK 2 has the slightly taller pan wires. Once I shorten them to the same height as the original XGK, and use identical pumps,I can run a side-by-side boil time test. Until then, my pragmatic opinion is that using the newer shaker type G K jet in an older XGK gives a taller hotter flame although the burning characteristics given the yellow present in the flame might indicate more CO production, and a different air mix. A practical solution- the new jets work in older stoves and might give a performance increase over the original shorter jets.Preliminary conclusion only, pending more sophisticated performance data. They fit, and burn hot, and don't leak around the threads So run a new jet in your old XGK and report the results here. We need a bigger sample than just my simple test run. I will continue to fool around with this to see what else I can discover.Trying kerosene with the same GK jet side by side with an original XK jet is first on the list. It will be interesting to compare results. Maybe this is a cheap performance upgrade for these old beasts MSR gurus, and stove worshippers, please help me interpret my results as I have attempted to report them above.
xgk81 You've alluded to the scarcity of XG jets but have you stated the type, source and age of the fuel you're using in these tests? Have you followed the MSR link that presscall provided above to some of the XGK data SNOWGOOSE has provided over the years in the reference gallery and other forums here?
I would not rush to lower the pan supports. A higher pan gives a cleaner burn, probably hotter. Regarding how the flame looks: a picture is worth a thousand words...
Thanks everyone. I have read everything I could find on this site re XGK jets etc. I very much appreciate being able to benefit from the knowledge and experience found here. I am including my latest results, and some more detail. Too many jets to distinguish without photos. I am grateful to Snowgoose, for posting these photos of the original xgk/xgk2 jets I refer to: https://classiccampstoves.com/fusion/gallery/1604/1318880493-R0020258A_opt.jpg The original jets in my stoves are the bottom two in the photo. https://classiccampstoves.com/fusion/gallery/1604/1327693663-R0021423A_opt.jpg The new jet used in this test is the one in this photo marked GK. The new ones sent to me 2 weeks ago by Cascade Designs customer service are the most recent ones for the latest model XGK EX, and are marked GK. Those jets fit both old stoves, burn well, and do not leak. The seat, on close examination, looks identical to the early jet seat. They seem, at this point only my opinion, to burn hot. I ran them continuosly for two hours again tonight at full blast, as a test before I trust them in the bush this winter. Lots of snow to melt in 25 below cold, and I can't afford to guess about something so important. I used the newest sea horse type of pump for this test burn.So far I used Coleman fuel from a can bought this summer and opened for the purpose. As far as I can tell, the differences are the new jet aperture is intended for both kerosene and white gas,(bigger or smaller then the original xg size?) and the jet is a shaker needle type, consequently is taller than the originals, and hollowed out for the needle. I ran my tests without the needle, because I generally don't use them in winter stoves as I have never seen them as better than the old poker I have always used. Not using a needle had no effect that I could see. The test passed with excellent results. In my 81 XGK, and my 84 XGK2, new XGK EX jets marked GK worked well with no complications on an extended burn, simulating an evenings use to melt snow, cook dinner, and provide continous hot tea. I will do a side by side comparison, and will post photos as time allows. Can anyone foresee any practical complications of using these taller jets in old stoves? The jet is now about 4 mm higher under the flame plate. Comments are also welcome about the aperture size in a jet intended for both white gas and kerosene. What will this do to fuel consumption using coleman fuel? Am I missing any possible perils or complications?
https://classiccampstoves.com/fusion/gallery/1604/1327693717-R0021432A_opt.jpg This is a link to Snowgoose' excellent photo of the two jets side by side. Height difference is obvious. I share his feelings about function giving way to fashion when solid fuel line stove production ended. I am one of those who needs a no nonsense simple stove that works every time without fuss or complication. That is why I want to find ways to keep the old XGKs going.
