Here's a different version of the 158's Nils already posted since it has the aluminium reflector, and thus the option /2. The text below is a direct quotation from Nils 158-posts since it's a good sum up for the variations of the 158 radiator. The 158 is found with two different types of burners. One is fitted with the 4115 stove burner (as used on the no.15 stove) and is called the 158/15. The other uses the 4047 stove burner (as used on the no. 107 stove) and just uses the number 158. These heaters use the same tank and basic style of the discontnued 1011 so have a 1.75 litre tank. The heaters could be ordered in three different variations. /1 - nickel plated tank with nickel plated brass reflector. /2 - nickel plated tank with polished aluminium reflector. /3 - nickel plated tank with polished copper reflector.
Very nice condition on this one. I wonder if there is a reliable way to measure the heat output of something like this. What I'm thinking of is a comparison between a 1011 and the 158. The 158 uses more fuel, but I'm not sure it gives more heat as a result.
Well it must do because the chemical energy in the extra fuel burned has to go somewhere - it can't just 'disappear'. So if the 158 isn't making more sound or light (which, presumably, it isn't), then it must be giving out more heat...
Yes I know that more fuel means a greater power output. That is fixed by the laws of physics. What I'm thinking though is if there is more 'waste' heat with the 158 than the 1011. What is actually felt is the reflected heat in front of the heater and it just doesn't 'feel' like there is more heat.
@Nils Stephenson I'm also wondering if the 1010 or the 158 gives more heat. My skin says that it comes more warm from 1010. I had both running on kerosene (fotogen) and it felt warmer the 1010. It is possible that they emit different types of radiation and the type from 1010is perceived different that the radiation from 158? The heat from 1010 was similar to my IR heater, if this has a relevance. /Francisc
@Carpedien1982 This is something I have thought about myself, but havn't had a scientific way of measuring it. If you just go on the amount of kerosene burnt, then the 158 should be hotter. The jet size on the 1010 is most likely 0.2mm (originally 0.17mm) and the 158 is 0.3mm. I am guessing that there are more losses with the stove burner heating up the brass dome than the 1010 burner, but as I said that is only a guess. If I need a heater myself I tend to use a 1010 mostly.
If i take another wire mesh heater what feels warm on the skin it will be Tilley R1. The consumption is low ( i still need to measure that). I think we need someone with knowledge of the types of radiation the heaters generate and what type feel warmer fir the skin.
