Stanley Legendary 1,9 l, water lukewarm after less than 30 hours

Submitted by Loobeensky t3_xy13lk in BuyItForLife

Hello everyone!

I've recently bought a Stanley vacuum bottle storing 1,9 l of liquid. Got it so I could boil lots of water once and then use it to make tea for 2 days. I have primed it and filled yesterday around 1 pm. To my surprise the content is merely lukewarm now. And it's been barely 28 hours or so. I have to say though that I have been opening and closing it and there was less and less water in it so maybe that's the cause. Anyway, it seems to be intact, no dents etc. and I reckon if the vacuum was messed up somehow, I could feel the water temperature being distributed to the outer chassis which doesn't happen, everything is cold to the touch.

Is this normal and my expectations were just unrealistic or did I get a faulty piece somehow?

/Edit: I have tested the thermos as advised. 48 hours without touching the bottle and the water is still hot enough to make a tea with it, if needed (not boiling though, but that shouldn't be a surprise). So Stanley definitely delivers, just not entirely the way I was expecting :D

2

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

KosmicTom t1_irev5j4 wrote

Expecting a thermos to keep water hot for 3 days seems absurd to me.

39

Loobeensky OP t1_irey2t2 wrote

Hey, don't look at me, look at their page: "This bottle can hold an entire pot of coffee—or whatever else you may be drinking—keeping it hot or cold for up to 45 hours."

So I assume there must be some circumstances when it's possible.

4

[deleted] t1_irf4b3n wrote

Idk man, 45 hours is barely 2 days, not 3.

13

Loobeensky OP t1_irf7g25 wrote

Yeah, my mistake and ~2 days would be enough but it doesn't even deliver this, probably because of the reasons stated in other comments.

5

KosmicTom t1_irf6w8o wrote

>an entire pot of coffee—or whatever else you may be drinking

Yeah, that's when it's full. Not opening it up constantly and draining part of the contents.

It's full of 100 C water, then you open it and pour some out, what do you think is the temp of all that air you just let in?

And "up to 45 hours" is a far cry from the 72 you want.

8

Loobeensky OP t1_irf7p6r wrote

Yeah, my mistake, was supposed to be 2 days, don't ask me how I went from 45h to 3 days :D Still, 28h is a bit of a bummer but at least I know why it's happening.

1

matthias7600 t1_irewnfy wrote

If the vacuum is what gives it the edge in conserving thermal energy, opening and closing it isn't doing you any favors. To answer your question, never in my life have I heard of someone trying to boil water for tea they don't intend to brew for another 48 hours.

10

Loobeensky OP t1_irey7vt wrote

If you ever paid as much for gas/electricity as we do now in the Netherlands, you'd understand 😁

But yeah, figured that opening and closing is probably affecting the temperature retention to a certain degree. Didn't know it messes it up that much though.

Anyway, thanks!

3

facebook57 t1_irfe1nc wrote

This is a hilarious workaround to reduce your energy costs

4

Loobeensky OP t1_irfoq4e wrote

Well... Can't switch bulbs to LEDs cause I already did it. Can't limit my computer-related electricity usage cause I work from home. Can't unplug devices in standby mode cause I already do this. Landlord doesn't want to upgrade the fridge. If I don't want to freeze, I can't permanently unplug the electric heater in my bathroom either.

The price of electricity is capped but only up to 2900kWh per year for a household, I usually use 3700 so something needs to go if I don't want my gas/electricity bill alone to devour half of my salary.

What I can still do is to switch from heating water in a 1000W kettle 7–10 times a day to heating it once and putting the water in a vacuum bottle to have hot drinks for the whole day ¯_(ツ)_/¯

0

BoilerButtSlut t1_irfykpn wrote

You're not really going to save anything by doing this. The amount of energy is going to be close to the same if you do it in one big batch rather than a bunch of smaller ones.

Eliminating tea entirely would be the better bet.

Historically the biggest cuplrit of energy is a fridge and electric water heater. Everything else is noise.

6

Loobeensky OP t1_irg3at5 wrote

If I was a camel, I could do that, not drink tea, that is. But I have to drink, sadly, tap water needs to be boiled anyway and buying bottled water would cost muuuch more than boiling what I already have.

Boiling lots of liquid at once would equal boiling smaller quantities more often if not for the energy losses due to the kettle getting warm and stuff. I know it's going to be really marginal and yet, small numbers sum up eventually.

−1

notreally_real_ t1_irgl7iu wrote

Are you on well water? I've heard the tap water in the Netherlands is very safe

3

Loobeensky OP t1_iri65wl wrote

The water itself is perfect, afaik the best or one the best in Europe but I'm afraid the same cannot be said about the pipes in my rental from the 50's :,)

2

Joaquox t1_irhj0t2 wrote

Maybe see if you can replace the seals on the fridge if they are old. The fridge is likely pulling way more than your cup of tea.

2

Loobeensky OP t1_iri6dpo wrote

That's a very good advice too, thanks! It's possible that the current ones are compelety messed up, every month I end up with a 3cm thick layer of icy buildup, never had it freezing this bad before tbh.

1

kitier_katba t1_iricuos wrote

Yeah, your fridge is the source of most of your energy probs then.

2

Joaquox t1_iriiian wrote

Yeah, then it's leaking, that's not supposed to happen! They are usually cheap, so even if the landlord won't pay for it, might be worth to just swallow the cost.

2

IsMyNameBen t1_irfnm38 wrote

You're still using the energy though, just in one chunk rather than several. Water takes a fixed amount of energy to heat up (per volume), so all you're getting out of this arrangement is rubbish tea.

The only reason boiling it all at once would make sense would be if your energy was considerably cheaper at certain times of day, but even then, you only need 24h.

2

Loobeensky OP t1_irfp5td wrote

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/678761/energy-used-to-boil-a-full-kettle-once-vs-boiling-enough-water-for-a-cup-multipl

Excuse me, I'm not a barbarian, I did my research before I've decided to buy Stanley's portable murder weapon to save electricity by boiling one big pot of water a day :D

Yeah, that's also something I wanted to do: to boil it all at night when it's cheaper and have it ready for the next day.

2

fatherofraptors t1_irun1kh wrote

What's your price per kWh, how much energy does you kettle use and for long does it run before it boils a batch of water? How much did the vacuum bottle cost?

I'm really having a hard time seeing how this can have a reasonable payback period considering how little energy we're talking about saving here.

1

jiqiren t1_is0jc2s wrote

Dunno how it works in Europe but in US (I’m in Oregon) the state licenses “Home Energy Assessors” that can audit your homes energy usage. This means all appliances are checked, weather stripping, windows, doors etc. They can give you a big list of improvements you can make to slash your energy bill.

If renting an apartment you can at least look at your appliances etc.

Side note: I have near-boiling water on demand on tap and it uses very little energy. My model is about 8 years old now but there are newer ones that are even better: https://www.realhomes.com/buying-guides/the-best-boiling-water-taps

2

pvtdirtpusher t1_irezj2n wrote

As said by others, the opening and closing is the killer. Not only are you exposing the contents of the thermos to air in the short term, you literally taking hot liquid and replacing it with room temperature air. Meaning that the thermos has both less thermal mass ( an subsequently easier to heat up) but now has to equalize in temperature with the room tell air now inside the closed thermos.

Fully primed, filled and left untouched,, I would expect it to last close to full time they specify

5

gravitas_shortage t1_irf0gpk wrote

Worth a test. My hunch was that unless the bottle is left uncapped for extended amount of time, it should not fall that quick, but then the smaller model has only half the expected hotness time, so maybe thermal mass is that important for a thermos bottle and I'm just capping my ignorance with more ignorance and should withdraw from this thread and perhaps civilisation altogether.

2

Loobeensky OP t1_irf1gua wrote

Half the expected hotness time? I splurge to have the most effective thermos and that's what I get? What a disappointment.

(I'd be more than satisfied with 28–30h of properly hot water though.)

Now I wonder if their "indestructible" model performs better.

The expected temperature retention goes up with the size of the bottle, so I had big plans for this boi.

1

gravitas_shortage t1_irf25st wrote

It can go two ways:

- Thermal mass is a major factor.

- The ratio of surface area to volume in a big bottle is much smaller, so the heat loss is much smaller.

Both ways can be true and act in opposite directions.

We need thermal measurements over time and volume, OP. For Science.

6

gravitas_shortage t1_irf6hhz wrote

Also, I'm glad to report that I just checked, and it is not the case that there is a point of emptiness at which the larger bottle gets a smaller volume-to-area ratio than the smaller one. So, no need to get a smaller bottle depending on your expected consumption in order to preserve the heat. Whew.

2

Loobeensky OP t1_irf0f3s wrote

Thank you for you answer! Yeah, that makes lots of sense. Time for some proper testing without opening the bottle.

1

gravitas_shortage t1_irewsyf wrote

Stanley themselves say their bottle will keep things hot for 24 hours. The laws of physics are harsh - the vacuum flask cannot contain a perfect vacuum to eliminate conduction and convection, it cannot be contained magnetically to prevent the plastic from transmitting some heat, heat is lost when you open the bottle, and no material blocks radiation perfectly.

4

Loobeensky OP t1_irexl79 wrote

I wonder if I've missed something then because they claim that the 1,9 l version should keep the contents hot for more than 40 hours 🤔 But as Matthias said below and as I suspected, it's probably the whole deal of opening and closing the bottle.

1

gravitas_shortage t1_irezk54 wrote

You're absolutely right, that model does say 45h here: https://eu.stanley1913.com/products/classic-legendary-bottle-2-0-qt and I'm wrong.

In that case, I'd return it for a replacement or refund. And since Stanley has a very bad reputation for customer service: don't take any shit if they try to wriggle out on some fine print defining hot as 'hotter than Connecticut in a snow blizzard', their site says 'keep coffee hot for 45h' and coffee has a well-accepted requirement for proper hotness. Take a screenshot of the web page, just in case.

Edit: I'd measure the time it stays uncapped first, as pvtdirtpusher said. I'd still argue /some/ amount of pouring out over time is expected from normal use.

3

Loobeensky OP t1_irfuugq wrote

Yeah, I'd say their promised 45h should include some pouring to even be a relevant piece of info about the product; on the other hand, it'd be a bit naïve to expect a company not to brag about the efficiency even if it's achievable only in optimal conditions.

1

Mountain_Man_88 t1_irf9jts wrote

>Hot or cold for up to 45 hours.

Up to 45 hours. Not 45 hours guaranteed. Also can be easier to keep things cold. Also depends on the environmental conditions, the temperature of the stuff you put in there, and whether you keep opening it. Also what you consider to be "hot." To some, hot would just mean noticably above room temperature. To others it would mean too hot to drink.

Just freeze you boiled water for it's boiled for later /s

3

Loobeensky OP t1_irfxlia wrote

>Up to 45 hours. Not 45 hours guaranteed.

You have a point. I had pretty good experience with Sho bottles which really keep stuff HOT for the promised 12 hours, so I figured that Stanley, a much more respected brand, is SURELY going to deliver 1:1. My bad.

1

SunflowerDune t1_irf6snr wrote

Did you prime the thermos before? With prime I mean fill it with some hot water, let it rest for a few minutes and then pour it out. After that you fill it up properly.

edit: I’m not saying this will give the desired 48 hours but it will be better.

2

Loobeensky OP t1_irf91ff wrote

Sadly I did, so not much can be improved in this aspect. I guess I'll just need to stomach that my XXXL, family-of-6-sized thermos cannot be used the way I wanted to use it 🥲

2

SunflowerDune t1_irfaksy wrote

Sorry to hear that. Perhaps there is another way? How are you boiling the water? If you’re looking to cut down on electricity costs a water boiler is more efficient that a stove.

Another thing could be a commercial thermos, but I don’t know how long they hold heat.

2

Loobeensky OP t1_irombcn wrote

I use a water boiler (a 1000W one, what a scary number) so I guess there just no way of cutting the cost of my teas any further unless I get a private spring and solar panels :D Thanks for help! :)

1

SunflowerDune t1_iroo26b wrote

I guess you have a new product idea there: solar powered tea maker.

Last resort could be going over to ice tea instead :)

2

Ill-ConceivedVenture t1_irffgqa wrote

Have you done any tests? I'm assuming the 45 hours claim is under ideal conditions. So create ideal conditions and see if you can hit 45.

Prime it with water as hot as possible, then fill it with hot liquid, then leave it for 44 hours before opening it.

2

Loobeensky OP t1_irolhap wrote

I actually finished testing the bottle today. After more than 45h the water was pretty hot, so the bottle is gucci :)

1

Brandon3541 t1_irl12ke wrote

Best case scenarios tend to assume that:

A) the thermos is full of the heated liquid (no void space, water has a higher specific heat than air)

B) the thermos is never opened (heat rapidly escapes during this time)

C) The thermos itself is preheated (to stop it from sapping any heat from the liquid)

D) it is left in a room temperature room (so no throwing it out in the snow).

2

--Hercules-- t1_irloh2s wrote

U just sound like a complainer from the comments lmao

1