Thermos flasks

Too  many  tests  of  this  type  rely  on  Personal  Opinion  where  what  we  really  need  is  a  Measurable  Rating  which  can  be  compared  between  item  A  &  item  B  etc.

The review of thermos flasks in the February 2016 issue of the CC magazine was really unhelpful. The primary purpose of a flask is to maintain the temperature of its contens, yet one review said "A great piece of kit.....designed for serious outdoor enthusiats" immediately after saying "the metal exterior became very hot very quickly" which must mean the contents loses heat quickly. It would be a more helpful review if the temperature after a given length of time in each of the flasks.was given.and not just a quote from the manufactuers brochures, or the phrase 'piping hot'.(How hot is that?)

Oh how I agree with you!  Modern steel vaccuum flasks just don't compare with their 'glass' ancestors.  Things like these tests should be subjective - and things that can be measured should be.  We find that several flasks we've bought recently just haven't kept our coffee hot............ and I'd like to buy one which I know is the best in the market for just that purpose - not how it looks, or how it fits in a pocket, or whatever.

I must admit I've stopped reading these sort of reviews, after reading reviews of a torch that we voted as 'absolutely carp' because it fell to bits after a very short use, but which came out top in their tests.

One of the problems with stainless steel flasks is that everyone thinks they are indestructible. The trouble is that hard knocks can sometimes damage the seal between the inner and outer and one hint that this has happened is when the outside gets as hot as the contents. Generally if you want a reliable steel flask you have to invest the money in one. The beauty of the glass inners is that they will always work whilst they are intact.

The trouble with product reviews in the magazine they are just that not tests. For that its best to go somewhere like Which.

David

The thread was about the quality of the review not about the relative merits of different types of vacuum flasks.

I agree that this review is not very useful because it is too subjective and no detail is given. (I think Valda meant that the review should NOT be subjective). I agree that Which would be better; however, I don't see why the magazine could not do proper tests (in the review the coment that "we tested the medium version" suggests that the writer thinks it was a test) rather than excuse the magazine because it always does things that way.

The OP is wrong about the outside getting hot. That comment was referring to the "insulated lid which doubles as a mug" and not to the flask itself.

Finally, whilst I agree it would be good to get more specific comparisons about how well they kept the contents hot, piping hot means very hot by any standard and probably means more to most people than a specific temperature. How many people know how hot tea or coffee should be to drink enjoyably but comfortably and safely?     

is it just me but should a review of a thermos flask be in the club magazine, a club which is about caravaning and motorhoming? While I agree that a good thermos is useful it is not really an essential piece of caravan/MH equipment (or is it - I am willinging to be convinced). Surely a thermos isn't that much use to Mher's with their kitchen with them at all times? (again or it is?)

A review of caravn toilet paper/branded v non branded blue stuff/awning lights/caravan steps/rock pegs/caravan table ware/electric kettles/pillows/awning mats/awning tables...all these are much more related to caravans than  a thermos?

When we are towing and need the, at our age, obligatory "comfort stops" we normally have a thermos of hot water for our tea/coffee ,rather than pay the outrageuos prices in service areas

I’m not sure that the author even performed any tests. There were few scientific measurements and no comparison table. Absolutely useless as a buying guide, other than knowing that such flasks exist. A school kid could’ve done better.

How much do they actually hold, how well do they pour, do they leak, how long do they stay above 40°C for, do they survive a drop, are they easy to pocket/carry, …? The article raises more questions than answers. The author should seek employment elsewhere.

I assume the article was a “dead donkey”, just filling space. Do they have nothing of substance to publish? When might we learn more about the member survey they started to tell us about? Perhaps that will be just as lacking.

I'm impressed that some people actually read it!