That is a very interesting question. I have a Primus Omnifuel, and it is just one fabulous stove. If I were to try to compare the Omnifuel to the XGK, I might say that the Omnifuel is like a very fine high precision automobile like, say a Porsche. It's beautiful. Just running the plunger up and down is enough to give a machinist wet dreams. I mean the thing is a work of art. The XGK on the other hand is more like a Sherman Tank: nothing fancy, but tough as nails and able to keep on coming when everything around it is down for the count.

Which would I choose? Well, it depends. What trip am I going on, what are the conditions under which I will operate, and what kinds of things will I demand of my stove? For "real" cooking, the Omnifuel with its ability to simmer wins hands down. For convenience, again the Omnifuel with its ability to run on canister gas wins hands down.

But take me out in the boonies where there's fuel of questionable quality or only "make do" fuels are available, and I'll take an XGK. If I'm going to be in some remote village in South America burning God only knows how crappy fuel oil #2 or some other such abomination, then there's no other stove I'd rather have than the XGK.

The Omnifuel, like I say, is a precision work of art. But don't try to run dirty third world kerosene through it. Run that same fuel through an XGK, and it won't run perfectly, but it will run.

Backpacker and author Colin Fletcher relates the story of how on a trip to the Grand Canyon, he grabbed the wrong fuel bottle. Instead of Coleman fuel, he grabbed the fuel intended for his chain saw, a fuel consisting of 30 weight motor oil and automotive gasoline (leaded I assume). Fletcher reports that he feared for his supper, but the XGK ran. The XGK didn't run quite at 100%, but it did run and got him through a week's worth of backpacking until he got to his next cache.

I would not even think of running a 30 weight motor oil and auto gasoline combo in a Primus Omnifuel.

HJ