{"id":34419,"date":"2021-10-07T08:28:00","date_gmt":"2021-10-07T11:28:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/geartips.club\/blog\/comparative-test-of-thermal-cups-arell-camelbak-coleman-and-stanley\/"},"modified":"2021-10-07T08:28:00","modified_gmt":"2021-10-07T11:28:00","slug":"comparative-test-of-thermal-cups-arell-camelbak-coleman-and-stanley","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/geartips.club\/blog\/en\/comparative-test-of-thermal-cups-arell-camelbak-coleman-and-stanley\/","title":{"rendered":"Comparative Test of Thermal Cups \u2013 Arell, CamelBak, Coleman, and Stanley"},"content":{"rendered":"

If you follow our experiments and tests at the Gear Tips Lab<\/strong>, you\u2019ve likely seen our videos and posts about thermal cups<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

We initially conducted a comparative test between a glass cup<\/strong> and a stainless steel vacuum-insulated thermal cup<\/strong><\/a> from the brand 360\u00ba (a brand belonging to Sea to Summit), to show the difference in performance regarding thermal insulation and the temperature increase of the liquid (in this case, Patagonia beer) over time. The result was obvious: the thermal cup\u2019s performance is far superior. But we didn\u2019t stop there!<\/p>\n

After this initial experiment, we conducted a comparative test between thermal cups from 360\u00ba, CamelBak, NTK, and Stanley<\/a><\/strong>. The results were impressive, showing that the most efficient thermal cup, both for cold and hot liquids, is the one from CamelBak<\/strong>. After publishing the video<\/a> on our YouTube channel and the post<\/a> on our website, we received a huge number of requests for new tests with cups from other brands. That\u2019s why we decided to carry out the test, whose results are presented below.<\/p>\n

But first, a few important considerations:<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

1 \u2013 Some people asked whether the lids of thermal cups influenced the test results, as each brand has slightly different lids. We were certain that for hot liquids, the lid made a difference. But for cold liquids, we weren\u2019t sure. So, we conducted a comparative test with two identical thermal cups \u2014 one with a lid and one without<\/a><\/strong>. We chose the CamelBak<\/strong> cup for this comparison since it was the winner of the first comparative test.<\/p>\n

We’re detailing this point to explain why, in this new test comparing cups from Arell<\/strong>, CamelBak<\/strong>, Coleman<\/strong>, and Stanley<\/strong>, we chose to run the test only with cold liquid, and removed the lids from all cups \u2014 precisely because they don\u2019t significantly affect cold liquid performance.<\/p>\n

2 \u2013 We included the CamelBak<\/strong> cup, winner of the previous comparative test, to see how it would perform against new contenders.<\/p>\n

3 \u2013 Many people questioned whether the Stanley<\/strong> cup used in the first test was fake. The answer is no. It was not fake, but an older version. So, we decided to buy a current version of the brand\u2019s cup and put it to the test in this new comparison.<\/p>\n

4 \u2013 We decided the Arell<\/strong> and Coleman<\/strong> cups for this competition because they were the most requested by our YouTube audience. We\u2019ll soon be conducting more tests with other brands, but only those officially distributed in Brazil.<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"Gear<\/p>\n

We received many comments asking why we didn\u2019t conduct the test at the beach, by the pool, or in a warm, sunny place \u2014 simulating the real-world use of thermal cups. That\u2019s why it\u2019s worth noting that this is the Gear Tips Lab<\/strong>, our testing lab, and there\u2019s a reason for that.<\/p>\n

As explained in other articles, one of the biggest challenges in equipment comparison is maintaining consistent conditions throughout the entire test and conducting the tests simultaneously whenever possible.<\/p>\n

Additionally, defining specific parameters and conditions is essential for test replicability and for validating results or testing new thermal cups.<\/p>\n

In the case of thermal cups, this is even more important due to the large number of models on the market. Our temperature measuring equipment has four probes, which allows comparison of only four cups at a time. If we couldn\u2019t maintain consistent conditions across tests, we wouldn\u2019t be able to compare so many models fairly.<\/p>\n

\"Comparative<\/p>\n

TEST CONDITIONS:<\/strong>
\n– Average Ambient Temperature: 24.8 \u00baC
\n– Initial Temperature of Patagonia Amber Lager beer: -0.8 \u00baC\n<\/div>\n

The test was conducted with all four thermal cups simultaneously to avoid any variation in the above conditions, since all cups were in the same room, at the same ambient temperature, and with the same liquid.<\/p>\n

TESTED EQUIPMENT:<\/strong>
\n– Arell 500 ml 304 Stainless Steel Double-Wall Vacuum-Insulated Cup without lid<\/a>
\n– CamelBak 500 ml 18\/8 Stainless Steel Double-Wall Vacuum-Insulated Cup without lid<\/a>
\n– Coleman 600 ml 340 Stainless Steel Double-Wall Vacuum-Insulated Cup without lid
\n– Stanley 475 ml 18\/8 Stainless Steel Double-Wall Vacuum-Insulated Cup without lid\n<\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"Thermal
\nGear Tips Lab set up for evaluating thermal cups from Arell, CamelBak, Coleman, and Stanley<\/span><\/p>\n

We also used the following equipment from the Gear Tips Lab<\/strong>:<\/p>\n

\nMEASURING EQUIPMENT USED:<\/strong>
\n– Kestrel 5500 Portable Weather Station
\n– Extech SDL200 Four-Channel Digital Thermometer with Data Logger and Type K Thermocouple Sensor (-100 to 1300 \u00baC), 0.1 \u00baC resolution, \u00b11 \u00b0C accuracy
\n– Fluke 561 HVAC Pro Lasergrip Infrared Thermometer (-40 to 550 \u00baC), 0.1 \u00baC resolution, \u00b10.1 \u00baC accuracy\n<\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

Thermal cup test with cold liquids<\/h2>\n

The first test was conducted using Patagonia Amber Lager beer<\/strong>. We started the test simultaneously with the beer at a temperature of -0.8 \u00baC. Below is a brief summary of the test:<\/p>\n

Initial Beer Temperature: -0.8 \u00baC
\nFinal Beer Temperature: 20 \u00baC
\nMeasured Temperatures: 5 \u00baC, 10 \u00baC, 15 \u00baC, and 20 \u00baC
\nExperiment Start Time: 09h 13min 03sec
\nExperiment End Time: 11h 39min 03sec (next day)
\nTotal Experiment Time: 26h 26min 00sec<\/p>\n

In the graph below (Time vs Temperature Increase<\/strong>), we can clearly see that the cup with the best thermal efficiency is the CamelBak<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

\"Cold<\/p>\n

To help interpret the graph, below are the times it took for the beer in each cup to reach the defined temperature levels (5 \u00baC, 10 \u00baC, 15 \u00baC, and 20 \u00baC):<\/p>\n

\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n <\/colgroup>\n <\/table>\n \n \n \n<\/div>\n\n

In the graph below (Temperature Increase vs. Time<\/strong>), we see another interpretation of the data, where it\u2019s clear once again that the CamelBak<\/strong> and Arell<\/strong> cups had very similar thermal efficiency for cold liquids during the first 5 hours of the test \u2014 the two curves are nearly overlapping. Later on, the curves diverge, and the CamelBak<\/strong> stands out. Additionally, we see that the Coleman<\/strong> and Stanley<\/strong> cups do not perform well thermally, as the beer temperature rises significantly in the early hours of the test.<\/p>\n

\"Cold<\/p>\n

Thermal cup ranking for cold liquids<\/h2>\n

1st Place:<\/strong> CamelBak
\n2nd Place:<\/strong> Arell
\n3rd Place:<\/strong> Coleman
\n4th Place:<\/strong> Stanley<\/p>\n

\"Thermal
\nArell, CamelBak, and Coleman thermal cups during testing<\/span><\/p>\n

Thermal cup prices<\/h2>\n

The list below shows the current prices (October\/2021) of the thermal cups tested in this experiment. Prices may vary between stores, and those shown are the brands\u2019 suggested retail prices:<\/p>\n

    \n
  • Arell:<\/strong> R$ 159.00 (without lid \u2014 lid sold separately for R$ 49.00)<\/li>\n
  • CamelBak:<\/strong> R$ 239.90 (with lid)<\/li>\n
  • Coleman:<\/strong> R$ 199.90 (with lid)<\/li>\n
  • Stanley:<\/strong> R$ 199.00 (with lid and bottle opener)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

    Watch the full video of this thermal cup comparison!<\/p>\n