UST WetFire Tinder with Lightweight, Compact Design
What we analysed
BVR’s AI bot is continuously reading, learning and evolving to generate reviews.
12,185 reviews
covering
52 products
for the category
Camping Emergency Fire Starters
Experiential insights by users
About UST WetFire Tinder with Lightweight, Compact Design
Overall Feedback:
74% positive
71% appreciated its rugged durability, but 29% found it prone to rust
These fire starters are useless after a year or possibly sooner.
I will continue to make and carry my own fire starters as they last 3 to 4 times longer and burn hot enough and long enough to try wet tinder to get a decent fire started.
71% found it easy to use in the dark, while 29% struggled with the mechanism
The fire starters light up quickly and stay lit to get the fire going.
I found that the product works well in starting a fire.
I found it difficult to use the product with a striking rod.
72% praised for its reliable ignition, though 28% experienced issues in windy conditions
Even when other tinder is damp, it works well.
I rated it 1 star because it is flammable but does not burn when wet.
67% appreciated its compact size, but 33% found it too bulky
I led a group of women on a backpacking trip and we spent 3 days in the rain.
I have noticed that the yellow packaged ust wetfire is not as lightweight and easy to travel with like the ust wetfire cubes in white packaging.
Rephrased: The ust wetfire cubes in white packaging are more lightweight and travel-friendly compared to the yellow packaged ones, as I have observed.
88% praised for its water-resistant design, though 12% experienced issues in heavy rain
To make these fire starters work, pile the shaved pieces above the water line.
I recommend the UST wetfire in the white packaging, which is what I want.
I noticed that the cube only burned about half way and then extinguished, indicating that it may not be water resistant as claimed.
