:I would guess that yes this is the case. [[User:Tom Sponheim|Tom Sponheim]] ([[User talk:Tom Sponheim|talk]]) 22:13, April 28, 2014 (UTC)

:I would guess that yes this is the case. [[User:Tom Sponheim|Tom Sponheim]] ([[User talk:Tom Sponheim|talk]]) 22:13, April 28, 2014 (UTC)

+

+

:When I raised the question I had the notion that the more sun you collect, the more you should be able to heat your water in a given amount of time. Picture a large magnifyng glass vs a small. So I thought it would be accurate to "weight" performance based on the amoung of insolated area. For example, if I have 1 square meter of insolated area and another cooker with 2 square meters of insolated area. And each increased the water temperature by 50 degrees in one hour, then the one square meter would have a temperature increase of 50 degrees per square meter and the 2 meter cooker would have a temperature increase of 25 degrees per square meter of insolation. [[User:Jimjola|Jimjola]] ([[User talk:Jimjola|talk]]) 16:03, May 2, 2014 (UTC)

If a large solar cooker and a small solar cooker both raise the temperature of a liter of water the same amount over the same time period - are they equal in performance? 68.6.8.94 14:56, April 28, 2014 (UTC)

I would guess that yes this is the case. Tom Sponheim (talk) 22:13, April 28, 2014 (UTC)

When I raised the question I had the notion that the more sun you collect, the more you should be able to heat your water in a given amount of time. Picture a large magnifyng glass vs a small. So I thought it would be accurate to "weight" performance based on the amoung of insolated area. For example, if I have 1 square meter of insolated area and another cooker with 2 square meters of insolated area. And each increased the water temperature by 50 degrees in one hour, then the one square meter would have a temperature increase of 50 degrees per square meter and the 2 meter cooker would have a temperature increase of 25 degrees per square meter of insolation. Jimjola (talk) 16:03, May 2, 2014 (UTC)