Reviews you can trust.
See why.The Best Chimney Starters
If you grill with charcoal, you need a chimney starter. Does it matter which one you buy?
We still love our longtime favorite chimney starter, the Weber Rapidfire Chimney Starter. But we now also recommend its smaller sibling, the Weber Rapidfire Compact Chimney Starter. Its more compact profile makes it ideal for cooks who go camping often, grill exclusively on a portable charcoal grill, or use charcoal smokers.
Top Picks
What You Need To Know
Lighter fluid is petroleum- or alcohol-based, so it can impart unpleasant flavors to grilled food. This is why we always use a chimney starter instead to light charcoal. These simple devices, shaped like giant metal mugs, generally consist of a cylindrical body with a handle and two stacked chambers: the top one for charcoal and the bottom one for the fuel used to light that charcoal, typically newspaper or a charcoal starter (we prefer two gently crumpled sheets of newspaper).
We've used the Weber Rapidfire Chimney Starter for years, but it's been slightly updated with a more ergonomic handle since we last tested, and there are new options on the market that promise to make the whole process faster and easier. So is our old winner still the best? To find out, we rounded up several widely available chimney starters, including the updated version of our former favorite.
We put the chimney starters to work, using them to light various amounts of charcoal and pour the briquettes out in different formations to represent the many ways we cook on a grill, from quick, high-heat recipes such as traditional burgers to low-and-slow projects such as pulled pork. For full-size models, we started with the most basic coal formation, 6 quarts of charcoal in a single-level fire. Then we tried a smaller amount, 3 quarts (often referred to as a “half chimney”), in a two-level fire, in which the coals are banked on one side of the grill to create a hotter zone and a cooler zone. Lastly, we tested with another two-level charcoal formation, using the maximum amount of charcoal we typically call for, 7 quarts. We timed how long it took to light the coals, rating each starter on how much charcoal it could hold and how easy it was to use. For smaller models, we filled them to their maximum capacities and used them to light charcoal in charcoal smokers, timing how long it took and rating them on how easy they were to use.
A Faster Fire
It can take a while for a chimney to bring its charcoal from cold to evenly dusted with ash (the visual cue we use to determine the charcoal's readiness)—between 20 and 40 minutes, depending on the amount of charcoal. We studied the design of the chambers, but none of the starters' ventilation features consistently tracked with faster, easier-to-light fires. One thing that did make a difference: the size of the starter's fuel chamber, the space on the bottom where the newspaper goes. One of the models had an exceptionally small fuel chamber thanks to a large pipe that was ostensibly designed to pull in more oxygen to fuel the fire but took away some of the usable space. In this instance, the two sheets of newspaper th...
Everything We Tested
Highly Recommended
- Capacity: 3 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 3 stars out of 3.
Our previous winner is still the best option and, at $14.99, it's also one of the least expensive models we tested. It always felt comfortable and secure thanks to its two handles: a roomy, comfortable primary handle that stayed cool and a slim secondary handle that helped us lift heavy loads and guided our pouring. Its sturdy cylindrical body was easy to load, lift, and pour from in a controlled manner. It also had two generously sized chambers; the top one held sufficient charcoal for all our recipes while the bottom one fit two full sheets of loosely crumpled newspaper and allowed for plenty of air circulation for quick and easy lighting.
- Capacity: 3 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 3 stars out of 3.
The smaller version of our top pick, this chimney starter holds slightly less than 3 quarts of briquettes. Its smaller size makes it ideal for cooks who need to light fewer briquettes at a time—such as when using a portable charcoal grill or lighting a charcoal smoker. It’s also great for folks who want a more compact chimney starter for camping trips. While its newspaper chamber is proportionately smaller than our winner’s, it’s still roomy enough to fit two sheets of newspaper (or a charcoal starter) easily, making it a breeze to light. It doesn’t have a helper handle, but because it’s so small, we didn’t miss it—even when filled to the brim, this starter is light enough to guide in the right direction.
Recommended
- Capacity: 3 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 2 stars out of 3.
The largest model we tested, this square starter fit the maximum amount of charcoal we required. It's collapsible for easy storage and was fairly simple to break down and set up, but it felt a little rickety compared with the noncollapsible cylindrical models. Testers also preferred pouring from the round starters because the curve directed the coals downward; when we dumped the coals from this boxy model, they slipped around a bit coming off the straight edge, making it harder for testers to direct them. That said, it was easy to light and had a comfortable handle and secondary helper handle to support its weight and guide pouring. It also came with a second grate that can be placed on top of the starter to turn it into a mini grill; we did not test this feature.
Not Recommended
- Capacity: 3 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 1.5 stars out of 3.
This model fit the largest amount of charcoal, but its trigger, designed so you can dump out the coals from the bottom (through the fuel chamber) instead of tipping them out of the top, was more trouble than it was worth. It was positioned between the handle and the canister, right in the way of our grip, so we had to either carefully maneuver around it (especially awkward with gloves on) or risk accidentally engaging it and dumping the coals prematurely. Also, the trigger allowed for zero control or finesse; when you pull it, the coals immediately dump in a flash of sparks, so you can't disperse them as you dispense. This meant we had to do lots of rearranging with a pair of grill tongs to get our banked or two-level fires. Another downside is that the plate separating the two chambers sits on top of a pin and flaps open (it's fixed on all the other models). This meant that we had to crumple the newspaper into the bottom chamber carefully, without pressing against the plate, or it opened into the top chamber.
- Capacity: 1 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 2 stars out of 3.
This sturdy, cylindrical model made it easy to pour charcoal out in a controlled manner, but it simply didn't hold enough of it. Three quarts, which we typically refer to as a half chimney, was the only standard recipe amount that fit. When full, the starter was about 20 briquettes shy of 6 quarts; a full 7 quarts was not an option. Additionally, its slim wooden handle was a bit insubstantial for some testers and got hot quickly.
- Capacity: 1 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 2 stars out of 3.
This basic model was sturdy and easy to pour from, but it was too small. It could hold only about 5 quarts of charcoal—far short of the 6 or 7 quarts required for many of our recipes. Plus, its wooden handle was thin and got hot fast.
- Capacity: 1 stars out of 3.
- Ease of Use: 2 stars out of 3.
This starter could hold only about 5 quarts of charcoal—not enough for the full or mounded chimneys many recipes require. It was also hard to light, thanks to a large pipe in its fuel chamber purportedly designed to allow in more oxygen and speed things up. Because the pipe takes up so much space, two sheets of newspaper were packed too tightly inside to light properly; when we tried one sheet, it wasn't enough to start the briquettes, so they just smoldered. The pipe can also be used to hold an attachable fan (for an additional $50.00) that supposedly blows air over the coals to speed up the process, but considering this starter's limited charcoal capacity, we didn't bother testing the fan.
Reviews you can trust
Reviews you can trust
The mission of America’s Test Kitchen Reviews is to find the best equipment and ingredients for the home cook through rigorous, hands-on testing. We stand behind our winners so much that we even put our seal of approval on them.
Hannah Crowley
Hannah is an executive editor for ATK Reviews and cohost of Gear Heads on YouTube.
Miye Bromberg
Miye is a senior editor for ATK Reviews. She covers booze, blades, and gadgets of questionable value.