# The not-so-difficult to run EPA stove



## Steve NW WI (Jan 20, 2014)

There have been comments in another thread about how difficult the newer "EPA stoves" are to operate. Last night, I lit my stove from cold, and took pics from an empty firebox till reload today. If I had a time lapse option on the camera, I'd have used it, you'll just have to settle for pics of each step that I clicked manually.

Before fire temp. Timestamp on the camera of 6:42 PM (add 4 hours for actual times, my camera clock must not be set right):




An empty firebox, 6:42 also:




Loaded. Mostly oak, a stick of elm on the right, and some pine to get going quick, also half of one of those fire starter bricks, cause I got a box of em for Christmas. Noodles would have worked just as good. 6:45PM:



Leave the door cracked open till you've got some good fire going, 6:55PM




Wait just a bit longer to get the wood charred and starting to coal, then turn down the single control lever. 7:23 PM. This seems like it's taking a long time, it is, partly due to me making some supper while I was at it, and partly from being a full-cold start. Reloading onto coals is much faster, as you'll see later.



Come back just shy of 10 hours later, to enough coals for a quick relight, 5:20 AM:



Add a few sticks of pine, enough to last till I fill it before work (about 4 hours):



Open control lever all the way and close door - top of stove temp at time of reload was still 300° 5:22 AM:



Let it fire up for a few minutes, and close the control lever and wander off to see what's up in AS land. 5:25AM:




Temp just seconds later, still up 5 degrees from the start of the process, despite a 10° drop in outside temps:




So easy a caveman could do it. Aliens apparently have a harder time with it though.


----------



## nathon918 (Jan 20, 2014)

what are those? KD spruce in the last 2 pics? if so you could light that with a match...


----------



## Steve NW WI (Jan 20, 2014)

Scrap from work. Pine/fir/spruce something. I'm OK at figuring out what flavor wood is in it's upright and growing state, but by the time it's lumber I can just tell you it ain't hardwood. It is pretty near match light, but so's my elm with all the strings hanging off it. 2 year dried oak needs just a little more convincing to get going, but not much.

While I'm here, current stove top temp is 600°, basement temp of 75° (on the little white egg thermometer in the pics, about 20' from the stove), and outside temp of 14°.


----------



## Chris-PA (Jan 20, 2014)

Yup, came downstairs this morning, basement still warm and the old furnace blower still on (it wasn't that cold out) and raked small amount of coals to the center. Added a large ash split on either side and three others across the top. Left the door cracked while I poured some cereal, went down and closed it up (inlet still open). Ate my breakfast, closed down the inlet and left for work.


----------



## oldspark (Jan 20, 2014)

So is the OP trying to pick a fight, difficult compared to what, my old stove was a set it and walk away and never have to worry about it, amazing what dry wood will do for you even in an old stove (even keeps the chimney clean if you burn right).
New stoves like to be tweaked now and then but overall with the house a little tighter its working fine, but not as easy to run as the old stove.


----------



## Steve NW WI (Jan 20, 2014)

oldspark said:


> So is the OP trying to pick a fight, difficult compared to what, my old stove was a set it and walk away and never have to worry about it, amazing what dry wood will do for you even in an old stove (even keeps the chimney clean if you burn right).
> New stoves like to be tweaked now and then but overall with the house a little tighter its working fine, but not as easy to run as the old stove.



This was a response to one of Spidey's posts in the "best stove" thread, where he's maintained multiple times that the new stoves need "constant fiddling" to work right. Just showing that it can be as simple as I've shown above. My old Woodchuck that this stove replaced took about the same amount of "fiddling" to get going as this one does.

As to this being "picking a fight", the fight's been going a long time. I'm just posting this so I can refer back to it every time I hear how hard these stoves are to run. I can only take being told something is true when I know it not to be true for so long.

Edited for grammar.


----------



## TonyK (Jan 20, 2014)

Jotul Firelight CB. Open door, feed wood, feel warm. Simple really.


----------



## Jredsjeep (Jan 20, 2014)

i dont have the same stove but i have found my NC30 from Home Depot to run about the same. got a good 8 years or so burning as a primary heat soarce with it. the wifey likes it about 75 in the house and you know what they say about a happy wife!

heck the real test was when my M-I-L could run it and keep the house warm with no furnace backup over Christmas last year when my little girl was born. this lady can bearly turn a screwdriver but she ran the woodstove for days with no previouse experiance while we were in the hospital.


----------



## Hddnis (Jan 20, 2014)

I think Spidey might just be a fiddler type, so he worries it more than he needs. Which is fine, world needs those types too.

Going from a non-EPA anything stove to my Quadrafire did take just a bit of learning, but once I got the hang of it that thing is easy to run. I can get 6-8 hours on a load of softwood, good clean burn and plenty of coals left. If I load up with a nice hardwood I can get to 12 hours, even on a cold night.

I plan to get a Blaze King next, know several guys that have them and I've run them while house sitting the neighbors place over the holidays during the cold snap, they seem to be everything they're cracked up to be.



Mr. HE


----------



## Steve NW WI (Jan 20, 2014)

I just snapped a couple more pics, filled the stove before work. I'll upload them tonight, and that will finish out a "day in the life". 2 1/3 fillings, a couple flicks of the lever shortly after loading, and nothing else needed.

Soooooo difficult, I tell ya.


----------



## CTYank (Jan 20, 2014)

My 13-yo micro Morso is just about that complicated. Of course, it does have a real hard time disposing of much wood anything near that Drolet. Once I figured out the internal airflow patterns, I was on autopilot with it.

The huge benefit of these Spidey-maligned stoves is the greatly reduced emissions, just so long as you feed them dry wood. The polycyclic organic matter (POM) in woodsmoke is a powerful carcinogen, not just a nuisance we can overlook. Turning such schmutz into heat, truly priceless.

Excuse me for a few, while I build it back from coals.


----------



## oldspark (Jan 20, 2014)

Steve NW WI said:


> This was a response to one of Spidey's posts in the "best stove" thread, where he's maintained multiple times that the new stoves need "constant fiddling" to work right. Just showing that it can be as simple as I've shown above. My old Woodchuck that this stove replaced took about the same amount of "fiddling" to get going as this one does.
> 
> As to this being "picking a fight", the fight's been going a long time. I'm just posting this so I can refer back to it every time I hear how hard these stoves are to run. I can only take being told something is true when I know it not to be true for so long.
> 
> Edited for grammar.


Maybe spidey is a little over the top but hard for to disagree with a lot of what he says, my summit does take more fiddling then the old stove but not constant by any means.
A lot of people who burn EPA stoves seem to be discovering dry wood for the first time in their lives, many posts by some who say if this was my old stove the cap would be plugged by now, another one is single wall stove pipe will only last for a couple of years, water dont burn very well.


----------



## stihly dan (Jan 20, 2014)

Steve, what was the temp in the house after the 10 hrs of being gone? If the basement was 65* I would think it wasn't heating the house for a few hrs by then. Easy now, just curious.


----------



## Chris-PA (Jan 20, 2014)

stihly dan said:


> Steve, what was the temp in the house after the 10 hrs of being gone? If the basement was 65* I would think it wasn't heating the house for a few hrs by then. Easy now, just curious.


This is where thermal mass is really your friend (not to mention insulation of course). That is going to vary a lot with type of construction.


----------



## Steve NW WI (Jan 20, 2014)

stihly dan said:


> Steve, what was the temp in the house after the 10 hrs of being gone? If the basement was 65* I would think it wasn't heating the house for a few hrs by then. Easy now, just curious.


1st thermometer pic was after the stove was out most of the evening. 2nd pic (70.something) was after the 10 hour burn.


----------



## flotek (Jan 20, 2014)

Looks extremely complicated and hard to understand( so you rake the coals forward and then add wood or add wood then rake the coals ?? Ugh. !So hard to figure out ) id just use an old barrel stove and toss some tires in it .10 hrs burn ain't hardly enough time for me to make a gallon of my moonshine shucks you can fit all 4) Geo metro in that ol drum and she'll burn for 3 days straight and as a side benefit after it's lights off the chimney not only do I achieve secondary combustion but the young ins get to see an amazing light show in the front yard like the Fourth of July


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 20, 2014)

Hddnis said:


> *I think Spidey might just be a fiddler type, so he worries it more than he needs.*



I wish that were the case... I fiddle with it because it stops heating.
That explanation don't hold water... I don't fiddle with my furnace, I don't worry it one iota.

As far as difficult... I don't believe I ever said "difficult"... I believe I said a PITA to be constantly fiddling with it to keep it heating and/or burning down the coals.
Yesterday morning at 4:30 AM I opened the door of my furnace and tossed some firewood in, closed the door, walked away... that's it, open door, load wood, close door, nothing more. I thought maybe I'd need to add more before the house came up to temp... but it wasn't that cold out, so one loading was enough. We actually made it into the lower 30's late yesterday afternoon, and at 9:30 last night it was still 72° in the house so I didn't even check the furnace before bed. This morning, at 5:00 AM, 24½ hours after touching it last, 67° in the house, I opened the door of the furnace, saw there was a couple coals still glowing, tossed some wood in, closed the door, walked away... that's it, open door, load wood, close door, nothing more. So, over a 24½ hour period (from 4:30 AM yesterday to 5:00 AM today) I spent a total of maybe 60 seconds... maybe 60 seconds, likely less... "fiddling" with my furnace.

It ain't, and never has been a question of "difficult" to run... just a PITA to run because it requires constant attention to keep heating.
I'm happy for you that your new-fangled stove runs good for you, or as you want it to... mine don't run, or heat worth sour owl crap.
On the other hand... my old fashion, non-EPA certified, smoke dragon furnace nearly runs itself, heats like a Banshee when needed, and is damn miserly on wood consumption during times of "normal" temperatures... it uses less than that EPA-certified stove I have ever did. (shrug) I don't see how I could expect or ask for anything more, it does exactly what I expect and ask it to do.

Steve NW WI,
Did I say, _"the new stoves need "constant fiddling" to work right"_?? (As in a "blanket" statement.)
Or did I say mine does, and pointed out where others have said the same thing to some degree... such as dragging coals around, placing splits just so to get coals burning down (actually, that one seems quite common, almost universal), making adjustments during the burn cycle, low heat output during the coaling stage, etc., etc., etc. OK, so your's works wonderfully for your purpose, but that don't seem to be the universal consensus... many (not all) are saying theirs requires more attention than the old smoke dragon did, some (not all) are saying a *lot* *more* attention. My smoke dragon requires near zero attention... and other than an occasional flue damper adjustment, none of my other smoke dragons required much in the way of attention either.

I've always believe in the KISS theory of doing things... simplicity normally equates to a wider range of usability, less chance for "issues", and much simpler "work-a-rounds" if any "issues" do materialize. Ya' wanna' call it a campfire in a box?? OK , call it whatever ya' like... makes no matter to me. I'm gonna' stick with what works well, what works well over an almost infinite range, and what has worked well since way before I was here. Obviously some (if not many) are finding the new-fangled stoves somewhat finicky under many conditions (just read the posts)... why take the risk, when what has always worked, still works?? KISS‼
*


----------



## stihly dan (Jan 20, 2014)

Steve NW WI said:


> 1st thermometer pic was after the stove was out most of the evening. 2nd pic (70.something) was after the 10 hour burn.



oh, thought those pics where of your basement temps.


----------



## Steve NW WI (Jan 20, 2014)

Yes, that is basement temp. Upstairs stays a couple degrees cooler, but still nice by my temperature preference. I can crank the basement up to 80 if I want 75 upstairs.

The basement is my "guy place" - satellite tv and radio, saw workshop, reloading area, and beer drinking space. Upstairs is just blah house stuff, except with a bigger TV and AC when it gets too hot.


----------



## Oxford (Jan 20, 2014)

I'm helping my son with a book report. Can anyone confirm that it was Mark Twain who said "Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience"?

Wait- what are we talking about here?


----------



## stihly dan (Jan 20, 2014)

Oxford said:


> I'm helping my son with a book report. Can anyone confirm that it was Mark Twain who said "Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience"?
> 
> Wait- what are we talking about here?



That's just not nice.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 20, 2014)

I would strongly suggest your son find someone else to help him with his homework...

*"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience."*
- George Carlin

*"Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."*
(often attributed to Mark Twain, but unconfirmed)

But there are a couple of confirmed quotes from Mark Twain that my apply here...

*"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please."*
- Mark Twain

*"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so."*
- Mark Twain

*"There are lies, damned lies and statistics."*
- Mark Twain
*


----------



## Hddnis (Jan 21, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> I wish that were the case... I fiddle with it because it stops heating.
> That explanation don't hold water... I don't fiddle with my furnace, I don't worry it one iota.
> ...*


 

No worries, I didn't mean it by way of picking on you. I based it mostly on you being one of very few guys I know that totally rebuilt a stove into a furnace and customized it to boot. Not many will go to that trouble.


Mr. HE


----------



## Steve NW WI (Jan 21, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> I wish that were the case... I fiddle with it because it stops heating.
> That explanation don't hold water... I don't fiddle with my furnace, I don't worry it one iota.
> 
> As far as difficult... I don't believe I ever said "difficult"... I believe I said a PITA to be constantly fiddling with it to keep it heating and/or burning down the coals.
> ...



I spent a little time looking, and didn't find any direct quotes from you that state what I implied. I'll hold my ground with the belief that you have that opinion however. Specifically, the post that got me to start this thread was this one: What is the best style stove, EPA, CAT, down drafter, one with a grate.

The reason your stove didn't work in your application, as some of us have tried to tell you repeatedly, it that it was simply TOO FRICKIN SMALL for your heat loads. Going from a 2.1 cf firebox to one 250% bigger solved your issues...I'll be damned.

Edited heavily pre-posting to keep me from having to send myself to banned camp.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 21, 2014)

Hddnis said:


> *No worries, I didn't mean it by way of picking on you.*



No worries over here either... I didn't take your post as picking on me at all.
*


----------



## oldspark (Jan 21, 2014)

stihly dan said:


> That's just not nice.


Yea all the others who have had trouble with the new stoves (including me) are idiots also.
I have read a lot of posts over the last 5 years or so and many do not like the new stoves, some was wood related but some just do not like them.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 21, 2014)

Steve NW WI said:


> *Specifically, the post that got me to start this thread was this one:* What is the best style stove, EPA, CAT, down drafter, one with a grate.
> *The reason your stove didn't work in your application, as some of us have tried to tell you repeatedly, it that it was simply TOO FRICKIN SMALL for your heat loads.*



Oh c'mon Steve, that post was a direct response to another's slam towards me.
Have you forgotten that the stove is now being used to heat a 480²ft area and is actually performing as bad or worse?? It was sunny and in the low 30's here on Sunday, near no wind. I started the fire out in the shop 'round 10:30 AM, butchered a deer I had hanging, then the neighbor and I sat and drank a box of beer... the best I could do in just over 6 hours was 66°, and a box almost *totally full* of coals. If a 2.1²ft firebox can't heat 480²ft on a day like that...?? So you're saying it's still *TOO FRICKIN SMALL*... seriously??

Well, if that actually is the problem, and I actually do buy that explanation... how does that render my opinion(s) false?
Yup, it's a $3000.oo charcoal maker. Charcoal is produced by charring wood in a low temperature, low oxygen environment... exactly what this firebox does.
I mean, were talking less that 500²ft for cripes sake, about like a medium-large living room... I could make a stove from a 5-gallon pail that would heat that on a 30°, windless, sunny day‼ I won't deny that I likely was asking a bit much from it as a whole-home heater... but, c'mon man, we're on a new page now. Nothing has changed... good heat at peak flame stage that drops off rapidly as it gets closer to the coaling stage, and near no heat from a coal bed, they just slowly die out... while you can touch the bare metal of the stove with your hand. Adding more wood just makes more coals... and because the coals reduce the amount of wood that can be added, heat from peak flame stage is reduced. The added coals smother those below... eventually you shovel out a 5-gallon bucket of charcoal. It's a never-ending cycle of frustration.

And I ain't the only one experiencing these and other issues with secondary combustion fireboxes... leading me to believe they can be frustratingly finicky depending on any number of variables. I'm just not interested in finicky. Like has been said, time 'n' time again, about many new-fangled things...
*"They work great... when they work."*

By-the-way... glad you didn't have to send yourself to camp... someone needs to be here and knock me back every now 'n' then.
*


----------



## Steve NW WI (Jan 21, 2014)

Spidey - humor me for a bit. Next time you're out in your shop, close down the stove controls as soon as the stove gets good-n-hot. I mean all the way down, closed up. Maybe not the flue damper, cause I don't even run one. At least in MY stove, that means that nearly the only flames you'll see are coming from the secondaries, very little if any coming from the wood itself. I THINK you'll see a lot longer "useful" heat.

As to the coals not giving off any heat - I don't friggin know. I just know my stove is still warm (stove top too hot for more than a quick touch, snap disc operated small blower on the stove still running most of the time) 10 hours after a fill, and while it's not keeping up with MY heat load at the far end of the cycle in real cold, it's still making heat, and the coals are burning off.

The reason is fairly simple. The more I have my draft control open, the higher the stack temps are. At a certain point, I'm heating my outside chimney instead of my house. I don't like to heat outside unless I'm drinking by a bonfire. WFO on the draft control on my stove is only useful to get a fire started. I can hold stove top temps of 6-800 with the control just cracked off of full closed.

If this doesn't help, the only bit of advice I have left is to come to the IA GTG, pull up a chair next to Ronaldo, and compare notes. Don't worry, he's a nice guy.

Hope this posts, I lost it once already and ain't got time to retype it again.


----------



## oldspark (Jan 21, 2014)

Steve NW WI said:


> pidey - humor me for a bit. Next time you're out in your shop, close down the stove controls as soon as the stove gets good-n-hot. I mean all the way down, closed up. Maybe not the flue damper, cause I don't even run one. At least in MY stove, that means that nearly the only flames you'll see are coming from the secondaries, very little if any coming from the wood itself. I THINK you'll see a lot longer "useful" heat.


 My stove will not run like that, if I turn the air down to the minimum the stove wont heat the house when its cold, stove seems to work well until it gets really cold and then its just a PITA, today is one of those days so I have a case of the ass about my stove today.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 21, 2014)

oldspark said:


> *My stove will not run like that...*



Mine won't either... the secondary will sputter for awhile and goes out, then thick smoke bellows from the chimney. Even if the secondary continues to do the "sputtering" thing the chimney will smoke some and it won't make enough heat to be of any value. It'll run at about ¾ closed (or a touch more) but don't make a lot of heat, it runs best set somewhere between ½ and ¾ closed. Opening it more than ½ way doesn't really make any noticeable difference in the lower fire... but it will cause the secondary to shoot impressive jets of flame straight down into the wood.

But, I haven't tried shutting the control (there's only one) all the way down since moving it to the shop... so I'll humor you Steve NW WI, I'll try it again.
*


----------



## NSMaple1 (Jan 21, 2014)

I don't have a stove, but I did go from a smoker to a clean burner. Boilers - so not quite apples to apples, I realize. I had to make some small adjustments in the way I burned, and the way I got a fire going - those were minimal and neither the before nor the after is any easier or harder than the other. But I will say - if the wood is not DRY, I can experience some of the same issues I read about on here of those having difficulties with their EPA stove.

It needs to be DRY, and DRY wood might not be as DRY as one thinks.

That's all I have for this one....


----------



## oldspark (Jan 21, 2014)

All my wood is below 20%
A lot of variables involved (type of wood, amount of draft) so hard to tell some one exactly where to set their stove.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 21, 2014)

Three years stacked... elm, hard maple, oak, and some odds 'n' ends.
Three years stacked in single rows, full sun and wind... doubtful it could get any dryer, just older.
*


----------



## cmsmoke (Jan 21, 2014)

Put a ceiling in that shop. It will make a huge difference. Insulate the ceiling and it will run you out of there. My 70,000 BTU torpedo heater won,t heat my 380 sq. ft. shed, running continuously. Put it in my insulated 1,050 sq. ft. garage and you will be in a tee shirt within 20 minutes and it will cycle with the thermostat after that.


----------



## Chris-PA (Jan 21, 2014)

On my US Stoves Magnolia I cannot stop the inlet all the way down as that block both primary and secondary air and puts it out. But there are often considerable differences between secondary combustion stoves, especially on the inlet controls.


----------



## Ronaldo (Jan 21, 2014)

Whitespider,
Seems there has got to be something that is not functioning correctly on that stove. I do a hot reload with nice bed of coals and add wood (usually dry Elm) ,let it get good and charred and allow magnetic stove pipe thermometer to read 500-700 degrees (doesnt take very long) then shut draft down all the way or a hair open. This is how I set it for overnight burns or when we are leaving house for a while. Wifey is home most days and she adds wood when needed and adjusts draft to her comfort level during daytime, she likes to be warm and generally keeps temps in the mid 70s. The only time the draft is open past half is when reloading or starting fire. If I gave this thing more air it would get way too hot and roast us out of the house. During extreme cold we may run draft lever near half open, but not usually for too long.
That is the way my P.E. works.


----------



## Oxford (Jan 21, 2014)

Ronaldo-

To paraphrase Groucho Marx: who are you going to believe, Whitespider or your lying eyes? There's no way you could be warm with that stove. You and your wife must be cold and just don't know it.


----------



## brenndatomu (Jan 21, 2014)

Ronaldo, as Oxford just said, you gotta be Eskimo or something, cause everybody knows those PEs don't work! 
Sounds like you have a good install. Spideys stove is either faulty (possible) or his draft was funky (my arm chair quarterback gut feeling)
It is generally accepted that the _chimney_ is the engine that drives the stove, so it seems the chimney is pretty important, I mean heck, the only difference between a stock Mustang and a 10 sec car is the _engine_ (mainly)
Spidey absolutely refused to get a draft reading (cause the stove "could suck up a small dog" or something like that, when the door was open) or get a flue temp, something most any good stove shop would do right off the bat when troubleshooting a troublesome stove. So don't be comin round here gushing about your stove, spouting off pipe temps, cuz that ain't it, it's just those new fangled EPA stoves is just junk, JUNK I TELL YA! 
Anyways,
Spidey, FWIW, my Yukon furnace is rated for 140k BTU (well, 112 after losses) and I think it would take 2-3 hours for even_ it_ to bring your unfinished/uninsulated garage up to temp. Something about heating up the mass of a xx thousand pound building (read: heat sink) with air leaks...oh, and the Yukon brings air in under the fire, (just so we don't go there )

I guess it is just the mechanic in me, always gotta figure everything out, then fix it, but I'd love to get my hands on the former "stovace" for a while, see what the heck...


----------



## oldspark (Jan 21, 2014)

Ronaldo said:


> Whitespider,
> Seems there has got to be something that is not functioning correctly on that stove. I do a hot reload with nice bed of coals and add wood (usually dry Elm) ,let it get good and charred and allow magnetic stove pipe thermometer to read 500-700 degrees (doesnt take very long) then shut draft down all the way or a hair open. This is how I set it for overnight burns or when we are leaving house for a while. Wifey is home most days and she adds wood when needed and adjusts draft to her comfort level during daytime, she likes to be warm and generally keeps temps in the mid 70s. The only time the draft is open past half is when reloading or starting fire. If I gave this thing more air it would get way too hot and roast us out of the house. During extreme cold we may run draft lever near half open, but not usually for too long.
> That is the way my P.E. works.


Sounds like your flue temps are high like mine (summit) but I can not get my stove top as hot as I want, I think my draft is a little too strong, if I don't keep an eye on the stove I have no idea how high the flue temps would go.
My old stove kicked out more heat with lower flue temps..
If I get a break from the whether I need to try a damper again


----------



## Ronaldo (Jan 21, 2014)

I am not trying to fuel the fire here. I am simply speaking of my experiences. I have used an Earth Stove fireplace insert that had a catalytic combuster when I lived in Wyoming for a number of years, and it was my first experience with newer stoves. It worked amazingly well just burning Ponderosa Pine. I hated to leave it when we moved back to Iowa! I have used a Woodstock Soapstone Palladian (catalytic) for a while and it did a fine job of heating, although not quite as big of firebox as the P E. Have been using this PE now for over 13 years and if it was problematic, hard to use or required constant fiddling to get good heat results, I certainly would not be singing its praises. I would be looking for its replacement!
Time to get some sleep-going to load her up for a nice overnight burn.

Ron


----------



## Ronaldo (Jan 21, 2014)

oldspark said:


> Sounds like your flue temps are high like mine (summit) but I can not get my stove top as hot as I want, I think my draft is a little too strong, if I don't keep an eye on the stove I have no idea how high the flue temps would go.
> My old stove kicked out more heat with lower flue temps..
> If I get a break from the whether I need to try a damper again


Those flue temps are when running wide open to start a fresh load of wood as per owners manual recommendations. When draft is closed down for a typical slower burn the thermo reads around 200.


----------



## oldspark (Jan 21, 2014)

Ronaldo said:


> Those flue temps are when running wide open to start a fresh load of wood as per owners manual recommendations. When draft is closed down for a typical slower burn the thermo reads around 200.


Now there is a big difference, mine stay high and always have with two different chimneys, I have the air all the way closed right now and the flue temp is about 550 or 600.
I have been fighting those high flue temps since day one, I can reduce the air quicker and all it does is slow it down, its still going high and staying there.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 22, 2014)

Ronaldo said:


> *Seems there has got to be something that is not functioning correctly on that stove... The only time the draft is open past half is when reloading or starting fire. If I gave this thing more air it would get way too hot and roast us out of the house. During extreme cold we may run draft lever near half open, but not usually for too long...*


Like I said... never say never... but after one full season in the house, a half season in the shop, and likely some couple hundred post from y'all tellin' me what to look for... I ain't seein' anything wrong with the stove proper. As far as running it with the draft open (or more than ½ way); I don't, I already said it runs best somewhere between ½ and ¾ closed... I only stated what happens when I open it further to illustrate the secondary appears to be working well.



brenndatomu said:


> *It is generally accepted that the chimney is the engine that drives the stove, so it seems the chimney is pretty important... Spidey absolutely refused to get a draft reading or get a flue temp, something most any good stove shop would do right off the bat...*


Does a "good stove shop" install per "installation instructions" or do they ignore them??
What is the draft supposed to be?? What is the flue temp supposed to be??
The "installation" manual doesn't say... it only gives symptoms of too little or too much draft in the "troubleshooting" section... none of which I am experiencing. As far as the chimney... forget the one I used last year in the house, that's past history, it will never be used with that stove again. How about we all turn to the same page... OK?
The "installation" manual specifies a chimney of the same diameter as the stove outlet, a minimum height of 15 feet from the base of the appliance and three feet above the peak... it is now connected to a chimney of specified diameter, at a height of 16 feet from the top of the appliance (about 18 from the base) and three feet above the peak. That is all the "installation" manual specifies, nothing more... no manometer readings, no temperature readings, and mentions absolutely nothing about any dampers of any sort.

What friggin' good are all these measurements and readings if there ain't any "standard" listed??



Ronaldo said:


> *...Have been using this PE now for over 13 years and if it was problematic, hard to use or required constant fiddling to get good heat results, I certainly would not be singing its praises...*


I believe you... and I'm not even claiming this is a PE problem. If you go back and read the threads from last year it was more than just PE owners stating some, or all of the same issues to the same of lesser degrees... at the same time, many claimed to have none. I don't remember who it was now, but he and his mother (or M-I-L) each had the same (PE?) stoves, installed in two different houses across the road from each other... one worked perfectly, but they were constantly shoveling coals out of the other to make room for more wood and get more heat. I've also done some other research and such; I am convinced that "secondary combustion" stoves are more likely to be finicky depending on variables (some professional installers even stated such)... and sometimes, under certain conditions, the issues cannot be remedied satisfactorily. There also seems to be a pattern of sorts, where northern or colder areas of the country have significantly more problems that tend to get worse as temperatures drop... which is what both oldspark and I are saying (and others have in the past). Yeah, some of that can be contributed to the firebox being too small, but that only adds to the finicky side... sure, I've had problems with smaller (old-style) boxes keeping up with heat demand for short periods (such as early morning before sunup), but they didn't give me these no heat, coal build-up, "pull-your-hair-out" problems. They still would heat, and kept heating... ya' just opened the draft a bit more, and slid your chair a bit closer. (shrug)

What it comes down to is... I'm not interested in finicky...
I am not denying they work good... when they work.
*


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 22, 2014)

I'd be willing to make a friendly bet with anyone here...

As the new EPA regulation are implemented, and if the non-cat stoves survive them, I'm bettin' these issues will become more common and widespread.
Any takers??
*


----------



## zogger (Jan 22, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> I'd be willing to make a friendly bet with anyone here...
> 
> As the new EPA regulation are implemented, and if the non-cat stoves survive them, I'm bettin' these issues will become more common and widespread.
> Any takers??
> *



Ain't got an epa stove dog in the fight, zero experience. 

With that said, people getting hip to actual dried wood versus cut this year in the spring or summer, full sap, kinda sorta split sometime before delivery brand "seasoned" wood will be addressed more and more as a bad idea. As will sales of moisture meters go up. Ya, need to calibrate against gravitational pull and tree subspecies, etc, bleh and meh..they work well enough to get a ballpark for anyone between low 20s delivered wood and down in the low teens. 

If I was a CL bulk wood seller, I would have several pics showing a nice low moisture content, pics of stacks well up off the ground, and the actual date, within a week or two range perhaps, that they were stacked up, showing at least two years cut/split/stacked. Heck, you could prove it with one pic showing a newspaper with the date in front of the wood, or at least that would be an attempt to verify for the buyer.

I am amazed at how chintzy dudes are with their free CL ads, at best you might see a pile of wood in the back of a truck and like one txt speek sentence. 

The green wood crap beer money sellers are gonna fall by the wayside eventually, as people realize their unseasoned wood, no matter how cheap or pretty looking, just slap doesn't work in most stoves. it will burn eventually, and throw not much heat, just smoke and moving cold air into and out of the house.

I have seen it in my own neighborhood lately, the few people down the street as I go into town who burn wood, all of them are out of seasoned, been watching their stacks shrink, now you see new stacks of what looks like cut a couple months ago max wood, dang stuff looks fresh. I think I am the only guy around here who has multiple years ahead that I can see.

Has to make a difference, smoke dragon or epa.


----------



## oldspark (Jan 22, 2014)

zogger, I made the comment some where about people discovering dry wood for the first time after being forced into it with the EPA stove.
A lot of people like to say the old stoves were crap, come to find out they were burning wet wood in their pre EPA stoves which very well could have partly led to the EPA regulations we have now.
You have to be smarter then the wood you are putting in the stove to get a good clean burn EPA stove or not.


----------



## ray benson (Jan 22, 2014)

Any coaling problem with my EPA stove is attributed to not dry enough wood. My older stoves a Ben Franklin and a converted Franklin that was air tight could burn most any wood with no problems.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 22, 2014)

Mine makes coals from dry newspaper.


----------



## zogger (Jan 22, 2014)

oldspark said:


> zogger, I made the comment some where about people discovering dry wood for the first time after being forced into it with the EPA stove.
> A lot of people like to say the old stoves were crap, come to find out they were burning wet wood in their pre EPA stoves which very well could have partly led to the EPA regulations we have now.
> You have to be smarter then the wood you are putting in the stove to get a good clean burn EPA stove or not.




Yep. My wood is all outside so it gets that gray weathered look and is well cracked when it truly is dry enough to burn well. I see people burning stuff that is fresh clean pretty looking on the ends. I have no idea how that burns, heck, I'll throw chunks into a pile for restacking later if I don't like them when they come off of the this years stack. I am not bringing them into the house, waste of time, hissy smoulder wood. Not cracked enough or enough gray, still seems a little heavy for the size, heck with it, throw in a pile for next years wood.

I guess if wood is in a shed from being fresh split it might not discolor bad, at least for a long time, but I don't know either, only burned from a shed once and that wood was so old it had grayed as well.


----------



## oldspark (Jan 22, 2014)

ray benson said:


> Any coaling problem with my EPA stove is attributed to not dry enough wood. My older stoves a Ben Franklin and a converted Franklin that was air tight could burn most any wood with no problems.


That is so not true and all you have to do is read posts by many who went through the last cold spell.
My wood is plenty dry
From woodheat.org
*"In cold weather the coal bed can build up so there is hardly room for more wood, and still you're freezing. Here's the solution.*
Big coal beds are a particular problem with EPA certified non-catalytic stoves because their insulated fireboxes and high temperatures tend to cook out the volatile gases quickly, leaving a big load of charcoal. This isn't much of a problem during moderate weather because the coal bed can do an adequate heating job.
But when the weather gets very cold, a coal bed is not enough to heat a house and the big coal bed gets in the way of adding more wood. The solution is to rake the coals towards the primary air inlet, place one log on the pile of coals and burn it fast. The primary air on almost all modern wood stoves is the airwash for the glass, so rake towards the glass door."


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 22, 2014)

oldspark,
He didn't say *all* EPA stoves... he said, "*my* EPA stove".
Gotta' be careful when reading someones post... people have been reading into mine what I did not say for two years on this subject.
*


----------



## oldspark (Jan 22, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> oldspark,
> He didn't say *all* EPA stoves... he said, "*my* EPA stove".
> Gotta' be careful when reading someones post... people have been reading into mine what I did not say for two years on this subject.
> *


Good catch my bad.


----------



## slowp (Jan 22, 2014)

I've had both kinds of stoves. I had an Earth Stove, a Schrader, and an old scary Fischer. The new Quadrafire isn't any different as far as fire taking off time. Here in the land of mildew and mildish climate, I start it fresh, with kindling every morning because I don't want a warm house at night. The house temp only drops into the 50s and probably wouldn't go that low if I didn't have a window open at night.

After a couple wet winters, it finally dawned on me to bring in a crate of kindling about a week to get it really dry. Now the kindling takes right off and there's no more failed attempts at lighting the fire in the morning.

I have a ranch style 1400 sq. ft. house which the stove heats. I regulate the temps by opening doors of closed rooms and sometimes have to open a window to keep it below sauna temp.

As far as operation, I don't notice any difference. I think the Quadrafire heats up quicker? Maybe not. I'll back up Steve's conclusion.

Friends of mine had to replace their old stove. They hated the new stove. It smoked their house up.
They talked to the stove guy and ended up having their chimney relined and now they like their EPA and additional Warshington State regulated stove. Yup, our state goes tougher than national requirements. Our stoves still work fine.


----------



## oldspark (Jan 22, 2014)

Del_ said:


> Our Jotul firebox is not insulated. It is cast iron.
> 
> Coaling is no problem with our non catalytic wood stove that meets the now 25 year old EPA emissions standards. Even if coals were a problem, there are easy to implement solutions.
> 
> ...


My coals when its cold and its known why they do it, just pointing out the fact.
My stove with my set up sucks for some reason and not sure why.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 22, 2014)

Ummmmm.... Del_, the reference to "insulated" means firebrick lined... or refractory brick lined.
Ain't no firebrick lining in yours??


----------



## oldspark (Jan 22, 2014)

slowp said:


> I'll back up Steve's conclusion


 Which one is that?


----------



## oldspark (Jan 22, 2014)

I don't think my stove is that hard to run just it has flue temps through the roof and stove top is not as hot as I like and when very cold it turns into a charcoal factory.
Now if I can fix all that with a flue damper I will be one happy camper.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 22, 2014)

Del_ said:


> *No firebrick.*



Interesting...
*


----------



## Cerran (Jan 22, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> I'd be willing to make a friendly bet with anyone here...
> 
> As the new EPA regulation are implemented, and if the non-cat stoves survive them, I'm bettin' these issues will become more common and widespread.
> Any takers??
> *



No more issues than non-epa stoves I bet.


----------



## sunfish (Jan 22, 2014)

Del_ said:


> No firebrick. I've never seen firebrick in a Jotul but it may be in some models.


Just another reason I bought a Jotul and like them so much!


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 22, 2014)

What the heck is there to "dislike" about that post deerlakejens??


----------



## sunfish (Jan 22, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> What the heck is there to "dislike" about that post deerlakejens??


Maybe he thought it was Not interesting?


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 22, 2014)

LOL 
Yeah, maybe that was it


----------



## blacklocst (Jan 22, 2014)

Del, I have a blanket of insulation of some sort that you can see if you take the stove pipe off the stove collar and I also have the same stove as you do. Does your stove not have one?


----------



## sunfish (Jan 22, 2014)

blacklocst said:


> Del, I have a blanket of insulation of some sort that you can see if you take the stove pipe off the stove collar and I also have the same stove as you do. Does your stove not have one?


I think they all have a ceramic blanket on top of the baffle. My 118cb does. But no fire brick or refractory in the fire box.


----------



## Chris-PA (Jan 22, 2014)

oldspark said:


> Now there is a big difference, mine stay high and always have with two different chimneys, I have the air all the way closed right now and the flue temp is about 550 or 600.
> I have been fighting those high flue temps since day one, I can reduce the air quicker and all it does is slow it down, its still going high and staying there.


Mine run about 300 on a magnetic thermometer about 18" above the stove. Not a very accurate way to measure but it allows me to get a relative reading.


----------



## brenndatomu (Jan 22, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> Does a "good stove shop" install per "installation instructions" or do they ignore them??
> 
> What is the draft supposed to be?? What is the flue temp supposed to be??
> 
> ...


1. A "good" stove shop would know from experience what works, what don't, and no, not ignore Mfgr install directions. You have/had no previous EPA stove install or operation experience to go off of.
2. I think -.06" to -.08" (maybe -.10" tops) is a generally accepted draft level for "tube burners" (EPA) stoves. Flue temps, depends, maybe 500* on "high burn" to 200-300* with the air turned down, in "cruise" mode.
3. I find it hard to believe that a call to the Mfgr tech line wouldn't net you the "standard" specs they call for. But I dunno for sure, can't speak for PEs customer service.
4. Having the stove now hooked up to a "proper" chimney, still having the same problems, and _still_ not having checked said #s is even worse!

My only point was to say that you have come at this problem from every angle, give 'er a pretty good workin over, except for a couple basic, right-outta-the-chute things. A draft reading, or any kind of temp reading, which I find surprising considering your profession. I'm sure you have a couple basic diagnostic tools with you at all times, things you grab immediately, to get some hard numbers. Verify the problem, get some preliminary #s...
Saying that you know you have good draft cause "the stove would suck up a small dog" with the door open and I know the flue temps are good cause it will singe your eyebrows when nearby, is 'bout like me working on a no start car, and I say that I know it has good spark cause it shocked me when I licked the coil wire. You know just as well as me, spark voltage needs to verified with a METER or better yet, shown to jump a known minimum gap.

Now then, having said all that, chances are, the chimney you have now is doing what it should, and I hafta say, it's looking more likely that there is something wrong with your stove individually. I know you say there are others with the same problem, heck, maybe PE has a real QC problem, I dunno. Anyways, I read another wood burning forum, they have an "EPA stove" section specifically, I would say 99.9% of the people that come there with stove problems either have improper chimney install, improper operation (running it like their old smoke dragon) or the most common, wet wood (I'm not sayin you have wet wood)
Bottom line, you don't like the "fiddly" new stoves, your DAKA is not "fiddly", I have one of each type, get along with both of 'em, Steve NW WI get's along with his stove , HEY, everybody is happy happy happy! 
Sorry to have added to the "off the rails" of this thread Steve.

I do agree with you though Spidey, that the new generation of EPA burners coming down the pike at us, likely will not make anybody's life better/easier, until I'm proven wrong...but that would surprise me. Not takin your bet. Gotta go, gettin hunt-n-peckers cramp


----------



## Oxford (Jan 22, 2014)

Ah, the Internet. You can find anything. I believe the story about two houses is this one, copied in its entirety so nobody can foam at the mouth about selective quotation:

*A tale of 2 fires*

I think this is as close to a real world apples to apple comparison as possible.

My mother-in-law lives across the road from us. We both have EPA Pacific Energy mid size stoves. We both heat similar size houses, approx. 1200 sq. ft. We both have stoves on the first floor and both burn the same wood (I cut for both houses). Winter daytime temps here are usually around 14F, we have cold snaps down to -25F and warm spells up to around freezing. We burn steadily from mid-October to mid-April, January and February being the coldest time. Our house, built early 1900s was totally renovated 6 years ago and very well air sealed and insulated. In-laws house was built in the 1980s and is poorly insulated. We burn a bit over 2 cord a year, I empty the ash every 3 weeks or so and it is just ash. MIL burns over 5 cord a year, shovels out a bucket of coals and ash once or twice a week, in really cold spells she shovels out coals daily to make room for more wood. Our place is always comfortably warm. Her house is usually either hot or cold.

The stoves must be performing similarly, but in our case the performance is satisfactory for our heat requirement, for my MIL the performance cannot keep up with the heat requirement. Needless to say, I am very pleased with the EPA stove, my MIL, less so.

This does not give an answer to Whitespider's problem, but it does show how different performance can be for 2 very similar users.​What this story does NOT show is that these dang ol' EPA stoves are just flat unpredictable, workin' just fine in one place and not puttin' out any heat, no matter what, in another. What it DOES show is that if you bring a knife to a gunfight, you're apt to not like the results. Horses for courses, after all. Mom needs a bigger stove.

Fair warning to Whitespider: when I used the search engine to find this, it was like unearthing an historical record of all the bloviatin' and blowin' and just bein' a pain that you've done about a stove that you after all got for free. You've told about eight or nine versions of this story, with the common theme of how much you hate the EPA and just how much better the world would be if everybody would just shut up and do as you tell them, despite your trumpeting of the virtues of individual liberty. Outside that common theme, your story has varied widely, usually changing every time somebody calls you on your BS and you can't get out from under. Before you start consulting your character generator so that you can say bad words to or about me without getting dinged for profanity, if you deny that your story has changed, I will post an example of every revision referenced to post and date. Not because I have extra time- I don't- but because you are deliberately and dishonestly representing your situation and your stove as typical of an entire category of stoves and stove owners and it's horsecrap. You're a bully, and every time you get called to heel by a moderator you put your hat in your hands, mumble an apology and then go right back to what you were doing before. I get that that's the Internet, that everybody's ten feet tall and bulletproof, but enough is enough.

Edited for clarity.


----------



## Eric Modell (Jan 22, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> Interesting...
> *


My non EPA smoke dragons are full of fire brick and one coals up when we shut er down, no problem, and the other will not hold a coal bed. The intersting thing is the one with a grate is the one that coals.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 22, 2014)

LOL... WOW Oxford... you do know they have an ignore function on this board right??
If my posts get so far under your skin, if I'm such a pain... well... why not just use it?? Or just don't read the posts??
LOL... A bully?? Did someone pick on you in school??

Anyway... your "fair warning" don't worry me none.
I FLAT DENY MY STORY HAS CHANGED, THE COMPLAINTS HAVE REMAINED CONSTANT THROUGHOUT... only your perception of it has changed as you read into my posts what I do not say (and you've done that several times). I believe it's because you just don't like me (even though you've never met me) and intently look for anything you perceive as an inconsistency you can use it to give me a little slam, or (hopefully) make me look bad. It's OK man... it don't bother me if you don't like me... I'm good with it... I see it as your loss, not mine.

Do I remind you of someone maybe??

Now read this very carefully...
Nowhere have I "deliberately and dishonestly" represented my "situation and stove as typical of an entire category"... but I have, several times, pointed out certain common designs or features of the "entire category" (EPA inspired) that *I believe* are counterproductive (even stupid) and/or have contributed to, or flat been the cause, of *MY* problems with *MY* stove (and of a couple others locally that I have personal knowledge of). And yes, I have made my non-love of the EPA, or any Federal "regulatory" body for that matter, extremely crystal clear... so what?? Is that why you don't like me?? Because I read the Constitution literally?? Because I see no allowance for the progressivism ideology in it?? No matter... don't answer that.

You sir, are the one making conclusions, stating absolutes, and armchair diagnosing something you have never even so much as laid eyes on... who's bloviatin' and blowin'?

So if you really feel the need to entertain us... HAVE AT IT ‼
*


----------



## oldspark (Jan 22, 2014)

Ok I am late in this free for all but time for a couple of you guys to pony up and say where he changed his story.
I am all ears.


----------



## oldspark (Jan 22, 2014)

Oxford, when you read all the propaganda about the new stoves and they say you can heat 3,000 sq feet they seem to forget to tell you the house has to be tighter then a nuns vagina.


----------



## slowp (Jan 22, 2014)

Ummm, you also need to have the correct size stove for your house and work in how drafty your house is. It isn't like there's only one size of EPA stoves. My stove is one up from the smallest.


----------



## Cerran (Jan 22, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> but I have, several times, pointed out certain common designs or features of the "entire category" (EPA inspired) that I believe are counterproductive (even stupid) and/or have contributed to, or flat been the cause, of MY problems with MY stove (and of a couple others locally that I have personal knowledge of). .



Except that considering a lot of other people who have your stove and it works fine seems to shoot that argument down.

This would seem to indicated either one of two things is true:

1) Something is physically wrong with your stove and you have failed to diagnose it.

Or

2) You are operating your stove outside of the parameters it was designed for.


----------



## oldspark (Jan 22, 2014)

slowp said:


> Ummm, you also need to have the correct size stove for your house and work in how drafty your house is. It isn't like there's only one size of EPA stoves. My stove is one up from the smallest.


Exactly but my stove is supposed to be able to heat 3,000 sq feet, ok pipe dreams but my old stove was bigger but I never had to load it full so this new stove should work well, not even close, the house is much tighter and rooms upstairs are closed off and it still cant do what the old stove did.
You can find these same types of stories all over the place.


----------



## Cerran (Jan 22, 2014)

oldspark said:


> Exactly but my stove is supposed to be able to heat 3,000 sq feet, ok pipe dreams but my old stove was bigger but I never had to load it full so this new stove should work well, not even close, the house is much tighter and rooms upstairs are closed off and it still cant do what the old stove did.
> You can find these same types of stories all over the place.



*To compute the maximum area each woodstove will heat, manufacturers use a model of a very well insulated house with 8' ceilings, thermopane or storm windows and an open floor plan in a climate similar to Seattle's, where January low temperatures average 41º F. Any deviations from this model (ie: colder climate, poor insulation, high ceilings, old windows, etc.) must be taken into consideration when choosing your stove.*

http://www.chimneysweeponline.com/pacsumm.htm

You can find a lot of anecdotal evidence that the EPA stoves are better as well. I myself went from a Timberline wood insert to a Quadrafire 3100i (ACT) with a firebox that is 30% smaller and I get a lot more heat from the new stove.

I have a neighbor that went from a Fisher with almost 4 Cubic feet of firebox to a Kuma Sequoia and gets more heat out of the new stove and has been using about ~30% less wood.

My guess is that if you were to test most installations of pre-EPA stoves against their EPA equivalents that the pre-epa stoves would perform poorly in comparison in the majority of cases.


----------



## oldspark (Jan 23, 2014)

Cerran said:


> *To compute the maximum area each woodstove will heat, manufacturers use a model of a very well insulated house with 8' ceilings, thermopane or storm windows and an open floor plan in a climate similar to Seattle's, where January low temperatures average 41º F. Any deviations from this model (ie: colder climate, poor insulation, high ceilings, old windows, etc.) must be taken into consideration when choosing your stove.*
> 
> http://www.chimneysweeponline.com/pacsumm.htm
> 
> ...


I can find many posts that report just the opposite and that is not the case with my old stove vs the new one and that information about how they size the stoves is very interesting and explains a lot, would have been nice for all the people blowing smoke up my ass to tell me that before I bought my stove.


----------



## oldspark (Jan 23, 2014)

I learned a lot from these posts, mainly that my stove is not going to work till I tighten up the house, might as well accept that fact, the big H kicked me off because they were tired of me complaining, I new the sq footage figures were off but did not realize it was that bad.
All this bickering and back biting has told me exactly what I needed to know.
Thank you very much!


----------



## slowp (Jan 23, 2014)

Do you flit from one forum to another to complain about your stove? Did you buy it from a dealer in your area? The company I bought my stove from has been in the business awhile, was familiar with the local climates--I'm in a colder place than their store, and had worked with the house builder several times before. The stove guy came out and looked over the house before delivering the stove and chimney pipe. 

And yes, my house is pretty air tight. There are tiny vents in some of the windows and a whole house fan on a timer that goes off and on year round. 

Bickering? I think not. Just a discussion of our experiences with our woodstoves.


----------



## oldspark (Jan 23, 2014)

slowp said:


> Do you flit from one forum to another to complain about your stove? Did you buy it from a dealer in your area? The company I bought my stove from has been in the business awhile, was familiar with the local climates--I'm in a colder place than their store, and had worked with the house builder several times before. The stove guy came out and looked over the house before delivering the stove and chimney pipe.
> 
> And yes, my house is pretty air tight. There are tiny vents in some of the windows and a whole house fan on a timer that goes off and on year round.
> 
> Bickering? I think not. Just a discussion of our experiences with our woodstoves.


No bickering, LOL did you read the posts directed at spidey?
Sure I bought the stove from a dealer here but was he going to talk me out of buying the stove, I was told these stoves were way better then the old one and to expect more heat, more to it then that.
Some of the bigger(4 cu ft) non cat stoves don't get very good reviews so not sure what stove I would buy, at this point I am ready to try the Nashua with the 6 inch chimney.


----------



## Cerran (Jan 23, 2014)

oldspark said:


> I learned a lot from these posts, mainly that my stove is not going to work till I tighten up the house, might as well accept that fact, the big H kicked me off because they were tired of me complaining, I new the sq footage figures were off but did not realize it was that bad.
> All this bickering and back biting has told me exactly what I needed to know.
> Thank you very much!



The square footage figures were based on very specific conditions. That doesn't mean they were off.

The real question is how large was your old stove compared to the new one and how much wood do you use now versus what you used to use?


----------



## oldspark (Jan 23, 2014)

Cerran said:


> The square footage figures were based on very specific conditions. That doesn't mean they were off.
> 
> The real question is how large was your old stove compared to the new one and how much wood do you use now versus what you used to use?


Like I said some where else, bigger stove but was never loaded full so I figured a little smaller stove was not an issue, plus it was supposed to do a better job of heating.
The house is way tighter then it used to be so hard to compare but the summit is chewing through wood in these cold spells.
Besides the fact the house is colder, NP, I will fix it one way or the other.
Will not wear out my welcome here as it sounds like I have a good start on that.


----------



## deerlakejens (Jan 23, 2014)

I'm not sure where I gave a dislike but am guessing it was an ''accidental'' while scrolling on the Ipad. I love the touch screen convenience but the down side is unintentionally clicking on a link every now and then. Sorry about that!


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 23, 2014)

I figured it had to be something like that deerlakejens... after all, the post only contained one word... "interesting".
Anyway... no need for apology, my feelings weren't hurt or anything 

As to the rest of this thread... just for the sake of argument let's say I concede 100% to all the armchair internet diagnostics...
The stove is to small...
The house (and now the shop) is to big and drafty...
The chimney (two separate chimneys) is wrong and draft is incorrect...
I don't run it correctly (even as I follow the manual)...
Am I missing anything else??

I only have one question... just one... and it goes directly to my biggest complaint, the one issue that has remained constant and the most irritating of them all...

When the firebox is half full of coals, why is there *no heat*?? I'm not talking low heat, or not enough heat, I'm talking lay my hand on the stove* no heat*. And why do those coals not burn down?? Why do they just die out?? Or, to get them to burn down and make a little heat, it requires constant attention by me, stirring them every 10-15 minutes over the course of several hours?? Too damn small or not... why can I lay my hand on the stove?? (No, I can't hold it there forever.) Yes, I suppose there could be something wrong with this individual stove... but that doesn't explain why a few others have the same or similar issues does it. I can understand, even live with the "not enough stove" concept... what I can't understand is a *cold stove* when the firebox ½ full of coals.

So I keep going back to the same thing...
For those coals to burn they need air...
If they won't burn or die out it's because they ain't getting air...
The coals are on the bottom of the stove...
The air comes in the top of the stove where the coals ain't...
And why does the air come in over the top?? Because the stove needs to meet certain clean burning "standards" (EPA regulations).
OK, so y'all with nice tight, insulated homes and new thermal windows don't see these problems... I believe you‼ Likely, also, *some* or *part* of the problem is because I don't heat like a lot of ya' do; I don't heat the house, or stove room up to 88° and then let it slowly cool, I like to keep things relatively constant in my comfort range. So when the stove cools down I don't have the "cushion" I guess... I need (or want) a relatively constant and even amount of heat output from my appliance throughout the complete burn cycle. OK, I get it, I'm not doing it correctly, that ain't how it works... but that is how it works with the old smoke dragons I've used, every single one of them‼

So here we are again... I don't like the way the new-fangled stoves work. I don't like the way they pump out massive amounts of heat during the flame stage that rapidly diminishes going into and during the coaling stage. I believe, my *personal* opinion is... *that's a stupid design*... inspired by EPA regulations written as a one-size-fits-all. It's simple, and it would be the same no matter how big the stove was... the way I use them, the way I *personally* use them, they will never burn clean and use less fuel for me. Why?? Because I will always try to make them heat less during the flame stage, and/or heat more during the coaling stage... because I will always want them to heat like an old smoke dragon, constant and evenly throughout the entire burn cycle. At the same time, if I do need extremely high heat output because I was away and the house cooled down, I want that also... and the smoke dragons give me that.

OK... so the stove is too small and my house looses too much heat during times of heat demand is high, but wouldn't a larger stove be to big when the heat demand is low?? See what I mean about finicky?? From what I've been reading here, too big can be worse than too small... correct?? The high heat demand times are during mid-winter... what about the other 4-6 months, the majority of heating season when heat demand is low?? At least with the old smoke dragon, if it was a bit small for times of high heat demand I could keep shoving more wood in it and control the coal bed by how much air I fed it... and if it was a bit big for times of low heat demand I could use a small, low burning fire. With the "stovace" the house was too damn warm in the spring and fall, too damn cold in the winter... finicky damn thing. When it's loaded with a fresh fuel load, even a small one, during times of low heat demand it would make more heat than I want during the flame stage... by design, I might add. During low heat demand, damping it down just causes it to smolder badly, opening it up so it don't smolder and it heats like a banshee... during high heat demand it won't heat constantly over the burn cycle and ya' can't control the coal bed... finicky damn thing. There was only one time it worked fairly well for me; early in the season out in the shop... I wanted the high heat from the flame stage to warm it up some 20° or 30° quickly, and then the real low heat from the coaling stage to maintain it. But that only works when outside temps are around 40° to 50°... that ain't the way the house works, or is heated, I keep the house at a steady temp.

I tried one... just one... I'm not interested in another. Before I would consider another it would have to be proven to me it can heat at a constant and even rate over the complete burn cycle (or nearly the complete cycle) under varying conditions. I don't see how that's possible given the way they work... during the flame stage they're gonna' heat like a banshee, I see that, mine does that... during the coaling stage not so much. What I want, what I require for my *personal* needs and comfort is something that heats consistently somewhere between those two extremes... and I need to be able to control what that rate is. I want more user control.

I'm not interested in babysitting the box (which I would need to do if I want them to work the way I want)...
I'm not interested in finicky (I need, or want, more user control, and it appears they are, or can be, finicky about that)...
I'm simply not interested... I don't care how clean and efficient they are... it ain't worth it to me... at least until someone comes up with a design that heats at a (relatively) constant, and user controllable rate for the entire burn cycle like the old smoke dragons do.

There you have it... Stuck in the 50s 
*


----------



## blacklocst (Jan 23, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> I believe, my *personal* opinion is...


 See that wasn't so hard.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 23, 2014)

*L-O-L ‼*


----------



## oldspark (Jan 23, 2014)

I will not try another one unless I get a loaner, way too much money to have a cooler house.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 23, 2014)

No doubt they are expensive... or at least the (perceived) top quality ones are.
You can get one for under a grand at the "big box" stores... but I see the one I have sells for around 3-grand.
Of course, some of that pays for the "pretty" part as well as the firebox.
Still, even a grand seem over-the-top to me... but I'm... well... Stuck in the 50's ya' know  (Too damn funny‼)
*


----------



## 3fordasho (Jan 23, 2014)

Spidey I'll have to agree with a few points - mainly the burn tube / steel stove design results in too much heat in the active burn period then not enough in the later coaling stages... however - my research lead me to two solutions to this problem:

1. buy a cat stove, mainly a Blazeking which is very good at spreading the heat pretty consistantly over a fairly large amount of time.. say up to 30 hrs.

2. By a cat or hybrid stove with lots of soapstone to spread the heat release over time...

Both options prevent the wide temp swings your complaining about.


I did option 2 and it's working pretty well for me. Heating 1600 ft2 of 1880's two story with crappy limestone foundation. Sure I've made improvements but there are lots of areas that just can't be improved much.. 
-15F this morning when I woke up, 74F in the house. I might hit 3.5 cords this winter, typically more like 2.5- 3 cords.
Natural gas furnace NEVER runs. 

Now I do have two stoves, a Fireview and A Progress Hybrid. Only run both when it gets around 0F or less.
Before I got the PH, I heated with just the fireview and on a well below 0F stretch I would get coal build up - just too much house and cold temps for one 2 cu.ft. stove.


----------



## zogger (Jan 23, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> I figured it had to be something like that deerlakejens... after all, the post only contained one word... "interesting".
> Anyway... no need for apology, my feelings weren't hurt or anything
> 
> As to the rest of this thread... just for the sake of argument let's say I concede 100% to all the armchair internet diagnostics...
> ...



I guess some sort of ultimate would be a wood chip boiler or hot air furnace, auger fed from like a grain bin or something.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 23, 2014)

Yeah 3fordasho, I suppose a cat or hybrid stove with soapstone is an option...
 But then we get back into me modifying it into some sort of furnace config for the house... remember, I like to heat the whole house sort'a evenly. Although, I know there are some "new-fangled" furnaces out there now, I don't know enough about them really. I want to see one installed and working in conditions close to mine... I'm a bit gun-shy if ya' can understand that. Maybe I'll put that stove in the well-house (doubles as a garden shed)... it's only a 10x10, and that way I'd still have something to ***** about 
As for the shop?? Naw, cat/hybrid is too much $$$ for no more than it gets used... just your basic campfire in a box will do, or, campfire in a barrel 

Ooooops, sorry about that word, didn't know it was unacceptable.
*


----------



## brenndatomu (Jan 23, 2014)

Hey Spidey, in your novel (post #89) ...



Whitespider said:


> If they won't burn or die out it's because they ain't getting air...
> The coals are on the bottom of the stove...
> The air comes in the top of the stove where the coals ain't...


Your stove has no air coming in the bottom? Most do. It's commonly referred to as the "doghouse" where the air comes in the bottom, holes blowing primary air back across the coals. I know my lil ole $400 Vogelzang does, the dang thing absolutely EATS coals, heck, I had to block part of the air holes to this stove so the dang thing would have ANY coals left after 4 hrs, (small stove, 1.2 CF) If I roll a large red coal in front of the "doghouse" it will literally cut it in two within 20 minutes.
If the PE has no bottom air holes, I could see it being a coal maker, that'd be a crappy design for sure, but not a "normal" setup on most EPA stoves. Might wanna check that out one more time (just for fun ) (or make some holes? not gonna hurt the warranty now!)
It seems some (most) EPA stoves have the primary "doghouse" air set (not adjustable) (like mine) only the airwash part of the primary air is adjustable. My secondary air is preset too, but some stoves you can adjust any/all of them, seems like that would make for a difficult (fiddly) to run stove.


----------



## slowp (Jan 23, 2014)

Spider, I seem to remember that the answer was revealed to you a few months back. The air intake, at least on my stove, enters at the bottom front. Right at the door. Block that and you might have some problems. 

Coals? I thought coals were part of the burning process. I get coals and they quickly burn down to ash. I'm burning our soft hardwood, Red Alder and our readily available softwood, Douglas-fir. Both are well seasoned.

Let me check, I started the fire from scratch an hour ago. It is running on 4 small chunks of alder. Alder doesn't throw out as much heat as other species of wood. The house was 54 this morning--I had a window open all night. It is now 58 indoors and 43 (we had a warm night) outdoors. It'll get up to 70 and I'll probably let it die out for the day, and maybe until tomorrow morning. 

I can turn on the ceiling fan and that will speed things up. The ceiling peaks to 13 feet high and the two end walls are mostly
windows. The PNW style of building usually incorporates lots of windows because of our perpetual gloom, and mild temperatures.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 23, 2014)

brenndatomu,
No there ain't any air coming in the bottom... well... that's not 100% true.
There is a small hole (about ¼ inch) at the bottom front, under the door, that feeds the "boost air"... basically used for helping get a fire started.
One modification I tried was drilling more holes... but the "channel" feeding them is the same one feeding the "primary" (glass door air wash). Once those "channels" got hot air the air just flows rapidly to the primary, pretty much bypassing the "boost air"... and it caused the glass to smoke up badly during warm-up (not that I cared much at that point). The only way I could get it (those holes) to work was when I took the firebrick out of the bottom and installed an elevated grate. But that just introduced more problems; the area under the grate would fill with ash in just one, or maybe two burn cycles, putting me right back to square one. And there wasn't any way of cleaning out the ash without lifting the grate out, which meant letting the fire burn completely out... every day (or even more often when heat demand was high). Both the primary and secondary air is controlled by a single lever/linkage system; I did try disconnecting the linkage and running them separate... marginal help at best, not worth the added headache of trying to balance two controls.

The best I've been able to do is remove the firebrick from the sides and back. This seems to accomplish two things...
1) It removes the insulation between the fire and the firebox steel, allowing more heat to be transferred to the steel.
2) It reduces the heat of the fire (somewhat) during the flame stage so it don't coal-up as rapidly... flame stage lasts a bit longer.
And, from what I can tell, it hasn't changed the coaling stage other than to allow a bit more heat transferred to the steel (if I keep stirring them).




addendum; Oh... and yes, the coals laying directly in front of the "boost air" will burn, maybe within an inch or two, and then only until they ash over. That's sort's what I mean by stirring... I have to continuously keep knocking the ash off and pulling a few coals up next to the "boost air" holes (like every few minutes)... even so, there ain't any heat to speak of. I can stick my hand inside the firebox and hold it over the coal bed for several seconds, if I stir 'em up a little ya' can't hardly stand in front of the door... but, as soon as ya' close the door they cool right back off.

They flat ain't getting enough air to heat... or, at least heat like I need 'em to.
*


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 23, 2014)

What's the temperature down there today Del_?
By-the-way... I like the idea of cast iron and no refractory brick in that stove... much closer to "old school".


----------



## naturelover (Jan 23, 2014)

WS, when are you fully opening the air control to burn down the coals?


Sent from my iPhone 5 using Tapatalk


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 23, 2014)

Del_,
I get (or, got, in the house) much better performance when temps are above... say, 20-25° depending on wind.
It's during high heat demand where the most irritating headaches begin... like today.
Right now, at 10:30 AM, it's -12°, 20 MPH wind, cloudy, windchill at -35°... we're lookin' at a high maybe hitting -4° late this afternoon, windchill remaining below -20° all day.
I'm not trying to say your stove wouldn't perform for me right now (We don't know, do we?), but at the same time you can't use what's happening there as a comparison to here either... it just ain't an apples-to-apples, is it??
*


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 23, 2014)

naturelover said:


> *WS, when are you fully opening the air control to burn down the coals?*



LOL
That's easy... when it stops heating‼
*


----------



## Chris-PA (Jan 23, 2014)

Our main stove cost about $800. It has no air outlets at the bottom and from what I can see of Spidy's image it works like that. Primary air comes from the top at the front of the secondary air manifold and washes down the window to the bottom front edge. If I stop it down properly for a long night's burn then I am greeted in the morning with moderate amount of coals, making my morning stove loading/re-kindling chore much quicker and easier.

The small Hampton H200 upstairs also has no bottom air outlets into the firebox, with primary air washing down the door glass as well. 

I still marvel at how well these stoves work, it just never gets old.


----------



## sunfish (Jan 23, 2014)

Del_ said:


> The reason I'm asking is because it would be easy to run at least eight or ten cords per heating season through our Jotul F600CB. The Jotul is likely more efficient that what you are running so I'd say it would do the job just fine and likely would even use less wood. Especially if it was placed in the living space, like it is designed to be placed.
> *
> The wood stove as a central gathering place is a very old tradition. Coming in from the cold and standing near it, watching it, reading by it, tending it are all a part of being connected to what the weather outside is doing. It's a very important part of heating with wood that I think is missing from a ducted forced warm air basement wood heater. It's amazingly simple to toss another log on the fire, and one that people really seem to enjoy. Of course for you this kind of proper use is out of the question.*


That's good right there bro!

Windchill below 0 here all day and the 118cb Jotul is cranking the heat on very little wood. House is a bit too warm right now...


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 23, 2014)

Del_ said:


> *Reminds me a lot of when you first signed on here and went on and on about the benefits of pouring used motor oil on your firewood.*



Heck man, I still do that 
I reckon, going on how cold it's been this year, and what I've used so far, I'm lookin' at burning in the neighborhood of 7½ cord in the furnace and shop this year (give or take a half).
Which, by-the-way, is what I used in the "stovace" last year when average temperatures were running some 10° to 20° warmer (but winter did drag on late last year).
Where I get really confused is, why so many people (and you do it the most often) post how "happy" other users are... I mean, how exactly does that relate to me?? And then when I point out that there are also a few not so "happy", it's scoffed at and ridiculed. Double standard I guess... depends on your side of the fence, don't it?? Your side is "right", my side is "wrong"... it never occurs to you that there may be both "right" and "wrong" on both sides of that fence... does it?? Even when I try to have a constructive discussion you revert to being a pompous, condescending, arrogant azz... and bring up things totally unrelated to the topic in some sort of attempt to discredit anything I have said, or may say (such as the used oil).

So I guess I'll say the same thing to you...
Why not just use the "ignore" function and save yourself all this irritation I obviously give you??
*


----------



## Steve NW WI (Jan 23, 2014)

Spidey, I'm ALMOST starting to believe there could be a factory defect with your stove. A hole not punched, an air duct with something wedged in it, something along those lines. I just can't make 2+2 equal 4 from a couple hundred miles away.







Is this a diagram of your stove, or just a representative pic? If it's yours, it's showing PRIMARY air (2 - Main Cumbustion Air) coming in low and in front. That should be enough to keep the coals burning down and producing heat, at least in my mind. Can you explain for me a little better the difference between the primary and boost air on your machine?

This drives me nuts, partially because of the 500 page book of arguments we could print from it, but also because if I take what you say at face value, I can't figure it out, and I really hope that I'm smart enough to outwit a simple box of steel, block, and glass.

I'm about to the point of building one myself, with all sorts of possible adjustments, maybe some fancy sensors to track what's going on, just to learn better exactly how doing what, where, at what time affects performance. Heck, maybe I can make one that will even pass the Spidey test.  If I can do that, I'll be retired before 50.


----------



## naturelover (Jan 23, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> LOL
> That's easy... when it stops heating‼
> *



Is this as soon as it stops burning the wood or when the secondaries stop?

Maybe try opening it sooner, to keep the temps and the draft up. If your stove or chimney is cooling too much before you are fully opening it, maybe it's losing its draft. 

As say, if you get a thermometer on there, it could help in diagnosis. 


Sent from my iPhone 5 using Tapatalk


----------



## oldspark (Jan 23, 2014)

Chris-PA said:


> I still marvel at how well these stoves work, it just never gets old


Yep me too.


Steve NW WI said:


> Spidey, I'm ALMOST starting to believe there could be a factory defect with your stove. A hole not punched, an air duct with something wedged in it, something along those lines. I just can't make 2+2 equal 4 from a couple hundred miles away.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I hope you figure it out as mine does the same exact thing.


----------



## Steve NW WI (Jan 23, 2014)

oldspark said:


> Yep me too.
> 
> I hope you figure it out as mine does the same exact thing.



IF, I'll say again, IF there's something effed up from the factory on some of these stoves (obviously not all of em, some are reported to work fine) - there's a fighting chance that more than one of em has the same defect.

Any chance your stoves have build dates or serial numbers on the UL tag? My Drolet does. It'd be interesting to see if maybe yours and Spideys were close together in build sequence, and Ronaldos was built at a different time.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 23, 2014)

Steve NW WI,
That's the picture in the manual... it's pretty damn close but not an exact representation of the external part of the stove..
I think if you look real close you'll what they are calling "Main Combustion Air" is nothing more than the "Air Wash System" air after it makes the turn into the pile of wood. Look close and you will see some of the arrows representing the "Air Wash System" air curving into the fire. I suppose they could also be labeling the combination of "Air Wash System" air and "Boost Air" as "Main Combustion Air" (shrug). But like I said, the "Boost Air" is fed by a single ¼ inch hole... and I only see evidence of it actually feeding any air during cold starts (such as flickering flame or smoke movement). Anyway... that's the best I've got.

addendum; Crap, my UL tag may have gotten trashed in the move up the steps and into the shop... I'll check this weekend though.
*


----------



## Steve NW WI (Jan 23, 2014)

I see it now - not the clearest pic. POSSIBLY - it looks like from the primary tube running above the door, some outlets are designed to point at the door (air wash) and some down toward the fire/coals. Best guess now is not enough primary air velocity to overcome draft, and therefore not getting air far enough down/back to keep the coals burning. Could go back to the draft argument, or could be the air feed tube not drilled properly????

Signing off for now, going to work and hate typing on my yuppie phone.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 23, 2014)

Funny... You are aware your self-importance is showing, right?? If I thought you were a "thorn in my side" I'd use the "ignore" function in a heartbeat.
See... I actually find the narcissism quite entertaining.

Just use the "ignore" function.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 23, 2014)

naturelover said:


> *Is this as soon as it stops burning the wood or when the secondaries stop?
> Maybe try opening it sooner, to keep the temps and the draft up. If your stove or chimney is cooling too much before you are fully opening it, maybe it's losing its draft.
> As say, if you get a thermometer on there, it could help in diagnosis.*


Sorry... I wasn't ignoring your post, just sort'a got sidetracked.
The rapid decline in heat output begins as soon as the secondary burn stops; when the blower is running you'll notice a significant drop within a minute. By the time the fire totally collapses into coals heat output pretty much bottoms out... which ain't very long after the secondary stops. And, of course, as I've said, the greater the temperature difference between inside and outside, the more dramatic and severe this output drop seems to be. I've played quite a bit with the draft control... and I'll likely play with it a lot more over the next few weeks in the shop.
But really, in direct response to your post, there has never been any sort of evidence that draft is weak or lost... I can't remember even the slightest puff of smoke coming out the door when opening it. Heck, when I stir the coals most of the sparks even get sucked up and away. I know that's not very scientific... but... gut feelings ya' know??
Yeah, I know... thermometers, manometers, and what not... if I had them laying around I'd use them so you guys could see the hard numbers you want... but I don't, so there we are (shrug). Besides, I'm just not hip on drilling (what I consider anyway) unnecessary holes in my flue pipe, just seems wrong to me... and spending $10 on something requiring a hole in the flue pipe seems even more wrong. Ya' know?? The "Lost in the 50's" thing I guess... just too much old school in me I suppose.

+++++++++++++++++++
Just use the "ignore" function.


----------



## brenndatomu (Jan 23, 2014)

Finding the PE airflow diagram a bit tough to decipher, I looked up the manual for this stove, I believe this is the correct one. http://pacificenergy.net/files/9213/8057/6138/super_spectrum.pdf First off, not a very impressive manual, I see your frustration with not having much to go off of, 'cause it's just vague! The website lists this stove as a "medium" stove, so I really believe it *never* stood a chance of heating your house, and prolly not the garage very well either. I think that is the bottom line issue. I noticed in the trouble shooting section of the manual that they say not to reload until the coals are burnt down to "quite small" So if doing that is not providing enough heat output, logically, the stove is just too small. BUT, I'm still not convinced that there isn't something else going on here though.
I looked on youtube to see if I could get a better idea of what the insides of this thing looks like, boy, there is quite a few PE vids there! Anyways, a couple things I began to wonder about, during the baffle removal/install process they mention checking the gasket between the baffle and the air tube up the back of the stove in the center (#16 on pg 15 of manual) is yours good Spidey?? Also, on the one vid, they talk about making sure that the brick retainers (13a & 13b on pg 15) that the baffle sits on are straight and the baffle is sitting on them flat, basically sealed between. I have read on another site, that a certain model stove (an Englander maybe?) has a reputation for their two piece baffle not quite sealing correctly, leaving a small gap, so guys "plug" it up by laying a welding rod in the gap. Supposedly it makes a HUGE difference in heat output and how the stove behaves.
OK, on page four of the manual, under monthly inspection, they say to check the boost tube cover, is this something that could be out of place, missing? If it is OK, then can you easily modify it to provide air at the base of the fire? That's likely what you said that you drilled more holes in already?
I hear ya on buying a manometer, BUT, if a $20 tool could have saved you _all this headache_...and drilling a 1/4" in the single wall flue pipe is no big deal, but you know that already, you had to do that to put in your manual damper. Just screw a short lag bolt in to plug the hole afterwards. I go back to the manometer cause...looking in the troubleshooting section of the manual it says...
Low Heat Output 1. Wood is wet - Use dry wood
2. Fire too small - Build a larger fi re
3. Draft too low - Chimney plugged or restricted, inspect and
clean
Take note of #3, not sayin your chimney is plugged, just a draft issue.
I think that's enough to chew on for now.


----------



## Chris-PA (Jan 23, 2014)

Other than the "Boost Air" shown as #1 on the drawing, it looks like it functions like mine. Looking at the exploded view I do not see any separate air entrance for "Boost Air" but there is little detail.

From the exploded view there is a single air shutter at the lower back, which most likely controls all the air entering into the riser tube at the back of the firebox (again, just like mine). If it controlled only primary air there would be no need to have it at the back where the tube for heating the air is. The picture shows primary air as coming out over the manifold and washing down the door. This stove appears to function exactly as mine does - one control for both primary and secondary air - except for the "Boost Air" note which I do not think is a separate inlet.


----------



## zogger (Jan 23, 2014)

Mud dauber nest in an airhole......


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 23, 2014)

OK, one at a time... good thing I type fast.

Del_,
I believe it was you that mentioned running the air controls separately last winter. I actually talked a little about that in post #100 earlier today, and I also posted some results of that last winter... but nothing real in-depth. I will say it was an interesting and educational experiment. Actually it was kind'a fun watching how the fire reacted as I changed the relationship of the two... but it didn't do a lot for the coal bed issue(s). In the end I modified the linkage so the primary was a bit more open... sort'a set it where I felt it did the most overall good. I thought it would be really cool to put the secondary on some sort'a rigged, adjustable bimetallic spring (kind'a like the auto dampers found on smoke dragon furnaces). Then I guy could set the primary where he wanted it, set the secondary to... say... medium, and it would self-adjust during the burn. But, I never pursued it further... figured one thing at a time.

brenndatomu,
About the baffle... that little gasket in the back is a PITA, it disintegrates every time ya' take the baffle out. I finally quit buying them and made one using that flat, thin, stove door gasket (they call it ribbon or tape gasket?) and glued it in place using door gasket cement. The baffle never did sit perfectly flat on those rails, but there's some of that "matting" (like on top of the baffle) stuffed in behind the rails to seal everything... and the top "matting" seals the baffle to the sides. I took the rails out and "buffed" off the crud on top so the baffle would sit somewhat flatter, and tucked the "matting" in tight. After that the baffle sat snug and didn't wiggle and appeared to be well sealed on the rails.The boost tube cover is nothing more than a piece of angle iron with holes in it, it sit/leans on the box wall under the door and directs what little air come out of the ¼ inch boost hole in the lower air passage. If ya' bump the darn thing it falls into the bottom of the box... seriously, it's just a piece of angle iron sitting there.

And as far as drilling holes in the flue pipe. It ain't single wall pipe out in the shop, I'm using stainless steel double walled pipe... and drilling holes in it just sits wrong with me. I installed the flue damper (that I don't use 'cause it don't help nothing) in the short little trim piece just over the outlet so I wouldn't have to drill holes in the expensive pipe.

And finally...
*3. Draft too low - Chimney plugged or restricted, inspect and
clean*
I won't say never... but the chimney is fairly new, I mean I just put it up this fall and I don't use it all that much in the shop.
I know someone is gonna' argue with me, but seriously, trust me, it ain't a low draft problem... and I base that on more than just gut feeling... it has plenty of draft. But, it's easy to check for being plugged, it ain't that high on a garage roof... I'll check it this weekend. Heck, I can pop the baffle out, stick my head in the box, and look up... it's that easy.

Chris-PA,
Yup, one control for both the primary and secondary... a slide lever on the front connected via cable to linkage in the ash drawer area. The boost air uses the same inlet as the primary air. Both air inlets are located in the ash ash drawer area under the box.

+++++++++++++++++++
Just use the "ignore" function.


----------



## brenndatomu (Jan 23, 2014)

Mud dauber nest in an airhole......

*LOL!* That right there, I've been bit before, on the wazoo, HARD, by that right one right there!
Wouldn't that be _hilarious_, if ALL THIS, was due to a stinkin lil bug!!!
If memory serves, that stove did sit around in a garage or barn before it was bestowed upon him.


----------



## zogger (Jan 23, 2014)

brenndatomu said:


> Mud dauber nest in an airhole......
> 
> *LOL!* That right there, I've been bit before, on the wazoo, HARD, by that right one right there!
> Wouldn't that be _hilarious_, if ALL THIS, was due to a stinkin lil bug!!!
> If memory serves, that stove did sit around in a garage or barn before it was bestowed upon him.



Once in my furnace in my old chevy camper van, another time the exhaust on my tanaka trimmer. Man, it doesn't take too much to plug things up to the "no workee" stage.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 23, 2014)

brenndatomu said:


> *I noticed in the trouble shooting section of the manual that they say not to reload until the coals are burnt down to "quite small"*



Oh, I forgot this one... two things about that...
1) It takes hours to burn them down... hours without heat‼
2) I downloaded the manual you linked to. It's the same one I have and I can't find where it says that. What page??

And yeah, the friggin' mud dauber thing would be funny, but only after I got over the embarrassment... which could take *YEARS!!* 
But I'll check for such again...

+++++++++++++++++++
Just use the "ignore" function.


----------



## brenndatomu (Jan 23, 2014)

Last line page 17...


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 23, 2014)

Yup ... found it now... flat missed that before.
Well that sucks... 'cause... well... that's like 3-5 hours without any meaningful heat.
So... I guess it-is-what-it-is 

Barrel stove 

+++++++++++++++++++
Just use the "ignore" function.


----------



## naturelover (Jan 23, 2014)

I'd think some shop air through the holes, sometimes the doghouse on the front can be unbolted too.

Buddy had a weedeater that wouldn't run, had me come and look. I pulled it over once and knew what it was. 

Mud daubers had built in the muffler, completely clogging it..

No need to drill the pipe, just place one of the mag pipe therms on top of the stove, in the center and centered between the flue exit and front. 

Got the Rutland at a farm supply store for 10 or so.... 




Sent from my iPhone 5 using Tapatalk


----------



## brenndatomu (Jan 23, 2014)

naturelover said:


> No need to drill the pipe, just place one of the mag pipe therms on top of the stove, in the center and centered between the flue exit and front.


Drillin holes for draft readings, not temp. Mag thermometer wouldn't work on a SS double wall pipe anyways


----------



## brenndatomu (Jan 23, 2014)

Maybe Steve can just wrap all this up into a Spidey EPA stove stickie!


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 23, 2014)

Well... I can say the manual don't lie (bolding and underlining mine).

2. High mass and thermal insulation:
The high mass (weight) acts as a heat storage 
and the thermal insulation keeps the combustion 
zone hot. Active flaming takes place during the 
first part of the burn. During this stage, heat is 
stored in the mass of the unit and is later released 
*slowly* and evenly. As wood chars, active flaming 
will diminish. This clean charcoal burning stage 
will last for a *considerable length of time* and 
refuelling should be avoided until the charcoal 
base has become quite small.

It definitely releases that heat slowly... and it definitely takes it's sweet friggin' time doing it 

+++++++++++++++++++
Just use the "ignore" function.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 23, 2014)

It just never ends with you does it Del_?

+++++++++++++++++++
Just use the "ignore" function.


----------



## zogger (Jan 23, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> Yup ... found it now... flat missed that before.
> Well that sucks... 'cause... well... that's like 3-5 hours without any meaningful heat.
> So... I guess it-is-what-it-is
> 
> ...



Any way to pressurize the air input with a blower, like a forge blower or something? Speed up that burning down the coals to minutes instead of hours. Click, whirrrr, go have a cupajoe, come back, done, click off, shovel out ash, reload, light.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 23, 2014)

Not easily zogger... it would take a lot more doing that just swapping out the stove... a lot more.

You guys do realize this all just reinforces and puts me back to square one with my (*personal*) opinion don't ya'??
(Unless I find something I've missed on the stove itself... which I doubt) Stupid Design‼ 

+++++++++++++++++++
Just use the "ignore" function.


----------



## Steve NW WI (Jan 23, 2014)

brenndatomu said:


> Maybe Steve can just wrap all this up into a Spidey EPA stove stickie!


Thatll be enough outta you pal. I'm already azz deep in overtime at my real job, now you want me to work here too?

Sheesh, just no pleasing some people


----------



## Vermonster (Jan 23, 2014)

Lots of manufactured drama going on here...............


----------



## naturelover (Jan 23, 2014)

brenndatomu said:


> Drillin holes for draft readings, not temp. Mag thermometer wouldn't work on a SS double wall pipe anyways



Well, not to put on the pipe, but on the stove itself to see what temps it's reaching and how long it's sustaining those temps through the cycle. 

I just don't see how it's ever getting cold enough for him to lay his hand on the stove. 

I still believe it's just too small, but seems like something else is wrong somewhere. 








Sent from my iPhone 5 using Tapatalk


----------



## Locust Cutter (Jan 23, 2014)

Not to add to the "fire" here but to add on to the Spidey/P.E. Bandwagon...
I define active fire as active flame/demonstrable heat output. The first load of the day from cold start is double stacked in a criss-cross pattern. Silver Maple, Ash, Piss Elm and Hakberry at 35-50 degrees and Hedge/Locust for colder temps. The first true load actively burns for about 3-4 hours with considerable heat output with the throttle on idle or near to it (after suitable ignition). After the active fire dies and it's just large burning coals I crank it open again to burn the coals down a bit. At this point I'm getting roughly 1/3 or less of the former output. If I continue to add wood to maintain active heat, it coals up to the point that within 6-8 hours I have to shovel burning coals out of the box to make room for more wood. At night I put 3 Good sized pieces of Hedge in and go to bed. 6-8 hours later, i dust the fine ash off of the coals put a few pieces on and it lights off. 

Following Steve's explanation, my stove is working as advertised. Compared to the smoke dragons I grew up with, the coals account for a lot less of the active heat which bothers me. My M.I.L.'s Smoke dragon puts out good heat, even when down to only an active coal bed. I am positive that the problem is not as much the stove being fulty, but the drafts in my house mitigating the effect of the low-output mode and my expectation(s) for the amount and style of heat output. The P.E. seems to be geared off of the principle of putting out a lot of heat and then simmering down to a sustained level. I want a much more gradual arc on the output curve and longer duration than my stove was designed for and I have the largest P.E. fire box available. I DO need to do stove maintenance as I haven't done a thing to it in three years outside of replacing the fire brick, door seals (every season) and flue cleaning. It DOES burn very efficiently and hold coals for a long time. I just don't like the speed for which it chews up a log and then effectively dies down leaving me to either wait on the coal burn-down or shovel them out. 

FWIW, I don't have a stove thermometer (flue or top style), wood moisture meter, or a way of checking the draft. I will get some of these tools when I can, but right now money's tight. If I open the door quickly it will back-puff for a second and the flue is 2.5 stories tall with the equivalent of 2x 90 degree bends. If I do it slowly, it doesn't. It is always burned at idle or near to it after the logs are fully ignited/charred. All of my wood that isn't Hedge is gray with the bark falling off when I pick up the splits off of the stack. I keep the ash pan cleaned out and periodically let it burn out completely to thoroughly vacuum out the burn chamber.

If I'm doing something fundamentally wrong, I'd love to know what as I'd love to get better performance. If not, then I generally agree with Spidey. I also no longer have a P.E. dealer near (w/in a 2.5 hr drive) as mine went out of business. So outside of talking to a factory tech, I have no one who is proficient in P.E. to come inspect my professionally installed setup to ensure that there isn't something either wrong with the stove, or with the flue install. I am not against EPA stoves and will likely by a Jotul Black bear to either augment or replace my current stove.


----------



## oldspark (Jan 24, 2014)

Locust Cutter, yep they can talk until they are blue in the face but all I had for heat for 30 years was my old stove and it did a great job with no problems, it is now in the shop and I am real close to putting in back in and trying it with the 6 inch chimney.
This new stove makes me want to puke.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 24, 2014)

That's a darn good explanation of what happens Locust Cutter... or summation of it.
It, or mine, chews through the flame stage way too fast for my liking, and then piddles 'n' diddles through the coaling stage way too slow for my liking. I'm assuming the reason it runs through the flame stage in about half the time yours does is because it's the "medium" size rather than the "large" size. Flame stage is like 1, 2 hours tops, and likely even makes less heat during coaling... and pretty much all there is for heat is what exits the glass a radiant heat during coaling. Like you said, _"I want_ (or need) _a much more gradual arc on the output curve and longer duration than my stove was designed for." _

The guy who gave it to me, my brother's FIL, had it installed in a little den... the house was sort'a a split level, and that den was the "split" level right off the garage. Insulated, only one outside wall with one single window, just big enough for a couch, couple chairs and a TV, and he raved about the way it worked... said he never had to "fill" it and it would burn all night. I'm guessin' it didn't take much to "maintain" the temperature in that room, I'm guessin' the coaling stage put out just enough heat to make that little room nice a cozy.

It's pretty much a space heater, a room heater... after all, that is what a stove is supposed to be, right??
Also, like you said, _"Compared to the smoke dragons I grew up with, the coals account for a lot less of the active heat which bothers me. My M.I.L.'s Smoke dragon puts out good heat, even when down to only an active coal bed."_ It bothers me also... a lot. There just ain't much difference in heat output between the flame stage and the coaling stage in a more traditional style box... that just is-what-it-is. My furnace is still making heat when there's barely enough coals left to cover the grate; it ain't awesome heat, but enough heat to cycle the circulation blower... and if you open the door they're glowing bright translucent red with hot blue flames coming off them. That's what I need for my purposes, a more gradual, shallower, heating output curve... whether in my house or in my shop.

In the end, my new-fangled style box doesn't save me on fuel consumption or burn any cleaner... because I need the heat output in the upper-middle part of the curve near constantly (and there ain't really a "middle" part with this stove) I'm always adding wood. Adding wood cools the fire temporarily and causes smoke, builds the coal bed until I have to waste them... just as you're saying, and you have the "big" box (so does oldspark I believe). I just don't realize the benefit of "efficiency" or "cleaner burn"... it-is-what-it-is. The "bigger" box would be less troublesome I'm sure, but I don't see it ever being trouble-free for my application in the shop (or the house). In the right environment I'm sure they do a fine job... a tight, well insulated room/house, warmer climates, small(er) spaces, and whatnot. A different brand of new-fangled stove might work better (for me)... no way to know without trying one... so I guess I'll never know (unless someone gives me another one ). I'll just swap it out this summer with a barrel... I've got a rusted-out one out in the old broken-down shed, I can use the "parts" off it and barrels are free (shrug). In these old farm buildings converted to shops, man caves, and whatnot the "barrel" is pretty much the "standard" heater in this area... they just always seem to get the job done.

oldspark,
Take a deep breath man... take a deep breath 
Warmer weather is just a couple months away.
*


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 24, 2014)

I've elected to use my built-in, mental *"ignore"* function this morning


----------



## naturelover (Jan 24, 2014)

Well, we're making progress folks, we went from WS never having one again to "I'd take it if they give it to me"... 


We'll have him sportin' around on radials before it's over with... 

Sent from my iPhone 5 using Tapatalk


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 24, 2014)

*LMAO ‼* Now that's funny naturelover, too damn funny‼

Actually Del_, we're in the middle of a heat wave also... 12° this morning (wind is at 30 MPH though).
Looks like we'll be just a bit on the chilly side come Monday, somewhere around -20° to -25° in the morning, a high maybe hitting -10°... that's supposed to last for a couple days before the cold front moves in. They ain't really sayin' how cold that front will be yet, might just be the common, everyday, -30° at night, -20° during the day... haf'ta wait and see I guess.


----------



## sunfish (Jan 24, 2014)

Locust Cutter said:


> I am not against EPA stoves and will likely by a Jotul Black bear to either augment or replace my current stove.


Bryan, the thing I like best about the Jotul 118 black bear is it throws out more radiant heat and faster than any stove we've had. It really does work like the old smoke dragons, but burns much cleaner & more efficient. I was burning off the coals this morning and it almost got too hot in the house! -3 here this morning. Ya just can't beat the heat output of a cast iron stove with no firebrick or refractory! Ya can't stand very close when it's crankin!


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 24, 2014)

Cast is good... always has been.
*


----------



## oldspark (Jan 24, 2014)

OK so I need a Jotul, do I continue down this path or put the old stove back in.
The ratings for the big Jotul are less then mine but then you can wipe your ass with most of those ratings.


----------



## sunfish (Jan 24, 2014)

oldspark said:


> OK so I need a Jotul, do I continue down this path or put the old stove back in.
> The ratings for the big Jotul are less then mine but then you can wipe your ass with most of those ratings.


That's what I'd do, but can't say it'll work for you...


----------



## Chris-PA (Jan 24, 2014)

Del_ said:


> Ten degress F out there this morning.
> 
> Another flawless day with our 'not so difficult to run' EPA wood stove.
> 
> ...


Yup, except when I'm a bonehead and stop it down too hard overnight. But no matter, it's blazing away again in minutes.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 24, 2014)

Well, I ain't never used a Jotul... ain't even sure I've seen one in use.
But, just going on what I know from using the smoke dragons, unlined cast has to be better than what I have now for a stove in the shop... but how much better I flat can't say.
It would be nice to spend a bit of time around one first... huh??
*


----------



## sunfish (Jan 24, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> Cast is good... always has been.
> *


Yep! I'll probably never buy a steel stove. But ya know about 'never say never'...


----------



## sunfish (Jan 24, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> Well, I ain't never used a Jotul... ain't even sure I've seen one in use.
> But, just going on what I know from using the smoke dragons, unlined cast has to be better than what I have now for a stove in the shop... but how much better I flat can't say.
> It would be nice to spend a bit of time around one first... huh??
> *


I don't know much about the other Jotul stoves but the 118 Black Bear is just a simple cast iron box stove with a baffle & smoke chamber above the firebox. It's a 100 year old design that they added secondary burn air tubes to. You can run it with or without secondary burn. The only thing that will need replacing on this stove is the door gasket & possibly the baffle, but that would be many, many years down the road, if at all. It is very easy on wood, but really cranks out the heat!


----------



## Steve NW WI (Jan 24, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> *LMAO ‼* Now that's funny naturelover, too damn funny‼
> 
> Actually Del_, we're in the middle of a heat wave also... 12° this morning (wind is at 30 MPH though).
> Looks like we'll be just a bit on the chilly side come Monday, somewhere around -20° to -25° in the morning, a high maybe hitting -10°... that's supposed to last for a couple days before the cold front moves in. They ain't really sayin' how cold that front will be yet, might just be the common, everyday, -30° at night, -20° during the day... haf'ta wait and see I guess.



I call BS.




Looks like one of those nice warm southern state forecasts. Wanna trade?


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 24, 2014)

You picked a town some distance south and east of me Steve NW WI... a good hour drive anyway.
Here, have a look.
Our forecast ain't that far off from yours... on average I'd say we look to run 'round 5° warmer than you for highs, less than that for lows.




'Course that does depend on which weather service you use.
This one here puts us damn near neck 'n' neck with you.
Guess we'll just haf'ta wait 'n' see.
But... at least we'll be seeing some sun over the next week.
That will be a welcome change.


----------



## Steve NW WI (Jan 24, 2014)

Ehh, Iowa's Iowa.

I just about went with Charles City, due to it being the former home of the good green tractors, but went with the "big city" instead.

I'll say one thing, 26° is still cold when your hands are soaked in diesel fuel after getting a batch of "bottom of the barrel" fuel cause I was too lazy to go to the coop and get good fuel. The old IH adage of "Buy clean fuel, keep it clean" applies here, and I got no one to blame but me. The local don't sell enough diesel to have trustworthy fuel. 

The ugliest filters I've took off in a long time:



Now I gotta go back out and bleed the injector lines. Friday fun!


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 24, 2014)

Oh man... that sucks sour owl $h!t Steve NW WI, miserable stuff that diesel in cold weather.
I accidentally drenched myself with calcium chloride solution in 30° weather once... by the time I got that tire filled I didn't think my teeth would ever stop chatterin'‼
That was one of the only times I remember falling asleep while sitting right next to the stove... and waking up still cold‼
*


----------



## Chris-PA (Jan 24, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> That was one of the only times I remember falling asleep while sitting right next to the stove... _*and waking up still cold*_‼
> *


So the old one didn't heat either?


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 24, 2014)

Smart Azz ‼ 
*


----------



## zogger (Jan 24, 2014)

Been thinking about this a lot..what is needed is a firebox on a pivot. 

OK, you have gotten down to big coals, but you want to add more wood to get the heat back up, but you know that isn't going to work. If you shovel them out, PITA and a waste of some good wood. 

With a pivoting rotating firebox, like an all around multi grate, you add wood to the top of the coals, and rotate that sucker 180. Now the hot coals are on top, they burn better, then ignite the new wood in a little while. Every time you rotate it, the ashes and baby negligible coals fall all the way through to the ash pan.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 24, 2014)

Chris-PA said:


> *So the old one didn't heat either?*



Hey... I found some pictures of the "old" furnace... the one that the converted PE ("stovace") replaced.
This is what it looked like the day it came out and the PE "stovace" went in... she'd seen better days, but managed to keep the house warm right up until the box cracked.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 24, 2014)

And here's the "stovace" up and runnin'...


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 24, 2014)

And this is what that PE looked like when I brought it home...


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 24, 2014)

And some build pictures...


----------



## zogger (Jan 24, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> Well, I ain't never used a Jotul... ain't even sure I've seen one in use.
> But, just going on what I know from using the smoke dragons, unlined cast has to be better than what I have now for a stove in the shop... but how much better I flat can't say.
> It would be nice to spend a bit of time around one first... huh??
> *



FWIW...back in the day, I had a variety of woods hippie friends, most of them used wood heat for a primary, some with heaters, some with furnaces.


Just the heaters...not counting cookstoves or furnaces...


Ok, the hierarchy went like this, bottom to top, po' schmoos like me used used box stoves, old used pot bellies, what you could scrounge up free or a few bucks.

Next up midrange bucks folks were stoves like ashleys, or soapstone/nickle trim, etc nice antiques

Top of the income bracket, jotuls, hands down.


----------



## Bushmans (Jan 24, 2014)

zogger said:


> Top of the income bracket, jotuls, hands down.



....and so ends my thought of ever owning a Jotul!


----------



## sunfish (Jan 24, 2014)

Bushmans said:


> ....and so ends my thought of ever owning a Jotul!


Jotul is priced like most other cast stoves, but ya get what ya pay for.


----------



## brenndatomu (Jan 24, 2014)

Hey Spidey, just wonderin, when the PE was in "stovace" mode did you take the factory heat shields off it?


----------



## Bushmans (Jan 24, 2014)

Vermonster,
You don't see much real stone work like that anymore. Everything is cultured now. Looks so fake. I like it! Well done!


----------



## Vermonster (Jan 24, 2014)

Bushmans said:


> Vermonster,
> You don't see much real stone work like that anymore. Everything is cultured now. Looks so fake. I like it! Well done!


Thanks Bushmans. All those field stones came from our homestead property. 
I actually meant to post this to the thread "Is you stove keeping up?", but had a senior moment and it ended up on this thread.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 24, 2014)

brenndatomu said:


> *Hey Spidey, just wonderin, when the PE was in "stovace" mode did you take the factory heat shields off it?*



Yes
*


----------



## Vermonster (Jan 24, 2014)

Steve NW WI said:


> I can make it go there if you'd like.


Yes, please do that Steve. Thanks my fellow hard water fisherman.


----------



## Ronaldo (Jan 24, 2014)

I like the enamel finish on the PE stove, Whitespider. They called those the Spectrum models, I believe, and my wife and I looked at those when we got ours, but they were priced bout a thousand more than the Super 27, which is just black and no gold trim etc. Decided they both had the same firebox, so we could get along with the less expensive one, since the only difference is the finish.


----------



## dustytools (Jan 24, 2014)

Spider, Im not seeing the draft control lever on the stovace or am I missing something. Also, the stove before the conversion looks like someone blocked the air inlet on the back. ???


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 24, 2014)

dustytools,
The draft control lever is behind the right side gold/brass trim piece... it swings open for access.
The air inlet isn't really blocked in that picture... LOL... it has a piece of window screen black-taped over it to keep mice out... LOL
Anyway, I removed the window screen and black tape during the "build"... and even if it was blocked, having the "stovace" up on concrete blocks opens the lower inlet hole anyway.
Good catch though...


----------



## dustytools (Jan 24, 2014)

That's cool, just curious. My lever is just below the ledge below the door, next to the ash dump handle. I assumed that the nipple on the back of the stovace was the new air inlet. Nice build, its a shame it didn't work out for ya. I think that over time as I get to know the ins an outs of my new Super 27 that it will make me a pretty good heater. One thing that I did notice about my stove was that the air inlet coming in to the front of the stove would/will not completely shut the stove down, in the fully closed position it still lacks about 1/4" of covering the inlet hole. I remedied that for now with a piece of metal duct tape, some say that a good magnet will do the trick too.


----------



## naturelover (Jan 25, 2014)

Aww Spidey, that was your setup? That poor stove never had a chance. 

Will say that is quite the handywork though. 
Anyway, loadin' up the 30. It was gusting to 30mph and in the mid 20's, and the garage is just a tad drafty (snow blows in the door in the back...), and even as big as this stove is, she was runnin' pretty hard today.

Loaded up.





Up and running...





And with the fan on low, which lowers it about 100 degrees than when not running it.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 26, 2014)

naturelover said:


> *Aww Spidey, that was your setup? That poor stove never had a chance.*



Yeah, I suppose your right. But you'd have been downright impressed by the amount of heat exiting the vents upstairs when the secondary burn was active. From an empty firebox cold start I never had a problem raising the temperature of the whole house a couple degrees, even in sub-zero weather... the problems came when I needed to continue raising the temp, or maintain it after the secondary shut down. As you can see from the pics, there wasn't an appreciable size difference between the old (homemade) furnace and the "stovace"... I think that's what frustrated me the most. I mean, I kept reading on this site the, "More heat, less wood" mantra... but I ended up with less heat (overall) and burning more wood using the same size box (shrug) Actually, after I removed the firebrick, the "stovace" had a larger firebox...
*


----------



## Locust Cutter (Jan 26, 2014)

Well, either way, my next stove will be a cast iron unit, not a plate steel. I'm not really impressed with the reality of a plate steel stove. It sounded good on paper, but I don't think the advertising stands up to the test.


----------



## sunfish (Jan 26, 2014)

Locust Cutter said:


> Well, either way, my next stove will be a cast iron unit, not a plate steel. I'm not really impressed with the reality of a plate steel stove. It sounded good on paper, but I don't think the advertising stands up to the test.


Bryan to be fair, steel stoves have been around a long time and the better ones do OK. But I do like cast much better! Cast iron takes high heat better & takes the heating/cooling cycles over many years much better. Most cast stoves will kick out more heat quicker also. This winter has Really sold me on this Jotul 118CB!


----------



## slowp (Jan 26, 2014)

It's 28 outside, 52 inside (let the stove go out last night and opened the window) and the Quadrafire is roaring away with a load of alder in it. Coals? I have this antique that my grandpa made and it is called a poker. Since the coals build up in the back and burn up in the front, I simply open the door and rake said coals so there is an even bed of them and put in more firewood, close the door and life is good. Coals burn up.

Maybe you should burn Doug fir and alder in your modified stove, and a bit of maple sometimes.  

I don't understand the coals thing, and I won't try. It isn't a problem for me.


----------



## Chris-PA (Jan 26, 2014)

Locust Cutter said:


> Well, either way, my next stove will be a cast iron unit, not a plate steel. I'm not really impressed with the reality of a plate steel stove. It sounded good on paper, but I don't think the advertising stands up to the test.





sunfish said:


> Bryan to be fair, steel stoves have been around a long time and the better ones do OK. But I do like cast much better! Cast iron takes high heat better & takes the heating/cooling cycles over many years much better. Most cast stoves will kick out more heat quicker also. This winter has Really sold me on this Jotul 118CB!


I have one of each. They both work really well. I liked the idea of a welded steel stove, as I figured it should be very well sealed and last a long time. So far this has turned out to be true - the only place it can leak is the door gasket and glass, which are no big deal to keep up with. I suppose if I overfired it regularly it could warp and be a problem, but this is hardly good for a cast stove either. Cast iron can warp and change shape quite drastically too. 

The smaller cast stove has been equally flawless in performance though, and it is certainly prettier. 

I must say that these two secondary combustion stoves are pieces of equipment that have constantly impressed me over a span of years. I am more than satisfied with both, and using them makes my smile - that is not all that common with purchases any more.


----------



## husky455rancher (Jan 26, 2014)

i got a blaze king king model this year and i was a little worried cuse of how hard these cat stoves supposidly are to run. so far i dont understand the issues people are having. you light it like any other stove. once the temp in the cat is up you close the cat. then what ive been doing and it isnt even really necessary is i run the thermostat a little higher than id like it for a twenty mins or so. then i go and turn it to the temp i like. 

its running in an uninsullated basement with cement rock foundation. i take the cellar door off during the winter so the heat just comes up and it keeps the floors nice and warm too its usually 68-69 upstairs. id like to get some insullation in the cellar at some point so my foundation dosent suck up all me heat. 

i still have my secondary burn tube insert in the living room. ive lit it a few times just for the hell of it but i really like the blaze king. i dont regret buying it one bit it really is a great stove.


----------



## Locust Cutter (Jan 27, 2014)

I've heard good and bad about VC and PE stoves. I rally haven't heard a bad thing about Jotuls or Blaze Kings... For whatever that's worth.


----------



## sunfish (Jan 27, 2014)

Locust Cutter said:


> I've heard good and bad about VC and PE stoves. I rally haven't heard a bad thing about Jotuls or Blaze Kings... For whatever that's worth.


VC used to be pretty good, but they have changed so much in the last 20 years. I had a not so good experience with one for about 9 years. I do read good things about Blaze King, but don't know anyone who has one & have never seen one? Jotul is top shelf stuff!


----------



## Ronaldo (Jan 27, 2014)

Locust Cutter said:


> I've heard good and bad about VC and PE stoves. I rally haven't heard a bad thing about Jotuls or Blaze Kings... For whatever that's worth.


I have a friend that has a jotul f400 and does not like it. It is very finicky about draft settings and smokes out the door every time unless you reload ONLY when burnt down to coals. Did some research and it seems to be a problem with this particular model.


----------



## flotek (Jan 27, 2014)

It surprises me somebody would build a air jacket around a modern wood stove like that in an effort to heat a building Seems like a lot of time and effort for nothing I like the ducting very interesting to say the least lol ( don't quit your day job ! I think spidey has been watching to many red green reruns on TV land ( if the ladies don't find you handsome they can at least find you handy. ) when he came up with this contraption . If it didn't put out the btus as a stove to heat the house it stands to reason it's not going to as a furnace either but to each their own . I probably would have just sold the pe before making a mcgyverism out of it but then again I would have bought the appropriate size and design stove for my needs in the first place too


----------



## Locust Cutter (Jan 28, 2014)

Well Flotek, I understand your point, but when you're on a budget and are trying to do the best you can within your budget you do what you gotta do. I'd love to have one of the nice, BIG OWBs, but right now it's not in the cards.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 28, 2014)

I'm hoping you can help me out here flotek 
See... I'm having a bit of trouble with the math, no doubt because I dropped out'a school and ain't as smart as you.

Anyway...
If the old non-EPA firebox of the same size (that I also "mcgyverised" in the same way) was capable of heating my home...
And the wiz-bang, new-fangled, EPA firebox of the same size was not capable of heating my home, while using at least as much wood, probably more by my measurements...
How exactly does that add-up to more heat burning less wood??
Am I forgetting to carry a "1" somewhere... maybe dividing when I should be multiplying??
Maybe my giant brain isn't pulsating as much as usual??

Help me out man...
*


----------



## sunfish (Jan 28, 2014)

Ronaldo said:


> I have a friend that has a jotul f400 and does not like it. It is very finicky about draft settings and smokes out the door every time unless you reload ONLY when burnt down to coals. Did some research and it seems to be a problem with this particular model.


I've heard the f400 needs very dry wood and the 'right procedure'. There are also a lot of folks out there that are completely happy with the f400. Our f118 is not so finicky.


----------



## naturelover (Jan 28, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> I'm hoping you can help me out here flotek
> See... I'm having a bit of trouble with the math, no doubt because I dropped out'a school and ain't as smart as you.
> 
> Anyway...
> ...



If you had taken the baffles out of your PE stove and made it a smoke dragon, do you think it would have heated your house?


Sent from my iPhone 5 using Tapatalk


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 28, 2014)

naturelover said:


> *If you had taken the baffles out of your PE stove and made it a smoke dragon, do you think it would have heated your house?*



No!
Even my smoke dragons had/have baffles... what DAKA calls a sliding "bypass damper" is nothing more than a movable "baffle" between the firebox proper and the secondary heat chamber. Heck, I even install baffles in barrel stoves... without them they don't heat as well or burn as clean. With the smoke outlet dead center in the top of the PE firebox it makes it impossible to install a proper solid baffle. All stoves need baffles‼

But maybe... if I welded it shut with plate steel and relocated the outlet... 
*


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 28, 2014)

...oh... no.. never-mind, that won't work... it does nothing to fix the larger issue of the air coming in over the top of the fire and no way to get it under the fire. It'd just be easier, simpler and a whole lot faster to build a proper firebox from scratch.
*


----------



## Chris-PA (Jan 28, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> No!
> Even my smoke dragons had/have baffles... what DAKA calls a sliding "bypass damper" is nothing more than a movable "baffle" between the firebox proper and the secondary heat chamber. Heck, I even install baffles in barrel stoves... without them they don't heat as well or burn as clean. With the smoke outlet dead center in the top of the PE firebox it makes it impossible to install a proper solid baffle. All stoves need baffles‼
> 
> But maybe... if I welded it shut with plate steel and relocated the outlet...
> *


Looks like the air manifold forms a baffle?


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 28, 2014)

Chris-PA said:


> *Looks like the air manifold forms a baffle?*



Yes... I know.
I was responding to the question from naturelover, who asked...
*"If you had taken the baffles out of your PE stove and made it a smoke dragon, do you think it would have heated your house?"*

The question was kind'a dumb... I mean... I wasn't serious about making the PE into a smoke dragon, it wouldn't work with air entering the combustion chamber above the fire. But I was serious when I stated even the (so called) smoke dragons need some sort of baffle to to run hot and clean.
*


----------



## Ronaldo (Jan 28, 2014)

Del_ said:


> Tell us about his chimney?
> 
> My money says that is where the problem is. I've got an F3CB which is the exact same design as the F400, just a little smaller. I've had no such problems running it.


I believe he has a 45 and a 90 and then enough chimney to get above the roof of a two story. I have not actually looked at his set up well, but I know he is no newbie to burning for heat.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 28, 2014)

Del_ said:


> *My Jotul has a proper firebox...*



Proper?? By who's standard?? 
*


----------



## Chris-PA (Jan 28, 2014)

It's time to go reload that stove which can't possibly work, what with the air coming in over top of the fire, so that it will keep us cozy and warm for the night.


----------



## Steve NW WI (Jan 28, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> Yes... I know.
> I was responding to the question from naturelover, who asked...
> *"If you had taken the baffles out of your PE stove and made it a smoke dragon, do you think it would have heated your house?"*
> 
> ...


Not totally true. My old Woodchuck didnt have a "real" baffle, just a plate in front of the rear exhaust outlet. It didnt do much at all.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 29, 2014)

Steve NW WI said:


> *Not totally true. My old Woodchuck didnt have a "real" baffle, just a plate in front of the rear exhaust outlet. It didnt do much at all.*



Heck Steve... that explains it. Now it all makes perfect sense... no wonder you like the new one some much more 

That vertical "baffle" was pretty common in a lot of 'em and it did a lot more than you think it did. The best ones extended all the way across the box, from side to side... the not-so-great didn't. They would trap heat and smoke where it would become super heated and ignite as it passed under the baffle closer to the fire (when the stove was run hot enough)... then the burn would extend into the "trapped" area. It required the correct use of a flue damper to get that extra burn working right... if 'ya listened close you could hear it starting and stopping, sort'a like a mini-explosion. If you look close at a well used one you can see where that burning smoke and heat has eroded portions of it away (like a cutting torch would), even warping the baffle badly. I installed two of 'em in the old smoke dragon when I replaced the firebox many, many years ago... the rear one about 5-6 inches from the outlet, the other, shorter one in the middle of the box. Look close at the the rear picture of it and you can see what remains of the rear baffle (which at one time extended down more than half the outlet). Those are the type baffles I put in barrel stoves, but ya' have to find one of those heavy barrels with a removable lid, sealed in place by a steel band to do it... I used to have a steady source of 'em when we had the dealership, now I'll haf'ta keep my eyes open for one.


----------



## Locust Cutter (Jan 29, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> Heck Steve... that explains it. Now it all makes perfect sense... no wonder you like the new one some much more
> 
> That vertical "baffle" was pretty common in a lot of 'em and it did a lot more than you think it did. The best ones extended all the way across the box, from side to side... the not-so-great didn't. They would trap heat and smoke where it would become super heated and ignite as it passed under the baffle closer to the fire (when the stove was run hot enough)... then the burn would extend into the "trapped" area. It required the correct use of a flue damper to get that extra burn working right... if 'ya listened close you could hear it starting and stopping, sort'a like a mini-explosion. If you look close at a well used one you can see where that burning smoke and heat has eroded portions of it away (like a cutting torch would), even warping the baffle badly. I installed two of 'em in the old smoke dragon when I replaced the firebox many, many years ago... the rear one about 5-6 inches from the outlet, the other, shorter one in the middle of the box. Look close at the the rear picture of it and you can see what remains of the rear baffle (which at one time extended down more than half the outlet). Those are the type baffles I put in barrel stoves, but ya' have to find one of those heavy barrels with a removable lid, sealed in place by a steel band to do it... I used to have a steady source of 'em when we had the dealership, now I'll haf'ta keep my eyes open for one.
> 
> View attachment 330846



WS,
What make stove is that? I ask because I just inherited stove from an Uncle-in-law that from the rear looks identical. The front of mine has a rather small door which takes logs length-ways and is lined w/firebrick and has no glass. It has the manifold vent on top with the exhaust vent on back, identical to yours with a squirrel cage underneath. I plan on welding up braces between the legs to add structure and support. I was going to install it in my bar, but hopefully will be building a 30'x30' or 30' x 40' garage in the next few years and the stove will go into it after which I will install some ducting to distribute the air accordingly. If it's ever been used, it was used very little. He bought it at a farm sale with the intent to install it, but never did. I also have a little vogelzang box stove which will likely get installed in the barn for "shop" use until the garage is built. Either way the shop will be a Godsend and God willing, the furnace will make Winter mechanic work and reloading MUCH more pleasant. Even if it is a smoke dragon.


----------



## flyboy553 (Jan 29, 2014)

Del_ said:


> imagine how much cleaner the air would be if every stove today was modern versus what we have today with the percentage of older tech stoves still being used."



C'mon, Del! You and I both know this would be like pee-ing on a forest fire! Who's statement is this that you quoted? Your own? lol



Ted


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 29, 2014)

I have no idea what make or "brand" that old thing is Locust Cutter... it's at least 35 years old, likely older than that, it had seen some use when I got it and rebuilt it (had a cracked firebox).
It never had firebrick in it, and the 3-piece cast grate sits about a third way up the door... high enough to shovel out ashes while the fire is burning. The door is a double-walled affair... the inner wall bolted to the outer, it channels incoming air under the grate. I replaced the firebox twice... but the front, and especially the back are so badly warped now it ain't worth the rebuild. The firebox floor is a stepped thing at the back; that's where I cut the inlet for the circulation supply air (under the step), and I made the plenum with heat outlet... it originally just had vented heat shields... it was just a stove not a furnace. I wouldn't classify the door on it as "rather small"... you can go back a couple pages in this thread a see a picture of it.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 29, 2014)

Del_ said:


> *BTW, also in that thread it was mentioned that there are already stoves on the market that meet the proposed new standards.*



The way *I* understand it there are some current appliances in the US market that would pass the first phase, but not the final 2019 standards. Supposedly there are some in the European market that would meet final standards... but as of yet, I haven't seen any EPA test results, so I take it as no more than a rumor. The Feds (EPA) have been trying to get the old stuff out of service for years, offering tax credits and pushing states to enact stricter regulations than the current EPA regs. The new, proposed EPA regs do go further towards that end (at least in the wording and how it could be applied)... limiting ownership transfer, appliance relocation, "new" installations, narrowing what constitutes a recreational/"cooking" stove, and other such.

I also am reading that several manufacturers are pushing back hard against this. Just as the 1988 regulations put the majority of small(er) manufacturers out of business... these new regs will put even more out of business. That seem counter-productive in an era of high unemployment to me. One manufacturer has stated that, according to their study, it will increase the cost of manufacturing at least $500 per appliance (on average)... a $500 increase in manufacturing equals a lot more than that to the retail consumer. After all, the maker needs to make a profit percentage on the investment. (Before you ask... I don't remember which manufacturer, and I ain't gonna' bother to find it again.)

Anyway, if the "final" rule comes down as the "proposed" reads, I expect to see this heavily contested by a coalition of manufacturers in the court systems... possibly with some "Live Free or Die" type states joining them. In any event... it may get interesting... the EPA may have finally gone far enough to invoke the proverbial "revolution" this time. We can only hope‼ *L-O-L*

Not trying to get political here... just adding to the conversation with what I've read and what I expect to see.
***


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 29, 2014)

So according to what *you* understand... this means the end of the non-cat stoves??
Well than... a $500 (average) manufacturing cost increase sounds cheap... don't it??
Bettin' it will be much higher for many... and drive more than a few "big-box" store stove makers out'a business.
Not to mention the added cost of periodically replacing the cat. Makes ya' wonder how many will just be run without them... in smoke dragon mode.

So I'm stickin' with what I expect to see as this gets closer to the final rule... in fact, I see it as even more likely, just goin' on what *you* understand.
*


----------



## Steve NW WI (Jan 29, 2014)

Much as I hate having to agreee with Spidey, if it comes down to being cat only stoves, it will be at a cost, and likely after a year of abuse by green wood burning new owners, the cats will be dead and bypassed or removed.

Back to the baffle, I went back to the storage room and took a pic of the old 'chuck's baffle. Lotsa flames shooting up the pipe when you opened the door with a load in it.




Del, stop reading this post HERE. The strap is still holding the appliance dolly to it, waiting for the day enough buddies show up at once to drag it up the stairs, outside and repurpose it as a "thermal recyclables converter".


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 29, 2014)

You're right... that ain't a proper baffle... ain't even close.
*


----------



## slowp (Jan 29, 2014)

I have no idea if my stove is a catalytic one or not. We have a good choice of models to choose from and the stoves don't seem any higher priced than those in other states. Our state has a stricter requirement than the EPA ones. I'm not even sure where to research what the difference is. We may already meet the future requirements.


----------



## stihly dan (Jan 29, 2014)

Del_ said:


> According to you there have been no good wood stoves since emission limits went into effect over 25 years ago
> 
> But you are wrong.
> 
> ...


I think you are right on the controls as my furnace already has them. Not so sure about heat powered tho.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 29, 2014)

Del_ said:


> *According to you there have been no good wood stoves since emission limits went into effect over 25 years ago
> But you are wrong.
> Likely you are wrong, again.*


Well, no... actually you're the one that's wrong. I never said that... and I challenge you to show me where I said, *"there have been NO good wood stoves since emission limits went into effect over 25 years ago."*



> *My bet is we are going to see some electronic controls on wood stove along with improved efficiencies and ease of use.*


My bet is we would've seen that whether-or-not there were new emissions regulations... likely sooner without them.



> *And an increased effort to get smoke dragons out of the smoking business.*


We've already seen that. Your's certainly ain't any sort of intellectual revelation... but I'm bettin' it's driven by your ideology and arrogance.
See... in your selfish, self-important mind... because you don't own a non-EPA firebox, and don't want one... no one else should have the choice, of any sort.
You're also a text book hypocrite, don't ya' know?? You defend your ideology on the "save-the-planet" theme... but man... only if it fits your personal view of it.
*


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 29, 2014)

Thanks for proving my point(s).


----------



## oldspark (Jan 30, 2014)

I think most of the older stoves that were any good had baffles in them.


----------



## Eric Modell (Jan 30, 2014)

Del_ said:


> Baggage man. You are carrying way too much baggage in that noggin of yours. Plus you are a bit mean, and you don't have to be. And you are wrong.
> 
> I have two non EPA fireboxes in the shop out back. A Riteway Model 37, and a double 55 barrel Sotz wood stove kit. Sotz sold a catalytic device too, which I have. I don't use either stove though as I don't heat the shop.
> 
> ...


Because of these two threads I am going to seriously look at a Jotul. A company that built smoked dragons for longer then any of us have been alive and still meet EPA standards with a tweak or two must be a good stove.


----------



## Eric Modell (Jan 30, 2014)

How may smoke dragons copied Jotuls designs? Is an older Jotul a smoke Dinosaur?


----------



## ltdann86 (Jan 30, 2014)

Don't know if this was posted before http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybe...-chilling-consequences-for-many-rural-people/
The last sentence says it all, with all the GW why worry about a handfull of wood stove's?


----------



## Eric Modell (Jan 30, 2014)

I can not see buying a cat stove were standard maintenance will cost me more then the purchase price of both my curnet stoves put together. In the past 25 five years burning my Earth stove, I have replaced the door gasket onece and replaced a few fie brick. I like low maintenance in a stove. Jotuls were off my list because I had preconceived ideas about cast iron being high maintenance.


----------



## sunfish (Jan 30, 2014)

Eric Modell said:


> I can not see buying a cat stove were standard maintenance will cost me more then the purchase price of both my curnet stoves put together. In the past 25 five years burning my Earth stove, I have replaced the door gasket onece and replaced a few fie brick. I like low maintenance in a stove. Jotuls were off my list because I had preconceived ideas about cast iron being high maintenance.


I feel the same way, I do not want a cat stove, or any stove that needs regular maintenance and stuff replaced. That's mostly why I bought a Jotul. 

I think I mentioned earlier I have two cast iron stoves in my shop used daily that are 24 years old and still working fine...


----------



## Chris-PA (Jan 30, 2014)

sunfish said:


> I feel the same way, I do not want a cat stove, or any stove that needs regular maintenance and stuff replaced. That's mostly why I bought a Jotul.
> 
> I think I mentioned earlier I have two cast iron stoves in my shop used daily that are 24 years old and still working fine...


I think maintainability is important too - I want an efficient stove but I'm not expecting good things from the economy in the coming years. I don't want to have to replace parts, nor to count on the supply of those parts. So for me a cat stove makes no sense - I'm not willing to accept the added complexity and requirement to buy new cats for the efficiency increase over a secondary combustion stove. When we bought our small stove I looked at various units, including a VC stove that had very complex ceramic firebox parts. The Hampton we ended up with has simple liner shapes that I have a reasonable chance of replicating myself if needed. It also works exceedingly well.

Part of the beauty and the attraction of a wood stove for me is the simplicity. It works by virtue of parts that don't move and are made of durable materials cast into purposeful shapes.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 31, 2014)

ltdann86 said:


> *Don't know if this was posted before * http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybe...-chilling-consequences-for-many-rural-people/
> *The last sentence says it all, with all the GW why worry about a handfull of wood stove's?*



OK, that Forbes piece, written just two days ago, really makes me angry‼
Larry Bell must be a member of AS... and I've been plagiarized damnit‼
He says all the same things I've been saying for months, even years... he even has the audacity to use my exact wording several times.
I mean, c'mon, when he mentions the EPA's "*one-size-fits-all rules*", he don't even bother to remove the dashes I use‼
He's got some... friggin'... nerve‼

Which one of you guys is Larry Bell anyway??
Well... you and Forbes owe me... big time‼ 
*


----------



## olyman (Jan 31, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> Well, no... actually you're the one that's wrong. I never said that... and I challenge you to show me where I said, *"there have been NO good wood stoves since emission limits went into effect over 25 years ago."*
> 
> 
> My bet is we would've seen that whether-or-not there were new emissions regulations... likely sooner without them.
> ...


on the nailhead,,,,,,,AGAIN.. repeatability,,reveals someone,no????


----------



## flyboy553 (Jan 31, 2014)

Man I love this thread and others like it! Should be titled "As The Smoke Turns"! There is more drama here than any tv soap could hope for! We have good guys, bad guys, neutral guys, pot stirrers, we got it all! And best part, who these good/bad/neutral/stirrer guys are, is all in the eye of the reader! Who could ask for more!!
Of course if it was changed to that, some would complain because there stove doesn't make _any_ smoke! lol 
Ol' Steve knew what he was doing when he started this thread! He must be a moderatroll! lol JK Steve, don't go bannin' me now!

Ted


----------



## oldspark (Jan 31, 2014)

flyboy553 said:


> Man I love this thread and others like it! Should be titled "As The Smoke Turns"! There is more drama here than any tv soap could hope for! We have good guys, bad guys, neutral guys, pot stirrers, we got it all! And best part, who these good/bad/neutral/stirrer guys are, is all in the eye of the reader! Who could ask for more!!
> Of course if it was changed to that, some would complain because there stove doesn't make _any_ smoke! lol
> Ol' Steve knew what he was doing when he started this thread! He must be a moderatroll! lol JK Steve, don't go bannin' me now!
> 
> Ted


Well put flyboy, when you troll with this many fish in the barrel you are bound to get many bites.


----------



## Bushmans (Jan 31, 2014)

Del_ said:


> the oldest heating method known to mankind and mainstay of rural homes and many of our nation’s poorest residents."




So now all you poor people will be required to shell out money you don't have to meet our standards because frankly we don't care about poor people.....

WOW it's like a slap in the face to all low income wood burners.
That would be like getting rid of hamburger and forcing us all to buy steak because the electric grinders use electricity made from the burning of coal which produces emissions *BUT *slicing a steak with a knife is perfectly healthy for our atmosphere because it only uses energy produced from the human body!

So irritating!


----------



## Vermonster (Jan 31, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> Well, no... actually you're the one that's wrong. I never said that... and I challenge you to show me where I said, *"there have been NO good wood stoves since emission limits went into effect over 25 years ago."*
> 
> 
> My bet is we would've seen that whether-or-not there were new emissions regulations... likely sooner without them.
> ...



WS.......


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 31, 2014)

Del_ said:


> *The 'proposed' new regs are for 2019 and are not set in stone yet.*



That's not true Del_,
The EPA has proposed new standards that include new stoves manufactured/sold in 2015.
Allowable emissions would be reduced by one-third in 2015, and 80% by 2019.

The reason these are called "proposed" is because of federal law requiring them to give ample time for feedback/challenges from anyone concerned (such as manufacturers, environmental groups, local/state governments and whatnot). The EPA is not required to make changes from this feedback, but concerned parties may dispute it in the court systems if they choose (or in congressional hearings as the auto makers did some decades ago). They must also give this time period so effected parties have time to "gear-up" for the new regs. Rarely does the EPA make changes between "proposed" and "final" rule... except on occasion to appease their friends the tree-huggers (my words), usually by covering their agenda through those bogus court proceedings described in that Forbes piece. The "final" rule is expected in early 2015, and will become effective near immediately. As it is worded now, any appliance manufactured and for retail sale prior to the rule becoming effective, will be exempt... any appliance manufactured after the effective date will need to meet the new 2015 standards. If any changes are made to the "proposed" rules, then the EPA must allow another "feedback" and "gearing-up" time period... so the chance of "final" rule being different than "proposed" rule is pretty much zilch‼

Unless some group, on either side of this, mounts a determined and well funded challenge in the court systems... those "proposed" regulations are in fact "set in stone".
*


----------



## oldspark (Jan 31, 2014)

Time to stock up on them old dirty stoves then sell them later to ones that want heat.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 31, 2014)

oldspark said:


> *Time to stock up on them old dirty stoves then sell them later to ones that want heat.*



According to current wording and how it would be interpenetrated... you could be fined or possibly even jailed for doing that.
*


----------



## oldspark (Jan 31, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> According to current wording and how it would be interpenetrated... you could be fined or possibly even jailed for doing that.
> *


So at some point in time you will not be able to sell used pre EPA stoves?


----------



## slowp (Jan 31, 2014)

oldspark said:


> Time to stock up on them old dirty stoves then sell them later to ones that want heat.


 
Yes, do that. 

I for one, don't want a rusted out, dented, needs some work, beater woodstove in my living room. Vermonster is right. A lot of drama, mostly by a few guys who are afraid. The majority of folks will purchase a stove that looks good and works. We don't care about it being EPA approved. The stoves work well and look good, and that's what matters. No way would I want that Whitespider modified (ruined?) stove in my house. 

Yes, buy up the old stoves. Maybe the scrap market will skyrocket, or not. 

I don't think any of the non-believers are reading my posts, but once again, we've had extremely strict standards beyond the national in our state. People still heat with wood--I do, and our stoves still heat the house well. That's the bottom line. The super regulated stoves still work, and will heat the house, even when the power goes off. Plus, they cost the same as a good quality nice looking woodstove always has. You pay a little more. I don't mind. I had a coworker who bought one of those super cheap cast iron stoves and her house burned down the first winter it was used, because of the stove. How is that cost efficient? I don't think I've seen safety mentioned much in this thread of manly emotions. 

Whine and beat your chests. Meanwhile, I'll enjoy my nice Warshington EPA regulated stove. It's doing a wonderful job and fits in with my decor.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 31, 2014)

oldspark said:


> *So at some point in time you will not be able to sell used pre EPA stoves?*



As it is worded, and depending on interpretation...
You will not be able to transfer ownership in any way or move the location of installation.
In other words, if you sell your home you will not "legally" be able to take an older (*pre-2015*) stove with you to the new home, nor will you be able to leave it for the new homeowner... it would have to be removed and destroyed. Again, as it reads and depending on how it is applied, any appliance you currently own, but are not using (such as stored in a shed) cannot be "legally" installed anywhere. The exemptions only include appliances currently in use and those currently for *new retail* sale. If you buy 50 of them today they become "used" stoves... you are not a "retailer", you bought them at retail, you are the consumer... you wouldn't be able to "legally" transfer ownership.

So slowp, your pre-2015 stove you love so much becomes a worthless hunk of iron if you ever decide to move, or even build a new home on your current property (unless you would like to pay the fee to have it re-certified at the new standard). These new regulations affect everyone owning, or using, a wood-fired appliance *today*‼ Even you slowp‼
*


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 31, 2014)

OH‼ And by-the-way Del_, I don't believe there are any non-cat appliances that can meet the *2019* standards, but there are some that can meet the phase one 2015 standards. At least that's what I've been reading...
*


----------



## oldspark (Jan 31, 2014)

slowp said:


> Yes, do that.
> 
> I for one, don't want a rusted out, dented, needs some work, beater woodstove in my living room. Vermonster is right. A lot of drama, mostly by a few guys who are afraid. The majority of folks will purchase a stove that looks good and works. We don't care about it being EPA approved. The stoves work well and look good, and that's what matters. No way would I want that Whitespider modified (ruined?) stove in my house.
> 
> ...


So when you go to buy a used car you look for a rusted, broke and dented piece of ****?


----------



## slowp (Jan 31, 2014)

*Part of our state's law. Don't move here. 



WAC 173-433-100 Emission performance standards.*
(1)

Woodstoves. On or before January 1, 1995, a person shall not
advertise to sell, offer to sell, sell, bargain, exchange, or
give away a new woodstove in Washington unless it has been tested
to determine its emission performance and heating efficiency and
certified and labeled in accordance with procedures and criteria
specified in "40 CFR 60 Subpart AAA - Standards of Performance
for Residential Wood Heaters" as amended through July 1, 1990.
After January 1, 1995, woodstove sales shall comply with the
requirements of subsection (3) of this section, Solid fuel
burning devices.
(2) Fireplaces. After January 1, 1997, a person shall not
advertise to sell, offer to sell, sell, bargain, exchange, or
give away a factory built fireplace unless it meets the 1990
United States Environmental Protection Agency standards for
woodstoves or equivalent standard that may be established by the
state building code council by rule. Subsection (3) of this
section shall not apply to fireplaces, including factory built
fireplaces, and masonry fireplaces.
(3) Solid fuel burning devices. After January 1, 1995, a
person shall not advertise to sell, offer to sell, sell, bargain,
exchange, or give away a solid fuel burning device in Washington
unless it has been certified and labeled in accordance with
procedures and criteria specified in "40 CFR 60 Subpart AAA -
Standards of Performance for Residential Wood Heaters" as amended
through July 1, 1990, and meets the following particulate air
contaminant emission standards and the test methodology of the
United States Environmental Protection Agency in effect on
January 1, 1991, or an equivalent standard under any test
methodology adopted by the United States Environmental Protection
Agency subsequent to such date:
(a) Two and one-half grams per hour for catalytic
woodstoves; and
(b) Four and one-half grams per hour for all other solid
fuel burning devices.
(c) For purposes of this subsection, "equivalent" shall mean
the emissions limits specified in this subsection multiplied by a
statistically reliable conversion factor determined by ecology
that relates the emission test results from the methodology
established by the United States Environmental Protection Agency
prior to May 15, 1991, to the test results from the methodology
subsequently adopted by that agency.
[Statutory


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 31, 2014)

slowp said:


> *...a coworker who bought one of those super cheap cast iron stoves and her house burned down the first winter it was used, because of the stove.*



How friggin' typical and ideological is that statement??
The house didn't burn down because of the stove... that's flat stupid‼
The house burned down because the person using it screwed up... inanimate objects can not "do" something, they are entirely dependent on the person using them.
That's like trying to claim a gun, in and of itself, is dangerous... it's just laying there, how is that dangerous?? It ain't the gun that's dangerous, but sometimes the person holding it is‼ The friggin' stove didn't burn the house down... the *idiot* user did‼ Move into the real world already‼
*


----------



## oldspark (Jan 31, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> How friggin' typical and ideological is that statement??
> The house didn't burn down because of the stove... that's flat stupid‼
> The house burned down because the person using it screwed up... inanimate objects can not "do" something, they are entirely dependent on the person using them.
> That's like trying to claim a gun, in and of itself, is dangerous... it's just laying there, how is that dangerous?? It ain't the gun that's dangerous, but sometimes the person holding it is‼ The friggin' stove didn't burn the house down... the *idiot* user did‼ Move into the real world already‼
> *


Yep that was the person not the stove, this thread is getting goofy.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 31, 2014)

slowp said:


> *Part of our state's law. Don't move here. *
> 
> *WAC 173-433-100 Emission performance standards.*
> *(3) Solid fuel burning devices. After January 1, 1995, **a
> ...



Thanks for making my point slowp, the new EPA regs would supersede current Washington State regs.
Your current regs qualify under the phase one 2015 standards, but not the 2019 standards which call for 1.3 per hour, for all stoves.
Which is much, much stricter than what you have now.
As I said, your stove you love so much becomes worthless iron... maybe not in 2015, but definitely by 2019.
*


----------



## brenndatomu (Jan 31, 2014)

Del_ said:


> I'm tickled shitless


So, what's that like?


----------



## oldspark (Jan 31, 2014)

brenndatomu said:


> So, what's that like?


That's gotta hurt don't it?


----------



## brenndatomu (Jan 31, 2014)

oldspark said:


> That's gotta hurt don't it?


That's kinda what I'm thinkin, but readin it in the context of his reply, it kinda sounded like he's a lookin foward to it! 
We got 'em on both end of the spectrum in this thread , ones thats ****less, and ones thats ****full, and everything in between!


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 31, 2014)

First of all Del_, that is a catalytic stove designed and built solely to win a competition.
And even the maker Morrissey says, "_It's a complicated stove that we needed to simplify down to its main components_".
Yeah, that's what I want... complicated (read damn expensive to maintain). Pretty damn doubtful any retail version would perform near like that one-of-a-kind.
It says *up to* 82% efficiency and *as little as* 0.54 g/hr of particulate emissions *in EPA testing*, but then goes on to say, "_The Wood Stove Decathlon does not plan to make its own test data public for concerns it would confuse customers attempting to compare it to EPA and other data._"
Personally, I'm reading that as meaning the real world didn't get the same result. Heck, the EPA rated my PE at 83% and it ain't even got a cat.

I wouldn't give up too much $h!t to that tickle yet, your likely get it back... thrown right in your face.
*


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 31, 2014)

brenndatomu said:


> *...and ones thats ****full...*



Who?? Who's that?? Who?? 
*


----------



## cre10 (Jan 31, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> How friggin' typical and ideological is that statement??
> The house didn't burn down because of the stove... that's flat stupid‼
> The house burned down because the person using it screwed up... inanimate objects can not "do" something, they are entirely dependent on the person using them.
> That's like trying to claim a gun, in and of itself, is dangerous... it's just laying there, how is that dangerous?? It ain't the gun that's dangerous, but sometimes the person holding it is‼ The friggin' stove didn't burn the house down... the *idiot* user did‼ Move into the real world already‼
> *


Keep in mind he's also anti-gun and thinks guns kill


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 31, 2014)

"He" is a "she".
*


----------



## cre10 (Jan 31, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> "He" is a "she".
> *


He, she, it, whatever. But knowing it's a she makes sense now


----------



## oldspark (Jan 31, 2014)

cre10 said:


> He, she, it, whatever. But knowing it's a she makes sense now


Yes indeed.


----------



## ray benson (Jan 31, 2014)

I remember reading a 2012 list of EPA certified stoves - and there were some non-catalytic stoves that met the proposed 1.3 grams/hr emissions. Wood stoves already installed or for sale are not affected by the regulations, the EPA announced in early January.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 31, 2014)

ray benson said:


> *I remember reading a 2012 list of EPA certified stoves - and there were some non-catalytic stoves that met the proposed 1.3 grams/hr emissions.*


I'd like to see that... do you remember where you found it??
Seems like I saw a list of appliances meeting the phase one 2015 standard of 4.5 grams/hr, but I an't seen anything on approved appliances meeting 2019 standards... although I do know some cats can get that low.



> *Wood stoves already installed or for sale are not affected by the regulations, the EPA announced in early January.*



How is that different than what I've already posted??
*


----------



## Steve NW WI (Jan 31, 2014)

Here's your list: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/publications/monitoring/caa/woodstoves/certifiedwood.pdf

Just going through the first couple pages, I'm only finding fairly small stoves (>30,000 btu), and almost all of em cat units, that are under 1.5. I'll let someone else analyze the whole list. FWIW, my new stove will be a "smoke dragon" by 2019, at 3.9g/h.

While I'm here, I'll mention that I actually have a little spare time on my hands on weekends, don't make me spend it deleting posts and handing out warnings. Play nice, people.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 31, 2014)

You guys are aware that the new regulations also change the testing procedure... right??
Don't remember exactly without looking it back up... but it revises the '88/'90 procedure allowing them to fail the "low" burn if they can pass the higher burn some number of times. Previous test results may not qualify... depending on how they passed it.

I guess I'm not seeing where that says any of them qualify under the new standards?
Not that some don't, but some on that list with a certain particulate emission using the old test procedure may not qualify under the new procedure... they will need to re-certify using the stricter, narrower test procedure (again, depending on how they passed the old tests).
Anyway... that's the way I read the new regulations. (shrug)
*


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 31, 2014)

Steve NW WI,
You need to send me your cellular number, e-mail address, and any other way to get hold of you while vacationing.
You know?? Just in case any of these guys act-up, so I can let ya' know right away.
You can trust me... I'll keep a sharp I on 'em. 
*


----------



## oldspark (Jan 31, 2014)

"While the new NSPS may reflect the status quo in many states in the near future, it could become far stricter for both stoves and boilers. In 2019, the test method for measuring stove emissions could change, for example, from averaging four burn rates to using only the highest or lowest burn rate (depending on which one the stove has the hardest time passing). Some in the industry think this standard will be a death-blow for stove manufacturers. Other experts say it will be achievable, but the stoves that will be made may not be as appealing to consumers. - See more at: http://forgreenheat.blogspot.com/20...tegy-again-will-now.html#sthash.Q5skh3Np.dpuf"


----------



## brenndatomu (Jan 31, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> Who?? Who's that?? Who??
> *


I hear an Owl...


----------



## Vermonster (Jan 31, 2014)

edit


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 31, 2014)

I stand corrected.
page 37 of 354...

_"...we propose to allow a transition period so that heaters/stoves with EPA certification currently in effect can continue to be manufactured and sold until the current certification expires (5 years from date of certification) or is revoked..."_
and this..
_"... it is also important to avoid unreasonable economic impacts on those manufacturers (mostly small businesses) who need additional time to develop a full range of cleaner models."
_
So, if a manufacturer certifies a new model in 2014 he could still produce and sell it until 2019... but it the model was certified in, say, 2010 then he would have to stop making it in 2015, or get it certified under the new regulations. Although, the EPA has also stated something termed the "Alternative Approach" in which all stoves would need to be in compliance within 3 years (by the year 2017 provided the "final" comes down in 2015). At this time the EPA has not determined which "approach" it will set.
page 38-39 of 354...

_"We are also asking for comments on a three-step compliance approach (referred to herein as the “Alternative Approach”) for all adjustable rate wood heaters, single burn 
rate wood heaters and pellet heaters/stoves. Under this Alternative Approach, the Alternative Step 1 emission limits would apply to each source: (a) manufactured on or after the effective date of the final rule, or (b) sold at retail on or after the date 6 months from the effective date of the final rule. (Step 1 under the Alternative Approach is the same as Step 1 under the Proposed Approach.) The Alternative Step 2 emission limits would apply to each source manufactured or sold on or after the date 3 years after the effective date of the final rule. The Alternative Step 3 emission limits would apply to each source manufactured or sold on or after the date 8 years following the effective date of the final rule (thus providing 5 years between the Alternative Step 2 and Alternative Step 3)."_
and this...
_"Our current preference is the Proposed Approach, but we intend to finalize a single compliance approach after fully considering the comments received during the public comment period on this proposed rulemaking."
_
Also interesting... page 41-42 of 354...

_"We are also proposing to require emission testing and reporting based on both crib wood and cord wood for the proposed Step 1 compliance, and allowing manufacturers to choose whether to certify with crib wood or cord wood for the proposed Step 1 upon the effective date of the final rule. For the proposed Step 2 compliance 5 years after the effective date of the final rule, we would require certifying with cord wood only."_
and this..
_"Although we lack sufficient data to propose a separate CO emissions standard at this time, we propose to require that the manufacturer determine CO emissions during the compliance test and report those results to the EPA. We specifically request emission and cost data for systems that reduce CO emissions. If those systems warrant inclusion in the final rule, we would consider doing so. In addition, we ask for specific comments on whether the final rule should explicitly require indoor CO monitors as a critical safety component for heaters installed in occupied buildings or other buildings or enclosures in which the operator would enter to add fuel..."_

I guess CO emissions will be the next big move against wood-fired appliances... but only after they force manufacturers to do the research and data gathering for them.

And here we have the out-with-the-old and in-with-the-new test procedures; previous 1988/90 testing no longer qualifies‼ All stoves will need to re-certify using a completely different test procedure from what it was designed around. Pretty much setting as many up for failure as possible.
page 48-49 of 354

_"The manufacturers, laboratories, states and the EPA have more than 25 years of experience with Method 28... ...to address some of these concerns, ASTM has used a “consensus-based” process to develop E2515-10 “Standard Method for Determination of Particulate Matter Emissions in a Dilution Tunnel.” The EPA is proposing that this sampling and analysis method be used for all of the appliances in this rulemaking."
_
By the way, the new procedure requires passing the "low" burn rate testing

Anyway, page 55 ends the summery section on stoves and begins the summery section for forced air furnaces and OWB's... and I don't feel like post all that crap... err... stuff.
*


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 31, 2014)

Oh yeah, I forgot this...
_"Under Proposed Step 2, manufacturers would be required to show compliance testing with cord wood. 

We are also proposing to revise the test methods to require the addition of 1-hour filters for each test run to gather data regarding startup and anticipated peaks. Further, we 
are proposing new compliance requirements for Step 2 with emissions limits at the lowest burn rate (Category 1) and the maximum burn rate (Category 4), not a weighted average of the four burn rates, as in the current 1988 NSPS."
_
Chances become very real that "adjustable burn rate" wood-fired appliances will become very difficult to find... especially in "larger" sizes... and you can be sure they won't be cheap. It will be very difficult to make an "adjustable" appliance that can pass testing at both extreme ends of the firing rates... much easier to make a "single burn rate" stove that passes. Likely the ability of the user to "crank it up" when he's cold, and "damp it down" for overnight burns will be gone... basically just on or off will be the options.

So, Del_, as you see by reading my last two posts... there ain't a single stove manufactured today that is guaranteed to pass the new standards. Some may be able to... but there ain't any way possible to use the old testing procedures to predict anything. The simple fact is... nobody friggin' knows.
*


----------



## Vermonster (Jan 31, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> Oh yeah, I forgot this...
> _"Under Proposed Step 2, manufacturers would be required to show compliance testing with cord wood.
> 
> We are also proposing to revise the test methods to require the addition of 1-hour filters for each test run to gather data regarding startup and anticipated peaks. Further, we
> ...


I think the takeaway from all this discussion is that it's really not that cool to pollute our environment, whether it be air, soil or water.
Anyone who thinks otherwise please chime in, and be prepared to be hoist by your own petard.


----------



## brenndatomu (Jan 31, 2014)

Hey, I'll give Spidey the credit he's due here, he's been doing his homework and sharing the cliff notes with all of us, any of the rest of y'alls actually read through this crap?


----------



## brenndatomu (Jan 31, 2014)

brenndatomu said:


> Hey, I'll give Spidey the credit he's due here, he's been doing his homework and sharing the cliff notes with all of us, any of the rest of y'alls actually read through this crap?





Del_ said:


> I read some of his postings.


Apparently I need to clarify..."This crap" referring to the latest EPA novel crap


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 31, 2014)

Jesus Christ Del_,
Why is it when someone presents you with actual facts... even the actual verbatim of facts... that differ with your perceived notions, you revert to character assassination of the presenter. I didn't make that stuff up, those are direct quotes from the proposed rules.

I've read the complete thing twice, all 354 pages, and skimmed through it several other times... have you even looked at it??
Sure, I added my personal opinions on what they mean, or could possibly mean... but that don't make the verbatim facts any less factual.
Maybe you'd like to hear my opinion of the Constitutionality of it?? I can guarantee you won't like those facts I present...

Listen, I read a lot of things... I read Senate and House bills being voted on, both Federal and State... I read all sorts of proposals from all sorts of regulatory bodies... I monitor the SCOTUS website intently. I don't get my news from TV, papers, radio, talking heads, and certainly not from "special interest" groups... I haven't even looked at a TV in weeks, and I ain't read a newspaper in years. I go directly to government websites, download the latest, friggin' read it, and form my own opinions... and I do it nearly every friggin' day.

As a citizen of these United States I believe it's my *duty* to be informed, I learned long ago that I'll never be informed by media such as TV, radio, papers and whatnot... but it appears you believe it's your duty to discredit anyone who is truly informed.
I feel sorry for you... it must be a miserable existence.
*


----------



## Vermonster (Jan 31, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> Jesus Christ Del_,
> 
> *


Using the Lord's name in vain will earn you scorn from the bible belters.....................et al.


----------



## cre10 (Jan 31, 2014)

Vermonster said:


> Using the Lord's name in vain will earn you scorn from the bible belters.....................et al.


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 31, 2014)

Vermonster said:


> *Using the Lord's name in vain will earn you scorn from the bible belters.....................et al.*



That's not taking the Lord's name in vain... but you may have been taught it is.
Read this...

http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/bl...t-really-mean-to-take-the-lords-name-in-vein/

*


----------



## jrider (Jan 31, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> Jesus Christ Del_,
> Why is it when someone presents you with actual facts... even the actual verbatim of facts... that differ with your perceived notions, you revert to character assassination of the presenter. I didn't make that stuff up, those are direct quotes from the proposed rules.
> 
> I've read the complete thing twice, all 354 pages, and skimmed through it several other times... have you even looked at it??
> ...


You read government websites then bash the science that our government often supports? Seems logical to me. I mean I wouldn't want only one side of things being presented whether I form my own opinions or not.


----------



## Vermonster (Jan 31, 2014)

Whitespider said:


> That's not taking the Lord's name in vain... but you may have been taught it is.
> Read this...
> 
> http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/bl...t-really-mean-to-take-the-lords-name-in-vein/
> ...


You know my post was tongue and cheek right?   I'm a GD pagan Norseman!!!


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 31, 2014)

Vermonster said:


> *You know my post was tongue and cheek right? I'm a GD pagan Norseman!!!*



If I have to 100% honest... no, I didn't see it that way at first (likely because I expected some sort of comment).
But after looking at it again... in context... yeah, my bad.
*


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 31, 2014)

jrider said:


> *You read government websites then bash the science that our government often supports? Seems logical to me. I mean I wouldn't want only one side of things being presented whether I form my own opinions or not.*



I don't want any "sides"... I just want the... well... verbatim.
I'll form my own opinion from there... and I really could not care any less which "side" it comes down on.
Government (in this country) is not provisioned a "side", it isn't even provisioned wrong or right... it only has the Constitution, and nothing more.
This idea that Government should, or needs to do something because it's the "right" thing to do is seriously flawed... it flat ain't allowed to do anything for that reason. Do you know why?? Because not all of us see right and wrong the same way... what may be "right" for you, may very well be "wrong" for me. There is a strict set of rules government is supposed to follow in this country... it's call the Constitution... anything outside of those rules is in fact... "wrong".

Personally I do not see "sides" when it comes to government, especially Federal Government... I only see what they are doing in relationship to what the Constitution allows them to do. Personally... I *BELIEVE* in the Constitution, all of it, as it is written... not how it has become twisted.

Anyway... enough of that...
I wonder if Steve NW WI has made it to his destination yet??
*


----------



## flotek (Jan 31, 2014)

One things for sure I bet the ol" daka won't be making the cut . Btw not that you'd care but you did take the Lords name in vain according to scripture


----------



## Whitespider (Jan 31, 2014)

flotek said:


> *Btw not that you'd care but you did take the Lords name in vain according to scripture*



Well... here'a another challenge...
Show me where it is written in scripture that I did... in the context I used it...

Oh... yeah... I've read the bible also, cover-to-cover, several times... different versions even.
*


----------



## slowp (Jan 31, 2014)

Thank you for looking it up. I didn't have time to do that today. I'm still not concerned. If I decide to sell my house, the wood stove isn't that important. It's kind of a spendy way to get a woodstove--to buy a house. Don't you agree? Or did you pick your house simply because it came with a non-certified stove? 

I don't plan on trying to sell my stove nor am I interested in buying a used stove. I also believe that the cheap cast iron stove *was *a factor in burning down the house. A heavier duty stove might have held up better. I guess I'm making a statement about a stove being unsafe in the same context as when some on here make a blanket statement that new stoves are no good. Apparently what is good for the gander is not good for the goose. 

And yes, I'm not a manly man. If that bothers you, too bad. Apparently you are running out of wind, you've started with the personal stuff and are getting all huffy.

You can keep your wood stove. I've no interest in you losing it. It just is quite boring to read about how our woodstoves are no good, when that is simply not true. And, I'll run through the woodstove brands I've heated with again, Earthstove (anything wrong with that?) Schrader (got any comments?) Fisher (which was installed in a rental not quite to code, but worked), a Schrader fireplace insert (was missing some parts so ate a lot of firewood withouth throwing much heat out--also in a rental) and my current Quadrafire. I've also had a couple of pellet stoves, and a propane fake woodstove. The Quadrafire is the only certified stove of the bunch, and it isn't much different, other than keeping the chimney cleaner than all the others. 

That's it. That's all. 'Nuff said. I've got better things to do.


----------



## Whitespider (Feb 1, 2014)

slowp said:


> *I guess I'm making a statement about a stove being unsafe in the same context as when some on here make a blanket statement that new stoves are no good.
> Apparently you are running out of wind, you've started with the personal stuff and are getting all huffy.*



slowp,
I have repeatedly asked, even made a couple flat out challenges, for someone to point out exactly where I have made such a "blanket" statement. I have never said your stove, or anyone else's stove is "no good"... EVER‼ ... *EVER‼*
Neither have I ever slammed anyone for their choice, I haven't even told someone not to get something. On the other hand, there are a few here, one in particular, that has done nothing but repeatedly state how bad and "no good" *my* appliance is and what a horrible person I am for using it. Not just the current appliance, and not just the one before it. Gander and goose?? That glass slipper don't fit my foot... but I can tell you who's it does.

Personal stuff?? I haven't made any personal attacks... but I have responded to a few (just look at the childish post above yours if you want to see what "personal stuff" is... I still ain't figured out what that has to do with the lord or his good book).
Don't you worry none girl... I got lots more wind.
I do find the "huffy" accusation interesting though... just curious, if I'm "huffy", what do you call your post then??
*


----------



## Chris-PA (Feb 1, 2014)

Balance people. I deal with standards and testing all the time in designing products for a different field. Some of these are safety standards, some of them performance standards, written by both government and private industry groups, both European and US standards. A well designed and written standard can be a great thing to have, as it gives the designer a clear target to shoot for, reduces liability (compared to making up the rules yourself), and eliminates the shoddy competition that makes crap and undercuts you. 

European standards tend to be more "prescriptive", basically telling you how you must make something rather than what you must achieve, while US standard traditionally were more "descriptive" and just gave you the target. But that is a generalization and does not hold in every case. By and large I like to have a performance target, as it lets us be innovative in how we approach it rather than a standard that forces everyone to use the same approach - otherwise you are stuck just trying to do the best implementation instead of inventing new solutions.

I've seen standards that are very well written, and others that are terrible. One thing that tends to happen with big standards in an industry is that it becomes a career path for those on the standards committees, and then the standards are under constant revision and the designer has to spend a lot of time trying to keep up, lots of money getting re-certified, and you are trying to hit a moving target. Plus you get change for change sake. I note this standard has not been revised for 25 years.

So the fact that there is a new performance standard is not alarming to me, but neither would I assume right off that it is well done either. I'll have to take the time to read it completely. On the plus side it looks like it is a standard written around a performance test. I think the change to cord wood is positive and more realistic. Things that concern me are that it sounds a little vague, at least in terms of the time of implementation. Vague is not cool in standards. I'm hoping it does not force manufacturers into overly complex solutions or exotic materials (cats, basically). 

I also hope they do not get into controlling CO or CO2 emissions, although these could be driven from completely different reasons. As someone who considers himself to be an environmentalist, I'm not sure what I think about the focus on directly toxic particulate emissions from woodstoves. The big environmental problems we face are from burning of fossil fuels, and from associated carbon releases that have nothing to do with the directly toxic particulate emissions that were long the primary focus of efforts to clean up the air. Basically, that danger was missed and other directly toxic emissions were overemphasized. Wood stoves cannot be a problem in regard to carbon emissions, because all the carbon in the fuel was taken from the environment in the last few decades - it has zero net effect in the local environment. Focusing on it distracts from the real carbon issue which is fossil fuels. Wood heat is not and cannot be an appropriate solution in every place or for everyone - there is not enough wood and some communities or environments won't support it. 

I don't know how to gauge how severe these rules are - one of my concerns is if they are trying to make every stove suitable for use in every area, like towns and denser residential areas. Another approach is to simply let local communities ban them, or to deal with local offenders (like the smoke from the OWB I drove through the other day, which blocked the whole road and surrounded about 5 other homes nearby). In lower density rural areas like mine, the existing standards may be fine. Wood heat is simply not appropriate everywhere. 

Here I have to point out that I am an environmentalist suggesting that letting local regulation ban the appliances might be a better solution than a national standard to modify all stoves, which is a profoundly conservative approach (based on the definition of traditional US conservatism, not Faux news conservatism). Still, if that was done there would be people on here complaining about how the socialists had taken away their right to burn wood in town. 

We don't know yet were these new rules sit in relation to the state-of-the-art - basically in relation to what to the designers have up their sleeves? The new chainsaw emissions rules got solved elegantly with strato engines, which have ZERO negative impact and in fact improve performance, yet people are still complaining.


----------



## Whitespider (Feb 1, 2014)

I have to say I really enjoyed your post Chris-PA.
I consider myself a "conservationist", not an "environmentalist"... and, when it comes down to it I disagree with most environmentalist thinking/reasoning. Still, your post proves, and some people (including me at times) should take note... not all environmentalist are "tree-hugging, bleeding-heart, liberals" blindly following some political agenda... just as not all on the other side are extremists. Some environmentalists actually are clear-headed, rational, analytical individuals that simply think in a different way... which, in the end, is a good thing. It is possible to have a rational discussion over differences in thinking if agendas, blind ideology, emotional reactions and personal attacks are set aside. Like you started your post, I'll end mine (if I may barrow it from you)... Balance.
*


----------

