# JUCA Hi-Efficiency Wood Burning



## WidowMaker (Oct 27, 2009)

Does anybody here use one of these? The web site makes them sound like the be-all, end-all of wood stoves...


Read about it here...

http://mb-soft.com/juca/index.html


----------



## laynes69 (Oct 27, 2009)

Yeah, 046 has one. There were many debates over the thing. One of the issues was he claimed they burnt green wood with no smoke. Don't know if he still likes it. There too much bs on jucas site. Here was one of the threads.

http://arboristsite.com/showthread.php?t=38965&highlight=juca


----------



## flotek (Oct 27, 2009)

looks like a smoke dragon and an awful eye sore in a persons living room , I dont see anything about secondary burning or epa certifed approval.just another rebadged 1970's pile of scrap with a hood and blower attached


----------



## 046 (Oct 27, 2009)

that's categorically untrue!

JUCA are not smoke dragons.... they are one of the cleanest burning stoves that I'm aware of... this includes EPA rated stoves. 

yes... I can and do burn green wood with little to no creosote. reason for burning green wood is to slow the burn down while generating more heat. 

how clean your wood stove burns is easily told by how much smoke your chimney is putting out. a truly clean burning wood stove will put out little to no smoke going full bore. 

all wood stoves will smoke while getting up to operating temps. what counts is... does your wood stove smoke for the entire burn? if so you will have creosote buildup. 

I've now gone 4+ season with almost zero creosote buildup with my JUCA. This includes burning a large amount of green wood. 

Note: DON"T burn green wood. JUCA is the only wood stove that I'm aware of that can do so cleanly. there may be others, but I'm not aware of them. Juca makes no claims it's stoves can burn green. this is what I'm saying from experience. 

some of the claims are BS... but most are not. the biggest fib is burntime. yes you can get the burntimes claimed.... If wood burned is PERFECT.... meaning using only seasoned Oak rounds 12in or bigger in diameter. 

if you go by JUCA's calculator... I should be using 2.5 cords per season. I'm actually using 4.5 cords per season in Tulsa, OK with a well insulated 2500sf single level home. heating 99% with wood. 

4.5 cords consumption is in line with EPA rated stoves for heating a 2500sq home. 

what is different about JUCA is it's SUPER efficient heat exchanger. 
first off... JUCA are MASSIVE... it's one HUGE hollow heat exchanger made out of 1/4in steel plate with a large blower. IMHO JUCA has one the highest deficiency heat exchanger of any wood stove. 

the other main difference is how JUCA burns... it uses an open burn system. the wood fire burns fast as it wants... sucks in as much air as the fire needs. so the fire is going to get HOT! How JUCA burns is why it's exempt from EPA regulations. 

this is the reason JUCA can burn green wood cleanly. it burns HOT... hot enough to vaporize wet wood into wood gas. I've done detail measurements of output air temps between seasoned and green wood. The green burns hotter... I'm convinced it's the wood gas generated. 

another reason for JUCA burning HOT is it's carefully designed updraft. when door is closed, updraft noticeably increases. this increases amount of air directed to fire. effect is exactly like how some main wood furnaces uses forced air. yes fire burns hotter but consumes wood faster. 

my plans was to add secondary burn tubes to my JUCA. but have not done so because I'm not convince it would improve JUCA's performance. I'll have to figure out a way to add secondary burn in a way that can be undone. 

there are other differences like how JUCA does business... very weird! 
but they do make a quality product for a reasonable price. 

would I buy it again.... 4.5 years ago when I purchased.... without a doubt yes. but since then EPA rated stoves have made BIG improvements. 

choices today are very different than five years ago. burntimes are longer than my JUCA. sure I can get 14+ hours burntimes. but I've got to pack it with perfect round Oak 12in dia. packed to it 25 cubic feet capacity. 

so today... would I buy another JUCA? don't know it's a tougher choice today. 
Am I happy with my JUCA... YES very much so... it's paid for it's self many times over. 



flotek said:


> looks like a smoke dragon and an awful eye sore ,plus I dont see anything about secondary burning or epa certifed approval.seems to me its just a rebadged 1970's pile of crap with a hood and blower attahced


----------



## Ductape (Oct 27, 2009)

I think the red flag would be the pictures on their website are fron 1978.


----------



## 046 (Oct 27, 2009)

not really... their design has not changed for 25+ years. 
believe it or not there are old designs that are still compititive today 
even when compared to latest EPA rated wood stoves. 

there's another design that I'm particularly impressed with. 
stove loads from the side & front. comes with catalytic converter and secondary burn. can't remember the name of that stove, but another AS member has posted loads of pic's. 

it's mostly available on the east coast... out of production but comes up on craigslist out east. sure wish I could find one to play with. but when it gets down to it... probably would keep my JUCA. 



Ductape said:


> I think the red flag would be the pictures on their website are fron 1978.


----------



## flotek (Oct 28, 2009)

im still failing to see how this is high tech or super efficient with the few features it offers .if you stuff wood in about any 12 ft sq firebox 14 hour burns should be childs play doesnt mean its efficient though just means its alot of wood volume to burnup. I guess if you count a smoldering wet log as burn time it may be different .at these dimensions this must have a large cumbersome footprint aside from its poor aesthetics (looks like it is from the nixon adminstartion)when i was a kid i n the late 70's my parents had a similar insert with a hood like your juca and it damn near burnt our house down .regardless of design i would love to know how can green wet wood burn hotter than dry seasoned ? this defies all rational logicalso keep in mind secondary burn tubes need a high temperature to function correctly and burn off the smoke /gases but your juca will likely not reach those heat levels especially if burning green wood or having open incoming air .im glad your happy with it but it appears to be a campfire in a box with a hood over it for 2 grand ,i guess thats why the company is out of the wood stove business now.this is like trying to argue a 1890 steam engine is much better than a modern fuel injected multi cylinder computer controlled design


----------



## Marc (Oct 28, 2009)

Meh.


----------



## 046 (Oct 29, 2009)

you've obviously don't understand how JUCA achieves it's efficiency.
that's OK.. it took me awhile to figure it out too. 

no it's footprint is not cumbersome... it's all sitting inside my fireplace. 
how can one be so negative without even seeing one?

my JUCA was custom made for my hearth.... since I happen to have a HUGE fireplace... my JUCA was fabbed to it's exact dimension and is also HUGE. 

you might read up on how wood gas works... this will help understand what's going on with the green wood. I do understand what I'm stating about burning green wood defies logic. 

think in terms of wood gas and a forced air fire. 
firebox is stroking with a super hot fire before green wood is added. 
fire has to be already hot enough to overcome the wet wood or the fire will go out. instead of getting hot enough to produce wood gas. the secondary burn occurs right above the green wood. (pic's below) so NO the green wood is not smothering... it's cooking and putting out wood gas. so yes... JUCA is getting hot enough to generate a secondary burn as evidence by the blue flames. 

I've documented this process with an IR thermometer enough times to know it works. the smoke that comes out the chimney tells no lies. when the green wood is fully burning at full temps... almost no smoke is coming out of the chimney. 

JUCA's super efficient heat exchanger combined with it's super hot fire means it's putting out BTU's. 

that super hot fire needs a monster heat exchanger to keep it in check. the open burn system which burn hot as it wants combined with a hyper tuned updraft... results in a forced air feed fire. this further accelerates burn rate. 

if this is starting to sound like an indoor OWB... JUCA can be a monster at eating wood. how you slow it down is by feeding it LARGE ROUNDS. wood only burns on the surface, so shape/size controls burn rate. I've learned to split my wood in large chunks. the rounds that are correct size (10-12in dia) are prized. they will burn 10-12hr+ vs 6-8 hours for split wood the same volume. 

unfortunately one cannot get rounds only from an Oak tree. most ends up being split wood. 
4.5 cords for heating 99% of the time for a 2500 sq single level home is not bad. 
wonder how much wood I would save with a current EPA rated stove. 

by the way beauty is in the eye of the beholder. My JUCA is flat beautiful!!!
it's saved me $thousands each season... that's reason enough right there. 

please note... in no way shape of form am I say JUCA is better than the current EPA wood stoves. what I am saying is JUCA's 25+ year old technology still works quite well. 







chimney showing no smoke take same time as green wood burning below.






blue fame is the secondary burn with green wood








flotek said:


> im still failing to see how this is high tech or super efficient with the few features it offers .if you stuff wood in about any 12 ft sq firebox 14 hour burns should be childs play doesnt mean its efficient though just means its alot of wood volume to burnup. I guess if you count a smoldering wet log as burn time it may be different .at these dimensions this must have a large cumbersome footprint aside from its poor aesthetics (looks like it is from the nixon adminstartion)when i was a kid i n the late 70's my parents had a similar insert with a hood like your juca and it damn near burnt our house down .regardless of design i would love to know how can green wet wood burn hotter than dry seasoned ? this defies all rational logicalso keep in mind secondary burn tubes need a high temperature to function correctly and burn off the smoke /gases but your juca will likely not reach those heat levels especially if burning green wood or having open incoming air .im glad your happy with it but it appears to be a campfire in a box with a hood over it for 2 grand ,i guess thats why the company is out of the wood stove business now.this is like trying to argue a 1890 steam engine is much better than a modern fuel injected multi cylinder computer controlled design


----------



## Cerran (Oct 29, 2009)

> yes... I can and do burn green wood with little to no creosote. reason for burning green wood is to slow the burn down while generating more heat.



Burning green wood will always generate LESS heat, not more.


----------



## Cerran (Oct 29, 2009)

> you've obviously don't understand how JUCA achieves it's efficiency.
> that's OK.. it took me awhile to figure it out too



Because it's not very efficient. Running with more excess air reduces efficiency, even if energy capture is higher on the back end. Modern EPA stoves run stack temperatures in the ~350 to 400 degree range and the efficiency loss through the stack/chimney caused by burning with excess combustion air is worse than the higher temperatures you see with a wood stove.

It reminds me of the old way they used to meet emissions on pre-1982 cars by just injecting more air into the exhaust to dilute tailpipe emissions.


----------



## 046 (Oct 29, 2009)

I knew this was going to get started again... 

gotta disagree... JUCA is quite efficient overall. the smoke rate going up is controlled by the damper. the amount of heat extract is in direct proportion to how long smoke stays in contact with heat exchanger. 

which in JUCA's case is HUGE as measured in total cubic inches of surface area. this combined with a healthy flow of air (460 CFM) across hot surfaces. a higher percentage of this heat is captured before it goes up the chimney. 

JUCA's firebox is equally hot or hotter than any EPA stove or JUCA would not burn so clean. but it's stack temps (area above firebox) are lower due the super efficient heat exchanger capturing more of the heat before it goes up the chimney. 

where JUCA is not efficient is burn rate of wood. anyone knows that forced air on wood means it will burn hotter and faster (slowed down by burning Large rounds). this is why most wood stoves choke down intake air to slow the burn down. this results in a smothering fire, which resulted in lower heat output and creosote. until secondary burn solved the problem by burning up the incomplete gases, resulting in higher temps and greater efficiency. 

Current EPA stoves generally have a tiny firebox with an equally small total surface area available to act as a heat exchanger. this is partially made up by the higher temps generated by the secondary burn. 

the bottom line is how many BTU is put out for the amount of wood consumed. judging by the 4.5 cords consumed per season by JUCA for a 2500 sf single level home. efficiency is not that out of line with current EPA wood stoves. 



Cerran said:


> Because it's not very efficient. Running with more excess air reduces efficiency, even if energy capture is higher on the back end. Modern EPA stoves run stack temperatures in the ~350 to 400 degree range and the efficiency loss through the stack/chimney caused by burning with excess combustion air is worse than the higher temperatures you see with a wood stove.
> 
> It reminds me of the old way they used to meet emissions on pre-1982 cars by just injecting more air into the exhaust to dilute tailpipe emissions.


----------



## Cerran (Oct 29, 2009)

> JUCA's firebox is equally hot or hotter than any EPA stove or JUCA would not burn so clean. but it's stack temps (area above firebox) are lower due the super efficient heat exchanger capturing more of the heat before it goes up the chimney.



Heat (BTU) = Mass * Cp* dT

Higher flow even at a lower exit temperature will drive up heat lost.


----------



## WidowMaker (Oct 29, 2009)

I have read and reread this thread several times..

The thing I'm trying to wrap my mind around is this..

"sure I can get 14+ hours burntimes. but I've got to pack it with perfect round Oak 12in dia. packed to it 25 cubic feet capacity."

Unless my math is wrong that means a cord of wood only last about 3 days and your 4.5 cords would be gone in about 2.5 or so weeks... I'm sure you must have a longer heating season then that..do you burn 24/7.


I'm heating 2000 sq. ft. 24/7 fot 6+ months a year and burn 6 to 8 cords a year in a Lopi Endeavor. Thats not hard wood mind you, thats red fir tamarack and lodge pole. I know it's a wonder my house ain't a ppile of ashes burning al that pine :greenchainsaw:, it's a PNW thing, you would'nt undersand...

so help me out here, how are you heating 2600 sq. ft on 4.5 cords, burning 25 cubic ft of wood in 14 hours, what am I missing???

Oh yea, nice looking fire can you post pictures of your stove??


----------



## Marc (Oct 29, 2009)

046 said:


> you might read up on how wood gas works... this will help understand what's going on with the green wood. I do understand what I'm stating about burning green wood defies logic.



... ok, I have a pretty good handle on how fuel limited and oxygen limited combustion of organic solids works... and I still don't understand how more net heat is generated burning greener wood compared to the same exact wood well seasoned.


----------



## kielbasa (Oct 29, 2009)

my brother has had a Juca wood furnace for about 10 years now...
the bad:
looks like a bunch of fourth graders did all the fab work and welding
weird looking furnace (but it grew on me, and now I actually like it)
i agree about that the advertised burn times are a little "optimistic"

the good:
that sucker throws out some heat (I've grown up with wood heat, so I know what serious heat is)
I'm always amazed at the $hit wood he gets away with burning in it - often times he goes out to an uncovered, rained on woodpile and loads the stove up with that stuff - I always shake my head in amazement...
not only does it blow heat thru attached plenum/ductwork, but it also blows heat DOWNWARD to the floor (from the sides of the furnace) - I'm not convinced people realize how nice of a feature that is (since I've searched high and low looking for something that compares), that alone makes it a standout stove in my book. How nice it is to come in the house after a day of snowmobiling, cutting wood, working out in the rain, etc and just throw your wet gloves, boots, hats on the floor near the stove - they don't remain cold and wet for long, that's for sure. 
I've currently installing a Yukon Big Jack in my own home, I hope I'm impressed with it as I am the Juca......


----------



## Cerran (Oct 29, 2009)

WidowMaker said:


> I have read and reread this thread several times..
> 
> The thing I'm trying to wrap my mind around is this..
> 
> ...




He's heating in an area with much fewer low temperature days I bet.


----------



## 046 (Oct 29, 2009)

apologies for my typo... firebox is 12 cubic ft 
and no.... firebox is seldom loaded to max capacity 

large diameter rounds burn slower than split wood of same volume. 
JUCA uses an open burn system.... ie meaning wood is allowed to burn hot and fast as it wants. 

rounds do burn longer... try it in any open fire pit... just like wood split into smaller piece will burn faster than larger chunks. 

normal stoves control burn time by choking down intake air. this forces fire to slow down resulting in a reduced fire that burns longer. fire puts out less heat do to incomplete burn or smothering. 

older non epa rated stove did exactly that and generated dangerous amounts of creosote. vs current EPA rated stove takes that incomplete smoke/wood gas ... allows it to mix with fresh intake air near top of firebox... secondary combustion occurs resulting in high heat production and a complete clean burn. 

JUCA is less efficient at burn rate, but more efficient at drawing out the heat that's produced due the much larger heat exchanger area available. JUCA achieves complete burn by virtue of it's hotter fire. which needs the much larger heat exchanger to keep the hotter fire under control. Blower is rated at 460 CFM and is thermostatically controlled to come on and off at set temps just like any natural gas furnace. 

so you see... net efficiency of my JUCA insert approaches the current EPA rated stoves. I still think new EPA rated stoves are slightly better at burntimes with less wood consumed. 

how much ... I don't know.... but based upon several threads on AS where folks input how much actual wood burned in cords, size of home, type, location, amount of insulation, etc. 

surprisingly 4.5 cords for JUCA heating my 2500 sf single level home 99% of the time.... comes pretty close to performance of newer stoves. 



WidowMaker said:


> I have read and reread this thread several times..
> 
> The thing I'm trying to wrap my mind around is this..
> 
> ...


----------



## dandk202 (Nov 24, 2009)

*JUCA experience*

I went into this with my eyes wide open. We really wanted a 2 sided fireplace in our living room and we also wanted it to be energy efficient. If you are reading this post you probably realize how difficult it is to find an efficient two sided fireplace. So we took the plunge and ordered JUCA Model F-9AX fireplace from the JUCA company in Indiana in May/June of 2009.

Well, if you are looking for an effortless process or a seamless experience, do not read any further. Stop thinking about JUCA and contact your local fireplace store. JUCA is not effortless. It is probably not the least expensive option once you consider the required accessories, vent piping, fireplace doors and your lost time and energy. It probably has some of the worst customer service in the industry. I am tempted to report them to the Better Business Bureau or Consumer Reports.

I really can't tell you if JUCA lives up to all of the hype on the website. It has been 6 months since I ordered the fireplace and I haven't received all of the parts yet. The fireplace did show up which honestly I was a little surprised that we received it. However we haven't received the $800+ dollars in fireplace doors yet. We keep contacting JUCA (Tim) with the one method we have for JUCA, (an e-mail address), Tim assures us that he is on top of things, yet we still wait for doors.

I am at the point now of ordering doors from another company because we cannot wait any longer. So, the expenses of the JUCA keep mounting. We are into this fireplace about $10,000 now. It's going to take a lot of seasons to make up for the cost of this fireplace. 

Would I order from JUCA again??? Probably not. The fireplace cannot compensate for the company shortfalls and failed customer service. I knew it was a gamble and that I may lose my original investment. Even after receiving the fireplace, there is probably a 50:50 chance that it will work as advertized.

Installation required consulting a team of engineers, hiring a local fireplace company to analyze the product and the lacking documentation and come up with a plan for installation. We were able to track down some double wall 10 inch vent piping and other accessories to install it (budget about $3000-$4000 for venting.) After a couple trips out by the local FP Company, we now have this thing installed in our new house, awaiting FP doors.

I just sent an angry e-mail to Tim at JUCA, asking for a refund for the fireplace doors I never received. And I am searching for new doors on-line. If anyone has a door suggestion that will fit a JUCA fireplace, I would be grateful. My new home has already been delayed 30 days and counting because if this fireplace. If you are still considering a JUCA, be prepared for a tough road.


----------



## 046 (Nov 25, 2009)

WOW... what terrible customer service! 

completely different from my experience. received my insert that was custom built to my fireplace's spec's in just under 3 months. 

total price including shipping was $1750 if memory is correct. 
mine needed no duct work as it used existing fire-bricked chimney. 

mine came with good set of documentation too. seems with a custom fireplace, duct work would have to be purchased no matter which product is used. 

installation from beginning to end took only a few hours. the most difficult part was getting the super heavy insert off the truck and inside living room. 

highly doubt if anyone sells doors for your JUCA. if yours is like mine, it was custom mfg specifically for YOUR fireplace. 

the only problems I had with my JUCA is the thermofan switch was defective. called up JUCA and they 2nd day shipped another switch. it's been problem free ever since and performing like a champ. 

again... sure sorry to hear about all your problems. mine paid for itself after one season. 



dandk202 said:


> I went into this with my eyes wide open. We really wanted a 2 sided fireplace in our living room and we also wanted it to be energy efficient. If you are reading this post you probably realize how difficult it is to find an efficient two sided fireplace. So we took the plunge and ordered JUCA Model F-9AX fireplace from the JUCA company in Indiana in May/June of 2009.
> 
> Well, if you are looking for an effortless process or a seamless experience, do not read any further. Stop thinking about JUCA and contact your local fireplace store. JUCA is not effortless. It is probably not the least expensive option once you consider the required accessories, vent piping, fireplace doors and your lost time and energy. It probably has some of the worst customer service in the industry. I am tempted to report them to the Better Business Bureau or Consumer Reports.
> 
> ...


----------



## ericjeeper (Nov 25, 2009)

I technically own a Junka. Have not seen it in years. I loaned it to a buddy to put in his shop. I bought it and drug it up out of a guys basement,. 
Another buddy of mine had one too. He tried to heat a well insulated 900 square foot shop with his. Barely did the job.He replaced it with a used woodfired furnace of conventional build.. It heats it very easily.
To me, I know this is only my opinion. These stoves were and are severely overrated. Not to mention ugly and look like a grade school class fabbed em up.


----------



## Ductape (Nov 25, 2009)

dandk202 said:


> So, the expenses of the JUCA keep mounting. We are into this fireplace about $10,000 now. It's going to take a lot of seasons to make up for the cost of this fireplace.
> 
> Would I order from JUCA again??? Probably not.




So......... you are out ten grand at this point, but 'probably' wouldn't buy from them again ????? :monkey:


This is why companies with service this poor get to stay in business.


----------



## Techstuf (Nov 25, 2009)

10 Grand?! Ouch. I built mine for less than 200 and it has kept our 2650sq ft. home at 80 deg. all winter here in NE Nebraska on 4.5 to 5.5 cords a season for the last 4 years.

wow. The kind of wood burner one could build for 10 Grand......


TS


----------



## 046 (Nov 28, 2009)

please post pictures.... as they say ... no pic's... it didn't happen
especially for a first post... oopss... forgot my manners... welcome to AS

seems I'm the only one that's actually posted a picture of a JUCA. 
no where on my insert is any kind of label, marking, tag, etc. 

welds/fabrication on my JUCA is totally professional in appearance and function. 
door hinges are welded and not removable, highly unlikely JUCA would ship a fireplace without doors. 

a team of engineers to figure out how it works.... come on... 
put wood in and light it up.... 



ericjeeper said:


> I technically own a Junka. Have not seen it in years. I loaned it to a buddy to put in his shop. I bought it and drug it up out of a guys basement,.
> Another buddy of mine had one too. He tried to heat a well insulated 900 square foot shop with his. Barely did the job.He replaced it with a used woodfired furnace of conventional build.. It heats it very easily.
> To me, I know this is only my opinion. These stoves were and are severely overrated. Not to mention ugly and look like a grade school class fabbed em up.





dandk202 said:


> I went into this with my eyes wide open. We really wanted a 2 sided fireplace in our living room and we also wanted it to be energy efficient. If you are reading this post you probably realize how difficult it is to find an efficient two sided fireplace. So we took the plunge and ordered JUCA Model F-9AX fireplace from the JUCA company in Indiana in May/June of 2009.
> 
> Well, if you are looking for an effortless process or a seamless experience, do not read any further. Stop thinking about JUCA and contact your local fireplace store. JUCA is not effortless. It is probably not the least expensive option once you consider the required accessories, vent piping, fireplace doors and your lost time and energy. It probably has some of the worst customer service in the industry. I am tempted to report them to the Better Business Bureau or Consumer Reports.
> 
> ...


----------



## barton174 (Jan 26, 2010)

Cerran said:


> It reminds me of the old way they used to meet emissions on pre-1982 cars by just injecting more air into the exhaust to dilute tailpipe emissions.



I know this is an old post, but ran across it searching insert installation, and had to correct this...

Air injection is used to supply oxygen to the catalyst (which have been widely used since '75 or so), so that the catalyst can work without having to run the engine lean and create NOx just for the purpose of getting oxygen to the catalyst... I guess I don't know about today (2010), but I know several cars still used them 2000+, and I know at least the Trailblazers/envoys used them until 2005 or so...

Mike


----------



## GlennG (Jan 26, 2010)

046 said:


> you've obviously don't understand how JUCA achieves it's efficiency.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I call BS. Who burns when green leaves are still on the trees? Thats a pic of your chimney in July.


----------



## Ductape (Jan 26, 2010)

*I Pulled Out The Ole Meter..............*

Looks like Glenn was right.................

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w306/IMASAP/BSDetector.gif


----------



## 046 (Jan 27, 2010)

ha..ha..ha... FYI.... don't know where you are from... but here in Tulsa... weather starts getting nippy when oak leaves are still turning. 

my oaks gradually drop their leaves and will not all drop until deep into winter.

call BS all you want... but my JUCA burns green wood HOT and clean. 
don't get me wrong... you've got to get the fire good and hot before adding any green. but once the green wood gets going ... it burns hotter than seasoned wood. 

please keep in mind ... JUCA is an open burn system.... NO choking down air of any kind... it's fed all the air it wants... the green wood slows the burn down, while delivering heat nicely. 

if you have a normal wood stove... which chokes down air to slow burn down... NO way will green wood work. but JUCA doesn't function like a normal wood stove.... more like a traditional fireplace with a MONDO size heat exchanger and blower. 



GlennG said:


> I call BS. Who burns when green leaves are still on the trees? Thats a pic of your chimney in July.





Ductape said:


> Looks like Glenn was right.................


----------



## logbutcher (Jan 28, 2010)

Some of you negativos online have to get a life---chill some. 

The JUCA guy obviously loves his heater, is willing to share the experience; live and learn. You want to put taste and experience down, do it WITH some understanding and real time on-site knowledge of how this JUCA stove operates. Get out and look. Forget your seat-of-the-underpants theory. If it works for him, take it.

From their site, 046's posts, and my willing brain with NO real visit to a JUCA  here's how I see it: The JUCA burns like a Russian Fireplace, Kacheloffen, Masonry Heater. Full air with no damping, large firebox, a big mass to store heat, and devices to move the heat around. Get a big enough bed of coals, you can burn anything---Not what I'd use, but for some it works. Hey, I don't even like OWB's, but the friends who have them, it's what they use and want. 

It's all the Stihl/Husky, blonde/brunnette, Glock/Sig, Ford/Chevy thing ( if I hear another anti Glock : "it's 'plastic" rant....I'll.... :censored: ).

How about we all do a GTG at 046's JUCA ????:monkey: Some of you need to drop the "BS" BS. What's this "green leaves" accusation ? :monkey: BS BS.

JMNSHO


----------



## 046 (Jan 28, 2010)

thanks ... logbutcher!!!

updated pic's taken a few minutes ago in Tulsa, OK
it's 32f degree with freezing rain... incoming winter storm 

it's an involved process burning green wood... it needs to burn HOT using seasoned wood to get up to normal operating temps. Will not work with wood stoves that chokes down air. 

again... in no way am I promoting the burning of green wood. 
seasoned wood is preferred everytime. but there are times one gets caught short on wood. 

hate to admit it but lost aprox. 50% of my seasoned wood due to rot. this is the first time I've lost this much wood due to rot. combine with coldest winter weather on record for Jan in Tulsa. 

sure is nice to be able to burn green wood cleanly. 

chimney with stove burning at normal operating temps. lack of visible smoke = clean burn 





output duct air temp shows 164f degree at 360 cfm 





burning logs pic, showing mixture of green and seasoned





burning logs pic with flash, showing mixture of green and seasoned


----------



## Cerran (Jan 28, 2010)

> but once the green wood gets going ... it burns hotter than seasoned wood.



You do realize that thermodynamically that's not possible. Moisture always drives down flue and adiabatic flame temperatures. This is 10+ years of combustion engineering talking.


----------



## 046 (Jan 28, 2010)

of course you are technically correct... but all I'm doing is relating cause ... effect. 

purely speculative... here's what I'm thinking is happening... when I toss on a few pieces of green wood, after reaching normal operating temps. 

the green wood when heated puts off all sorts of wood gas. it's the extra wood gas burning that raises final output duct temps. very similar to burn achieved by secondary burn chambers. 



Cerran said:


> You do realize that thermodynamically that's not possible. Moisture always drives down flue and adiabatic flame temperatures. This is 10+ years of combustion engineering talking.


----------



## ericjeeper (Jan 28, 2010)

046 said:


> of course you are technically correct... but all I'm doing is relating cause ... effect.
> 
> purely speculative... here's what I'm thinking is happening... when I toss on a few pieces of green wood, after reaching normal operating temps.
> 
> the green wood when heated puts off all sorts of wood gas. it's the extra wood gas burning that raises final output duct temps. very similar to burn achieved by secondary burn chambers.



wood gas is basically steam coming from green wood..


----------



## laynes69 (Jan 28, 2010)

Green wood when burned releases a ton of moisture. Which in effect robs the combustion of wood. When wood is properly seasoned it will throw off wood gas much quicker resulting in a hotter fire, faster. Probably with your unit, between the fast draft, and the amount of air running through the unit thats what allows for it to happen. Secondary burn chambers are 100% different.


----------



## wkpoor (Jan 28, 2010)

In that one pic of the chimney looks like you need to cut back that overhanging tree (more green firewood) and clean the gutters out.


----------



## 046 (Jan 28, 2010)

guilty as charged  

sure hate cleaning out gutters... with all the oak leaving dropping for seems like most of the winter. not much chance of keeping em clean. 

just got back from buying 10 gallon of gas and groceries. freezing rain is coming down hard... they've been prediction power outages ... Honda EU2000i is ready



wkpoor said:


> In that one pic of the chimney looks like you need to cut back that overhanging tree (more green firewood) and clean the gutters out.


----------



## Mr. Obvious (Jan 29, 2010)

Think I'll stick with my defiant. 

Right now the temp in the cat chamber is 1500 F. Got up to 1700 once that I saw. My house is same size as yours 046 and not sealed well since it is a log Cabin but I only use 1/2 the wood of the Juca.

Cold here in KY too.


----------



## 046 (Jan 29, 2010)

when I purchased my JUCA over 5 years ago, there wasn't near the number of EPA rated (clean burning) wood stoves on the market as today. 

JUCA's burn-time claims are inflated. but based upon wood usage threads JUCA wood usage are inline with other wood stoves with similar sized houses. but others are in much colder climates than Tulsa. mine is single level, others are split levels, etc, etc. 

newer EPA stoves are more efficient than JUCA. by how much, not really sure. if I had to purchase new stove today... I'd probably go with a current EPA rated stove to pick up efficiency gains. 



Mr. Obvious said:


> Think I'll stick with my defiant.
> 
> Right now the temp in the cat chamber is 1500 F. Got up to 1700 once that I saw. My house is same size as yours 046 and not sealed well since it is a log Cabin but I only use 1/2 the wood of the Juca.
> 
> Cold here in KY too.


----------



## iowagold (Mar 14, 2020)

is juca still in biz?
or are they gone??
does any one still have a good phone number for them?


----------

