What is the best style stove, EPA, CAT, down drafter, one with a grate

[Steve NW WI]

Truce flag for a minute!

Spidey - you've got a concept and might not even know it yet. Instead of measuring by the "stack loss measurement", why aren't we measuring by "Heat Output Measurement" - put the stove in a room, measure the BTUs transferred to the room on a given load of wood, and make that our efficiency measurement?

It shouldn't be hard to scientifically measure, but maybe (and you know I'm playing devils' advocate here), it's gonna give the "wrong" answers.

No I haven't looked through the EPA proposal from the other thread (which one of the other mods moved btw, not that I blame them), but I doubt there's much difference in the measuring method. Emissions per BTU DELIVERED might be a better standard of measure.

 

[Eric Modell]

I a going out on a limb, never having burnt a modern stove.
Catalytic great for low heat demand long burn time must have very dry wood.
Secondary burn design not as fussy as a catalytic good for extended burns but will build coals at high demand not enough air.
Smoke dragons good for all out heat during high demand times less maintenace and will burn any wood one has on hand.

 

[Gavman]

I a going out on a limb, never having burnt a modern stove.
Catalytic great for low heat demand long burn time must have very dry wood.
Secondary burn design not as fussy as a catalytic good for extended burns but will build coals at high demand not enough air.
Smoke dragons good for all out heat during high demand times less maintenace and will burn any wood one has on hand.

I think the most important thing about burning wood in whatever device you use is dry properly seasoned wood....
And now that I have some experience with cat stoves, sure extra long low heat burns are easy to get but long (8 to 12 hour) burns with very decent heat output are certainly easily doable with these stoves.
I am guessing cat stoves are not all alike too like most things but I can tell you awesome stoves are available if you research it...

 

[Eric Modell]

Can anyone comment on what the down side is of an oversized modern stove.

 

[Locust Cutter]

So here your stove is well undersized for the home, where your shoveling out coals to make more room for wood. Your aunt however has a well insulated home with no problems, which proves my point. If the stove is sized correctly, it can burn a full cycle. On the otherhand if your too small, you push the stove with more wood trying to recoupe heat. This causes excessive coaling. For us, the tighter our home becomes (a 2500 sqft Victorian) the less coaling becomes an issue. My point is it's not always the technology, but the application it is used in.

95%t of the time, I have it barely running above idle as that is the best heat retention point of the stove and affords the longest burn-time. Any more and it goes up the flue while eating the load much faster. My longest burn-time so far is about 3 hours and that was loaded to the brim with Hedge. Once there's a decent coal bed, the depth you lose is effectively halved. It's a vicious cycle. If I was running my stove wide open to try to make more heat, to account for my home's inefficiencies, I'd agree with you but I'm simply trying to augment my Central heating and undercut my propane bill. The stove is tight and I'm feeding it seasoned, hard wood, (Hedge, various Oaks, Honey Locust, Mulberry and Hackleberry). I also define a fire as an active primary flame and secondary flame. In other words, that dog don't hunt.

 

[sunfish]

Can anyone comment on what the down side is of an oversized modern stove.

We have a modern stove designed for up to 2000 sq feet. We have 1200 sq ft, good doors/windows/insulation. Works great when it is COLD. Pain to keep a fire going and not run us out of the house when temps are above 20 degrees.

I personally would rather have a smaller stove that can be run more efficiently/hotter without having to open windows.

But right now it's very good to have a 'oversized' stove! For the next few days anyway...

 

[Locust Cutter]

Can anyone comment on what the down side is of an oversized modern stove.

They don't take that well to being throttled down all the way to compensate for having too large of an appliance for the area it's heating.

 

[flotek]

White spider the reference of using a 8 cord log truck of wood was for those who don't insulate their house and use wood hog units with a firebox beyond 7 cubic feet.to make a point that it will consume a good amount of wood. ..i was not referencing a typical average or perhaps what your use is , so you may want to re read how my post was worded . You seem like a well meaning guy who happened to have some issue with your epa stove and perhaps hot a lemon or gave up to soon I don't know but whatever it was sounds like your going to paint any new technology appliance with the same brush based on your experience on one stove . The fact is we know now that there's more btu in a stick of wood than what meets the eye and by burning the secondary gas off it allows for up to 30% more energy that's real heat that you will make use of instead of going up the flue . That's not propaganda its a fact that means its observable can be tested and repeated . In my experience I'm set to be using around half the wood I used to with my epa unit that doesn't mean everyone will but for me that's what I'm seeing I'm also seeing longer burn times and even heat instead of swings. .im sorry whatever unit you had didn't work out but your experience is truly unique being most everyone has seen numerous benefits of secondary burning . I no longer use fire starters kindling or play Boy Scout like my old unit and no I'm not a yuppie kid who just got a new stove I've been around the scene and owned and operated new and old woodburners for years so I can compare with experience . I would put my 3.5 cubic foot epa furnace against any airtight non secondary style model any day of the week using same wood and outperform it every time and burn cleaner too . Look we all know The epa for the most part like any govt agency is a total joke and kills a lot of our jobs but this is probably the only thing they ever got right when they set out to make cleaner burners . Believe what you want but I'm seeing longer cleaner burning and on less wood ,that's a fact jack . If your burner is working it for you than that's great ! but just be advised there are other options and wood burning has come a long way in recent years

 

[zogger]

Sounds like there is a need for a convertible heater, one that can be "sized" as per expected demand. the shoulder season smaller box, then adjust or remove some stuff, get it to the full bore winter size.

 

[flotek]

3 hr burn time. ? Dang no wonder your looking at other options . I could toss some logs and cardboard boxes in my firepit in the backyard and get that . Concerning the heat swings : this is why when its mild you learn to use wood to your advantage . I like to use hemlock slabs ( we have slot of Amish sawmills around here ) so I don't get the house overheated . They take the chill off but don't build up a coal bed . Operator error can usually account for too heavy a coal bed . Its avoidable ..They usually come by reloading to frequently then guys don't realize how to burn them off . You just rake them all toward the very front of the stove and toss a small thin slab on top then open your air intake to wide open and leave it for next few hours and enjoy the heat from those coals.proper technique on running these new stoves it goes a long way and avoids the concerns you have

 

[Locust Cutter]

I've tried that too and still experience a lot of heat loss due to volume loss. I typically burn Hackleberry, Silver Maple, a bit of Cedar that we're always cleaning out of pastures and occasionally some piss elm in the shoulder seasons. Right now, it's Hedge, Mulberry, Honey Locust Burr/White and Red Oaks... It's throttled down as soon as it's lit properly and there's secondary ignition. I run it up at least once a night for a smaller load just to try to burn the coals down a bit and make sure that the chimney isn't getting sooted up. I guess i'm just un-impressed with the coal-bed only heat output and how quickly it eats logs. Typical refill time, once there's a coal bed and the corresponding volume loss is around 1-2 hrs depending on how hard the wood is and how much I can fit in. My splits are between 2"x"2 and 5"x5" with the length varying from 16-22" as the pretty, uniform pieces get sold and I keep the various cutoffs for my own use.

 

[Whitespider]

Instead of measuring by the "stack loss measurement", why aren't we measuring by "Heat Output Measurement"...

That's a simple answer... Because the EPA regulations are not, and have never been intended to reduce fuel usage, increase heat output or heating efficiency. The sole, single purpose intent, or goal, of those regulations is, and always has been to reduce emissions... nothing more, and nothing less. It is stated over and over... it's about emissions... it's all about what's come from the stack. But the BTU output is measured... remember my example in the other thread for the Spectrum?? (I'm adding burn time for this example)

• Efficiency - 81.6%
• Heat Output (EPA) -36,600 BTU
• Heat Output (Cordwood) -72,000 BTU
• Burn Time (Max.) - 8 Hours

Why is that so hard for "believers" to comprehend?? To achieve the 81.6% efficiency the stove was producing only 36,600 BTU's (average per hour?) over the burn cycle. But... let me say it again... BUT‼ Pacific Energy says they get "up to" 72,000 BTU's (average per hour?) over the burn cycle with cordwood in their real world(?) test. Well... the simple fact is... YOU CAN'T HAVE YOUR CAKE AND EAT IT TOO‼ It is impossible... let me say it again... IMPOSSIBLE... to double BTU output without significantly lowering both efficiency and burn time‼

So to you true believers... you disciples of the "new" technology... YOU CAN'T HAVE YOUR CAKE AND EAT IT TOO‼ It is impossible‼ Unless the Lord our Christ himself has stepped in and performed a great miracle... it is not possible for you to be getting anything near the efficiency rating at the same time you're getting the heat output you claim, or believe, you're getting.

The point of my posts over the last 2 years is not that the "new" technology is automatically bad, rather that it ain't automatically good. Use the proper tool for the job and it will be good... don't matter what technology used. "True" believers make blanket statements, like the "new" technology will automatically give you 30% more heat, or you'll automatically get more heat using less wood... and that's simply BS‼ (Heck, I even bought into it for a while, listening to the "true" believers here.) I tried using my PE stove to heat the entire house, it was the wrong tool for the job... now it's in my shop, it's the wrong tool for the job. If I were to install it in a cozy little den somewhere I'd likely love the thing. If the properly sized, quality made, proper style, wood burning appliance is used for the intended purpose it will work wonderfully... and it won't matter if it's the "new" or "old"... run correctly, in the "real world", there won't be enough difference to spit at. The "new" technology does not have a lock on secondary burn... run correctly the "old" technology also achieves secondary burn... it's just that the "new" technology does it automatically (the user can't screw it up as easily)... it removes the need to use your brain‼ The biggest trade-off is in size and weight... the "new" technology, by it's very design (and with few exceptions) will be larger and/or heavier to do the same job. (And likely more expensive.)
*

 

[sunfish]

I've tried that too and still experience a lot of heat loss due to volume loss. I typically burn Hackleberry, Silver Maple, a bit of Cedar that we're always cleaning out of pastures and occasionally some piss elm in the shoulder seasons. Right now, it's Hedge, Mulberry, Honey Locust Burr/White and Red Oaks... It's throttled down as soon as it's lit properly and there's secondary ignition. I run it up at least once a night for a smaller load just to try to burn the coals down a bit and make sure that the chimney isn't getting sooted up. I guess i'm just un-impressed with the coal-bed only heat output and how quickly it eats logs. Typical refill time, once there's a coal bed and the corresponding volume loss is around 1-2 hrs depending on how hard the wood is and how much I can fit in. My splits are between 2"x"2 and 5"x5" with the length varying from 16-22" as the pretty, uniform pieces get sold and I keep the various cutoffs for my own use.

Bryan, this doesn't sound too good for Pacific Energy. I know it's not the norm with these 'modern' stoves, but you might try a flu damper and see if that helps with the burn time?

Another thing would be to tighten up your house and add more insulation, then ya can let the coal bed burn down without getting the house too cold...

 

[Locust Cutter]

Ideally I'd like to have somewhere between a medium and large cat stove on one end of the house and a larger stove, say like the aforementioned Tempwood, or a Wonderwood where the PE stove currently resides. I will get to the insulation and doors as quickly as possible, bubt after that the house will still be inefficient to heat as it is a series of add-ons which were not thought out well from a convective airflow point. The cat stove would be nice for all-day heat, on a low setting and the bigger one for when we're for nights/weekends.

 

[super3]

But you can!
Just watch this guy make pellets....





7

That was great!

 

[Locust Cutter]

Bryan, this doesn't sound too good for Pacific Energy. I know it's not the norm with these 'modern' stoves, but you might try a flu damper and see if that helps with the burn time?

Another thing would be to tighten up your house and add more insulation, then ya can let the coal bed burn down without getting the house too cold...

Don,
I might try the damper idea. I WILL do the insulation, but I don't have $8-14K burning a hole in my pocket right now. The West side add-on, was only partially insulated and the original part, literally had the siding, (new vinyl BTW) screwed to the studs, with sheetrock on the other side. We discovered this when the insurance contractor took some of the siding off of the West side, after a tornado and he and I stood there speechless for a few minutes. Needless to say the affected West and North side now are fully insulated, Tyvec'ed and so on. I now have the other two sides to deal with and there's a lot of surface area. I figure to do the doors and the insulation, I'm looking around $8-13K right now, to include the attic(s) as fiberglass is more expensive, but I don't like cellulose, particularly the way it settles over time with the resultant R-factor loss... I plan to do it once and do it right. In the mean time, I have plenty of wood and have some options for stoves. The P.E. stove isn't bad, I just expected more out of it, when compared to older Ashleys, and Wonderwoods.

 

[sunfish]

Don,
I might try the damper idea. I WILL do the insulation, but I don't have $8-14K burning a hole in my pocket right now. The West side add-on, was only partially insulated and the original part, literally had the siding, (new vinyl BTW) screwed to the studs, with sheetrock on the other side. We discovered this when the insurance contractor took some of the siding off of the West side, after a tornado and he and I stood there speechless for a few minutes. Needless to say the affected West and North side now are fully insulated, Tyvec'ed and so on. I now have the other two sides to deal with and there's a lot of surface area. I figure to do the doors and the insulation, I'm looking around $8-13K right now, to include the attic(s) as fiberglass is more expensive, but I don't like cellulose, particularly the way it settles over time with the resultant R-factor loss... I plan to do it once and do it right. In the mean time, I have plenty of wood and have some options for stoves. The P.E. stove isn't bad, I just expected more out of it, when compared to older Ashleys, and Wonderwoods.

Bryan, that is the craziest thing I think I've ever read! Wow!

 

[CTYank]

Been using a non-cat cast-iron Morso and loving the efficiency, now in its 13th season. I'd NEVER run a woodstove with secondary combustion, with secondary air turned off. Never. You're tossing away a lot of energy as super-nasty stuff up the flue.

If you've a couple of big ones to invest, take a look at Woodstock's "Hybrid" stove- can be operated as cat or non-cat very cleanly, with high efficiency over a very wide output range. Just don't plan on taking it up many stairs- lots of soapstone. Truly a thing of beauty.

If you want a water heater on a woodstove, research [steam boiler explosion]. Honest. Can be deadly.

www - woodstove - com

 

[dustytools]

My experience so far with my new PE Super 27 is this, I too experience the large amount of coals after burning and reloading during the night, however, I find it true that if you rake them forward in the morning and place a small split in the stove it generally takes care of them. My biggest concern at this point is the burn times, seems like its only a few hours until I am to the point to where I have to rake the coals forward and burn them down. This hasn't been a real problem for me because I am up several times through the night taking a leak and whatnot. This could be because of my lack of experience with this new stove and maybe with time I can get better with it. My previous stove was a VC Vigilant smoke dragon which also did a good job of heating our home. The thing about this stove was that it was too big for its intended purpose and I had to keep her shut down 90 percent of the time just to keep from running us outta the house, which created tons of creosote and had me on the roof every week or two scrubbing pipes. We live in a very well insulated double-wide trailer with fair to middlin windows. With all of this being said I am glad that we did decide to replace the old smoker with the new stove. It heats just as good as the old one and doesn't seem to burn any more or less wood at this point however I aint never been the kind to measure wood usage. The biggest plus for me with the new stove is that I go to bed at night and don't have to worry about the amount of creosote in the pipes. I have cleaned the flue twice already this year and there hasn't been enough stuff in there to even warrant setting up the ladder but atleast now I know. I am inclined to agree with whoever it was that said that there are trade-offs when using one stove or the other. There probably aint one perfect stove that will serve the needs of everybody. Stay warm fellas!!

 

[sunfish]

Been using a non-cat cast-iron Morso and loving the efficiency, now in its 13th season. I'd NEVER run a woodstove with secondary combustion, with secondary air turned off. Never. You're tossing away a lot of energy as super-nasty stuff up the flue.

You might if your stove was cranking out too much heat for your house? And the stove operated just fine without it...
After 6 years I started doin it. Secondary air is on right now though!