EPA vs non EPA wood furnace

[Johnmn]

I'm building a new house in northern Minnesota I want to heat it with a wood furnace. I was thinking of either a vapor fire, caddy or charmaster chalet. I was wondering if the epa ones are really that much better. My dad has had a charmaster since 1981 and it still works great! He also has a epa fireplace and it seems the old charmaster burns about the same amount of wood and smokes about the same oh and since he installed a double wall insulated chimney 15 years ago he hasn't cleaned it. Anyway any thoughts on wood furnaces would be great thanks.

 

[Whitespider]

Welcome aboard.

Your question is gonna' bring the whole menu to the table. "Better" is a matter of personal priorities and preference... we all look at things differently. Honestly... the results with either type are varied. Some have switched from one type to the other because of less-than-desirable results... others have switched the other way.

Just my personal preference... but I like the "old school" simplicity and zero maintenance (maintenance such as cleanin' heat exchangers and shovelin' out ashes). I've never cleaned my chimney either... in near 23 years‼ But there are those that had terrible luck with "old school"... plugged chimneys, massive wood consumption, and whatnot. At the same time, there are those that weren't happy with the heat output of the "EPA" style. And again... just my observation... it often seems to be how the user runs the appliance, not the appliance itself.

With a new house it's likely to be well insulated, so I'm guessing you wouldn't be all wrong with any choice. Download the user manuals for any you may be considerin' and read what's involved with maintenance and operation... set your priorities... and choose well.

I will warn you about one thing...
There are gonna' be a few come to this thread and claim twice the heat using half the wood from a "EPA" style... I call that "the magic". That may very well be their personal experience... but if both are run properly it ain't possible. There ain't no magic.

Disclaimer: I ain't never used an "EPA" furnace such as the Vapor Fire or Caddy.
*

 

[stihly dan]

What he said ^^^^ I like ease of use, load and go, no adjusting. Runs itself through the whole cycle. There is a manufacturer in your back yard, Tower Mn. Field trip...

 

[svk]

Welcome. Where abouts are you in MN?

To echo what @stihly dan said Lamppa in Tower does make good stuff.

 

[flotek]

I've owned and used multiple EPA and none epa furnaces ..it depends on what your looking for in an appliance, the older ones throw a lot heat but a lot goes up the flue in waste ..If you don't mind loading 7 or 8 cubic feet of hardwood in a dirty burning old style furnace only to get 6-8 hours of heat then by all means grab a big box store campfire-in-a box unit .you can burn greenwood ,oil soaked railroad ties or dead raccoons in them ..The newer EPA units burn far cleaner retain far more of the available heat , use far less wood and offer longer burns times often over 10 hours all with fireboxes about half the size of old furnaces. ,No running downstairs setting spin knobs or sliding air controls around , very little fiddling on the newer EPA units if your wood is seasoned . It is no magic just a improved design with secondary burntechnology burning off the wasted smoke as energy and of coarse loads of heat exchange area that keeps more of the heat in the unit instead of up the flue into the atmosphere ..Also down the road if big brother cracks down on emissions ( which eventually they will) you'll have a certified unit that passes and is permitted for use. The times they r a changin

 

[Dogsout]

Also down the road if big brother cracks down on emissions ( which eventually they will) you'll have a certified unit that passes and is permitted for use.

Don't let that statement lead you astray. As of right now non EPA stoves are still permitted. If you buy one now and they do indeed try to put in stricter regulations your non EPA stove will be grandfathered in and still be permitted for use, even down the road.

 

[brenndatomu]

I'll put the units you mentioned in the order you should consider them in (IMO of course )
1. VaporFire. Go ahead, try to find someone that doesn't love theirs! Heck, I can think of several people that bought a 2cnd one for the garage
2. Caddy. Probably the most bang for the buck of the 3 you mentioned. Lots of Caddy lovers out there.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10. Charmaster. I know where there is a 1 year old (well, 1 year used) one for sale, guy hated it. My neighbor has one, it heats his house, he tolerates it.

 

[flotek]

Don't let that statement lead you astray. As of right now non EPA stoves are still permitted. If you buy one now and they do indeed try to put in stricter regulations your non EPA stove will be grandfathered in and still be permitted for use, even down the road.

Can you see into the future ? You are basing that on the assumption your old unit will be grandfathered in that may be the case now ,but a simple regulation can change all that in the near future. The EPA is only going to grow and get more strict on rules .There is no promise or Gaurentee on this grandfather idea .that is wishful thinking on your part . It's going to get to a point where it's required for new houses or to sell your old one we are already seeing that on the west coast . In the future it'll likely be tested like your car emissions for particulates

 

[VERONICA STARR]

I like ease of use, load and go, no adjusting. Runs itself through the whole cycle.

 

[Johnmn]

I live between grand Rapids and duluth. The main reason I was looking at the caddy was I could get the oil burner and only buy one furnace that way

 

[Johnmn]

I have an OWB right now so I know all about the epa and burning lots of wood. I like it but I hate going outside to load it in the rain or when it's 40 below and so on.

 

[Whitespider]

...it depends on what your looking for in an appliance...

I agree 100%.

...the older ones throw a lot heat but a lot goes up the flue in waste ..If you don't mind loading 7 or 8 cubic feet of hardwood in a dirty burning old style furnace only to get 6-8 hours of heat then by all means grab a big box store campfire-in-a box unit...

I disagree 100%.
First of all, you couldn't get 7³/ft in my furnace using a sledge hammer... and considerin' I cut everything to 16-inches I'm doubtin' I've even managed to stuff 3³/ft in it more than handful of times.
Second, burn time (heatin' time) is entirely dependent on heat demand... no different than any wood-fired appliance. Yeah, if it's -20° and blowin' like hell outside I've seen 6 hour burn (heatin') times, but 8-12 is more the norm... and 15 or more ain't uncommon.
Third, the amount of heat goin' up the flue (you're talkin' combustion efficiency, not heatin' efficiency) is totally dependent on how ya' run it.
Forth, what is "dirty burning"?? The OP says his dad ain't cleaned the chimney in 15 years. How often are you cleanin' your heat exchanger??
Fifth, I ain't the only one, on this board alone, that has excellent results with a "campfire-in-a-box unit"... it's total BS to claim your experience as an across-the-board fact with all of 'em, in all setups. I still say it's more about how the appliance is setup and operated, than it is the appliance itself... it-is-what-it-is.

The newer EPA units burn far cleaner retain far more of the available heat , use far less wood and offer longer burns times often over 10 hours all with fireboxes about half the size of old furnaces.

See Johnmn, I warned ya' about the magic.
Far more heat and longer burns from a firebox half the size?? Think about that... think hard about that... using an appliance that's maybe, at best 15-20% (maybe, just maybe 25%) more combustion efficient if both are run correctly?? And remember, combustion efficiency has nothin' to do with heatin' efficiency... at least not in a linear way.
Magic I say... friggin' magic‼ See, the laws of physics can be bypassed with magic.
*

 

[flotek]

Your someth

I agree 100%.


I disagree 100%.
First of all, you couldn't get 7³/ft in my furnace using a sledge hammer... and considerin' I cut everything to 16-inches I'm doubtin' I've even managed to stuff 3³/ft in it more than handful of times.
Second, burn time (heatin' time) is entirely dependent on heat demand... no different than any wood-fired appliance. Yeah, if it's -20° and blowin' like hell outside I've seen 6 hour burn (heatin') times, but 8-12 is more the norm... and 15 or more ain't uncommon.
Third, the amount of heat goin' up the flue (you're talkin' combustion efficiency, not heatin' efficiency) is totally dependent on how ya' run it.
Forth, what is "dirty burning"?? The OP says his dad ain't cleaned the chimney in 15 years. How often are you cleanin' your heat exchanger??
Fifth, I ain't the only one, on this board alone, that has excellent results with a "campfire-in-a-box unit"... it's total BS to claim your experience as an across-the-board fact with all of 'em, in all setups. I still say it's more about how the appliance is setup and operated, than it is the appliance itself... it-is-what-it-is.


See Johnmn, I warned ya' about the magic.
Far more heat and longer burns from a firebox half the size?? Think about that... think hard about that... using an appliance that's maybe, at best 15-20% (maybe, just maybe 25%) more combustion efficient if both are run correctly?? And remember, combustion efficiency has nothin' to do with heatin' efficiency... at least not in a linear way.
Magic I say... friggin' magic‼ See, the laws of physics can be bypassed with magic.
*

Your twisting words as usual
Volume for volume Your not going to get longer burns on a smoke dragon
I agreed an older throws more heat but the catch is it uses more wood to do it , just because your firebox isn't 7 cubic doesn't mean a lot of the smoke dragons aren't I wasn't talking about your setup just older ones in general as usual your flaunting your opinions as facts

 

[Whitespider]

Your twisting words as usual...

No... I am not.
You're tryin' to make a generalized statement and apply it to all non-EPA boxes in any setup... it don't work that way‼
You then try to make another generalized statement and apply it to all EPA boxes in any setup... it don't work that way‼
You attempt to make it about absolutes... it don't work that way... there ain't no ******* friggin' magic‼

Absolute #1
"If you don't mind loading 7 or 8 cubic feet of hardwood in a dirty burning old style furnace only to get 6-8 hours of heat then by all means grab a big box store campfire-in-a box unit."

Absolute #2
"The newer EPA units burn far cleaner retain far more of the available heat , use far less wood and offer longer burns times often over 10 hours all with fireboxes about half the size of old furnaces."

Absolute #3 (you must have one of those magic crystal balls)
"Also down the road if big brother cracks down on emissions ( which eventually they will) you'll have a certified unit that passes and is permitted for use."

If you go back and read my post(s) I don't use absolutes... I state there have been satisfied and unsatisfied users of both types.
I don't state anything as undeniable fact or make any promises regarding either type... such as fuel consumption, heat output, etc.
I don't have an agenda... but the appearances are, you do have one... and I'll call it every time I see it.
*

 

[svk]

I don't use absolutes...
*

I'm done‼ Tossed the last few sticks in the firebox this mornin'.
I'm done I tell ya'‼ Done‼
I ain't gonna' bring anymore in... done... done... done‼

The family can freeze their pansy butts off for all I care... 'cause I'm done‼
Bunch'a whiners... crybabies... I'm dumpin' the ashes for the last time tonight, and that marks the end.

I am... really... I am... I'm done... finished... it's friggin' over... kaput...
*

 

[USMC615]

View attachment 420394

...yeh, but I believe he hadn't hocked the title to the nutz to his 'ol lady either back in those days...LOL. Of course that was a different thread altogether so now it's just 'circumstantial' evidence...

 

[Whitespider]

Some smart-azz is always gonna' remember somethin' you've said or done‼
*

 

[laynes69]

I've had both, and I've seen a significant reduction in wood consumption. While others may have had luck with long burns with a non epa unit, we did not. Our old furnace was manual, and there was a fine line between not enough heat or too much heat. I would get it hot and then close it down to where it was burning well, but once I would go to bed, the blower would stop and the furnace would almost smoulder. If I gave it a little more air, it would burn out during the night and the house would hit 80. The furnace we currently have doesn't keep the house as warm, that's okay. We keep it 72 to 75 almost all winter (70 when it was 20 below). While an Epa wood furnace may not be for everyone, there are many benefits. We saw a reduction in fuel, a cleaner chimney and longer burn times. Would I go back, nope.

 

[Whitespider]

...there was a fine line between not enough heat or too much heat. I would get it hot and then close it down to where it was burning well, but once I would go to bed, the blower would stop and the furnace would almost smoulder. If I gave it a little more air, it would burn out during the night and the house would hit 80.

Sounds like you needed a key damper installed in the flue pipe
Sorry... I couldn't help it... bad spider... bad spider‼

Actually laynes69, good post... simply what you have personally experienced by goin' from one style to another.
No claims of magic, an honest comparison without claimin' "every", "all", "always" and whatnot... just what you've personally witnessed in your application in Ohio. (By-the-way, exactly what I've come to expect from you.)

I'll just point out the OP lives in Northern Minnesota... not that it takes anything away from your post, just something to consider. After all, you did indicate the new furnace doesn't keep the house as warm, especially when it's -20°... and -20° is just another day in northern Minnesota. At the same time, he did say this would be in a new house... so maybe not as much of a concern...

Just sayin'.
*

 

[stihly dan]

I'm going to throw the theory of no generalization, there are 4 types of furnace categories that I know of. 1. a unit that has manual air control. 2. a unit that has a combustion blower on a t-stat. 3. unit that intake air (primary) damper controlled by T-stat, no control of secondary air. 4. unit intake air controlled by combustion temp modulated by a computer, no control of secondary air. These are the 4 types I know of and all run drastically different. My unit is perfect for my application and needs. I don't think spidey would like it, I think he has found the perfect unit for him. I also think this works especially well for spidey because I (think) he has very high draft causing his unit to work better than it would at my place.