Here's a few thoughts about this forum's wood burners

[CrappieKeith]

Hey guy's,not sure how y'all are gonna take this post ,but after a many weeks of perusing the topics I've got a few things on my mind I thought I'd point out.
Now don't go all crazy on me. I am not knocking anyone for what they are burning wood with nor how they are set up.
I just see a lot of mods going on because it does not do what you want it to do.
I've been seeing posts about how can I get longer burn times.
I've been seeing posts about all sorts of problems and issues,especially with stoves.
I've also been seeing some great deals you bought them for....well a cheap price does not mean it's a good deal.
Just look at all of the wood you are flying through.Without any decent 10 hour burn times heating your whole home. Not just a few rooms.


Maybe start thinking furnaces instead of stoves.
I just saw a comment about a reburn box...no it's an extra heat exchanger.
That is different than a process of buring the smoke(gasses) which nets out 30-40% extra btu's that you are not making.

It's not just this forum. I see many OWB's or stoves.
Why doesn't a guy get a furnace? Why not get something that burns a cord of wood to heat 3000s/f per month when it's 0 or colder?

I get asthetics.I like the looks of a flame in a fireplce or parlor stove.
I also get using in floor heating too with an OWB with free hot water.
I also get that they go through 3 times the wood for the most part.
I also get that some rot out pretty quickly and that without power there is no heat.

I'm sure the responses will be all over the board and by making this post I'm sorta asking for it.
I am in all honesty trying to figure out why furnaces are not the norm?

Is it because stoves are cheaper?
Easier to install?
They burn pellets that can be bought by the ton on a pallet?

I would like to envite all civil comments or answers.

 

[boltonranger]

Alright - I'll start.

Hmm..
My folks had a multi-fuel furnace in their last home.
Tarm I think. Red. Would do oil; coal; or wood.
Are those type more efficient (with wood) than OWB?
Is OWB inefficient by design?
I know someone who has an OWB now; but I don't know his usage.
House is like 2800 s.f. three level; well insulated in Zone 6.
Expound a little OP.
-br

 

[Marc]

I can't speak for anyone else, but I bought an EPA stove to tide me over until I have time and money to install a forced downdraft wood boiler, like a Tarm, Eko or Econoburn with some heat storage since I already have hydronic central heat.

That being said, I understand many of the reasons why OWB are popular, but they're not for me.

Should be an entertaining thread.... opcorn:

 

[Marc]

Hmm..
My folks had a multi-fuel furnace in their last home.
Tarm I think. Red. Would do oil; coal; or wood.
Are those type more efficient (with wood) than OWB?
Is OWB inefficient by design?
I know someone who has an OWB now; but I don't know his usage.
House is like 2800 s.f. three level; well insulated in Zone 6.
Expound a little OP.
-br

Most OWB are less efficient by design, yes, because the firebox is surrounded and hence cooled by a water jacket. To completely combust all the gases produced by the pyrolysis of wood, one needs temperatures in exceeding the 1100 deg F neighborhood, and lots of oxygen. Those things are difficult/impossible to achieve in a water jacketed fire box. Also, because many OWB's are designed to be 'set it and forget,' i.e., throw a load of wood in and let the boiler idle until heat is called for, efficieny is lost in the idling process.

Combining bulk heat storage with an efficient forced downdraft type boiler allows one to burn a load of wood completely at max temperature and efficiency.

There's also the issue with OWB's being advertised as being able to burn any type of wood, green, wet, etc. Further reduces efficiency. And then there are just plain irresponsible operators who burn things like tires and trash.

 

[Tree Pig]

Hey guy's,not sure how y'all are gonna take this post ,but after a many weeks of perusing the topics I've got a few things on my mind I thought I'd point out.
Now don't go all crazy on me. I am not knocking anyone for what they are burning wood with nor how they are set up.
I just see a lot of mods going on because it does not do what you want it to do.
I've been seeing posts about how can I get longer burn times.
I've been seeing posts about all sorts of problems and issues,especially with stoves.
I've also been seeing some great deals you bought them for....well a cheap price does not mean it's a good deal.
Just look at all of the wood you are flying through.Without any decent 10 hour burn times heating your whole home. Not just a few rooms.


Maybe start thinking furnaces instead of stoves.
I just saw a comment about a reburn box...no it's an extra heat exchanger.
That is different than a process of buring the smoke(gasses) which nets out 30-40% extra btu's that you are not making.

It's not just this forum. I see many OWB's or stoves.
Why doesn't a guy get a furnace? Why not get something that burns a cord of wood to heat 3000s/f per month when it's 0 or colder?

I get asthetics.I like the looks of a flame in a fireplce or parlor stove.
I also get using in floor heating too with an OWB with free hot water.
I also get that they go through 3 times the wood for the most part.
I also get that some rot out pretty quickly and that without power there is no heat.

I'm sure the responses will be all over the board and by making this post I'm sorta asking for it.
I am in all honesty trying to figure out why furnaces are not the norm?

Is it because stoves are cheaper?
Easier to install?
They burn pellets that can be bought by the ton on a pallet?

I would like to envite all civil comments or answers.

Im gonna guess a lot of it has to do with purchase and installation costs.

I dont pay for wood so multi fuel is out of the question. Installing a furnace would have to go in my basement. To install it by code would be quite costly compared to dropping a pipe in my existing fireplace and connecting a wood stove.

wood stove costs
Stove (Moderate) + Installation (free or cheap) + fuel (free) = affordable for most

Multi fuel furnace costs
Stove (expensive) + Installation (expensive) + fuel (costly compared to free) = not as affordable for most

 

[husky455rancher]

well i started with the inseret simply because i couldnt pay the oil bill. so i financed the insert. if i dont want to heat the cellar i can heat my entire house (1200sqft) with the insert alone using 0 oil. the 2 winters previous to this i did it a hair under 4 cord each winter.

this year i picked up the shenandoah from my buddys dad who was switching over to an indoor furnace. that stove is great it pretty much gives me 100% totally even heating, i was keeping the living area at 71 ish in the dead of winter and the cellar would be about 78. only drawback is it loves the wood. i may add secondary burn tubes this summer to help it out. as it sits now i get longer burn times with this than i do with the insert aswell.


with this heating season comming to a close ive come to this conclusion. the insert still will be my main source of heat. i plan to use it for the beginning and end of the heating season but ill feed the shenandoah for the dead of winter. it just heats so much better its worth the extra wood.

now as far as a furnace goes id entertain it when i get extra money. seems since i got married and had kids ive been strapped for cash (funny coincidence huh) so the current setup will have to do for now.

owbs i dont even think i can do with the lanf requirements needed. though theres a guy down the road with one with about the same size yard as me and hes real close to other houses. i also dont think i would like going outside to feed it when theres 2 feet of snow on the ground.

all and all yeah i know with the shenandoah im using more wood than needed. the way i figure it my wood is free its just my labor and time to get and process the wood. i gotta go through a LOT of wood before i can recoop the thousands id spend on a different setup.

 

[Wood Scrounge]

Im gonna guess a lot of it has to do with purchase and installation costs.

I dont pay for wood so multi fuel is out of the question. Installing a furnace would have to go in my basement. To install it by code would be quite costly compared to dropping a pipe in my existing fireplace and connecting a wood stove.

wood stove costs
Stove (Moderate) + Installation (free or cheap) + fuel (free) = affordable for most

Multi fuel furnace costs
Stove (expensive) + Installation (expensive) + fuel (costly compared to free) = not as affordable for most

I agree, I looked at one of those add on wood furnace to go with my oil burner, the installation required MAJOR work. I have an insert and a stove in the basement that heat my house well. I cannot justify rippining out the oil furnace that is in great shape being that it is hardly used. when and if the day comes when the oil burner needs to go I will look at multi fuel for sure.

 

[ktm rider]

Hmm..
My folks had a multi-fuel furnace in their last home.
Tarm I think. Red. Would do oil; coal; or wood.
Are those type more efficient (with wood) than OWB?
Is OWB inefficient by design?
I know someone who has an OWB now; but I don't know his usage.
House is like 2800 s.f. three level; well insulated in Zone 6.
Expound a little OP.
-br

I had an OWB and it burned an absolute boatload of wood. Wifey got sick of freezing her butt off tending to it while I was at work so I sold it and got an INDOOR multi fuel ( wood, coal, oil backup ) unit and it is WAY WAY more efficient than the OWB. I can easily get 14-16 hour burn times at around 15-20 degrees outside. I am heating a 3,500 sq ft. log home that is three levels.
It is in my detached garage and it is great not freezing to death while tending the fire and the wifey loves it.
I burn 90% coal in mine however, and only used the oil backup once to see how it worked..

BTW-- I paid $3,400 for it brand new ( with the oil backup )
my OWB was around $6,000 and that was in 2001 and without the oil backup..

 

[boltonranger]

I see. But....

Very interesting, KT.
So then can someone please tell me why one would want an owb at all?

What is the benefit? (or supposed benefit?)
Not having to bring wood into the cellar / garage?

-br

I had an OWB and it burned an absolute boatload of wood. Wifey got sick of freezing her butt off tending to it while I was at work so I sold it and got an INDOOR multi fuel ( wood, coal, oil backup ) unit and it is WAY WAY more efficient than the OWB. I can easily get 14-16 hour burn times at around 15-20 degrees outside. I am heating a 3,500 sq ft. log home that is three levels.
It is in my detached garage and it is great not freezing to death while tending the fire and the wifey loves it.
I burn 90% coal in mine however, and only used the oil backup once to see how it worked..

BTW-- I paid $3,400 for it brand new ( with the oil backup )
my OWB was around $6,000 and that was in 2001 and without the oil backup..

 

[beagledog]

Bottom line is I don't want to depend on anyone else. World events can change the cost of oil, gas, coal, pellets, etc. But.........the rest of the world can go to hell and the wood from my property still only costs as much as the gas it takes to run my saw. I feel alot more comfortable and sleep better at night that way. Buying an owb was the largest purchase I've ever made that didn't make me feel sick about spending that kind of money.

 

[IndyIan]

When I bought my wood stove(2003) high efficiency wood furnaces were not locally sold in my area and they were $6-10k plus installation, chimney, etc.
I considered an OWB but the inefficiency, complexity and cost scared me off. Also the smoke from a neighbour's OWB didn't appeal to me.

We also don't have enough of a heatload to make a OWB really work, if I had my dream garage and a greenhouse then I'd take another look at a OWB.

I do like the simplicity of a wood stove, there is not much to go wrong really. Rerope the seals every decade? With most things made in China and designed to last for 90 days, I like the fact my heat relies on a metal box functioning as a metal box...
Ian

 

[ncountry]

In todays political climate it would seem that owb's are on their way out in many areas. We currently have a CB owb and heat 2 places roughly 3500sqft with it at the cost of 25+ full cord of wood a year.So I have seen their inefficiency first hand .I am currently completing my new house and am installing a 20 year old tarm in the garage that is more high tech and twice as efficient as most owbs . Hopefully this will last me long enough until I can afford a gasifier. The only downfall that I can see is I will have to split less wood finer.

 

[Boogieman142]

Very interesting, KT.
So then can someone please tell me why one would want an owb at all?

What is the benefit? (or supposed benefit?)
Not having to bring wood into the cellar / garage?

-br

The benefit is when you don't clean it and us guys in the red trucks show up its outside your house and doesn't take your house with it. Another benefit is your neighbors will leave and you won't have any visitors. Another benefit is the longer burn times so you can leave for a while at a time. One last benefit is that you don't have to bring the wood inside. I'm just stating them as i dislike them very much.

 

[never2muchwood]

I've lived in my current home for near 20 years now, and this year I decided to get back to burning wood. It's been a tough decision on what to go with, but I'm going to install a new woodburning fireplace, couldn't find an insert big enough to do the job. I thought long and hard about buying an OWB, one advantage to me would have been I could have put it right between my 2500 sq ft home and 1500 sq ft shop and it would have heated both. I have seen alot of folks heat more than one building which makes an OWB much more practical. Bottom line for me is I didn't want to have to cut 15 cords of wood every year, so hopefully the woodburning fireplace will only take 6-8 cords of wood per year and heat the house, where the shop is newer and doesn't heat bad at all. I know some other folks in my area who have OWB's, they just prefer to keep the wood mess outside is their main reason. Interesting thread....

 

[bore_pig]

Grew up with a stove. That's what I'm used to. Heats the whole house quite well considering my windows. Cost would have been a factor had I been interested in OWB's at all. $1600 total investment for stove and pipe. I figure it nearly paid for itself the first year.

 

[mga]

Hey guy's,not sure how y'all are gonna take this post ,but after a many weeks of perusing the topics I've got a few things on my mind I thought I'd point out.
Now don't go all crazy on me. I am not knocking anyone for what they are burning wood with nor how they are set up.
I just see a lot of mods going on because it does not do what you want it to do.
I've been seeing posts about how can I get longer burn times.
I've been seeing posts about all sorts of problems and issues,especially with stoves.
I've also been seeing some great deals you bought them for....well a cheap price does not mean it's a good deal.
Just look at all of the wood you are flying through.Without any decent 10 hour burn times heating your whole home. Not just a few rooms.


Maybe start thinking furnaces instead of stoves.
I just saw a comment about a reburn box...no it's an extra heat exchanger.
That is different than a process of buring the smoke(gasses) which nets out 30-40% extra btu's that you are not making.

It's not just this forum. I see many OWB's or stoves.
Why doesn't a guy get a furnace? Why not get something that burns a cord of wood to heat 3000s/f per month when it's 0 or colder?

I get asthetics.I like the looks of a flame in a fireplce or parlor stove.
I also get using in floor heating too with an OWB with free hot water.
I also get that they go through 3 times the wood for the most part.
I also get that some rot out pretty quickly and that without power there is no heat.

I'm sure the responses will be all over the board and by making this post I'm sorta asking for it.
I am in all honesty trying to figure out why furnaces are not the norm?

Is it because stoves are cheaper?
Easier to install?
They burn pellets that can be bought by the ton on a pallet?

I would like to envite all civil comments or answers.

i have a 2000 sq. ft. ranch. i heat it quite comfortably all winter, even when it's in the minus degrees, with my fireplace. i have made mods to it that can't be beat and i have only used less than 6 cords of wood this season.

i thought i was doing good. the house is comfortable thru-out. it has to be because my wife is an italian princess who doesn't settle for anything less.

my point is you can critisize others because they may not have a set-up like yours, but, i wouldn't belittle what others are using. i also have read about the complaints some have posted, but i choose not to critisize them.

just because someone threw a wood burner in their house doesn't mean it's going to be efficient. i don't have the luxury of getting alot of wood, so i did everything i could think of to make what i have as efficient as possible. i'm not about to invest thousands into an OWB, nor does my town (now) allow them without intensive EPA testing. they aren't worth it to me.

 

[johnha]

Do you ask because you're a furnace salesman?

I heat a 2650 SF split level with a Regency Medium woodstove and a Quadra-Fire 4100i insert. No basement, stove on bottom level, insert in living room. Insert only gets lit if it goes below upper 20's, which is about every night from late November to late March.

My free standing stove is passive heat. Even my insert produces enough heat without the blower to be called passive. A furnace requires electricity.

My furnace is forced hot air. Blech. I've had hot water in previous homes, large radiators and baseboards. Wood heat is warmer. I can't explain it.

The aesthetics of a fire are a very important part of heating with wood to me. My furnace would be in a utility room that I would only get to look at while doing laundry.

Being a wood scrounge is good for me. Before I started heating with wood I weighed in at 230. Six winters later I'm 203 fully clothed (just weighed today), and it's the END of the winter, when I would usually have added a few pounds. If I use less wood I do less hunting and gathering. I wouldn't get to play out in the woods as much.

As of 4/1/2009, I have NOT sent the gas utility $7,519.43 that I would have without burning wood. I would say 'saved' but, the insert, 4 chainsaws, log splitter, trailer, etc. all add up. True savings are more like $2K. That's really not a reason to not have a furnace, but a justification for burning in general.

If I ever get tired of all the work, the natural gas just kicks back on.

I'm not unhappy with either unit and have not modded them. But tinkering with and modding things is something that I usually do do.

Number one reason? Aesthetics and being outdoors.

 

[Rookie1]

To each his own.

 

[bowtechmadman]

Dirt, bugs, mess, smoke is all outside. Hot water benefit is just extra on top. Ability to heat my barn another benefit. More excercise having to cut 10-12 cords compared to 4-6 cords. Hot water heat is best for keeping dust down and my allergies appreciate that.
Life is good I can fill twice a day in below zero weather and keep my 3800 sq ft home at whatever temp I'd like. Gone as far as 48hrs w/ dropping the thermostats to 60 and leaving for the weekend.
Use alot of wood yes...do I like it another resounding yes.
Each to their own...grew up burning wood inside, got tired of the smell and the mess.

 

[Steve NW WI]

I heat a 16x70 mobile home on a full basement with a Woodchuck wood furnace that is probably 25+ years old. The forced air is not connected to the upstairs ducting, just blows it around the basement, and that gives fairy even heat upstairs as well.

Upsides: huge firebox, 24" deep by approx 18" 3/4 round and tapering down to the ash box, bottom 1/3 is firebrick lined. Good burn times, depending on species burned and damper settings. Electricity not required. Wood storage inside for about 1 1/2 full cords means I only have to bring in wood when it's decent weather, instead of every couple days.

Downsides, no walkout basement means all wood either comes down the stairs or down a chute thru a window (which makes a huge mess). Wood storage in the basement attracts/brings in unwanted pests. Need to be home regularly to keep it fed. (I do have a small propane heater that can be used as backup in the basement, plus the gas furnace upstairs) Low chimney outlet in relation to the door opening can smoke up the basement some if conditions are right.

It's not the perfect setup, but it does what I need it to do. New windows/siding/more insulation are all higher on the list than a different stove.

I have thought about adding (not replacing wood with) GASP a corn stove, but the only good place for it is where my wood storage currently is, and without and autofill system from a bin outside, it still needs nearly as much tending as wood, although much less work (but more expense) involved in shelling a couple hundred bushels of corn. Ideally then, when corn prices are low, I could burn corn and sell wood, or vice versa.