wkpoor
Addicted to ArboristSite
Last 2 posts pretty sum up my experiences too.
Old vs New wood stove
- Thread starter jreed
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
danrclem
Addicted to ArboristSite
I have an old Fisher Grampa Bear in my finished basement and it heats the upstairs really well without any type of blower or fan. I can usually feel a lot of heat on the basement ceiling when coming down the stairs. I'm sure that if I put a vent from the basement ceiling going to the upstairs hallway it would heat the upstairs even more but it really isn't necessary. I may put one in and see how it works and I could always block it off if the basement got too cool.
I hear a lot of people saying that their newer epa stoves use less wood but produce less heat. That doesn't sound like a very good trade off to me.
There is something wrong with either your stove (cracked top section not allowing secondary burn maybe), improper installation or wet wood.
New EPA stoves create most of their heat from the secondary burning of the gases being released from from the primary burning of the fuel. Secondary burn takes place at over 1000F. That temp is reached by the air being preheated. If cooler air is being introduced through that crack, you probably are not getting a full burn.
If your wood is wet, the water vapor being released is at 212F. That water is usually kept trapped under the bark. That cool temp prevents a good secondary burn. I can watch the temp in my house drop when trying to burn two year cut/split/stacked locust. My wood is stacked tightly under a lean to. Air can't circulate as the stack is 8'x8'x18'.
If you have the primary air wide open all the time, is any air being diverted to the secondary burn area? What happens when you initiate secondary burn?
Is your stove installed into a masonry flue? Do you have a stainless liner? Is it insulated? If in an old clay liner flue, it is probably way over sized. If it is an exterior chimney & not insulated, you are killing your draft. (& creating creosote)
There is a reason you are not getting the heat you should be. You just have to figure out why not.
Good Luck
Al
Last edited:
deerlakejens
ArboristSite Operative
We've heated our 3200 sq.ft. house with a Fisher in our finished basement for the past 5 years. During our 10 day power outage with lows in the teens and highs in the low 30's, we were able to keep the house in the mid 60's. I go through about 5 cords of fir a year and have also wondered about upgrading to a more efficient stove. The old Fisher heats up fast, though, and with a full load lasts through the night, it would be hard to see it go!
sesmith
ArboristSite Operative
Take a look at the graph on this brochure from Blaze King.
http://www.blazefireplaces.com/Wood_Stoves/68051 Classic.pdf
While I'm not going to comment on whether I think I could ever see useful 2 day burns on one, the graph should say one thing if you look at the cat temp vs the flue temp. The cat stays lit throughout the burn, and burns gases that would just go up the chimney. The flue temp is lower, so the stove is turning these "waste" gases into useful heat. That means less wood for the same heat, period. How much less is anybody's guess and would probably vary depending on how the stove is burned.
I don't have a new epa stove personally. I added secondary burn tubes to my older 80's vintage stove last year. I can say that it completely changed the way the stove burns. I get more heat out of it when the secondary tubes are lit (I have to be careful not to overfire it). It does use some less wood although no where near a third less (the solar hot air collector I built this year is way more responsible for my savings of wood this year, so it's hard to tell how much less the stove is using). It also burns noticeably cleaner. So I can say there is some truth to the value of the new stove technologies.
http://www.blazefireplaces.com/Wood_Stoves/68051 Classic.pdf
While I'm not going to comment on whether I think I could ever see useful 2 day burns on one, the graph should say one thing if you look at the cat temp vs the flue temp. The cat stays lit throughout the burn, and burns gases that would just go up the chimney. The flue temp is lower, so the stove is turning these "waste" gases into useful heat. That means less wood for the same heat, period. How much less is anybody's guess and would probably vary depending on how the stove is burned.
I don't have a new epa stove personally. I added secondary burn tubes to my older 80's vintage stove last year. I can say that it completely changed the way the stove burns. I get more heat out of it when the secondary tubes are lit (I have to be careful not to overfire it). It does use some less wood although no where near a third less (the solar hot air collector I built this year is way more responsible for my savings of wood this year, so it's hard to tell how much less the stove is using). It also burns noticeably cleaner. So I can say there is some truth to the value of the new stove technologies.
des170stihl
ArboristSite Lurker
I hate to get of rid things that work
I agree that the new stoves that are EPA Certified run cleaner,, But I have a Old Fisher Mama Bear in one shop and a Fisher Baby Bear in another shop And a Jotul in my house. Those Old Fishers I bought over 25 years ago and still produce super heat. I don,t think I,m going replace them anytime soon. I guess it,s ones choice on weather to take the plunge or not. The New Wood stoves are not getting any cheaper. The longer you wait the more you,ll pay for sure.
I agree that the new stoves that are EPA Certified run cleaner,, But I have a Old Fisher Mama Bear in one shop and a Fisher Baby Bear in another shop And a Jotul in my house. Those Old Fishers I bought over 25 years ago and still produce super heat. I don,t think I,m going replace them anytime soon. I guess it,s ones choice on weather to take the plunge or not. The New Wood stoves are not getting any cheaper. The longer you wait the more you,ll pay for sure.
Last edited:
We have a Vermont Casting Large Winter Warm fire place insert and it works great to heat our two story home in Atlanta GA. We do keep the doors closed to the rooms that we are not using. It does use less wood and puts out more heat than the open fire place. I had a Franklin stove in the 80's and the insert seems to use less wood...
MarylandGuy
ArboristSite Operative
Oh my gosh, the differences between my old stove from the 1970's and my 2003 (Non Cat) Hearthstone is unbelievable. I am burning at least a third less wood and possibly half as much. I could never go back to that old stove.
The new stove does have it's quirks. As mentioned earlier, it does not like green wood or wet wood. The old stove would gobble that stuff up with a little extra air in the firebox. The new stove just wants to smolder with wet wood.
Where I used to use large splits and kept a small stack of large overnight logs, the new stove is just the opposite. It wants small splits, even for the overnight burn.
The key it to allow the stove to get good and hot so that the secondary burn kicks in. When you see the flames in the ceiling of the stove, you know there is zero smoke coming out of your chimney.
Some of you may have had semi efficient stoves pre EPA days, but for those of you that have stoves that gobble up wood, think long and hard about getting a new stove. You will be soooo much happier!
The new stove does have it's quirks. As mentioned earlier, it does not like green wood or wet wood. The old stove would gobble that stuff up with a little extra air in the firebox. The new stove just wants to smolder with wet wood.
Where I used to use large splits and kept a small stack of large overnight logs, the new stove is just the opposite. It wants small splits, even for the overnight burn.
The key it to allow the stove to get good and hot so that the secondary burn kicks in. When you see the flames in the ceiling of the stove, you know there is zero smoke coming out of your chimney.
Some of you may have had semi efficient stoves pre EPA days, but for those of you that have stoves that gobble up wood, think long and hard about getting a new stove. You will be soooo much happier!
jreed
ArboristSite Lurker
Here's my delima...which Ive posted other places as well. Still not sure what direction to go in.
I am in the process of re-evaluating my heating method. I am in a 1500 sq. ft ranch home with an unfinished basement. I currently have an Alaska Kodiak wood stove insert propped up on blocks in the basement which I fire around 4 months a year. I typically burn about 6 cords of wood. It does an ok job heating and looks exactly like this:
My preference would be to stick with a wood stove but get something more efficient that would heat both the basement and upstairs. I will likely be insulating the basement in the near future which will help tremendously I would think. However, my question is what happens if I add a room in the basement and hang a ceiling? Will the stove still be effective at that point? My plans are to have a family room and possibly one bedroom in the basement, but it will mostly be open. Or, should I just bite the bullet and install duct work and a furnace? If the wood stove would still work once the basement I would prefer that.
Last question, would the insert I have be less efficient than a free standing stove of the same type? Or, are the basically the same?
I am in the process of re-evaluating my heating method. I am in a 1500 sq. ft ranch home with an unfinished basement. I currently have an Alaska Kodiak wood stove insert propped up on blocks in the basement which I fire around 4 months a year. I typically burn about 6 cords of wood. It does an ok job heating and looks exactly like this:
My preference would be to stick with a wood stove but get something more efficient that would heat both the basement and upstairs. I will likely be insulating the basement in the near future which will help tremendously I would think. However, my question is what happens if I add a room in the basement and hang a ceiling? Will the stove still be effective at that point? My plans are to have a family room and possibly one bedroom in the basement, but it will mostly be open. Or, should I just bite the bullet and install duct work and a furnace? If the wood stove would still work once the basement I would prefer that.
Last question, would the insert I have be less efficient than a free standing stove of the same type? Or, are the basically the same?
Ljute
Free Teak
I'm in a similar situation. We heat the whole house with an old Timberline stove that is in the basement. It has no windowed doors which is fine with me because it's not in an area where we would sit to admire the flames. I nicknamed the thing "Smokedragon".
Been shopping around for a replacement. One problem I have getting a new one (besides the price!) is that all woodstoves these days seem to have windows in them. I presently crank the ol' Smokedragon, sometimes getting it up to 800°. Would this harm a new stove, especially the glass?
Been shopping around for a replacement. One problem I have getting a new one (besides the price!) is that all woodstoves these days seem to have windows in them. I presently crank the ol' Smokedragon, sometimes getting it up to 800°. Would this harm a new stove, especially the glass?
cjcocn
Tree Freak
I believe that the glass is tempered or otherwise treated so that the higher temps will not affect it. I have had my little Regency cranked full-bore and the glass has not suffered because of it. Besides, the high heat will help keep the glass clear.
The heat will not hurt the glass, now you're avatar may break it if you look at it.
Ljute
Free Teak
Ljute
Free Teak
Good to know. Now if I can get over the prices.
In some of these reports, old vs new, one has to take into account the stove side & back shielding. Take a look at the clearances for the non epa vs approved units. There can be up to 12" less on the new models generally this means the radiant heat is somehow being focused in only a couple directions hence the provisions for blowers. Take a look at the ESW 30nc or 13 blower air flow for a better idea of what I am trying to convey. Not that the older designs did not use blowers but that they radiate heat from a lot more surface area due to the internal design ( or lack there of) differences. The old Ben Franklin in the middle of the room radiated 360 degrees, stuff tight in a corner or 12" of the back and the walls would be charcoal shortly ( kind of extreme ,just for illustration). My own stove ( 2000 Comfort Systems) has side and back shielding which when is at operating temp ( secondary's roaring) you can put your hand on them with out getting burned. They are hot but not blistering.
laynes69
Addicted to ArboristSite
I went from a old woodfurnace to a EPA model and its a night and day difference. While the old one would produce more heat, it gobbled the wood. We are at a normal temperature, instead of 70-80 degree swings and our chimney has stayed clean. The old furnace would have used all rounds and lots of them to get us through the night. The new furnace half the load and I don't have to worry about waking to a cold furnace. I wish we would have switched a long time ago.
Mgrella5
New Member
I'd find an old nashua n24. Just refurbished one and dropped it in my basement. 30yrs old and looks and runs like its brand new. These stoves are awesome. It throws so much heat
Nc 30 - I wouldn't want to touch the sides of my 30 when the top is registering 400+ as the sides are not far behind. Note NC 30 comes with rear heat shield side ones are optional.
zogger
Tree Freak
Seems to me the newer stoves all mostly work much better and use less wood, at a variable, but also require a lot more expensive repair parts all the time. Plus, initial cost. they ain't cheap, at least not for me they ain't. (yes, I know I am at the bottom of the scale here on this site for income...) That's what is keeping me away from a newer heater, geez loweez even the used ones cost a lot. New is out of the question right now. I've looked at all the various cheap entry level new stoves and heaters I could find, meh, can't see them working any better than what I have now. I could add ambience with a glass front as the only upgrade part at cheap levels. meh..
Then the repairs, the stuff that wears out and has to be replaced with these new high tech stoves,, those tubes and burners and fireblankets and blowers and so on. Plus mostly having to have the electricity going for a lot of them to work properly. That's a big negative to me, big ice storm hits, cold windy nasty..dang power is gonna go out, you just know it will, right exactly when you really want the old dragon throwing some heat. Heck, supposedly some of the boilers can fail pretty good if they don't have electricity working to run them.
ya, I know having a genny is a good idea and I have one, you just don't know i it will really work or not, might start then crap out, then uel storage. got enough for a day or two, how about a month? Questions like that. I want my all back reality here to not be entirely dependent on electricity up, OR easy cheap close by more fuel supplies..because that might just not exist, as we have just seen. My wood heater.no electricity needed, my backup propane heater, no electricity needed, just a wall unit with a piezo click start or use a match.
My old heater cost 25 bucks used. antique, no idea when it was made. Cast iron with sheet metal sides. Well, it's an oval shape. Only one side to an oval.... Have to go around ten times price of that to even think about a newer stove,(and those cheap ones just ain't that great) and they go up from there into way over a thousand bucks-two grand, whatever, or those outside boilers, which cost like a late model decent used truck... and I sucketh at welding so can't make my own.
Every few years I get a few black stove pipe sections to use as liner and reline it on the inside (the exisiting sheet metal) with some pop rivets and sheet metal screws.(most likely there was exact factory new sheet metal for it, way out of production, so came up with that idea) Not too expensive or hard to do. Besides that, looks like it would work pret near forever. I know I burn a lot of wood, but I think that is way more to do with the leaky no insulation cabin then the design of the stove. If the cabin was actually built well and insulated well and good windows, etc,, meh, proly a heater 1/3rd the size and only 1/3rd or less for the wood would work fine. Or, could work for a 3-4 times larger house if it was more modern and tighter, etc.
ME, if I had the extra loot, and owned here, I'd put the loot into an actual 21st century (this is important, 21st century, not last century level, or century before that) insulation update, and skip the new expensive heater. You'll cut the wood supply down much farther (and forever, a point) than you would with an updated top of the line heater, in almost any case. Now that's just my opinion, but based on working in the field and looking at and living in a variety of homes and seeing what people consider to be "good" insulation levels as opposed to what real engineering studies have shown is actually "good".
Analogy time! This is what I have seen, I'll be as close and accurate as I can get with this
For example purposes, we are talking very cold winter day, "you" are the house..ask yourself what you want to be wearing for the outside temps...
my cabin = wearing a T shirt..absymal two centuries ago levels of air infiltration and insulation construction, basically nothing, just planks and some cheap panelling on the inside to cut the draft down a little
most residential units, the vast hugemongous majority, even relatively new construction, at best = long sleeve sweat shirt
what most consider to be very good insulation and very best quality windows and doors etc = nice jacket (getting better finally now, maybe one home in a hundred like this, something like that)
There are maybe, some sort of SWAG at this from what I have read, a few hundred to maybe small single digit thousands (no one knows other than not very many) "winter parka" level residences around in the US-you get to that level, very little if any additional winter heating is actually needed (also for cooling purposes)
I know it ain't sexy, but it has been my experience most folks only think in terms of throwing more energy at a situation, or somehow altering what energy source they use, or energy consuming device, rather than conserving what they have better. Talking about the longer term economics of it and so on. It's an all of the above solution, not just one or the other.
""Conservation" the entire topic of it, has turned into "boring", "can't work" "stupid green hippie nonsense" "must be subsidsed by the tax payer/government" etc. Well, that's just not true, none of it, but there ya go, anyone can take it for what it is worth. I hope my analogy makes some sense, because that is really what it is. Burn more and more with what you have, get some modest gains with throwing more tech at it and expense (upgraded good quality burner), or burn much less with just a lot more solid "old tech" entering into the solution (same burner, go to a jacket or parka), or both, more of the old combined with just a little bit more o the new tech. I like that last option the most of the three choices. And there's really only those three choices.
Anyway, using a more modern heating device, sure, that's the easiest/quickest and cheapest way to get more BTUS in your home with less burning/cutting. Depends on your house's insulation level, what a cost or hassle it is to get your wood, and what an upgraded unit costs over pay back there. No problem there, this is completely viable to upgrade the unit to a better one,, but it is good to look at both sides of it, getting the BTUs there cheaper, and also *hanging on to those BTUs* so you ain't trying to heat the outside world. Go at least from a sweatshirt level to a jacket level.
Then the repairs, the stuff that wears out and has to be replaced with these new high tech stoves,, those tubes and burners and fireblankets and blowers and so on. Plus mostly having to have the electricity going for a lot of them to work properly. That's a big negative to me, big ice storm hits, cold windy nasty..dang power is gonna go out, you just know it will, right exactly when you really want the old dragon throwing some heat. Heck, supposedly some of the boilers can fail pretty good if they don't have electricity working to run them.
ya, I know having a genny is a good idea and I have one, you just don't know i it will really work or not, might start then crap out, then uel storage. got enough for a day or two, how about a month? Questions like that. I want my all back reality here to not be entirely dependent on electricity up, OR easy cheap close by more fuel supplies..because that might just not exist, as we have just seen. My wood heater.no electricity needed, my backup propane heater, no electricity needed, just a wall unit with a piezo click start or use a match.
My old heater cost 25 bucks used. antique, no idea when it was made. Cast iron with sheet metal sides. Well, it's an oval shape. Only one side to an oval.... Have to go around ten times price of that to even think about a newer stove,(and those cheap ones just ain't that great) and they go up from there into way over a thousand bucks-two grand, whatever, or those outside boilers, which cost like a late model decent used truck... and I sucketh at welding so can't make my own.
Every few years I get a few black stove pipe sections to use as liner and reline it on the inside (the exisiting sheet metal) with some pop rivets and sheet metal screws.(most likely there was exact factory new sheet metal for it, way out of production, so came up with that idea) Not too expensive or hard to do. Besides that, looks like it would work pret near forever. I know I burn a lot of wood, but I think that is way more to do with the leaky no insulation cabin then the design of the stove. If the cabin was actually built well and insulated well and good windows, etc,, meh, proly a heater 1/3rd the size and only 1/3rd or less for the wood would work fine. Or, could work for a 3-4 times larger house if it was more modern and tighter, etc.
ME, if I had the extra loot, and owned here, I'd put the loot into an actual 21st century (this is important, 21st century, not last century level, or century before that) insulation update, and skip the new expensive heater. You'll cut the wood supply down much farther (and forever, a point) than you would with an updated top of the line heater, in almost any case. Now that's just my opinion, but based on working in the field and looking at and living in a variety of homes and seeing what people consider to be "good" insulation levels as opposed to what real engineering studies have shown is actually "good".
Analogy time! This is what I have seen, I'll be as close and accurate as I can get with this
For example purposes, we are talking very cold winter day, "you" are the house..ask yourself what you want to be wearing for the outside temps...
my cabin = wearing a T shirt..absymal two centuries ago levels of air infiltration and insulation construction, basically nothing, just planks and some cheap panelling on the inside to cut the draft down a little
most residential units, the vast hugemongous majority, even relatively new construction, at best = long sleeve sweat shirt
what most consider to be very good insulation and very best quality windows and doors etc = nice jacket (getting better finally now, maybe one home in a hundred like this, something like that)
There are maybe, some sort of SWAG at this from what I have read, a few hundred to maybe small single digit thousands (no one knows other than not very many) "winter parka" level residences around in the US-you get to that level, very little if any additional winter heating is actually needed (also for cooling purposes)
I know it ain't sexy, but it has been my experience most folks only think in terms of throwing more energy at a situation, or somehow altering what energy source they use, or energy consuming device, rather than conserving what they have better. Talking about the longer term economics of it and so on. It's an all of the above solution, not just one or the other.
""Conservation" the entire topic of it, has turned into "boring", "can't work" "stupid green hippie nonsense" "must be subsidsed by the tax payer/government" etc. Well, that's just not true, none of it, but there ya go, anyone can take it for what it is worth. I hope my analogy makes some sense, because that is really what it is. Burn more and more with what you have, get some modest gains with throwing more tech at it and expense (upgraded good quality burner), or burn much less with just a lot more solid "old tech" entering into the solution (same burner, go to a jacket or parka), or both, more of the old combined with just a little bit more o the new tech. I like that last option the most of the three choices. And there's really only those three choices.
Anyway, using a more modern heating device, sure, that's the easiest/quickest and cheapest way to get more BTUS in your home with less burning/cutting. Depends on your house's insulation level, what a cost or hassle it is to get your wood, and what an upgraded unit costs over pay back there. No problem there, this is completely viable to upgrade the unit to a better one,, but it is good to look at both sides of it, getting the BTUs there cheaper, and also *hanging on to those BTUs* so you ain't trying to heat the outside world. Go at least from a sweatshirt level to a jacket level.
Similar threads
