cmsmoke
ArboristSite Operative
Here we go again! :sword:
What to look for when buying a wood stove...
- Thread starter Fyrebug
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
lampmfg
ArboristSite.com Sponsor
What do you mean by burning hedge? He would probably pass out from the price tag, but if anyone saw how much time it takes to make a couple of them and the material we use they would understand and tell us to raise the price.
Hedgerow
HACK
I fully understand that... I too am in the manufacturing realm...
Even though Del thinks I'm slow...
:msp_tongue:
Del,
You live in an area of the country with climate much different than where I live.
It won't make any difference how slow I talk, you refuse to have an open mind and understand the difference in requirements... the result is you'll just never "get it".
You live in an area of the country with climate much different than where I live.
It won't make any difference how slow I talk, you refuse to have an open mind and understand the difference in requirements... the result is you'll just never "get it".
Hedgerow
HACK
Hedgerow
HACK
That would be a tree...
That we burn around here...
:after_boom:
It can get pretty HAWT...
Steve NW WI
Unwanted Riff Raff.
Spidey, I think if you want to keep trying to use this stove as a furnace, you need to re-read Laynes69's post on the first page, and instead of working on the grate concept so much, look toward a forced draft system to generate the heat when the heat is needed. I think that's the key to heating consistently with an EPA furnace. Caddy and Yukon use forced air draft, the Kuumas use an electronically adjusted non-forced draft, both methods control the air to maximize the burn when it's needed.
I have had stoves with grates all my life, and will probably miss not having them when I get my new stove, but I'm sure I'll adapt.
PS - while Del is a southerner (and Delaware is still south, Del
), there are many homes north of you (and me for that matter) happily keeping warm with EPA stoves.
I have had stoves with grates all my life, and will probably miss not having them when I get my new stove, but I'm sure I'll adapt.
PS - while Del is a southerner (and Delaware is still south, Del
), there are many homes north of you (and me for that matter) happily keeping warm with EPA stoves.
cmsmoke
ArboristSite Operative
Which stove did you decide on?
Sorry Del, I've been to Delaware, I have a friend that lives in Delaware... that ain't anything like the northern plains when it comes to "cold".
We have several days a year where the mercury never makes it above zero, often several days in a row... Delaware rarely ever drops below zero during an overnight low.
And the wind is a completely different story... Have you spent much time standing in a 40 MPH wind when the temperature is below zero[sup]o[/sup]??
Have you spent much time standing in a 40 MPH wind that doesn't end for days in any winter temperatures??
Until you acknowledge the differences in heating requirements... sorry, you ain't never gonna "get it".
We have several days a year where the mercury never makes it above zero, often several days in a row... Delaware rarely ever drops below zero during an overnight low.
And the wind is a completely different story... Have you spent much time standing in a 40 MPH wind when the temperature is below zero[sup]o[/sup]??
Have you spent much time standing in a 40 MPH wind that doesn't end for days in any winter temperatures??
Until you acknowledge the differences in heating requirements... sorry, you ain't never gonna "get it".
Steve NW WI
Unwanted Riff Raff.
Haven't yet, still looking for a used "nice" stove while I work through the rest of my long-cut wood, but if I was buying today, I'd probably be getting the Drolet HT-2000.
Hedgerow
HACK
You need "More Horsepower"!!!
Caddy's used forced air nuthin.... all natural draft. Kuuma does not have electronically controlled draft either. We both use natural draft.
Draft is what comes out the pipe. You may confusing it with primary air intake which both Kuuma and Caddy, control electronically.
Sorry Whitey... Will have to completely disagree with you and pummel you with facts & science :msp_w00t:
So you had an old belching stove and now you have an EPA unit? What do you think happened to the smoke? It burns right? Smoke=Fuel=BTU. So whether or not you like EPA, the stove will now burn all the fuel not just part of it.
The MFG listed efficiencies are not EPA efficiencies but actual efficiencies burning hardwood using the 'stack-loss' method. It means if over the life of the fire you lost 20% of the heat in the stack, then your heating efficiency is 80%. Not to be confused with burning efficiency which has more to do with how much of the fuel is left unburned.
Sounds to me there's something not quite right with your stove... Maybe you bought the wrong brand and should've got a... oh I dont know but an Osburn perhaps? :msp_thumbup:
Actually, you might have an overdraft, stove might be undersized for what you need or by the sound of it you may have been happier with a catalytic stove.
brenndatomu
Hey you woodchucks, quit chucking my wood!
Spidey, I think if you want to keep trying to use this stove as a furnace, you need to re-read Laynes69's post on the first page, and instead of working on the grate concept so much, look toward a forced draft system to generate the heat when the heat is needed. I think that's the key to heating consistently with an EPA furnace. Caddy and Yukon use forced air draft, the Kuumas use an electronically adjusted non-forced draft, both methods control the air to maximize the burn when it's needed.
I have had stoves with grates all my life, and will probably miss not having them when I get my new stove, but I'm sure I'll adapt.
PS - while Del is a southerner (and Delaware is still south, Del
I wasn't sure about Caddys, but that is only partially true for Yukon. The Jack line has combustion blowers, the rest have natural draft combustion.
I think you guys are misunderstanding what spidey is trying to do. I don't think he is trying to keep the house a steady 72 deg, rather maximize the available BTUs over as long of a time period as possible instead of the roast-and-freeze cycle that he has now.
Sounds like his old stove would do it well enough. Carry on spidey, I bet with some tinkering and lots of trial and error, you'll get it figured out. I usually don't take "you can't DO that" as my final answer either, sometimes it doesn't work, but most of the time I prove "them" wrong, at least partially, if not completely.
Simply not true, before this EPA firebox I had no problems heating my home with a basic steel and cast box (no firebrick or heat storage of any sort), burning wood on a grate, with a basic steel plenum around it. In the past I've even used a barrel stove with a shroud over it to pipe the heat upstairs... can't get any more basic and simple than that.
No, I don’t think so. The EPA firebox I’m using makes a lot more heat than anything I’ve ever used… but only when it’s crankin’! Once the secondary cuts out and the fire collapses into coals they don’t get enough air to heat properly… they don’t heat worth sour owl crap. Seriously, I had over 9-inches of coals in the bottom of the stove just the other day (they fell out when I opened the door), yet I needed to add more wood to keep it heating… the problem was, with all those smoldering (not burning, just barely smoldering) coals there wasn’t enough room for more than a couple of splits… which just made more coals. I never had any such problem using a simple steel box (of about the same size) burning on a grate… no, it did not make as much heat as the EPA does when the secondary is crankin’, but more than the EPA does once the secondary shuts down… and kept on heating until the coals were all but consumed.
Yeah, I need more horsepower; I need to get air under the fire (coals). The “engine” has plenty of fuel and plenty of displacement… the problem is it can’t get enough air to the fuel so it can make that horsepower! It’s the same with any “engine”… it doesn’t matter one bit how much fuel and displacement you have if it can’t breathe properly. If it can’t breathe, it can’t make horsepower.
It really is that simple.
cmsmoke
ArboristSite Operative
That is what the bricks and/or mass does for you...plus you have to add some wood every so often to maintain it.
brenndatomu
Hey you woodchucks, quit chucking my wood!
Agreed. BUT, if ya can't get the best part of your fuel to burn...
I think that's what spidey is trying to work out.
Thermal mass LOVES to soak up that red hot coal heat, but if your coals are only so-so, doesn't work out nearly as well.
EDIT: I would also agree that sometimes throwing a few real dry sticks (2-3" dia. stuff) on mediocre coals heats them (coals) up pretty well, if that's what you mean.
Last edited:
Is that true Spidey? That might play with the draft and the performance of your stove.
Please dont jump on me with this since I know you dont care and dont mind tinkerin'. But 'code' says a solid fuel appliance must be on it's own chimney system, not shared.
High efficiency stoves are a lot less forgiving to proper venting and following the installation manual. Are you able to install your stove on a single 6" chimney and see if you notice a difference in performance?
Hedgerow
HACK
And all the damn things do, is fill up the stove...
Now, I can spend 30 min. stirring them with a stick, and make em hot again, but might freeze to death while doing it...
I'm with spidey on this one... How about a stove that burns the wood, the smoke, AND the coal bed!!! Leaving nothing but ash...
And a warm house...
BS!
Burning 30 pounds of wood over 6 hours at 50% efficiency will keep my house warm for all 6 hours of it.
Burning 30 pounds of wood over 12 hours at 80% efficiency will not keep my house warm for any 6 hours of it... which means I just have to keep adding more wood and in the end I'm still stuffing near 30 pounds of wood in the firebox every 6 hours (until the thing is so full of coals I just have to quit and turn on the gas furnace, wait 3 friggin days for the coals to burn out)... all that "efficiency" is lost because the potential "high" heat from the coals is wasted because they burn to slowly to make enough heat (it doesn't mater how much heat they make over the 3 friggin' days if I have to fire the gas furnace to keep up with heating demand, does it?). Now, if that EPA stove completely burned (consumed coals and all) 30 pounds of wood at 80% efficiency over the same 6 hours as the non-EPA I would agree with you, and I could cut my wood consumption back to 20 pounds every 6 hours... but that ain't the way it works. They rate the EPA box efficiency over the complete burn cycle (i.e. from start to burn-out) just like they do the non-EPA... well heck, if I drive my 4x4 pickup at 65 MPH for 15 minutes and then slow down to 15 MPH for the remainder of the trip, I can average 40 miles per gallon of gas no problem, but I wouldn't consider that a very efficient use of it... And that's exactly what they're doing with the EPA stove ratings.
It was what I suspected all along... I've now tested my suspicions... and I was correct.
One thing is for sure... I'll never fork out hard cold cash for one.
I'll take the more efficient "heater" over the more efficient "burner" any day!
Similar threads
