post a pic of your wood stove/chimney in action

[046]

well I certainly didn't start this thread to promote using of green wood.
again purpose of this thread was to show lots of wood burning stoves can and do burn very clean.

how many times do I need to post, this thread was not started to promote advantages of my JUCA's firebox or what ever. the only thing I was trying to highlight is wood stoves when properly designed can and do burn clean.

just so happens JUCA has the ability to burn cleanly with green and season wood both.
I installed this insert last Jan and have ran a fair amount of wood thru already. creosote buildup is almost none. My fireplace has always burned clean.

chimney was inspected to see if it needed to be cleaned before insert was installed. in the 15+ years I've lived here with this fireplace it's never had a creosote problem. I've ran JUCA long enough to know it burns very_clean.

totally agree a runaway creosote fire can be really dangerous. but there's no chance of that happening here. JUCA burn very_clean. and any other wood stove that burns equally clean will not have creosote problems either.

I have to say I have NEVER heard of any type of stove that encourages the burning of green wood. Besides why would you want to burn green wood.
There is no way that green wood burns better ( and safer ) than good dry wood.

I don't care about the shape, size color or even the personality of your stoves firebox, Thereis no way that there can be an advantage to burning green wood. Only major disadvantages.

I have a feeling the BTU output of the Juca stove is going to be off the charts sometime soon if the green wood is continually burned. I wonder what the BTU output of a flue fire is anyway??

 

[046]

then the JUCA folks are lying to me. they've been producing wood stove for 10+ years. and they represented all their products has passed EPA requirements.

no question lots of new technology has evolved. don't understand why everyone is coming at me like I saying your stove is a piece of sh*t. which I have not. or that JUCA is the only good technology out there, which I have not.

again... there are lots of good wood stoves out there.
getting tired of answering all these off topic posts.

if you don't have something to add to the original topic. which is to show your wood burning stove's performance. Please don't post here. go start you own thread....

Thats an outright lie.
Every thing else is just total crap!:yoyo:

 

[ktm rider]

According to the Juca website the are going out of business.

the reason they gave is that they have TOO MANY orders so they are going to stop making them.. ? got me, that is just what it says...

http://mb-soft.com/juca/info/bad.html

 

[Dr. Hackemoff]

Just finished installing it this morning...here's the first fire!!!

Very nice unit. Also, is that a fireproof mat in front of the hearth? If so, where did you buy it - I need one.

I'll post pics of my Kozy Heat soon.

Da Hack

 

[curdy]

Hey Doc,

Thanks! Yeah, I paid $150 for the insert...one heck of a find! My wife and I curled up together last night and enjoyed the fire while reading our devotion book for married couples...it was great!

The mat in front of my hearth is a basic "Hearth Extension". I paid about $65 + tax for it at the same stove shop I bought my liner from. I didn't opt for the fancy ones that cost a couple hundred bucks...I didn't think they looked that nice against my brick anyway. My hearth doesn't extend out far enough, so I was told I needed one. I think it looks nice actually...keeps my floor cleaner too. I had some wood stacked there yesterday to dry out a little extra before tossing it in the stove.

BTW, the extension is pretty light...so it wouldn't be much to ship it in the case you'd have to drive kinda far to get one otherwise.

 

[RaisedByWolves]

then the JUCA folks are lying to me. they've been producing wood stove for 10+ years. and they represented all their products has passed EPA requirements.

Their not lying to you as much as you are lying to your self.




Their site specifically states that their design sidesteps the EPA regs, you told us this yourself.


This thread dosent seem as much about showing that modern stoves burn clean as it does you once again championing your stove that miraculously burns live trees while giving twice the heat that a small nuculer device would provide.


Theres no way that they have sidestepped their way into a new discovery that contradicts the wood burning methods employed over the last thousand years.

And as to the statement that it saves you time in "Processing" Wood, hows that work?

I dont find any time savings in cutting, hauling and dragging into the house 10 cords VS 3 cords.



I think this says it best......

I hate to say it, but I think you became a victim of a really good sales pitch.
I have a feeling the BTU output of the Juca stove is going to be off the charts sometime soon if the green wood is continually burned. I wonder what the BTU output of a flue fire is anyway??

But C'Mon KTM, dont you understand its a masonary chimney hes talking about?

 

[Adkpk]

This thread dosent seem as much about showing that modern stoves burn clean as it does you once again championing your stove that miraculously burns live trees while giving twice the heat that a small nuculer device would provide.

Oh my god, that should be sent over to the joke forum. Ouch my sides are splitting.

 

[RaisedByWolves]

If this is true you have a date with a lawyer......

then the JUCA folks are lying to me. they've been producing wood stove for 10+ years. and they represented all their products has passed EPA requirements...

Read the 4th paragraph.....


http://mb-soft.com/juca/print/epa.html

 

[wdchuck]

Hey, TreeCo;

Nice stove pic, I wish there was a way to add a secondary type setup to my furnace, it just has a shelf/baffle below the smoke outlet.

The bottom half of the firebox has firebrick-vertically on three sides. There is probably room up top to do something but the added heat might be too much for the steel plate construction. Maybe a letter to the mfgr. asking about tolerance would be a good idea.

 

[Dr. Hackemoff]

Hey Doc,

Thanks! Yeah, I paid $150 for the insert...one heck of a find! My wife and I curled up together last night and enjoyed the fire while reading our devotion book for married couples...it was great!

The mat in front of my hearth is a basic "Hearth Extension". I paid about $65 + tax for it at the same stove shop I bought my liner from. I didn't opt for the fancy ones that cost a couple hundred bucks...I didn't think they looked that nice against my brick anyway. My hearth doesn't extend out far enough, so I was told I needed one. I think it looks nice actually...keeps my floor cleaner too. I had some wood stacked there yesterday to dry out a little extra before tossing it in the stove.

BTW, the extension is pretty light...so it wouldn't be much to ship it in the case you'd have to drive kinda far to get one otherwise.

Thanks for the scoop on the hearth extension Daniel - and kudos on the devotions with the spouse too.

Da Hack

 

[Hansson]

My Afterburner
Tarm Innova 30

 

[046]

What a load of BS!

recently taken the time and read the EPA regulations, which confirms what JUCA's site claims about being exempt due to 30:1 burn ratio.

how would you know it take 10 cords to support a JUCA?
have you ever seen a JUCA or personally know someone else that does?

super efficient heat exchange is what JUCA is all about. at full blast JUCA's exterior barely gets hot. my rock chimney barely gets warm. that's because most of of the heat is removed from smoke before going up chimney.

originally projected 3.5 cords usage a season (2,500sf). I've used not quite one cord so far, so I'm on track.

the only claim I've made in this thread is JUCA burns clean.
NOTHING else. not trying to sell any JUCA's. they've already got a waiting list of folks and can already sell as many as they wish to produce. they could give a rats a** what you think.

If you don't like it, go start your own thread!

I'm always open to new suggestions to improve efficiencies of my insert. I'm designing a secondary burn duct which will route outside air from my ashe dump to top of firebox. this should pull smoke back down into fire. I'll have to install air flow control for outside air. JUCA is already designed with sliding air vents, allowing control of air entering.

I've gotten burn times long as 14 hours using two 2ft x 14in seasoned oak logs. normal burn times with spit wood are 4-8 hours depending upon type, size and amount of wood used.

I'm hoping to increase efficiency of my insert further yet.

Their not lying to you as much as you are lying to your self.

Their site specifically states that their design sidesteps the EPA regs, you told us this yourself.

This thread dosent seem as much about showing that modern stoves burn clean as it does you once again championing your stove that miraculously burns live trees while giving twice the heat that a small nuculer device would provide.

Theres no way that they have sidestepped their way into a new discovery that contradicts the wood burning methods employed over the last thousand years.

And as to the statement that it saves you time in "Processing" Wood, hows that work?

I dont find any time savings in cutting, hauling and dragging into the house 10 cords VS 3 cords.



I think this says it best......






But C'Mon KTM, dont you understand its a masonary chimney hes talking about?

 

[RaisedByWolves]

then the JUCA folks are lying to me. they've been producing wood stove for 10+ years. and they represented all their products has passed EPA requirements.

recently taken the time and read the EPA regulations, which confirms what JUCA's site claims about being exempt due to 30:1 burn ratio.

OK, first off, please tell us which of these opposing ideas you hold to be true, Does it pass or is it exempt?


Once we have this nailed down we can proceed.

I'm always open to new suggestions to improve efficiencies of my insert. I'm designing a secondary burn duct which will route outside air from my ashe dump to top of firebox. this should pull smoke back down into fire. I'll have to install air flow control for outside air.

But why? Its allready able to burn live green conifers without putting out any smoke, what do you plan to achieve? Using it without a chimney? filling deep sea divers tanks with its exhaust?



Wait, I got it, you want to develope a wood burning stove for use on Submarines!

Please don't post here. go start you own thread....

Ah, NO!

If you don't like it, go start your own thread!

Ah, NO!

Its not a matter of what I personally like, Rather its a matter of preventing someone else from falling for this companys scam, which is a moot point due to their going out of buisiness due to excessive demand just like the rest of the woodstove companys.




But, just to satisfy you, heres some pics of a properly built stove showing secondary burn.



Looks hot dont it?

Notice the blue flames at the Base of the fire, Blue = HOTT!

OOPS! Theres also nice blue flames in the secondary burn area at the top of the stove. More Blue = More HOTT!

 

[046]

alright A**hole... I'll answer your questions. how about answering mine? have you ever seen a JUCA? How do you know it takes 10 cords to run?

According to information I've read from EPA publications. JUCA are exempt. It burns cleaner than EPA rated stoves regardless of exemptions. that's why it's able to burn green wood cleanly. the entire unit is designed to accelerate burning. when you close the door, you see flames immediately get hotter.

so what you post pictures your insert burning hot. never stated it couldn't. here's a pic of mine burning hot... what does that prove? nothing...... what counts is the chimney's output in smoke when burning hot.

hince the entire point of this thread! which you have taken off topic.
if it bothers you that much start your own thread!

what a MORON you are! Here's a link just in case you don't understand. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moron

"EPA exempted central wood furnaces, which nearly all JUCAs qualify as. Secondly, the JUCA non-airtight operation creates a higher than 30:1 ratio of oxygen to wood and thereby is exempt as being non-airtight.

"The EPA made it abundantly clear that their strict rules were ONLY meant to apply to air-tight products, which happen to be MOST of the woodstoves on the market. In the Federal Register, of February, 1988, EPA 40 CFR Part 60, states:

The intent of the committee was to exempt from the standards those appliances which rely on clean-burning air-rich conditions and which have high combustion efficiencies.

This statement exempted traditional masonry fireplaces and the very few non-airtight woodstoves (like JUCAs) that were and are on the market."

http://mb-soft.com/juca/print/epa.html

OK, first off, please tell us which of these opposing ideas you hold to be true, Does it pass or is it exempt?


Once we have this nailed down we can proceed.

But why? Its allready able to burn live green conifers without putting out any smoke, what do you plan to achieve? Using it without a chimney? filling deep sea divers tanks with its exhaust?

Wait, I got it, you want to develope a wood burning stove for use on Submarines!

Ah, NO!

Ah, NO!

Its not a matter of what I personally like, Rather its a matter of preventing someone else from falling for this companys scam, which is a moot point due to their going out of buisiness due to excessive demand just like the rest of the woodstove companys.

 

[b1rdman]

What's all this EPA, cat converter, secondary burn stuff?

 

[stipton]

Somebody pass me the marshmallows, dem dere fires look good!

 

[046]

b1rdman, that stove looks totally cooOOlll!!!!!

 

[curdy]

Here's a good picture of a high efficiency unit frequently seen downtown.

 

[laynes69]

I will say that blue flames are very hot, the idea of producing heat in the form of secondary combustion is this, burn off all gasses and smoke. The idea of a wood fire is not to cool the smoke, or extract heat from the smoke its to burn the smoke. You burn the smoke, you will see those blue flames over the fire, or in my case under my baffle. The more air, doesn't mean a hotter fire, and can actually cause loss of heat.

 

[046]

no question blue flame is very hot.

one is an airtight design, other is a free burning design.
they really work differently.

increasing air flow always produces hotter flame in an open burn design. that may not always be true in an airtight design w/secondary combustion.

being able to pull heat from smoke is entire reason for stove's existence. so I failed to see why that's bad. if you don't pull of heat from smoke, it's going up the chimney.

what you state about burning smoke is only true for airtight w/secondary combustion.

what I'd like to do is combine Juca's huge firebox and excellent heat exchanger abilities with a secondary burn system. in order to do this. I must convert Juca into a airtight system and provide a way to delivery fresh air to top of firebox. this will pull smoke back into fire along with fresh air.

I'm hoping this will greatly increase my burntime and heat output.

pulled down my insert today and measured ash dump to fab a fresh air delivery tube. outside air will be preheated before entering near top of firebox. I'll fab a flat tube running up back side of insert from ash dump hoe.

I will say that blue flames are very hot, the idea of producing heat in the form of secondary combustion is this, burn off all gasses and smoke. The idea of a wood fire is not to cool the smoke, or extract heat from the smoke its to burn the smoke. You burn the smoke, you will see those blue flames over the fire, or in my case under my baffle. The more air, doesn't mean a hotter fire, and can actually cause loss of heat.