# The Ideal Steel in black



## begreen (Nov 22, 2013)

Lorin and Ken at Woodstock were kind enough to whip me up a CAD drawing of the Ideal steel in plain black. The soapstone is exposed on the side, but it could be solid metal there if desired. It's still an industrial design, but I like it better in black. It reminds me of some older coal stoves, purpose built and serious about heat. The andirons are fleur de lis in this drawing, but they could be plain if desired. My wife doesn't approve of the look, but I hope this firebox soon migrates into more classic designs based on the same firebox. The tech behind this stove is fantastic. It's a trend setter for sure.


----------



## BCC_Burner (Nov 22, 2013)

Interesting.  I would love to learn more about the technology in it, but that's the first stove I've seen in awhile that makes me think, "wow, my NC-30 is one good looking stove."


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Nov 22, 2013)

Thanks for posting that begreen. Some will like this for sure but certainly not all of us! In plain black, I simply do not like it at all. However, it would be okay for a work shop but not in my home.


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Nov 22, 2013)

BCC_Burner said:


> Interesting.  I would love to learn more about the technology in it, but that's the first stove I've seen in
> awhile that makes me think, "wow, my NC-30 is one good looking stove."



http://blog.woodstove.com/

BCC_Burner, if you go to that blog, it really describes very well the stove and how it works. Hope this helps.


----------



## BCC_Burner (Nov 22, 2013)

Thanks for the link BWS!


----------



## begreen (Nov 22, 2013)

I'm definitely not pushing the all black theme.  I just wanted to see it mono-colored and free of adornment. Black, or honey brown is the way most stoves have started out. It's a basic industrial look that will appeal to some, but of course not all.


----------



## BCC_Burner (Nov 22, 2013)

It isn't so much the color as the overall design of the stove that doesn't "do it" for me.  I'm saving my pennies for a Progress Hybrid, and the house I want to build around it.


----------



## Tenn Dave (Nov 22, 2013)

BCC_Burner said:


> Interesting.  I would love to learn more about the technology in it, but that's the first stove I've seen in awhile that makes me think, "wow, my NC-30 is one good looking stove."


Yeah, this stove and some of the Blaze King models will never win beauty contests, but their performance is first class.........


----------



## begreen (Nov 22, 2013)

I'll be curious to see how the burn times pencil out with this stove. If it can provide 12-16 hrs of good clean heat that will have a beauty of its own.


----------



## Todd (Nov 22, 2013)

For me it would be a hard stove to purchase by pictures alone, I'd want to see it in person along with all the options.


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Nov 22, 2013)

That is why you should have gone to DC Todd.


----------



## BrowningBAR (Nov 22, 2013)

Todd said:


> For me it would be a hard stove to purchase by pictures alone, I'd want to see it in person along with all the options.


I agree. The all black pics help a lot. It darkens the whole thing up so you don't see all the line art. The multicolored scheme made it seem noisy. And the two tone, light colored stove seemed unpleasant. The Defiant I have is flat black so it is a good comparison.


----------



## BrotherBart (Nov 22, 2013)

Can't believe nobody has mentioned the hinged flop top on it. Quick servicing of the cat.


----------



## Dave A. (Nov 22, 2013)

Hinged top? Hmm.  Guess that rules out the ability to make it into an insert.


----------



## weatherguy (Nov 22, 2013)

BCC_Burner said:


> It isn't so much the color as the overall design of the stove that doesn't "do it" for me.  I'm saving my pennies for a Progress Hybrid, and the house I want to build around it.


 Me too, I think I'll switch out over the summer in time for next year's burning season. I like the idea of the new stove but the PH is a beauty and one hell of a heater.


----------



## rdust (Nov 22, 2013)

I don't care what it looks like, although I do like the look of the stove.  I think it looks like a stove should look.  If it can burn low like my BK and has a bigger firebox I'd be willing to try it.  I doubt it's going to be ember protection only for the hearth though.  I have a feeling it looks better in person just the the BK stoves that people can't stomach.

Function over form any day of the week for me.


----------



## binko (Nov 22, 2013)

Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.
Having said that, with all due respect to Tom and the Woodstock team, this is a look that only a mother could love.


----------



## jeff_t (Nov 22, 2013)

rdust said:


> I don't care what it looks like, although I do like the look of the stove.  I think it looks like a stove should look.  If it can burn low like my BK and has a bigger firebox I'd be willing to try it.  I doubt it's going to be ember protection only for the hearth though.  I have a feeling it looks better in person just the the BK stoves that people can't stomach.
> 
> Function over form any day of the week for me.



Ya, I think it looks fine


----------



## firefighterjake (Nov 22, 2013)

I found the Fireview too ornate for my tastes.

I think this stove may be a top contender for the ugliest looking stove . . . after thinking that some of the Blaze King models had the lock on that title.

For my own tastes, I really like the look of the Progress H.


----------



## bag of hammers (Nov 22, 2013)

Maybe expectations around the aesthetics are so high because Woodstock set the bar so high with their other stoves like the PH (which I think is one of the nicest looking stoves out there)...?  I dunno - but I don't hate it - I could picture this stove sitting in one of those big old industrial loft conversions, for example, among the exposed brick, metal columns / beams, exposed duct work, etc.  Or some other non-contemporary / rustic settings.  Regardless of looks, I think it would cook me out of my place.


----------



## begreen (Nov 22, 2013)

BrotherBart said:


> Can't believe nobody has mentioned the hinged flop top on it. Quick servicing of the cat.


I'm not a fan of this solution, but for this design, it would be very hard to service the cat otherwise. That said, a lot of stoves sit in basements. A clean, strong heater at $1500 can be industrial down there and bother no one.


----------



## BrotherBart (Nov 22, 2013)

I want my welded steel stoves to have that top plate welded down to the stove body. For structural integrity if nothing else.


----------



## kingquad (Nov 22, 2013)

BrotherBart said:


> I want my welded steel stoves to have that top plate welded down to the stove body. For structural integrity if nothing else.


Helps keep everything straight when you run them up to 900+


----------



## BrotherBart (Nov 22, 2013)

kingquad said:


> Helps keep everything straight when you run them up to 900+



Or a thousand.


----------



## webbie (Nov 22, 2013)

Todd said:


> For me it would be a hard stove to purchase by pictures alone, I'd want to see it *in person* along with all the options.



You mean you want to see it "in stove". 


So do they, I'm sure. We are really jumping the gun on this one. They are talking about possibly shipping in the spring/summer and who knows what it will look like and/or what options will be available?

As I've said a few times, I suspect this is the technology "prover" and in a few years we will see a range (well, maybe 3) stoves from them centered around the basics...heck, you might see a 100% cast iron one! Who knows? I doubt even they do!

The main point here is that stoves are moving up a notch in terms of efficiency and of "real world" design. We always lamented that the older EPA stoves were "designed to the test". I think the DC meetup as well as experience in the field with many of the newer stoves (BK, PE, Progress, etc.) show we are on to the Next Big Things. 

This stuff actually (IMHO) brings American R&D ahead of most Euro designs when it comes to freestanding wood space heaters. They don't have the big homes to heat, so most of their clean designs don't have the burn times and larger boxes...

As I said at the panel in DC, I'm glad that my sunset years in this industry are seeing a new burst of innovation. Too much stuff is the same as it was 20, 30 and even 40 years ago.


----------



## Beetle-Kill (Nov 22, 2013)

begreen said:


> A clean, strong heater at $1500


 Is that the aim for market price?


----------



## begreen (Nov 22, 2013)

It's a goal. We won't know the final price until perhaps summer 2014.


----------



## Dakotas Dad (Nov 22, 2013)

I don't care how good it runs.. it can't do enough better than the Manny for me to put it front and center in HER living room. If it was 125% efficient, she still wouldn't have it. and I am OK with that.


----------



## Hogwildz (Nov 22, 2013)

weatherguy said:


> Me too, I think I'll switch out over the summer in time for next year's burning season. I like the idea of the new stove but the PH is a beauty and one hell of a heater.



What is wrong with the Princess? Why are you swapping that out?


----------



## alforit (Nov 22, 2013)

begreen said:


> Lorin and Ken at Woodstock were kind enough to whip me up a CAD drawing of the Ideal steel in plain black. The soapstone is exposed on the side, but it could be solid metal there if desired. It's still an industrial design, but I like it better in black. It reminds me of some older coal stoves, purpose built and serious about heat. The andirons are fleur de lis in this drawing, but they could be plain if desired. My wife doesn't approve of the look, but I hope this firebox soon migrates into more classic designs based on the same firebox. The tech behind this stove is fantastic. It's a trend setter for sure.
> 
> View attachment 118386
> View attachment 118387


 
Oh no.......That color just makes a bad thing even worse......It looks like an incinerator in a morgue or something dark, coal like...........Ugghhhh !!

I think it only works with light 2 tone colors.............and will only work in homes like bag of hammers said , that are downtown modern, urban converted lofts with brick and pipes exposed...............I am surprised by this design and how limited it is in its placement with any home décor........seriously the Blaze kings look nice compared to this and fit in many more home settings also..............oh well........maybe it will grow on us..........heh.


----------



## Grisu (Nov 22, 2013)

I fear, despite all the great tech that went in there, that stove will have very disappointing sales. At the end, most people will want to have a nice looking stove sitting in their living room. I guess only engineers will like the ideal steel. It is too bad since Woodstock is such a great company.


----------



## begreen (Nov 22, 2013)

At $1500 and a big honking steel stove, I think this will show up in more than living rooms.


----------



## rdust (Nov 22, 2013)

begreen said:


> At $1500 and a big honking steel stove, I think this will show up in more than living rooms.



I think you're spot on with your thinking!


----------



## Beetle-Kill (Nov 22, 2013)

I like it.  The location I would install it, I'd probably have a bench vise bolted to it in 6 months and it would look fine.
I'm still not finding the specs. on this thing, my Google-Fu is weak tonight. Anyone have any insight?


----------



## Grisu (Nov 22, 2013)

begreen said:


> At $1500 and a big honking steel stove, I think this will show up in more than living rooms.



I am wondering whether it is "neither fish nor flesh". The customers who are tight in money will gravitate towards the cheaper NC-30 or an US stove etc. while the ones who can afford something better will be looking for something nicer looking. Looking at the general consensus here I am not too positive that particular design will be a good seller. Also, don't forget that people have to decide from pictures alone (unless they take a trip to NH); another disadvantage IMHO for this stove.


----------



## Beetle-Kill (Nov 22, 2013)

Grisu, you left out the budget minded people who appreciate the benefits of a catalytic stove. At $1500, this will have a following.


----------



## begreen (Nov 22, 2013)

As a hybrid, this stove is in another class than the tube stoves. It is more efficient and should do a better shoulder season burn. Of course this is all hypothetical at this point. We need a hearth.com member to sign up as a beta test site for this stove. I would do it gladly but alas, the stove is a focal point in our living room.


----------



## Grisu (Nov 22, 2013)

Beetle-Kill said:


> Grisu, you left out the budget minded people who appreciate the benefits of a catalytic stove. At $1500, this will have a following.



How many of these budget-minded people will come here to hearth.com and learn about the benefits of ordering a catalytic stove online versus walking into HD or Lowes and buying a stove fore less than 1 grand? 

Don't get me wrong, I don't wish that the ideal steel becomes a flop for Woodstock; actually the exact opposite is true. Thus, I would like them to have maybe someone from outside take a look at the design and make some improvements. That stove could be a real breakthrough for them but only if its design matches its great performance.


----------



## Beetle-Kill (Nov 22, 2013)

Grisu said:


> How many of these budget-minded people will come here to hearth.com and learn about the benefits of ordering a catalytic stove online versus walking into HD or Lowes and buying a stove fore less than 1 grand?


I have no idea. Depends on their requirements I would guess. Now for me, I'm fairly budget minded, so if I can find a stove like this "Ideal Steel" for $1500, vs. 2K+ for a  Blaze King I want, yeah, I'm going to consider it. *Especially* with the customer support I've seen reported from Woodstock.


----------



## Beetle-Kill (Nov 22, 2013)

begreen said:


> We need a hearth.com member to sign up as a beta test site for this stove. I would do it gladly but alas, the stove is a focal point in our living room.


 Sign me up, I'd love to do that.


----------



## begreen (Nov 22, 2013)

Looking at the stove in all black is a good exercise I think. It allows one to study the core design.


----------



## bag of hammers (Nov 22, 2013)

begreen said:


> We need a hearth.com member to sign up as a beta test site for this stove.



If I had a big space and the time to play, I'd be throwing my name in the hat.  But not meant to be....


----------



## weatherguy (Nov 22, 2013)

Hogwildz said:


> What is wrong with the Princess? Why are you swapping that out?


 I want a freestander and my options are limited and I want a bigger heater.


----------



## Brick (ware)House (Nov 23, 2013)

begreen said:


> As a hybrid, this stove is in another class than the tube stoves. It is more efficient and should do a better shoulder season burn. Of course this is all hypothetical at this point. We need a hearth.com member to sign up as a beta test site for this stove. I would do it gladly but alas, the stove is a focal point in our living room.



I held off on my purchase of a Progress Hybrid to see what would develop with this stove.  Finally decided to go with the Progress for my loft on the second floor of my building because of the dramatic difference in "looks".  I'll continue to watch this stove mature and most likely will install one in my 1st floor where the industrial look will fit right in and where I will need all the firepower I can get to heat a 3800 sq. ft. room with 14' ceilings.

I inquired about beta testing but they understandably wanted to have the beta stoves closer to home.


----------



## alforit (Nov 23, 2013)

Brick (ware)House said:


> I inquired about beta testing but they understandably wanted to have the beta stoves closer to home


 
That's perplexing...........I would think sending a beta tester stove to different parts of the country to get the full picture of how this stove burns in different climates and conditions would be a smart move........That would help enormously with the refining process and troubleshooting to get the overall picture of the stoves abilities and limitations to help perfect the stove.


----------



## Beetle-Kill (Nov 23, 2013)

On a lighter note- (and this could be the beer talking)- I've always been a Star Wars fan...
The BK has been referred to as " Jabba the Hot"-
This stove looks like "R2-D2", they could compliment each other.


----------



## Brick (ware)House (Nov 23, 2013)

alforit said:


> That's perplexing...........I would think sending a beta tester stove to different parts of the country to get the full picture of how this stove burns in different climates and conditions would be a smart move........That would help enormously with the refining process and troubleshooting to get the overall picture of the stoves abilities and limitations to help perfect the stove.



Your exact points were made by one person I spoke to at Woodstock who encouraged me to ask about being a beta.  My offer to test was a little late in the game and my guess is that they were focused on preparing for DC at the time.  Probably for the best as I think I will be very happy with the PH that is set to arrive next week.  I wasn't really looking forward to spending the money and effort to drop 40+ feet of chimney liner either!


----------



## kingquad (Nov 23, 2013)

If this were a 2 cuft stove I'd be in.  Does this stove have a rear vent option?


----------



## Todd (Nov 23, 2013)

If the overall looks don't pan out I'm sure they can tweak it back to a traditional square box stove. They have the fire box, just need to find the right look that sells.


----------



## peakbagger (Nov 23, 2013)

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Vt does seem to have tradition of unusual looking woodstoves 

http://www.vermontironstove.com/


----------



## bag of hammers (Nov 23, 2013)

Brick (ware)House said:


> I'll continue to watch this stove mature and most likely will install one in my 1st floor where the industrial look will fit right in and where I will need all the firepower I can get to heat a 3800 sq. ft. room with 14' ceilings.



Brick - looking at your avatar, I think I might have been having a flashback to one of your previous posts when I made the earlier comment about the stove.  That's the sort of thing I was thinking about when I look at the Ideal Steel.  Sounds like quite the place you have there.


----------



## Tenn Dave (Nov 23, 2013)

Brick (ware)House said:


> I held off on my purchase of a Progress Hybrid to see what would develop with this stove.  Finally decided to go with the Progress for my loft on the second floor of my building because of the dramatic difference in "looks".  I'll continue to watch this stove mature and most likely will install one in my 1st floor where the industrial look will fit right in and where I will need all the firepower I can get to heat a 3800 sq. ft. room with 14' ceilings.
> 
> I inquired about beta testing but they understandably wanted to have the beta stoves closer to home.


Congratulations - you will be very happy with the Progress.  It's an awesome heater and a beautiful piece of furniture.  Just wait until you see the 'fit & finish' up close.  You will be impressed!


----------



## mudr (Nov 23, 2013)

Grisu said:


> I am wondering whether it is "neither fish nor flesh". The customers who are tight in money will gravitate towards the cheaper NC-30 or an US stove etc. while the ones who can afford something better will be looking for something nicer looking. Looking at the general consensus here I am not too positive that particular design will be a good seller. Also, don't forget that people have to decide from pictures alone (unless they take a trip to NH); another disadvantage IMHO for this stove.



Grisu: I'm a frugal person who likes the utilitarian look, but wants better efficiency.  I put a 30 in the house I just moved to.  If this stove was out and at that $1500 price at the time, there's a good change it'd be sitting next to me right now gnawin on some sugar maple.  Killer efficiency and great burn times yet black steel, utilitarian looking, and very good price? I would be ALL over that.


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Nov 23, 2013)

BrotherBart said:


> Can't believe nobody has mentioned the hinged flop top on it. Quick servicing of the cat.



Indeed it makes for quick servicing of the cat and also shows why that center spot will be the hottest spot for cooking. Were you there when Tom opened that flop top while the stove was burning? No smoke came out! Not sure you would want to do that in a house but it really did show something amazing because of the size of the opening. 

Indeed we will also be seeing a few changes in the final product.


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Nov 23, 2013)

Beetle-Kill said:


> Is that the aim for market price?



Aim is no more than $2000 but the final price will also depend upon what the customer wants in customizing. I have a hunch Tom will want a really good introductory price but we'll have to wait and see.


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Nov 23, 2013)

Grisu said:


> I fear, despite all the great tech that went in there, that stove will have very disappointing sales. At the end, most people will want to have a nice looking stove sitting in their living room. I guess only engineers will like the ideal steel. It is too bad since Woodstock is such a great company.



You certainly are allowed your opinion but we realize that is all it is. On the other hand, we were in DC, in the tent and outside the tent and were amazed at the folks who had questions, liked it (of course a few didn't like it) had brochures, etc. The best thing we liked was the enthusiasm shown by the folks there at DC; that is, potential buyers and not engineers.


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Nov 23, 2013)

begreen said:


> As a hybrid, this stove is in another class than the tube stoves. It is more efficient and should do a better shoulder season burn. Of course this is all hypothetical at this point. We need a hearth.com member to sign up as a beta test site for this stove. I would do it gladly but alas, the stove is a focal point in our living room.



That may happen but I'm not sure who.


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Nov 23, 2013)

alforit said:


> That's perplexing...........I would think sending a beta tester stove to different parts of the country to get the full picture of how this stove burns in different climates and conditions would be a smart move........That would help enormously with the refining process and troubleshooting to get the overall picture of the stoves abilities and limitations to help perfect the stove.



I think the stove will perform the same in all parts of the country but one would get more variety of types of wood burned. However, that would not allow the Woodstock folks to visit the place where the stove is without large sums of dollars. R & D is expensive enough so why add more if not totally necessary? 

Now if you could talk begreen into it....


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Nov 23, 2013)

kingquad said:


> If this were a 2 cuft stove I'd be in.  Does this stove have a rear vent option?



It could be burned like a 2 cu ft stove; just don't fill it.  Yes, it will have the option of rear or top exhaust.


----------



## Michael Golden (Nov 23, 2013)

I like the looks of this stove a lot, I may be looking into one for the basement in the spring/summer!


----------



## kingquad (Nov 23, 2013)

Backwoods Savage said:


> It could be burned like a 2 cu ft stove; just don't fill it.  Yes, it will have the option of rear or top exhaust.


Thanks.  Hearth depth and lintel height will be my limiting factors.  Also, the keystone is about perfect for my application, but it will be close on the height.  Doesn't matter for now.  I've got to get a couple years worth of wood stacked up before I'm ready to pull the trigger.


----------



## BrowningBAR (Nov 23, 2013)

If $1500 is the price, then I'll be hard pressed not to do it over the Progress or the Ashford.


----------



## BrowningBAR (Nov 23, 2013)

Backwoods Savage said:


> It could be burned like a 2 cu ft stove; just don't fill it.  Yes, it will have the option of rear or top exhaust.


That's not what I'm looking for. I want to fill it and stretch it out.


----------



## BrotherBart (Nov 23, 2013)

BrowningBAR said:


> That's not what I'm looking for. I want to fill it and stretch it out.



"Patience hell. I wanna glow something!"


----------



## Beetle-Kill (Nov 23, 2013)

BrowningBAR said:


> That's not what I'm looking for. I want to fill it and stretch it out.


 Me too. I'm still trying to find the CF capacity.
I'm liking this thing so far.


----------



## BrotherBart (Nov 23, 2013)

Beetle-Kill said:


> Me too. I'm still trying to find the CF capacity.
> I'm liking this thing so far.



3.2 cf.


----------



## BrowningBAR (Nov 23, 2013)

BrotherBart said:


> 3.0 cf.


I thought it was 3.25?


----------



## BrotherBart (Nov 23, 2013)

I typoed it and was changing it when you posted. They figure 3.2.

An extra seven minutes of burn time.


----------



## Beetle-Kill (Nov 23, 2013)

Thank you. I do believe I just had my "O" face on.  must nap now...


----------



## BrowningBAR (Nov 23, 2013)

BrotherBart said:


> I typoed it and was changing it when you posted. They figure 3.2.
> 
> An extra seven minutes of burn time.


Or just a little more room for those damn weirdly shaped splits.


----------



## Huntindog1 (Nov 23, 2013)

Anyone know hows the  Steel performs vs the Progress?  I know they are two different size stoves.


----------



## BrowningBAR (Nov 23, 2013)

Huntindog1 said:


> Anyone know hows the  Steel performs vs the Progress?  I know they are two different size stoves.


The running theory is that the Steel is a little more controllable, can be burned at a lower temp, and should provide longer burn cycles.


----------



## Huntindog1 (Nov 23, 2013)

BrowningBAR said:


> The running theory is that the Steel is a little more controllable, can be burned at a lower temp, and should provide longer burn cycles.


 
Nice!


----------



## begreen (Nov 23, 2013)

The steel is also about a half a cubic foot larger in capacity than the Progress which should translate into a bit longer burn time.


----------



## Hogwildz (Nov 23, 2013)

I'd buy a Blaze King before I bought one of those ugly SOB's.
Those plates on the sides with all the slots in them for hanging all that crap on really does not help the look of the stove either.

Oh well, guess I won't be getting a Gear Head sweatshirt.......


----------



## BrowningBAR (Nov 23, 2013)

Hogwildz said:


> I'd buy a Blaze King before I bought one of those ugly SOB's.
> Those plates on the sides with all the slots in them for hanging all that crap on really does not help the look of the stove either.
> 
> Oh well, guess I won't be getting a Gear Head sweatshirt.......


I always enjoy Hog's honesty.


----------



## aansorge (Nov 23, 2013)

It looks like a stove version of this...


----------



## aansorge (Nov 23, 2013)

...and the jeep is a classic.  If I had a man cave this stove would be in there.  It is the opposite of the ornate Fireview.


----------



## begreen (Nov 23, 2013)

The stove is not out yet and Woodstock is super responsive to ideas and suggestions. I think the cleaner, simpler they make the basic stove, the better it will sell. The bottom line is going to be cost vs performance.


----------



## Highbeam (Nov 23, 2013)

Love the funnel flue collar. Looks like a mistake before it was even released. It's too bad, why must the thing look weird at all. Is "basic" really so hard to understand?


----------



## begreen (Nov 23, 2013)

There was a heat sink around the flue collar on the mockups for added efficiency. If that is still there it would explain the funnel flue collar.


----------



## Beetle-Kill (Nov 23, 2013)

Hogwildz said:


> I'd buy a Blaze King before I bought one of those ugly SOB's.


 And I, on the other hand, am thinking about moving the BK and putting this thing in the living room.


----------



## Hogwildz (Nov 23, 2013)

BrowningBAR said:


> I always enjoy Hog's honesty.


Just call it as I see it. And I seen it pretty good from behind the railing they had set up.
I was fortunate to be at the competition.
Many fine looking stoves, some not so fine looking.
Some not too realistic for true home heating, other were.
I likes the Ideal Steel itself and even the leg set up wasn't so bad., but those side panels with the slots and the circle shat etc, too much for me.

There was a mix of humble and some ego going on that I observed. But hey, you'll have that anywhere.
Personally, the European stuff was very nice and fascinating, but the one I liked most was the double chamber stove, but it was way to small for anything but taking the chill of in a room.
I was particular put off by one contestant that I asked simple questions, and he acted like I was trying to steal his secret formula. News flash bud, don't bank on selling many of those things.
Under other circumstances, he would have gotten a much different reaction.
Matter of fact, while BB and I were standing there, we were told we had to leave while he loaded his stove, or loaner stove I should say. 
Not talking about the great guy with the Smart Stove set up either, He was cool and very informative of his product.
A couple tings I did notice, it the stoves were kept burning along by throwing a couple small splits in at a time. I would have liked to see some of those puppies loaded up.
To each their own, but $2k for that thing, not outa my wallet.


----------



## BrowningBAR (Nov 23, 2013)

Hogwildz said:


> I would have liked to see some of those puppies loaded up.


Same. I don't care how much heat a stove gives off with a few splits. I need to know what it does loaded full.



Hogwildz said:


> To each their own, but $2k for that thing, not outa my wallet.


Understood. I feel the same about the PE steel free standing stoves. They look like a damn microwave build in 1984.

I'm still trying to wrap my head around the Progress. But, if the Steel can give me 20 hours of usable heat for $1500, That sure as hell beats the $3,400 for a BK. Especially since I need two.


----------



## Hogwildz (Nov 23, 2013)

I think the starting price is $2k, I could be wrong.
Englander had their new stove there(not running).
It is a mid size model, but they will be making the new model in a 3cf firebox size also.
It will also have the auto adjusting air feature also.
The glass on the mid sized they had there seemed huge! Big viewing area.


----------



## BrowningBAR (Nov 23, 2013)

Hogwildz said:


> I think the starting price is $2k, I could be wrong.


I don't think you are wrong. I would just prefer BeGreen's price to be right. It would make decision making easier.



> Englander had their new stove there(not running).
> It is a mid size model, but they will be making the new model in a 3cf firebox size also.
> It will also have the auto adjusting air feature also.
> The glass on the mid sized they had there seemed huge! Big viewing area.


Anything new with the Englander's or will they be standard non-cat steel stoves?


----------



## Hogwildz (Nov 23, 2013)

BrowningBAR said:


> I don't think you are wrong. I would just prefer BeGreen's price to be right. It would make decision making easier.
> 
> 
> Anything new with the Englander's or will they be standard non-cat steel stoves?


Just the new smart model that cuts the air back and adds air automatically. I seem to remember the guy saying you can set a preference point also.
I asked about any cats in the future, and that does not look like it will be happening.


----------



## begreen (Nov 23, 2013)

BrowningBAR said:


> Same. I don't care how much heat a stove gives off with a few splits. I need to know what it does loaded full.


The stoves were tested with 12# of wood per cubic foot of capacity. The EPA only uses 7#.  In the case of the Ideal Steel that would have been about 40# of wood.


----------



## BrotherBart (Nov 23, 2013)

In two days time I never saw that stove with anywhere near 40 pounds of that oak in it. Or the Oakwood either.


----------



## begreen (Nov 23, 2013)

I didn't get to see the big stoves tested. I think they started with them, maybe on Fri. or Sat.?


----------



## BrowningBAR (Nov 23, 2013)

Hogwildz said:


> I asked about any cats in the future, and that does not look like it will be happening.


Didn't figure a cat would be in Englander's future anymore, but I was hoping for a new burn system that kind of ran like the PE stoves. Some of those stoves have some impressive burn times for what they are.


----------



## Hogwildz (Nov 23, 2013)

BrowningBAR said:


> Didn't figure a cat would be in Englander's future anymore, but I was hoping for a new burn system that kind of ran like the PE stoves. Some of those stoves have some impressive burn times for what they are.


The new stoves have 3 burn tubes instead of 4. The baffle system also tapers down from front to back. There are also a few holes drilled into the sides of the channels that supply the burn tubes to add additional secondaries direct from the channels.
And there are two courses of firebrick on the walls and back. Much higher than what we are used to.
I guess they are hinting to load the damn thing full!

I will have to be real careful loading my 30 up when I ever get it hooked up.
I really do like and am spoiled by the stainless baffle in the Summit.


----------



## BrowningBAR (Nov 23, 2013)

Hogwildz said:


> Much higher than what we are used to. I guess they are hinting to load the damn thing full!


Way ahead of them!


----------



## Brick (ware)House (Nov 27, 2013)

bag of hammers said:


> Brick - looking at your avatar, I think I might have been having a flashback to one of your previous posts when I made the earlier comment about the stove.  That's the sort of thing I was thinking about when I look at the Ideal Steel.  Sounds like quite the place you have there.



Yes.  I think the space in which any specific stove is installed makes a huge difference on the perception of "good looking".  Here's a view of the 1st floor where IMHO that stove would fit right in.


----------



## Brick (ware)House (Nov 27, 2013)

Tenn Dave said:


> Congratulations - you will be very happy with the Progress.  It's an awesome heater and a beautiful piece of furniture.  Just wait until you see the 'fit & finish' up close.  You will be impressed!



I have about two weeks to go and can't wait.  Wish I would have settled on the PH earlier but hindsight is 20/20!


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Nov 27, 2013)

Highbeam said:


> Love the funnel flue collar. Looks like a mistake before it was even released. It's too bad, why must the thing look weird at all. Is "basic" really so hard to understand?



Not all want basic. Is some design to make it look nicer so hard to understand?


----------



## begreen (Nov 27, 2013)

I'd like to see Woodstock team up with the original VC team now that they are back in charge and put a cast iron jacket on this stove. That could reduce clearances and dress it up quite nicely.


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Nov 27, 2013)

As for the price of the Woodstock stove, that is yet to be determined. An approximate has been given but not set for certain. In addition, for those who don't like the designs on the sides or top, I doubt that Woodstock would have any problems dealing with that. And for those who want intricate designs, they will do it but there could be some additional costs involved.


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Nov 27, 2013)

begreen said:


> I'd like to see Woodstock team up with the original VC team now that they are back in charge and put a cast iron jacket on this stove. That could reduce clearances and dress it up quite nicely.



One has to keep in mind that cast is more expensive than steel. The exhaust will be cast and it will be rear or top exhaust.  I agree, it could be interesting if they could join up with the original team. As for clearances, I think they will be very low but too early to talk about that yet.


----------



## Highbeam (Nov 27, 2013)

Backwoods Savage said:


> Not all want basic. Is some design to make it look nicer so hard to understand?


 
I've yet to see anything on the outside of this stove I would describe as "nicer". Remember, I own a BK and know an ugly stove when I see one.


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Nov 27, 2013)

Highbeam said:


> I've yet to see anything on the outside of this stove I would describe as "nicer". Remember, I own a BK and know an ugly stove when I see one.



Or that could be stated as you simply do not like the stove nor do you like any of the extra designs. But one must also remember that we all have different tastes. For example, I love the Fireview but still find that many think it too ornate. That is fine.


----------



## begreen (Nov 27, 2013)

Backwoods Savage said:


> One has to keep in mind that cast is more expensive than steel. The exhaust will be cast and it will be rear or top exhaust.  I agree, it could be interesting if they could join up with the original team. As for clearances, I think they will be very low but too early to talk about that yet.



Of course it would cost more. It would also increase sales. Without the tux it wouldn't make it into this house. I guess if one wants to go to the ball one needs to dress and tip the help appropriately.  This is not picking on the Steel. My wife didn't particularly like the looks of the Summit either, but the same firebox in a cast iron wrapper is good to go with her.


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Nov 27, 2013)

begreen said:


> Of course it would cost more. It would also increase sales. Without the tux it wouldn't make it into this house. I guess* if one wants to go to the ball one needs to dress and tip the help appropriately. *


----------



## dave_376 (Nov 27, 2013)

A little off topic but I want a lager insert with a cat...something the size of the summit ... maybe ever the BK king in an insert.


----------



## Papa-Yankee-Romeo-Oscar (Nov 27, 2013)

BrowningBAR said:


> Same. I don't care how much heat a stove gives off with a few splits. I need to know what it does loaded full.
> 
> 
> Understood. I feel the same about the PE steel free standing stoves. They look like a damn microwave build in 1984.
> ...



+1...I'm hoping they can deliver on the 20hrs for $1500, I'll buy one. I have planned all along to put a second stove in my kitchen knowing that the Manchester, or just about any stove for that matter was going to heat 3100sf of drafty, not-so-open farmhouse. So far it has surprised me but on these days with a high of 25 and heavy winds from the north, I have to load the thing a little more than I'd like.


----------



## rdust (Nov 27, 2013)

Backwoods Savage said:


> Or that could be stated as you simply do not like the stove nor do you like any of the extra designs. But one must also remember that we all have different tastes. For example, I love the Fireview but still find that many think it too ornate. That is fine.



Dennis I agree!  

Unfortunately many of the Woodstock loyalists have been saying for years how god awful ugly the BK stoves are without ever considering people have different tastes or expectations from a stove.  I can see how some users of the "ugly" stoves are now more than happy to let the WS loyalists that their company now offers one of those "ugly" stoves.


----------



## Hogwildz (Nov 27, 2013)

There is a new red headed step child on the block.
I bet BK owners are happier than all.
No longer the ugliest stove on the market BAHAHAHAHA.


----------



## begreen (Nov 27, 2013)

If it burns well and the price is right, this red-headed gal will be the one that's chuckling soon. So far she's showing a lot of spunk. 

This reminds me of the old Jimmy Soul tune.


----------



## ddddddden (Nov 28, 2013)

. . .laughing all the way to the bank. 
They have probably already sold 1,000+ of these stoves to Popular Mechanics readers.


----------



## BrotherBart (Nov 28, 2013)

Hell I am the one that thinks the 30-NC in a brown suit is gorgeous. And that the Fireview is fugly. I want a stove. Not a Buddhist temple. 

Point being, different smoke for different folk. Its all good.


----------



## ddddddden (Nov 28, 2013)

It is a wise man who recognizes the temple of the cat.


----------



## weatherguy (Nov 28, 2013)

dave_376 said:


> A little off topic but I want a lager insert with a cat...something the size of the summit ... maybe ever the BK king in an insert.


 The King doesn't come in an insert, only the Princess with a 2.54 cf box, look at the Buck 91, huge box and cat.


----------



## DevilsBrew (Nov 28, 2013)

I like the all black.  It does look like an old stove.  Kinda steampunkish.


----------



## Tenn Dave (Nov 28, 2013)

Hogwildz said:


> There is a new red headed step child on the block.
> I bet BK owners are happier than all.
> No longer the ugliest stove on the market BAHAHAHAHA.


This new stove certainly wouldn't be my first choice in a beauty contest, but I still think BK 'rules the roost' when it comes to ugly stoves.


----------



## Tenn Dave (Nov 28, 2013)

Are there any beta testers of the new Woodstock stove posting here on Hearth.com ?  If so let us know what you are experiencing with this heater.


----------



## Coog (Nov 28, 2013)

I'd buy it for $1500.  Challenge is getting the wife on board with another stove.  It doesn't look that bad.

I still do not understand the technology.  I looked on their website but was not real clear.  The best part about BK is the simlicity of design.  For $1500 it can't be too complicated.


----------



## Grisu (Nov 28, 2013)

dave_376 said:


> A little off topic but I want a lager insert with a cat...something the size of the summit ... maybe ever the BK king in an insert.



The Kuma Sequoia comes also as an insert. It is the largest one I know with a 3.6 cu ft firebox. Requires an 8-inch liner though. (P.S. Maybe open another thread?)

Add-on: Apart from an insert, the Woodstock Progress Hybrid stove can be rear-vented and has a 2.8 cu. ft. firebox. I also found a bigger insert than the Kuma, the Buck 91 with 4.4 cu ft and cat.


----------



## Osage (Nov 28, 2013)

begreen said:


> If it burns well and the price is right, this red-headed gal will be the one that's chuckling soon. So far she's showing a lot of spunk.
> 
> This reminds me of the old Jimmy Soul tune.


I have seen some good looking redheads and I like this one.


----------



## rdust (Nov 28, 2013)

Tenn Dave said:


> Are there any beta testers of the new Woodstock stove posting here on Hearth.com ?  If so let us know what you are experiencing with this heater.



I wish there was, I'm not blown away by the the one I've read about so far.


----------



## Tenn Dave (Nov 28, 2013)

rdust said:


> I wish there was, I'm not blown away by the the one I've read about so far.


Which one are you reading about?  Who is posting?


----------



## begreen (Nov 28, 2013)

DevilsBrew said:


> I like the all black.  It does look like an old stove.  Kinda steampunkish.


That's my impression.


----------



## Tenn Dave (Nov 28, 2013)

Enough already about this stove's looks, or lack thereof.  How is it performing in beta testing?  The intented emphasis is function over form.  Much like BK.


----------



## begreen (Nov 28, 2013)

From what I have seen and read the stove performs similarly to the Lopi Cape Cod hybrid. Clean burning, clean glass and 10-12 hr burn times. It is a radiant stove, no blower. Just remember, this is a pre-production stove still. Tweaks and different wood may increase or decrease performance.


----------



## becasunshine (Nov 28, 2013)

I just went to the Blaze King site and took a look at their stoves.  I don't know much about wood stoves- I am trying to learn- but the spec numbers looked impressive to my untrained eye.  I am all about function over form.  That being said, I do appreciate the aesthetic as well.  I think the Blaze King stoves look fine!  They look like wood stoves- which is what I expect a wood stove to look like- both on the web site and in the house.  I think they are quite attractive.   Humor a newbie:  do the Ideal Steel numbers compete with the Blaze King numbers so far?  I like the idea of the thermal mass properties of the soapstone liner in the Ideel Steel.  (We did attend the Decathlon.  We are in the nascent stages of shopping for a wood stove for a specific purpose.)


----------



## begreen (Nov 28, 2013)

Hmmm, BK Princess $2800, Ideal Steel $1500, black glass vs great fire view. Yes I think the numbers are competitive, but then again one is not comparing identical stoves here. I think it's best to compare hybrid to hybrid.


----------



## becasunshine (Nov 28, 2013)

begreen said:


> Hmmm, BK Princess $2800, Ideal Steel $1500, black glass vs great fire view. Yes I think the numbers are competitive, but then again one is not comparing identical stoves here. I think it's best to compare hybrid to hybrid.



Ok- so both the Ideal Steel and the BK Princess have catalytic combusters (more maintenance for the cat but lower emissions) but the Ideal Steel has a secondary combustion capability as well- right?  Also, the Ideal Steel has the soapstone liner...


----------



## begreen (Nov 28, 2013)

Correct.


----------



## becasunshine (Nov 28, 2013)

begreen said:


> Correct.



Ok, sorry for picking the thread apart with my newbie questions, but what is the difference between the Ideal Steel and the Progress hybrid, beyond the steel outer envelope for the Ideal Steel, and the price point?  I ask this sincerely, because we were thinking strongly about a Progress Hybrid- but if there is new, better technology and a lower price point with the Ideal Steel, it may be best for us to wait for it.  We aren't installing the wood stove this season.  We are serious enough that we will probably buy wood to sit for another year or so, but no wood stove this year.  Is it worth waiting out the beta testing on the Ideal Steel?


----------



## begreen (Nov 28, 2013)

Visit the blogs for the Ideal stove. There are significant design challenges that they had to overcome in order to reach the low price point target. As a tricked out full soapstone stove the Progress Hybrid is almost the opposite. It is a high-end design with a different cat setup, full soapstone body, ash pan option, cooktop etc.


----------



## becasunshine (Nov 28, 2013)

begreen said:


> Visit the blogs for the Ideal stove. There are significant design challenges that they had to overcome in order to reach the low price point target. As a tricked out full soapstone stove the Progress Hybrid is almost the opposite. It is a high-end design with a different cat setup, full soapstone body, ash pan option, cooktop etc.




Aha.  Will do.  I do remember that the Ideal Steel has a cook top with different burner designs, etc.  If I'm going to have a wood stove, I'm going to have a cook top.  The point is to save on propane in our particular application.  We have a gas range at that location, fueled by propane.  If I've got the wood stove cranked up, I'm going to cook on it.  The ash pan is a must have accessory.  I am not familiar with catalytic combusters in wood stoves.  My limited, dated experience is way older than that technology, even.  During the time in which my friends and family were burning wood to reduce utility bills, a room blower was considered high end.     So yeah, I've got a learning curve ahead of me on catalytic combustion, much less catalytic combustion plus secondary combustion.  We may end up buying a Progress Hybrid because the technology is well-tested and established, just to avoid mixing our learning curve up with the shake down cruise of a new technology.


----------



## begreen (Nov 28, 2013)

The tech on the cat/secondary hybrids has only been on the market for about a year. the PH came out about this time last year. The Cape Cod after that. We have no long term reports yet and won't for a few more years to come.


----------



## Oldhippie (Nov 28, 2013)

becasunshine said:


> Aha.  Will do.  I do remember that the Ideal Steel has a cook top with different burner designs, etc.  If I'm going to have a wood stove, I'm going to have a cook top.  The point is to save on propane in our particular application.  We have a gas range at that location, fueled by propane.  If I've got the wood stove cranked up, I'm going to cook on it.  The ash pan is a must have accessory.  I am not familiar with catalytic combusters in wood stoves.  My limited, dated experience is way older than that technology, even.  During the time in which my friends and family were burning wood to reduce utility bills, a room blower was considered high end.     So yeah, I've got a learning curve ahead of me on catalytic combustion, much less catalytic combustion plus secondary combustion.  We may end up buying a Progress Hybrid because the technology is well-tested and established, just to avoid mixing our learning curve up with the shake down cruise of a new technology.



Just to get you going in the right direction with your choices, i would strongly suggest following the Woodstock Blog about this stove at this link.

http://blog.woodstove.com/

The $1500 price keeps being brought up but anything coming out of Woodstock reads like the underlined below. I have no idea where $1500 comes from, but I believe there is no final pricing. They do run special deals at certain seasons or when new products get announced, so take any prices you hear with a grain of salt unless they are recent and come from Woodstock. Here's something I just copied off their Blog. _11/11/2013 The primary design focus has been affordability, and our goal is to offer the Ideal Steel Hybrid stove at a retail cost of $2000.00 or less. 
_
The Ideal Steel pics I have seen have an ash pan, it may not be as nice as the one on the PH. Remember, the design is still evolving and what comes standard, versus optional etc, may change.

All else being said, it's pretty clear that the technology implemented inside the Ideal Steel is a spin off of all lessons learned from the PH, so In a general sense it's pretty safe to say the Ideal Steel will be similar to the PH in many ways. Weather that equals the performance of the PH remains to be seen, but field units are now out in people's homes and reports are starting to come in. The one thing to know about Woodstock is that they are very good at back engineering any product updates into already sold and operating stoves.


----------



## begreen (Nov 28, 2013)

They were talking a target goal of ~$1500 at the decathlon. I made them repeat that to be sure I heard it correctly. Whether that ends up being overenthusiasm or fact we'll have to wait and see.


----------



## DevilsBrew (Nov 28, 2013)

$1500?  Sh**.  Not bad.


----------



## Oldhippie (Nov 28, 2013)

begreen said:


> They were talking a target goal of ~$1500 at the decathlon. I made them repeat that to be sure I heard it correctly. Whether that ends up being overenthusiasm or fact we'll have to wait and see.



Very interesting. If it comes out at $1500 that will attract a lot of buyers and I would really love to see that. On the Woodstock site, they just keep quoting what I posted above. But I'm really glad to hear it came from the Decathlon folks, makes it more credible to me, ...and I'm not surprised you asked them to repeat that!  If it happens I'll believe it, till then I'll be a skeptic.


----------



## begreen (Nov 28, 2013)

Agreed, that is a heckuva low price for the stove.


----------



## becasunshine (Nov 28, 2013)

begreen said:


> They were talking a target goal of ~$1500 at the decathlon. I made them repeat that to be sure I heard it correctly. Whether that ends up being overenthusiasm or fact we'll have to wait and see.



For what little I know, under $2000 is a great price for a Woodstock, along with their customer service.  I fell in love with the Woodstocks the first time I fell backwards into their web site.  I love the soapstone look, but I like the Ideal Steel just fine as well.  I don't need the side bling but I do love the cook top. 

I appreciate the feedback from everyone even though I hijacked the thread into my personal shopping service.  

I think I said this before, but the simple, clean lines of the Ideal Steel (without the side bling) appeal to me.  Throw some nice burner trivets on the top and I'll be happy.  I was really happy to learn, at the Decathlon, that it has a soapstone liner.  I like the idea of the soapstone mass.  

I'm going to go read the blog.   

Thank you again, everybody!


----------



## rdust (Nov 28, 2013)

Tenn Dave said:


> Which one are you reading about?  Who is posting?



Haven't seen it posted here, just the one that I believe you're already following by Brian.


----------



## Tenn Dave (Nov 28, 2013)

rdust said:


> Haven't seen it posted here, just the one that I believe you're already following by Brian.


Oh, ok.  I thought you were talking about another one on Hearth.com.  Surely there must be some other beta testers around.  I wish they would start posting some of their test results.


----------



## rideau (Nov 28, 2013)

My Progress Hybrid was installed December 2011 - TWO years ago.  Stove has been up and running for two years.  It certainly appears that Woodstock has this stove running the way they intended at this time.  A beautiful stove, a very good heating appliance, easy to operate but very responsive to owner manipulation.


----------



## rdust (Nov 28, 2013)

Tenn Dave said:


> Oh, ok.  I thought you were talking about another one on Hearth.com.  Surely there must be some other beta testers around.  I wish they would start posting some of their test results.



I'm sure some more will pop up sooner or later.


----------



## RockyMtnHigh (Nov 28, 2013)

I think it's a good looking stove, although I kind of dig the "workhorse" look. In the shop I always kind of define the steel stoves as a workhorse look and the cast iron models as functional furniture.

I'd definitely buy one at that price though, $1500 would be a kickin deal for that stove especially if that was MSRP.


----------



## Tenn Dave (Nov 28, 2013)

RockyMtnHigh said:


> I think it's a good looking stove, although I kind of dig the "workhorse" look. In the shop I always kind of define the steel stoves as a workhorse look and the cast iron models as functional furniture.
> 
> I'd definitely buy one at that price though, $1500 would be a kickin deal for that stove especially if that was MSRP.


I have to admit that when I first saw the new stove I was less then thrilled with the way it looked.  Not the stove so much, but all the silly add ons.  However, as time passes, the stove's looks are starting to grow on me; especially the all black clean version.  And if it performs somewhat like the Progress Hybrid, and sells in the $1500 - $2000 range, I think it will be a smashing success !!


----------



## RockyMtnHigh (Nov 28, 2013)

Tenn Dave said:


> I have to admit that when I first saw the new stove I was less then thrilled with the way it looked.  Not the stove so much, but all the silly add ons.  However, as time passes, the stove's looks are starting to grow on me; especially the all black clean version.  And if it performs somewhat like the Progress Hybrid, and sells in the $1500 - $2000 range, I think it will be a smashing success !!



Yeah, the black look is slick and the price is just dashing.


----------



## chipsoflyin (Nov 29, 2013)

The key to this stove will be low end operations with marginal draft( shoulder season/less than ideal chimney setup). Being all steel I would think some sort of blower setup may be in order.


----------



## Tenn Dave (Nov 29, 2013)

chipsoflyin said:


> The key to this stove will be low end operations with marginal draft( shoulder season/less than ideal chimney setup). Being all steel I would think some sort of blower setup may be in order.


 I might be wrong about this, but I think the goal of Woodstock with this new stove is to achieve Progress Hybrid like burning results ( maybe slightly longer burn times), but at a more affordable price point.  And also offer a  degree of customization to the purchaser.  I do not think they are looking for 40 hour burn times.  This stove is not intended to be a smudge pot that sits and smolders all day.  It is intended to be a strong heater with a nice fire show with moderate to long burn times that will easily get you through the night with plenty of heat even on the coldest days of winter, and still have a big bed of hot coals for the next fire.  Some folks, especially those with no backup heat source, put a huge amount of importance on super long burn times.  But for me and the vast majority of stove owners, getting through the night with plenty of heat and a good coal bed in the morning is what counts.  12 hour burns times are great because they usually fit nicely into most people's working schedule.  I know I like to check my stove before I go to bed and when I wake up in the morning.  And even if it doesn't need any wood, I'm still going to check it for peace of mind.  After all, this is a fire you have burning inside your home. 

The following was just my opinion and I hope no one takes offense.


----------



## begreen (Nov 29, 2013)

chipsoflyin said:


> The key to this stove will be low end operations with marginal draft( shoulder season/less than ideal chimney setup). Being all steel I would think some sort of blower setup may be in order.


So far I was told there are no plans for a blower. My guess is because that would have a dramatic effect on price. But who knows, may be later it will show up as an accessory?


----------



## Tenn Dave (Nov 29, 2013)

begreen said:


> So far I was told no plans for a blower.


 I hope you are right.  I know blower fans serve a purpose, but I hate the noise and the look of the power cord coming out of the stove.


----------



## begreen (Nov 29, 2013)

Not all blowers are noisy and not all stoves are in a location where noise matters. I think this may be an oversight on their part coming from soapstone stoves. A blower should be optional IMO. All homes are not created equally. Some stove locations benefit from a boost in convection.


----------



## Highbeam (Nov 29, 2013)

Tenn Dave said:


> Enough already about this stove's looks, or lack thereof.  How is it performing in beta testing?  The intented emphasis is function over form.  Much like BK.


 
I think the intended purpose is about more than function. At least I hope so because if the focus is on performance then they failed with only a 10-12 hour burntime as BG quoted. Perhaps it would be wise to shift the emphasis to a low cost, basic, stove that performs almost as well as the other woodstock stoves?


----------



## begreen (Nov 29, 2013)

Note that I was estimating not stating the burntimes. My comparison was to the Cape Cod. Until will have some actual field results the burntimes are a guess at best. Also, I was being conservative in defining burn time as the period of meaningful heat, not to coals enough for a restart.


----------



## Tenn Dave (Nov 29, 2013)

Highbeam said:


> I think the intended purpose is about more than function. At least I hope so because if the focus is on performance then they failed with only a 10-12 hour burntime as BG quoted. Perhaps it would be wise to shift the emphasis to a low cost, basic, stove that performs almost as well as the other woodstock stoves?


 Emphasis on low cost is not a bad idea.  However, to say they failed with only 10 -12 hour burn times is ridiculous.  Those burn times are ideal for most of us stove owners.  Getting through the night with plenty of heat and a good hot bed of coals in the morning is the goal.  And doing it with super low pollution and a nice fire show is even better.  All in all, I think the early results for this stove are very impressive, *especially at this price point*.  It may not win any beauty contests, but for a great many people, looks take a back seat to performance.  And in simple black without the moose antlers, it doesn't look bad at all.


----------



## Highbeam (Nov 29, 2013)

becasunshine said:


> I just went to the Blaze King site and took a look at their stoves.  I don't know much about wood stoves- I am trying to learn- but the spec numbers looked impressive to my untrained eye.  I am all about function over form.  That being said, I do appreciate the aesthetic as well.  I think the Blaze King stoves look fine!  They look like wood stoves- which is what I expect a wood stove to look like- both on the web site and in the house.  I think they are quite attractive.
> 
> Humor a newbie:  do the Ideal Steel numbers compete with the Blaze King numbers so far?


 
Not even close, the BK specs KILL anything from woodstock as far as function. If function is your goal then you need to stick with BK for now. Woodstock has put out one new stove in the last year and now this IdealSteel is coming out so they may someday make a run at BK. Both companies make great stoves and you can believe the posted specs from their marketing. Really sit down and compare line for line each spec before you buy.

I owned a soapstone stove. Meh, the stone offers very little advantage in real life.


----------



## Tenn Dave (Nov 29, 2013)

begreen said:


> Not all blowers are noisy and not all stoves are in a location where noise matters. I think this may be an oversight on their part coming from soapstone stoves. A blower should be optional IMO. All homes are not created equally. Some stove locations benefit from a boost in convection.


 You hit the nail right on the head when you said 'optional'.  That way, everyone can be happy.


----------



## Highbeam (Nov 29, 2013)

If all you want is 10-12 hours of burntime, a basic stove, a cheap stove, one with a dependable reputation and low emissions then an NC-30 will do the job.


----------



## Tenn Dave (Nov 29, 2013)

Highbeam said:


> Not even close, the BK specs KILL anything from woodstock as far as function. If function is your goal then you need to stick with BK for now. Woodstock has put out one new stove in the last year and now this IdealSteel is coming out so they may someday make a run at BK. Both companies make great stoves and you can believe the posted specs from their marketing. Really sit down and compare line for line each spec before you buy.
> 
> I owned a soapstone stove. Meh, the stone offers very little advantage in real life.


 If a smoldering fire with less heat is your goal, than you can't beat BK.  Also, remember that it takes an hour just to fill it up with wood.  Lets be practical here:  you know you are going to want to check your stove before you go to bed and when you wake up.....so what is the point of 35 hour smudge pot fires?  And, if you take pride in the way your home looks, it's hard to beat the beauty of a Woodstock stove.  If you're going to ban the stove to an unfinished basement, then you might as well go ugly with a BK.


----------



## begreen (Nov 29, 2013)

This is getting a bit silly. You can fill up a Princess in the same time as a Progress or our T6. Yes, the BK can be turned down and run at a lower temp than our stove, but the inference that it is burning dirty is incorrect. It's anything but a smudge pot. FWIW, the newest BKs are not bad looking at all IMHO. In particular I like the lines of the  Ashford.

Now let's get back on topic and stick to the Ideal Steel. This is not a discussion about pure soapstone stoves.


----------



## Tenn Dave (Nov 29, 2013)

begreen said:


> This is getting a bit silly. You can fill up a Princess in the same time as a Progress or our T6. Yes, the BK can be turned down and run at a lower temp than our stove, but the inference that it is burning dirty is incorrect. It is anything but a smudge pot. The newest BKs are not bad looking at all IMHO. In particular I like the lines of the  Ashford.


 I think they are ugly.......but to each his own.


----------



## Waulie (Nov 29, 2013)

If you are using the burn time definition of enough coals to easily relight, then I'd have to guess the Ideal Steel will push 20 hours or so.  With that definition, my PH gets 16 hours "burn times" easily and the Ideal Steel is quite a bit bigger.  Personally, I hate that definition because 90% of my heating season I need HEAT, not just coals.

Getting real, siginificant heat for 12 hours is my top priority when it comes to function.  Probably many others too.


----------



## BrowningBAR (Nov 29, 2013)

I think the Steel will provide longer burns than 10-12 hours. I think with good hard wood, dialed in, you will get 15+ hours of heat for most people.


----------



## begreen (Nov 29, 2013)

Tenn Dave said:


> I think they are ugly.......but to each his own.


Do you think the Ideal Steel is a beauty?


----------



## Tenn Dave (Nov 29, 2013)

BrowningBAR said:


> I think the Steel will provide longer burns than 10-12 hours. I think with good hard wood, dialed in, you will get 15+ hours of heat for most people.


 BrianK is going to do a long, slow burn with oak pallet scraps this weekend.  The results should be interesting.


----------



## Tenn Dave (Nov 29, 2013)

begreen said:


> Do you think the Ideal Steel is a beauty?


Nope, I already said that several times on this thread.  But I don't think it is ugly either.  It is just not my style.  (Although the one in simple black without all the add ons is starting to grow on me.)  I like the looks of the Progress Hybrid - and I bought one.


----------



## begreen (Nov 29, 2013)

BrowningBAR said:


> I think the Steel will provide longer burns than 10-12 hours. I think with good hard wood, dialed in, you will get 15+ hours of heat for most people.


That could be very possible, again I was just comparing it to the meaningful heat times of the Cape Cod. However, Highbeam brings up a good point. In order for it to be more than a curiosity the IS is going to have to have some distinguishing features. The price point is good but Drolet and Englander easily own the low-price, big stove market. Another win might be in efficiency. If the IS can out-heat a similar 3 cu ft stove that could be a plus. Another could be meeting stricter EPA regs, which might leave out some stoves. And there is customizability which may be attractive to a certain market segment. Some folks just want to have something unique.


----------



## Tenn Dave (Nov 29, 2013)

begreen said:


> That could be very possible, again I was just comparing it to the meaningful heat times of the Cape Cod. However, Highbeam brings up a good point. In order for it to be more than a curiosity the IS is going to have to have some distinguishing features. The price point is good but Drolet and Englander easily own the low-price, big stove market. Another win might be in efficiency. If the IS can out-heat a similar 3 cu ft stove that could be a plus. Another could be meeting stricter EPA regs, which might leave out some stoves. And there is customizability which may be attractive to a certain market segment. Some folks just want to have something unique.


When you start adding up all the potential advantages this stove has [ cutting edge appearance, respectable long burn times, low pollution, great heat performance, good fire view, affordable price point, outstanading Manufacturer Customer Service, and customizability ], it gets harder and harder to beat.  Only time and the market place will determine how successful it is.  So let the naysayers chatter away until then.


----------



## BrowningBAR (Nov 29, 2013)

Tenn Dave said:


> Nope, I already said that several times on this thread.  But I don't think it is ugly either.  It is just not my style.  (Although the one in simple black without all the add ons is starting to grow on me.)  I like the looks of the Progress Hybrid - and I bought one.


I love the looks of the Progress. I like the look better than any stove I own. I like it better than any BK stove. But, it seems like that stove does not meet my needs when it comes to burn times. I wish it did.


----------



## Waulie (Nov 29, 2013)

BrowningBAR said:


> I love the looks of the Progress. I like the look better than any stove I own. I like it better than any BK stove. But, it seems like that stove does not meet my needs when it comes to burn times. I wish it did.


 
What is your need for burn time and by what definition?


----------



## begreen (Nov 29, 2013)

Tenn Dave said:


> When you start adding up all the potential advantages this stove has [ cutting edge appearance, respectable long burn times, low pollution, great heat performance, good fire view, affordable price point, outstanading Manufacturer Customer Service, and customizability ], it gets harder and harder to beat.  Only time and the market place will determine how successful it is.  So let the naysayers chatter away until then.



I still think the Englander 30NC is going to be its main competition. At 50% less cost, it is an exceptionally clean burner with a great fireview and super customer service. Personally I don't like the customization, I prefer the IS in all black. However, one can customize the 30NC just like BB did, with a can of Stove Brite. I think the IS is going to have to have some added benefits like longer burn, noticeably greater heat output, etc. in order to make a significant mark in the big steel market.


----------



## BrowningBAR (Nov 29, 2013)

begreen said:


> That could be very possible, again I was just comparing it to the meaningful heat times of the Cape Cod.


I was disappointed with the reports from the Cape Cod. Great looking stove. But, at 3 cu ft, those burn times should have been better. The reason why I feel that the Steel will provide longer burns is that I heard that Woodstock allowed for the steel stove to burn at a lower output than the Progress. So, that _*should *_mean consistent burn times in the 15 hour range. We'll see if that holds true.



> However, Highbeam brings up a good point. In order for it to be more than a curiosity the IS is going to have to have some distinguishing features. The price point is good but Drolet and Englander easily own the low-price, big stove market.


Agreed. if 10-12 hours is the end results, the lower price point isn't low enough to compete with the economy steel stoves. For half the price I am getting 10-12 hours from the 30.


----------



## Tenn Dave (Nov 29, 2013)

BrowningBAR said:


> I love the looks of the Progress. I like the look better than any stove I own. I like it better than any BK stove. But, it seems like that stove does not meet my needs when it comes to burn times. I wish it did.


 Keep searching...eventually you will find what you need.  For my current situation, burn times of 12 hours are ideal.  I am fortunate enough to have been able to take early retirement, so I enjoy interacting with my stove, and have the time to do it.


----------



## Tenn Dave (Nov 29, 2013)

begreen said:


> I still think the Englander 30NC is going to be its main competition. At 50% less cost, it is an exceptionally clean burner with a great fireview and super customer service. Personally I don't like the customization, I prefer the IS in all black. However, one can customize the 30NC just like BB did, with a can of Stove Brite. I think the IS is going to have to have some added benefits like longer burn, noticeably greater heat output, etc. in order to make a significant mark in the big steel market.


 We will just have to wait and see.


----------



## BrowningBAR (Nov 29, 2013)

Waulie said:


> What is your need for burn time and by what definition?


Usuable heat is my definition of burn time. 15 hours during the coldest temps (highs in the 20s, lows in the teens to single didgets) and 20+ during milder temps


----------



## Waulie (Nov 29, 2013)

I just can't believe it will be in the 10 to 12 hour range.  They would have had to take a pretty large step backward to only get 10 to 12 hours of meaningful heat out of such a large stove.


----------



## Waulie (Nov 29, 2013)

BrowningBAR said:


> Usuable heat is my definition of burn time. 15 hours during the coldest temps (highs in the 20s, lows in the teens to single didgets) and 20+ during milder temps


 
Yeah, then the PH is probably not for you.  Really, I think only the King meets those definitions.  With your heat needs, I doubt you'd be able to 15 hours in the coldest weather with a Princess.

I just had a 12 hour burn with the PH last night with the low down to 3 degrees.  I could have easily reloaded after 15 hours, but wouldn't have gone past 12 because I needed the heat.


----------



## Tenn Dave (Nov 29, 2013)

Waulie said:


> Yeah, then the PH is probably not for you.  Really, I think only the King meets those definitions.  With your heat needs, I doubt you'd be able to 15 hours in the coldest weather with a Princess.
> 
> I just had a 12 hour burn with the PH last night with the low down to 3 degrees.  I could have easily reloaded after 15 hours, but wouldn't have gone past 12 because I needed the heat.


 12 hours seems to be the sweet spot for most of us.


----------



## BrowningBAR (Nov 29, 2013)

Tenn Dave said:


> Keep searching...eventually you will find what you need.  For my current situation, burn times of 12 hours are ideal.  I am fortunate enough to have been able to take early retirement, so I enjoy interacting with my stove, and have the time to do it.


I'm holding out hope that the Steel can be burned low and provide a 20 hour burn. At the rumored price point, it would be the easiest solution.


----------



## Tenn Dave (Nov 29, 2013)

Tenn Dave said:


> 12 hours seems to be the sweet spot for most of us.


Oops, time to go out on the mountain and feed the wild turkeys and deer.  Just one of the many chores for us retired folks.


----------



## Waulie (Nov 29, 2013)

Tenn Dave said:


> 12 hours seems to be the sweet spot for most of us.


 
Agreed.  And, it works perfectly for my schedule.  If I worked from home and had to manage 3 stoves, well let's just say thats a different situation for sure.


----------



## BrowningBAR (Nov 29, 2013)

Waulie said:


> Yeah, then the PH is probably not for you.  Really, I think only the King meets those definitions.  With your heat needs, I doubt you'd be able to 15 hours in the coldest weather with a Princess.
> 
> I just had a 12 hour burn with the PH last night with the low down to 3 degrees.  I could have easily reloaded after 15 hours, but wouldn't have gone past 12 because I needed the heat.


I am nearly positive that a Princess will meet my expectations. Which is one of the reasons I had hoped that the Progress would have worked like the Fireview. If the Progress was a straight cat stove, it would have provided longer, controllable burns in the 20 hour range. 12 hours during cold temps would have been acceptable if the stove was more controllable during milder temps.


----------



## Waulie (Nov 29, 2013)

BrowningBAR said:


> I am nearly positive that a Princess will meet my expectations. Which is one of the reasons I had hoped that the Progress would have worked like the Fireview. If the Progress was a straight cat stove, it would have provided longer, controllable burns in the 20 hour range. 12 hours during cold temps would have been acceptable if the stove was more controllable during milder temps.


 

I hear ya.  I just shoot for 12 hour loads regardless of temps and load accordingly.  If I load her full in mild weather, I could reload after 18 or more hours, but it will be pretty hot in the joint in the middle of the burn!


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Nov 29, 2013)

Coog said:


> I'd buy it for $1500.  Challenge is getting the wife on board with another stove.  It doesn't look that bad.
> 
> I still do not understand the technology.  I looked on their website but was not real clear.  The best part about BK is the simlicity of design.  For $1500 it can't be too complicated.



Did you look on the company blog?  http://blog.woodstove.com/


----------



## rideau (Nov 29, 2013)

Re Blowers:

No Woodstock stove has a blower.  It isn't an issue of cost.  They have a philosophy of putting nothing in the stove that requires electricity.  I am quite certain the new stove will not have a blower.


----------



## webbie (Nov 29, 2013)

Ok, closing another silly thread. It seems a bit useless to constantly compare the same stoves - even if they all actually existed.

This forum is for educating consumers. If any of you want to blog about a stove you have, a stove which may exist, will exist or did exist, blog platforms such as wordpress, etc. are free.

This is not the function nor the purpose of this forum. Please contact me if you have any question.....

I'd say those interested in beta tests and development should follow the woodstock blog or any blogging by beta testers of the stove. As far as I know, we have none of them here - at least no one has asked about blogging their beta testing here, etc....


----------

