# Prefer pre-EPA stoves?



## area_man

I'm curious about whether anyone prefers pre-EPA to modern stoves.  I can burn junkier wood in it and it will get hot, use paper grocery store bags as firestarters, bust up my Christmas tree and let it sit until next year to burn it in the stove, etc.  Does the flexibility of using 2nd tier combustibles provide you with some extra stockpiling?  I would PREFER to use only three-year dried oak, but I'm not there right now.  It's probably going to be five years before I'm in that situation.

Right now I'm thinking I might not upgrade to an EPA just for the flexibility.  Maybe that's dumb.


----------



## PassionForFire&Water

Hmmm, you forgot to mention that you can also burn your paper $$$bills in them .... .

How hot is your stack temperature, on the inside, not on the outside? Probably 700-800F. Speaking of global warming.


----------



## pen

It depends on the situation.  Had an old fisher here in the house for years that was a heck of a heater, but I went through way more wood (5-6 a year instead of 4 now), chimney wasn't as clean, couldn't go as long between loadings, etc.  

So for the house, I really like the modern stove.  My cabin however, still has 2 pre-epa stoves in it.  Since that place is ambient temps when one arrives, the pre-epa stoves can chew through wood quicker and heat a place like that up better than my modern stove could.  Since we only go through about 1.5 cord a year out there anyway, it just wouldn't make sense to change them.

pen


----------



## rkshed

I prefer my pre-epa stove.
It cost almost nothing ($75), heats our home perfectly (0 oil used) and there are no maintenance parts to replace,
Ya ya, I know its not a popular opinion to hold these days...


----------



## Scols

I wont say that I prefer my pre EPA stove but when I had one I found it to be alot more tempremental because of poor wood. Right now I cant justify the cost of an EPA stove, especially since my wood is free. Besides if you burn poor wood in an EPA stove you're still gonna smoke out the neighbors.


----------



## Corey

Have not had an "EPA" stove, so really can't compare the two.  Though I DO much prefer my stove now that the secondary air system has been installed.  Many of the things you mention...paper bag firestarter, christmas tree, junky wood, etc might apply to a catalytic stove, but I don't think they'd be much issue in a secondary air stove.  Given that, I think the secondary air is only a benefit.   True, if you happen to get into wet wood, it might not light off the secondaries as well.  But in that case, the only bad thing is it knocks you down to the efficiency/emissions you'd have with the old smoke dragon anyway.  But then if you get back to good wood, you're right back to the cleaner/efficient burn.  With the smoke dragon, you're always less clean/lower efficiency, no matter how good of wood you shovel in.


----------



## oppirs

I'm old fashion and like quality, and where I live wood smoke is not an issue.

I see old smoke dragons as well built like my Lopi.  Or my pot belly or Russo.  And made to last.  I like things to last way after planed corporate profits.


----------



## NE WOOD BURNER

I have loved my grandpa fisher for many seasons. still works and I can still sell for what I bought it for. great stove.
I have seen and burned many other newer stoves that I could not afford never made the leap.
If I where shopping for a new stove today I would feel much better laying out the dough then years ago. They are much better. My favorite is Woodstock.
The big advantage I see to new stoves is that the chimney is much cleaner. and of course burn times.


----------



## Seasoned Oak

I use both. Pre EPA and home built for quick temporary heat,such as garages and workshops and EPA stoves where i want to use less wood and burn all day.


----------



## topoftheriver

I've heard changes are on the horizon in the near future.  Having said that, I burned many stoves.  Presently, a Jotul Oslo but they say the emissions are OK.  But maybe not for long.  In Maine, we can burn pretty much anything but in Mass the sunset is bringing a new morning of rules and nationally also.  For now, just burning and staying warm.  That's why we're here.


----------



## tfdchief

As you can see in my signature, I have both and love both.  They are just different.


----------



## begreen

I like my Jotul 602. It's a fun little stove, but I don't like the smoke coming out of the chimney. I like the EPA T6 a lot better. Less wood, more heat, cleaner flue.


----------



## begreen

area_man said:


> I'm curious about whether anyone prefers pre-EPA to modern stoves.  I can burn junkier wood in it and it will get hot, use paper grocery store bags as firestarters, bust up my Christmas tree and let it sit until next year to burn it in the stove, etc.  Does the flexibility of using 2nd tier combustibles provide you with some extra stockpiling?  I would PREFER to use only three-year dried oak, but I'm not there right now.  It's probably going to be five years before I'm in that situation.
> 
> Right now I'm thinking I might not upgrade to an EPA just for the flexibility.  Maybe that's dumb.



Burn fir or alder.  It's readily available in OR and is a nice firewood that seasons in a year. Save the oak for the very cold nights after it has fully seasoned.


----------



## swestall

EPA in the house, see avatar. As others said, burning 24/7 you want to get the most from the wood and dirty the stack the least. 

But, for the shop it is the Pot Belly all the way; no better place to sip coffee and ponder life and projects. I only burn it when I am in there and I stop loading at least an hour before I am leaving. OH YEAH, I never have smoke out the chimney, always run 450- 600 on top and 350-400 18" above.  There is no sense in burning to smoke, it makes a mess and doesn't give you the best heat.


----------



## topoftheriver

swestall said:


> EPA in the house, see avatar. As others said, burning 24/7 you want to get the most from the wood and dirty the stack the least.
> 
> But, for the shop it is the Pot Belly all the way; no better place to sip coffee and ponder life and projects. I only burn it when I am in there and I stop loading at least an hour before I am leaving. OH YEAH, I never have smoke out the chimney, always run 450- 600 on top and 350-400 18" above.  There is no sense in burning to smoke, it makes a mess and doesn't give you the best heat.


I'm with you  brother.  I burn a Oslo 500 and what ever it does, it keeps us warm.  In Maine where the lodge is sometimes sub "0"  it also keeps us warm and we also cook on it not to mention we have a propane stove.  When the wood is dry and hot, the smoke is little to none.   Why is the government getting into a twist over this.  Burn and stay warm.


----------



## defiant3

The question is too broad.  There are many great stoves out there, some old and some new.  Modern stoves have definite advantages, but not all will turn out to be reliable and cost effective.  Some older stoves are just classics, and will always find a good home, others are best forgotten.  Which stoves have you looked at?


----------



## Dell

I burn a Fisher because that is what came with my house.  I research new stoves (Kuma, Blaze King, etc) , but am skeptical of reviews on them and can't part with that much money right now, especially if its not going to outproduce my current stove.  I wish they had a trial program or a return period of 30 days...
I have friends who are amazed at the tremendous heat the Papa can produce.  I replaced fire brick and installed a baffle, no other repairs needed after 35 years of overall use.  I burn a lot of wood, but that is what I have it for.  With 0-5 outdoor low temps currently , I am keeping my 2500 ft cape at 90, 75 and 69 degrees in basement, main and 2nd floors respectively with no fans or vents (almost all oak wood).  I clean the black pipe from stove to chimney about once a month and do get some creosote buildup.  I had a VC before and could not achieve overnight burns.


----------



## begreen

Woodstock does even better with a 6 month return guarantee. 

Heating from the basement you have to be going through a lot of wood. With a good stove on the main floor I think you could cut fuel consumption in half. And you would have the delight of a warm stove to cozy up to plus a beautiful fire view.


----------



## Seasoned Oak

begreen said:


> Woodstock does even better with a 6 month return guarantee.
> 
> Heating from the basement you have to be going through a lot of wood. With a good stove on the main floor I think you could cut fuel consumption in half. And you would have the delight of a warm stove to cozy up to plus a beautiful fire view.


Granted, but some stove put out so much heat that it overwhelms the space. Better they are overheating the basement than your living space. Most days my basement stove room is 90+ With the air all the way down. That makes the living floor above a comfortable 75.


----------



## begreen

When the stove is used as intended, as an area heater, you are better to get a right-sized stove and then regulate the heat by the load. In most cases it's not the stove that's overheating the space it's the operator.


----------



## Dell

If I could afford a Woodstock stove or a PE, I'd have one in my main floor fireplace.  I keep looking for the right insert or stove for that fireplace, then I can cut back on wood usage and smoke.  
My basement is finished, there is no better place to warm up and watch TV.  I would like to see the fire.  Lugging wood down the bilco steps in recycling bins at 65-75# each is not preferred either.  I go through a lot of wood, but I get it all for free.  My biggest concern is creosote.
So, I would try a new stove on main floor if I could afford it but in the meantime I'm content with my dragon.


----------



## Seasoned Oak

Its not always simple. In my case Id love a stove on the living floor,but there is no place for one and im moving within a year or two,so no desire to reconstruct. Smaller loads equals less heat but also shorter burn times. Its a necessary evil that you overheat the basement in order for the upper floors to be comfortable. At least in my case.


----------



## area_man

defiant3 said:


> The question is too broad.  There are many great stoves out there, some old and some new.  Modern stoves have definite advantages, but not all will turn out to be reliable and cost effective.  Some older stoves are just classics, and will always find a good home, others are best forgotten.  Which stoves have you looked at?



I looked around at different stoves for a bit but my hearth isn't really set up for a freestanding stove unless I want to give up a lot of floor space for it.  I would really have to go with an insert.  Not that inserts are bad, but the radiant heat won't quite be there.  As is, my pre-EPA will throw off a lot of heat.  

The other thing is it doesn't make sense for me to spend a ton of money on a new stove.  I did a little math with our electric bill, and the most money I'm going to save in a cold winter is about $250/mo.  Wood heat is a lot more comfortable than the electric heat pump, so there's that.  There's no way for me to pay for wood and come out ahead, at best I could break even.  Lucky me I just hit a goldmine of a scrounge today.  I'm going to have to see if it's as good as it seems, but apparently this nice tree service guy around the corner from me will stack up bucked hardwood for me for free, all you can eat, all year long.  He already filled up a couple of other neighbors until they told him they just can't take any more free bucked hardwood.

I picked up about a cord of oak limbs today.  If I'm not mistaken, an EPA stove will choke on all the bark, and the constant opening and shutting of the door will mess with the delicate balance that has to be maintained in an EPA stove.  The other wood I have is construction ends that are all full of nails and stuff.  It's junk wood.  Thing is, it keeps my house warm.  If I upgrade, this marginal wood isn't going to burn right.

Spend a bunch of money on a new stove, spend a bunch of money on premium wood, and possibly break even but probably not.  Why?


----------



## begreen

Epa stoves don't balk at burning bark as long as it's dry. Nails mean nothing, they are inert as far as the stove is concerned.


----------



## area_man

begreen said:


> Woodstock does even better with a 6 month return guarantee.
> 
> Heating from the basement you have to be going through a lot of wood. With a good stove on the main floor I think you could cut fuel consumption in half. And you would have the delight of a warm stove to cozy up to plus a beautiful fire view.



Now that is a major concern.  I had the local power company come out and pressure test my house.  I need a little more insulation in a few places and should replace a couple windows.  Once that's done, the house will be nice and tight.  There are places I can add cold air drains from upstairs, that will help with convection.  For example, if I install a cold air drain in the living room straight down to the burn room, I can take that 68 degree air and flood the 90 degree air up the staircase.  Upstairs won't get to 90, probably just mid-70s, but the burn room won't get so hot.  The bonus to that is the greater the air temperature difference in the burn room, the greater heat transfer from the stove to the air.  That will help the stove work more efficiently.

So, you can get a basement heater working better.  Obviously a stove in the main living area is going to be the best, but there are ways to live with less-efficient setups.  I think the main concern is to 
1.  Get wood
2.  Dry it out
3.  Burn it

If you can get through those three things in a time and money efficient way, dialing it in is just frosting.


----------



## BrotherBart

"Spend a bunch of money on a new stove, spend a bunch of money on premium wood, and possibly break even but probably not. Why?'

Don't. If you are happy doing what you are doing. Keep on doing it.


----------



## Seasoned Oak

A warm house during the next ice storm and power outage changes the whole equation. Ill bet those folks that cant get propane in the midwest are a little envious of their woodburning neighbors.


----------



## area_man

begreen said:


> Epa stoves don't balk at burning bark as long as it's dry. Nails mean nothing, they are inert as far as the stove is concerned.



Hmmm.  Didn't know that.


----------



## Motor7

I would not say I prefer non epa since I have never tried one, so I really can't answer that question. I'm heating from the basement and our electric bill for Jan was $75. My neighbor's w/heat pump and a fireplace was $270. I do go through a bit of wood, but I'm on 100ac and have the time to CSS, so I'm ok with the 6-7 cords I burn a season. 

Now, I would love to try a BK King($3K), or a Yukon wood/elec//coal furnace($5K) someday, but there is a large cost involved in either so I will continue to "think about it".

I have about $700 in my stove, I have my routine down(keeps the main floor at about 68 degrees which is where we like it) and enjoy running it. I chose the basement this time, because ran a wood stove in my other log house in the great room. I don't think the stove was too big, but large temperature swings(too hot, too cold) and not moving heat to the other rooms in the house was a negative for me. Everyone is different in their preferences and expectations. My pre-epa works for us, and until that changes or I get tired or unable to whack a few extra cords a year, I reckon I'll stick with it.


----------



## tfdchief

Well, gee, I have posted already, but I will again.  As you can see in my signature, I have both, and although I love my new little EPA Hampton, I would be lost without my old Buck, which I use to heat up the house fast.  It it is a heating machine.  It may not be as efficient as my new little Hampton EPA  but I love it.  So, I guess there is a place for both, at least in this house there is.


----------



## BrotherBart

BrotherBart said:


> Don't. If you are happy doing what you are doing. Keep on doing it.



Unless you are the Chief. In that case you should chuck the Buck.


----------



## tfdchief

BrotherBart said:


> Unless you are the Chief. In that case you should chuck the Buck.


----------



## valley ranch

Greetings Guys, My stove is cooking right now here in the mountains, tons of snow outside, suns up. This is a brand new stove! Bought it Brand New in the 70ies. Made some improvement on it. Have another model in at our other ranch, like that one too. We're happy, thank God.

When those EPA stove owners move up, as they should, to the NEW DUEL FLAME stoves, Putting their money where their mouth is, they will have to move on as there are in fact stoves that make their EPAs out of date. I wouldn't turn my nose up at picking up one of the old EPAs and try it out in one of the barns or at a ranch if it works well enough. 

I like stoves there are so many great looking and working stoves, can't have them all, but now and then I pick up one and find a place for it. Still, there are none like the one sitting here close by, I lit it about 3 hours ago, fans still on it will stop as the stove cools down, it's just over 80degrees in here, wifey likes it like this, and I like wifey. 

I like this forum too, like to hear what others are doing at home and in the shop. Have a good day and keep the family warm tonight. God bless you all.

Richard


----------



## mikey

Using clean burning stoves will minimize pressure to stop wood burning, I live in the city and feel good about changing from a fireplace to my Jotul f100,  it is smoke free almost right away so I don't have to worry about neighbors who might object to smoke. Some objections are  valid as many children and seniors have respiratory issues, burn clean.


----------



## Simonkenton

Hell yes I prefer the old stoves. I had a 1988 Vermont Castings Resolute, what a great stove. Easy to light and it loved green wood. I could load it up at 11pm with green wood and would get a good 6 to 7 hour burn with lots of hot coals left. In fact, I made a point every year of cutting down an oak tree in November just to make sure I had a stockpile of green wood. Had one stack of dry wood, and one stack of green.
I got my mother to buy that same stove and she still uses it every day. No problems with the old Resolute and it looks great! No problems with creosote on either stove, sweep the pipe once a year.

I also had a Sotz 55 gallon and that was a great stove too. What a huge firebox. Would hold a hot fire for 12 hours easy.
I own 49 heavily wooded acres, I have a pickup and 3 chains saws. Firewood is free for me.

I have an EPA compliant stove, a 1999 Waterford, it is a pain in the ass. Hard to light and will only hold a hot fire for 3 hours. Won't burn green wood very well, it will pile up with hot coals and half burned wood if you try to burn anything that isn't real dry. What a hassle! Both it and the old Resolute are rated at 43K btu but the old Resolute is twice the stove the Waterford is.


----------



## bholler

I don't see how you would not have creosote burning green wood and there are many modern stoves that can hold fire 8 hours easily and some that will hold much longer.  Yes you need to burn dry wood but you should be anyway.   As far as easy to light every modern stove I have used with dry wood is pretty easy to light.  I have never used or worked on a Waterford so I cant comment on that stove at all but a bad experience with one stove doesn't mean that all modern stove are a pain in the ass.


----------



## Simonkenton

In the classic book Wood Stove Encyclopedia Jay Shelton did extensive testing on wood stoves. This was prior to the EPA regs of 1989. He proved that green wood produces no more creosote than dry. And my own extensive use of my old Resolute prove that he is right. Burned that stove every cold day using at least 50 percent fresh cut green wood, and only had to clean the pipe once a year.

But, fear not, I am not stuck in the past.  I am going to build an addition to the log cabin next year and have to get a new stove, for one thing, I am sick of this dainty Waterford. I would just put a 55 gallon Sotz in there, in fact, I found a brand new in the box Sotz kit on craigslist in Cleveland last month for $60.  A beautiful thing.
What a wood stove! Sadly, the fiancee hates the Sotz as much as I love it.
So, next year I will buy a Jotul Oslo for the new log cabin. I have to admit I like the glass doors.
The Waterford is a beautiful stove, has a little Irish castle in the cast iron on the right side, glass doors, but is a hassle to work with. If you don't get up within 4 hours and stoke it up, it it out and you have to relight it. We keep a big stack of small split, very dry pine on hand just for that. The dumb Micks [I am Irish so it is OK if I insult the Irish] included the ash pan within the cast iron firebox.
For example, the Jotul stoves have the ash pan tacked onto the bottom of the stove and not enclosed within the fire box.
On the Waterford there is a separate, 3 inch high cast iron door at the bottom of the firebox that you open to remove the ash pan. That poor design really eats up the cubic inches in that fire box.


----------



## tfdchief

Old versus new.  It is hard to argue with new.  We need to burn cleaner if we can.  I have both old and new.  And yes they are different.  I love my new stove and I love my old stove.  And I am old enough that I am going out with both.  My old stove is easier in some respects and the new stove is easier in other respects.  Being old and having experienced both, I can sympathize with both ranks.  Bottom line is, we have to move on.  Oh, and yes you can burn an old stove without creosote.  I have done it for 40 years.  It isn't just the stove, but the operator as well.


----------



## BrotherBart

I did extensive testing from 1977 to 2005 on old stoves and green wood. Neither will come through the door of this house ever again.


----------



## Simonkenton

Whatever you say, Bart. Gee, your experience is vastly different from mine.


----------



## tfdchief

Simonkenton said:


> Whatever you say, Bart. Gee, your experience is vastly different from mine.


Don't mind BB, he is old and set in his ways


----------



## BrotherBart

tfdchief said:


> Don't mind BB, he is old and set in his ways



Says the guy that won't chuck the Buck.


----------



## pen

Simonkenton said:


> Whatever you say, Bart. Gee, your experience is vastly different from mine.



.....and yours different from mine as well.  Point is, there are many variables. 

However, there is no denying the fact that green wood, with or without extra creosote, is a handicap in the fact that energy that you'd like to use to heat your home must to be used to boil off the excess moisture that is in that green stuff (by green I mean any wood that isn't well seasoned)


----------



## tfdchief

pen said:


> .....and yours different from mine as well.  Point is, there are many variables.
> 
> However, there is no denying the fact that green wood, with or without extra creosote, is a handicap in the fact that energy that you'd like to use to heat your home must to be used to boil off the excess moisture that is in that green stuff (by green I mean any wood that isn't well seasoned)


Yep


----------



## Simonkenton

Bart, were you burning green oak?


----------



## tfdchief

BrotherBart said:


> Says the guy that won't chuck the Buck.


Just depends on how long me and the old Buck live.  Maybe if I outlive the old girl


----------



## BrotherBart

I can't part with the old one either. In the Spring and Fall I burn in it at the back of the yard with the cat on my lap and a beer in my hand. If the wind is blowing toward the neighbor that I don't like.


----------



## tfdchief

BrotherBart said:


> I can't part with the old one either. In the Spring and Fall I burn in it at the back of the yard with the cat on my lap and a beer in my hand. If the wind is blowing toward the neighbor that I don't like.


BB, That's where the old Buck is going if I out live her.  Really, I would love to replace the old girl with a new one, and have already picked out the replacement,  but until she dies, I am a happy man.  Every morning when I restart the stoves, the old Buck is first because I can get heat out of her quicker.  And momma likes heat quick in the morning.  While she is drinking her coffee in front of the old Buck, I am working on the Hampton, freezing my ass off.   My son has the old Buck just like mine and I think he is going to replace his as soon as they offer the 30% again.  I think you know me BB.  I just love burning wood and staying warm and have a love for everything that does that.  Old and New.


----------



## Grisu

Simonkenton said:


> In the classic book Wood Stove Encyclopedia Jay Shelton did extensive testing on wood stoves. This was prior to the EPA regs of 1989. He proved that green wood produces no more creosote than dry. And my own extensive use of my old Resolute prove that he is right. Burned that stove every cold day using at least 50 percent fresh cut green wood, and only had to clean the pipe once a year.



I have not read the book but I am not sure if he would concur with your sweeping conclusion. That's what he wrote to a reader inquiry in Mother Earth News:
"We observed up to 48 times more creosote with a smoldering fire than with a hot flaming fire using the same fuel.
Thus, the most important and easiest way to reduce creosote buildup is to burn the fuel rather than smoke it."

http://www.motherearthnews.com/home...eosote-buildup-zm0z11zblon.aspx#axzz2xjiB8UXE

With other words: All other things equal green wood will produce more creosote as you will not easily get a hot, flaming fire. You have to increase the air supply to get a hot fire to achieve a clean burn. Of course, that will send more heat up the flue in a modern wood stove.


----------



## bholler

I just don't understand why someone would think burning wet wood is better than dry.  You waste so much heat drying the wood to a point where it will burn properly.  I guess you could theoretically get it hot enough quick enough as to not create lots of creosote but why bother just dry it it will work way better and give you more useable heat.   Simonkenton I am wondering what you believe you are gaining by burning it wet.   All that being said I am by no means against classic stoves I burn one myself (although mine is an early clean burn stove) but you can at least burn it correctly.


----------



## pfettig77

I love my newer Cumberland Gap because it burns so well I don't have to think about it much. I love my old Jotul 602 because it's nostalgic (when we were tiny kids my brother burned his little butt on one and got a cool lion tatoo) and I don't mind having to fuss with it more because it's fun.  It's sort of like having a new Ford Fusion because it's practical, reliable and gets good mileage, but also having an old Corvair around because of fond memories and classic look.


----------



## Seasoned Oak

Iv seen friends trying to burn wet wood in a fireplace and it was a constant battle just to keep it lit. Threw almost no heat until it turned to coals and not much after that. Just a waste of wood and a smoky house was the result.


----------



## tfdchief

Burning wet wood is just silly.  Even those who do know darn good and well it is not the thing to do. Whether i\t is an old stove or new stove, seasoned wood is and always will be the smart thing to do, along with good burning practices.....you have to maintain good temps. My old Buck burns just as clean as my new Hampton, burned correctly and with seasoned wood.  After an entire winter of burning, I checked my flue/chimney on the old Buck just tonight and it is clean,  and will yield little when I clean it next fall before the next burning season.


----------



## valley ranch

I think that everyone given the choice would prefer dry wood. 

I'm looking forward to installing the Buck, it will have to be in the mountain home, the girls like the Nordic we have here in Nevada. Is the 27000 suited for a 2000 sq ft house?


----------



## dafattkidd

area_man said:


> I looked around at different stoves for a bit but my hearth isn't really set up for a freestanding stove unless I want to give up a lot of floor space for it.  I would really have to go with an insert.  Not that inserts are bad, but the radiant heat won't quite be there.  As is, my pre-EPA will throw off a lot of heat.
> 
> The other thing is it doesn't make sense for me to spend a ton of money on a new stove.  I did a little math with our electric bill, and the most money I'm going to save in a cold winter is about $250/mo.  Wood heat is a lot more comfortable than the electric heat pump, so there's that.  There's no way for me to pay for wood and come out ahead, at best I could break even.  Lucky me I just hit a goldmine of a scrounge today.  I'm going to have to see if it's as good as it seems, but apparently this nice tree service guy around the corner from me will stack up bucked hardwood for me for free, all you can eat, all year long.  He already filled up a couple of other neighbors until they told him they just can't take any more free bucked hardwood.
> 
> I picked up about a cord of oak limbs today.  If I'm not mistaken, an EPA stove will choke on all the bark, and the constant opening and shutting of the door will mess with the delicate balance that has to be maintained in an EPA stove.  The other wood I have is construction ends that are all full of nails and stuff.  It's junk wood.  Thing is, it keeps my house warm.  If I upgrade, this marginal wood isn't going to burn right.
> 
> Spend a bunch of money on a new stove, spend a bunch of money on premium wood, and possibly break even but probably not.  Why?


 
Being a fairly new wood burner (this was my fifth winter), and only burning in EPA units, I cannot offer much to this conversation. But I can say that I regularly burn construction debris, pizza boxes, oddball wood pieces in my EPA unit and it burns very cleanly. So I hope that helps you to understand the range of crap you can burn without harming the unit.

I have really been enjoying this thread. Thanks for sharing your experiences.


----------



## Seasoned Oak

I cant help but wonder as man has been burning wood for thousands of years,when we actually learned that it had to be dry to throw a lot of heat. Im guessing
the majority of wood burned over those years was not the ideal MC.


----------



## tfdchief

valley ranch said:


> Is the 27000 suited for a 2000 sq ft house?



Yes.


----------



## mikey

Construction debris and pizza boxes, are you proud of that?


----------



## Grisu

dafattkidd said:


> Being a fairly new wood burner (this was my fifth winter), and only burning in EPA units, I cannot offer much to this conversation. But I can say that I regularly burn construction debris, pizza boxes, oddball wood pieces in my EPA unit and it burns very cleanly. So I hope that helps you to understand the range of crap you can burn without harming the unit.
> 
> I have really been enjoying this thread. Thanks for sharing your experiences.



I would be careful with the pizza boxes. We had people here who got the screen of their chimney cap clogged burning cardboard or had glowing pieces fall on their roof. Not to mention that those would be great a igniting some creosote in your flue.


----------



## BrotherBart

Pizza boxes in action in my old wood stove.


----------



## Grisu

Scary.  Did it ignite some creosote in the flue or was that really just the boxes?


----------



## BrotherBart

Just cardboard boxes.


----------



## dafattkidd

mikey said:


> Construction debris and pizza boxes, are you proud of that?


Apparently I'm NOT exactly embarrassed about it.  What's the shame in burning construction debris and cutting pizza boxes to strips to start fires?? Should I be embarrassed about the amount of pizza we consume as a family?


----------



## begreen

Construction debris is a broad term. As long as it means two by x cutoffs no big deal. But it shouldn't include pressure treated or glued woods like chipboard. Here is Osburn's POV:


Your Osburn insert is designed to burn *CORDWOOD FUEL ONLY*. Do not burn coal, charcoal, or trash in the unit. Highly flammable items such as trash may ignite creosote in the chimney, resulting in a chimney fire. Never burn salt wood, beachwood, chemically treated wood, or wood removed from salt water, since the deposits left will deteriorate the firebox. Damage caused by chemicals or salt is not covered under warranty.


----------



## dafattkidd

Of course!  It's untreated solid wood without glues only.  Strips of pizza boxes and junk mail could qualify as trash burning, but it's carefully and strategically used to start fires---I'm not tossing house hold trash in the wood stove.  I'm also careful not burn envelopes with the plastic window, glossy paper magazines/ads, etc.  I hope that is clear.  

My point is: Non cat EPA units are not harmed by burning items other than super dry cordwood as area_man had mentioned was a concern of his.  This should not be cited as a drawback to an upgrade from a pre EPA unit to a newer cleaner burning unit.


----------



## begreen

Good deal. Actually EPA stove are tested with doug fir dimensional lumber.


----------



## valley ranch

Interesting, I burned a Pizza Box last night. It had a plastic window, wifey tore it out, when twisted into a twig, they burn like the wood they are mad from, nice fuel. 

Bart, Is there a barrel stove under that pipe with the flame coming out of it?

Richard

Do you remember the Title of this thread?


----------



## BrotherBart

valley ranch said:


> Bart, Is there a barrel stove under that pipe with the flame coming out of it?



Nope. This one with a full baffle in it.


----------



## valley ranch

That's a nice looking stove.  You're stove rich.

Do you have chairs ringed round it, for summer evenings?


----------



## Jags

Cardboard beer and soda boxes cranked down to the stoves lowest burn setting:


----------



## BrotherBart

valley ranch said:


> That's a nice looking stove.  You're stove rich.
> 
> Do you have chairs ringed round it, for summer evenings?



It looked better in its former job.


----------



## tfdchief

BrotherBart said:


> Pizza boxes in action in my old wood stove.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 131111


BB tries to one-up-me but I am one-uping him.


----------



## tfdchief

BrotherBart said:


> It looked better in its former job.
> 
> View attachment 131170


Sweet looking old stove BB!  Bet you miss it.


----------



## fbelec

not to mention that a nice dry piece of pine not only lights easier but it can be lit without kindling


----------



## Sherumsey

rkshed said:


> I prefer my pre-epa stove.
> It cost almost nothing ($75), heats our home perfectly (0 oil used) and there are no maintenance parts to replace,
> Ya ya, I know its not a popular opinion to hold these days...



I totally agree!  We got a nice sized wood stove on Craigslist, cleaned it up and updated our chimney pipe to double wall insulated pipe at the ceiling.  It replaced an older and very inefficient fireplace and is our sole heat source in winter.  I load it at night, get it going fairly hot and crank down the air intakes before going to bed.  It keeps the house toasty until morning, when I add a few more logs so the house isn't freezing cold when we get home from work.


----------



## Seasoned Oak

I have been using use 4 EPA stoves and 4  Home made NON EPA Stoves for about 6 years now. 
I dont  "prefer" either type . I use all for what they do best.
The NON EPA Stoves throw a lot of heat fast but burn out quick and need constant reloading. 
The EPA stoves are the MPG champions. They shine where i need heat over a long period of time or overnight and i dont want to be reloading often.
That said for my home,i want none other than a certified EPA stove, preferably a harman.


----------



## alex14

Hi,
I suggest to use ecco stoves instead of EPA stoves. Ecco stove masonry heaters so efficient.  It consistent warmth for your home, and with up to 88% efficiency and just 0.07% carbon production. It is best alternative of the wood burning stoves.


----------



## pen

alex14 said:


> Hi,
> I suggest to use ecco stoves instead of EPA stoves. Ecco stove masonry heaters so efficient.  It consistent warmth for your home, and with up to 88% efficiency and just 0.07% carbon production. It is best alternative of the wood burning stoves.



Are you selling these units? 

I'm glad you like your stove, but this is the 3rd thread TODAY you are pushing the units.  Enough already.


----------



## BCC_Burner

Alex14 comes to us from the faraway internet fiefdom of spam-a-lot.


----------



## BrotherBart

Posting from India via a relay in the UK is work. Hard work.


----------



## Jags

BrotherBart said:


> Posting from India via a relay in the UK is work. Hard work.



You noticed that too, eh?


----------

