# Another help me choose add on furnace



## Gbawol42 (Dec 16, 2018)

After reading so many threads, some maybe to old to matter anymore, I'm still having trouble with what to purchase. 

I was looking at the vapor fire 100 for my purchase but I keep wondering if the new tundra 2 would be just fine for my needs and I would save a couple thousand dollars. What are the main differences here? Just more automation with the vf100? Yes I know I am comparing a Camery to a Cadillac. 

Burn time is a big consideration for me as I work from 7-5 in the winter, I would really hate coming home to a cold house everyday and have to relight the furnace. The vf100 says 12 hour burn times and the tundra says only 8 hour.  Looking for some real world people to tell me what they are really getting for burn times. 

I was looking at the Heatpro for the larger firebox so I could get the longer burn time, but my home is only 1800 square feet so I thought it would be too much furnace for my house. Thoughts on this? Would I be running this furnace to low perhaps? Also there really is only a 2k difference between the vf100 and the Heatpro, so not as much savings from the tundra 2.

Doing this all from stratch all I have to far is the wood cut and stacked waiting for next winter, any input is greatly appreciated!

Home info: 1800 sq/ft, 2 story home.  Furnace will be in basement (not counted in sq/ft number). Newer built so good insulation. Northern Michigan location.


----------



## sloeffle (Dec 16, 2018)

If your main concern is burn time and not money then I think you’ll be a lot happier with the vf100. I’ve had a Caddy ( same firebox design as the tundra ) for about 5 or so years and the longest burn times I’ve been able to get are around 8 hours. I generally only burn ash due to EAB, so you might get longer burn times with locust or oak. If you’ve read a lot of the threads, the biggest problem people have is wet wood and an improper chimney setup. If you can solve both of those problems then I think you’ll be happy with either choice really.  Tagging @JRHAWK9 to give more insight into the vf100.

IMHO - the Heatpro is too big for your square footage ( even in the UP ) and you’ll end up idling the furnace a lot and causing creosote to build up.

Off topic - you live in beautiful country up there. Went snowmobiling in Grand Marais a few years ago and it was awesome. Hope to make it back up there sometime soon.


----------



## brenndatomu (Dec 16, 2018)

Tundra (TII) would work for you...but just FYI, many people find that they work the best with some simple and inexpensive aftermarket control mods.
Normal load schedule for my T1, 6:15 AM, again at 4 to 4:30 PM, again at 11 PM or so...that's during cold weather...in not so cold weather, a 12 hour/twice a day loading is not unusual...and that is still often times a matchless relight. (after control mods)
I agree that the HeatPro is probably overkill for you. VF100 would work...the smaller VF200 would probably work too...it is in for its EPA emissions testing right now, Lamppa says they hope to be building them again by the end of the year...probably after they get moved into their new facility I'd guess...which is supposed to be by the end of the year too.
You need to have a stock of dry wood for whatever you buy...and most woods need 2 years cut/split/stacked to be dry...some, like Oak, need 3 years before it will burn well (and cleanly) in modern fireboxes.


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Dec 16, 2018)

I PM'd him a link to my review on another site, after making the link a tinyurl though seeing this site seems to take offense to the other site   .  Very immature if you ask me.  Makes me think this site is ran by a bunch teenage girls or something.  Grow up.   

Anyway, burn times are dependent on lots of things.  I can say a week or so ago we were leaving to go out of town for a couple days and I wanted to do what I could to keep the LP furnace from running while we were gone.  Outside temps were in the single digits at night for lows and 20's during the day for highs.  Right before we left I loaded 84lbs of 95% Black Locust into the firebox.  Kept the computer at minimum burn (which is all I have used so far this year) and left.

I have the ability to remotely check on things by way of IP cameras, so I was keeping an eye on all my temps and what state the Kuuma computer was keeping the damper open to maintain the level of burn I had set the computer on (low).  NINE hours after loading, the computer was still going to pilot, which means there were still many hours left of wood and burn time.  Out of that large load I'm guessing I was able to get anywhere from 15-18 hours of burn time.  When I woke up the following day (24 hours after I had loaded the furnace), the house was still 2° above the LP thermostat setpoint.  Out of the 36 hours we were gone, the LP furnace only ran for 170 minutes total.  Our place is not what most would consider "efficient" either.


----------



## brenndatomu (Dec 16, 2018)

JRHAWK9 said:


> Makes me think this site is ran by a bunch teenage girls or something. Grow up.



Yeah, I'm pretty sure I know the site...and there's some history there...


----------



## brenndatomu (Dec 16, 2018)

@Case1030  might be able to provide some input as a TII owner...


----------



## sloeffle (Dec 16, 2018)

Off topic question - what do you consider burn time to do be ? 

I consider burn time to be the time from when I load the furnace and set the timer to when I majority of the cools are burnt and I'm seeing exhaust temps of around 150 or so. Generally the furnace fan is done cycling by that time. It might run every once in awhile though to keep the furnace from overheating.


----------



## brenndatomu (Dec 16, 2018)

I guess I have gradually, over time, adjusted my view of "burn time" from visible flames and/or a scorching hot pile of coals, to the amount of time that passes between loads needed to maintain the house at the preferred temp range...because that's all that really matters anyways...how often ya gotta load.
Notice I said "range"...because if you expect to do wood heat well...I think you must be able to accept some temp swing. 
The good thing about it is, with wood heat, its not so painful to adjust the generally accepted temp swing range upward


----------



## sloeffle (Dec 16, 2018)

brenndatomu said:


> The good thing about it is, with wood heat, its not so painful to adjust the generally accepted temp swing range upward


When the old lady starts taking her clothes off then you know you have it warm enough.


----------



## brenndatomu (Dec 16, 2018)

sloeffle said:


> When the old lady starts taking her clothes off then you know you have it warm enough.


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Dec 16, 2018)

brenndatomu said:


> the amount of time that passes between loads needed to maintain the house at the preferred temp range...because that's all that really matters anyways...how often ya gotta load.



Then my "burn time" changes depending on how cold it is outside.     When cold, I load on more coals than I do when it's not as cold out.



sloeffle said:


> Off topic question - what do you consider burn time to do be ?



I guess I would consider burn time to be the amount of time from initial load to the point of when one has enough coals left to be able to comfortably reload on and just walk away and not have to wonder if the fire is going to take or not.  IE, not have to add kindling and/or open ash pan door to very dimly lit coals in order to continue the fire.  I would consider this situation to be a matchless relight.  How I have my blower slowed down and shutting off at ~98°, it's always still running when I go to re-load.  If I were to re-load when my blower shuts off, I would consider that to be a matchless relight, as I don't have many coals left at all by that point and kindling would most likely be needed.


----------



## brenndatomu (Dec 16, 2018)

JRHAWK9 said:


> Then my "burn time" changes depending on how cold it is outside.  When cold, I load on more coals than I do when it's not as cold out.


True...but I would think when most people are asking about burn time, they mean when its really cold out...in other words, when its -20*F out, am I gonna need to get up in the middle of the night to feed this thing to keep from freezing to death in my sleep?!


----------



## Case1030 (Dec 16, 2018)

In the last two weeks of owning the new Tundra2, I haven't had the need to load the furnace 100% full of wood. Even on a 3/4 full load I still have coals to relight after 11 hours no problem. 

The furnace has no problem maintaining house temp of 75f with minor fluctuations. 

And I only use electricity heat for backup or to use while on vacation.

Ether option you choose you won't be disappointed unless your wood moisture is high or incorrect installation.


----------



## Case1030 (Dec 16, 2018)

Also my house is a little smaller than yours at 1400sqft. But being in Manitoba our climate is a little colder than Michigan. My place only has 4 inch studs tight as a home is built in the 1970. Tundra just fit the floor plan perfectly, a Heatpro would have been overkill.


----------



## Medic21 (Dec 16, 2018)

I can tell you to stay away from anything HY-C produces.  Anything other than that I don’t know.


----------



## brenndatomu (Dec 16, 2018)

Medic21 said:


> I can tell you to stay away from anything HY-C produces.  Anything other than that I don’t know.


Yeah, kind of a changing of the guard here...Fire Chief was always regarded as a middle/upper end product before...before they crapped the bed with this new generation of...of...I dunno even what to call it...scrap metal maybe?
I was at Menards yesterday and they have the new Vogelzang wood furnace on display there...so I had a look...not bad, its a totally manual stove, looks like a pretty standard "secondary tube" type of firebox...I guess they figure best to not "re-invent the wheel" with this stuff...unlike some. 
Vogelzang was bottom shelf stuff in the past, but seem to have stepped it up a bit now...I had one of their newer stoves...not a bad little unit, not great, but not bad either.
If someone was looking for a manual wood furnace I'd still probably steer 'em to the new Englander 28-4000 over the VZ...made in USA, plus decent customer service...VZ is china made and not so great CS.


----------



## Medic21 (Dec 16, 2018)

brenndatomu said:


> If someone was looking for a manual wood furnace I'd still probably steer 'em to the new Englander 28-4000 .



A decision I regret now as that was my other choice.


----------



## Gbawol42 (Dec 16, 2018)

Awesome responses guys this is what I was hoping for. 

As for the burn time comments I was considering burn time to be say I leave for work at 645 and get home at 5 (10 hours), will my house be butt cold and need to use kindling to relight.  Or will the house still be warm and I will be able to matchless relight. This is important to me because sometimes I get stuck at work and I need my wife to be able to easily be able to load the stove.

Like I said the reason I am comparing the tundra 2 and the vf100 is because of the 3k price difference. I am trying to justify the purchase of the vf100.


----------



## Gbawol42 (Dec 16, 2018)

Case1030 said:


> Also my house is a little smaller than yours at 1400sqft. But being in Manitoba our climate is a little colder than Michigan. My place only has 4 inch studs tight as a home is built in the 1970. Tundra just fit the floor plan perfectly, a Heatpro would have been overkill.



That's crazy to have 2x4 construction where you are wow! You are making a good case for the tundra, and thank you for reaffirming the Heatpro would be too much for the house.


----------



## brenndatomu (Dec 16, 2018)

Gbawol42 said:


> As for the burn time comments I was considering burn time to be say I leave for work at 645 and get home at 5 (10 hours), will my house be butt cold and need to use kindling to relight. Or will the house still be warm and I will be able to matchless relight.


This is within the capability's of either furnace...slightly more so with the 100...so seems like you still have a choice to make


----------



## Gbawol42 (Dec 16, 2018)

brenndatomu said:


> This is within the capability's of either furnace...maybe slightly more so with the 100...seems like you still have a choice to make



Haha this is why I made the orginial post. I mean the 3k I would save builds me my flue and probably enough left over for the install. But I am trying to figure out if the 3k is a better investment in the stove instead. Basically I just don't want to waste 3k lol.


----------



## Gbawol42 (Dec 16, 2018)

Also doing further research I see the firebox size of the tundra is 3.6, if my math is right the vf100 is 7.4 (website said 23"x15.5"x20"). 

Can anyone validate this? Is the vf100 firebox really twice as big?


----------



## brenndatomu (Dec 16, 2018)

Gbawol42 said:


> Also doing further research I see the firebox size of the tundra is 3.6, if my math is right the vf100 is 7.4 (website said 23"x15.5"x20").
> 
> Can anyone validate this? Is the vf100 firebox really twice as big?


No, 4.1 CF


----------



## brenndatomu (Dec 16, 2018)

Gbawol42 said:


> the 3k I would save


Yeah, at least 3k...'til you figure in shipping and tax on the 100...and if you catch the Tundra on a 11% sale at Menards...which they have pretty often, especially after the 1st of the year. Good place and time to get your chimney too...their prices on Supervent class A chimney can't be beat...especially at 11% off. 
I've used Supervent to build a chimney here, and at my sisters place (another Tundra install) and also at my inlaws new house too (NC30 install) With the price I got on their new NC30, and the chimney system (sale price plus 11 % off on top of that!) they only have a bit more than a grand in everything (no labor charge from the installer )


----------



## Gbawol42 (Dec 16, 2018)

brenndatomu said:


> Yeah, at least 3k...'til you figure in shipping and tax on the 100...and if you catch the Tundra on a 11% sale at Menards...which they have pretty often, especially after the 1st of the year. Good place and time to get your chimney too...their prices on Supervent class A chimney can't be beat...especially at 11% off.
> I've used Supervent to build a chimney here, and at my sisters place (another Tundra install) and also at my inlaws new house too (NC30 install) With the price I got on their new NC30, and the chimney system (sale price plus 11 % off on top of that!) they only have a bit more than a grand in everything (no labor charge from the installer )



Yes I already planned on purchasing my chimney from Menards, I was looking at right around 1k when I priced it out on thier website with the 11% off. I believe the tundra 2 was around 1700 with the 11% off. 

The tundra is computer controlled dampener right? Or is it manual?


----------



## Highbeam (Dec 16, 2018)

brenndatomu said:


> True...but I would think when most people are asking about burn time, they mean when its really cold out...in other words, when its -20*F out, am I gonna need to get up in the middle of the night to feed this thing to keep from freezing to death in my sleep?!



I would disagree. Most people want to know the maximum burn time which means at the lowest possible clean burn rate so that the house temperature might fall but so it doesn’t fall too much and you can just reload and go! Has a lot to do with how long you’re away from home for work and sleep. 

It’s a hugely important performance specification of any solid fuel burner and completely independent of the house heat demand.

Wouldn’t it be great to have a wood furnace as large as the max caddy but with a low burn rate for 24 hour burn times and still the ability to efficiently blow the same wood load on 3 hours?


----------



## Case1030 (Dec 16, 2018)

Gbawol42 said:


> That's crazy to have 2x4 construction where you are wow! You are making a good case for the tundra, and thank you for reaffirming the Heatpro would be too much for the house.



This might help you figure out what to expect: our coldest night -15f (-26 celcus) kept easy 75f on 3/4 quarter load. After 8 hour reload house was still 70f. If I were to have waited till the 10 hour mark I'd expect the house to be around 65f in that weather. I'll have to wait till it gets cold again to find out what burn times I get if I fill the box right full.

And for what iv been hearing the Kumma, (having a slightly larger firebox) would be able to add a couple hours ontop of that burntime. The question you will need to figure out is if it's worth the extra 3 grand.


----------



## brenndatomu (Dec 16, 2018)

Highbeam said:


> Most people want to know the maximum burn time which means at the lowest possible clean burn rate so that the house temperature might fall but so it doesn’t fall too much and you can just reload and go! Has a lot to do with how long you’re away from home for work and sleep.


Not entirely different from what I said.


Gbawol42 said:


> The tundra is computer controlled dampener right? Or is it manual?


Basically manual...can hook a Tstat up though...there is a computer, but I'm not sure what all it is involved with, blower control for sure...probably high limit controls too...I'm pretty sure it is not involved in the everyday go-ins on of the damper.
But it is pretty easy to "computer control" them, right @Case1030 !?


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Dec 16, 2018)

Case1030 said:


> And for what iv been hearing the Kuuma, (having a slightly larger firebox) would be able to add a couple hours ontop of that burntime. The question you will need to figure out is if it's worth the extra 3 grand.



The extra $$$ doesn't just get you that, it's the completely automated computer control of the fire.  In just a few minutes I can go from lighting a fire in a completely cold firebox to walking away and leaving it completely unattended for the rest of the burn knowing the fire will be burning -_optimally_- throughout the full burn cycle.  Heck, even my GF can light a fire from scratch with it and she's never ran a wood fired anything in her life.  The only learning curve is knowing how much wood to load for the weather.   This is in addition to it being hand built in a small factory in N MN by a company who pays good wages to their handful of employees.  To me this is worth something and something I'm willing to pay more for.         

Having said that I've actually got to go downstairs now and start a fire in a cold firebox.


----------



## Case1030 (Dec 16, 2018)

JRHAWK9 said:


> The extra $$$ doesn't just get you that, it's the completely automated computer control of the fire.  In just a few minutes I can go from lighting a fire in a completely cold firebox to walking away and leaving it completely unattended for the rest of the burn knowing the fire will be burning -_optimally_- throughout the full burn cycle.  Heck, even my GF can light a fire from scratch with it and she's never ran a wood fired anything in her life.  The only learning curve is knowing how much wood to load for the weather.   This is in addition to it being hand built in a small factory in N MN by a company who pays good wages to their handful of employees.  To me this is worth something and something I'm willing to pay more for.
> 
> Having said that I've actually got to go downstairs now and start a fire in a cold firebox.



Your right I took for granted the tempurature controller that moderates the heat output was a tool I added on to my tundra to allow load and go. Doesn't cost much about $60.


----------



## Case1030 (Dec 16, 2018)

Dont get me wrong if I could of bought a new Kumma for a price I was willing to spend I would have. But with exchange rate Cad/Usd and shipping it wasn't and option at the moment. Those extra features are nice.

As the tundra sits it's all manual. With little modification you have the capability to load and go. Like a knock off kumma.


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Dec 16, 2018)

It obviously works and improves the Tundra, but controlling it via flue gas temps is not quite the same as by firebox temps.  I monitor all sorts of temps (including firebox temps with a MYPIN wired to the factory thermocouple connected to the computer) and the flue/firebox temps are not locked to each other.  It's actually kinda cool to sit and watch how the firebox/flue temps relate to each other.  At times one can be going up while the other is going down and visa versa.


----------



## Case1030 (Dec 16, 2018)

JRHAWK9 said:


> It obviously works and improves the Tundra, but controlling it via flue gas temps is not quite the same as by firebox temps.  I monitor all sorts of temps (including firebox temps with a MYPIN wired to the factory thermocouple connected to the computer) and the flue/firebox temps are not locked to each other.  It's actually kinda cool to sit and watch how the firebox/flue temps relate to each other.  At times one can be going up while the other is going down and visa versa.



I understand and agree with what your getting at. That means a cleaner burning stove. Very impressed that a small family owned company can get done what large stove manufacturers can't.

At least with the 2020 emissions I expect more companies will be coming up with similar clean burn technology.

You do get what you pay for, and with the funds I saved by purchasing an economy furnace that still performs upto my expectations and needs. (Paid $1800 CAD for Tundra 2)

Just for speculative sake if I didn't already own the following, I'd be able to buy a 20 ton gas log splitter, huaquavarna 372xp, sthil ms290, and cover the 16 foot chimney for the Tundra. If my math is correct, I should still have a bit of cash left over. For some one just starting out burning wood that's exactly what would help a guy get a good start.


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Dec 17, 2018)

Speaking of cleaner burning.  

Just went to see if the EPA released a new list of the certified furnaces yet as they did recently release one for stoves.  Looks like they haven't, as they still show the June '18 one as the latest.  Anyway, looked at the results a bit closer and something surprised me.  With all the negative real-world reviews of the Hy-C furnaces, they actually tested out 2-4 times CLEANER burning than SBI's lineup even though they are not nearly as efficient.  SBI's furnaces tested out among the 'dirtiest' of the whole group.  Very strange.


----------



## Highbeam (Dec 17, 2018)

JRHAWK9 said:


> Speaking of cleaner burning.
> 
> Just went to see if the EPA released a new list of the certified furnaces yet as they did recently release one for stoves.  Looks like they haven't, as they still show the June '18 one as the latest.  Anyway, looked at the results a bit closer and something surprised me.  With all the negative real-world reviews of the Hy-C furnaces, they actually tested out 2-4 times CLEANER burning than SBI's lineup even though they are not nearly as efficient.  SBI's furnaces tested out among the 'dirtiest' of the whole group.  Very strange.
> 
> ...



Efficiency and emissions are not directly related. There are many low emissions and low efficiency wood burning devices. It’s great when you can have high efficiency and low emissions.


----------



## brenndatomu (Dec 17, 2018)

JRHAWK9 said:


> Speaking of cleaner burning.
> 
> Just went to see if the EPA released a new list of the certified furnaces yet as they did recently release one for stoves.  Looks like they haven't, as they still show the June '18 one as the latest.  Anyway, looked at the results a bit closer and something surprised me.  With all the negative real-world reviews of the Hy-C furnaces, they actually tested out 2-4 times CLEANER burning than SBI's lineup even though they are not nearly as efficient.  SBI's furnaces tested out among the 'dirtiest' of the whole group.  Very strange.
> 
> ...


They (HY-C) must have run them balls out to get them that clean for the test...but then when people try to run them more realistically...puff the magic furnace.
I did rifle through the EPA test report on the FC's a while back, and they did have some pretty short burn times...


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Dec 17, 2018)

Highbeam said:


> Efficiency and emissions are not directly related. There are many low emissions and low efficiency wood burning devices. It’s great when you can have high efficiency and low emissions.



I understand that, I'm just surprised the SBI's stuff is many times "dirtier" than those o so well designed Hy-C's.


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Dec 17, 2018)

brenndatomu said:


> They (HY-C) must have run them balls out to get them that clean for the test...but then when people try to run them more realistically...puff the magic furnace.
> I did rifle through the EPA test report on the FC's a while back, and they did have some pretty short burn times...



I guess that would make sense.


----------



## sloeffle (Dec 17, 2018)

I didn’t realize the efficiency of the Caddy and VF100 were that close. I always thought the VF’s were a lot more efficient. The VF definitely has the edge when it comes to emissions though.


----------



## Highbeam (Dec 17, 2018)

sloeffle said:


> I didn’t realize the efficiency of the Caddy and VF100 were that close. I always thought the VF’s were a lot more efficient. The VF definitely has the edge when it comes to emissions though.



The vf is very clean and pretty efficient.


----------



## Case1030 (Dec 18, 2018)

sloeffle said:


> I didn’t realize the efficiency of the Caddy and VF100 were that close. I always thought the VF’s were a lot more efficient. The VF definitely has the edge when it comes to emissions though.



Same here didn't realize that ether. I thought the Vapor Fire would have had at least a 10% if not more efficency advantage over the Tundra.

I honestly believe the only way Sbi will come close to meeting the 2020 emissions will be removing the fire picture window and insulating the door to increase firebox temps.

I know this might be off topic for this thread but when it comes to emission standpoint, remember when the new DEF systems first came out... burn more diesel to burn cleaner exhaust.


----------



## sloeffle (Dec 18, 2018)

Case1030 said:


> Same here didn't realize that ether. I thought the Vapor Fire would have had at least a 10% if not more efficency advantage over the Tundra.


I was thinking about this last night after my post. I wonder what it would take to get a cord wood furnace in the 80% efficiency range with emissions low enough to meet the 2020 regulations. The boiler guys have had lambda controlled cord wood boilers for years now that have efficiencies over 80% maybe even 90%. I'd assume it is tougher to do in a furnace since you possibly can't have a downdraft design with a furnace. Maybe @lampmfg can give some insights on this.



Case1030 said:


> I know this might be off topic for this thread but when it comes to emission standpoint, remember when the new DEF systems first came out... burn more diesel to burn cleaner exhaust.


International Harvester knows how that panned out.


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Dec 18, 2018)

Case1030 said:


> removing the fire picture window



that's blasphemy for some on this site!


----------



## Highbeam (Dec 18, 2018)

sloeffle said:


> I was thinking about this last night after my post. I wonder what it would take to get a cord wood furnace in the 80% efficiency range with emissions low enough to meet the 2020 regulations. The boiler guys have had lambda controlled cord wood boilers for years now that have efficiencies over 80% maybe even 90%. I'd assume it is tougher to do in a furnace since you possibly can't have a downdraft design with a furnace.



Easy. The stoves, some not all, have been over 80% for decades. Catalysts. That’s the future. Just like your car.


----------



## sloeffle (Dec 18, 2018)

Highbeam said:


> Easy. The stoves, some not all, have been over 80% for decades. Catalysts. That’s the future. Just like your car.


I had a catalytic wood stove. No thanks. I’d take less efficiency over that any day of the week.

I want something that is controlled by a computer ( lambda ) and that is smarter than what I am when it comes to burning the cleanest.


----------



## Gbawol42 (Dec 18, 2018)

I keep hearing about the new 2020 regs coming out on wood furnaces. IF they were to take effect (I just heard they are trying to push for 2 more years) would it be the 1st if the year they take effect? I am just wondering if that happens what will others besides Kuuma do? Or do you think they have furnace technology ready just in case the new regs do happen?


----------



## Gbawol42 (Dec 18, 2018)

JRHAWK9 said:


> that's blasphemy for some on this site!


If I was purchasing a wood stove I would most certainly want a window, as it would be almost a piece of furniture in my main living quarters. However a furnace will be in my basement only seen by me most of the time.  I don't really see the need for a window, except to see exactly what your fire is doing without opening the door.  But it sounds as though Kuuma took this guess work out, so I shouldn't have to worry about what the fire is doing for the most part.


----------



## woodey (Dec 18, 2018)

Gbawol42 said:


> I keep hearing about the new 2020 regs coming out on wood furnaces. IF they were to take effect (I just heard they are trying to push for 2 more years) would it be the 1st if the year they take effect? I am just wondering if that happens what will others besides Kuuma do? Or do you think they have furnace technology ready just in case the new regs do happen?



As of now the new regs are effective May of 2020 .


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Dec 18, 2018)

Gbawol42 said:


> I am just wondering if that happens what will others besides Kuuma do?



Either sh*t or get off the pot is a term which comes to mind.  

<soap box>
Which brings up another reason why I made the decision I did.  This extremely small company seems to be the only one who had the foresight and drive to do what the larger companies couldn't or were unwilling to do and all with a R&D budget minuscule compared to these larger companies.  Instead these other companies were/are sitting around selling products in which they knew would eventually become outdated.  Now some of them are whining because they don't have "enough time".  It's laughable how a little mom and pop shop in the middle of nowhere can do it while these companies "can't".  I don't believe it's because they can't though, it's my opinion it's because they don't want to spend the resources to do so.  It's a shame guberment has to step in and force these companies to advance/better themselves while a few enthusiasts in N MN made it happen YEARS prior w/o any guberment intervention. </soap box>


----------



## Case1030 (Dec 18, 2018)

JRHAWK9 said:


> Either sh*t or get off the pot is a term which comes to mind.
> 
> <soap box>
> Which brings up another reason why I made the decision I did.  This extremely small company seems to be the only one who had the foresight and drive to do what the larger companies couldn't or were unwilling to do and all with a R&D budget minuscule compared to these larger companies.  Instead these others companies were/are sitting around selling products in which they knew would eventually become outdated.  Now some of them are whining because they don't have "enough time".  It's laughable how a little mom and pop shop in the middle of nowhere can do it while these companies "can't".  I don't believe it's because they can't, it's my opinion it's because they don't want to spend the resources to do so.  It's a shame guberment has to step in and force these companies to advance/better themselves while a few enthusiasts in N MN made it happen YEARS prior w/o any guberment intervention. </soap box>



I believe most of the big manufacturers where/are trying to milk every last drop out of the old tech before investing in cleaner burning stoves.


----------



## Gbawol42 (Dec 18, 2018)

Case1030 said:


> I believe most of the big manufacturers where/are trying to milk every last drop out of the old tech before investing in cleaner burning stoves.


This is pretty much what I was thinking, why come out with a new and/or more efficient truck design when the old one is still selling so well.


----------



## woodey (Dec 18, 2018)

Gbawol42 said:


> . Looking for some real world people to tell me what they are really getting for burn times.


I am heating my house with the Vapor Fire 100. The house is a 2 story 2700 sq/ft  home built in 1866.  With temps in the mid 20's I am able to achieve 12 hours  between  loads without house temps dropping below 68-70* by the end of the burn cycle.Radiant heat from the furnace and ducts also helps keep  the chill out of 1200 sq/ft of basement.


----------



## Highbeam (Dec 18, 2018)

Gbawol42 said:


> If I was purchasing a wood stove I would most certainly want a window, as it would be almost a piece of furniture in my main living quarters. However a furnace will be in my basement only seen by me most of the time.  I don't really see the need for a window, except to see exactly what your fire is doing without opening the door.  But it sounds as though Kuuma took this guess work out, so I shouldn't have to worry about what the fire is doing for the most part.



It’s nice to check on fuel remaining with a window too. I’d bet that omitting the window and associated air wash system makes the construction simpler. Less gaskets to fail.

It’s a tough call. I really like to see the fire.


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Dec 18, 2018)

Highbeam said:


> It’s nice to check on fuel remaining with a window too.




I use the computer's display of the damper position tell me that.  Now that I added a firebox temp gauge (reading the OEM thermocouple used by the computer) I can also go by that if I wanted to......or the other temps I also monitor.  

Waiting to light a fire for the night.  BBQ thermometer on top right displays stack and plenum temps, which has a wireless remote unit which I place on the night stand next to the bed so I can glance at it when I roll over in the middle of the night.    Top left is the MyPIN which I use just to monitor firebox temps.








Highbeam said:


> I’d bet that omitting the window and associated air wash system makes the construction simpler. Less gaskets to fail.




IIRC, Daryl said they tried a window but they could not keep the burn as clean.  I'm guessing it cools things down too much.  Just a guess though.


----------



## woodey (Dec 18, 2018)

Highbeam said:


> It’s a tough call. I really like to see the fire.


It is nice to see the fire, but if its in the basement like mine all you have to do to see the time remaining for burn times is look at the computer, when it turns to 3 you have @ 2hrs of heat left.


----------



## Case1030 (Dec 18, 2018)

woodey said:


> It is nice to see the fire, but if its in the basement like mine all you have to do to see the time remaining for burn times is look at the computer, when it turns to 3 you have @ 2hrs of heat left.



Well I got my tundra furnace in the sunroom so the window is a very nice addition.


----------



## NoobTube (Dec 19, 2018)

woodey said:


> I am heating my house with the Vapor Fire 100. The house is a 2 story 2700 sq/ft  home built in 1866.  With temps in the mid 20's I am able to achieve 12 hours  between  loads without house temps dropping below 68-70* by the end of the burn cycle.Radiant heat from the furnace and ducts also helps keep  the chill out of 1200 sq/ft of basement.



Question,

Do you only have the ducting on the first floor and just let the heat rise to the second?


----------



## woodey (Dec 19, 2018)

NoobTube said:


> Question,
> 
> Do you only have the ducting on the first floor and just let the heat rise to the second?


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               I have warm air ducts to all the rooms upstairs but leave them shut unless the temps fall well below zero- the only one I leave open is the one to the bathroom.


----------



## lampmfg (Dec 19, 2018)

Case1030 said:


> Same here didn't realize that ether. I thought the Vapor Fire would have had at least a 10% if not more efficency advantage over the Tundra.
> 
> I honestly believe the only way Sbi will come close to meeting the 2020 emissions will be removing the fire picture window and insulating the door to increase firebox temps.
> 
> I know this might be off topic for this thread but when it comes to emission standpoint, remember when the new DEF systems first came out... burn more diesel to burn cleaner exhaust.




The Kuuma Vapor-Fire 100 was certified by the EPA test lab to provide a 79% efficiency based on the current test criteria.  The current test "only measures" heat produced while the "blower" is running.  So any heat generated when the blower isn't running does not get counted.  So you can do the math.  In real world the VF100 would be generating in the mid to upper 80% efficiency ranges.  It is also 2020 certified.  It actually tested 40% cleaner than the 2020 phase 2 mandate.


----------



## Highbeam (Dec 19, 2018)

lampmfg said:


> The Kuuma Vapor-Fire 100 was certified by the EPA test lab to provide a 79% efficiency based on the current test criteria.  The current test "only measures" heat produced while the "blower" is running.  So any heat generated when the blower isn't running does not get counted.  So you can do the math.  In real world the VF100 would be generating in the mid to upper 80% efficiency ranges.  It is also 2020 certified.  It actually tested 40% cleaner than the 2020 phase 2 mandate.



It appears then that the efficiency ratings of wood furnaces can not be compared to the efficiency ratings of woodstoves or fossil fuel furnaces. Similarly, the EPA emissions rating system for wood furnaces uses an incompatible metric instead of the standard GPH.  

Is the entire 4.6 cubic feet of the VF100 usable or does that include secondary chamber volume?


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Dec 19, 2018)

Highbeam said:


> Similarly, the EPA emissions rating system for wood furnaces uses an incompatible metric instead of the standard GPH.
> 
> Is the entire 4.6 cubic feet of the VF100 usable or does that include secondary chamber volume?



You always seem to bring this up but they do show both:  



It also has a 4.1CF firebox, according to the dimensions of the box shown in the owners manual.  If IIRC, those dimensions in the manual agree with when I measured mine and it's all fully usable.


----------



## Highbeam (Dec 19, 2018)

JRHAWK9 said:


> You always seem to bring this up but they do show both:
> View attachment 236133
> 
> 
> It also has a 4.1CF firebox, according to the dimensions of the box shown in the owners manual.  If IIRC, those dimensions in the manual agree with when I measured mine and it's all fully usable.



Thanks JR. I don't recall ever seeing that published anywhere important like on their EPA label or the owner's manual. Imagine me trying to prove that the furnace is under 2.5 gph to some enforcement guy.

Thanks for the firebox verification. There's a lot to like about the VF100.


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Dec 19, 2018)

Highbeam said:


> Thanks JR. I don't recall ever seeing that published anywhere important like on their EPA label or the owner's manual. Imagine me trying to prove that the furnace is under 2.5 gph to some enforcement guy.
> 
> Thanks for the firebox verification. There's a lot to like about the VF100.




The GPH actually came right from Intertek's EPA test results, page 8:  https://www.lamppakuuma.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Vapor-Fire-100-EPA-test-report.pdf

Also on Page 26 of the owners manual.  Pretty sure they HAD to add it per EPA requirements:  https://www.lamppakuuma.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Model_100_Manual_60525.pdf







lampmfg said:


> The Kuuma Vapor-Fire 100 was certified by the EPA test lab to provide a 79% efficiency based on the current test criteria.  The current test "only measures" heat produced while the "blower" is running.  So any heat generated when the blower isn't running does not get counted.  So you can do the math.  In real world the VF100 would be generating in the mid to upper 80% efficiency ranges.  It is also 2020 certified.  It actually tested 40% cleaner than the 2020 phase 2 mandate.



To be fair though, then all wood furnaces tested using the same method would see higher real world efficiencies.

I believe what you are referring to is stack loss efficiency?  I believe this number is the more accurate of the numbers as it takes 100% minus the percentage of BTU's lost up the stack.

Definitely gives wood stoves an advantage on paper when comparing numbers.


----------



## Highbeam (Dec 19, 2018)

JRHAWK9 said:


> The GPH actually came right from Intertek's EPA test results, page 8:  https://www.lamppakuuma.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Vapor-Fire-100-EPA-test-report.pdf
> 
> Also on Page 26 of the owners manual.  Pretty sure they HAD to add it per EPA requirements:  https://www.lamppakuuma.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Model_100_Manual_60525.pdf
> 
> ...



I was drooling over the kuuma website and they DO list GPH now! Hot dog.


----------



## Gbawol42 (Dec 19, 2018)

So after reading a lot of your comments and doing my own research I am leaning hard to the VF100. I believe I now see what the extra 3k will get me, and it seems worth it. Also looking at longevity of the appliance, I believe that the Vf100 will last many years more than the tundra, so looking at it in an investment point of view, the VF100 is the way to go.

The biggest selling point is if I tell my wife she has to fill the furnace because I got stuck at work. She should be able to load wood, shut the door, and walk away. That piece of mind is worth a lot to me.


----------



## brenndatomu (Dec 19, 2018)

sloeffle said:


> I want something that is controlled by a computer ( lambda ) and that is smarter than what I am when it comes to burning the cleanest.


Just a point of clarification...the Kuuma's are not lambda controlled...they just monitor firebox temps.


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Dec 19, 2018)

brenndatomu said:


> Just a point of clarification...the Kuuma's are not lambda controlled...they just monitor firebox temps.



by lambda, are they referring to having O2 sensors and having STRIMS and LTRIMS like on OBDII autos in order to get things really dialed in?


----------



## brenndatomu (Dec 19, 2018)

Yeah, more or less...the air/fuel mixture is monitored and controlled to try to maintain stoichiometric (but I think with wood as a fuel, they might aim for the "excess air" side of stoi)


----------



## brenndatomu (Dec 19, 2018)

Here is a little reading on lambda
https://www.hearth.com/talk/threads/lambda-controlled-boilers.82410/


----------



## sloeffle (Dec 20, 2018)

Along with the lambda controlled wood furnace, can I have it feed itself also. Something similar to 

When I hit the lottery, I'll hire a bunch of people smarter than me and we'll build it.


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Dec 26, 2018)

Christmas day we left to go out of town again to go up by family for the holiday.  I did a similar thing as last time in that I planned the loads out so that when we are walking out the door to leave the furnace was ready to be loaded (even though I would not have loaded if we were staying home).  So I loaded the firebox full, leaving the computer on minimum burn.  The whole point was to keep a nice slow and steady burn for as long as I could to keep the LP furnace from running.  I didn't care how warm the house got seeing we were not going to be home.  I knew it was going to get warm.  The cats would enjoy it though.  

We are heating ~31,000 CF of air volume (including basement, which is heated by radiant heat only off the Kuuma).  No Attic, 12/12 pitch roof, ~25' ceiling at peak with a loft.  Not efficient.  No outside vapor barrier.



Below is what I calculated the heat loss to be at 70°, definitely not "careful new construction".  Closer to the "leaky" side of things.  Calculated it from here:  https://www.builditsolar.com/References/Calculators/HeatLoss/HeatLoss.htm





Anyway, it was a balmy 28-30° the whole time during the burn.  I loaded 95.7lbs of black locust (nice and dry with NO bark, as it fell off) into the firebox at 11am on 12/25 with house temp 75°.  I have a MyPIN wired into the factory TC now so I can view internal firebox temps and also have an IP camera setup so I can view all vitals remotely via my laptop.

Started monitoring and documenting temps around 10:30pm (11.5 hours after loading) while binge watching Homicide Hunter: Lt. Joe Kenda on ID while laying in bed....which I could not stop watching, hence the data points in the middle of the night.  Good thing my other half sleeps good, as I sure didn't get much sleep.   

Keep in mind, as  a reference, the internal firebox temp at which the computer goes to pilot (when set to minimum burn) is ~1,080°.

-  0 - 11.5 hours.  Guessing it spent a lot of time on pilot (while opening to '1' momentarily when needed) keeping firebox temps between 1,100° - 1,200°.
-  11.5 hours into the burn,  firebox temps 1,020°, computer on '1' and house temp 77°.
-  12 hours into burn, firebox temps 1,003°, computer on '1' and house temp 77°.
-  13 hours into burn, firebox temps 925°, computer on '1' and house temp 78°
-  14 hours into burn, firebox temps 919°, computer on '1' and house temp 78°
-  15 hours into burn, firebox temps 907°, computer on '2' and house temp 79°, turned off TV and went to bed.
-  19 hours into burn (woke up to pee then went back to sleep), firebox temps 475°, computer on '3' and house temp 78°, blower was still running
-  22 hours into burn (got up), firebox temps 282°, computer on '3' and house temp 77°, blower was off.

When I first calculated out what my theoretical "burn time" should be on low with ~96lbs of wood, I came up with between 19-20 hours.  Pretty much what I got.  Going off memory here based on past experience, I am guessing blower turned off shortly before I got up when plenum temps reached ~98°......~21-22 hours of blower run time.

We got back home 27 hours after initial load and house temp had already dropped to 71°.....warmed up to 34° outside.  The LP furnace never kicked in though so it was a success.


----------



## Gbawol42 (Dec 26, 2018)

JRHAWK9 said:


> Christmas day we left to go out of town again to go up by family for the holiday.  I did a similar thing as last time in that I planned the loads out so that when we are walking out the door to leave the furnace was ready to be loaded (even though I would not have loaded if we were staying home).  So I loaded the firebox full, leaving the computer on minimum burn.  The whole point was to keep a nice slow and steady burn for as long as I could to keep the LP furnace from running.  I didn't care how warm the house got seeing we were not going to be home.  I knew it was going to get warm.  The cats would enjoy it though.
> 
> We are heating ~31,000 CF of air volume.  No Attic, 12/12 pitch roof, ~25' ceiling at peak with a loft.  Not efficient.  No outside vapor barrier.
> View attachment 236680
> ...



Wow I am so surprised that you heat that much space for so long on one load of wood. I am still used to the old wood stove at my parents that if not loaded every 6 hours the house will drop fast in temp.


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Dec 26, 2018)

Gbawol42 said:


> Wow I am so surprised that you heat that much space for so long on one load of wood. I am still used to the old wood stove at my parents that if not loaded every 6 hours the house will drop fast in temp.




It wasn't very cold out though.  When it drops below 0 for longer periods things change in a hurry in this house.


----------



## Highbeam (Dec 26, 2018)

Gbawol42 said:


> Wow I am so surprised that you heat that much space for so long on one load of wood. I am still used to the old wood stove at my parents that if not loaded every 6 hours the house will drop fast in temp.



Almost 100# of wood got him 22 hours. Good woodstoves can now run an easy 24+ hours on 50# of fuel if you can live with less output. Your parents old wood stove is not one of the good modern ones. This kuuma is also more advanced than the old furnaces. 

When buying a woodstove or wood furnace you have some pretty big choices to make these days.


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Dec 27, 2018)

Highbeam said:


> Good woodstoves can now run an easy 24+ hours on 50# of fuel if you can live with less output.


   .....and are willing to deal with the idiosyncrasies of a cat stove.    Some people prefer their appliance actually burn the wood completely and not smolder it; only to let the consumable cat deal with the fuel before it exits the flue.      Kinda like with women, some guys like temperamental/higher maintenance women and some, well, umm, don't.


----------



## brenndatomu (Dec 27, 2018)

JRHAWK9 said:


> .....and are willing to deal with the idiosyncrasies of a cat stove.    Some people prefer their appliance actually burn the wood completely and not smolder it; only to let the consumable cat deal with the fuel before it exits the flue.      Kinda like with women, some guys like temperamental/higher maintenance women and some, well, umm, don't.


Blaze King used to make cat furnaces...used to...http://www.blazeking.com/EN/furnace-apex.html
Edit: looks like they are back in production...? https://www.hearth.com/talk/threads/blaze-king-apex-cbt-forced-air-wood-furnace.144440/#post-1948624
I could have swore they were out of production...and I don't recall seeing them on the 2020 EPA cert list


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Dec 27, 2018)

I just looked at the most recent (June 2018) list of EPA certified warm air furnaces....they are not on it at all.

I remember looking at them when doing my research.  I saw it was a cat furnace and said, nope.


----------



## Highbeam (Dec 28, 2018)

It took a weird 7” flue too. No window.

I have had no idiosyncratic problems with my cat stove. It’s been a real peach. Only load once per day. There are good cat stoves and bad ones, just like good furnaces and bad ones.

I just need more output in the shop. Furnaces can really pump out the btu. I’m not afraid of a little kitty if the math works out. If somebody like kuuma can make a cat unnecessary then that’s even better.


----------



## maple1 (Dec 28, 2018)

Highbeam said:


> It took a weird 7” flue too. No window.
> 
> I have had no idiosyncratic problems with my cat stove. It’s been a real peach. Only load once per day. There are good cat stoves and bad ones, just like good furnaces and bad ones.
> 
> I just need more output in the shop. Furnaces can really pump out the btu. I’m not afraid of a little kitty if the math works out. If somebody like kuuma can make a cat unnecessary then that’s even better.



You callin' my flue weird?


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Dec 28, 2018)

maple1 said:


> You callin' my flue weird?



It's "prime"


----------



## BKVP (Dec 28, 2018)

Highbeam said:


> It took a weird 7” flue too. No window.
> 
> I have had no idiosyncratic problems with my cat stove. It’s been a real peach. Only load once per day. There are good cat stoves and bad ones, just like good furnaces and bad ones.
> 
> I just need more output in the shop. Furnaces can really pump out the btu. I’m not afraid of a little kitty if the math works out. If somebody like kuuma can make a cat unnecessary then that’s even better.


Be Careful there Highbeam....7" is VERY common is land to the North.  We have not made them for sale in the USA since the new NSPS was published in March of 2015.  The 7" flue was very popular in Canada, but not the US market.  We are not making the unit at this time.


----------



## sloeffle (Dec 28, 2018)

brenndatomu said:


> Blaze King used to make cat furnaces...used to...http://www.blazeking.com/EN/furnace-apex.html
> Edit: looks like they are back in production...? https://www.hearth.com/talk/threads/blaze-king-apex-cbt-forced-air-wood-furnace.144440/#post-1948624
> I could have swore they were out of production...and I don't recall seeing them on the 2020 EPA cert list


Speaking of older certified EPA furnaces. I wonder what happened to the Energy King 385EK wood only furnace.  It looks like the only furnaces they sell now are wood / coal furnaces.

Edit: It looks like it was never certified by the EPA.


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Dec 28, 2018)

BKVP said:


> We are not making the unit at this time.



At the link below, back in 2015, you mentioned how it will be going back into production and how it was tested, passed and waiting for certification.  What changed?

https://www.hearth.com/talk/threads/blaze-king-apex-cbt-forced-air-wood-furnace.144440/


----------



## brenndatomu (Dec 28, 2018)

sloeffle said:


> Speaking of older certified EPA furnaces. I wonder what happened to the Energy King 385EK wood only furnace.  It looks like the only furnaces they sell now are wood / coal furnaces.
> 
> Edit: It looks like it was never certified by the EPA.


Yeah that was just some clever marketing on those...from my research on them, they didn't even have a great secondary air system...kinda reminded me of my Yukon in that respect.


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Dec 28, 2018)

sloeffle said:


> Speaking of older certified EPA furnaces. I wonder what happened to the Energy King 385EK wood only furnace.  It looks like the only furnaces they sell now are wood / coal furnaces.
> 
> Edit: It looks like it was never certified by the EPA.




man, re-reading that thread you linked above years later and all the positive comments on the up and coming line from Hy-C made me     
Gotta love the BS company spokesmen will spew.  



> I spoke with Hy-C about the new shelter furnace. It sounds like it could be a heating monster if the rep is right. I guess there's been a handful in use, and they reported a 30 to 45% reduction in wood usage. He said output temperatures in the plenum are higher, and burns between 10 and 14 hours. The firebox size is 4.8 which is very large for a clean burning unit. He said both primary and secondary air is superheated. They are working on a new site, and sometime within 2 weeks will have a manual and breakdown online





> Yeah, from the sounds of it, they invested some serious money! I guess they have patented the system and are currently working on their 6th or 8th model. I took interest when he said plenum temps were up to 170 degrees! I guess they are using a forced draft for demand, but it closes down and burns clean when demand isn't needed. A 1200 to 1800 cfm blower and a large plenum opening, it sounds like it will heat well.



This is exactly how @Mrpelletburner 's 1000 and 1500 operated, right?


----------



## Mrpelletburner (Dec 28, 2018)

Yes for the 1500. The 1000 shares primary and secondary air inlet.


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Dec 28, 2018)

Mrpelletburner said:


> Yes for the 1500. The 1000 shares primary and secondary air inlet.




oh, so you are getting 10 to 14 hour burn times, consuming 30-45% less wood and burning clean while doing it then.  

They also have patented that great system too.  It's a good thing, as I'm sure anyone who is looking for a good wood furnace to reverse engineer would be looking at the Hy-C line.


----------



## Case1030 (Dec 28, 2018)

JRHAWK9 said:


> man, re-reading that thread you linked above years later and all the positive comments on the up and coming line from Hy-C made me
> Gotta love the BS company spokesmen will spew.
> 
> This is exactly how @Mrpelletburner 's 1000 and 1500 operated, right?



Not playing advocate for HY-c but hook a Tundra upto a 28 foot chimney with no baro or damper, or even a kumma for that matter. The stove will never operate to its specified potential. 

With a 4.8 firebox loaded up there is no reason why you cant get 12 hours that's compleatly reasonable to expect, especially considering I'm getting that and above with a 3.6 CF firebox.

The main fault of HY-c is there customer support spewing BS about not having to control draft when its specified plain as day in there manual.


----------



## Case1030 (Dec 28, 2018)

JRHAWK9 said:


> oh, so you are getting 10 to 14 hour burn times, consuming 30-45% less wood and burning clean while doing it then.
> 
> They also have patented that great system too.  It's a good thing, as I'm sure anyone who is looking for a good wood furnace to reverse engineer would be looking at the Hy-C line.




Also Drolet only claims their tundra can get 10 hour burns. But as Benu and many others have found out they are more capable of 12+ hours. Not all manufacturers overestimate and exaggerate burn time.


----------



## Mrpelletburner (Dec 28, 2018)

Case1030 said:


> With a 4.8 firebox loaded up.



The 1500 is 4.1 firebox and you can only fill so much as the flap gets in the way and can’t close as it gets caught on the splits inside. PITMFA


----------



## Case1030 (Dec 28, 2018)

Mrpelletburner said:


> The 1500 is 4.1 firebox and you can only fill so much as the flap gets in the way and can’t close as it gets caught on the splits inside. PITMFA



Someone on this page said it was a 4.8 Cf firebox... Now that you say 4.1 that would make more sense.


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Dec 28, 2018)

Case1030 said:


> Not playing advocate for HY-c but hook a Tundra upto a 28 foot chimney with no baro or damper, or even a kumma for that matter. The stove will never operate to its specified potential.
> 
> With a 4.8 firebox loaded up there is no reason why you cant get 12 hours that's compleatly reasonable to expect, especially considering I'm getting that and above with a 3.6 CF firebox.
> 
> The main fault of HY-c is there customer support spewing BS about not having to control draft when its specified plain as day in there manual.




yeah the whole situation is crap.  They, Hy-C, are talking out of both sides of their mouths it seems like.

I think since the standardized testing in the recent years the burn times and heat output of a lot of these furnaces have been made to become more realistic.  A couple years ago I posted an example of SBI's Caddy line, showing present and past ratings of the same furnace. 

Found it.  Read from post #16 on down a few posts.
https://www.hearth.com/talk/threads/kuuma-vapor-fire-100-epa-testing-results.157075/#post-2112765


----------



## Case1030 (Dec 28, 2018)

JRHAWK9 said:


> yeah the whole situation is crap.  They, Hy-C, are talking out of both sides of their mouths it seems like.
> 
> I think since the standardized testing in the recent years the burn times and heat output of a lot of these furnaces have been made to become more realistic.  A couple years ago I posted an example of SBI's Caddy line, showing present and past ratings of the same furnace.
> 
> ...



Just finished reading the details of the post you dug up. 

It could have been a variety of reasons why the output changed. For example it might be interpreted as deceiving (reason for change to reflect more accurate value), or it could be an honest design change which lowered the btu output (similar to the tundras primary air inlet made smaller, also the T2 damper door only opens 1" and the T1s look like about 2")


----------



## maple1 (Dec 28, 2018)

Case1030 said:


> Not playing advocate for HY-c but hook a Tundra upto a 28 foot chimney with no baro or damper, or even a kumma for that matter. The stove will never operate to its specified potential.
> 
> With a 4.8 firebox loaded up there is no reason why you cant get 12 hours that's compleatly reasonable to expect, especially considering I'm getting that and above with a 3.6 CF firebox.
> 
> The main fault of HY-c is there customer support spewing BS about not having to control draft when its specified plain as day in there manual.



I think there are more faults simmering that would be bigger than the customer support issue - or more like, the customer support issue is a by-product of bigger fault(s). Such as - the darned things simply aren't designed to burn properly to start with. Everything else is chasing stuff or circle talk, trying to improve on fundamentally flawed situations. Or deflect from them.


----------



## brenndatomu (Dec 28, 2018)

maple1 said:


> I think there are more faults simmering that would be bigger than the customer support issue - or more like, the customer support issue is a by-product of bigger fault(s). Such as - the darned things simply aren't designed to burn properly to start with. Everything else is chasing stuff or circle talk, trying to improve on fundamentally flawed situations. Or deflect from them.


Nailed it


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Dec 28, 2018)

Case1030 said:


> Just finished reading the details of the post you dug up.
> 
> It could have been a variety of reasons why the output changed. For example it might be interpreted as deceiving (reason for change to reflect more accurate value), or it could be an honest design change which lowered the btu output (similar to the tundras primary air inlet made smaller, also the T2 damper door only opens 1" and the T1s look like about 2")




could be, but that's quite a big drop in performance on the same furnace without any known large scale changes!  After all we are talking mostly about average and max BTU ratings which were pretty much cut in half.     That kind of performance decrease would have not gone unnoticed.  I'll put my money on fuzzy/deceiving marketing and once they tested to a standard it was "corrected". 

It wasn't just SBI, seems it was pretty much everybody except Kuuma.  What started me digging around was back when I was researching furnaces for myself and noticed how much lower the advertised BTU output was for the Kuuma compared to pretty much everybody else.  It was about half the rated output of other furnaces.  The VF100 was originally tested for some tax credit thing back in 2012 (?).  I saw and read the results of that test, this is where I saw the actual heat output.  That's when I started to question what I was seeing from everybody else as I could not find any certified testing data, just marketing data, which I did not believe or trust.

Believe nothing, question everything.


----------



## BKVP (Dec 28, 2018)

JRHAWK9 said:


> At the link below, back in 2015, you mentioned how it will be going back into production and how it was tested, passed and waiting for certification.  What changed?
> 
> https://www.hearth.com/talk/threads/blaze-king-apex-cbt-forced-air-wood-furnace.144440/


Demand dropped significantly.   Certification test costs skyrocketed and demand for other products was intense...still is.


----------



## Case1030 (Dec 28, 2018)

JRHAWK9 said:


> could be, but that's quite a big drop in performance on the same furnace without any known large scale changes!  After all we are talking mostly about average and max BTU ratings which were pretty much cut in half.     That kind of performance decrease would have not gone unnoticed.  I'll put my money on fuzzy/deceiving marketing and once they tested to a standard it was "corrected".
> 
> It wasn't just SBI, seems it was pretty much everybody except Kuuma.  What started me digging around was back when I was researching furnaces for myself and noticed how much lower the advertised BTU output was for the Kuuma compared to pretty much everybody else.  It was about half the rated output of other furnaces.  The VF100 was originally tested for some tax credit thing back in 2012 (?).  I saw and read the results of that test, this is where I saw the actual heat output.  That's when I started to question what I was seeing from everybody else as I could not find any certified testing data, just marketing data, which I did not believe or trust.
> 
> Believe nothing, question everything.





JRHAWK9 said:


> could be, but that's quite a big drop in performance on the same furnace without any known large scale changes!  After all we are talking mostly about average and max BTU ratings which were pretty much cut in half.     That kind of performance decrease would have not gone unnoticed.  I'll put my money on fuzzy/deceiving marketing and once they tested to a standard it was "corrected".
> 
> It wasn't just SBI, seems it was pretty much everybody except Kuuma.  What started me digging around was back when I was researching furnaces for myself and noticed how much lower the advertised BTU output was for the Kuuma compared to pretty much everybody else.  It was about half the rated output of other furnaces.  The VF100 was originally tested for some tax credit thing back in 2012 (?).  I saw and read the results of that test, this is where I saw the actual heat output.  That's when I started to question what I was seeing from everybody else as I could not find any certified testing data, just marketing data, which I did not believe or trust.
> 
> Believe nothing, question everything.




Yep no such thing as magic btu. Like all of us already know the wood you load with is a big part of output, can't make heat out of nothing (water).

If you aren't making smoke (although there are invisible particulates which accumulate to a negligible amount of btus) only place to loose heat is up your flue. That being said if your flue temp is low, and the chimney is clean your getting close to as much heat possible and no exaggerated numbers can tell you any different.

Also these manufacturers telling us average output of what? The main 3 hours of burn time, or WOT chew through the wood and coals in 4 hour average throwing half the btu up the chimney? Too much room for interpretation, that's why customers have to do there research and not rely on pointless claimed numbers.

I'd be more interested in efficiency, knowing what I'm getting for each pound of wood I load.


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Dec 29, 2018)

Case1030 said:


> Also these manufacturers telling us average output of what? The main 3 hours of burn time, or WOT chew through the wood and coals in 4 hour average throwing half the btu up the chimney? Too much room for interpretation, that's why customers have to do there research and not rely on pointless claimed numbers.



that's why they have the standardized test, so everybody is now required to test the same way  




Case1030 said:


> I'd be more interested in efficiency, knowing what I'm getting for each pound of wood I load.



I agree, there are also a handful of different efficiency ratings too.....combustion, LHV, HHV, stack and delivered are the ones I'm aware of.  There are probably more.


----------



## STIHLY DAN (Jan 9, 2019)

Hmmm, did you purchase yet?


----------



## Gbawol42 (Jan 10, 2019)

Not yet, will probably be a febuary/March purchase. Want my tax money first


----------



## Gbawol42 (Feb 4, 2019)

So small update, the kuuma just isn't in this year's budget, hours are getting cut back a little at work. So called my local Menards to ask about the tundra and Heatpro since they are special order I wanted some info.  Tundra is on the website for $1800, long story short they said they would get back to me on the Heatpro since it wasn't on thier website. Couple days later they called me and said they could get me a Heatpro for $2100. I was surprised at the price.  This might be the direction I go.

This was a week ago, since then the Heatpro is now on the website for $2300 (with thier 11% off), don't know if they will honor the phone price or not but getting the bigger firebox for a longer burn is what I am leaning toward.

This polar vortex we just had is also making me learn hard for the Heatpro.


----------



## Case1030 (Feb 4, 2019)

Gbawol42 said:


> So small update, the kuuma just isn't in this year's budget, hours are getting cut back a little at work. So called my local Menards to ask about the tundra and Heatpro since they are special order I wanted some info.  Tundra is on the website for $1800, long story short they said they would get back to me on the Heatpro since it wasn't on thier website. Couple days later they called me and said they could get me a Heatpro for $2100. I was surprised at the price.  This might be the direction I go.
> 
> This was a week ago, since then the Heatpro is now on the website for $2300 (with thier 11% off), don't know if they will honor the phone price or not but getting the bigger firebox for a longer burn is what I am leaning toward.
> 
> This polar vortex we just had is also making me learn hard for the Heatpro.



If they honor the $2100 price point I'd go with the heatpro... if not the Tundra is still a good option to save yourself $500.

The polar vortex really didn't last that long... so what if a guy has to use a gallon or 2 of LP per year in extream weather conditions.


----------



## Gbawol42 (Feb 4, 2019)

Case1030 said:


> If they honor the $2100 price point I'd go with the heatpro... if not the Tundra is still a good option to save yourself $500.
> 
> The polar vortex really didn't last that long... so what if a guy has to use a gallon or 2 of LP per year in extream weather conditions.



So true, also leaning for the bigger firebox to get longer burns while I am at work for 10 hours. Honestly I believe the tundra will heat the house, hell I heat it now with a pellet stove made for 1800 square feet, and it almost kept up last week except for the windy days.  I just don't want the house to cool down before I get home from work.


----------



## brenndatomu (Feb 4, 2019)

It honestly sounds like the Tundra would be a better fit for your house...like @Case1030  said, that cold spell we just had was "1 in 25 year" temps...and I'd rather "right size" a wood furnace for my house than to have one that can "keep up with any winter storm ever"...reason being, if the Heatpro proves too big, then you will have to shut down more often in the spring and fall...which means more cold starts (PITA) which means a dirtier chimney too...the spring/fall (shoulder season) comes _every year_, and lasts _much longer_ than any cold spell ever will...I would guestimate that shoulder season burning is 50% of my wood usage on average.
They always say that you can build a small fire in a big stove, but you cant build a big fire in a small stove...which is true, to some degree...but, building real small fires in these newer fire boxes doesn't work out real well...they don't get up to proper operating temp, so the heat output is real low, and they burn dirty that way too...just doesn't work out as well as you would think.

And the Tundra should give you 10 hour burns...it did for me...sometimes 12 hrs if it was a lil warmer day.
In the spring and fall warmer temps, I often loaded at 6 am and 6 pm. (occasionally once per day)
Once "winter" actually hit, I loaded at 6 am, 4 pm, and again at 11 pm.
And any time you load you vary the wood type and size of the load for the expected heat demand in the next xx hours...it takes a bit, but you will learn your house. Once you get good at it you can often hold the house temp swings to 2-3*


----------



## Case1030 (Feb 4, 2019)

Kinda funny how it works out, I'm always a little wary about recommending stove size... best way to figure it out is based off your pellet useage. 

My house is partially hard to heat, just because the climate I live in. The polar vortex was cold but that's our normal winter to get extreamly cold weather for week after week. It's still -20 f tonight not much of a warm up. January and February always seem to pack a punch with a hook.

My furnace is a little oversized with consideration to our climate. I like the thought of being able to push the house up to 80f regardless of outside tempurature to take the chill off.

My dad thought the heatpac (2.4cf box) might be good enough for this house... I would have been seriously disappointed to say the least. 

With that being said I have trouble keeping a fire going any warmer than 32f without cooking myself out of the house... although that's fine with me because I can just switch to my small insert. You just need to find the happy medium like benu mentioned.


----------



## Gbawol42 (Feb 4, 2019)

brenndatomu said:


> It honestly sounds like the Tundra would be a better fit for your house...like @Case1030  said, that cold spell we just had was "1 in 25 year" temps...and I'd rather "right size" a wood furnace for my house than to have one that can "keep up with any winter storm ever"...reason being, if the Heatpro proves too big, then you will have to shut down more often in the spring and fall...which means more cold starts (PITA) which means a dirtier chimney too...the spring/fall (shoulder season) comes _every year_, and lasts _much longer_ than any cold spell ever will...I would guestimate that shoulder season burning is 50% of my wood usage on average.
> They always say that you can build a small fire in a big stove, but you cant build a big fire in a small stove...which is true, to some degree...but, building real small fires in these newer fire boxes doesn't work out real well...they don't get up to proper operating temp, so the heat output is real low, and they burn dirty that way too...just doesn't work out as well as you would think.
> 
> And the Tundra should give you 10 hour burns...it did for me...sometimes 12 hrs if it was a lil warmer day.
> ...



Your reload times would be almost the same as mine, that does make me feel a lot better.  Of course saving more money would be a huge plus. I didn't think about burning more wood than I needed in the shoulder seasons


Case1030 said:


> Kinda funny how it works out, I'm always a little wary about recommending stove size... best way to figure it out is based off your pellet useage.
> 
> My house is partially hard to heat, just because the climate I live in. The polar vortex was cold but that's our normal winter to get extreamly cold weather for week after week. It's still -20 f tonight not much of a warm up. January and February always seem to pack a punch with a hook.
> 
> ...



I burn around 6-7 tons of pellets, but the house is nowhere near as warm as I would like it when it is colder out (sub 25 degrees).  That's around 65-70 main floor (where the stove is) , 60 upstairs, and no heat in the basement. Evening out the heat throughout the house is the main reason for switching to a wood furnace.  Also I would like to actually use my basement in the winter, it hovers around 40-45 degrees right now (36 in the vortex).  Makes for a very cold floor for the main level.

Anything above 25 and it stays very warm, unless it's really windy, so I believe I have good insulation. Windows need some addressing, project for the coming summer.


----------



## Case1030 (Feb 5, 2019)

Gbawol42 said:


> Your reload times would be almost the same as mine, that does make me feel a lot better.  Of course saving more money would be a huge plus. I didn't think about burning more wood than I needed in the shoulder seasons
> 
> 
> I burn around 6-7 tons of pellets, but the house is nowhere near as warm as I would like it when it is colder out (sub 25 degrees).  That's around 65-70 main floor (where the stove is) , 60 upstairs, and no heat in the basement. Evening out the heat throughout the house is the main reason for switching to a wood furnace.  Also I would like to actually use my basement in the winter, it hovers around 40-45 degrees right now (36 in the vortex).  Makes for a very cold floor for the main level.
> ...



So by my understanding your using around 2-2.5x40lb bags per day in cold weather?


----------



## Gbawol42 (Feb 5, 2019)

Case1030 said:


> So by my understanding your using around 2-2.5x40lb bags per day in cold weather?



Yes that would be accurate


----------



## Boilers (Feb 5, 2019)

Gbawol42 said:


> So true, also leaning for the bigger firebox to get longer burns while I am at work for 10 hours. Honestly I believe the tundra will heat the house, hell I heat it now with a pellet stove made for 1800 square feet, and it almost kept up last week except for the windy days.  I just don't want the house to cool down before I get home from work.



Tundra T2 owner here. 9-10 hour burns are pretty easy. That is...you will still have plenty of hot coals, which will kick on the blower every so often, but heat output at that point is pretty minimal. One thing thats very important is your ducting. The Tundra will keep your basement pretty warm from radiant heat alone (no ducts needed). Read the directions in the manual regarding the ducts and think about how to get the heat to your house within those guidelines. I missed the boat on this when I installed mine and I've been fighting it ever since!


----------



## brenndatomu (Feb 5, 2019)

Boilers said:


> Tundra T2 owner here. 9-10 hour burns are pretty easy. That is...you will still have plenty of hot coals, which will kick on the blower every so often, but heat output at that point is pretty minimal.


A speed control for your blower helps with this...a lot. By the time the blower shuts off, you can stick your hand inside the firebox (depending on how you adjust things)


----------



## Case1030 (Feb 5, 2019)

Gbawol42 said:


> Yes that would be accurate



Well if you burn 6-7 tons of pellets. Correct me if I'm wrong but that's about equivalent to about 7 cords of medium density wood by my understanding. Now I'm kinda leaning towards the heatpro. Especially if you want to keep your house warmer than the pellet stove and come home to a warm house after 10-12 hours in cold weather.

What pellet stove model are you currently using?


----------



## Gbawol42 (Feb 5, 2019)

Case1030 said:


> Well if you burn 6-7 tons of pellets. Correct me if I'm wrong but that's about equivalent to about 7 cords of medium density wood by my understanding. Now I'm kinda leaning towards the heatpro. Especially if you want to keep your house warmer than the pellet stove and come home to a warm house after 10-12 hours in cold weather.
> 
> What pellet stove model are you currently using?



It's an older stove, came with the house when I moved in. An Enviro EF-3.


----------



## Gbawol42 (Feb 5, 2019)

Case1030 said:


> Well if you burn 6-7 tons of pellets. Correct me if I'm wrong but that's about equivalent to about 7 cords of medium density wood by my understanding. Now I'm kinda leaning towards the heatpro. Especially if you want to keep your house warmer than the pellet stove and come home to a warm house after 10-12 hours in cold weather.
> 
> What pellet stove model are you currently using?



Also I have only been in the home for 2 years, last year I burned the pellet stove only during the day and let the lp furnace do the work at night. This kept the upstairs warmer at night. I went through 4 tons of pellets and probably 600 gallons of propane.  Water is the only other thing heated with propane.  However I went to Florida for 6 weeks (last week of January to first week of March) so the house was just set to 50 and obviously only using propane. 

When I bough the home I asked the previous owners what they burned, they didn't use the pellet stove and burned around 1000-1200 gallons for the year of propane.  Maybe that number would give you a better idea? 

So I am sitting with either a $2500 propane bill, $1200-$1400 wood pellets (plus still some supplementary propane), or switch to wood. 

I am not set on what I am purchasing so if you have a different idea let em fly.  All I know is I have 10 cord of CSS wood outside currently and just need to decide on how to burn it.


----------



## Case1030 (Feb 5, 2019)

91600 btu per gallon x 1100 gallons of lp= 100,760,000 × 0.90% efficiency~= 90,684,000 btu delivered per year. 

Not sure what your water tank uses for LP... but that would need to be subtracted from the beginning fuel starting btu.


----------



## brenndatomu (Feb 5, 2019)

Gbawol42 said:


> When I bough the home I asked the previous owners what they burned, they didn't use the pellet stove and burned around 1000-1200 gallons for the year of propane. Maybe that number would give you a better idea?


Well, propain has 91,500 BTUs per gallon, fuel oil has about 140,000. 
My place, that the Tundra heated fairly well (to 72-73*)  previously took on average 700 gallons of fuel oil to keep the place 65* at night, 68* in the daytime...and that's with an old coal-converted-to-oil furnace (but it was a pretty good conversion) so I'd guess 60-70% efficiency?
So 700 x 140,000 x .65 = 63,700,000 BTU per year.

Yours would be 1100 x 91,000 x (whatever the efficiency rating of your furnace is...80%? 95%?)
1100 x 91,000 x .80 = 80,080,000 BTUs
1100 x 91,000 x .95 = 95,095,000 BTUs
So yeah, you might have a bit more heat load than we do...
Feel free to check my math...its late...I'm tired...


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Feb 6, 2019)

Gbawol42 said:


> When I bough the home I asked the previous owners what they burned, they didn't use the pellet stove and burned around 1000-1200 gallons for the year of propane.  Maybe that number would give you a better idea?



You are approaching what we used to use per year in LP.  We are not quite as cold though, with you being in the UP.



Gbawol42 said:


> So I am sitting with either a $2500 propane bill, $1200-$1400 wood pellets (plus still some supplementary propane), or switch to wood.



You must have expensive LP and buy cheap pellets.  LP by us is $1.45/gal and my buddy buys very good pellets (https://pellethead.com/product/uncle-jeds-cold-remedy-douglas-fir-bear-mountain/) for $355 per ton delivered.



brenndatomu said:


> So yeah, you might have a bit more heat load than we do...



I would think so, as you guys really don't see very cold temps on a consistent basis.


----------



## Gbawol42 (Feb 6, 2019)

JRHAWK9 said:


> You are approaching what we used to use per year in LP.  We are not quite as cold though, with you being in the UP.
> 
> 
> 
> You must have expensive LP and buy cheap pellets.  LP by us is $1.45/gal and my buddy buys very good pellets (https://pellethead.com/product/uncle-jeds-cold-remedy-douglas-fir-bear-mountain/) for $355 per ton delivered.



Propane was 1.85 this season with a prebuy, which I didn't do since I burned the pellet stove at night this year.  I buy a hardwood pellet (pro pellet) that is 227/ton.  I have also tried a softwood pellet that sells for 205/ton.  The hardwood seems better quality, less ash and what not. Tons of hardwood VS softwood, to be honest I can't tell the difference. 

My pellet usage might less, kinda estimating since this is my first full winter here with no vacation. As of now I am up to 3 ton burned and around 15% burned of propane of my 500 gal tank. I might get away with only 5 ton burned, future weather will tell.


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Feb 6, 2019)

Gbawol42 said:


> Propane was 1.85 this season with a prebuy, which I didn't do since I burned the pellet stove at night this year.  I buy a hardwood pellet (pro pellet) that is 227/ton.  I have also tried a softwood pellet that sells for 205/ton.  The hardwood seems better quality, less ash and what not. Tons of hardwood VS softwood, to be honest I can't tell the difference.



My buddy is very anal when it comes to burning clean.  He's tried all sorts of different ones and has settled on pretty much the most expensive pellet one can buy.  I guess it burns really clean and he also uses less of them compared to the cheaper ones.  He knows it would cost him less just to burn LP, but he refuses to use LP.

He's heating 1,428 sq ft. of living space and 1,100 sq ft. of garage space.  He has two pellet stoves.  He lives a bit closer to you in Crivitz, WI.  Last year, by the end of February, he burned through about 3 tons.  He has a newly constructed house which is very tight and well insulated.


----------



## Gbawol42 (Feb 6, 2019)

JRHAWK9 said:


> My buddy is very anal when it comes to burning clean.  He's tried all sorts of different ones and has settled on pretty much the most expensive pellet one can buy.  I guess it burns really clean and he also uses less of them compared to the cheaper ones.  He knows it would cost him less just to burn LP, but he refuses to use LP.
> 
> He's heating 1,428 sq ft. of living space and 1,100 sq ft. of garage space.  He has two pellet stoves.  He lives a bit closer to you in Crivitz, WI.  Last year, by the end of February, he burned through about 3 tons.  He has a newly constructed house which is very tight and well insulated.



That would make since, the less your cleaning the less junk is in the pellet, thus more btus availible. From the reviews I have heard they all say to stay away from the big box stores and youll be fine. To be honest the most I have never seen a ton of pellets around here is 300 a ton. I've done quite a bit of math and if it ever came close to burning lp cheaper I would do it in a heartbeat haha.  My breakeven would be propane down to 1.20 or the pellet going up to 300 a ton at current lp prices.

I'm not really saving much burning the pellet stove, my calculations are around 500-700 a winter over propane.

I could see myself having a setup like yours when I am all said and done, I love keeping track of numbers and adjusting things to get the most efficiency out of my appliance.  I literally have a half full notepad of this furnace purchase, return on investment time, how much I would save, things I have found on this forum, etc.  My wife thinks I'm crazy sometimes


----------



## woodey (Feb 6, 2019)

Gbawol42 said:


> I could see myself having a setup like yours when I am all said and done,


You may want to do it sooner than later as JRHAWK9  might file for a patent on his after market modifications.


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Feb 6, 2019)

Gbawol42 said:


> To be honest the most I have never seen a ton of pellets around here is 300 a ton.



I believe his price included shipping for 6 or 7 tons in total.



Gbawol42 said:


> My wife thinks I'm crazy sometimes



Same here, except include pretty much her whole family.    Don't give two sheits though, that's their issue.  



woodey said:


> You may want to do it sooner than later as JRHAWK9  might file for a patent on his after market modifications.



  Although they may not all work for everyone.


----------



## Gbawol42 (Feb 6, 2019)

brenndatomu said:


> Yours would be 1100 x 91,000 x (whatever the efficiency rating of your furnace is...80%? 95%?)
> 1100 x 91,000 x .80 = 80,080,000 BTUs
> 1100 x 91,000 x .95 = 95,095,000 BTUs
> So yeah, you might have a bit more heat load than we do...
> Feel free to check my math...its late...I'm tired...



Did some recon on my furnace, it's a tempstar dc90, made in 1999.  Says the efficiency is 90%.

So for the sake of auguement lets say the water heater used 200 gal for the year:

800 x 91000 x 90% = 65,520,000 btu needed. 
1000 x 91000 x 90% = 81,900,000 btu needed. 

So I am probably between those numbers.


----------



## brenndatomu (Feb 6, 2019)

Gbawol42 said:


> Did some recon on my furnace, it's a tempstar dc90, made in 1999.  Says the efficiency is 90%.
> 
> So for the sake of auguement lets say the water heater used 200 gal for the year:
> 
> ...


So what I get from this is, on a warmer year you have a similiar heat load to us, and the Tundra would for sure do a fine job most of the time. On a colder year, you may have to supplement the Tundra with 200 gallons of propain during the colder times...


----------



## Case1030 (Feb 6, 2019)

In an ideal world you could buy the heatpro get good burn times in cold weather, also quicker recovery times after being away from the house.

In warmer weather when you need less of a heatlload that would be a PITA to fire up the heatpro furnace for short burns just use the pellet stove.

Or buy the tundra and use the pellet stove (in cold weather) to substitute extra heat to achieve your longer burn times if needed.

Ether way you would be able to heat on 90% cord wood while making life simple.


----------



## Gbawol42 (Feb 6, 2019)

brenndatomu said:


> So what I get from this is, on a warmer year you have a similiar heat load to us, and the Tundra would for sure do a fine job most of the time. On a colder year, you may have to supplement the Tundra with 200 gallons of propain during the colder times...



I like the way you are putting it, making a lot of sense. 

I just spent yesterday and this morning reading the whole tundra thread on this forum, wow tons of info there. I wish there were more people posting that actually had the t2, but maybe, like you have said before, only the people that are having issues are posting. No news is good news? Have you heard if they are still having any of the issues with the t2 that you guys had with the t1?


----------



## Case1030 (Feb 6, 2019)

Gbawol42 said:


> I like the way you are putting it, making a lot of sense.
> 
> I just spent yesterday and this morning reading the whole tundra thread on this forum, wow tons of info there. I wish there were more people posting that actually had the t2, but maybe, like you have said before, only the people that are having issues are posting. No news is good news? Have you heard if they are still having any of the issues with the t2 that you guys had with the t1?



Their are 3 guys I know who are in the general area around me that own drolet furnaces. Two of them own heatpacs and the other guy owns a heatpro, one year heating for them and no complaints with ether one. None of them are using temp controllers either which prolonged/ saved the old t1s from cracking.

I own the tundra 2 but haven't owned it long enough to really know... What I can say is all the newer drolet lineup of furnace owners have no complaints. Essentially the only difference I could find were the firebox size/ ash box size/ heatexchanger size. Same design from what I could tell just upsized.

If you dont have the cash for a Kuuma then this lineup is the next in line. Unless you wanted to go indoor boiler route then you will have more options.


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Feb 7, 2019)

Gbawol42 said:


> That would make since, the less your cleaning the less junk is in the pellet, thus more btus availible. From the reviews I have heard they all say to stay away from the big box stores and youll be fine. To be honest the most I have never seen a ton of pellets around here is 300 a ton. I've done quite a bit of math and if it ever came close to burning lp cheaper I would do it in a heartbeat haha.  My breakeven would be propane down to 1.20 or the pellet going up to 300 a ton at current lp prices.
> 
> I'm not really saving much burning the pellet stove, my calculations are around 500-700 a winter over propane.
> 
> I could see myself having a setup like yours when I am all said and done, I love keeping track of numbers and adjusting things to get the most efficiency out of my appliance.  I literally have a half full notepad of this furnace purchase, return on investment time, how much I would save, things I have found on this forum, etc.  My wife thinks I'm crazy sometimes




Got a reply from my buddy.

-THESE- are what I burn.  I get six tons for $316/ton, but if you add in my delivery charge of $155, then I get them for $341.83/ton, which comes out to $8.55/bag.  That is almost double what I can get Marth hardwood pellets for($192/ton delivered) but I literally have to clean my stoves twice all winter long burning three tons in each stove(just vacuum and empty ash bin).  When I burned Marth, I would have to clean the stove every three to four weeks.  I guess I pay to be lazy. J

-HERE- is what he is probably burning.  I could buy them from Earth Energy Systems for $189/ton, but I would probably have to spend the extra $155 on delivery as I have a deal worked out with them that if I buy all six tons of their best pellets from them that they only charge me for three tons being delivered($55/ton delivery).  So I would end up paying $330 for delivery, which would make it $244/ton and $6.10 per bag.

I don’t really know how efficient my stove is.  I know there is a big fluxuation in different stoves.  You can get stoves pretty cheap from Menards but I know you burn a crap-ton more pellets with them.  Both of my stoves are the Harman P43.


----------



## Gbawol42 (Feb 7, 2019)

JRHAWK9 said:


> Got a reply from my buddy.
> 
> -THESE- are what I burn.  I get six tons for $316/ton, but if you add in my delivery charge of $155, then I get them for $341.83/ton, which comes out to $8.55/bag.  That is almost double what I can get Marth hardwood pellets for($192/ton delivered) but I literally have to clean my stoves twice all winter long burning three tons in each stove(just vacuum and empty ash bin).  When I burned Marth, I would have to clean the stove every three to four weeks.  I guess I pay to be lazy. J
> 
> ...



To be honest the the differences in pellet quality, even year to year, and the fact they are creeping up in price is also what is making me go to burning wood instead


----------



## brenndatomu (Feb 7, 2019)

I wasn't thinking about you having the pellet stove too...so between the Tundra, the pellet stove, and the propain furnace, you got it covered!


----------



## Mrpelletburner (Feb 7, 2019)

Gbawol42 said:


> To be honest the the differences in pellet quality, even year to year



That is the truth.. one year the pellets are perfect and the next all over the place with clumps.

I have the Hartman Accenture 52i insert.


----------



## Gbawol42 (Feb 7, 2019)

Mrpelletburner said:


> That is the truth.. one year the pellets are perfect and the next all over the place with clumps.
> 
> I have the Hartman Accenture 52i insert.



I am currently have a clumping issue with a pellet brand that burned awesome last year.  Pretty much cleaning burn pot every 2 days.  Guess it all depends on where the company gets the wood that they compress.  I heard the ones that get sawdust from hardwood furniture makers are usually the best.


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Feb 7, 2019)

Gbawol42 said:


> To be honest the the differences in pellet quality, even year to year, and the fact they are creeping up in price is also what is making me go to burning wood instead



Prices of wood & pellets seem to go as fossil fuel prices go.  Makes me glad I don't have to pay for wood.  I'm actually waiting for LP prices to go sky high again so I can sell some of my wood for a premium as well.    Doesn't make any sense to sell when LP prices are low. 

He's not had any pellet issues.  Only issues he's had in the past were the amount of ash and how often he had to clean his burners when using the cheaper pellets.  Seems that's been solved for a few winters now that he switched to the better pellets.  He's definitely paying for that luxury though.  He also has newer pellet stoves too.



Gbawol42 said:


> Pretty much cleaning burn pot every 2 days.



jeez, he cleans his twice a YEAR.  He was complaining about having to clean it every few weeks before switching to the pricey pellets.  He wouldn't put up with having to clean it every couple days.


----------



## Case1030 (Feb 7, 2019)

Today was the hardest I accidentally ran my tundra.

Went outside to shovel snow and lost track of time.

Was away from home for 16 hours prior so the house was only 58-60f.

The plenum reached up to 210f. Wasn't my intention... forgot the switch was left on the open position. (No different than a thermostat calling for never ending heat) Got flue temps upto 850f internal 1 hour into burn. 

I wonder what is the max plenum temp is on these before it kicks the damper closed?

Furnace originally never saw flue temps above 600f. So I guess rest of the paint is cured now lol. House is now a steamy 85f. 

Ouside temp of -12f


----------



## brenndatomu (Feb 7, 2019)

Case1030 said:


> Today was the hardest I accidentally ran my tundra.
> 
> Went outside to shovel snow and lost track of time.
> 
> ...


Why did the temp controller not override "the call for heat?" It should have...


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Feb 7, 2019)

Case1030 said:


> Today was the hardest I accidentally ran my tundra.
> 
> Went outside to shovel snow and lost track of time.
> 
> ...


----------



## Mrpelletburner (Feb 7, 2019)

Case1030 said:


> Today was the hardest I accidentally ran my tundra.
> 
> Went outside to shovel snow and lost track of time.
> 
> ...



First... please keep the -12f up in your area, but do please send the snow this way.

600-800 are common flue temps that I see with the FC1500. Might be why every inch of the firebox is now warped. There is not one straight piece of steel anywhere on this unit. Even the holes for the primary air are bloated outwards and this is with the BD set to -0.06” wc.


----------



## JRHAWK9 (Feb 7, 2019)

Mrpelletburner said:


> First... please keep the -12f up in your area, but do please send the snow this way.



It's even going to be -10° tonight and -16° Friday night "down" here.  We do need more snow though.  I welcome whatever weather that bi-polar b1tch wants to send us, as long as temps stay below 30° or so.  40°+ temps in January and February are just plain wrong.  

Although it was low 20's this morning and it was RAINING on my way in to work.  It wasn't freezing rain, it was rain, it would then freeze once it hit whatever surface it landed on forming a nice sheet of ice.  WTF.     Looks like it's finally starting to snow now.


----------



## brenndatomu (Feb 7, 2019)

Mrpelletburner said:


> Even the holes for the primary air are bloated outwards and this is with the BD set to -0.06” wc.


I'm sayin that damage was done when the BD was not being used...or set higher than -0.06"


----------



## Boilers (Feb 7, 2019)

brenndatomu said:


> Why did the temp controller not override "the call for heat?" It should have...



Sounds like he left the manual switch set to "open"


----------



## brenndatomu (Feb 7, 2019)

Boilers said:


> Sounds like he left the manual switch set to "open"


Yes, but the temp controller should have overridden it...unless it is not wired that way...I suppose that's a possibility. I had mine set up so it just cut the power to the damper motor...didn't matter where the call for heat was coming from. Did it that way for the "idiot proof" factor...


----------



## Case1030 (Feb 7, 2019)

brenndatomu said:


> Why did the temp controller not override "the call for heat?" It should have...



I used the manual switch. Didnt use the timer or temp controller.


----------



## Case1030 (Feb 7, 2019)

Mrpelletburner said:


> First... please keep the -12f up in your area, but do please send the snow this way.
> 
> 600-800 are common flue temps that I see with the FC1500. Might be why every inch of the firebox is now warped. There is not one straight piece of steel anywhere on this unit. Even the holes for the primary air are bloated outwards and this is with the BD set to -0.06” wc.
> 
> View attachment 240399



We could still use another foot of powder.


----------



## Boilers (Feb 7, 2019)

brenndatomu said:


> Yes, but the temp controller should have overridden it...unless it is not wired that way...I suppose that's a possibility. I had mine set up so it just cut the power to the damper motor...didn't matter where the call for heat was coming from. Did it that way for the "idiot proof" factor...



If he wired his like I did, we just wired a 24vDC signal into the spot for the thermostat. Since the thermostat is really just a relay to tell the damper when to open and provide more heat. This way the manual switch will still override the control system.


----------



## Case1030 (Feb 7, 2019)

brenndatomu said:


> Yes, but the temp controller should have overridden it...unless it is not wired that way...I suppose that's a possibility. I had mine set up so it just cut the power to the damper motor...didn't matter where the call for heat was coming from. Did it that way for the "idiot proof" factor...



I'm going to use an ssr to make 3rd alarm to kill the damper motor. 1st for normal burn timer startup (300f on 420f off), 2nd for decoaling in cold weather (rarely have to use), 3rd for flue limiter thinking 600f off 400f on should get heat in the house faster.


----------



## Mojappa (Feb 7, 2019)

Case1030 said:


> Today was the hardest I accidentally ran my tundra.
> 
> Went outside to shovel snow and lost track of time.
> 
> ...


I bounced my plenum off a hair over 200° last week about 15min after loading it, came back down pretty quickly though. Not sure if the wood was extra dry or if I left too many coals in there (iirc that might have been a time I shoveled some coals out to be able to reload on time). At least the basement was warm after that. Lol


----------



## Case1030 (Feb 7, 2019)

Mojappa said:


> I bounced my plenum off a hair over 200° last week about 15min after loading it, came back down pretty quickly though. Not sure if the wood was extra dry or if I left too many coals in there (iirc that might have been a time I shoveled some coals out to be able to reload on time). At least the basement was warm after that. Lol



When I let the temp controller do its job loading on a large bed of coals just means the damper doesn't open and close as much... quicker to get good secondarys going. After that damper stays closed until next reload. In cold weather I'll have the damper reopen at 240f internal flue to burn off the coals.


----------



## Gbawol42 (Feb 12, 2019)

I know these furnaces are able to run with no power but do any of you guys run a battery backup on your furnaces?

I have a generator, but it's not automatic so it wouldn't help if I'm at work.  Just wondering if I should be looking into a battery backup at all?


----------



## 3fordasho (Feb 12, 2019)

Gbawol42 said:


> I know these furnaces are able to run with no power but do any of you guys run a battery backup on your furnaces?
> 
> I have a generator, but it's not automatic so it wouldn't help if I'm at work.  Just wondering if I should be looking into a battery backup at all?



Yes.  I'm using a 1000w pure sine inverter with built in charger and transfer switch, a group 27 lead acid deep cycle marine battery will run the furnace for over 6 hours.  Should be plenty of time for either the power to come back on or the fire to die down enough that an overheat situation will not occur.  The operation is completely automatic, when grid power fails the inverter switches over to battery power in milliseconds.  When power is restored it goes back to grid power and charges the battery.


----------



## brenndatomu (Feb 12, 2019)

Gbawol42 said:


> I know these furnaces are able to run with no power but do any of you guys run a battery backup on your furnaces?
> 
> I have a generator, but it's not automatic so it wouldn't help if I'm at work.  Just wondering if I should be looking into a battery backup at all?


You would need a pretty decent sized UPS to run the blower for long.
A better plan IMO would be to install the ductwork with the clearances and the rise on your runs to be able to dissipate heat by gravity. 
Or you could install an emergency heat dump door on the plenum that has a fusible link on it, it will melt at a given temp allowing the door to fall open and dump the heat to the basement. I have a combination of both gravity heating, and once I get things set up how I want them permanently, I will have a heat dump door that will be part of the install...its actually there now, but not really gonna help much where it is now...


----------



## Gbawol42 (Sep 22, 2019)

Going to bring my post back from the dead. 

Went with a heatmax for my final choice, still getting it hooked up for this season.  Should be done here in the next 2 weeks.  

Really liking the idea of the temp controller, could someone point out where in the forum there is more info on this, or PM if you have the time.  Not an electriction by any means so looking at how to hook it up as well.

Any help is appreciated 

Thanks


----------



## brenndatomu (Sep 22, 2019)

Temp controller info in the big Tundra thread...link to it here. But this was all on the TI...T2 (Heatmax is same) is computer controlled, so things may be a bit different...still very doable though in my opinion. @Case1030  may be a source of info here too.




__





						Tundra/Heatmax Information Guide
					

The purpose of this post is to help users quickly find information about the Drolet Tundra/Heatmax, for example operation of the furnace, typical temperatures, cracking problems, control improvements, and helpful hints.  Even if you don’t own a Tundra/Heatmax, you may find helpful general...




					www.hearth.com


----------



## Gbawol42 (Oct 12, 2019)

This thread has gone from me not even knowing what to buy, to finally doing my first burn in my new furnace.

Went with the drolet heatmax 2.  So far so good, burning nice and hot, long burn times.  However it's only just 40 degrees outside so we will see what happens when it actually gets colder.

All I have left to do is install the temp controller that I just got in the mail.  Might also do the 30 minute timer that has been mentioned to more automate the process.  Still trying to dial in the draft as well, only getting about .01, could be because it's not that cold out yet?

Thanks for all the help over the last 2 years everyone, it was greatly appreciated!

Also that chimney is 36 feet, I'm sure some of you were going to ask.


----------



## brenndatomu (Oct 12, 2019)

Congrats!
So you only have -0.01" draft, or -0.1"?
0.01  is pretty low...even at 40*, especially with a tall chimney. I would be surprised you could even get the furnace to burn well with 0.01
-0.1" would be more expected with a tall chimney...and then they can be hard to control when the weather gets real cold


----------



## Gbawol42 (Oct 12, 2019)

brenndatomu said:


> Congrats!
> So you only have -0.01" draft, or -0.1"?
> 0.01  is pretty low...even at 40*, especially with a tall chimney. I would be surprised you could even get the furnace to burn well with 0.01
> -0.1" would be more expected with a tall chimney...and then they can be hard to control when the weather gets real cold



Mistype, 0.1 is what it was supposed to be.  That was this morning when it was a little cooler.  I'm actually sitting at .05 right now.

Only been burning 3-4 splits at a time as I didn't want to overheat the house.  Been sitting between 68 and 70 degrees in the home, and like I said it was 37 this morning and snow/rain.  Now it's around 45 degrees outside.  Yay northern michigan! Haha


----------



## brenndatomu (Oct 12, 2019)

The -0.06" you have  in the pic there is max recommended draft...as I'm sure you know. (they still call for -0.04" to -0.06" I would guess?) So -0.10" is way too high and will cause overheating of the furnace. Do you have a barometric damper installed? With a 35' tall chimney 1 might not be enough...I've heard of people that had to install 2! Personally I think I would just install a manual damper downstream of the baro...when it gets real cold and windy and the baro can't keep up, then close the manual damper enough that the baro can do its job without being wide open all the time. Just have to remember to open the manual damper before reloading...makes for smoke in the house if you don't 
I had a manual damper in addition to the baro before...changed my stove pipe setup last year and didn't put it back in because I hardly used it...guess what happened last winter...real cold spell came along and I needed it! Its going back in right now...got some purty SS stove pipe I'm installing this weekend


----------



## Gbawol42 (Oct 12, 2019)

brenndatomu said:


> The -0.06" you have  in the pic there is max recommended draft...as I'm sure you know. (they still call for -0.04" to -0.06" I would guess?) So -0.10" is way too high and will cause overheating of the furnace. Do you have a barometric damper installed? With a 35' tall chimney 1 might not be enough...I've heard of people that had to install 2! Personally I think I would just install a manual damper downstream of the baro...when it gets real cold and windy and the baro can't keep up, then close the manual damper enough that the baro can do its job without being wide open all the time. Just have to remember to open the manual damper before reloading...makes for smoke in the house if you don't
> I had a manual damper in addition to the baro before...changed my stove pipe setup last year and didn't put it back in because I hardly used it...guess what happened last winter...real cold spell came along and I needed it! Its going back in right now...got some purty SS stove pipe I'm installing this weekend



Been doing to much lately I guess, I had .2 stuck in my head as i was doing my heating ducts a little bit ago.  So  my draft is actually doing well, for now.  I haven't really dialed in the baro yet so I suppose time to mess with that.  Hopefully I don't have the need for 2, wouldn't be difficult to install if it was needed.

I was only seeing the .1 when the wind would gust really hard, came back when the wind stopped.  Had quite the wind storm last night and this morning.


----------



## brenndatomu (Oct 12, 2019)

If you have a Fields baro then you should be able to set it by the numbers behind the adjustment knob...that will get it close anyways...use your manometer to confirm.

Seeing .1 during wind gusts with a 35' chimney is not surprising. You don't want the draft to stay that high very long though...


----------



## Mrpelletburner (Oct 12, 2019)

Nice setup [emoji106]


----------



## Gbawol42 (Oct 14, 2019)

Is the raking the coals to the front for reloading something that should be applied to all furnace reloading? Or is it just a Kumma thing?  Just curious


----------



## 3fordasho (Oct 14, 2019)

Gbawol42 said:


> Is the raking the coals to the front for reloading something that should be applied to all furnace reloading? Or is it just a Kumma thing?  Just curious


Yes, I do it with my Tundra on every reload on coals.  The pilot air right in front under the loading door directs  air onto the coals making for a quick restart.


----------



## brenndatomu (Oct 14, 2019)

Works good in the Tundra too...


----------



## Gbawol42 (Oct 21, 2019)

Ok time for the diagnosis post.  

I have my temp controller installed and it is telling me some things about how my wood is burning that I really couldn't tell before. The big one is my flue is not really heating up that much.

1. I now believe that my wood isn't ideally dry.  Went and got a moisture meter and checked a few splits on a fresh face and I am sitting at around 22-25 on most is seems.  I thought I would get away with one year drying since I had it in one long row however the wet spring and fall we had here in michigan did not help my situation.  I am going to make a decision to either supplement with eco bricks or just burn propane since it's only around $1.25-$1.35 a gallon right now.  

2. This is where I might need input.  I have the temp controller plugged about 8 inches above the rear flue opening of heatmax.  I set the temp controller at 250F to reopen the damper and burn down my coals.  However when I loaded the stove with 4 splits (wasn't that cold out) I couldn't get the flue temp over 220F-230F.  So basically the damper never wanted to shut off.  The stove magnetic gauge never went above 350F-400F, I have that located just to the left of the dampener on the front of the stove.  I inferred thermometer the single wall stove pipe and it sat just above 200F.  Does this sound right to you guys?  I feel like I am missing something or have something not hooked where it is supposed to go.  Or do these stoves just not heat up all the way when partially loaded?

What do these stoves range in flue temps when the are loaded and when they are at idle?

If I missed something or you need more info or pictures just ask.  

Thanks in advance guys.


----------



## brenndatomu (Oct 21, 2019)

Is your temp controller reading C or F? 
If you are reading 200*F externally on the pipe, the internal temp should be 400, or a bit more...my guess is something is not right with the controller settings, or the TC is goofy.
It should burn 22-25% MC wood "sorta OK", not great, but OK...you probably will not see extended secondary burns..._especially_ with only 4 pieces  of marginal wood in it.
Depending on your chimney, you may not have "great" draft until the temps drop a little more (unless its been colder there?) that will affect the way it burns too.
As you have found out, until you can get the firebox up to temp, on dry wood, and the intake damper closed, the heat output is "meh".
As far as temps go...I had a mag thermometer on the HX cleanout door and it would run in the 350* range (IIRC, I haven't run the ole Tundra since winter '16-'17, so this is all from rusty cobwebs memory) and my internal flue temps would hover in the 300's for the first couple hours...I had my controller set to close the damper at 350*, and reopen at 300* (_if_ there was still a call for heat) and it would usually only cycle once after a re-load...then the temp would stay over 300 on its own running on just pilot air, and the timer was usually timed out by then anyways....but this was all burning 3-4 year CSS wood too.
Oh, make sure the baffle above the secondary burn tubes is sitting in place properly, and slid back against the back bricks (doesn't hurt to check this once in a while either...it can be dislodged with a split, and if out of place it makes a big difference in the way things work!)


----------



## brenndatomu (Oct 21, 2019)

If you want to burn small loads, split those splits in half and put them in loosely, as high as possible, log cabin style works too...it will burn small loads better that way. Makes a good "shoulder season" fire. Starting with burning down a small load of kindlin (almost down to hot coals) and then load the splits on that, can make things run more normally too...


----------



## Gbawol42 (Oct 21, 2019)

brenndatomu said:


> Is your temp controller reading C or F?
> If you are reading 200*F externally on the pipe, the internal temp should be 400, or a bit more...my guess is something is not right with the controller settings, or the TC is goofy.
> It should burn 22-25% MC wood "sorta OK", not great, but OK...you probably will not see extended secondary burns..._especially_ with only 4 pieces  of marginal wood in it.
> Depending on your chimney, you may not have "great" draft until the temps drop a little more (unless its been colder there?) that will affect the way it burns too.
> ...



That's what I thought, it was double the inferred to get approx flue.

The TC is in celcius, I just bought a cheapo from good ol china.  Perhaps I need to test the probe.  It appeared to be reading correctly before I lit the stove though.

I know the stove will run better with dryer wood, I just wanted to see if I had something not set right.  Probably need to check more settings on this TC.  I just set the bare minimum.  I am going to have to look into how you set yours up.  I just hooked mine into the thermostat connection on the stove.  One relay, just on and off at a certain temp, will need to see how to did a range.  One of the main reasons for it was if I loaded the stove before work and set the timer for 20 or 30 min (depending on how many coals were present) and the fire didn't get hot enough and smoldered out, the TC would open the dampener for me and heat it back up.  Just trying to make it through that crucial cresote making stage since I have less than ideal wood.  It will be a little easier when I am home to check the stove more.

I'll be honest I am still having fun burning wood, kind of a neat mental game figuring everything out.


----------



## brenndatomu (Oct 21, 2019)

So that is 200C? That would be 392F.
How long is the TC probe? If it is short I would move it to the front of the pipe to try to get in the exaust stream as much as possible. I have a 6" TC probe and found out that if I stick it all the way in on my horizontalish stove pipe it reads way low. Pull it up/out 2-3" the temp reading jumps up.
If you are tied into the tstat terminals you are using the controller in a different way than I was. I had it set up to interrupt the call for heat from either the tstat, manual switch, or the timer. So acted as a true high temp controllr...and never did set it up to burn down coals. I had the luxury of firing up the stove in the fireplace if I needed more heat, so no real need to push the Tundra to the point of coal build up. Sounds like you could just fire up the LP to make up the difference if you needed to.
And yes, it is kinda fun figuring this stuff out...as long as you can actually get it to work at some point...early on I was about ready to boot my T1 out permanently!


----------



## Mrpelletburner (Oct 21, 2019)

What is the temperature of your basement around the distribution blower intake? 

Just wondering if you are drawing in cooler air. As the cooler air can impact plenum and flue temps. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Gbawol42 (Oct 22, 2019)

Mrpelletburner said:


> What is the temperature of your basement around the distribution blower intake?
> 
> Just wondering if you are drawing in cooler air. As the cooler air can impact plenum and flue temps.
> 
> ...



Now this is something I wasn't taking into consideration!  I'm probably sucking lower 60 degree air from my basement floor.  Might have to look into putting a return duct up to the ceiling where the air is warmer.  I would tie into my main return system but it's kinda far from the wood stove and wouldn't be cheap.


----------



## brenndatomu (Oct 22, 2019)

The cold air from down low will affect the supply duct temps some, especially in the cold parts of the winter, but will make very little/no difference in the chimney temps...


----------



## Mrpelletburner (Oct 22, 2019)

brenndatomu said:


> The cold air from down low will affect the supply duct temps some, especially in the cold parts of the winter, but will make very little/no difference in the chimney temps...



Why would that cooler air make very little to no difference to flue temps? Just asking... 




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## maple1 (Oct 22, 2019)

Mrpelletburner said:


> Why would that cooler air make very little to no difference to flue temps? Just asking...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Likely talking in terms of 'negligible'.

A 10 degree drop from say 100 to 90 in supply temps would be more a more pronounced and notcieable difference than say a 10 degree drop from 380 to 370 (or whatever) in flue temps.


----------



## brenndatomu (Oct 22, 2019)

Mrpelletburner said:


> Why would that cooler air make very little to no difference to flue temps? Just asking...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well, I would say its kinda like spraying a garden hose on a forest fire...just not gonna make any difference.
If you think about it, 10-20* less going into a 12-1500* (more?) fire is nothing...might even make up for the temp loss completly by burning a bit hotter due to cooler air being more oxygen dense.
But the furnace is only raising the return air temp 40-70* going into the supply ducts, so 10-20* less coming in is a big deal.


----------



## Highbeam (Oct 22, 2019)

Also remember that unlike a stove, these warm air furnaces are built with a massive back and forth heat exchanger in the flue gas path which is not unlike the old "magic heat" flue gas heat reclaimers that so many people hate from the old days. This heat exchanger is designed to strip heat from the flue gasses. 

It's a good idea but it will lower the flue gas temperatures from what you may be familiar with when running a stove. You still want to be sure that you are keeping above the condensation temperature in the flue. That may mean adjusting the blower speed or keeping a hotter fire.


----------



## Gbawol42 (Oct 27, 2019)

How about a dampener question for you guys.  

I currently have 2 direct outputs (1 to main living room, and 1 to upstairs master), and 4 outputs to my heating trunk to heat the rest if the house.  I have a gravity dampener in the plenum of my propane furnace so the heatmax will not blow into it, as well as the propane furnace could open it anytime it runs as the fan is stronger.  On the 4 outputs to the heat trunk from the heatmax I have 4 manual dampener installed.  My thought process was if I wanted to use the propane during the shoulder season I would just close those 4 vents and that should be good to not backfeed the heatmax.  

So i am now thinking about running the unit in parallel with the propane furnace.  Was looking into 4, 6" gravity dampener for the heatmax.  My question is what happens when the heatmax is nice and hot and the propane furnace kicks on, say under a really cold day.  If the gravity dampeners close on the heatmax won't the plenum overheat?  Grant it I still have the 2 direct connects.   Am I thinking about this right, or would you guys plumb up the ducts differently? Or would the way I am thinking be ok and not overheat?


----------



## brenndatomu (Oct 27, 2019)

Oh boy...probably a number of different things you could do here...and at least for me, it is sometimes hard to completely envision things without being there. Parallel the two systems would work. Are the 2 direct lines 6"? If they were 8" that would probably be enough to keep things under control by themselves...that's all the T1 even had! Another thing you could do is to put a relay on the main furnace that locks it out when the Tundra blower is running...guess it depends on how much of your heat load you think the TII is going to be able to handle.
I'm sure there are other things you could do too...hopefully someone else will jump in here with a better idea...


----------



## Gbawol42 (Oct 27, 2019)

brenndatomu said:


> Oh boy...probably a number of different things you could do here...and at least for me, it is sometimes hard to completely envision things without being there. Parallel the two systems would work. Are the 2 direct lines 6"? If they were 8" that would probably be enough to keep things under control by themselves...that's all the T1 even had! Another thing you could do is to put a relay on the main furnace that locks it out when the Tundra blower is running...guess it depends on how much of your heat load you think the TII is going to be able to handle.
> I'm sure there are other things you could do too...hopefully someone else will jump in here with a better idea...



The 2 directs are 6".

I feel this would be a rare occurence like I said, only when we get a freak polar vortex or something where the heatmax couldn't keep up on it's own.  

I believe the propane would kick on more often in the morning as the heatmax is cooling down, thus so is the house.  I feel that both systems running here would be fine heat wise.   It's just that really hot burn that concerns me.

I do like the relay idea......have to sleep on it.


----------



## Gbawol42 (Nov 15, 2022)

So little update.   Went with the Heatmax 2, 3 seasons later.

This was my original thread from purchasing my wood furnace.

I experienced some rot cleaning my furnace and replacing some firebricks this spring .  After going back and forth with Drolet with their warranty process (lots of pictures and questions). They decided it is my fault and will not cover or help in any way. A very disappointing response from them imo. At only 3 seasons old I need to look into another furnace now as I don't trust this one anymore.

They claimed I didn't clean it good enough.

If this kind of rot was possible just because of cleaning I would have cleaned more often. However I never thought of cleaning the back of the firebox anyways, just the heat exchanger and flue.

Not sure if there is still someone who works for Drolet that lurks on here that could help in any way, but I just don't have the money to invest in another furnace, especially at the prices they are currently at.

Thanks guys for all the help I received on here the last 3 years, but even all the tips and tricks that I received and implemened for getting a better burn didn't have me ready for this issue.


----------

