# Cat stoves are no good



## jeff_t (Mar 22, 2010)

I talked to a dealer at a home improvement/builders show yesterday and he told me cat technology was way old and I would be foolish to buy a cat stove. He is also a sweep and said he sees a lot of problems with Blaze Kings he services. 
I'm not quite sure what to think. Do I believe everybody here, or a dealer who doesn't sell any of the stoves I'm interested in?


----------



## pinewoodburner (Mar 22, 2010)

He probably does not sell cat stoves so he is doing a sales job on you.


----------



## rdust (Mar 22, 2010)

This has come up many times.  My feeling on it is most dealers don't educate their customers about using seasoned wood or feel their customers will not have a seasoned wood supply.  If you're using a CAT stove without a seasoned wood supply I feel this will cause more issues with a CAT stove.  Of course both stoves will have problems but one will have a nasty chimney, the other will waste a CAT prematurely along with having a nasty chimney.

With a properly seasoned wood supply a CAT stove will serve you just fine.


----------



## jeff_t (Mar 22, 2010)

He asked me where I was getting my information and I told him from people I know and hearth.com. He must know about us cause he didn't have much more to say after that.


----------



## Michael J (Mar 22, 2010)

My thoughts may not be worth very much as I personally am a new wood burner using a cat stove. I do have friend that has been heating with a cat stove for many years now it seems and he has nothing but great things to say about it.

The 4 weeks I have under my belt have been wonderful. We haven't hit anything colder then -20 but it has worked like a champ thus far.

Good luck in your findings.

Mike


----------



## Slow1 (Mar 22, 2010)

My guess is that you are already better educated on the topic than the vast majority of those buying stoves and making the cat/non-cat decision today.  

Obviously I think that the dealer is biased.  I'm with rdust though - if you have the proper wood supply - i.e. well dried wood - then you will do great (cat or non-cat).  The difference really comes down to whether or not you want to extend the burn for longer, lower heat output with the cat or if you are happy enough with the higher peaks of the non-cat stove.  Depending on your heating needs, stove size etc I expect that you can adjust things and be happy not matter what technology you go with  really.  However, to characterize cat tech as "way old" and imply that it is somehow flawed as a result sounds mostly like a bit of marketing FUD spreading. 

If I were a stove shop I expect I'd not want to sell cat stoves to the majority of the 'off the street' casual burners as they likely wouldn't bother to pay attention to getting dry wood (we all know it isn't easy to come by right?) and as such would likely have trouble and blame the stove.  I suspect non-cats are more forgiving in the long run - once you get the wood dried up you probably can more easily salvage the stove, but perhaps once you foul up the cat it will only get worse pretty quick (haven't done it but I could see it happening).  Perhaps his rhetoric is a way of avoiding having to support such things...


----------



## jeff_t (Mar 22, 2010)

I'm not really looking for any advice, I just thought it was a kinda funny conversation. I've got my choices narrowed down to BK, Woodstock, and PE Alderlea. Cat and non-cat, steel, cast and soapstone. I think I'm just gonna flip a coin when the time comes.


----------



## begreen (Mar 22, 2010)

The world is full of opinions, some good, some not so good. There are good stoves out there and some not so good ones. Same for cat stoves. FWIW, stoves are old technology too.

Regardless, the number one problem we hear about here is not the stove or technology, it's the wood. Number 2 problem here isn't the stove either, it's the flue. Install a good stove  correctly, cat or otherwise, to a proper flue and burn good, dry wood according to the manual and you are likely to be a happy camper. Burn unseasoned wood or painted scraps and you are likely to be griping about a bad cat in a year or two. But that is not the stove. 

What surprises me is that the sweep says he services lots of Blaze Kings. Sounds like there is an active dealer there. Maybe go get his (or her) opinion too.


----------



## jeff_t (Mar 22, 2010)

MI didn't get the feeling that he really did service any Blaze Kings, he just didn't want me to buy one. "Cat stoves suck and mine don't."
He was selling Napolean, Regency, and Harmon.


----------



## Highbeam (Mar 22, 2010)

jeff_t said:
			
		

> I talked to a dealer at a home improvement/builders show yesterday and he told me cat technology was way old and I would be foolish to buy a cat stove. He is also a sweep and said he sees a lot of problems with Blaze Kings he services.
> I'm not quite sure what to think. Do I believe everybody here, or a dealer who doesn't sell any of the stoves I'm interested in?



He was right, well, a little bit. Cat technology is way old. It was around before the modern non-cats and the stoves that use the cat system are all old. Look at the BK, buck, and the country flame. They are old 70s stoves and look like something from the 70s. 

He was wrong when he said you would be foolish to buy one. That was a sales pitch or if I want to be somewhat positive about it, he made the mistake of assuming that since a very small percentage of woodburners use cat stoves that they must not be as good. If it was good, everyone would be doing it right? Well it just ain't so. Non-cats DOMINATE the market, I don't know why.

Here's the thing with cat stoves. The best ones are sold direct from the factory or from hardware stores leaving no reason for dealers to pick up their line and market them. BK and woodstock. The other brands like buck and country flame are small companies with relatively low national exposure. For cat stoves to ever become mainstream, like they deserve, a major company will have to start selling them. Until they become mainstream, there will always be people that think they are oddball relics from the past.


----------



## begreen (Mar 22, 2010)

Cat stoves are a bit more complex and need a bit more servicing, but not a lot. From reports here, they are great for shoulder season burning when you want a low steady fire. This is ideal for the 24/7 burner relying on wood as a sole source of heat. However, when it gets cold out and the stove is being asked to crank out the btus, their advantage is negligible.


----------



## Flatbedford (Mar 22, 2010)

We started to consider upgrading our stove last spring because of the spring sale Woodstock was having. We had been burning our Franklin smoke dragon for 6 years didn't know anything about the new EPA stoves. I talked to the folks at Woodstock and started reading here on Hearth.com. We went to out local stove shop to see what else was out there. He told us pretty much the same thing about cat stoves. They were old technology, the cat had to be cleaned and even replaced. He didn't even think that soapstone was great stove material, but would sell us something from the Hearthstone line for about $600 more than a Fireview. I asked him if there were any other makers of soapstone stoves and he told me that there used to be a small company in Vermont that made them, but he wasn't sure if they were still in business or not. I told him that they were and that I had spoken with them. He was surprised. I guess you can't blame the guy for trying to sell his stuff, but you also can't expect a salesperson to be the best source of information either.


----------



## firefighterjake (Mar 22, 2010)

rdust said:
			
		

> This has come up many times.  My feeling on it is most dealers don't educate their customers about using seasoned wood or feel their customers will not have a seasoned wood supply.  If you're using a CAT stove without a seasoned wood supply I feel this will cause more issues with a CAT stove.  Of course both stoves will have problems but one will have a nasty chimney, the other will waste a CAT prematurely along with having a nasty chimney.
> 
> With a properly seasoned wood supply a CAT stove will serve you just fine.



I think this response is pretty accurate . . . and perhaps a reason some dealers do not carry stoves with cats.

At one time I was anti-cat . . . convinced I was that a cat was not the way to go . . . but then to the light side of the force I went . . . and now I would not hesitate to buy a cat or secondary burning stove.


----------



## ControlFreak (Mar 22, 2010)

The thing that bugs me the most about everburn and cat technology is that the main firebox serves as a smoke generator to feed the combustor or the cat.  This means that if you have glass in your door, it's going to be grimy looking along with all other interior surfaces in there.   The appearance of the fire is miserable, and you can't tell what's going on in the combustor/cat by looking at the stove like you can with a more common EPA stove with secondaries.  I classify everburn and cat in the same category, because they're basically doing the same thing, just that one uses a catalyst.  The everburn claims to be non-cat, but uses the same basic technology without the benefit of the catalytic reaction, so getting it to light off is much more difficult, and it goes out easier.

The nice thing about everburn/catalytic technology is that you can have a much more even heat output.  A non-cat stove is going to have a 2-4 hour burst of heat output with a long tail of declining temperatures, while the cat can produce a constant heat for much more than 4 hours.


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Mar 22, 2010)

jeff_t said:
			
		

> I talked to a dealer at a home improvement/builders show yesterday and he told me cat technology was way old and I would be foolish to buy a cat stove. He is also a sweep and said he sees a lot of problems with Blaze Kings he services.
> I'm not quite sure what to think. Do I believe everybody here, or a dealer who doesn't sell any of the stoves I'm interested in?



Jeff, it is a very common thing for someone who does not sell cat stoves to attempt to put them down. They will usually say exactly what you heard about the old technology and other foolish things. Personally I despise people who sell in that manner. Would it not be better to praise them.....and then praise whatever you are selling. I think it gets better results and keeps one from looking like a fool.

We too were undecided for some time and were actually afraid of cat stoves when we bought out last one simply because we heard bad things about those old fashioned cat stoves. Long story short, we bought a cat stove and have not been a bit sorry for it. We burn only half the amount of wood we used to burn and where we used to clean our chimney 3-4 times per year, we have now burned this new cat stove for 3 years and it has been cleaned one time....and got less than a cup of soot from the chimney. No creosote here. 

As for the maintenance of the cat, it is pretty simple. In fact, just a couple days ago I took the cat out to look at it. I didn't even brush any fly ash off but just put it back in because it was clean. It took about a minute or maybe 2 minutes to do that. 

Good luck on whatever stove you get.

btw, take a look at Woodstock as they have a big sale going on right now; probably the best sale you'll see from them.


----------



## Dakotas Dad (Mar 22, 2010)

Flatbedford said:
			
		

> We started to consider upgrading our stove last spring because of the spring sale Woodstock was having. We had been burning our Franklin smoke dragon for 6 years didn't know anything about the new EPA stoves. I talked to the folks at Woodstock and started reading here on Hearth.com. We went to out local stove shop to see what else was out there. He told us pretty much the same thing about cat stoves. They were old technology, the cat had to be cleaned and even replaced. He didn't even think that soapstone was great stove material, *but would sell us something from the Hearthstone line for about $800 more than a Fireview*. I asked him if there were any other makers of soapstone stoves and he told me that there used to be a small company in Vermont that made them, but he wasn't sure if they were still in business or not. I told him that they were and that I had spoken with them. He was surprised. I guess you can't blame the guy for trying to sell his stuff, but you also can't expect a salesperson to be the best source of information either.



WOW.. what stove was he trying to sell you? When we bought our Homestead it was $650 _less_ then the Fireview that was our other option, and we didn't have to pay for shipping (my research seems to indicate they are pretty close in peak btu's, efficiency and firebox size). 

I think either technology will do what it is supposed to do, we just went with the stove that had a dealer close and a good price, knowing what I know now, I might have waited for the spring sale to bring the price of the Fireview down closer to the Homestead's price. I guess there are people who would not want a cat stove just because of the one or two extra steps, and the periodic maintainence needs of the cat itself.


----------



## Flatbedford (Mar 22, 2010)

I may not remember correctly, but I think the they wanted around $2850 for the Hearthstone stove, and I do not recall which one it was. The Woodstock was around $2200 with the sale. I guess my numbers were off in my post. I will fix.


----------



## Slow1 (Mar 23, 2010)

ControlFreak said:
			
		

> The thing that bugs me the most about everburn and cat technology is that the main firebox serves as a smoke generator to feed the combustor or the cat.  This means that if you have glass in your door, it's going to be grimy looking along with all other interior surfaces in there.   The appearance of the fire is miserable, and you can't tell what's going on in the combustor/cat by looking at the stove like you can with a more common EPA stove with secondaries.  I classify everburn and cat in the same category, because they're basically doing the same thing, just that one uses a catalyst.  The everburn claims to be non-cat, but uses the same basic technology without the benefit of the catalytic reaction, so getting it to light off is much more difficult, and it goes out easier.
> 
> The nice thing about everburn/catalytic technology is that you can have a much more even heat output.  A non-cat stove is going to have a 2-4 hour burst of heat output with a long tail of declining temperatures, while the cat can produce a constant heat for much more than 4 hours.



Heh - well now.  As someone who has owned/burned both an Everburn and a Cat stove I can tell you first hand that although a couple of your comments appear to be based on fact, your overall conclusions do not match my experience.

Where you are on target is that both technologies burn the smoke in a distinct part of the stove more separate from the firebox than is done with a stove injecting air to induce secondary combustion in the firebox.  I also agree with the concluding remark that with cat can produce a constant heat for a much longer period of time.

The middle of your post, however is where I disagree with your statements/observations/conclusions.

The glass doesn't have to be "grimy looking" even in the Encore NC that I disliked so much, the glass was fairly clean - granted I did have to clean it on a daily basis, but what I cleaned off it was more to keep it completely clear - far from the description you give.  My Fireview cat stove I go weeks without having to clean the glass (then it is more of a haze and/or ash layer to remove).  If you have experienced otherwise then I submit you were burning wood that was not dry.

Appearance of the fire miserable?  Um... not in my experience.  But then again, that is quite subjective.  When burning very low, the FV does look like a pile of glowing coals or sometimes is dark.  Ok, not exciting as bright secondaries in a good non-cat.  However, if I burn it hotter I get what I find to be attractive flames that guests have described as looking like "those idealistic fake fire pictures but so much better since it is obviously real."  Again if you have other experiences perhaps you have had wet wood in there.

Everburn and Cat the same technology?  I'm sorry - but there just is no reasonable way that one can classify them the same at all.  The similarity between the two ends with the fact they burn the smoke somewhat removed from the firebox.  The temperatures that the smoke is burned at is dramatically different, they way that the stove is operated is just not the same and the practical efficiencies are not comparable.  Granted they are both "the other technology from secondary burn" but that is about the only way I can see to lump them together.  One major difference that I can point out to you (given your username of "controlFreak" you should appreciate this one!) is that once you light off the downdraft stove you pretty much let it go - you can turn down the air as far as it goes but it's off to the races (unless you overdo it and the downdraft stalls, then you will be pumping out smoke like crazy).  Now, with the cat once you light it off, you can adjust your air and modulate the heat output quite a bit without fear of stalling the cat - you will continue to burn clean.  Rather nice in my book.


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Mar 23, 2010)

Slow, thanks for posting this. For some reason I had missed ControlFreak's post.

Just to add. We did have dirty glass once. When the stove was new and we did the burn in fires the glass got black. That quickly changed when we started burning a regular fire. Like Slow, we have to clean the ash haze off occasionally but no dirty black glass on our stove. Also, the appearance of the fire is certainly not miserable; it is beautiful.


----------



## REF1 (Mar 23, 2010)

Man, I hate to sound like a Rep or cheerleader for Vermont Elms, but with the use of cat and secondary combustion tubes you get the best of both worlds. Saying someone would be "foolish" to purchase a cat stove is foolish. How long have Blaze Kings been around, to the praise and satisfaction of their owners? Same with Woodstock's stoves. I believe it IS accurate to state that until catalytic stoves are produced by a major manufacturer they will always be looked down upon by alot of people, as old, or too difficult to deal with.


----------



## BrowningBAR (Mar 23, 2010)

ControlFreak said:
			
		

> The appearance of the fire is miserable, and you can't tell what's going on in the combustor/cat by looking at the stove like you can with a more common EPA stove with secondaries.



The appearance is miserable? Not following. 

And I can tell if the cat is working properly by looking ant the flame.


----------



## SolarAndWood (Mar 23, 2010)

ControlFreak has a point.  The stove is pretty dark right now except for the glow of the cat.  No mood just getting the job done.


----------



## weatherguy (Mar 23, 2010)

My glass stayed clear as day all year on my stove, then again I burned seasoned wood. Someone else here put up a video of his cat stove, I think it was a buck, and it was a nice mesmerizing flame show, mine does the same thing when I turn it up. Tonight its just glowing red and throwing heat.


----------



## begreen (Mar 23, 2010)

Cat stoves are produced by Vermont Castings, one of the major stove producers. Unfortunately, quality control slipped for a bit and left a bitter taste for some owners that have been replacing refractory assemblies too frequently.


----------



## VCBurner (Mar 24, 2010)

BeGreen said:
			
		

> Cat stoves are produced by Vermont Castings, one of the major stove producers. Unfortunately, quality control slipped for a bit and left a bitter taste for some owners that have been replacing refractory assemblies too frequently.


I was wondering when someone was going to mention VC.  They seemed to dirty their name over the past few years with declining service and quality control.  However, I don't know hard facts on this, but aren't they still a major manufacturer of catalytic stoves?  Be Green seems to have backed my thought.  I've been told that the refractory they had the most problems with was also one that they used frequently on different models.  It was the same fragile refractory housing and catalyst combination that was used in the defiant encore and winterwarmer.  I could be wrong, but, I don't believe they use this anymore.  Does anyone know?


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Mar 24, 2010)

BeGreen said:
			
		

> Cat stoves are produced by Vermont Castings, one of the major stove producers. Unfortunately, quality control slipped for a bit and left a bitter taste for some owners that have been replacing refractory assemblies too frequently.



BeGreen, cat stoves are also produced by Woodstock and they work extremely well. But I'm sure you know that and just forgot to mention them.


----------



## SolarAndWood (Mar 24, 2010)

VCBurner said:
			
		

> BeGreen said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm glad I didn't let my bitter taste affect my decision to buy another cat stove.


----------



## Slow1 (Mar 24, 2010)

Backwoods Savage said:
			
		

> BeGreen said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I don't think it was an omission there Dennis - rather the discussion was on "Major stove producers" which as much as you and I consider Woodstock to be major since they are central to our solution, I don't think their volume of sales or brand recognition is anywhere near what VC or Jotul enjoy and thus it is hard to consider them a "major player" in the market.  Pros and cons to this of course - downside for me (and many other potential consumers) is that I didn't know they existed when I bought my first stove and thus they were out of the consideration (and I made a poor decision).  On the bright side Woodstock is small enough that they retain the small company attitude of customer first that seems to become more of a motto and less of a reality the large a company grows.

I wish nothing but the greatest success on Woodstock, but I'm happy with their size not growing too much.  Grow the stove perhaps with a new larger model, but keep the company in the small size so they can maintain their quality and customer service.


----------



## REF1 (Mar 24, 2010)

That becomes a major issue, doesn't it? The huge manufacturer versus the smaller owned company and what each brings, or does not bring, to their units and customer service. 

The big companies have the bucks to deal with the Fed Regs, bring out new models, big advertising budgets, etc. But then they tend to really leave the customer as a sales number. 

The small company seems to truly be into customer service, invests a great deal of passion into their products, but cannot offer alot of variation in their units. 

Back to cat stoves and those who make them. I was surprised to see just how many companies still offer catalytic stoves. They are all on the EPA list. There's quite a bunch of them out there.


----------



## Dakotas Dad (Mar 24, 2010)

My friend and mentor in the wood heat lifestyle has an old (early 80's) Buck stove, and when we brought our stove home, he was surprised it wasn't cat, and in fact thought all stoves since the mid 80's where required to be catalytic.


----------



## REF1 (Mar 24, 2010)

Man, I remember that deep Buck stove with the deers head on the door. Classic stuff back then.


----------



## slindo (Mar 25, 2010)

To say nothing of firebacks, damper assemblies and andirons. 

Still I can't help but love them. A cat VC when it works, works wonderfully well, and no one makes better looking stoves. Just wish they'd hold up better.



			
				BeGreen said:
			
		

> Unfortunately, quality control slipped for a bit and left a bitter taste for some owners that have been replacing refractory assemblies too frequently.


----------



## BrotherBart (Mar 25, 2010)

Cat stoves are ugly. Cast iron stoves are ugly. Soapstone stoves are ugly.

My stove is beautiful.


----------



## Dakotas Dad (Mar 25, 2010)

BrotherBart said:
			
		

> Cat stoves are ugly. Cast iron stoves are ugly. Soapstone stoves are ugly.
> 
> My stove*(s)* is beautiful.



meh.. beauty is in the woodpile of the holder..

oh, and fixed it for you, surely, like your children, you don't have a favorite..


----------



## BrowningBAR (Mar 25, 2010)

BrotherBart said:
			
		

> Cat stoves are ugly. Cast iron stoves are ugly. Soapstone stoves are ugly.
> 
> My stove is beautiful.



Dakota brought up your stoves... as in plural. I've been meaning to ask you about them. You only seem to ever mention the 30NC, and based on the posts you've made about your home it seems that only the 30NC is located there. You also mentioned that before you found Hearth you had old smoke dragons (and wet wood). So, this leads to my question of; where are the two Jotuls and the Englander Pellet stove located?


----------



## BrotherBart (Mar 25, 2010)

BrowningBAR said:
			
		

> BrotherBart said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The F3 is for heating my office in the basement. To conserve wood I moved the office upstairs this year so it heats the outdoor cat that stays in the basement at night. The F100 was heating the small warehouse when we needed to work out there in cold weather but the building collapsed under the snow load this year so the stove is resting in the basement. The pellet stove was purchased with an eye to doing repairs for all of those Englanders sold around here at the box stores and to see if pellets were a viable option when I get to broken down to whack trees anymore. My business liability insurance carrier torpedoed the repair business idea so the stove was hooked up and two bags burned before it was mothballed for later.

The Jotuls will probably be sold when I get around to it someday. If ESW will ever get it together and make the wood furnace a clean burner I will put one in the basement. If not I will put a 13-NC down there. I just don't like cast stoves and also I want something down there with a longer burn time.


----------



## BrowningBAR (Mar 25, 2010)

BrotherBart said:
			
		

> BrowningBAR said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Interesting.

Few questions:

How well did the F100 work? Better than an Intrepid? (in terms of heat output and burn time)
I would love to be able to fit an F3 where the Intrepid is. How short can I make that stove?


----------



## wendell (Mar 27, 2010)

ControlFreak said:
			
		

> This means that if you have glass in your door, it's going to be grimy looking along with all other interior surfaces in there.   The appearance of the fire is miserable,



It is too bad you are only a Control Freak and not also a Fact Freak.  :roll:  Your response is just silly and no where close to reality!


----------



## ErikMacc (Mar 27, 2010)

I sell both cat stoves and non cat and  i can say that cat stoves are still very good. I sell Vermont Castings and Conolidated Dutchwest and the catalytic systems work just fine and i wouldnt call them "old". Still, with the non cats most of the nicer brands like jotul, hearthstone, ect... use a secondary baffle system which works very well. In sales we sell alot more non cats because the cutomers as i see it want to do less work meaning they rather not open the damper to load and remember to close it, or they rather not even replace a catalyst. All said and done i would side more with non cats, but that only because ive noticed with cats that i dont get as nice of a flame show and the glass tends to get dirtier faster.


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Mar 27, 2010)

Welcome to the forum Erik.

Even though I welcome you, I do have to disagree with most of your comments. Perhaps you just have not seen a good cat stove or the good fire it presents or just have not used good fuel in your stoves. And what is this about dirty glass? If you sell stoves then you should also school yourself a bit more about the fuel you put in them. We installed our cat stove 3 years ago and have never cleaned anything other than some fly ash off the glass. If the glass gets dirty, your fuel is bad.

That always tickles me too about the "extra work" with that bypass lever. Either it is up or down. Open the draft wide for reload and move that little lever at the same time. When it is time to dial the draft down, you also move that little lever and then don't move it again until the next load. If anyone thinks that is extra work, then they should not be burning wood because there is a lot of work involved and to compare that to moving a lever up or down.....is silly.

Sorry about the rant there but I hear these silly things from time to time and it is usually salesmen that pass on these silly ideas. I wonder what folks would have done 50 years ago with the stoves we had. Let me see now. We had the damper in the stovepipe, a slider in the firebox door and then a draft control down by the ash bin. Oh My God! Three things to keep track of! Yet, by the time I was about 8 years old it was my job to keep the stoves filled along with the woodbox and also taking out the ashes. No, I'm sorry, moving a lever I do not consider work.


----------



## ErikMacc (Mar 27, 2010)

Thanks for the welcome and i see what you are saying and i shouldnt have said neccissarily more work because your right in saying that you might as well not even burn wood then. Still, what i mean is that customers that i get seem to take that as foreign. they lke the idea of a traditional fire that you just open the door and place wood in the firebox. Also, what i meant by dirtier glass was simply meant as i feel that i notice more. obviously i wouldnt use that in a sales type of situation because its biased. As for the type of wood or fuel that is burned, yes obviously i burn seasoned wood but many new wood stove owners dont until they come in with issues and are taught how to dry and stack their wood. Just like you i was taught at a young age with old style wood stoves and the proper way to season wood. Sorry everything i said didnt make sense at first, but as far as this being a forum i kind of just gave my opinion not what i would say to a buyer which in a sense can turn them away. Rather i embrace both technologies and let the customer choose.


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Mar 27, 2010)

Eric, I'm sure you do the right thing. I just hate to hear the "extra work" or some even refer to it as being "more complicated" with having that little lever to move. Folks like that should not even burn wood. I think also too many people when the start burning wood tend to think of it just like an oil or gas furnace. You go out and buy wood, put wood in the stove and stay warm. Well, that sounds good, but as you know, there is much more to it and folks need to know this and should know before they buy the stove. 

On the fuel, I like to tell folks if they are looking at stoves to start heating with wood that they are getting ahead of themselves already. The very first thing to look at and get on hand is their fuel supply. That one little subject itself can be very complicated for new wood burners....but they do need to learn. Hopefully we are able to help a lot of folks in these areas. That is the only reason I am on hearth.com is to try to help others.


----------



## begreen (Mar 27, 2010)

Greetings Erik and thanks for the observations. What part of NY do you hail from? 

It's great to have a Vermont Castings dealer log on. We don't get a lot of feedback on how things are going from the dealer side. As a VC dealer, how have sales been since the sale to Monnesen? How has it been working with the new owners, especially regarding warranty work?


----------



## ErikMacc (Mar 27, 2010)

i agree 100% with you and i do take the time out and run through all the detail about burning wood and everything that comes with it. I also sell pellet stoves, coal stoves, gas , ect and many people get turned off by wood because those other heating appliances are targeted for people who want that ease of use but, the people who actually listen and dont mind the work go straight for wood which is nice because in my eyes its the most practical source of heat.


----------



## ErikMacc (Mar 27, 2010)

Well beGreen, i hail from middletown ny which is one hour north of nyc.

with the shift over to monessen in the beginning it was rough. because the shift in the economy we had alot of people wanting to restore and fix their old VC models and getting parts were a pain. Now, i think everything is basically back in order they are still producing a great line and not making changes which is great and as for working with the people over at monessen it seems fine the only thing is getting ahold of tech sometimes that takes a long time.


----------



## Chad S. (Mar 28, 2010)

Backwoods Savage said:
			
		

> Welcome to the forum Erik.
> 
> Even though I welcome you, I do have to disagree with most of your comments. Perhaps you just have not seen a good cat stove or the good fire it presents or just have not used good fuel in your stoves. And what is this about dirty glass? If you sell stoves then you should also school yourself a bit more about the fuel you put in them. We installed our cat stove 3 years ago and have never cleaned anything other than some fly ash off the glass. If the glass gets dirty, your fuel is bad.
> 
> ...



About worrying to engage-- I usually re-load and set the draft at 2 for 10 mins then 1.5 for 10 and engage.  I have already fell asleep with the draft at 1.5 no cat on for a couple of hours, woke up on the lazy boy and the flue was at 500 the stove was at 400.  So I wasted some wood big deal...  Now if I had a non-cat and fell asleep for 2 hours with the draft at 1.5 I probably would have over-fired (I think?)  so the extra step (engaging) in my eyes is really not THAT important.  You'll just use more wood and get less heat.  Actually, I don't even bother engaging the cat if the outside temp is like 50+ cause the house gets too hot!  Oh, and I get AWESOME secondaries when the draft is choked way down so yeah, the fire is lame....


----------



## BrotherBart (Mar 28, 2010)

Chadwylde said:
			
		

> Actually, I don't even bother engaging the cat if the outside temp is like 50+ cause the house gets too hot!



I thought the great thing about the cat was "low and slow".  :coolsmirk:


----------



## stoveguy2esw (Mar 28, 2010)

nothing wrong with a cat stove , i ran one for years as a stand alone heat source. if anything they are a bit more complex to run as you have to "preheat" the cat before closing a bypass which allows this and settle in for a long slow burn, non- cat stoves do not have to be tended to in this way so they are a bit easier to operate. i do not wish to make this sound like a big difference it isnt, literally its just one more step. cat's fire off at about 400-550 F cat stoves are designed to allow smoke to "bypass" the cat during startup until it has fired off , then the bypas is closed to shunt all of the exhaust to pass through the cat. the cat literally incinerates the smoke which comes off the fire, the same process is carried out in the firebox or a secondary chamber with a non-cat.

it should be noted that "wet" wood , green or saturated by rain, is not good for a cat and can cause thermal shock which could result in an expensive replacement, dry wood is important, non cat stoves dont like green wood either but generally will not suffer the same effects. both types of stoves are great heaters. with a proper chimney and good fuel either one would get the job done for you


----------



## BrotherBart (Mar 28, 2010)

stoveguy2esw said:
			
		

> ...both types of stoves are great heaters. with a proper chimney and good fuel either one would get the job done for you



I know one non-cat that gets the job done for me. With a big ass glass and a beautiful view of the fire. Why would I want to look at smoldering wood?

I think cat stoves are great heaters. I would like to have one. In the basement.  :lol:


----------



## REF1 (Mar 28, 2010)

None of the cats I had gave a smoldering fire. To the contrary.


----------



## BrotherBart (Mar 28, 2010)

REF1 said:
			
		

> None of the cats I had gave a smoldering fire. To the contrary.



But out of your five stoves which ones did you like? The one you don't have yet doesn't count.


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Mar 28, 2010)

BB, as you well know, a cat stove is fully capable of either a smoldering fire or a great show. The best of both worlds. Your choice.


----------



## Slow1 (Mar 28, 2010)

stoveguy2esw said:
			
		

> nothing wrong with a cat stove , i ran one for years as a stand alone heat source. if anything they are a bit more complex to run as you have to "preheat" the cat before closing a bypass which allows this and settle in for a long slow burn, non- cat stoves do not have to be tended to in this way so they are a bit easier to operate.



Ok - the only non-cat stove I operated was the Encore so it is a poor comparison for me on this count (it too had considerable pre-heat times etc and then had other issues in my install that made it far more complex than it should have been).

However, don't you have to allow other non-cat stoves to get up to temp before bring the air down to achieve optimal secondary burns?  If so, how is this necessarily any less/more complex than waiting to get a cat stove up to temp and flipping the lever? (other than the obvious lever to flip which I think everyone can agree isn't THAT complex).


----------



## Todd (Mar 28, 2010)

Funny how I go away for awhile and come back to the good old cat vs non cat debate with Brother Bart stirring the pot.  :lol: 

CATS RULE  :coolgrin:


----------



## REF1 (Mar 28, 2010)

Bart, I used an Elmira cat, and had the Cat Elm for 15 years in Maine. Neither stove smoldered. The Elmira employed two cats, one in each side.


----------



## REF1 (Mar 28, 2010)

The other stoves were a smaller, non-cat Elmira, and the 700 pound Hearthstone, which I sold after one season. I also used a 24" Cat Elm for a little while before getting the 36" unit.


----------



## Highbeam (Mar 28, 2010)

Todd said:
			
		

> Funny how I go away for awhile and come back to the good old cat vs non cat debate with Brother Bart stirring the pot.  :lol:
> 
> CATS RULE  :coolgrin:



And Dennis doing his dangdest to convince folks it isn't complicated. It will always be a fact that cat stoves are more sensitive to fuel and more complicated to run. Preheat this, time that, throw thirty different levers at precisely the right time, etc. My non-cat can be run with about any fuel and only has one lever to mess with.

That said, I welcome the additional operational effort since with it comes longer burn times and lower output settings. I would love to have a cat stove. 

Just don't be bullied into thinking a cat stove is not more complicated than a non-cat.


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Mar 28, 2010)

Well Highbeam, where have you been all this time. Oh, you are moving those 30 levers.... Have you got a new stop watch yet to time them? lol


----------



## begreen (Mar 28, 2010)

30 levers? Sounds more like a CAT D5 or a 416E.


----------



## REF1 (Mar 29, 2010)

I am curious how going from one lever to two becomes a matter of complication.


----------



## Slow1 (Mar 29, 2010)

REF1 said:
			
		

> I am curious how going from one lever to two becomes a matter of complication.



It's twice the work?

Bottom line seems to be that it is different.  One has to develop different operating habits and if you are used to one then the other will be uncomfortable.  I imagine that if I were to operate a good non-cat stove I would find it awkward the first few times and would not run it optimally for some period of time now that I'm used to my FV.  I don't think it would be "hard" but I didn't find learning the FV to be hard either.

Some folks will likely never be convinced to like or recommend either technology.  I think I've said it before, but it is worth saying again in this thread:  The technology alone doesn't make the stove - the satisfaction you can get depends on the overall stove design and construction as much as whether it is cat or non-cat.  Then the real performance results on any stove will come from the fuel, chimney, and operating habits.

All of this can be as complicated as you want it to make it.


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Mar 29, 2010)

REF1 said:
			
		

> I am curious how going from one lever to two becomes a matter of complication.



Think about cutting some meat on your plate. You could do it just with a knife (one lever) or use a fork and a knife (2 levers). Either way you would get the job done but most times the knife and fork work good together and is not complicate (to most folks). 

If you don't like that analogy, how about driving a car. Can you imagine how complicated this job has been all these years. You have to press an accelerator while holding onto a steering wheel (two tasks) at the same time! Then we can throw in some radio adjustments, maybe some mirror adjustments, sun visor up or down, and God forbid, using a telephone or texting all at the same time. 

Conclusion is that God designed these bodies to be able to do many different things. It is the mind which prevents most folks from making good use of what they were given.


----------



## REF1 (Mar 29, 2010)

My question was sort of rhetorical, but I appreciate the logic in the answers. 

I'm not certain how cats got the bad rap they have gotten. I suspect it came from ads or things stated by non-cat stove manufacturers. I cannot see that pushing in a bypass arm or dropping a bypass lever when the cat reaches light-off temps, is any different than adjusting intake controls when a stove reaches cruise temps. No stove is free of adjustment in a burn cycle. 

The whole cat/non-cat discussion seems out of place for people who love burning wood for heat. I know cat stoves work well. Apparently EPA stoves work well to do the same thing - burn volatiles. But I have not found my Homestead to be easier to use than former cat stoves. Too the contrary.


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Mar 29, 2010)

REF1, you must also realize that some of the posts are made in jest. Highbeam always tries to rattle me a bit but never seems to because I usually answer him with logic. Sometimes he understand and sometimes not. lol  (Said in jest.)  It is sort of along the same lines as the debate over burning pine. You will run into lots and lots of posts about burning pine and you will also find lots of comments about your house burning down and other bad things. It simply is not true. 

Pine is fine. It just got a bad rap from some of the old timers. Years ago with the old stoves folks used to cut their wood and burn it in the same day. Naturally this caused all sorts of creosote problems. I even recall one time a fellow came on the forum and stated that there were only two kinds of wood burners: those who have had chimney fires and those who haven't had one yet, but soon will. He was old school and old school thinking. You can imagine if the flue is partially clogged and someone burns a hot fire made with pine. Pine is a hot and fast burning wood which in those cases could start a chimney fire. With today's stoves and with seasoned wood, there are no worries about that sort of thing.


----------



## REF1 (Mar 29, 2010)

I can see alot of the discussion runs around taking shots at each other. But it seems odd the discussion exists from a more serious wood burning viewpoint. Ignorant or misinformed people may always say something which causes confusion, but after all these years it seems people would just let people use what they want to burn with and not hassle about what variety of stove they use. Especially a dealer. If he doesn't want to carry any cat stoves, so be it. But running down a longstanding, viable technology is foolish. 

They don't put cats in automobiles for nothing. Or, if I went to some auto forum would I find some raging discussion thread there about cats? Probably would.


----------



## BrowningBAR (Mar 29, 2010)

Highbeam said:
			
		

> Todd said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




And soapstone stoves can't get above 400 degrees and don't heat as well as steel or cast iron. Those facts are just as proven as 'a cat stove is not more complicated than a non-cat'.


----------



## firefighterjake (Mar 29, 2010)

REF1 said:
			
		

> I can see alot of the discussion runs around taking shots at each other. But it seems odd the discussion exists from a more serious wood burning viewpoint. Ignorant or misinformed people may always say something which causes confusion, but after all these years it seems people would just let people use what they want to burn with and not hassle about what variety of stove they use. Especially a dealer. If he doesn't want to carry any cat stoves, so be it. But running down a longstanding, viable technology is foolish.
> 
> _*They don't put cats in automobiles for nothing*_. Or, if I went to some auto forum would I find some raging discussion thread there about cats? Probably would.



Hmmmm . . . got me thinking . . . I wonder what a car with secondary combustion looks like . . . I'd like to see that light show . . . for some reason I'm picturing a hot rod with flames shooting 25-feet out of the tailpipe.


----------



## Highbeam (Mar 29, 2010)

I honestly think that cat stoves are more complicated to run. Always have and always will. Dennis might try but he will never be able to change this simple fact. 

I look at it from the teaching point of view. My 7YO daughter can run the non-cat, I tell her that the lever goes one way for hotter and the other way to settle it down. To teach my 7YO to run a cat stove would be, well, more complicated and I would put it past her abilities. 

We are all genius woodburner enthusiasts on this site. It is easy to hold our noses up and say that we are masters of fire and that the additional difficulties with running a cat stove are no problem. We need to remember that not all woodburners are so smart or even care to learn how to properly run a cat stove. They like the simple stove with a single lever, hot one way and cold the other. I hope we all can appreciate this point of view.


----------



## Highbeam (Mar 29, 2010)

Oops, one last item, thank you dennis for understanding and not getting upset over our little ongoing "debate". I am convinced that I personally would love a cat stove and this is in large part due to your vigorous approval of them.


----------



## Flatbedford (Mar 29, 2010)

Highbeam,
You could tell your 7 year old to push both the levers down before he/she opens the door. Load the wood in. Close the door. Go eat 3 cookies and drink a glass of milk. When you are finished with the milk and cookies (don't eat too fast) push the big lever back up until it clicks and push the little lever back up to just past the #1. Repeat this every 6-10 hours or until your lazy father finds the energy to deal with two levers.


----------



## BrowningBAR (Mar 29, 2010)

Highbeam said:
			
		

> I honestly think that cat stoves are more complicated to run.



I will never understand that.


----------



## daleeper (Mar 29, 2010)

Highbeam said:
			
		

> I honestly think that cat stoves are more complicated to run. Always have and always will. Dennis might try but he will never be able to change this simple fact.
> 
> I look at it from the teaching point of view. My 7YO daughter can run the non-cat, I tell her that the lever goes one way for hotter and the other way to settle it down. To teach my 7YO to run a cat stove would be, well, more complicated and I would put it past her abilities.



So far, all you have taught her to do is turn the air supply up or down, which is exactly the same for either a cat or non-cat.  

Loading either stove will take additional steps which can be simple or complex depending on several factors for both styles of stove.


----------



## begreen (Mar 29, 2010)

It's not really a big challenge. But it seems with people's busy lives, the more tasks one needs to remember over a period of time, the more likely it is that there are going to be forgetful space-outs. I've been guilty of this myself running a bypass stove and when needing to check the flue damper on the 602. It happens. At least with a single control I can peek back at the stove from my office and visually know roughly where the damper is set for the given period of the burn.


----------



## grommal (Mar 29, 2010)

BrowningBAR said:
			
		

> Highbeam said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


What's not to understand?  I've had both.  My non-cat Oslo has one lever only.  My old VC cat had two levers.  When I reloaded the cat VC, I had to remember to open the bypass, or I'd get smoke in the house.  Don't need to do that with the non-cat Oslo.  With the cat VC, had to remember to close the bypass or I'd get nuclear overfire in short order.  While overfire with the non-cat Oslo is possible, I suppose, you'd need to leave the single air lever wide open for an extended period, and it would be less severe anyway.

I don't think anybody is saying that cat stoves are complicated pieces of equipment to operate.  The only claim is that they are, or at least can be, somewhat more complicated than non-cats.


----------



## BrotherBart (Mar 29, 2010)

When a stove shop sells a non-cat they don't have to worry about the buyer taking the time to learn about dry wood, the wood may not burn good but it will burn, and people clogging cats and stuff like that. Ya wanna sell it, install it and never hear from the buyer again. If somebody wrecks the cat they are gonna want it replaced for free and there is a good chance the dealer will have to end up eating the cost and not getting reimbursed. Hard as it is for forum members to believe, burning wood isn't a passion with the majority of people that buy wood stoves. They just want a nice fire every once in a while.


----------



## REF1 (Mar 29, 2010)

I don't know if I buy that, BrotherBart. I think the majority of people who heat with wood do have a passion for it or they would not do everything that needs to be done to burn wood. 

I wonder if there's statistics on percentages of those who buy a stove for primary heat and those who burn alot of the time, and those who burn every once in awhile.

As far as the attitude dealers have towards cats, that's another issue.


----------



## BrotherBart (Mar 29, 2010)

REF1 said:
			
		

> I don't know if I buy that, BrotherBart. I think the majority of people who heat with wood do have a passion for it or they would not do everything that needs to be done to burn wood.
> 
> I wonder if there's statistics on percentages of those who buy a stove for primary heat and those who burn alot of the time, and those who burn every once in awhile.
> 
> As far as the attitude dealers have towards cats, that's another issue.



Just talk to your local stove store. They will tell you how many people aren't buying them for primary, or even major secondary, heating. Or ask a local wood dealer how many people buy just one cord of wood or less a year.

Ambiance burning is orders of magnitude above heating with wood.


----------



## SolarAndWood (Mar 30, 2010)

BrotherBart said:
			
		

> Ambiance burning is orders of magnitude above heating with wood.



+1 as long as we are talking Memorial to Labor day.


----------



## BrotherBart (Mar 30, 2010)

SolarAndWood said:
			
		

> BrotherBart said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The average stove owner thinks Blaze King is a hamburger chain.  :lol: 

I don't know about the other stove makers but ESW shoves forty to fifty thousand stoves a year out the door. Figure all of the others do the same and the number of people using all of those stoves for even 1/4 of their heating needs is minuscule.


----------



## SolarAndWood (Mar 30, 2010)

I'll take the 10' diameter fire pit circled with granite over the BK any day...until it gets cold out.  More people around here seem to be turning to wood heat given all the log loads I have seen in the past couple weeks.  Haven't seen it before.  But agreed, still a pretty minuscule number.


----------



## BrowningBAR (Mar 30, 2010)

grommal said:
			
		

> BrowningBAR said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



So, what you're saying is; I shouldn't install a pipe damper on my Heritage as it will make the stove too complicated?


----------



## North of 60 (Mar 30, 2010)

BrowningBAR said:
			
		

> grommal said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




 :lol: 
Good one!


----------



## Slow1 (Mar 30, 2010)

BrotherBart said:
			
		

> SolarAndWood said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Good point.  If you aren't looking for the stove to provide a significant portion of your heating needs then the analysis of stove choice would be quite different.  Certainly I don't think that I'd be at all concerned about the "low and slow clean burns" during shoulder season if I was just burning for kicks - I'd simply not burn at all.


----------



## BrowningBAR (Mar 30, 2010)

Slow1 said:
			
		

> BrotherBart said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




If I was burning for kicks, I would have kept the open fireplaces.


----------



## weatherguy (Mar 30, 2010)

Not so sure about that Brother Bart, Im in peoples house every day and 95% of the people that have wood stoves are pretty knowledgeable and burn for their primary heat. The one caveat is people that buy a house and the woodstove is left by the previous owner, those people are the ones that burn occasionally but the people that go out and buy a stove are pretty much like the folks here. These are just my observations and not to be considered 100% correct in regard to woodburners


----------



## begreen (Mar 30, 2010)

BrotherBart said:
			
		

> SolarAndWood said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



example:
https://www.hearth.com/econtent/index.php/forums/viewthread/54692/

tear out a nice fireplace mantle for a few logs a year... There are thousands of folks that buy fireplaces for ambience and won't touch a stove because they want a bigger fireview and the crackle and pop of a fire. There's a caveman (and woman) in a lot of people. They don't want the hassle and work of stacking and storing a lot of wood. Just looking for the crackle of a nice fire on holidays.


----------



## grommal (Mar 30, 2010)

BrowningBAR said:
			
		

> grommal said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Nope.  If you read what I said very carefully (slow down, it might take a time or two to sink in), I'm saying that adding a pipe damper will make it MORE complicated, not TOO complicated.  See the difference?


----------



## REF1 (Mar 30, 2010)

I believe region has alot to do with it, i.e winter temperatures. Around here in the mountains I see smoke coming from chimneys all winter long. Around here, whatever stoves people are using, they use every day. The dealer I bought my stove from said colder winters here are keeping him super busy installing stoves for people switching to wood. They are not ambience buyers. When oil prices go up, so do stove sales. And the lion's share of those sales represent people switching from oil to wood for primary heat. 

800,000 stoves are sold in the USA every year, according to what I've read. While it may be a large percentage of that is ambience buying, it still represents huge numbers of people switching to wood heat. I see new people here every single day who are doing their homework and research. The web allows for consumer understanding unheard of when cats came onto the scene. 

Now that I have experienced an EPA non-cat stove I am glad to go back to a cat. I'll find it much easier to use. Pushing in an arm at 500 degrees is no different than closing the air intake at 450 on this Homestead. Especially using the Elm, which I already know is a great performer and not fussy at all. From everything I have read here since I joined the forum, while EPA non-cat stoves may do the same as a catalytic stove in burning volatiles, they do it with a much more finicky and fussy attitude. Simple to use, as long as you don't mind the details. The Elm I'm getting is a hybrid stove, so I guess I get the best of both worlds without the details and fussy nature of most of the non-cats out there. Some might say there are better non-cat performers than this Homestead, so my experience and observations are very limited and that is quite true. I'm just basing my observations as much on posts here as my own experience.


----------



## BrowningBAR (Mar 30, 2010)

grommal said:
			
		

> BrowningBAR said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



So, you're going with insults and insinuating I am stupid? Good job. Stop being snarky, we're only talking about stoves. I understand how you could hate cat stoves if your only experience is with VC cat stoves (which are completely hit or miss).


----------



## firefighterjake (Mar 30, 2010)

BrotherBart said:
			
		

> When a stove shop sells a non-cat they don't have to worry about the buyer taking the time to learn about dry wood, the wood may not burn good but it will burn, and people clogging cats and stuff like that. Ya wanna sell it, install it and never hear from the buyer again. If somebody wrecks the cat they are gonna want it replaced for free and there is a good chance the dealer will have to end up eating the cost and not getting reimbursed. Hard as it is for forum members to believe, burning wood isn't a passion with the majority of people that buy wood stoves. They just want a nice fire every once in a while.



I'd buy this argument . . . or at least the first part.

Around here I think the majority of folks get a woodstove for "cheap" heat and aren't using it so much for the ambiance . . . but the vast majority aren't wood-burning nut jobs like ourselves . . . they simply want to get an easy-to-use, reliable stove where they can put wood in it and get warm . . . and a number of them still believe "seasoned" wood means the wood was cut to log length in January, dropped off in their door yard in February and at some point between now and September they can cut it up and split it and be good to burn their "seasoned" wood. These folks then will fire up the woodstove in September or October and may or may not get their chimney cleaned during the season . . . and they may or may not have stove and flue thermometers . . .

For this reason I think Bart is right . . . when you're dealing with these folks it is most likely easier to sell secondary burning tech which is perhaps a little more forgiving to folks burning less than ideal wood in less than ideal situations . . . yeah, the wood certainly will not burn as well in the stove and we may see a few of these folks in the Fall coming here to figure out why the nice view of their brand new woodstove is ruined every time they fire up their stove . . . but many will simply be happy with the heat they are getting and figure the black glass, leaving the air control all the way open, etc. is normal.


----------



## grommal (Mar 30, 2010)

BrowningBAR said:
			
		

> grommal said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Sorry.  I didn't mean to be any more insulting than the "So, what your saying is; I shouldn’t install a pipe damper on my Heritage as it will make the stove too complicated?" comment that came my way.  Let's declare a cease fire to keep the thread on track.

I don't hate cats at all.  Never said I did.  Had I been in the market for a soapstone stove, I would not have hesitated to buy a Woodstock.  I ran the VC for 23 years.  I doubt if any woodstove is too complicated for most people to run correctly, at least most of the time.  But simpler equals a greater degree of mistake-proofing, as long as the desired degree of operational control can be achieved with the simpler design.  And that makes it easier for anybody, especially the less hard-core woodburners, to operate without messing up.


----------



## rickw (Mar 31, 2010)

Well, to me the reduced wood usage and increased length of burn more than makes up for spending another couple of seconds flipping an additional lever. I think I'm burning at least 25% less wood, and almost never have to light a fire. That isn't a matter of preference, style, or opinion.

Maybe non-cats are better for newbs, I probably would have destroyed a cat my first year burning. If this was primarily a trade forum (meaning sellers of woodstoves) that would be a great argument. Since it is primarily a users forum it doesn't seem like such a great argument.  Now that I know more about it I picked a better stove.
Well, no need to hot under the, er, lid?...Its supposed to be in the 70s soon. Better for cutting splitting and stacking.


----------



## BrotherBart (Mar 31, 2010)

rickw said:
			
		

> I think I'm burning at least 25% less wood, and almost never have to light a fire. That isn't a matter of preference, style, or opinion.
> 
> .



25% less than you were burning in what?


----------



## rickw (Mar 31, 2010)

A Lopi Answer. Decent little stove, but wouldn't hold fire for more than 4 hours or so usually; always had to get up in the middle of the night with it. Surprisingly that little stove went through wood just staying lit, the same amount that would barely keep it going for 2 days keeps the FV going for 3 or more. It was fine for ambience and power outages, but not so great for 24/7.


----------



## BrotherBart (Mar 31, 2010)

rickw said:
			
		

> A Lopi Answer. Decent little stove, but wouldn't hold fire for more than 4 hours or so usually; always had to get up in the middle of the night with it. Surprisingly that little stove went through wood just staying lit, the same amount that would barely keep it going for 2 days keeps the FV going for 3 or more. It was fine for ambience and power outages, but not so great for 24/7.



Understand. That is as much an argument for mass and firebox size as it is a cat/non-cat discussion. Longer burn time and more heat stored in the mass and radiated during the coal stage of the burn, from more coals.


----------



## Slow1 (Mar 31, 2010)

Another data point on fuel consumption:

2008-2009 winter I burned the VC Encore NC from Nov-end of season
I consumed 4 cords of wood and about 260 gallons of oil heating the house

2009-2010 I burned the Fireview from the beginning (really October but we had fires in Sept too... new stove and all) 
I've consumed about 3 1/4 cords of wood and around 60 gallons of oil heating the house (estimated oil burn - haven't actually gotten a delivery since last May)

Many days I burn less fuel in the FV than it took to establish the coal base in the Encore to get it ready to burn clean (i.e. engage the 'Everburn'). 

I do agree with BrotherBart's core argument as it is as much an issue of the overall design of the stove as anything - clearly simply dropping a cat into the Encore NC wouldn't be the same (hmm.. did VC do that?).  However, I can't help but feel the cat is an integral part of the design of this stove thus it cannot be dismissed.


----------



## REF1 (Apr 1, 2010)

Like many threads, this one has morphed some. If the subject is catalytic stoves are no good, that's nonsense. If the issue is cat stoves are not as easy to use as modern non-cat stoves, because of the difference in one control lever, I suppose that point has merit to some degree. But then the issue of user friendliness must be taken into perspective of the benefits of using a well designed cat stove. As a former and new continuing cat stove owner, I love how cat stoves operate and what cat stoves do - supply long clean burns, and use less wood in a season.

I've read where Pacific stoves offer longer burn times compared to other non cat stoves. I don't know how they sack up against cats.


----------



## begreen (Apr 1, 2010)

My PE never sacks up with a cat!  :coolsmirk:  But the cat does like to stretch out near it.


----------



## BrotherBart (Apr 1, 2010)

Cats stoves are fine. But I wouldn't want my sister to marry anybody that owns one.  :coolgrin:


----------



## REF1 (Apr 1, 2010)

STacks up, sTacks up.


----------



## begreen (Apr 1, 2010)

Well now our Alderlea has an approved cat added. What a difference! Purrs like a kitten in this mild weather.


----------



## REF1 (Apr 4, 2010)

On another thread about a Jotul Black Bear it was mentioned the stove is not a north south burn, but an omni-burning stove. So, I checked out the manual. Well, what do you know, this EPA approved, non-cat stove has TWO controls - main air intake on the door, and a secondary intake for the burn tubes. 

Are there other non-cat stoves which operate with two controls? Because if the issue is ease of use this Jotul shoots that argument down, I should think.


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Apr 4, 2010)

lol. That is funny REF1. Now the Jotul is a complicated stove. It is strange that nobody has brought that up before. Somehow I've always got the idea when folks are shooting down cat stoves because of the "complication" it is perhaps also trying to run down the soapstone stoves or perhaps running one type down (remember that Woodstock and Hearthstone are the biggies here and Hearthstone does not use the cat). Sometimes there may be some jealousy and sometimes it just might be the old "mine is better than yours" attitude. In the end, it still comes down the fact that there are great stoves made; some use cats and others don't. Both have their pros and cons. Cat or non-cat is only a part of the picture.


----------



## begreen (Apr 4, 2010)

Dual controls on stoves are pretty common. Most top loaders, regardless of burn technology have a bypass and an air control. On the Quad IR there are 3 controls if you include the bypass. There are also non-cat, steel stoves with two controls. Some have a bypass to allow easy starting + smoke-free reloading and the primary air control. Quad ACT stoves have 2 air controls, one for startup and one for burn rate. 

The main "complications" I see with running a cat stove are not the controls. It's making sure nothing is burned that can contaminate the cat, making sure it doesn't get thermally shocked, and engaging it at the right temperature. That's why one is not in our house. There are multiple people running our stove and some can get a bit distracted with other activities at times. For that case, the simpler, the better.


----------



## Seasoned Oak (Apr 4, 2010)

ControlFreak said:
			
		

> The thing that bugs me the most about everburn and cat technology is that the main firebox serves as a smoke generator to feed the combustor or the cat.  This means that if you have glass in your door, it's going to be grimy looking along with all other interior surfaces in there.   The appearance of the fire is miserable, and you can't tell what's going on in the combustor/cat by looking at the stove like you can with a more common EPA stove with secondaries.  I classify everburn and cat in the same category, because they're basically doing the same thing, just that one uses a catalyst.  The everburn claims to be non-cat, but uses the same basic technology without the benefit of the catalytic reaction, so getting it to light off is much more difficult, and it goes out easier.
> 
> The nice thing about everburn/catalytic technology is that you can have a much more even heat output.  A non-cat stove is going to have a 2-4 hour burst of heat output with a long tail of declining temperatures, while the cat can produce a constant heat for much more than 4 hours.


=================
I have to dis-agree with the statement that a non cat has a 2-4 hour heat burst and a long tail of declining temperatures. My harman TL-300 down draft stove keeps a steady 350-450 stove top temp for hours on end  only to decline when most of the wood has been burned up some 12 15 hours later.  THe output is solely determined by the primary air adjustment. WHile i do not own a cat stove i can see the reason for buying one,but my harman downdraft non-cat does everything i want it to do and it does it well no matter  what time of year. Whether it burning flat out on the coldest day or in shoulder season and 55 degrees outside,my secondaries still work for a clean burn. THe only thing i do not yet know is how long the combustion package will last but i hear its a s long as 10 years.  THe main reason i did not buy a cat stove is i was afraid of replacing an expensive CAT on a regular basis.


----------



## REF1 (Apr 6, 2010)

Of course, even if you do not close a bypass for a cat the cat will still ignite and burn gases when the temp hits ignition. You would just be losing some up the flu as well. The same can be said for not watching a non cat and as the fire builds there is no light off of a combustor,but until the air is shut down some, plenty of surging flames and volatiles are going right out of the stove. 

In the end, no stove can be left unattended with a new large load of wood in it. Not for safety. Not for a complete burn.


----------



## SolarAndWood (Apr 7, 2010)

REF1 said:
			
		

> In the end, no stove can be left unattended with a new large load of wood in it. Not for safety. Not for a complete burn.



After a 5-10 minute burn off, I close the bypass, set the tstat and leave 4 cu ft of wood to be dealt with by the stove.  Safe, complete and predictable.


----------



## Slow1 (Apr 7, 2010)

SolarAndWood said:
			
		

> REF1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Although perhaps I give it a bit longer sometimes (I go by flue temp hitting 500) and I don't have the tstat to set (bummer for me) so I just set the air somewhere between .5 and .75, it is about the same here.  I consider it quite safe (packed load or partial fill) and I get a complete burn down to minor coals/ash if I don't reload.

Perhaps this is another advantage of well designed cat stoves over non-cat stoves?  Less babysitting a full load?  I don't treat full loads any different than partial loads in terms of how I operate the stove.  I was under the impression that with burn tube non-cat stoves that you basically did the same thing (with the obvious exception of the cat engagement) am I wrong here?


----------



## North of 60 (Apr 7, 2010)

REF1 said:
			
		

> In the end, no stove can be left unattended with a new large load of wood in it. Not for safety. Not for a complete burn.



If the CAT is still lit from the previous load then WHY NOT?
I am able to do this every time. Give or take 10 minutes to get the new load blazing.


----------



## Todd (Apr 7, 2010)

Slow1 said:
			
		

> SolarAndWood said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Your right, I also have found less baby sitting and air control tweaking with my cat stove on full loads. I'm thinking the non cat burn tube style stoves have that fixed secondary air hole that can cause the stove to be less controllable at times of high off gassing of the load. You would think a t-stat would be a good thing for a non cat for more control but maybe it's not possible for a clean EPA burn?


----------



## BrotherBart (Apr 7, 2010)

Todd said:
			
		

> Your right, I also have found less baby sitting and air control tweaking with my cat stove on full loads. I'm thinking the non cat burn tube style stoves have that fixed secondary air hole that can cause the stove to be less controllable at times of high off gassing of the load. You would think a t-stat would be a good thing for a non cat for more control but maybe it's not possible for a clean EPA burn?



All ya gotta do is plug those un-restricted EPA primary air holes and they purr like a kitten. Load it, get to four hundred and close the air down to 3/4 closed and let it cruise up to five fifty to six hundred. Me and the neighbors with non-cats now do it all the same way and don't go to bed dreaming of cat stoves.  Or worry about smoke.

Everybody just needs to burn in whatever they wanna burn in. It's all good.


----------



## grommal (Apr 7, 2010)

Todd said:
			
		

> Slow1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This has not been my experience with my first non-cat secondary tube stove.  Toss in a bunch of wood on the coal bed and shut the door.  Wait 5 minutes for good flame.  Dial the air back.  Forget it for 8-10 hours.  Repeat.  No extra fiddling with the air control at all.  The stovetop rises to 500 quickly, then settles in at 550=600 for hours, then slowly drifts back down once the wood has fully outgassed and there's nothing but coals.  Don't need to tweak anything to stay "in the zone".

My experience with a (poorly designed?) cat stove was the opposite.  Some days it was fine, but some days needed constant fiddling with the air control for hours after a reload, trying to maintain stable operation without overfiring or backpuffing, which happened often whenever the wood was still outgassing but the thermostatically-controlled primary air would close it off enough to lose all flame in the firebox.  Once that happened, it was only a matter of minutes until ignition of the built-up gases and a minor explosion in the firebox, which would just increase in intensity with each cycle until I intervened.  No way out of this without opening the bypass for a little while to re-establish flame in the firebox and trying once again to get it stable with the bypass closed, only to be defeated once again by the thermostat's adjustment of the incoming air below that necessary to maintain flame.

The main point being that generalizations about cat vs. non-cat are probably not very reliable.  I'm sure there are very well-designed cat stoves that would have run beautifully in my installation.  From some comments by others, there are apparently non-cat stoves that require babysitting to keep the temperature where you want it.  I have happened to have neither of these in my personal experience, but two models of stove out of the hundreds that have existed is not enough data to make broad comments about all cats vs. all non-cats.


----------



## firefighterjake (Apr 7, 2010)

Slow1 said:
			
		

> SolarAndWood said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Ummm . . . not the case for me . . . I'm like you (only with a secondary burn stove) . . . I also rarely fiddle with the air control once I have the fire up and running.

On a reload I may open the air up all the way . . . once the temps are hot enough (generally I too go by the flue temp now that I have the slab of soapstone on top . . . well that and after two years you get a feel for when you should move the air lever) . . . I'll shut the air down to the quarter mark or less . . . and then sit back and enjoy the show. I used to turn down the air in quarter mark increments every 5-10 minutes . . . and still recommend that folks do this . . . but once you've got a well established fire (or rather coals) and your wood is truly seasoned you really don't have to fiddle around with the air much . . . the exception perhaps being on a cold start where you don't already have a nice bed of coals and may want to shut things down in quarter mark intervals.

Generally speaking I do the same thing whether I have the firebox filled to the gills or just loaded up halfway . . . and in every case so far the results have been the same . . . the difference being the fire lasts longer and produces more heat overall with a full load vs. a partial load . . . I still get the secondaries firing off . . . and the temps still say in the Goldilocks Zone (not too hot, not too cold).


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Apr 7, 2010)

grommal, I can understand why you had problems with that stove you had. I always tend to mistrust the thermostatically controlled wood stoves and it sounds as if that is where your problem was. For sure if I had to be at the stove controls like that I would have had a sour taste in my mouth. However, as Todd stated, the Fireview is not like that. Once you turn the cat on and adjust the draft, it is basically forget the stove for hours as it will burn nicely. Even if the fire gets to the smoldering stage it will do just fine as the cat can do all the burning with the smoke then. I do open the draft though once it get down to almost all coals which will hold the temperature up and burn down the coals at the same time.


----------



## Todd (Apr 7, 2010)

Well my prior non cats all had problems trying to find that sweet spot for low long burns. Sometimes the secondaries would peter out and other times they flamed too much. It seemed like I was always adjusting the air. I guess it could of been a draft problem but I have the same setup now that I did with my previous Hearthstone and now like Dennis says it's pretty much set and forget. Not trying to flame you non cat guys, this is just my experience.


----------



## BrotherBart (Apr 7, 2010)

Todd said:
			
		

> Well my prior non cats all had problems trying to find that sweet spot for low long burns. Sometimes the secondaries would peter out and other times they flamed too much. It seemed like I was always adjusting the air. I guess it could of been a draft problem but I have the same setup now that I did with my previous Hearthstone and now like Dennis says it's pretty much set and forget. Not trying to flame you non cat guys, this is just my experience.



The answer for me was to quit trying to run a non-cat like a cat and forget about secondary burn. You might notice that not one stove manual says "Get it ripping and slam the air shut and watch the light show."

Since I quit trying to do that stuff I have a hot stove, nice flames in the firebox, long burns and no smoke with a clean chimney. And a lot nicer fire to look at to boot. Load dry wood on hot coals, let the wood catch for ten minutes or so and set the primary air to 25% and go back to my rat killin. In fact on the odd occasion when the gas burner act starts up at the burn tubes it irritates me.


----------



## Highbeam (Apr 7, 2010)

I am lucky enough to have a chimney system that will pull just hard enough to give a good, clean, hot, and longish burn with the primary air fully close on my non-cat. This means that I can shut her off and I know that it will burn down safely nomatter the fuel load. 

I think that the cat stove, once you get all the levers thrown at the right times in the beginning, will give you more burn time without messing with the stove. A more even heat for longer. Non-cat stoves may have less and simpler controls but the performance nod will go to the good cat stoves.


----------



## summit (Apr 7, 2010)

have you all checked any of the upcoming epa mandates? Its got VC going pretty bad... they have found a way to install a slim CAT on top of the everburn system in the new defiants... Word on the street is that many cos will be integrating a CAT one way or the other (horrible move, IMHO) into their 2ndry burn systems, because the CAT is (and always was) a test lab wonder to pass thru the tougher new mandate.. but like any system can be misused and/or innefective in the field


----------



## precaud (Apr 8, 2010)

summit, are there details on the new mandates anywhere?


----------



## REF1 (Apr 8, 2010)

In reading replies, I have to rest my case. NO STOVE can be left unattended with a full load. Whether it is after 5, 10, 15 minutes, whatever the user decides, you have to shut it down to some degree or you have over-firing. So what is the difference between shutting down an air control to cruise on a non cat, versus shutting down your bypass and air when a cat hits 500? This is really kind of silly and drenched in semantics. Every stove owner looking to understand their stove will work with it to find sweet spots for optimum burning of fuel. I just fail to see the efficacy in any argument which says a cat is more difficult to run than a non-cat. 

I have never driven a stick shift. Always had automatic transmission vehicles. Sticks seem incredibly difficult to drive, yet I know people who are so used to it they do it in their sleep. 

In the end it's about dealing with a learning curve for any wood stove. My first and only, simple to run, one control non-cat Homestead gave me fits for three months. The Hybrid Elm puts a smile on my face. For me, it's no contest on which is easier to run and which stove performs better. 

"To each his own."


----------



## Todd (Apr 8, 2010)

summit said:
			
		

> have you all checked any of the upcoming epa mandates? Its got VC going pretty bad... they have found a way to install a slim CAT on top of the everburn system in the new defiants... Word on the street is that many cos will be integrating a CAT one way or the other (horrible move, IMHO) into their 2ndry burn systems, because the CAT is (and always was) a test lab wonder to pass thru the tougher new mandate.. but like any system can be misused and/or innefective in the field



Boy, if VC is worried about their Defiant stove that only burns .75gph, I wonder how low the new EPA numbers will be?


----------



## Highbeam (Apr 8, 2010)

REF1 said:
			
		

> So what is the difference between shutting down an air control to cruise on a non cat, versus shutting down your bypass and air when a cat hits 500?
> 
> I just fail to see the efficacy in any argument which says a cat is more difficult to run than a non-cat.



So there you go, one step for the non-cat and three steps for the cat stove with one of them being a variable depending on the user reading a thermometer. Three times as complicated to run a cat stove. Open your eyes man.


----------



## BrowningBAR (Apr 8, 2010)

Highbeam said:
			
		

> REF1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*VC Intrepid Cat Stove:* Lever to engage Cat, Air Control Lever. Total: 2

*VC Vigilant Non Cat:* Vertical/Horizontal Burn Lever, Air Control Lever, Pipe Damper Control. Total: 3

*Hearthstone Heritage Non Cat:* Air Control, Pipe Damper Control. Total: 2

Please point out which stove is more complicated to use.


----------



## REF1 (Apr 8, 2010)

LOL. This is silly.

Highbeam, would you have us believe non-cat owners do not observe their stove and pipe thermometers? For those who operate their stoves with their "eyes closed," we salute you. Those of us who enjoy a catalytic stove do have our eyes open.


----------



## summit (Apr 8, 2010)

precaud said:
			
		

> summit, are there details on the new mandates anywhere?



I'm gonna try to find some. The HPBA trade mag had some charts, but I have been unable to locate it at the shop, and a google search does not find me any hard #'s... But the trade mag did say it had the potential to put many stove co's under because of the stricter mandates: new testing, retrofits, new UL listings, etc. think cali style emissions regs, no burn areas, etc.. The owner of Husdson River stoves was in a few weeks ago (we buy alot of pipe from their distribution co) and he was all worked up about it. 2014 was the target date for these, I believe.


----------



## BrotherBart (Apr 8, 2010)

summit said:
			
		

> precaud said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It is called "New Source Performance Standards". Here is the presentation they saw at HPBA:

http://www.epa.gov/burnwise/workshop2010/nsps.pdf


----------



## Highbeam (Apr 8, 2010)

BrowningBAR said:
			
		

> Highbeam said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Stove dampers are not recommended any manufacturer (that I know of) unless you have an extreme chimney situation, in other words, you created your own problem there. 

So that makes the non-cat only have one control. Winner. 

As you know, the VC stoves are not typical and really should be dismissed as a company. They also sell that other cat stove with several intake controls. 

Yes, it is silly but is so simple that you understand why the vast majority of stoves sold are noncat. It is mostly because they are easier to operate. I'm with you in regards to which stove tech is superior, I would rather own a cat stove but you and I are not typical, we are stove enthusiasts.


----------



## BrowningBAR (Apr 8, 2010)

Highbeam said:
			
		

> Stove dampers are not recommended any manufacturer (that I know of) unless you have an extreme chimney situation, in other words, you created your own problem there.



You're going to have to explain that one.


----------



## Highbeam (Apr 8, 2010)

Check your manual, the makers of the stoves do not recommend that you install an inline flue damper unless you have a high suction chimney which creates a super strong draft. On our heritages, BAR, the manual specs out a figure for measured suction before you should install an aftermarket damper. So what I'm saying is that adding a flue damper to the non-cat is optional at best, and actually discouraged by manufacturers. Ref1 added the damper to his "lever" count as though it is part of standard equipment when in reality it is not standard. Heck, you could add 8 dampers if you want.


----------



## REF1 (Apr 9, 2010)

Damper? What damper? I didn't add a damper. Main air intake and cat bypass rod/lever. Two. But as mentioned a bunch of non-cat stoves have two controls, as well. Dampers in pipes would make three in my book, and not part of the stove. 

Not that I have done any search on Why, but I would suspect the reason manufacturers stayed non-cat, or went non-cat is one of expense. Cats add money to the stove's design and manufacture - cat, housing, chamber, rod/lever connections ...adds to the price of the stove. If you can get the same test burn without the cat - less money to manufacture, but same retail price in the marketplace - more profit. Plus what the EPA regs add to the price of every stove. 

As far as operation I just do not believe it's an issue for any adult wanting to burn wood for heat.


----------



## Todd (Apr 9, 2010)

Highbeam said:
			
		

> Check your manual, the makers of the stoves do not recommend that you install an inline flue damper unless you have a high suction chimney which creates a super strong draft. On our heritages, BAR, the manual specs out a figure for measured suction before you should install an aftermarket damper. So what I'm saying is that adding a flue damper to the non-cat is optional at best, and actually discouraged by manufacturers. Ref1 added the damper to his "lever" count as though it is part of standard equipment when in reality it is not standard. Heck, you could add 8 dampers if you want.



Fudge factor, just cuz the manufacture recommends no damper doesn't mean you couldn't use one. I think they know most people don't burn properly as is and a damper would only worsen the situation but for stove enthusiests that burn dry wood and monitor stove and pipe temps a damper can help out with efficiency and burn times. 

Didn't you install a pipe damper this year?


----------



## BrotherBart (Apr 9, 2010)

Todd said:
			
		

> Highbeam said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



They don't encourage a pipe damper because if they did their stoves would have to be tested using one. And that would do nothing good for them in the testing with that fifteen foot chimney mandated by the test procedures. Kinda like a blower. If a blower is standard or an option with a stove a test run has to be made with the blower running full blast start to finish.


----------



## rdust (Apr 9, 2010)

A little off topic......I'm interested in looking at some of the Steel or CAST CAT stoves on the market.(not soapstone or VC)  I'm familiar with Blaze King and Buck, who else makes CAT stoves?


----------



## Highbeam (Apr 9, 2010)

That's funny ref1, you listed your heritage as:

"Hearthstone Heritage Non Cat: Air Control, Pipe Damper Control. Total: 2"

I have a heritage and there is no pipe damper unless you add one. So which is it? Did you add one or not? Regardless, the modern heritage only has one little lever to control the whole stove just like all but a handful of non-cat stoves. 

You're right, it just isn't an issue for any of us enthusiasts burning wood for heat. It is an issue for the thermostat crowd, those folks that have no interest in burning wood except for a cheap source of heat with the absolute minimum amount of fuss. The sales folks have spoken as well, additional fuss is not a sales plus. There's a reason that manual transmissions are getting rarer and rarer. 

We're both here because we have this oddly strong interest in burning wood. I think your new stove venture with the elm is great and am watching closely how it goes. Do you think this is normal? Not really, it makes perfect sense to all of us here but most people would think that I am weird for knowing so much about a guy's stove in VA.


----------



## bsearcey (Apr 9, 2010)

Backwoods Savage said:
			
		

> Eric, I'm sure you do the right thing. I just hate to hear the "extra work" or some even refer to it as being "more complicated" with having that little lever to move. Folks like that should not even burn wood. I think also too many people when the start burning wood tend to think of it just like an oil or gas furnace. You go out and buy wood, put wood in the stove and stay warm. Well, that sounds good, but as you know, there is much more to it and folks need to know this and should know before they buy the stove.
> 
> On the fuel, I like to tell folks if they are looking at stoves to start heating with wood that they are getting ahead of themselves already. The very first thing to look at and get on hand is their fuel supply. That one little subject itself can be very complicated for new wood burners....but they do need to learn. Hopefully we are able to help a lot of folks in these areas. That is the only reason I am on hearth.com is to try to help others.



Just to put my 2cents in.  This was my first year burning with an 1983 Consolidated Dutchwest Federal Airtight 224CCL (man that's a mouthfull).  Anyway it has a cat and worked flawless.  The reason why I quoted Backwoods was because like he said I put the stove before the wood and spent alot of my winter scrounging for wood.  I had enough standing dead trees that I was able to not technically burn green wood, but as all of you know standing dead when first split has a very high moisture content.  Aside from the few occasions where I was able to get my hands of some very good seasoned wood I was burning newly split standing dead wood.  Well towards the end of February (burning 24/7 since November) I noticed my cat had begun to deteriorate and had cracked.  This was a brand new cat from Condar.  Anyway it was thermal shock that did it.  Totally my fault.  

The times I was burning wood with 20% or less MC the heat output (especially when the cat and blower were working together) was tremendous.  Burn times were excellent considering my stove is very small.  The glass would definitely get sooty, but with good dry wood it would usually clear itself up with a nice hot fire.  If you burn wet wood you'll never get it clean even with a hot fire.  

As far as cats being "old technology" explain to me why they are in every single one of the cars we drive.  Obviously if this technology were not the best out there for efficiency and pollution reduction I would think the car industry would be using something else.


----------



## BrowningBAR (Apr 9, 2010)

Highbeam said:
			
		

> That's funny ref1, you listed your heritage as:
> 
> "Hearthstone Heritage Non Cat: Air Control, Pipe Damper Control. Total: 2"




That was me, not ref1.


----------



## Highbeam (Apr 9, 2010)

I'm so confused. Sorry about that.

There is no cat in my 2000 model truck. Never was either but they have since added them. Cats are wonderful technology especially  in autos since they work with NO human input and last for pretty much the life of the car.

I did try and put a damper in my stove pipe bacause I wanted additional control over my non-cat for super long burntimes, I'm jealous of the cat guys, but it wouldn't work since Simpson appliance adapters don't adapt to hearthstone flue outlets. I know, I actually wanted to add fuss and steps to stove operation. We are enthusiasts.


----------



## begreen (Apr 9, 2010)

It is an older technology for EPA clean burns, though not that old. 



> I would think the car industry would be using something else.



This is why the auto industry is preparing for a switch to electrics and hydrogen powered fuel cells. Though there has been some interesting work on new catalysts recently. It will be interesting to see if it gets applied in the woodstove industry.


----------



## Slow1 (Apr 9, 2010)

Anytime someone brings up the whole "cat in the car" discussion I am left wondering what the blazes it has to do with stoves?  Sure I know they do much of the same thing (i.e. combust remaining CO and other organics in the exhaust) but the purpose is somewhat different isn't it?  We don't optimize cars for the heat they produce - the cat there is simply to clean up the exhaust and if anything it negatively affects the performance of the vehicle.

I do think it is an "older" technology and stoves may well be borrowing/learning from the auto industry research but I don't know as that has much to do with whether or not current cat stoves are good or bad, easy or hard to operate etc.   Older does not imply inferior to me - simply mature.  This idea that something has to be new (or that newer is automatically better) is, in my opinion, a flawed viewpoint.  Now, when IS that new stove from Woodstock going to come out so I can order one?


----------



## Highbeam (Apr 9, 2010)

"Older does not imply inferior to me - simply mature."

I'll have to use that. Older VCs were better than new ones, older diesels are better too. I wonder how often newer really does equal better.


----------



## BrotherBart (Apr 9, 2010)

Imagine how many cars you would sell if the owner's manual said something like "Start the car and hold the accelerator half way down until the pyrometer reads 500 then pull the lever next to the drivers seat to close the bypass and engage the combustor. You can then proceed to the proceed to drive the car.".


----------



## BrowningBAR (Apr 9, 2010)

BrotherBart said:
			
		

> Imagine how many cars you would sell if the owner's manual said something like "Start the car and hold the accelerator half way down until the pyrometer reads 500 then pull the lever next to the drivers seat to close the bypass and engage the combustor. You can then proceed to the proceed to drive the car.".



I prefer manual transmission cars.


----------



## BrotherBart (Apr 9, 2010)

BrowningBAR said:
			
		

> BrotherBart said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Oh great. Now ya gotta open the bypass for each gear change and then close it again.  :lol:


----------



## BrowningBAR (Apr 9, 2010)

BrotherBart said:
			
		

> BrowningBAR said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I also like old manual transmission 4x4 jeeps when you need to turn the wheel hubs to use four wheel drive.


----------



## BrotherBart (Apr 9, 2010)

BrowningBAR said:
			
		

> BrotherBart said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You would have been in heaven driving that over the road tractor I drove for a while with the two stick Spicer transmission. Arm crooked through the steering wheel shifting with both hands at fifty miles an hour with 40,000 pounds behind ya.

Here is how it is done. Notice that you never touch the clutch.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3cFz9wzGPw


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Apr 9, 2010)

Highbeam said:
			
		

> "Older does not imply inferior to me - simply mature."
> 
> I'll have to use that. Older VCs were better than new ones, older diesels are better too. I wonder how often newer really does equal better.




Yes, older wine. Some older women. The older the buck the stiffer the horn, etc.


----------



## REF1 (Apr 10, 2010)

I realize the auto/stove illustration is a flawed apples and oranges to some degree. And technology moves forward and perhaps some completely new technology will grab the wood stove industry. Until then, though, in a real world situation of non-perfect firewood, and imperfect conditions which often happen, I cannot fathom anyone who knows how to use any wood stove would complain using a cat is too difficult compared to a noncat. Brand new users? Possible, but again, even using a noncat for the first time ... look at the posts that come in here from newbies totally frustrated with some aspect of using their set up, cat, noncat ... earning curve. Everything has a learning curve. 

I guess my partiality comes from using both and seeing the results of each type of unit. I'll take the second function, and now burn off into the sunset. Great thread, though.


----------



## BrotherBart (Apr 10, 2010)

With your hybrid ref1 you will never know if it is the cat or the burn tubes that are really getting it done.  :lol:


----------



## REF1 (Apr 11, 2010)

Ha! Both. There ya go. I'm a cat non-cat burner. Who can argue with me now!


----------



## BrowningBAR (Apr 11, 2010)

REF1 said:
			
		

> Ha! Both. There ya go. I'm a cat non-cat burner. Who can argue with me now!




The complexity of merging a cat and non-cat stove has been known to cause nose bleeds and black holes.


----------



## Slow1 (Apr 11, 2010)

BrowningBAR said:
			
		

> REF1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Just imagine what will happen when you start burning pine in that thing!


----------



## Todd (Apr 11, 2010)

REF1 said:
			
		

> Ha! Both. There ya go. I'm a cat non-cat burner. Who can argue with me now!



Ha, don't tempt us! Back when Woodstock was looking into a hybrid for the Fireview I remember talking with one of their guys and he said they couldn't achieve the long burns and basically all the cat was doing was cleaning up what little is left after the fire boxes secondary burn. They also thought about some kind of hybrid for their new stove but found the cat alone to burn better.


----------



## REF1 (Apr 11, 2010)

Does the Fireview have secondary tubes in their box? I didn't know that. Or is it something else? What is their baffle made from? Is it soapstone resting on a frame of some kind?


----------



## Todd (Apr 12, 2010)

REF1 said:
			
		

> Does the Fireview have secondary tubes in their box? I didn't know that. Or is it something else? What is their baffle made from? Is it soapstone resting on a frame of some kind?



No secondary air tubes, but they were tinkering with the idea and then decided against it and are currently building a new larger stove. The baffle is cast iron and there is an opening in front where the cat sits behind a screen. If you go to their web site and find the cat cleaning slide show you can kind a see how it all works.


----------



## Highbeam (Apr 12, 2010)

Todd said:
			
		

> REF1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



How about an update on that new woodstock. I hear tidbits like this and wonder what the actual status is. Any photos yet? Even some idea if it is a fireview or keystone on roids?


----------



## sauer (Apr 12, 2010)

I run both. Fireview upstairs and the Mansfield in the man cave. They both are different animals. Both are great heaters. some like ford, some like chevys. The best one is the one you own


----------



## BrotherBart (Apr 12, 2010)

sauer said:
			
		

> I run both. Fireview upstairs and the Mansfield in the man cave. They both are different animals. Both are great heaters. some like ford, some like chevys. The best one is the one you own



The man said it all.


----------



## Todd (Apr 12, 2010)

Highbeam said:
			
		

> Todd said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Last time I talked to them they said they will post pics and details on their site in about 3 weeks and to be patient, well it's been 3 weeks, hopefully we will see something soon. I did notice they changed their web site some and will soon have a blog and videos. They also have a sign up for special pre-release pricing for the new stove but they won't give me those details yet either.


----------



## Backwoods Savage (Apr 12, 2010)

I got an email from one fellow from Woodstock and he is working on the web page this morning. He did not mention anything about the new stove yet though.


----------



## REF1 (Apr 12, 2010)

"Fact is, with board replacement the maintenance costs of this non-cat and a cat stove ain’t gonna be a dime’s worth of difference." BrotherBart

Hey, I caught ya, BB. At least as far as the argument of cat replacement folks use. Not that you have used it. Have you? In any event, it appears some non cats have probable maintenance costs associated with cat replacement, as well. So, we are down to that second lever. Unless, of course, a PE enthusiast comes in here and says, Sorry, no ceramic baffle. Non cats win.


----------



## Slow1 (Apr 12, 2010)

Sure am glad we live in a free country where lots of different stoves get to compete in the market!  Everyone can look around and choose which ones they like best and go for it.  Stove makers will keep on trying to improve things - whatever that may mean to the consumers paying for them - and thus in theory stoves (cat, burn tube, and whatever else may come down the pipe next) will only get better.


----------



## BigBlockChevy (Apr 14, 2010)

I think (know) the catalytic stoves guys are light years ahead of where they were in the 1980's.  I spoke with Matt at Sud Chemie before I bought my King.  He pointed out that 80% of catalytic failures are in 1 specific brand of stove.  He would not say which brand.  The stove builders attend a yearly event where they display new products.  They also have classes they teach at the same time. (check out the HPBA.org web site)  

They had a class on catalytic stoves and have this link to the class materials, which seems to support why I love my King model stove.  Although no mention is made of brand names, you can bet from these forums who is who!

The science side of this is cool to read.

http://www.chc-hpba.org/chc_news.htm

Enjoy the reading and curent factual test data they taught....


----------



## REF1 (Apr 15, 2010)

I got a 404 link not found window. Is that link correct?


----------



## begreen (Apr 15, 2010)

The link has a space in it. Copy and paste the entire link into the browser address space to connect to the document.


----------



## BigBlockChevy (Apr 15, 2010)

I fixed the link for those interested.  What's amazing is that you will see one of the catalytic stoves will burn cleaner for up to 30 years before it burns as dirty as a (highest limit) EPA noncatalytic stove.

I think I have that one!!


----------



## Todd (Apr 15, 2010)

Excellent link. I was impressed with the Omni tests and how long a cat can survive. Also noticed in that chart where they display the gph comparison at different burn rates that the cat stoves actually burn cleaner at the low air setting (0.29) than the higher setting (4.67). When they come up with the overall gph number it must be an average of the whole burn range when in reality 80% of the stove use is in the lower burn range so a cat stoves majority of the burn is usually under 1gph which I find pretty incredible. Non cats are about 3 times dirtier in the lower burn than cats according to that chart.


----------



## Slow1 (Apr 15, 2010)

I can't get the link  to load (perhaps my work connection...).  Does it get into other things such as CO output?  I've always wondered if cat stoves also burn off more CO than non-cats.  Seems to me they just might - isn't this what the cat on a car is there for?


----------



## BigBlockChevy (Apr 15, 2010)

There are two documents on that site.  One has to do with the age study and the other the role of catalytic stoves in renewable energy.  That second document has some great details and charts on CO and other gases.  I did not know how many gases were produced by wood smoke until I read the document.  (They call them Volatile Organic Compounds).

It looks like the cataltyic stoves eat these up 100%, except methane which was mostly consumed at higher catalytic combustor temperatures.

What I do know and understand is what I see (or don't see) and that is no smoke pooring from my chimney for the past 7 years or more from my King.

http://www.chc-hpba.org/chc_news.htm


----------



## ddown (Apr 16, 2010)

Very interesting reads think about switching to a cat stove for longer lower burns


----------



## REF1 (Apr 17, 2010)

4. It’s not enough to assume market conditions will sort out those stoves that are durable and
those that are not. Manufacturers must be held accountable for building durable products. This
applies to both catalytic wood stoves and non-catalytic wood stoves. An informal survey of
hearth retailers in February of 2009 showed that a number of components used in the construction
of specific non-catalytic wood were known to fail, in some models regularly. Secondary air
tubes, refractory materials and insulating blankets can fail as a result of exposure to higher temperatures
with the end result being higher levels of emissions being produced. The costs associated
with these parts can at times exceed the cost of combustor replacement."


That is a great paragraph in the second study. Goes to the heart of another thread I resurrected last week. The whole thing was extremely useful for me. Lots of good insights into the entire discussion of cats versus noncats. 

If the Fed goes with Washington state regs, there are a number of stoves on the EPA list which will not pass. Until some new technology comes along to replace cats, I imagine they shall not only be around a long time, but even grow in numbers. 

My original Catalytic Elm should have suffered thermal shock. It may have, and cats could have lasted longer than they did. This new one I have prevents that thermal shock possibility, so it should last to an optimum degree. The entire concept of making a stove and then adding a combustor, rather than designing a stove around the combustor is a really important point made in the presentations. Kudos to those manufacturers who hung on and designed better catalytic stoves.


----------



## REF1 (Apr 17, 2010)

The second presentation mentions the CHC's position that there should be only one number that all manufacturers go by, not two - a number for cats stoves and a number for noncat stoves. That does seem fair. Either a certain number of particulates is harmful or not. There is no fair reason why cat stoves should be restricted by lower numbers. It just shows the regulators expect cat stoves to perform better. If the EPA actually set such a low single standard, most manufacturers would start scrambling, that's for sure, looking at the EPA manufacturers list. Lots of good numbers, but if lowered to cat standard, big problems for some companies. Either raise the number for cat stoves, or lower it for noncats.


----------



## REF1 (Apr 17, 2010)

If the numbers in the presentation are solid, and the EPA is truly going after the lowest pollution numbers a stove can make, one might predict the next generation of stoves to be hybrids, or thoroughly redesigned cats. But noncats are not going to remain the current trend, unless they can lobby for the higher numbers to remain for them. Back to politics, which is why I hate politics. There should not even BE an EPA, Constitutionally speaking, but there is, and if they lower the regs to one number everyone meets, it will change the manufacturing industry again.


----------



## Todd (Apr 17, 2010)

I think back when phase II went into effect the cats weren't as good as today and probably degraded faster so the EPA set a lower gph standard thinking after a few years those gph numbers would rise to noncat levels.


----------



## REF1 (Apr 17, 2010)

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying, Todd.


----------



## Todd (Apr 18, 2010)

I was referencing your #170 post on why I think the EPA went with a lower gph for cat stoves verses noncats. 20 or so years ago phase 2 went into effect and I'm thinking the cat technology wasn't as good for wood stoves back then as they are now and the old cats probably started out very clean but degraded to non cat levels or worse in a few years so the EPA made it tougher on cats.


----------



## REF1 (Apr 19, 2010)

I see. Given the combustor industry claims to be putting out better products now, it will be interesting to see if the EPA goes with one new number all stoves must meet, cat or noncat. That's is the way it should be.


----------



## Highbeam (Apr 19, 2010)

This is like having two different physical performance standards for firemen/policemen. The standard is much tougher for a male but somehow I don't get to choose who gets to drag my butt out of a burning building.


----------



## Dakotas Dad (Apr 19, 2010)

Highbeam said:
			
		

> This is like having two different physical performance standards for firemen/policemen. The standard is much tougher for a male but somehow I don't get to choose who gets to drag my butt out of a burning building.



Army's the same way, and I assume so are the other services.


----------



## firefighterjake (Apr 20, 2010)

Highbeam said:
			
		

> This is like having two different physical performance standards for firemen/policemen. The standard is much tougher for a male but somehow I don't get to choose who gets to drag my butt out of a burning building.



HehHeh . . . you should meet Firefighter Mel . . . she's not very tall, but she's like Mighty Mouse . . . on steroids . . . seriously . . . I think she could out lift and out perform over 1/2 or more of the guys here at our station.


----------



## Highbeam (Apr 20, 2010)

I'd be thrilled to have her pull me out. I am all for women (maybe my two daughters) doing these jobs with the emphasis on "doing" them. If you can't meet the standard, then you aren't doing the job. Sorry for the sidetrack, its a pet peeve of mine.


----------



## Defiant (Apr 21, 2010)

More heat (bang) for your wood, and understanding the maintenance and concepts of clean wood burning for supplemental or primary heat a cat stove is better. The non cat stoves require less attention but still have their issues.


----------

