# Advice Please: Intrepid I or Intrepid II



## josde21 (Mar 1, 2015)

Hi,

I am new to this forum, so please be kind.... I just bought a house in northern NJ, and it is COLD here lately.

I am looking for a budget solution, and am looking to purchase a wood stove (I grew up with a couple different varieties in my parents home through the years).

We have our mind made up on the Intrepid, or the Intrepid II, I found 2 used ones in the area.

My question for the group here is, what are the opinions of the Intrepid I vs. Intrepid II. Is one of a higher quality than the other?

The idea of a simpler stove (non-catalytic) was appealing to me, as I hear that it is fairly expensive to replace and the catalytic stoves can be a bit more choosy for the type of wood you are burning in them. I am eager to hear opinions on this.

The intrepid I in question (while significantly cheaper) is an older stove in need of some serious TLC....a casting on the top of the stove is broken as well. So my question here is, are parts still available for the Intrepid? If they are, can they be sourced from a local dealer, or online, etc?

The Intrepid II while newer, is significantly more expensive, but does appear to be in good condition without being in need of a rebuild (other than maybe some firebricks).

I do not know the year either were built. I am working to learn what I can about model numbers, to supply some more information on here.

Are parts interchangeable from the Intrepid II to the Intrepid I?

We are going to be running the stove to heat our home (approximately 1100 sq. ft.) to supplement our radiators and cut down on cost. It will be placed in an older Stone fireplace with the pipe running up the chimney.

Hoping this gives enough information for everyone.

Thanks for your advice!


----------



## Oldman47 (Mar 1, 2015)

Welcome to the forum. I am also a newbie when it comes to burning. In fact I don't even have a functioning stove yet. As far as a cat vs. a non-cat, we have ongoing disputes on that very subject here. The way it seems to be going so far is that the cat stoves are more economic of fuel but for someone used to the older style stoves they require a lot of learning. You are probably like me and many others who feel you should be able to see flames when you are getting loads of heat but the cat stoves often do not run that way. In fact a smoldering main fire is often when they produce a lot of their heat. They seem to be easier to control for people who understand them but I am installing a non-cat in a new home build that I have in progress. I can adapt from a "smoke dragon", meaning an old fashioned stove, to a secondary burn stove fairly easily but so far am not ready to take that next logical step. Maybe I am just too old to learn but I find a stove that has no visible flames as a disappointment. I really do like a fire.


----------



## begreen (Mar 1, 2015)

What is going to be important is the condition of the stove and the price. Both stoves are small and will not have a long burn time, but the cat version will go longer between reloads. What are the prices? Would you consider any alternatives?


----------



## Simonkenton (Mar 1, 2015)

Y'all have made your mind up on the Intrepid?   Why did you make that decision?

Spend a half hour researching on this forum, and you will not want to buy a Vermont Castings stove.
You must study, and study some more, Grasshopper. Only then will you attain wisdom.


----------



## begreen (Mar 1, 2015)

It's mostly the downdraft EPA stoves made by VC that earned the poor reputation. The Intrepids are not an awful stove. The Intrepid II is a cat stove and reasonably affordable to rebuild every 7-10 yrs. Not everyone's cup of tea, but it is the smallest cat stove on the market and for some an attractive choice. The original Intrepid was pretty durable, but by given its age by now most would need full servicing. If you are lucky enough to find one with low miles and need a small heater, it's a decent little stove.

That said, there are a lot more options in small stoves which are less complex and may be a suitable option worth considering.


----------



## legrandice (Mar 1, 2015)

We have an intrepid I that was used to heat our house for a few years.  It did OK, but was small and needed frequent loads of wood.  It now lives at my parents summer cottage and is perfect for use in the fall and spring to take the chill out.  If you have the option, I would look for a slightly larger stove.  

FYI, my house was 1600 sq/ft and the intrepid was just able to keep it 60 degrees working hard when it was cold out.


----------



## josde21 (Mar 2, 2015)

begreen said:


> What is going to be important is the condition of the stove and the price. Both stoves are small and will not have a long burn time, but the cat version will go longer between reloads. What are the prices? Would you consider any alternatives?


Thanks for your reply, I would consider alternatives, but need to make a decision to get something in here sooner rather than later. I appreciate the insight into the burn times. Intrepid 1 - $400 (or so) and Intrepid 2 - $750.


----------



## josde21 (Mar 2, 2015)

legrandice said:


> We have an intrepid I that was used to heat our house for a few years.  It did OK, but was small and needed frequent loads of wood.  It now lives at my parents summer cottage and is perfect for use in the fall and spring to take the chill out.  If you have the option, I would look for a slightly larger stove.
> 
> FYI, my house was 1600 sq/ft and the intrepid was just able to keep it 60 degrees working hard when it was cold out.



Thanks for your reply, this is good info. I really don't have an option, this is about the largest I can fit in the living room, using the existing fireplace.


----------



## josde21 (Mar 2, 2015)

begreen said:


> It's mostly the downdraft EPA stoves made by VC that earned the poor reputation. The Intrepids are not an awful stove. The Intrepid II is a cat stove and reasonably affordable to rebuild every 7-10 yrs. Not everyone's cup of tea, but it is the smallest cat stove on the market and for some an attractive choice. The original Intrepid was pretty durable, but by given its age by now most would need full servicing. If you are lucky enough to find one with low miles and need a small heater, it's a decent little stove.
> 
> That said, there are a lot more options in small stoves which are less complex and may be a suitable option worth considering.



Thanks for your reply. I just heard good things about the intrepid stove. I am interested to hear some of your suggestions regarding the small stove alternatives. Just need to make a decision and move forward, and the local stores are pushing the intrepid and resolute acclaim. Thanks for your help.


----------



## josde21 (Mar 2, 2015)

Oldman47 said:


> Welcome to the forum. I am also a newbie when it comes to burning. In fact I don't even have a functioning stove yet. As far as a cat vs. a non-cat, we have ongoing disputes on that very subject here. The way it seems to be going so far is that the cat stoves are more economic of fuel but for someone used to the older style stoves they require a lot of learning. You are probably like me and many others who feel you should be able to see flames when you are getting loads of heat but the cat stoves often do not run that way. In fact a smoldering main fire is often when they produce a lot of their heat. They seem to be easier to control for people who understand them but I am installing a non-cat in a new home build that I have in progress. I can adapt from a "smoke dragon", meaning an old fashioned stove, to a secondary burn stove fairly easily but so far am not ready to take that next logical step. Maybe I am just too old to learn but I find a stove that has no visible flames as a disappointment. I really do like a fire.



Thanks for your reply! This is helpful information.


----------



## josde21 (Mar 2, 2015)

josde21 said:


> Hi,
> 
> I am new to this forum, so please be kind.... I just bought a house in northern NJ, and it is COLD here lately.
> 
> ...




I should have also asked, will the Intrepid II function similarly to the regular intrepid, if you remove the CAT?


----------



## Simonkenton (Mar 2, 2015)

"Thanks for your reply, I would consider alternatives, but need to make a decision to get something in here sooner rather than later. I appreciate the insight into the burn times. Intrepid 1 - $400 (or so) and Intrepid 2 - $750."

What's the rush? It is March. Winter is almost over. You have six months to make your decision. Take your time and get it right the first time.


----------



## begreen (Mar 2, 2015)

josde21 said:


> Thanks for your reply. I just heard good things about the intrepid stove. I am interested to hear some of your suggestions regarding the small stove alternatives. Just need to make a decision and move forward, and the local stores are pushing the intrepid and resolute acclaim. Thanks for your help.


What are the factors that determined the Intrepid as being the best for this location? Can you post a picture of the entire fireplace and provide its opening dimensions?

Do you know anything about the condition of either of the two Intrepids. In particular have you closely examined them for cracks and inner component integrity?


----------



## begreen (Mar 2, 2015)

josde21 said:


> I should have also asked, will the Intrepid II function similarly to the regular intrepid, if you remove the CAT?


No. The original Intrepid went into downdraft burning mode with the bypass closed. The Intrepid II without the cat would have no such secondary burning.


----------



## njmeder (Mar 2, 2015)

I purchased a used Intrepid II a few back(prior to joining Hearth.com) based on the reliability and reputation of two VC stoves we had growing up as a kid and they're certainly not the stoves they used to be. Constant tinkering and maintenance as others have alluded to. Aesthetically the stove is wonderful and it heats well for its size but it's capacity is limited which has become an issue for me based on these last few heating seasons.

If I could go back I certainly would not be looking at an Intrepid. There are many other great stoves that require far less energy to operate.


----------



## Foz682 (Mar 2, 2015)

We had an Intrepid II up until last week, I disliked every minute I owned it. It heated our 1400 sq ft house poorly and burn times were only about 4 hrs, 5 at best. The cat could be very frustrating at times and is about $300 to replace. Very nice looking stove but also very time consuming.


----------



## elmoleaf (Mar 2, 2015)

Considerations in no particular order:
1. Intrepid specs state 16" log...this is true really only when the firebox is mostly empty. I cut my own wood to 14", which is a lot easier to load.

2. Top loading is very nice feature. Nothing really fits in thru front if you have the andirons in place (which I do to keep wood from hitting the glass during top loading).

3. I think the catalyst for the II is just a bit more than US $120 or so (it's been a few years since I replaced). The more expensive item is the white refractory chamber inside the stove that holds the catalyst...it's very fragile and easily damaged. I think that was well over $200 to replace. I would not buy a II with a damaged chamber for $750, giving the price of a new chamber. You should get the stove's exploded parts diagram online and price out the typical replacement parts via Black Swan or some other retailer before you inspect a used stove....that way you know what parts are typically replaced/their cost...and thus you can negotiate lower price with the used stove's seller.

4. The II needs a bottom heat shield. Make sure the stove comes with it or get one elsewhere (I made mine). Also check your proposed installation location for necessary clearances etc/modifications that may be required. With bottom heat shield and the regular legs, the II only requires spark protection at floor. Short leg kit may have different hearth requirements.

5. Both of these stoves are cast iron parts held together with tie rods. If the stove has been moved and leveraged or handled via holding/pulling on door openings etc, typically the seams (which have stove cement in them) will become loose. Any used stove of this type is a good candidate for tear down/rebuild before using to ensure it's airtight at the seams (Not terribly complicated to do, just requires time and attention to detail).

I love the look of the stove, so I'm willing to put up with some of the drawbacks (checking/cleaning catalyst, small ash pan, etc.). I've got a pretty tight well-insulated house, so my used Intrepid II has worked great for supplementing my oil heat.


----------



## Simonkenton (Mar 3, 2015)

*Vermont Castings Intrepid I or Intrepid II?*
This poll will close on Mar 8, 2015 at 3:55 PM.

 intrepid I
 Intrepid II  
None of the above  CHECK


----------



## josde21 (Mar 8, 2015)

elmoleaf said:


> Considerations in no particular order:
> 1. Intrepid specs state 16" log...this is true really only when the firebox is mostly empty. I cut my own wood to 14", which is a lot easier to load.
> 
> 2. Top loading is very nice feature. Nothing really fits in thru front if you have the andirons in place (which I do to keep wood from hitting the glass during top loading).
> ...



thanks for all of this great information. I seriously appreciate it.


----------

