# Ready to Join The Gang - Time For a Wood Stove!



## Log Splitter (Oct 6, 2016)

(just realized how long this was!  If you don't want to read, check the TLDR summary at bottom)

Hello gang.  I've been lurking for a while, and appreciate all of the useful information these forums have to offer.  Here's my story:

I grew up in NY, about an hour North of NYC.  Once I graduated college, I moved down to Florida.  6 years later, we're back in New York, and this is the first time we'll be here as home owners during a winter!

My house is currently heated through oil and forced air.  It's a 1200 sq ft home with an unfinished basement.  Not important to focus on heating the basement, but rather the upstairs living area.  We currently have a fireplace located at one end of the home where the living room/dining room/kitchen are all relatively open to each other.  Then a long hallway, and then the 3 beds and bathroom.  Standard raised ranch type layout.

DIMENSIONS:
The opening for my masonry fireplace now is 42" wide by 31" high.  The bottom depth is 24.5".  The rear high is 15" and width is 28".  My current hearth  is a little over 16".  The chimney runs throughout the exterior of the house.  Would need a liner to run from stove up the chimney.

We just did a major tree clearing in our backyard, so we're pretty set with wood.  Much of it will need to season for next year, but we should have close to enough to work for this year.

Past records indicate this house goes through 800-1000 gallons per winter.

Here is what I'd like to be able to do:

1. Heat the house exclusively through wood burning.  Either a stand alone stove or a wood burning insert.
2. Be large enough to last 6-8 hours through the night, and be ready to reload in the morning.
3. Wife would prefer insert over standalone, but if price or effectiveness are steeply in favor of standalone, she can be swayed.  We want a large glass door to be able to see the fire, and hopefully hear the crackle/pops to enhance the ambiance.  Also would prefer to not have to deal with a loud obnoxious fan 24/7 if possible.

And finally, I went around to some local places today.  Most seemed quite a bit more expensive than what people here on the forums talk about.  I'd say about 20% higher.  So here are those questions:

a. Do you buy locally, or order online?
b. And if you do buy locally, do you have them install, or find someone else to install?  Most of these guys seem to be quoting install (including install materials) around $2500-$3000, where they itemize as half material, half labor.

I'd say my overall budget for this project is $5k.  I anticipated spending quite a bit less than that at first, but after install costs came into the picture, I had to re-assess.

I'd love to hear people's thoughts on this, specifically about standalone vs insert, cubic feet, where to buy, and who to have install.

Any an all advice and criticism would be appreciated.

Thanks!

*********************
TLDR: First winter as homeowner in NY.  Have current ineffective fireplace.  Want a stove of some sort.  Budget is $5k, but I had planned to spend quite a bit less.  House is 1200 sq ft, not insulated well.  800-1000 gallons of oil yearly in a forced air system.  Want to burn wood as exclusive source of heat.  Want a nice large glass door, and to be able to last 6-8 hours unmanned.  Dimensions of fireplace listed above.


----------



## begreen (Oct 6, 2016)

Welcome. You'll find the gamut of installs here from having a pro or stove dealer install to a complete DIY. To easily keep within budget a freestanding stove in the fireplace connected to an insulated liner would be first suggestion. Looks like an Englander 30NC could squeak in there. For an insert the smaller Englander 13NCi is worth considering. 

Run the furnace a couple times a day in very cold weather to exercise it and keep pipes from freezing.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 6, 2016)

This is a smaller fireplace?  From some other things I've seen, I actually thought it was above average size.  Did you see the dimensions I posted?

I'm completely guessing and probably totally wrong though 

Just looked at the 13NCi, and the insert's cover without some sort of mod is only 30" and won't cover the entire fireplace top to bottom.  I'll have to remeasure to make sure, but from what I remember, if anything, was probably closer to 32".

Also, is that wood burning stove too big?  The needed to be heated area is only 1200 sq ft.  Does this become inefficient overkill?

And random, but there's a place going out of business near us.  One of the only inserts they have left is the Enerzone 1.8 insert.  Don't know if it's a good deal, but on sale for $950.


----------



## begreen (Oct 7, 2016)

The 30NC is a bit oversized for a well-insulated 1200 sq ft house in say southern NJ, but not for a poorly insulated house in upstate NY. The larger size will help extend the burn time. It doesn't need to be filled to the gills for a good long fire. Otherwise the smaller 13NC freestanding is an option or a metal strip painted back could be added to the insert surround to make up the space. The Enerzone would work well. That is a great price if new. It's made by SBI, same mfg. as Osburn and Drolet stoves.


----------



## EatenByLimestone (Oct 7, 2016)

I'll be unpopular, but I'd spend money on insulating and air sealing first.  It was last on my list and if I'd known the difference it would make, it would have been first.  Less noise, less wood burnt, more stable house temps.... Just to name a few benefits.


----------



## kennyp2339 (Oct 7, 2016)

go to Fire Comfort in Goshen NY, great show room, knowledgeable staff, and decent prices


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 7, 2016)

begreen said:


> The 30NC is a bit oversized for a well-insulated 1200 sq ft house in say southern NJ, but not for a poorly insulated house in upstate NY. The larger size will help extend the burn time. It doesn't need to be filled to the gills for a good long fire. Otherwise the smaller 13NC freestanding is an option or a metal strip painted back could be added to the insert surround to make up the space. The Enerzone would work well. That is a great price if new. It's made by SBI, same mfg. as Osburn and Drolet stoves.



Yes, the Enerzone insert is new.  Their "normal" sale price was $1,899, but their showroom is closing and apparently turning into a training center.  It's 50% off so $950+tax.  But isn't this a far cry from what something like the 30NC or the 13NCi could produce?



EatenByLimestone said:


> I'll be unpopular, but I'd spend money on insulating and air sealing first.  It was last on my list and if I'd known the difference it would make, it would have been first.  Less noise, less wood burnt, more stable house temps.... Just to name a few benefits.



Good points.  It's always tough to look at the big picture first even though it's the logical route!



kennyp2339 said:


> go to Fire Comfort in Goshen NY, great show room, knowledgeable staff, and decent prices



I'm in Poughkeepsie, so probably about an hour away.  I'll have to add it to the list!  These forums are great, but I'd like to be able to talk to some people in person about what I'm looking for.


----------



## begreen (Oct 7, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> Yes, the Enerzone insert is new. Their "normal" sale price was $1,899, but their showroom is closing and apparently turning into a training center. It's 50% off so $950+tax. But isn't this a far cry from what something like the 30NC or the 13NCi could produce?


Same sized firebox as the Englander 13NCi. The difference is that it is a shallower, wider firebox which makes it an E/W loader. It's a well made unit and SBI makes a good stove. For sure that is a great price.


----------



## mol1jb (Oct 7, 2016)

EatenByLimestone said:


> I'll be unpopular, but I'd spend money on insulating and air sealing first.  It was last on my list and if I'd known the difference it would make, it would have been first.  Less noise, less wood burnt, more stable house temps.... Just to name a few benefits.



I would have to agree with Limestone. Last year when I moved into my 1200sqft ranch in central IL I said we are not getting a stove until we insulate this place first. It is a small price to pay for a great yearly return. And usually attic insulating is easily DIY. Now after one winter of seeing what our heat demands actually are I can size our stove to the demands we need with out heating us out of the living room. I am currently installing our Pacific Energy Super 27 (2.0cuft stove). 

Also if you feel comfortable with your knowledge of stoves/inserts, you can find great deals buying used. I got our Super 27 used for 1/3 of what it is new. And they barely burned in it. I had to drive 3 hours to pick it up but that is worth the money saved for me.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 7, 2016)

begreen said:


> Same sized firebox as the Englander 13NCi. The difference is that it is a shallower, wider firebox which makes it an E/W loader. It's a well made unit and SBI makes a good stove. For sure that is a great price.



Hmm, I guess I'm a little confused.  So the volume space of the box isn't the quantifying factor in the "size" of the box, but it's rather just the left/right size?  I would think that a higher volume box and all other factors considered would produce more heat, no?

And just to double check, you think a box of this size would be adequate to reach down the hall to the bedrooms of an older, poorly insulated 1200 sq ft home?  Would the Englander insert at a similar price make more sense?  Seems like they're maybe $100 more and can be bought at Home Depot.

Sorry if the questions are getting redundant!  Also, with a standard external chimney, is there a ballpark estimate between installs and install materials?  I thought the $3,000 price I was quoted was a bit high...


----------



## begreen (Oct 7, 2016)

The 13NCi and the Enerzone 1.8 are both 1.8 cu ft stoves. The volume is the same but the inside dimensions of the fireboxes vary. One is a more square firebox than the other. The 30NC firebox is almost twice as large. You can get more heat out of the larger firebox if you ran it wide open, but if you throttle it back you get a longer burn time (more fuel reserves).

Installation prices are going to vary depending on the materials used, what's included and the labor done. A top of the line heavy duty liner can cost twice what a basic lightweight liner costs. $3K does sound high unless there are confounding factors like height, roof pitch, whether tiles need to be busted out, liner quality and insulation, blockoff plate building, etc.. Maybe get some competitive quotes from certified sweeps in your area. 

www.csia.org


----------



## Ashful (Oct 7, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> This is a smaller fireplace?


That's a matter of perspective.  From here, I'd say, yes.  

If going the DIY route, you could easily do a pretty nice stove or insert with liner for less than $5k, and that doesn't limit your choice of stoves.  Involving a pro, you'll probably be closer to $6k for the same.  Going with a more budget-minded stove could still keep you under $5k, even with a pro install.

Poughkeepsie has a 10 year average of 6638 HDD's per year.  You're running 900 gal / 1200 sq.ft., or 0.75 gal/sq.ft.  Heating oil is around 140,000 BTU/gal, so assuming you're furnace is around 85% efficient, you're running about 13.45 BTU/HDD/sq.ft.  That puts you around the 64th (eyeballing) percentile for energy use, among homes in the northeast, midwest, and west, as of 1997 survey.

So the advice to do some air sealing is good, but I'd do this in tandem with, not in lieu of installing a stove today.  No reason one activity should interfere with the other.


----------



## Ashful (Oct 7, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> Hmm, I guess I'm a little confused.  So the volume space of the box isn't the quantifying factor in the "size" of the box, but it's rather just the left/right size?  I would think that a higher volume box and all other factors considered would produce more heat, no?


All else equal, volume dictates burn time at a given heat output level.  The rate of heat transfer is mostly dependent on surface area and surface temperature, with area being only partially related to volume, all else being equal.


----------



## Rearscreen (Oct 7, 2016)

Alternative could be a wood burning EPA approved furnace.


----------



## Woody Stover (Oct 7, 2016)

They describe the Enerzone blower as "ultra-quiet" but I don't even like my computer fans so I prefer free-standing stoves. And the feeling of radiant heat off the box as you sit in the living room can't be beat. If you get a shallow, wide stove you might be able to fit it on the hearth without alterations. If your attic insulation is poor, you will reap _HUGE_ benefits in heat retention by beefing it up, and it's easy to do.


----------



## Rearscreen (Oct 7, 2016)

Woody Stover is right, you can't beat the feeling of radiant. I believe there are different degrees of radiant warmth. Sometimes it can be too much, take the feeling of the sun in the last 15 years for example. But sit in front of my soapstone even if the room temp is cool...ahhhh
I'm not a fan (no pun intended) of hot air furnaces, but for 2 to 5 grand Log Splitter could heat with wood replacing the oil fired burner.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 8, 2016)

Thanks to all for the suggestions and advice.

I went to a shop today where the owner was present.  Has owned a fireplace shop for the past 39 years.  He seemed to know his stuff.  However, many of the things he said were a bit of a contrast from what I've been reading here.

1. He didn't feel there was a discernable difference between the heat provided by a 3 cubic foot stove vs a 3 cubic foot insert.  Both would be functionally the same in regards to their ability to heat.

2. He also said whether I went 1.8 cubic feet or 3.5 cubic feet, it's more about burn time then square footage reached.   Ashful seemed to share the same thoughts in one of his previous responses.  He said however I would likely struggle to keep the entire upstairs (1200 sq ft) warm if it was not totally open.  Once you get into hallways and additional rooms, your issues are more about airflow then they are about heat being given off by your box.

3. Had lots of options.  After explaining what I was looking for, including size of home, wife approval (big glass opening), he pointed me towards the Jotul C 450.
I'm curious to hear the rebuttals to these, specifically points 1 & 2.


----------



## begreen (Oct 8, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> Thanks to all for the suggestions and advice.
> 
> I went to a shop today where the owner was present.  Has owned a fireplace shop for the past 39 years.  He seemed to know his stuff.  However, many of the things he said were a bit of a contrast from what I've been reading here.
> 
> ...



Sounds like good advice so far.
1) Technically correct, but the insert will need a blower to convect most of the heat and there will be losses to the masonry surrounding the insert cabinet. The more the stove sticks out in the room the better it will heat without the blower running.
2) As noted in my second post #4. Burn time will be relative to the air you give the fire. More air, hotter stove, shorter burn time. You will need extra horsepower to quickly raise temps in the cold weather that NY sees. For a 1.8 cu ft stove figure about a 4-6 hr burn time when pushing the stove hard and 7-8hrs when cruising at a lower temp with the room fully warmed up.
3) The C450 is a good insert but no larger and much more expensive. The Enerzone is a tad larger and a much better value. But if you like the look of the Jotul better and have the budget for it and a full liner plus block-off then go for it.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 8, 2016)

begreen said:


> 3) The C450 is a good insert but no larger and much more expensive. The Enerzone is a tad larger and a much better value. But if you like the look of the Jotul better and have the budget for it and a full liner plus block-off then go for it.



Is the block off something standard that most places install, or is it something specific you have to ask them to do?

And you really got me thinking now!  I would probably go with the Jotul 550 over the 450 for only a couple hundred more.  After looking at it though, if firebox is nearly identical, why is the 550 rated to heat a large sq footage?

Maybe as my first stove it would simply make sense to see if I didn't sleep too long on that Enerzone from the place going out of business, grab it, and find someone else to do the install...


----------



## gregbesia (Oct 8, 2016)

Hi and welcome to the forum. I think this will be our 8 th winter using Englander 13 insert. We have a one story 1200sq ft ranch in CT. That insert it's not bad , we saved lots of money versus using oil. My 2 biggest dislikes are: no overnight burn ( I always have to start new fire in the morning with newspaper and kindling) , shallow firebox. Please do yourself a favor and do not go entirely for looks. Whatever you choose to buy ,make sure you can load the wood straight in ,aka NS. In my insert I can load only sideways (EW) and this limits the capacity of the stove. Wood is always falling down on the glass creating mess when the door is opened. Remember that you're buying for long haul , so take your time picking something with ease of use/ looks that you're happy with. As a side note: Englander is a great American company with the customer service that slowly disappears everywhere else.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 8, 2016)

gregbesia said:


> Hi and welcome to the forum. I think this will be our 8 th winter using Englander 13 insert. We have a one story 1200sq ft ranch in CT. That insert it's not bad , we saved lots of money versus using oil. My 2 biggest dislikes are: no overnight burn ( I always have to start new fire in the morning with newspaper and kindling) , shallow firebox. Please do yourself a favor and do not go entirely for looks. Whatever you choose to buy ,make sure you can load the wood straight in ,aka NS. In my insert I can load only sideways (EW) and this limits the capacity of the stove. Wood is always falling down on the glass creating mess when the door is opened. Remember that you're buying for long haul , so take your time picking something with ease of use/ looks that you're happy with. As a side note: Englander is a great American company with the customer service that slowly disappears everywhere else.



Thanks for the advice.  I'm definitly doing my due diligence on this and hoping to find something that meets the aesthetics criteria but will also allow for optimal utility purpose.  But as the days get colder, my wife is asking more frequently where we stand with the wood burning project!  I can't hesitate too much longer!

For any Jotul fans, I notice people keep saying the 550 is bigger, but the dimensions in the brochure have them at 2.05 and 2.08 cubic feet, so a negligible burn box difference.  So what is the difference allowing for longer burn time and sq footage heated?


----------



## begreen (Oct 8, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> Is the block off something standard that most places install, or is it something specific you have to ask them to do?
> 
> And you really got me thinking now!  I would probably go with the Jotul 550 over the 450 for only a couple hundred more.  After looking at it though, if firebox is nearly identical, why is the 550 rated to heat a large sq footage?
> 
> Maybe as my first stove it would simply make sense to see if I didn't sleep too long on that Enerzone from the place going out of business, grab it, and find someone else to do the install...


A block-off plate will keep the heat in the fireplace chamber and thus keep the insert warmer. That means more heat in the house instead of warming up the mass of masonry and outdoors. The Jotul 550 is not a much larger stove and has mixed reviews from those wanting long burn times. Sometimes one needs to be skeptical of marketing figures. In mid-sized I would look at PE, Osburn and Enviro inserts.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 8, 2016)

begreen said:


> A block-off plate will keep the heat in the fireplace chamber and thus keep the insert warmer. That means more heat in the house instead of warming up the mass of masonry and outdoors. The Jotul 550 is not a much larger stove and has mixed reviews from those wanting long burn times. Sometimes one needs to be skeptical of marketing figures. In mid-sized I would look at PE, Osburn and Enviro inserts.



Yeah, that's where I'm confused.  Because even the #'s they have spec'd out for the fire box are almost identical.  So what makes this a bigger, better burning box when the firebox sizes are nearly identical?


----------



## begreen (Oct 8, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> So what makes this a bigger, better burning box when the firebox sizes are nearly identical?



It's not. The main difference is adjustable depth vs flush.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 8, 2016)

begreen said:


> It's not. The main difference is adjustable depth vs flush.



Hmm, not exactly sure I follow what you mean by this.  Is this referring to how far out the box can sit on the hearth?  One can be only flush where one can be flush or stick out?

Edit:  To answer my own question, it looks like 450 is adjustable in regards to depth on hearth.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 8, 2016)

I guess the last "general" type of question I have is, outside of aesthetics, what factors should I consider when choosing between wood burning stove and insert?  If they both fit, and they both look good, what else is there to consider?  

I know fan noise is a concern for some inserts.  

What about radiant vs convection heat?  Will the actual feel of the different types of heat be noticeable when the closest we'll be sitting is 10+ feet away when watching tv, and most other times further?  

Any other factors we should be considering when picking between stove and insert?


----------



## begreen (Oct 8, 2016)

The more a stove projects out onto the hearth the better it will radiate heat. This can be important in a power outage. Fan access is important. Some are a pain to get to and some are easy to service and keep clean. With any stove clearances to combustibles like the mantel are important. Also important with a freestander in a fireplace is the location of the flue outlet aligning with the liner. Not all freestanding stoves have the flue outlet at the far rear of the stove.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 8, 2016)

If the fireplace alcove is big enough, and you plan to sit the stove deep inside the alcove and not out on the hearth, are you basically losing the benefit of the radiant heat of a stove, and might as well go with an insert?  Or is there more to it than that


----------



## gregbesia (Oct 8, 2016)

Another factor to consider: cat versus non cat stoves. Look up Blaze King and what they have to offer, then come back here and check the reviews. Me personally, God willing I will be trying one of Blaze King inserts in the future. I think in this  climate and size of a house , low and slow burn of a cat stove would work very well.


----------



## begreen (Oct 8, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> If the fireplace alcove is big enough, and you plan to sit the stove deep inside the alcove and not out on the hearth, are you basically losing the benefit of the radiant heat of a stove, and might as well go with an insert?  Or is there more to it than that


I suppose it could get to an eventual wash especially if the stove was not too efficient and the insert was exceptionally efficient. If there's room the back of the fireplace can be insulated to keep more heat in the room together with the block-off plate.


----------



## begreen (Oct 8, 2016)

Another factor to consider is cleaning. Some stoves are a piece of cake to clean the liner because the baffle is easily removed or there is a bypass that allows chimney soot to drop straight down into the firebox. Some other stoves/inserts are not too easy.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 8, 2016)

begreen said:


> Another factor to consider is cleaning. Some stoves are a piece of cake to clean the liner because the baffle is easily removed or there is a bypass that allows chimney soot to drop straight down into the firebox. Some other stoves/inserts are not too easy.


Besides sifting through people's post about specific stoves, is there a certain spec I should look for in regards to cleaning?  I would definitely put a major plus on the ease of being able to use some sort of bypass to clean from top down directly into firebox.


----------



## begreen (Oct 8, 2016)

Unfortunately baffle removal is sometimes not documented, but check the stove manual to see if this is covered under the maintenance or baffle installation section. The Enerzone has a 2 part, c-cast ceramic baffle which comes out fairly easily by removing the front secondary tube.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 8, 2016)

I think my first step is to decide stove vs insert.  Then I can create a list of the few I like and get some opinions.

What are the thoughts on radiant vs convection heat?  Does it have a noticeable difference of feel when not standing right next to it?  I don't see us ever being closer than 10 feet except when working with it.


----------



## Ashful (Oct 8, 2016)

A radiant stove, like any traditional cast Jotul model, will not work when placed in a fireplace. The masonry will soak up damn near 100% of the energy they radiate, radiating the majority of that outdoors. If you wonder how I know this, look at my sig. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 8, 2016)

Ashful said:


> A radiant stove, like any traditional cast Jotul model, will not work when placed in a fireplace. The masonry will soak up damn near 100% of the energy they radiate, radiating the majority of that outdoors. If you wonder how I know this, look at my sig.



Talk about a large fireplace!  Now I understand your post from before!

And yes, I guess that makes sense.  If it's going to sit back and I'm not going to sit out on hearth, then I'm losing that radiant benefit for the stove.  At that point, there's really no reason to go stove, and it seems like it would actually be more efficient to go with an insert that can circulate that heat to the room before it's lost to the masonry.


----------



## begreen (Oct 8, 2016)

Ashful could park a SmartCar in his larger fireplace.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 8, 2016)

Way to exaggerate.  Oh wait.  He actually could! 

What I'll do is stop with the 101 random assorted questions, put together a final list of inserts I find interesting based on my personal goals for my insert, and then get some fellow forum members opinions.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 9, 2016)

I have narrowed down the search to 6 brands, 12 models. Many just the same thing, in varying sizes

I think at this point, it probably comes down to what size do I need, and design preference preferred as they all should perform well.

So maybe this is more of a "don't get this one" because it's notorious for having a bad issue, than "pick this because I like this brand". Also a "this one is good"

One last time, here are the basics of what I'm looking for.

- 1200 sq ft home, 60 miles North of New York City
- 1960s build with no improvements to insulation since.
- Standard Ranch Build. Fireplace sits on end of home in living room. 3 Bedrooms are on other end down a hallway.

- Would like to be able to heat entire upstairs
- Plan to run as much as possible (24/7) to cut oil usage.
- Would like nice size window for viewing fire

ALL INSERTS:

Napoleon EPI3C

Regency H2100
Regency CI2600

Osburn 2200
Osburn 2400
Osburn Matrix

Jotul C 450 Kennebec CF
Jotul C 550 Rockland CF

PE Neo 2.5
PE Alderlea T5
PE Super Insert

Enviro Venice 1700

Thanks to all who have offered advice/suggestions. Information overload over the past few weeks, but I love it!


----------



## Ashful (Oct 9, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> If it's going to sit back and I'm not going to sit out on hearth, then I'm losing that radiant benefit for the stove.  At that point, there's really no reason to go stove, and it seems like it would actually be more efficient to go with an insert that can circulate that heat to the room before it's lost to the masonry.


You got the idea, but I wouldn't go as fast and hard as that, on a ruling.  Any stove with a convective jacket around the firebox can work very well in a fireplace, as these stoves move a much larger amount of their net energy using convection.  I believe the Pacific Energy T5 fits this bill, as does the Blaze King Ashford.  In fact, I thought the Jotul F55 Carrabassett shared this construction, but I guess I've never looked.  You would NOT want an Oslo, Firelight, or any of the traditional cast Jotuls, as these are almost purely radiant heaters.

On my fireplaces, these are odd layouts.  My family has been in this area for more than 320 years, and we have owned many (maybe most?) of the old pre-revolutionary houses you will find around here.  Most have cooking fireplaces that are very wide, perhaps 8 to 10 feet, but very shallow.  The ones in this house are different, in that they're very deep (one is 4 feet deep!), but only five feet wide.  Each has a thimble above the lintel, one of which I am 100% convinced to be original construction.  Our theory is that this house, the majority of which was built in 1770's, was built to be equipped with the then-new cast-iron cookstoves.  They weren't quite ready to give up 100% on their cooking fireplaces, but they shrunk them and equipped them with thimbles, and likely set a cookstove directly in front of the fireplace.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 9, 2016)

Ashful said:


> The ones in this house are different, in that they're very deep (one is 4 feet deep!), but only five feet wide.



Seems like these would have been great hiding places as a kid!  But the real serious question is, have you ever actually tried to park your smart car in one of them? 

As for the insert vs stove, another reason after talking more with the wife becomes the unavoidable "wife approval factor".  With this being one of the first things you'll see when walking into the house, she'd rather more of a seamless piece integrated into the wall rather than an alcove with a stove sitting in it.

Working with that list of 12 do you think there are any you'd immediately remove from the list, or put towards the top?


----------



## Ashful (Oct 9, 2016)

I'll leave the answer to that last question to the real stove model experts, like begreen. I can only add that of the brands listed, Jotul and PE are premium brands, near the top of the arc in non-cat performance and quality.

Smart car?  I don't drive anything with less than 8 cylinders.


----------



## Texas123 (Oct 9, 2016)

begreen said:


> Ashful could park a SmartCar in his larger fireplace.


 Ashful you could probably put a small cook stove in one of your fireplaces.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 9, 2016)

Any thoughts on the PE Neo 2.5? I've read on a few threads here some good things.

- It's a PE so that's a plus
- Seems that a 2.5 cubic feet should be a sufficient size
- Sits nice and high and has a great window to view fire

Any additional thoughts on this one?


----------



## begreen (Oct 9, 2016)

Do you mean the insert? It's a flush unit. In the 2.5 cu ft size the Enviro Kodiak 1700 may heat better, especially during a power outage. The PE Super insert would also work well.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 9, 2016)

begreen said:


> Do you mean the insert? It's a flush unit. In the 2.5 cu ft size the Enviro Kodiak 1700 may heat better, especially during a power outage. The PE Super insert would also work well.



Any reason you recommend the Super Insert over the Alderlea T5 besides price?

Another reason I was a fan of the Neo was the N/S and E/W loading capabilities too.

I'm not too concerned about power outages here.  They're few and far between where we live.

Begreen, are you a strong proponent of the non-flush inserts that sit out on the hearth?


----------



## begreen (Oct 9, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> Any reason you recommend the super insert over the Alderlea T5?


No, just cost.  The Alderlea is a good looker. I like non-flush inserts because the heat better with the blower off which can be prefered when in the room and I like inserts that have an ashlip. It helps stop ash from being sucked into the blower. That said I really like the look of the Enviro Boston and it does not have a large ashlip. 

The Super and T5 both have square fireboxes.


----------



## brenndatomu (Oct 9, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> she'd rather more of a seamless piece integrated into the wall rather than an alcove with a stove sitting in it.


You need to show her some of the pics of what people have done with alcoves...phenomenal! I'll see if I can find a link...if anybody else knows where those are right off the bat, feel free to post it.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 9, 2016)

begreen said:


> No, just cost.  The Alderlea is a good looker. I like non-flush inserts because the heat better with the blower off which can be prefered when in the room and I like inserts that have an ashlip. It helps stop ash from being sucked into the blower. That said I really like the look of the Enviro Boston and it does not have a large ashlip.
> 
> The Super and T5 both have square fireboxes.



So on the same principles as mentioned before, and under consideration of size of house, poor insulation, and location, what are your thoughts on the Super Insert vs the Summit?  They seem to be comparable in design besides size.



brenndatomu said:


> You need to show her some of the pics of what people have done with alcoves...phenomenal! I'll see if I can find a link...if anybody else knows where those are right off the bat, feel free to post it.



I know, I have seen a few!  But I think a big part was also the fact that it seems that if I stick it deep back into the alcove, I'm not going to get the radiant heat benefit anyway.  Ashful has said that sitting one back deep into the fireplace would be a big mistake.


----------



## begreen (Oct 9, 2016)

I like big, especially if the house is going to be cold and need a large push of heat, but the Super is a good performer.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 9, 2016)

begreen said:


> I like big, especially if the house is going to be cold and need a large push of heat, but the Super is a good performer.



So you would recommend something like the PE Super Insert over the Jotul C450 because the PE is a hearth insert?


----------



## brenndatomu (Oct 9, 2016)

Ashful said:


> Any stove with a convective jacket around the firebox can work very well in a fireplace, as these stoves move a much larger amount of their net energy using convection





Log Splitter said:


> But I think a big part was also the fact that it seems that if I stick it deep back into the alcove, I'm not going to get the radiant heat benefit anyway. Ashful has said that sitting one back deep into the fireplace would be a big mistake.


You may lose a bit, but if you look at convective stoves (have a air jacket) or any insert, they are designed to move the heat out into the room


----------



## begreen (Oct 9, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> So you would recommend something like the PE Super Insert over the Jotul C450 because the PE is a hearth insert?


Both are good inserts. The PE has a bit of an edge because it is larger, has a unique baffle system and a coupled secondary air control. The Jotul has an edge in the looks dept..


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 9, 2016)

begreen said:


> Both are good inserts. The PE has a bit of an edge because it is larger, has a unique baffle system and a coupled secondary air control. The Jotul has an edge in the looks dept..



So to win everything, go with the PE Alderlea T5 insert


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 10, 2016)

I'll talk to the wife and see her thoughts on flush vs on hearth.  I think if we go flush, we may take the plunge on the Neo 2.5 or the Jotul C 450/550.

If I can convince her of something to sit out on the hearth, we'll decide between:

Osburn 2400
PE Alderlea T5
PE Summit
Enviro Kodiak 1700

Got my lists dwindled down, so speak out if you have any strong feelings one way or another!


----------



## Ashful (Oct 10, 2016)

It can help to look at photos of existing installs, in making your choice.  Nick Mystic has one particularly nice looking install of a Jotul Oslo stuffed into a fireplace opening.  In his case, I believe his fireplace is completely interior to the home and the stove sticks well out of the fireplace, so he doesn't have the same troubles I did with putting a cast Jotul inside a fireplace on an exterior wall.  There are also several photos of my fireplaces on this forum (probably enough that most regulars on this forum are sick of seeing them), to show what a stove inside a fireplace would look like.  Jharkin also has some nice photos of his fireplace/stove rig, his big old fireplace being bricked in to a much smaller size (maybe similar to your opening).

There is also a photo gallery linked of the main hearth.com page (or there used to be), for more ideas.  Anything you have listed above would work well enough, so check the photos and decide what you like.

Any reason there's not a BK Ashford 20 or 30 listed above?  While a little more expensive than most of what's listed above, it's a much better stove for one who wants to heat in all weather with wood.  It can rip full-bore like a Jotul or Osburn, but also dial back to run slower than any other stove on the market.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 10, 2016)

Ashful said:


> Any reason there's not a BK Ashford 20 or 30 listed above?



Can't say I have any good reason besides from my limited time on here, and through my few trips to the shops, I have not heard of the Blaze King stoves as frequently as the ones mentioned. I would say it's likely we go with the insert just because it's the most seamless looking one.  And with the BK inserts, we'd be hitting the Catalytic insert market, which I have very little knowledge of.  I would say my choice against it would be less moving parts and less to worry about breaking.  But again, I know very little about how they work and are integrated into wood stoves.

I'll certainly take a look into Blaze King as well as some photos on here to get some better ideas.


----------



## Ashful (Oct 10, 2016)

No intent to sway you one way or another, and cat vs. non-cat is an oft-debated topic here, so I'll just leave it at this:

1.  Many forum members realize the better performance of cat stoves only after coming here, and make the switch from non-cat to cat.  I have not seen many members go the other way.

2.  Cat stoves have a wider range of heat output, than non-cat stoves.  It is easily feasible to stretch a 3 cu.ft. load of wood for 36 hours in a cat stove, at very low heat output, whereas most non-cat stoves will max out under 12 hours.  This means a cat stove is far superior in the shoulder seasons, where lower heat output is desired.  It also means less concerns with heating yourself out of the house, if you go with a big stove.  In very cold weather, when you're running the stove at higher settings, the differences mostly disappear.

3.  Of all cat stoves, BK is at the top of the heap on performance and burn time, and their stoves are mostly convective designs.  Woodstock also makes excellent cat stoves, but their stoves are radiant designs.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## kennyp2339 (Oct 10, 2016)

100% agree with Ashful


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 10, 2016)

kennyp2339 said:


> 100% agree with Ashful



Everytime I feel I have refined the search to just a few stoves, there's more and more I continue to read and learn about what the possibilities are.  I'm glad it seems like the list I've mentioned would all be good decisions, but you always want to strive to make the BEST decision.

Do you have any advice on resources to learn more about the catalytic technology in a stove?  From a very rudimentary understanding, it seems that the catalytic stove will add another component that should give longer burn times and greater control over low level burns.


----------



## Ashful (Oct 10, 2016)

_edit:  I typed this in response to your post #60, and you entered #61 before I clicked Submit, so much of what I have in this post is somewhat academic, now.  Nothing wrong with an insert, but I'll let the folks who know those models give better advice on which to choose._

Now you know why so many here are on their second (or sometimes more) stove.  We're always learning.  This forum is probably the best resource in the world, although not all the advice you read here will be good advice, as with any forum.

Here's a short and crude history:  In the early 1980's, new legislation was proposed that would require improvements in efficiency and reduction in emissions from wood stoves.  Wood stove companies were often small, without serious engineering resources, and so most copied the same path. That path was to simply add a catalytic combustor to the exhaust path of existing stove designs.  This had variable rates of success, with many not working very well, since the stoves were not correctly designed to work with a secondary combustion system.  This gave catalytic stoves an unfairly bad reputation.

During this time, many of the small stove manufacturers ended up closing up shop, or being consumed by the larger companies.  The first non-catalytic stoves were born, being mostly new stoves designed completely around the secondary burn system.  These stoves work by ensuring the exhaust gases entering the secondary burn system are hot enough to support a re-burn, with the addition of fresh (often pre-heated) air to the secondary burn chamber.  They work very well, but due to the need to maintain exhaust gas temperature high enough to support secondary burn without the aid of a catalyst, they can not be run as slow and low as stoves of the past.  Folks had to learn to manage their fire, and avoid run-away, but technology and instruction improved to the point where now it's almost as reliable as concrete.

The benefits of catalytic technology were not forgotten, though.  While it takes exhaust gas temperatures over 1100F to support a secondary burn without a catalyst, a catalytic combustor can support the same at temperatures down to 450F.  This left a void for companies like Woodstock and Blaze King to continue developing and improving stoves designed specifically around catalytic combusters.  Due to the ability to support reburn at much lower temperatures, these stoves have much better LHV efficiency and wider burn range than any non-cat stove.

So, today both exist.  I suspect that, had folks not had bad experience with the early and improperly designed cat stoves of the 1980's, non-cats might have never existed.  As to the pros and cons of each, you could read arguments on that topic from now until the end of time.  Both work very well at medium to high burn rates, but only cats work as well at low burn rates.  There are not any extra maintenance requirements of cat stoves, other than replacing your combuster every 5 to 10 years (about $200), and keeping the gasket on the bypass damper in good order.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 10, 2016)

I'm on info overload now.  Started this research about two weeks ago.  I certainly feel quite a bit more informed thanks mostly to you forum members, but I feel no closer to making a decision.  I spoke again to the wife, and after reviewing a few things, she's very high on a flush insert.  If I can't convince her of something to sit out a little on the hearth, then I think we'll give the *PE Neo 2.6* a shot.  If I can convince of the hearth, then we will probably give the *PE Super or Summit* a go.

At some point I need to simply resign to the fact that all of these options are good, and I'll win either way.  If I keep trying to pick the perfect one, I'll be cold and cranky for the rest of the Winter!  I'd rather make a good decision now than try to wait for the perfect decision in January.

If there's any other thoughts, keep them coming, as I'm constantly on this thread, and the entire forum in general finding more information and ideas to help make this decision.

Thanks!



Ashful said:


> So, today both exist. I suspect that, had folks not had bad experience with the early and improperly designed cat stoves of the 1980's, non-cats might have never existed. As to the pros and cons of each, you could read arguments on that topic from now until the end of time. Both work very well at medium to high burn rates, but only cats work as well at low burn rates. There are not any extra maintenance requirements of cat stoves, other than replacing your combuster every 5 to 10 years (about $200), and keeping the gasket on the bypass damper in good order.



And to this, I will give an additional look into the catalytic burns.  I appreciate you taking the time to explain the history, and your perspective on where there is such a divide among users.


----------



## Ashful (Oct 10, 2016)

http://www.blazeking.com/EN/wood-inserts.html

No, those burn times are not exaggerated.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 10, 2016)

Ashful said:


> No, those burn times are not exaggerated.


Web page isn't working for me right now.  Resources are all being put into R&D


----------



## NYSB (Oct 10, 2016)

I was in your position about 3 years ago.  We had moved from Texas up to NY a few years back and now reside in a split level ranch about an hour north of NYC.  Our central heat is a natural-gas fired forced-air furnace.  We had a list of projects to do around the house, not the least of which was the fireplace.  Our house is 1800 sqft on the main level which is the area we wanted to heat.  The layout is similar to what you describe.  The pre-existing masonry fireplace is at one end of the house with the external brick chimney lined with ceramic flue tiles.  It's in the living room with the dining room and kitchen nearby.  Then there is the hallway with the three bedrooms at the end of the house opposite the fireplace.  We had already done the insulation upgrades consistent of blown-in cellulose in the attic and new siding (Added 1" thick rigid foam insulation at that time) so we were finally ready for the fireplace upgrade last year.  My goal was to heat primarily with the fireplace, but not necessarily to be completely independent of the natural gas furnace.   We wanted something quite contemporary looking with a large glass opening to see the fire.  I wanted to maximize burn time as well.  It was pretty apparent to me early in the search, even before I started reading posts here, that the way to get max burn time is to buy a catalytic stove with as big a firebox as possible.   Aesthetically, we wanted a very modern-looking stove which mounts as flush to the wall as possible - we did not want something sticking out more than a couple inches.  They are so many designs and brands to choose from - most of them are very good and will do the job.  I rather arbitrarily just looked at the brands my local dealers carried - all of which have been mentioned in this thread.

In the end, we decided to get the Regency CI2600.  This is a very contemporary-looking flush-mount stove with a catalyst and a relatively large firebox.  They do make a smaller version of this stove as well.  Once I learned how to use it, we have been extremely pleased.  It warms our whole house even on the coldest days and can go 10+ hours on a low-to-medium setting which is more than enough.  I am able to restart a fire using just leftover coals even after 24 hours.  I have never run it on high more than a 2-3 hours at a time since the house gets too warm.  Last winter I managed to run it continuously for about 6 weeks straight even with both my wife and I working full time - I only had to light it once.  The fan is very effective - and I would also say necessary in a flush-mount stove like this.  If you are subject to very frequent power outages this could indeed be a concern - but we have a back-up generator as well.  The stove does run just fine without the fan and definitely heats the house without it, but on a super-cold day with no power or backup gen the bedrooms would be cold.  Generally, there is a temp differential of about 6-10 degrees between the living room and the bedrooms on the opposite side of the house.  Not surprising given our layout.  This turns out to be a good thing, since we all like it cooler in bedrooms for sleeping anyways.  If it's 80 in the room with the fireplace, the kitchen will be 75-78, and the back bedrooms will be 70-72.  With our gas furnace we keep the thermostat 65-60 - so the house is much warmer with the wood stove.

I had the dealer install the stove and chimney liner, but I also did a lot of work myself.  I built the wood hearth myself (with proper clearances and R values, of course).  Between the stove and wood hearth is all tile and non-combustible next-gen Duroc under the tile.  My original hearth was a flagstone slab 18" deep but I wanted to extend it to 22".  So I removed the flagstone revealing the "wedge" of concrete underneath.  I then had to cut away some of the wood floor in front of the hearth to make room for the extension. I removed the drywall ceiling underneath (the basement ceiling) to get easy access to make a new fireproof subfloor.  I then built-up the floor with a combination of sheet metal, micore 300, duroc, and appropriate mortar.  Once I had finished the hearth extension I then used appropriate cement/mortar to even out the level between the old concrete hearth base and the new extension and over that I placed a single pieced of duroc to make sure the whole thing was on the same level.  Finally, I put the ceramic tile over all that.  I then placed matching tile around the edge of the fireplace opening.  Then I brought in the pros to install the major hardware.  After it was installed, I started to read a lot more information here.

Over the summer, I made a sort-of insulated box between the stove and the pre-existing brick firebox in order to reduce the transmission of heat to the external masonry.  I used Micore 300 on the sides, where there was only about 2" of space.  In the back I had plenty of room so I used much thicker Roxul mineral "boards".  The installers did the usual mediocre job of stuffing fiberglass insulation up the flu instead of a real block-off plate, so my project for next year will be to fix that.  I will probably use more micore 300 for that and/or sheat metal.  Had I known, I would have paid extra for a fully insulated flue liner, but the whole thing works pretty darn well as is.

Good Luck!


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 10, 2016)

Glad to hear you have had success heating a similar layout/size house with a wood stove insert.

I have looked into that Regency insert as well.  It's towards the top of my list along with the PE Neo 2.5 insert.

I have someone from the dealer coming out on Friday to do some measurements and to provide a quote.  I will be sure to question hard about insulation and block off plates.  I doubt for most installers this is standard, but I will see what it will take to get it done.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 11, 2016)

I have until Friday to make a final decision.  The company I plan on using is coming out to do some measurements to confirm that the units I'm looking at will work fine in the space available.  Finally ready to make some progress on this!  Was outside for half of the day today cleaning up some tree clearing we had done last week.  Lots of big logs moving up a hill so I can prepare/split/stack for next season.  A few dead trees we took down that may be ready now.


----------



## begreen (Oct 11, 2016)

As you look, consider the shape of the firebox. Often flush inserts need to have a shallower firebox in order to fit the depth of the fireplace. Many shallow fireboxes are constricted to E/W loading or will not load N/S unless the splits are short (like 12").


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 11, 2016)

That's another thing I've read a lot about.  Is there really a big difference in N/S vs E/W loading besides not having to worry about logs rolling out or into the glass?


----------



## begreen (Oct 11, 2016)

Yes, it is very nice to be able to load both ways. I usually load N/S for faster starts and I am able to pack the stove more without concern of a log rolling up against the glass. If you like the 2.5 cu ft size firebox take a look at the Enviro Boston. It will load 16" N/S and has good WAF.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 11, 2016)

`


begreen said:


> Yes, it is very nice to be able to load both ways. I usually load N/S for faster starts and I am able to pack the stove more without concern of a log rolling up against the glass. If you like the 2.5 cu ft size firebox take a look at the Enviro Boston. It will load 16" N/S and has good WAF.



Is there a reason this would be preferred over PE Summit or Super insert for a non-flush insert?


----------



## begreen (Oct 11, 2016)

I like them both. The Boston/Venice/Cabello gives you a .5 cu ft larger than the Super with a choice of trim. It's in between the Super and Summit in capacity and a nicely finished insert.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 11, 2016)

I feel like at this point I'm leaning towards the Summit or the Neo 2.5, with the deciding factor being whether or not I can convince my wife to allow for the stove to extend onto the hearth.

With the previous specs I mentioned, is the Summit overkill?  If it is, I could look again at the Super Insert and Enviro's line.


----------



## Ashful (Oct 11, 2016)

A problem with E/W loading is that you rarely use as high a fraction of the firebox, as one can with N/S loading. This is because you usually need to put fewer logs on top than on bottom, forming a bit of a ramp, lest they tumble out on you. I'd argue a 2 cu ft NS stove may on average see as much wood as a 3 cu ft EW stove. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## begreen (Oct 11, 2016)

The Enviro's surround makes the insert look built-in which minimizes the non-flush aspect as the front is flush with the side pillars. The Alderlea T5 has a similar effect.

Yes the Summit is large, but given the house description large can be an asset. The Super or T5 though would handle it and still meet your criteria for burn time and would be closer to your budget desires. This is what I would most likely choose with what I know so far.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 11, 2016)

I haven't inquired about Enviro Pricing.  Where do they stand against the above mentioned PE's?  

At this point, we're probably splitting hairs over a few hundred one way or another, so it would probably behoove me to simply choose the one I think would best fit my needs...


----------



## Woody Stover (Oct 12, 2016)

What insulation do you now have in your attic? The difference when we blew in cellulose here was HUGE...but there was nothing up there before. If you have some roll insulation up there now (how thick?) you could have cellulose blown in to beef it up. A lot of heat goes up through the ceiling, including around light fixture gaps. With that taken care of, and improving air sealing around doors and windows, your heat retention will go way up and you can opt for a smaller insert. If you put a big insert in now, then you will be fighting to not heat yourself out once you improve your insulation and air sealing. Trying to burn small fires in a big stove is inefficient, as well as being a hassle; You may often end up letting fires burn out, and then having to start a cold stove. Also bear in mind the savings you'll realize from either not having to process as much wood, or not having to buy as much.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 12, 2016)

Woody Stover said:


> What insulation do you now have in your attic?


I'm pretty sure it's some old crappy rollout out sheets of R-19 insulation.  That's definitely something I can beef up.  We do use about half the attic space for storage though, so won't it lessen the quality of insulation if we throw plywood over the top  and press it down?



Woody Stover said:


> Trying to burn small fires in a big stove is inefficient


And I've been asking this question, but it seems that most people say to go with the bigger box and not to be concerned about having to run smaller fires in a bigger box.  The bigger box will just give longer burn times if you have the settings adjusted appropriately....


----------



## Woody Stover (Oct 12, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> Iwon't it lessen the quality of insulation if we throw plywood over the top  and press it down?


True. I don't know but there may be newer alternatives that would provide higher insulation value within the 2x6 height available...


> seems that most people say to go with the bigger box and not to be concerned about having to run smaller fires in a bigger box.  The bigger box will just give longer burn times if you have the settings adjusted appropriately....


Yes, but you can only cleanly run a non-cat so low. But you *do* live in a relatively harsh climate, with more full-bore burning once it gets cold than we have here. We get a lot of breaks in the nasty weather.


----------



## Ashful (Oct 12, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> I'm pretty sure it's some old crappy rollout out sheets of R-19 insulation.  That's definitely something I can beef up.  We do use about half the attic space for storage though, so won't it lessen the quality of insulation if we throw plywood over the top  and press it down?


Calling @woodgeek.



Log Splitter said:


> And I've been asking this question, but it seems that most people say to go with the bigger box and not to be concerned about having to run smaller fires in a bigger box.  The bigger box will just give longer burn times if you have the settings adjusted appropriately....


A non-cat stove requires an exhaust gas temperature of 1100F or higher to activate the secondary burn.  If you can achieve this with your small fire (burned at a higher rate), then you're good to go.  The troubles to which Woody is referring is when folks try to burn a small fire at a low rate, which is the exclusive territory of a cat stove, being able to activate secondary burn below 500F.

The compromise, if running non-cat, is to burn small hot fires.  This will get the stove hot quick, which can work.  Think of your house as a giant capacitor.  Putting a 500F (stovetop temp) stove in that space for hours on end may overheat you on a mild day.  But if you rocket that stove up to 500F for just an hour or two, the objects your house will absorb the heat and radiate it back slowly.  Not as ideal as running a cat stove, but a workable compromise, that many here use.


----------



## begreen (Oct 12, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> I haven't inquired about Enviro Pricing.  Where do they stand against the above mentioned PE's?


That would depend on local dealers. The Enviro Kodiak 1700 is the rough equivalent to the PE Super, but with a .5 cu ft larger firebox. I would expect them to be close in pricing, but you never know, a dealer may be trying to move last year's stock at a discounted price. Call around.

If the intention is to address leaks and beef up insulation in the house then the Super/T5 will be quite sufficient.


----------



## Ashful (Oct 12, 2016)

What year is was this house built?  In some cases, if keeping the authenticity of an old house is of value, a conscious choice is made to limit how much you address the leaks and insulation.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 12, 2016)

So what happens when running a smaller fire in a non-cat stove at a low rate and there is no secondary burn?  Lower efficiency and higher possibility for creosote buildup?  I'm trying to get a better grasp on understanding in what conditions I would be running the stove where having a cat stove would be very helpful.

I'll go back and read through the post a few back explaining cat stoves before asking more questions.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 12, 2016)

begreen said:


> That would depend on local dealers. The Enviro Kodiak 1700 is the rough equivalent to the PE Super, but with a .5 cu ft larger firebox. I would expect them to be close in pricing, but you never know, a dealer may be trying to move last year's stock at a discounted price. Call around.



Will do.  Will also check with the ultimate authority, the wife! I'm still trying to push the Super/Summit inserts over the Neo.  



Ashful said:


> What year is was this house built?  In some cases, if keeping the authenticity of an old house is of value, a conscious choice is made to limit how much you address the leaks and insulation.



House was built in early 1960s.  I'm not sure what you mean but value in keeping authenticity of an older house potentially having value.  Is there ever a time where a clear upgrade, especially one that is not necessarily visible, would lower the value.


----------



## begreen (Oct 12, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> So what happens when running a smaller fire in a non-cat stove at a low rate and there is no secondary burn? Lower efficiency and higher possibility for creosote buildup?


If you are trying to move the room temp 3-5º you will be burning a decent sized fire. When temps are mild, instead of running a very low fire which would smolder you run a hotter, small fire with less splits than a full load. That keeps efficiency up without overheating the house. We do this during milder weather. For example, it was 45F yesterday morning and I made a 5 split fire instead of a full house 9-10 split fire. I let it burn to ashes and didn't refuel the firebox as the sun took over warming the house around noontime. The fire brought the LR temp up from 65F to 74F in an hour or so and the rest of the house was about 70F.


----------



## begreen (Oct 12, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> House was built in early 1960s. I'm not sure what you mean but value in keeping authenticity of an older house potentially having value. Is there ever a time where a clear upgrade, especially one that is not necessarily visible, would lower the value.


There are special construction circumstances where it is hard to insulate a house well without great expense or without altering its intrinsic character. Think log or stone houses. Your house is not that case. Get an energy audit by the state, seal up leaks aggressively, and insulate well. This will pay off 24/7, 365 days a year.


----------



## kennyp2339 (Oct 12, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> House was built in early 1960s. I'm not sure what you mean but value in keeping authenticity of an older house potentially having value. Is there ever a time where a clear upgrade, especially one that is not necessarily visible, would lower the value.


Don't know how much merit this has but I heard that if your house was built before 1978 you need special contractors to due work due to the possibility of lead paint contamination, again don't know how try that is, one of the old timers was telling me at work about how he had to pay extra for a different type of window installer to do his windows due to the house age and possible lead paint.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 12, 2016)

begreen said:


> If you are trying to move the room temp 3-5º you will be burning a decent sized fire. When temps are mild, instead of running a very low fire which would smolder you run a hotter, small fire with less splits than a full load. That keeps efficiency up without overheating the house. We do this during milder weather. For example, it was 45F yesterday morning and I made a 5 split fire instead of a full house 9-10 split fire. I let it burn to ashes and didn't refuel the firebox as the sun took over warming the house around noontime. The fire brought the LR temp up from 65F to 74F in an hour or so and the rest of the house was about 70F.



I think I'm a bit confused when you're saying you're running a smaller(5 v 10 split), hotter fire, but you're not overheating the house.  If it's a hotter fire, isn't it going to heat the house up a bit?  Or are you saying that since it is a smaller fire, even though it's running at a higher temperature, it's smaller in size so the amount of heat it's giving off is proper for the circumstance? 

And to add to this, how is running a small, hot fire more efficient?  Isn't it going to burn the wood quicker rather than a slower burning, full oven?

And is this where efficiency for a cat box comes into play?  Rather than making the smaller, hotter fire, you can consistently run a large load and just manage heat through airflow knowing that secondary burn will happen even at the lower temps?


----------



## begreen (Oct 12, 2016)

The duration of the burn will be shorter with less fuel and the temp will be lower. With a full 10 log load our stove top will cruise at 600-650F for hours. Yesterday's fire only reached about 500F stovetop. This was still plenty hot enough for good secondary combustion. It's more efficient because the fire was allowed to go out instead of overheating the house.


Log Splitter said:


> And is this where efficiency for a cat box comes into play? Rather than making the smaller, hotter fire, you can consistently run a large load and just manage heat through airflow knowing that secondary burn will happen even at the lower temps?


Yes, a cat stove burns the volatiles coming off the wood through the catalyst. Depending on the design this can be more efficient, especially if you want appliance-like low heat over a long period of time. The advantage is less when the stove is being pushed harder for real heat. Note that all cat stoves are not created equal. Burn times vary a lot. Also, there are differences in design and some are hybrids using both a cat and secondary tube.
There are many many past threads on this topic here that a search will turn up.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 12, 2016)

begreen said:


> The duration of the burn will be shorter with less fuel and the temp will be lower. With a full 10 log load our stove top will cruise at 600-650F for hours. Yesterday's fire only reached about 500F stovetop. This was still plenty hot enough for good secondary combustion. It's more efficient because the fire was allowed to go out instead of overheating the house.
> 
> Yes, a cat stove burns the volatiles coming off the wood through the catalyst. Depending on the design this can be more efficient, especially if you want appliance-like low heat over a long period of time. The advantage is less when the stove is being pushed harder for real heat. Note that all cat stoves are not created equal. Burn times vary a lot. Also, there are differences in design and some are hybrids using both a cat and secondary tube design.
> 
> There are many many past threads on this topic here that a search will turn up.



I guess either way I go, I'll need to look up a bit more about how to effectively operate a wood stove based on the type of stove I'm using, and finding a balance between heat output, and optimizing efficiency.

To make sure that I'm following properly so far, the reason for your small burn yesterday was so when the wood was flaming, it was very hot and secondary burn in your non-cat was initiated.  But this was only done for a short period of time to avoid the house overheating.  As the wood continued to burn down, there was no longer a need for a secondary burn.  And since it was warming up outside, the less heat the box began to give off was a desired side effect of the smaller burn.

The difference between this and had it been a cat stove would have been there would not have been that initial need to get that hot fire going to start since the Cat Stove would have been able to produce a secondary burn at a lower temp.

Not sure if this thought process is right, but that's my rudimentary understanding so far!  I'll do a search to try and get a better understanding.


----------



## Ashful (Oct 12, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> House was built in early 1960s.  I'm not sure what you mean but value in keeping authenticity of an older house potentially having value.  Is there ever a time where a clear upgrade, especially one that is not necessarily visible, would lower the value.


I was thinking old houses, something built before the American Revolution.  In my case, we have an un-insulated stone house, with windows and doors dating to 1770's.  Some parts of the house are as old as 1738, and never messed up with modern insulation and vinyl windows.  There is historical value in this that goes beyond what I'm paying in additional heating costs.



Log Splitter said:


> I think I'm a bit confused when you're saying you're running a smaller(5 v 10 split), hotter fire, but you're not overheating the house.


You're confusing stove temperature with house temperature.  You can sit a 500F stove in your house for a short period of time, without enormous impact on indoor house temperature.  That hot stove may eventually bring your house up to an uncomfortable warm temperature, but not if you keep the duration of the fire short enough, by limiting how much wood you put in the box.

Another way to look at this is to consider that you're putting a fixed number for BTU's in the firebox, when you build a fire.  Whether you release it quickly or slowly, you're still putting a similar net BTU into your living space.  Assuming that living space has enough size and mass to create a long time constant against the load of the stove, the temperature will not spike quite so badly.

Thermodynamics vs. Thermostatics.  Fun stuff, for the physics-minded.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 12, 2016)

Yes, I think I still have a lot confused right now, not even necessarily directly related to cat vs non-cat stoves, but how to optimally run an oven, like how hot to run the fire, how much to fill it, and how these variables change based on temperature, time, etc.


----------



## begreen (Oct 12, 2016)

This is pretty typical. It's an expensive purchase and you want to make the right decision. Don't overthink it too much. If you have a proper and safe installation with a good stove AND have good fully seasoned wood, the rest will come with experience. There is an art to burning well with wood. We can help with that. There are thousands of posts here with folks that have gone through similar circumstances.


----------



## Woody Stover (Oct 12, 2016)

Ashful said:


> What year is was this house built?  In some cases, if keeping the authenticity of an old house is of value, a conscious choice is made to limit how much you address the leaks and insulation.


Yeah, a cool breeze on the ankles is part of the charm. 
What begreen was saying was that a smaller, hot fire with secondary burn is going to be more efficient than letting a big load smolder (no secondaries) in an effort to not roast yourself out. But if you have to start a lot of small fires, it's inefficient in that, during the startup period when you are getting the stove hot enough for the secondary to kick in, you are spewing some unburned smoke and volatiles out the flue. And annoying your neighbors if they are close by. Better to have a stove size close to what you need the majority of the time, then let your backup heat help in extreme conditions. With the right size stove you'll be able to load full most of the time, and let the load run its course.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 12, 2016)

begreen said:


> This is pretty typical. It's an expensive purchase and you want to make the right decision. Don't overthink it too much. If you have a proper and safe installation with a good stove AND have good fully seasoned wood, the rest will come with experience. There is an art to burning well with wood. We can help with that. There are thousands of posts here with folks that have gone through similar circumstances.





Woody Stover said:


> Yeah, a cool breeze on the ankles is part of the charm.
> What begreen was saying was that a smaller, hot fire with secondary burn is going to be more efficient than letting a big load smolder (no secondaries) in an effort to not roast yourself out. But if you have to start a lot of small fires, it's inefficient in that, during the startup period when you are getting the stove hot enough for the secondary to kick in, you are spewing some unburned smoke and volatiles out the flue. And annoying your neighbors if they are close by. Better to have a stove size close to what you need the majority of the time, then let your backup heat help in extreme conditions. With the right size stove you'll be able to load full most of the time, and let the load run its course.



Both very well said.  Great community here with tons of resources.  Hopefully I will be able to reciprocate and help others in the future.

I'll continue to posts update about the purchase/install/usage and then consolidate into a summary at some point.  Hopefully it can provide answers to someone in a similar situation in the future.


----------



## nola mike (Oct 12, 2016)

Ok, I'll give a little of what I've learned. I have a free standing tiny stove at 1 house. The second house is probably closer to what you have. 1500 sqft, block construction, new windows, good attic insulation, insert. Warmer here in VA, but we'll hit the teens at night. I have a 1.5 cuft firebox on the insert. If I could do it again, I'd go free-standing. Nicer without the fan, I prefer the warmth. On my interior chimney, the heat output is probably about the same. Firebox size: Go bigger. I can keep my house warm if I'm tending the stove, but I have to run it hard and pack it often. I get 4 hours of a good burn out of it, and by the am my house will be cold--it dips 1-2'/hour that the stove isn't running. It also takes a while in the morning to get it back up to temp=more fiddling. On my vacation house this isn't a big deal, but a cold start in the AM sucks if you're trying to go to work. Cat v. non-cat? I'd probably go larger stove/cat, but firebox size would def be my determining factor. Looks? I think they all look fine (as does my wife and anyone who's seen my stoves) if they have a big window. Very few aspects in life where you say I wish I went smaller/had less power/etc. Oh, and I find my stove that I can load N/S to be easier to load, and easier to start. Going E/W tends to block off your airflow, esp on a cold start.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 12, 2016)

Would the PE Summit or Super Insert be considered a hearth insert?

Is it able to provide some radiant heat from the part that sticks out better than your standard flush stove?


----------



## begreen (Oct 12, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> Is it able to provide some radiant heat from the part that sticks out better than your standard flush stove?


Yes.


----------



## Ashful (Oct 12, 2016)

Another advantage of free-standing stoves = easy swap-out!  I started burning stoves in autumn 2011, and was on stoves number four and five by spring 2015.  It was like musical stoves for a few years, here.

If I replace my current pair, it will be with another pair of BK's.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 13, 2016)

Ashful said:


> Another advantage of free-standing stoves = easy swap-out!  I started burning stoves in autumn 2011, and was on stoves number four and five by spring 2015.  It was like musical stoves for a few years, here.
> 
> If I replace my current pair, it will be with another pair of BK's.



Yeah, but the more I look at my layout, I think I'd end up losing quite a bit of the benefit of having a free stander by having to tuck it so far back into the fireplace so it could exhaust through the current opening...


----------



## begreen (Oct 13, 2016)

Not if the stove rear vented.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 13, 2016)

What are some of the more commonly seen rear vented wood stoves?

I have to say, leaning very heavily towards Summit or Super insert at this point.  Just trying to decide if the Summit is too large for my needs, and will take lots of fiddling to try and get a proper balance between load size and temperature.


----------



## begreen (Oct 13, 2016)

The Jotul F55 is a large cast-iron jacketed stove like the Alderlea T6 but with a configurable rear flue collar that can be set to rear exit. Woodstock makes the somewhat odd looking Ideal Steel and the soapstone Progress Hybrid. Both of these stoves can be rear vented. The main thing is that the top of the horiz. pipe needs to fall below the fireplace lintel. 

There are many threads on this topic with stove suggestions. Search on Rear Vent.


----------



## Ashful (Oct 13, 2016)

Note Woodstocks are very good cat stoves, but being convective heaters, aren't ideal for a tucking back in a fireplace install. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## begreen (Oct 13, 2016)

Agreed, the point of rear-vent stove vs the top vent would be to bring most of the stove forward out onto the hearth. The F55 and it's convection blower allows for a deeper installation.


----------



## twd000 (Oct 13, 2016)

Ashful said:


> That's a matter of perspective.  From here, I'd say, yes.
> 
> If going the DIY route, you could easily do a pretty nice stove or insert with liner for less than $5k, and that doesn't limit your choice of stoves.  Involving a pro, you'll probably be closer to $6k for the same.  Going with a more budget-minded stove could still keep you under $5k, even with a pro install.
> 
> ...



can you point me to where you found this data?  I would like to know how much energy I would expect to save by air-sealing the attic.  I am burning 70 MBTU gross (52 MBTU net) in 3000 sq ft.  7300 Heating Degree Days


----------



## Woody Stover (Oct 13, 2016)

twd000 said:


> can you point me to where you found this data?  I would like to know how much energy I would expect to save by air-sealing the attic.  I am burning 70 MBTU gross (52 MBTU net) in 3000 sq ft.  7300 Heating Degree Days


I think you want the attic to breath, as a lot of moisture ends up there. Or are you talking about air-sealing around light fixtures etc. that let warm air leave the living area?


----------



## begreen (Oct 13, 2016)

twd000 said:


> can you point me to where you found this data?  I would like to know how much energy I would expect to save by air-sealing the attic.  I am burning 70 MBTU gross (52 MBTU net) in 3000 sq ft.  7300 Heating Degree Days


Good topic for the Green Room forum here.


----------



## twd000 (Oct 13, 2016)

Woody Stover said:


> I think you want the attic to breath, as a lot of moisture ends up there. Or are you talking about air-sealing around light fixtures etc. that let warm air leave the living area?



The latter. I have seen it referred to as "sealing the top plate" of the stud wall on the second floot


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 14, 2016)

Decided to finally make my move!  Thank you again to all the advice here.

I went with the Pacific Energy Summit.  Probably a bigger box than I need, but it fits so I'll take those longer burn times.  I was really intrigued by the idea of a cat-stove, as well as going with a free stander, but the wife is happier with the looks of this unit, and it would have kept me in the research phase far too long.  I envision that this won't be my one and only purchase.  Between the possibility of a free standing unit, along with toying with the idea of a cat-stove, I could see an upgrade, or even an addition in the future.

I'll continue to post pictures and updates of the install.  

And now, on to the FAQ on how to most effectively use a wood stove


----------



## iron (Oct 14, 2016)

one tidbit to add (and others may dispute): 
cat stoves will have dark, black glass for most of the burn and you don't get to see flames. if flames are important, a non-cat will be better (i think)

FTR: i have a non-cat ZC fireplace. sometimes i dream of cat stoves, but can't have everything. i will say that EW loading is kind of lame.


----------



## Ashful (Oct 14, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> Decided to finally make my move!  Thank you again to all the advice here.


Congratulations!  You'll be thrilled with it.  Woodburning is a lifestyle, just be careful to introduce the wife to it slowly.  I can give you exacting, precise directions, on the wrong way to do it.




iron said:


> one tidbit to add (and others may dispute):
> cat stoves will have dark, black glass for most of the burn and you don't get to see flames. if flames are important, a non-cat will be better (i think)


This is a half-truth.  A cat stove will have plenty of flame show, like any non-cat, if burned at similar burn rate.  What you're missing here is that the cat stove can also burn at much lower burn rates, outside the capability of any non-cat stove.  It is at these very-low burn rates that the stove turns to a black box of radiating heat.


----------



## Woody Stover (Oct 15, 2016)

Summit insert? And what finish?


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 15, 2016)

Woody Stover said:


> Summit insert? And what finish?



I went with the standard across the board.  Metallic black door and beveled surround panel.


----------



## nola mike (Oct 15, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> I guess either way I go, I'll need to look up a bit more about how to effectively operate a wood stove based on the type of stove I'm using, and finding a balance between heat output, and optimizing efficiency.
> 
> To make sure that I'm following properly so far, the reason for your small burn yesterday was so when the wood was flaming, it was very hot and secondary burn in your non-cat was initiated.  But this was only done for a short period of time to avoid the house overheating.  As the wood continued to burn down, there was no longer a need for a secondary burn.  And since it was warming up outside, the less heat the box began to give off was a desired side effect of the smaller burn.
> 
> ...



Yup, pretty much. If you have a smaller/hotter fire, you're going to have more of a swing in the room temp. The secondaries only are going for part of the cycle. Once the relatively volatile gasses burn off you burn pretty much smoke free anyway.


----------



## begreen (Oct 15, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> I went with the standard across the board.  Metallic black door and beveled surround panel.


Congratulations, that is a good looking combo. Take pictures and get that wood ready. 
PS: if you can draw a sketch of the floorplan we can help with some air distribution suggestions to move the heat. Is there a ceiling fan in the stove room?


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 15, 2016)

There is a ceiling fan in the dining room which is open to the living room.  The living room is the one which will contain the stove.  I'll sketch out a floor plan and post it.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 15, 2016)

Quick, crude, not to scale sketch of the house.

The picture is taken with bank to bed #2.  There is a half wall, and then a older style wood slat wall.  I'm not sure how much this will imepede air flow down the hall.  We have talked about removing them in the past, and this could certainly lead to a good reason to do so.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 15, 2016)

And overall dimensions are roughly 50' long by 24' wide on the house.


----------



## begreen (Oct 15, 2016)

The wall will impede "assisted" airflow somewhat. 

Normally the simplest way to move the heat in this setup is to  blow cool air from the hallway, down low, toward the stove. There are two issues in this layout with that plan: the blocking wall and the narrow hallway. A fan looks like it would be in the way even if only 12" wide. 

The second option is with a ducted circulation fan system. Which way to the stairs go, up or down? Is there a basement?


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 15, 2016)

begreen said:


> The wall will impede "assisted" airflow somewhat.
> 
> Normally the simplest way to move the heat in this setup is to  blow cool air from the hallway, down low, toward the stove. There are two issues in this layout with that plan: the blocking wall and the narrow hallway. A fan looks like it would be in the way even if only 12" wide.
> 
> The second option is with a ducted circulation fan system. Which way to the stairs go, up or down? Is there a basement?



Stairs go down to basement.

And that's what the blue/red lines on the wall represent.  Blue are the return ducts and red are where the forced air come out.


----------



## begreen (Oct 15, 2016)

In that case a quiet inline fan (~150-200cfm) that is ducted to intake air from the far bedrooms and blow it into the stove room should work pretty well at improving heat circulation. The far br doors would need to have about 1" open on the bottom or a vent grille in their doors if the doors are normally kept shut. If they are normally open then this is not an issue.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 15, 2016)

What's the difference between that, and simply the giant blower down in the basement that will take air from all of the intake ducts and circulate through the exhaust ducts?  

In my image, that would be blue ducts to red ducts


----------



## begreen (Oct 15, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> What's the difference between that, and simply the giant blower down in the basement that will take air from all of the intake ducts and circulate through the exhaust ducts?
> 
> In my image, that would be blue ducts to red ducts



If all the ductwork, supply and return, is fully sealed and insulated then it might work. Otherwise it might cool down the air too much. In a nutshell, the issue is duct heat loss. Most hot air systems are lossy. That's ok when the air going into the ducts coming off the furnace is at 150º. Some loss, mostly to the basement, may actually be desirable. But when trying to recirculate room air at say 75º via the ductwork, losses to a 50F basement are undesirable and can actually cool down the air too much. Also, it uses more electricity to drive a 1/4 or 1/3d hp motor for hours on end.


----------



## Woody Stover (Oct 15, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> The difference between this and had it been a cat stove would have been there would not have been that initial need to get that hot fire going to start since the Cat Stove would have been able to produce a secondary burn at a lower temp


Oh, I still have to heat up the stove for a while to get it hot enough to light the cat. You never want a roaring fire, in *any* stove, to avoid over-firing of the stove and chimney. You want some lively flame, but the air cut sufficiently to build heat in the box. I always use my phone timer in the ramp-up phase, in case I get distracted. You can over-fire in a relatively short amount of time if you don't stay on top of it. 


Log Splitter said:


> I could see an upgrade, or even an addition in the future.


Congrats, you're already talking like someone who's been on these forums for *years*.


----------



## Ashful (Oct 16, 2016)

I'd not jump too quickly into doing a ducted system, yet. I would run as-is for now, and just see how it works. If circulation ends up being as poor as we suspect, then remove the half wall. If it's still lacking, then try putting a fan on the floor back by bedrooms, pointed toward living room.  

The ducted system would be the final solution, but you have many other things to figure out, before determining its necessity. For example, do you actually prefer the bedrooms being cooler than the living room. How will your traditional heating coexist with the stove?  Most burners struggle with getting enough dry wood to make it thru the first year or two, so expecting to switch over to 100% wood heat on year one usually leads to much frustration on the first two years of burner and spouse. Baby steps. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 16, 2016)

Ashful said:


> I'd not jump too quickly into doing a ducted system, yet. I would run as-is for now, and just see how it works. If circulation ends up being as poor as we suspect, then remove the half wall. If it's still lacking, then try putting a fan on the floor back by bedrooms, pointed toward living room.
> 
> The ducted system would be the final solution, but you have many other things to figure out, before determining its necessity. For example, do you actually prefer the bedrooms being cooler than the living room. How will your traditional heating coexist with the stove?  Most burners struggle with getting enough dry wood to make it thru the first year or two, so expecting to switch over to 100% wood heat on year one usually leads to much frustration on the first two years of burner and spouse. Baby steps.
> 
> ...



Agreed. There will definitely being some tinkering with the setup.

I think the bedrooms being at a -10 differential would likely be a desired side effect of this setup.  If we can keep the living area at 75+, and then keep the bedrooms at 65+, I think we'll be good to go.

If the gap is larger, I imagine as Ashful has said, the wall will be the first thing to go.  Then we'll see how much of a difference turning the main fan on makes.  We can also look at install a ceiling fan in the living room, and then of course, figuring out some sort of floor flan from the hallway.


----------



## brenndatomu (Oct 17, 2016)

Ashful said:


> If circulation ends up being as poor as we suspect, then remove the half wall. If it's still lacking, then try putting a fan on the floor back by bedrooms, pointed toward living room.


What about a small fan in/through that half wall?


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 17, 2016)

brenndatomu said:


> What about a small fan in/through that half wall?



Yes, this was actually what I was thinking too.  Build something small into the bottom of the half wall so it wasn't just randomly sitting in the hallway.


----------



## Ashful (Oct 17, 2016)

brenndatomu said:


> What about a small fan in/through that half wall?


I was mostly going off Log Splitter's earlier post, stating he and his wife have been debating removing that wall for a while, before the wood stove was even in the picture.  Yes, a fan thru the wall might work very well, if they didn't want the wall gone.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 18, 2016)

Ashful said:


> I was mostly going off Log Splitter's earlier post, stating he and his wife have been debating removing that wall for a while, before the wood stove was even in the picture.  Yes, a fan thru the wall might work very well, if they didn't want the wall gone.



Sorry, I wasn't clear.  Look up a few posts at the picture I showed:
https://www.hearth.com/talk/attachments/wood-wall-jpg.185756/

We would first remove the wood slats above the half wall, not the entire wall itself.....to see if that would make a difference.  I didn't consider the entire wall, but I guess that wouldn't be terribly difficult too.  We'd just be left with some wall patch work, and then have to see what type of floor mess we're looking at in that one spot.

That's a bit more invasive, so we'd probably be hesitant to do it without knowing if it was going to make a substantial difference.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 19, 2016)

We're scheduled for install Friday!

When all is said and done:

$2700 - PE Summit
$500 - Install Materials
$775 - Labor

So we're looking at little over $4,000 after tax.

Anything I should keep an eye out for?  Specific questions I should ask?


----------



## begreen (Oct 19, 2016)

That's an inexpensive install. Seems like this may not include a block-off plate. Will the liner be insulated? Will the chimney get cleaned thoroughly first?


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 19, 2016)

begreen said:


> That's an inexpensive install. Seems like this may not include a block-off plate. Will the liner be insulated? Will the chimney get cleaned thoroughly first?



They will assess when they're up there and will charge $50 more to clean if necessary.

They will not use a block off plate.  The liner is also not an insulated liner.  I did inquire about this.  They said they could if I wanted, but they did not feel it was necessary in this situation.

I know the block off plate and liner insulation seem quite popular around here, so I will have to think a bit more about this.  The block off plate is a project I can work on after the install, but the liner insulation is probably something that would be easier for them to do now if I chose to go that way.


----------



## begreen (Oct 19, 2016)

The situation should be decided by safety and code first and then performance. Insulation is a very small premium to pay to will improve both. 

Is the chimney in contact with the structure of the house at some points or separated by at least an inch?


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 19, 2016)

Attached is an image of the chimney.


----------



## begreen (Oct 19, 2016)

Looks like it's in contact with the house but it's hard to tell. If this were my house I'd insulate the liner.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk


----------



## Ashful (Oct 19, 2016)

I've run liners both with and without insulation, two of them in the same chimney (at different times, not together).  If your chimney is in proper working order, then there is no safety-based (CTC) reason to need insulation on your liner.  In this case, the sole advantage of the insulation is that it may help keep the liner warmer, which has advantages for better draft and less creosote on stoves with super-low exhaust temperatures.

The block-off plate is something many here like to have, but very, very, very few installers seem to do.  It's at least daily we read posts of folks who had liners installed without block-off plates.  Again, there's usually no safety-based need for one, but they do provide the advantage of helping to keep the liner warm, and more of your heat in your house.

If you want an insulated liner, the easiest way to do this is to blanket wrap the liner prior to installation, but this is not the only way.  You can also install the block-off plate and back-fill with Vermiculite, post-insulation.  I'd not derail a planned installation date over either of these issues, unless there was a safety concern.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 19, 2016)

begreen said:


> Looks like it's in contact with the house but it's hard to tell. If this were my house I'd insulate the liner.
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk



I'm not sure what you mean by being in contact with the house.  There is no gap between the siding of the home and the brick on the outside of the chimney.  If this is what you're referring to, then there is no gap.



Ashful said:


> I'd not derail a planned installation date over either of these issues, unless there was a safety concern.



What safety concerns should I look into?  The house was previously owned by an older couple who never used the fireplace.  They had the fireplace cleaned and serviced a few years back (I believe I have the paperwork on this) and have not used it since.

I imagine the chimney's structural integrity, and being in proper working order is something the installers will investigate upon install?


----------



## Ashful (Oct 19, 2016)

I don't suspect you have any safety concerns.  Newer house, build to modern code.  I was more including that for the many readers who live in much older homes.  My house was built in four stages, 1738, 1773, 1894, and 1994.  In homes like this, there are some safety concerns necessitating insulated liners.  I'm assuming your chimney is lined with a clay tile liner, and that there are no major failures.  Your installer, if they have any care at all for their work, will do a visual inspection from above and below.


----------



## begreen (Oct 19, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> I'm not sure what you mean by being in contact with the house.  There is no gap between the siding of the home and the brick on the outside of the chimney.  If this is what you're referring to, then there is no gap.


This is a safety concern, the chimney was not built to code. There should have been a 1" gap to the structure. This is not untypical in modern construction. By code the liner needs to be insulated. When in doubt, give the inspecting authority a call.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 19, 2016)

begreen said:


> This is a safety concern, the chimney was not built to code. There should have been a 1" gap to the structure. This is not untypical in modern construction. By code the liner needs to be insulated. When in doubt, give the inspecting authority a call.



I will take a look, but I believe it is flush against the house.

This is of course against the siding of the house, not directly up to the actual frame of the home....if that makes any difference.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 19, 2016)

Maybe I'm just a fool and you're referring to the chimney being up against the house on the sides?

If that's the case, I believe we have a little gap.  

Dark here so the picture isn't great.

Oh yeah, and what on earth am I doing getting a wood stove.  It's 8:30 PM, mid October, and 65 degrees outside!


----------



## begreen (Oct 20, 2016)

Hard to see. There may be a gap there and a trim piece covering it. Here is the code. 




Considering the small additional cost which is trivial over the life of this infrastructure improvement it seems like a simple decision. Another benefit can be a cleaner flue. There will also be a performance improvement which can be important if the chimney height is short. This would be most notable during milder weather burning.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 20, 2016)

begreen said:


> Hard to see. There may be a gap there and a trim piece covering it. Here is the code.
> 
> View attachment 186041
> View attachment 186042
> ...



I checked again this morning.  There is a 1" gap between the chimney and the structure of the home.  With the trim, and the way it has a little give, it's about 0.5".  We should be good on code, but I will still give the installer a call and ask once again about insulating the liner.

Is the entire liner typically insulated when the liner gets insulation, or just a portion?


----------



## Ashful (Oct 20, 2016)

Entire liner.  The liner comes to them as a large coil.  The insulation is usually a 20" wide blanket of foil-backed insulation, cut to the length of your liner.  They lay it out in your driveway, and use foil tape (or sometimes the foil backing on the liner is self-adhesive) to affix it around the liner.  Then they wrap that in a wire, or sometimes use a wire sock that looks like a giant Chinese finger trap, to hold the insulation there permanently.  Then the try to coil it back up as best they can, to haul it up to your roof and slide it down the chimney.  It adds maybe 30 minutes to the install job.


----------



## Woody Stover (Oct 20, 2016)

Ashful said:


> Entire liner.  The liner comes to them as a large coil.  The insulation is usually a 20" wide blanket of foil-backed insulation, cut to the length of your liner.  They lay it out in your driveway, and use foil tape (or sometimes the foil backing on the liner is self-adhesive) to affix it around the liner.  Then they wrap that in a wire, or sometimes use a wire sock that looks like a giant Chinese finger trap, to hold the insulation there permanently.  Then the try to coil it back up as best they can, to haul it up to your roof and slide it down the chimney.  It adds maybe 30 minutes to the install job.


My insulation was sent with a 3M spray adhesive. The mesh also keeps rough surfaces in the masonry chimney from tearing up the insulation blanket when you pull the liner through.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 21, 2016)

Install is complete.  Took about 4 hours total.  The two guys seemed to be on their game.

I'll post some pictures in a few minutes.
EDIT: Pictures posted

Currently burning a small fire in the 60 degree weather per the instructions.  Haven't noticed any paint smelling, but I sure as hell got quite a bit of smoke in the house!  This fire starting stuff is an art, and I get too antsy poking and proding trying to make sure everything is burning as efficiently as possible.

Here's one question.  I know there are likely many factors, but how long does it take for the box and its surroundings to really start to heat up to the point where it begins radiating heat?  I've been at a very small fire now for 30 minutes, but minimal radiant heat, or even hot air from the blower.

EDIT: Just remembered, also need to get some sort of hearth extension to meet code for the 16"


----------



## Mr. Jones (Oct 21, 2016)

Mine doesn't heat up until I start closing the air down. Big flames when starting, but most of the heat goes up the chimney.


----------



## brenndatomu (Oct 21, 2016)

Congrats!
It'll probably take a long time with a fire that small...


----------



## begreen (Oct 21, 2016)

brenndatomu said:


> It'll probably take a long time with a fire that small...


Yes, it would take loading 4-5 splits on that starter fire to warm things up. Then it should be at temp in about 20-30 mins.

The current outside temps are working against you, especially if the chimney is short and more so if the liner didn't get insulated. When you start up the insert at 45F or below it will start behaving quite differently and there should be no smoke spillage. Here is a short video which has good tips for starting the fire. Watch the "Efficient Woodstove Operation" video.
http://woodheat.org/wood-heat-videos.html


----------



## mol1jb (Oct 21, 2016)

Good looking install.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 21, 2016)

begreen said:


> Yes, it would take loading 4-5 splits on that starter fire to warm things up. Then it should be at temp in about 20-30 mins.
> 
> The current outside temps are working against you, especially if the chimney is short and more so if the liner didn't get insulated. When you start up the insert at 45F or below it will start behaving quite differently and there should be no smoke spillage. Here is a short video which has good tips for starting the fire. Watch the "Efficient Woodstove Operation" video.
> http://woodheat.org/wood-heat-videos.html



I've actually seen a couple of those exact videos, haha.  

We should be getting some sub 40 nights over the next few days, so I'll have to give it its TRUE test then.


----------



## begreen (Oct 21, 2016)

Sounds good. The Summit has a big belly. Fill it at least half way for a decent test.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 21, 2016)

begreen said:


> Sounds good. The Summit has a big belly. Fill it at least half way for a decent test.



Will do.

The installer laughed and said I'm gonna be walking around in my banana hammock this winter


----------



## EatenByLimestone (Oct 21, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> Will do.
> 
> The installer laughed and said I'm gonna be walking around in my banana hammock this winter




Pfft.  You only walk the first couple times.  After that you skip.


----------



## Squisher (Oct 21, 2016)

Nice stove. Congrats. PE's are well built stoves that are user friendly and servicing friendly.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 21, 2016)

Squisher said:


> Nice stove. Congrats. PE's are well built stoves that are user friendly and servicing friendly.



Servicing?  What?!

This thing isn't guaranteed to be issue free for 50 years?  Regretting my decision already 

Been playing around with it some more.  Weather is still silly warm here, so my house smells like an ash tray.  I need to work on remembering to not just pull the door open, but open a crack and wait some and then slowly open.  In time, in time.

I can already tell,this thing will easily stay burning through the night.  The box is huge.  Threw in a few small splits and they're still glowing now, a few hours later.  And it does so far seem to be getting down the hallway.  But then again, it's like 60 outside, so raising things down the hall 15 degrees is a joke.

I'm most curious to see how well this thing radiates when it's fully loaded.  Right now, with only a few small splits, without the fan, you can't feel much unless you're a couple feet out.  I'm hopeful that when running hot and heavy, the radiant heat will at least get the living room/dining room area.


----------



## begreen (Oct 21, 2016)

The insert has barely warmed up. The first time you do warm it up fully there will be a strong paint smell and some smoke coming off the insert until the paint bakes in. Be prepared to open a window or nearby door, turn off the ceiling fan and remove the smoke detector battery temporarily. If you have a fan that you can point out the window or door it will help exhaust the fumes. This will happen the first time the stove body gets up to 550-600F and will diminish. Fortunately this just happens for the first few fires, then you are all set.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 21, 2016)

begreen said:


> The insert has barely warmed up. The first time you do warm it up fully there will be a strong paint smell and some smoke coming off the insert until the paint bakes in. Be prepared to open a window or nearby door, turn off the ceiling fan and remove the smoke detector battery temporarily. If you have a fan that you can point out the window or door it will help exhaust the fumes. This will happen the first time the stove body gets up to 550-600F and will diminish. Fortunately this just happens for the first few fires, then you are all set.



Might have to keep the wife and kids out of the house the first time I fire this sucker up for real.  

So let's be real.  Do you guys now look forward to the first really cold night of winter?


----------



## Squisher (Oct 21, 2016)

Nawww. I enjoy being able to effortlessly overheat the house.

By servicing I meant for sweeping. They are imo some of the easiest stoves to clean. A PE is a slam dunk for a sweep.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 21, 2016)

Yeah from what I understand it's a sweep, pin pull, and drop.

Only issue I've noticed so far is the fan.  It's erratic with how it sounds.  Occasionally has a rattle on the left side.  Then sometimes if I don't' progressively increase the fan speed, and simply start at high, it will be exceptionally loud and airplane over head sounding.  Other times I'm on medium and it sounds very inconspicuous.  Weird.


----------



## begreen (Oct 22, 2016)

I just cleaned our stove and flue. It takes about 30 minutes if all is prepared and ready to go. You need a replacement gasket for where the baffle sits on the secondary air feed tube. Or make your own.
https://www.hearth.com/talk/threads/quiet-day-good-time-to-clean-the-chimney.157005/

By the description, the blower could have a bad speed control. Contact the dealer.


----------



## gregbesia (Oct 22, 2016)

Great looking stove and fireplace. Looks like a good timing on that install with the cooler weather coming.


----------



## beatlefan (Oct 22, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> So let's be real. Do you guys now look forward to the first really cold night of winter?


Absolutely!


----------



## EatenByLimestone (Oct 22, 2016)

Come the end of February, mid March were ready for warmer weather too.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 22, 2016)

begreen said:


> By the description, the blower could have a bad speed control. Contact the dealer.



I've been toying with the fan quite a bit and haven't been able to recreate that issue of the odd airplane sound.

The only issue I have now is the rattling sound on the left hand side.  I'll have to look through the manual to see how to take the cover off so I can better detect what's causing it.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 22, 2016)

Lots of toying around with this unit.  I can tell that experience in different situations, depending on the weather, temperature, burn duration goals, etc. are going to take a while to catch up on.

Here's a random scenario:

I made a moderate sized fire around 5:30 PM.  4-5 decent sized splits.  Played around with it for the first 90 minutes, switching back and forth between a raging inferno, and then running it on low.  It's now 10:30 and it's a crazy huge bed of glowing coals.

I want to load it for the final time tonight so I've added in a couple splits running north south, and then a threw in a few very large splits going east/west on top.  Whether or not that makes sense, I don't know, but that's what I did.  

Do I need to open the airflow for a little bit to let coals catch and really light the logs, or will time and radiant heat simply take care of that?  House is at a good temp now, so I simply want to make sure the stuff in there will ultimately burn, and that I won't lose my bed of coals because I left it on low and threw in some giant pieces of wood and didn't open up the air flow.


----------



## begreen (Oct 22, 2016)

Reloading on a large bed of coals can cause a hot fire to ensue. Try to not do that.  I would not give it any more air.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 22, 2016)

begreen said:


> Reloading on a large bed of coals can cause a hot fire to ensue. Try to not do that.  I would not give it any more air.



Gotcha.  Is there any reason you would not want a hot fire, or is that simply responding to the condition I stated before about temperature already being good?  Is this a safety hazard?

And if I'm not supposed to reload on a large bed of coals, does that simply mean I shoudl have waited longer before reloading?


----------



## begreen (Oct 22, 2016)

You want a predictable fire. Throwing a large fuel load on a "a crazy huge bed of glowing coals" could lead to an overfire.

Instead of adding more wood, open up the air a bit to help burn down the coal bed down before reloading. Your stove will provide 10-12hr burn cycles so time your reloads for a good lifestyle fit. Lets say you normally go to bed around 11pm. A good 12 hr cycle would be to reload at around 8 or 9pm then so that you can get the wood burning, then close down the air and watch it go into a steady burn. When I reload I want to go to bed knowing that the fire is at a steady temp and not climbing.

For starting out I recommend doing your first large loads of wood in the morning so that you can track the fire progress. Did you get a thermometer for the face of the insert yet? That will help a lot.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 22, 2016)

begreen said:


> You want a predictable fire. Throwing a large fuel load on a "a crazy huge bed of glowing coals" could lead to an overfire.
> 
> Instead of adding more wood, open up the air a bit to help burn down the coal bed down before reloading. Your stove will provide 10-12hr burn cycles so time your reloads for a good lifestyle fit. Lets say you normally go to bed around 11pm. A good 12 hr cycle would be to reload at around 8 or 9pm then so that you can get the wood burning, then close down the air and watch it go into a steady burn. When I reload I want to go to bed knowing that the fire is at a steady temp and not climbing.
> 
> For starting out I recommend doing your first large loads of wood in the morning so that you can track the fire progress. Did you get a thermometer for the face of the insert yet? That will help a lot.



- "This is great.  I can hardly wait to try this at home.  Thanks, I really appreciate you teaching me all this stuff"
- "You're very welcome.  Be sure to let me know how it turns out."
- "You bet I will!"

Had to throw this in there.  Those videos are hilarious.  Quite informative, but can't help but laugh at the conversing between the two.

I bought the Condar inferno.  Should be here Monday.  

I'm going to be up for a few more hours, so I'll be sure to monitor the fire.  I'll probably sleep out on the couch tonight too to make sure all is running properly.  I've been taking mental notes on each load to better understand patterns so I can more efficiently run this beast.

So let me ask this.  Lets say that I've determined that to heat my house under current conditions, the stove should be at 500 degrees.  After I get the stove to 500 degrees, if the fire is burning and nothing is touched, I imagine there would naturally be an inverse relationship between time and stove temperature.  In order to keep the temperature on a straight line, would I have to very slowly increase air flow so that as the wood volume decreases, I'm burning the diminishing amount at a higher rate?

I'm sure I'm over analyzing this, and it's not practical to employ so precisely, but i want to make sure my thought process behind it is sound.


----------



## begreen (Oct 22, 2016)

Yes, stove output will decline over time, but with a full load the stove can still be putting out good heat many hours after being loaded. Think of wood heating as pulse and glide. The thermal mass of the stove, masonry and room will keep temps from dropping too fast.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 24, 2016)

Besides a catalytic stove, what are good practices for those long, overnight burns....and finding the balance between hot enough, but lasting long enough?

When I'm loading up my oven on a bed of hot coals, after I open the air and let things roar for a bit, after I reduce the air, we have quite a bit of smoke leaving the chimney.  My thermometer comes in the mail today, so I'll finally be able to see if the stove is dipping to a level lower than it should be.  I imagine that's the issue, and the solution is to not close the air to the lowest setting, but maybe open it up a little more...


----------



## Squisher (Oct 24, 2016)

Sounds like the thermometer will help. When everything is up to temp and 'cruising' there should be no smoke.


----------



## Squisher (Oct 24, 2016)

When my load is off gassed and I'm looking to settle in with good secondaries my air control is set between closed and maybe 3/4" of an inch open. Depending on the weather and the size of the load. The load will cruise 300-450f single wall magnetic thermometer. My stovetop will stay pretty steady in the 500-600 range with a magnetic thermometer.  Sometimes a bit higher but 650plus seems to be in danger of a 'runaway'. Espescially if stovepipe temps are real hot too.

This is with seasoned Douglas fir and depending on the size of the load I'll see 4hr to a overnight burn.

Usually the stovepipe temp will be in that higher range as I was burning the new load of wood hot and getting everything up to temp and over the life of the load it'll creep down to 300 even as low as 230 sometimes at the very end if I hadn't adjusted my air up at all near the end of the load. Near the end of the load the stovetop temp will start to fall off a bit too.

At the end of the load I crank my air open for a couple/few minutes to get temps coming back up a bit and get the coals a bit roasty, the. On goes the new load of wood.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 25, 2016)

Finally got a thermometer and have faced in on the facing of the stove above the door.

One thing I've noticed is I have not been running hot enough before tapering down the air flow.  I would typically lower it just a few minutes after the stove was under heavy flames.  But I'm now realizing the stove needs quite a bit more time in that zone to hit a proper burning range.

The problem I'm having is, it seems to take a while to get there, and by the time the stove is finally there, the wood is halfway burned down.  Once I begin to lower the air flow, the box doesn't seem to maintain temperature, but continues to drop instead.  I tend to load 4-6 decent size splits in the stove at a time.  I could certainly load more than this, but then again, it has only been 30-50 degree range, so hasn't been too cold. 

Any thoughts on this?  Am I not loading enough wood?  Should I try different things with the air control?  Is it not  that big of a deal to run the oven for extended periods at 300 rather than say 450?

EDIT: Full disclosure, just bought a moisture meter.  Most of the wood I'm currently burning is in the 20-25% range.  Not sure how much of a hinderance this could be, but it's what I have now.  I can buy some wood if this 5% difference is the deal breaker.


----------



## Squisher (Oct 25, 2016)

It is the deal breaker. Unfortunately.  You'll never get a good burn and temps with wet or even marginal wood. Be careful buying 'seasoned' wood. That's a highly interpretive phrase in wood selling circles.  

I always tell people it's called 'wood burning' for a reason. You can have the fanciest stove in the world, but if the main ingredient isn't cured. Your SOL. 

I always load N/S.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 25, 2016)

I have some wood from last year that I thought would have been seasoned by now, but apparently not.

I have been doing a little bit of both, putting a layer at the bottom E/W and then loading some N/S on top of that.  

So in the meantime, what's the best "bad" choice?  Do I just keep loading the thing up like crazy and let it roar away to keep it in the hot zone, or should i just let it peak in the hot zone and slowly simmer off?


----------



## begreen (Oct 25, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> I have been doing a little bit of both, putting a layer at the bottom E/W and then loading some N/S on top of that.


I would do the opposite with less seasoned wood. You air to go under the logs front to back for the best ignition. Or just load N/S.


Log Splitter said:


> Do I just keep loading the thing up like crazy and let it roar away to keep it in the hot zone, or should i just let it peak in the hot zone and slowly simmer off?


What do you mean by the "hot zone"? If the weather is cold enough then load it once and let it go through the complete burn cycle. This would be say from 300F on reload back to 300F as the coals burn down.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 25, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> I've had some wood from last year that I thought would have been seasoned by now, but apparently not.
> 
> So in the meantime, what's the best "bad" choice?  Do I just keep loading the thing up like crazy and let it roar away to keep it in the hot zone, or should i just let it peak in the hot zone and slowly simmer off?





begreen said:


> I would do the opposite with less seasoned wood. You air to go under the logs front to back for the best ignition. Or just load N/S.
> 
> What do you mean by the "hot zone"? If the weather is cold enough then load it once and let it go through the complete burn cycle. This would be say from 300F on reload back to 300F as the coals burn down.



Sorry, I should have been more clear.  By "hot zone" I meant the zone you're aiming to run in.  Not in creosote zone, or the "too hot" zone, but right in the middle.  I think my thermometer suggests 400 as minimum, but you're saying let it drop down to 300 and then reload?  And on the reload, when/if I open the air, at what temp do you typically close it down again?


----------



## Squisher (Oct 25, 2016)

if your wood can't get your stovetop temp over 300, and won't support secondaries I think you're going to have a rough time producing much substantial heat and you're going to have lots of creosote and smoke out the chimney.

Here's a halfish to two thirds load all settled in (couple hours into the load) for the long haul from one of my loads last night.

Where are you placing your thermometer on your summit insert?  Maybe snap a pic?


----------



## begreen (Oct 25, 2016)

What thermometer did you get and where is it placed?

On reload I usually don't go by temp. I go by eye. When the wood starts burning robustly I start to close down the air. How quickly depends on the wood, heat of the coal bed and strength of the draft. On a cold winter day with good dry doug fir I can close down the air within a few minutes of the wood igniting. On a mild day the air may get closed down over 10 minutes, 50% at a time, and maybe never closed off all the way if draft is weak.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 25, 2016)

I have it on the face of the stove, which is what appeared the be the only part of the actual firebox exposed.

I'm about 2/3rds open now.  It's high 40's outside, low 70's inside.  Chimney without any visible smoke.


----------



## begreen (Oct 25, 2016)

OK, that's a good thermometer for this application. Let's refer to temps, not zones. Try closing the air to 1/4 and see how it behaves. Ideally you want the flames to be wispy, almost wraith-like, and lazy.

Those splits are fairly small, good for shorter, mild season burning.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 25, 2016)

Dropped it down 1/4 a little before you said to.  Been about 30 minutes now, and surprisingly (compared to last time), temperature has still continued to climb another 50 or so degrees up to about 500.  

I have since lowered air to the lowest setting.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 25, 2016)




----------



## begreen (Oct 25, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> Dropped it down 1/4 a little before you said to.  Been about 30 minutes now, and surprisingly (compared to last time), temperature has still continued to climb another 50 or so degrees up to about 500.
> 
> I have since lowered air to the lowest setting.


That's as expected. Closing down the primary air causes the air to be drawn more through the secondary manifold. This leads to more complete combustion and more heat. The blue wispy flame is an indication.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 25, 2016)

As quickly as I say that, it now seems to have begun its slow decline.

So at this point, you would advise to wait until it hits 300 degrees and then reload, open the air, and then slowly close it again?


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 25, 2016)

In this case, would you just let it go through it's cycle naturally, or would you raise the airflow at any point before it hits 300?


----------



## begreen (Oct 25, 2016)

Usually I don't touch it with smaller fires, especially if I am going to let the fire burn out. When burning 24/7 though I will usually turn up the air about 30 minutes before reloading to burn down the coal bed first. 300F is not a hard fast rule. 250F or even 200F may be fine during mild weather. There's no danger of creosote buildup during the coaling stage.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 25, 2016)

So what's the trick to running the stove in milder weather?  If the stove is at it's sweet spot say 300-600, but you're only looking to raise the temperature of the house up maybe 10 degrees, how do you safely burn at a lower temperature for a longer duration?


----------



## Ashful (Oct 25, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> Finally got a thermometer and have faced in on the facing of the stove above the door.
> 
> One thing I've noticed is I have not been running hot enough before tapering down the air flow.  I would typically lower it just a few minutes after the stove was under heavy flames.  But I'm now realizing the stove needs quite a bit more time in that zone to hit a proper burning range.
> 
> ...


As I read this, my first thought was, "wet wood".  Then I saw your edit.  Yes, the more water in your wood, the longer you need to burn at WOT to expel that water. 

Mixing something ultra-dry in with your wood is a cheap and easy way to knock down net MC%.  Think pallet wood, framing lumber scraps, etc.  Just a few pieces of dry wood will make a notable difference in a load that would be otherwise 25%.

Also, when measuring with your moisture meter, don't forget to correct for temperature, or warm your wood to 70F before testing.  Wood will always show falsely low, as you move to colder temperatures below 70F.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 25, 2016)

Ashful said:


> As I read this, my first thought was, "wet wood".  Then I saw your edit.  Yes, the more water in your wood, the longer you need to burn at WOT to expel that water.
> 
> Mixing something ultra-dry in with your wood is a cheap and easy way to knock down net MC%.  Think pallet wood, framing lumber scraps, etc.  Just a few pieces of dry wood will make a notable difference in a load that would be otherwise 25%.
> 
> Also, when measuring with your moisture meter, don't forget to correct for temperature, or warm your wood to 70F before testing.  Wood will always show falsely low, as you move to colder temperatures below 70F.



Good tip on adding in the dry wood.

And I was not aware of that.  I'll be sure to bring a few pieces inside to warm up to get a more accurate test.


----------



## begreen (Oct 25, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> So what's the trick to running the stove in milder weather?  If the stove is at it's sweet spot say 300-600, but you're only looking to raise the temperature of the house up maybe 10 degrees, how do you safely burn at a lower temperature for a longer duration?


Ten degrees is a lot. It will take a decent sized fire to do that. You are not just bringing the air temp up, but all the mass of the room too. That includes walls, furniture, brick, flooring, etc.. We don't burn until it gets cooler and in the 40's, except for an occasional chill-chaser. In mild weather we pulse and glide with smaller fires and if the house is warm enough we let the fire go out.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 25, 2016)

I guess 10 degrees was an overstatement.  Probably more like going from 65 to 70, so only 5 degrees.

But I guess the same remains true.  Hit it hard and hot and then ride it out.


----------



## begreen (Oct 25, 2016)

It also depends on how well insulated the house is and how much glass area it has. If the temps are mild you might just do a half-load of wood, then add a few more if necessary once that load burns down. Hitting it hard means a full load of wood to me and a 600-650F stove. I still haven't done that this year.


----------



## Woody Stover (Oct 25, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> Hit it hard and hot and then ride it out.


As was mentioned, as the load catches and the fire builds, you cut the air. I aim for lively flame with the air closed as much as I can, not a roaring fire which eats through the load faster and sends more heat up the flue. As you get ahead on your wood supply, you will have drier fuel and you can get the stove up to temp quicker, with less of the load consumed.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 25, 2016)

One of my two dogs has found a comfortable new home...


----------



## begreen (Oct 25, 2016)

They find that warmth quickly. 

You'll be needing some better hearth protection there. Embers can and will pop out sometimes. Is there a plan to extend the hearth?


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 25, 2016)

begreen said:


> They find that warmth quickly.
> 
> You'll be needing some better hearth protection there. Embers can and will pop out sometimes. Is there a plan to extend the hearth?



Yes, we don't currently meet the minimum.

We're going to get a basic hearth extension pad to throw down in front of the current hearth and on top of the carpet.


----------



## begreen (Oct 25, 2016)

That'll work. It should be screwed down at least in the front two corners to keep it from creeping away from the hearth. The extension can be removed in the summer.


----------



## Woody Stover (Oct 25, 2016)

begreen said:


> You'll be needing some better hearth protection there.


Looks like they want 16" from the front of the stove (not the ash lip,) correct? Can you put a ruler on the front of the stove, and if you can't reach anything combustible within 16", then you're good? Or do you look from above, straight down, in which case the floor might within 16" if you had the ruler going straight out parallel to the floor? Seems like the former would make more sense...


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 26, 2016)

I'm currently about 12" from the opening to the edge of the hearth.  I think this is the only number that matters because even if a straight line of the hypotenuse is >16" before getting to the wood floor, once it passes the 12" mark, the distance traveled is no longer caused by things popping out of the stove. 

Damn gravity.


----------



## Ashful (Oct 26, 2016)

Woody Stover said:


> Looks like they want 16" from the front of the stove (not the ash lip,) correct? Can you put a ruler on the front of the stove, and if you can't reach anything combustible within 16", then you're good? Or do you look from above, straight down, in which case the floor might within 16" if you had the ruler going straight out parallel to the floor? Seems like the former would make more sense...


I always thought it was from the front of the stove opening, to be legal, but I'll always advise going at least 24" out.  You want a place to set your satchel of logs, when you bring them in to load the stove.  Make the hearth extension big enough for this, and you'll be much happier.  It also gives you a better place to set tools, when you're cleaning out ash, etc.  More is always better.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 26, 2016)

Going to quickly share some thoughts/questions in a little rant.

I feel like if I'm not running the fan, that I'm wasting some of heat from the stove.  But with the fires I've been making, if I run the fan, the main room gets quite toasty.

So conventional thinking would say to use less wood and run the stove at a lower temp, and then turn on the fan.

But with less wood, and the stove at a lower temp, I'm in that "creosote" zone.

Is there a way to properly run the stove at a lower temperature and not have to worry about creosote buildup?  Instead of throwing the 4-5 splits, I could just throw it 1-2 at a time if that will get temperature down, but then again, the issue is still lower temps creating creosote problems.

Thoughts?


----------



## begreen (Oct 26, 2016)

NY is exceptionally warm for this time of year. What you are experiencing is not uncommon in a ranch when the weather is mild. That's why it was suggested to burn shorter hot fires and let it go out. Or just wait until it gets colder to burn. 

Have you tried distributing the excess heat to the rest of the house?


----------



## Ashful (Oct 26, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> Is there a way to properly run the stove at a lower temperature and not have to worry about creosote buildup?


Yes:  buy a catalytic stove.

Your only option with non-cat is burning hot fires of shorter duration.  Pump and glide.  Yes, the room temp will cycle a bit, but most find it tolerable.

We did try to warn you (eg. post #58).


----------



## Woody Stover (Oct 26, 2016)

Ashful said:


> Your only option with non-cat is burning hot fires of shorter duration.  Pump and glide.  Yes, the room temp will cycle a bit, but most find it tolerable.


I'd think "spurt burning" would be less of a problem if one has good insulation and air-sealing, and a convective stove with a cast iron jacket that flattens out the swings in temp. This place of ours loses heat relatively quickly, so cat burning works well for us.


----------



## Squisher (Oct 26, 2016)

Get a fan going and try moving some air around.  The summit is a big firebox, so it produces a lot of heat, you'll be thankful for that when it gets cold out. You should be able to still get up to temp with a small load of wood, you mentioned your wood is a bit wet and that I believe is what is hampering getting out of the creosote zone on smaller loads. Don't be frustrated it's definitely a learning curve to dialling in a baffle/reburner type of stove.  It takes some practice and skill to run one well, not like those cat stoves that even a small child could operate. So enjoy your nice big clean fireview, while the cat guys are staring into their black box trying to see their cat glow. 

The summit is a fantastic woodstove that when operated properly will still be operating for decades without having to replace any.............cat. 

In case it's not clear cat lovers, I'm a dog guy. Lol. As in doghouse for secondary air. Lol. My comments are tongue in cheek so let's not ruin this fellows thread with how awesome cat stoves are. I get it, and there's plenty of threads going to discuss that already.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 26, 2016)

begreen said:


> Have you tried distributing the excess heat to the rest of the house?


I used the forced air fan.  I think the air cools down too much before it hits the bedroom, and then the side effect is also colder air coming out of the vents into the main rooms.  



Ashful said:


> We did try to warn you (eg. post #58).


First thing I thought of through all of this was cat-stove!  

But as I think of it. my problem isn't necessarily overheating the house.  I feel the problem would be with any type of stove.  I can certainly get the stove running at lower temperatures, a more ideal temperature for these mild weathers, but whether it's a cat or non-cat stove, isn't running the stove at say 200 degrees going to be an issue with creosote buildup?



Woody Stover said:


> I'd think "spurt burning" would be less of a problem if one has good insulation and air-sealing, and a convective stove with a cast iron jacket that flattens out the swings in temp. This place of ours loses heat relatively quickly, so cat burning works well for us.



My insulation actually isn't as bad as I thought it was.

Ultimately, I'm able to get the house to the temp I want.  My question is, I feel to optimize the heat being created, I should be running the fan full blast all the time.  The only way I can run the fan full blast and not heat myself out of the house is if the stove is running sub 300 degrees in that "creosote" level.  Wouldn't this be an issue for a cat stove too?


----------



## Ashful (Oct 26, 2016)

Woody Stover said:


> I'd think "spurt burning" would be less of a problem if one has good insulation and air-sealing, and a convective stove with a cast iron jacket that flattens out the swings in temp. This place of ours loses heat relatively quickly, so cat burning works well for us.


Ditto.  The cavern I call a house needs continuous heat, and will not work with "pump and glide", the way so many seem to do in modern construction.  Also, it's really only in these shoulder season temperatures, that we find so many having trouble with this.  Once it gets cold, this short-coming of the non-cat mostly goes away.


----------



## Squisher (Oct 26, 2016)

Just turn the fan off if the room is getting to hot. I heat my entire two story home from a summit stove in t h basement and don't run a single fan. There is no fan kit on my stove at all. I know with a insert you need the fan to pull heat out, but if the room is to hot turn the fan off. No biggie. 

Also try using a freestanding fan to push air from the colder/cooler areas of your house towards the room with the insert in it.Experiment a bit until something works.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 26, 2016)

Squisher said:


> Get a fan going and try moving some air around.  The summit is a big firebox, so it produces a lot of heat, you'll be thankful for that when it gets cold out. You should be able to still get up to temp with a small load of wood, you mentioned your wood is a bit wet and that I believe is what is hampering getting out of the creosote zone on smaller loads. Don't be frustrated it's definitely a learning curve to dialling in a baffle/reburner type of stove.  It takes some practice and skill to run one well, not like those cat stoves that even a small child could operate. So enjoy your nice big clean fireview, while the cat guys are staring into their black box trying to see their cat glow.
> 
> The summit is a fantastic woodstove that when operated properly will still be operating for decades without having to replace any.............cat.
> 
> In case it's not clear cat lovers, I'm a dog guy. Lol. As in doghouse for secondary air. Lol. My comments are tongue in cheek so let's not ruin this fellows thread with how awesome cat stoves are. I get it, and there's plenty of threads going to discuss that already.



Let the wars continue! 

I've been able to get it out of creosote zones, but the creosote zones are the temps that I actually want to run right now in these mild temperatures. 

Maybe that's the idea of pump/glide.  Pump to out of the creosote zones and then let it glide down and when it hits the lower levels, by that point the volume of wood has decreased and you don't have to worry about creosote anymore...

EDIT: Consolidate Posts

I'm probably just being an idiot. 

I can get the house to where I want it to be by turning the fans off, but I feel like I'm wasting the heat generated from the box if I'm not pulling it all out.

Intuitively it seems that it would be more efficient to have a lower temp box and pull 100% ofl the hot air out rather than burn a hot fire and only use 50% of the heat by not pulling it with the fan.

But again, it seems that running the fire at the lower temperature is an issue with creosote. That's where I'm getting a little confused.


----------



## Squisher (Oct 26, 2016)

Exactly. In the coaling stage you will produce little to no creosote even well down in the 'creosote zone' range of temperatures. So burn hot, off gas all the nastys and burn them up, then cut your air back and cruise on coals, stretching it out as long as you can before, upping the air and reloading. 

I would be cautious trying to idle down to much if you have questionable moisture content wood. I've actually never run my summit with wet or even wettish wood, only cured, cured, cured. I've burned my whole life(41 now) and long before having this stove learned the importance of wood. It is the main ingredient after all. 

The best way to know how much creosote you're making is checking the chimney. If it's fairly easy to get to it would be worth popping that cap and having a look see down the liner after a couple/few weeks of burning to see what's up. Snap a pic and post up here. You'll get lots of opinions!


----------



## Squisher (Oct 26, 2016)

Off of good wood it's easy to get out of the creosote zone with a smallish load.

I just started my stove before piping in here with four splits and a fire starter. No other wood used and here's what my fire looks like and my stovetop temp.

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong but with your thermometer placement due to being an insert you are always going to be reading a bit cooler then what most people are referring to for stovetop temps. In my pic you can see how close my thermometer is to the flue.  

Also of note, I don't ever clean my glass anymore. I haven't cleaned it for atleast the last couple months of last years burning and all of this years.


----------



## prezes13 (Oct 26, 2016)

See that's exactly what ashful was talking about.  You cannot run a tube stove low and slow.  In a weather like that, it's still 50s-40s in ct I don't bother with the stove.  Once it gets colder down to 30s I will start burning.  In a warmer weather i feel just like you that I am wasting wood.  Hopefully one day I will get a freestanding cat stove in my rec room downstairs.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 26, 2016)

First thing first, quick story.  My neighbor has been talking to me while watching me gather and split wood that last few weeks.  He offered up some of his wood that he doesn't use anymore.  Some nicely seasoned wood that he has had around for the last couple years, including some good oak.  I threw some into my coal bed to test it out.  Had it run hot for only 15-20 minutes, and turned it down.  Came back in a little later and the oven was running hotter than ever before, and got there faster!

So to Squisher, and many of the others on the board.  Haven't found a more critical component of this equation yet than the quality of your wood!



prezes13 said:


> See that's exactly what ashful was talking about.  You cannot run a tube stove low and slow.  In a weather like that, it's still 50s-40s in ct I don't bother with the stove.  Once it gets colder down to 30s I will start burning.  In a warmer weather i feel just like you that I am wasting wood.  Hopefully one day I will get a freestanding cat stove in my rec room downstairs.



I guess I'm a little confused.  I can sorta kinda run my stove low and slow and just keep adding a little bit of wood to the coal beds and keep the fires small.  My question is, how does the cat stove burn safely at 200 degrees and becomes ideal for these situations, but a regular stove has risks of creosote?


----------



## Squisher (Oct 26, 2016)

Yes, you can burn slow and low with a tube stove. Just not as long or efficiently as with a cat. Here's the same load I posted earlier now, and the temp. I could easily cruise slow and low like this for quite awhile if I didn't desire more heat then I've already got. I will concede. Not as low and slow as a cat, or consistent. But to say you're wasting wood and can't burn low with a reburner/tube stove is not true.


----------



## Squisher (Oct 26, 2016)

That's four pieces of wood with a fire starter I've burned so far. It's mild out. Low and slow, after the burn off. And I'm not worried about creosote or build up of any sort at all.


----------



## prezes13 (Oct 26, 2016)

They are two different technologies.  Tube stove needs to achive much higher temprature to burn clean, I think it's about 1000-1200df.  To get there you use a lot of fuel.  Cat stove needs only half of it I think 500df is enough to get the combustor working.  At that point you can turn the stove down and cat will eat smoke without putting creo in you chimney.  Tube stove by design will not let you do that.  You can do what Squisher did but you won't be able to load your stove full and run it really slow at low heat output, without putting creo in your chimney.  That's why for me to get the stove to the operating temp and let it die so I won't overheat the house is a waste of wood.


----------



## brenndatomu (Oct 26, 2016)

A couple thoughts here...you _can_ burn small fires in a tube stove, you just need to use really dry wood and stack it log cabin style or in a pyramid so that you get some good hot flames up near the baffle to kick off secondary burn...with this type of fire I don't worry about the stove top temp so much as I do just making sure there are nice hot, bright and clean burning flames and no smoky lazy flames. You may or may not be able to turn the stove down to its normal "cruise" air setting.
The other trick I have learned is to load the stove with some hardwood on the bottom and then some softwood on top, the softwood will bring the stove up to secondary burn temps and then hardwood will coal up and give off some "low and slow" smokeless heat for quite a while...this would also be a smaller load of wood stacked loose and tall. Same deal with the STT, pay attention to the fire more so...


----------



## Squisher (Oct 26, 2016)

I have zero issue with creosote but will say that I usually run hotter then I did. Or reload sooner because I desire more heat then an idle.

Here is three pics of the stove at reload.  before reload. Right after reload and the last about five minutes after. Cutting my air back pretty severely at the last picture. A six piece load of half and half spruce and fir tonight. Spruce is a lightweight in the heating/burn time department.

I'll off gas this load and settle it into coals and there will be zero concern of creosote. I can run those coals a long time if I choose to. But as usual the demand from the family for heat comes into play long before that.


----------



## begreen (Oct 27, 2016)

Squisher said:


> Someone can correct me if I'm wrong but with your thermometer placement due to being an insert you are always going to be reading a bit cooler then what most people are referring to for stovetop temps. In my pic you can see how close my thermometer is to the flue.


Still too warm for us to be burning here. 57F right now. This has been an unusual October. When we do start burning regularly I'll take the stove top temp with an IR thermometer reading and compare with one off the front face corner.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 27, 2016)

Thanks to all the posters for their explanations and personal experiences.  Lots of the questions I'm asking now are variations of previously asked questions.  Now they are more specific since it's in practice rather than the in theory questions from prior to purchase.   So my apologies for any redundancy.  I promise to make some sort of compilation from this thread of my FAQ and other good information from posters so that this thread could potentially help others in the future.

I better understand now the pros of the Cat stove.  Since secondary combustion can occur at much lower temps, you don't have to worry as much about running in that creosote levels since you'll still have secondary combustion occurring anyway.  For the normal stoves however, there are some workarounds, most importantly using high quality dry wood.  Get that initial burst of heat and then glide.


----------



## EatenByLimestone (Oct 27, 2016)

Taking advantage of different species of wood will help too.   For example, pine and poplar have fewer BTUs than oak as they are less dense.  (Per pound they are the same). Burning these during the shoulder seasons will allow you to achieve which, hot fires.


----------



## Woody Stover (Oct 27, 2016)

Squisher said:


> it's definitely a learning curve to dialling in a baffle/reburner type of stove.  It takes some practice and skill to run one well, not like those cat stoves that even a small child could operate.


Sure, the Woodstocks I've run have been pretty much foolproof. But my Buck 91, on a 22' interior stack, demands that you take some variables into account. The only cat stoves with 'training wheels' are the BKs, with their thermostats.


----------



## Ashful (Oct 27, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> But as I think of it. my problem isn't necessarily overheating the house.  I feel the problem would be with any type of stove.  I can certainly get the stove running at lower temperatures, a more ideal temperature for these mild weathers, but whether it's a cat or non-cat stove, isn't running the stove at say 200 degrees going to be an issue with creosote buildup?


I think you already got the answer on this.  If you want to discuss further, we can start a separate thread and link back here.



Log Splitter said:


> I can get the house to where I want it to be by turning the fans off, but I feel like I'm wasting the heat generated from the box if I'm not pulling it all out.


So, you're finding that running the fans cools the stove to the point where your thermometer indicates you may be killing secondary combustion.  First, I'd try to determine if that's even true, and one of our non-cat experts can surely help you figure that one out.  Second, short of killing secondary combustion, fans have very little impact on the efficiency of a stove (meaning fraction of heat into house versus heat up the chimney), in most standard installations.  The exception to this rule is when the stove is very near a masonry structure (eg. your fireplace), where the fans may be increasing convective coefficient, and thus reducing the heat radiated off the back of the stove into the masonry.  In my house, I have to run fans, or I'm putting half my wood into heating the back yard.  Others with well-insulated stick-frame houses see no benefit at all, in their installations.



Woody Stover said:


> Sure, the Woodstocks I've run have been pretty much foolproof. But my Buck 91, on a 22' interior stack, demands that you take some variables into account. The only cat stoves with 'training wheels' are the BKs, with their thermostats.


That's not training wheels, it's _cruise control_.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 27, 2016)

Ashful said:


> I think you already got the answer on this.  If you want to discuss further, we can start a separate thread and link back here.



Check post #225.  I already started the apologies as I realize as this thread continues to grow, I'm getting repetitive with some of my questions.  I think what's happening now is that my questions were first geared towards understanding basic principles before I had anything to apply them to.  Not that my questions have actual application, they're a bit more refined and specific to my circumstances.  And then of course, with 101 new things to learn, I might have only retained 20% of it so far   Gotta do a better job of looking back then asking again though.  My bad!



Ashful said:


> So, you're finding that running the fans cools the stove to the point where your thermometer indicates you may be killing secondary combustion.  First, I'd try to determine if that's even true, and one of our non-cat experts can surely help you figure that one out.  Second, short of killing secondary combustion, fans have very little impact on the efficiency of a stove (meaning fraction of heat into house versus heat up the chimney), in most standard installations.  The exception to this rule is when the stove is very near a masonry structure (eg. your fireplace), where the fans may be increasing convective coefficient, and thus reducing the heat radiated off the back of the stove into the masonry.  In my house, I have to run fans, or I'm putting half my wood into heating the back yard.  Others with well-insulated stick-frame houses see no benefit at all, in their installations.



Let me clarify.  I was not trying to say that running the fan actually cooled my firebox.  What I was saying was that I can get the house warm without the need of the fans, at least in this mild weather (except what on Earth?! I work up this morning and it's snowing).  But when I'm not using the fans, I feel like I'm wasting heat that is being generated.  And since my stove is right inside of my fireplace, it does seem like the fans would be a wise choice to use.  So that leads me to believe that I'm probably burning a hotter fire than necessary if I'm not using my fans.  And if I'm not factoring in other variables, it seems like it would make the most sense to just run a fire that's not as hot, and then switch the fans on.  But then again, we hit those creosote levels.  

It's a balancing game with many variables that I'm having a hard time grasping at these early stages.


----------



## Squisher (Oct 27, 2016)

I will add that the good dry wood is not just a requirement for the reburner/tube stoves. I cleaned a BK King cat last week that's chimney was creo'd up like no tomorrow. I'm sure wood was an issue because he was buying out of the classifieds and burning it straight away. Not saying user error wasn't part of it too and not trying to totally derail your thread.

I'll use my IR gun tonight, like Begreen suggested, and see what sort of readings I get on the front part of my stove,similar to where your thermometer is placed on your summit insert. So we can compare a bit more.

I've only been diving in here so much because I have the exact same model(as a freestanding stove) and would like to see you get dialled in to some good and safe burning.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 27, 2016)

Squisher said:


> I will add that the good dry wood is not just a requirement for the reburner/tube stoves. I cleaned a BK King cat last week that's chimney was creo'd up like no tomorrow. I'm sure wood was an issue because he was buying out of the classifieds and burning it straight away. Not saying user error wasn't part of it too and not trying to totally derail your thread.
> 
> I'll use my IR gun tonight, like Begreen suggested, and see what sort of readings I get on the front part of my stove,similar to where your thermometer is placed on your summit insert. So we can compare a bit more.
> 
> I've only been diving in here so much because I have the exact same model(as a freestanding stove) and would like to see you get dialled in to some good and safe burning.



I appreciate the help Squisher.  I'm definitely noticing more and more that if I'm not feeding my stove with dry wood, it's gotta have completely open air flow for far too long, wasting way too much energy.  I think it was begreen who mentioned that even if you can get a few pieces of dry wood in there along with the 20-25% wood, it will make a noticeable difference.


----------



## begreen (Oct 27, 2016)

Maybe save the current wood supply for next season and see if there is good, kiln, or shed dried wood sold in your area?


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 27, 2016)

begreen said:


> Maybe save the current wood supply for next season and see if there is good, kiln, or shed dried wood sold in your area?



Yes, that's the plan.  I hear there is this place called Cord King that does it is a primary business, not a side thing.
http://cordkingfirewood.com/

Not too far from me, so I think they're #1 on my call list.

They sell regular seasoned wood, advertised at < 25% moisture.  They also sell kiln dried wood advertised at 6-8% moisture.  I'll give them a call and see what the prices are and report back to see what you guys think.


----------



## Ashful (Oct 27, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> I'm definitely noticing more and more that if I'm not feeding my stove with dry wood, it's gotta have completely open air flow for far too long, wasting way too much energy.  I think it was begreen who mentioned that even if you can get a few pieces of dry wood in there along with the 20-25% wood, it will make a noticeable difference.


The heat is only "wasted" if it's going up the chimney, either in solid particulate (potential energy) or heat (kinetic energy) form, and I don't think that's your case.  Burning hot might deliver more heat than you desire, but it's not wasted!


----------



## Woody Stover (Oct 27, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> if you can get a few pieces of dry wood in there along with the 20-25% wood, it will make a noticeable difference.


If you have a woodlot and a saw, and can find *small, *dead-standing trees with no bark, a lot of that will be around 20%. Those small ones start adding up to a decent amount of wood if you can find several...


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 27, 2016)

Ashful said:


> The heat is only "wasted" if it's going up the chimney, either in solid particulate (potential energy) or heat (kinetic energy) form, and I don't think that's your case.  Burning hot might deliver more heat than you desire, but it's not wasted!



Maybe I'm wording things incorrectly.

It seems that by the time the stove actually gets to a proper temperature where I can lower the air flow, that a good chunk of the wood is already burned down.  Doesn't it "waste energy" to have to spend heat drying out the wood?


----------



## Squisher (Oct 27, 2016)

Yes. Burning even wettish wood is very wasteful.  You will always fight heat vs wasting wood vs creosote.  But I get that sometimes you have to burn what ya got, espescially when starting out. Also now is the time to be sourcing/prepping wood for next year and the year after. I am in a fairly unique area where it's very dry and predominantly all softwoods. If I get wood C/S/S in the spring and into my shed I can burn it by that fall. Hot and dry and open to the wind but completely covered from all precipitation. Most are not so lucky.


----------



## rowerwet (Oct 28, 2016)

Last winter we only had green wood for heat. I put a hearth grate on top of the stove and baked a stove load of wood.
Reloading the grate each time we loaded the stove.
WE went from foaming sizzling wood that barely burned, to wood that lit instantly and burned hot (maple)
We really got to like the smell of baking maple wood, and all the evaporated water from the wood went into the house instead of wasted up the chimney .

IF YOU TRY THIS
You have to keep the top of the stove clear of chips and scraps or they char and make smoke. we used hearth bellows to clear them.

Don't let any wood touch the stove or it will burn, I  laid gas stove grates on the stove to keep any wood contact from happening.

My infrared thermometer showed that the wood on top never got over 300 F.


----------



## brenndatomu (Oct 28, 2016)

rowerwet said:


> Last winter we only had green wood for heat. I put a hearth grate on top of the stove and baked a stove load of wood.
> Reloading the grate each time we loaded the stove.
> WE went from foaming sizzling wood that barely burned, to wood that lit instantly and burned hot (maple)
> We really got to like the smell of baking maple wood, and all the evaporated water from the wood went into the house instead of wasted up the chimney .
> ...


Wood can/will burn (ignite) at 425*-450* (F)...wood that has been baked (pyrolosis) (SP?) will ignite as low as 190*


----------



## Ashful (Oct 28, 2016)

rowerwet said:


> IF YOU TRY THIS...


I'd add that I'd not try this unless you're going to be near the stove for the entire duration.  I'd definitely not be comfortable leaving the house, with a load of wood baking atop the stove, no matter how many times you did this without incident.


----------



## rowerwet (Oct 29, 2016)

Ashful said:


> I'd add that I'd not try this unless you're going to be near the stove for the entire duration.  I'd definitely not be comfortable leaving the house, with a load of wood baking atop the stove, no matter how many times you did this without incident.


my wife is a home maker, and homeschools the kids, someone was always in the room. 
I'm not saying it is the best idea, but it made our wood burning season possible. 
Most of the time the stove was burning the wood on top was not much over 100 F and rarely over 200. It was also spaced 4 inches above the stove. 
The top of my stove is not the hottest part as the smoke baffle Coaly recomends for Fisher stoves makes the lower step on the top the hottest part, and the upper step much cooler.


----------



## Log Splitter (Oct 31, 2016)

Random question #13027.

How much would a single rainfall impact uncovered seasoned wood, and do you need to bring to a sheltered area for a few days before use to dry out again?


----------



## firefighterjake (Oct 31, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> Random question #13027.
> 
> How much would a single rainfall impact uncovered seasoned wood, and do you need to bring to a sheltered area for a few days before use to dry out again?



Very little effect . . . if you are making a fire from a cold start there may be a little more challenge, but otherwise (in most cases -- assuming your wood isn't punky or the bark has not absorbed some of the moisture) you should have few problems. I would bring it inside and let it dry for a few hours . . . but a single storm or rain fall will not make the wood bad for use.


----------



## rowerwet (Oct 31, 2016)

brenndatomu said:


> Wood can/will burn (ignite) at 425*-450* (F)...wood that has been baked (pyrolosis) (SP?) will ignite as low as 190*


I find that temperature hard to believe considering that paper must be higher than that to ignite .
After all, you can boil water in a paper cup if you are careful


----------



## brenndatomu (Oct 31, 2016)

rowerwet said:


> I find that temperature hard to believe considering that paper must be higher than that to ignite .
> After all, you can boil water in a paper cup if you are careful


I did too...and unfortunately I can't seem to find the resource where I found this info. Now mind you this is not just any piece of wood, like I said, this would be after significant pyrolysis...which can lower the autoignition temp to almost unbelievably low temps.
That's one reason (among others) that you see old houses that suddenly catch fire to timbers right next to the chimney, after years and years of chimney use, including chimney fires, etc, without the actual house framing catching fire before.
Maybe @bholler can shed some light on where I may have found this info before (and confirm or deny my numbers)


----------



## bholler (Oct 31, 2016)

rowerwet said:


> I find that temperature hard to believe considering that paper must be higher than that to ignite .
> After all, you can boil water in a paper cup if you are careful


He is right I will try to find the info but I know it is right.  Drying wood on top of a wood stove is a very bad idea.  I don't care how many times you have done it it is still a bad idea.


----------



## Sawset (Nov 1, 2016)

"Wood can/will burn (ignite) at 425*-450* (F)...wood that has been baked (pyrolosis) (SP?) will ignite as low as 190*"

Here is one reference I have seen related to this.
https://www.doctorfire.com/low_temp_wood1.pdf


----------



## brenndatomu (Nov 1, 2016)

Sawset said:


> "Wood can/will burn (ignite) at 425*-450* (F)...wood that has been baked (pyrolosis) (SP?) will ignite as low as 190*"
> 
> Here is one reference I have seen related to this.
> https://www.doctorfire.com/low_temp_wood1.pdf


Thank you, that was one of the articles that I had read...I was off on the low temp ignition though...170*F, not 190


----------



## rowerwet (Nov 1, 2016)

That link says less than 250C for years, I'm talking about 2-4 hours on maple cut with green leaves on it. 
Baking wood is actually an old idea from back when you had to have a wood pile as big as the house to make it through the winter... hard to get ahead that way and keep the farm.


----------



## brenndatomu (Nov 1, 2016)

rowerwet said:


> That link says less than 250C for years, I'm talking about 2-4 hours on maple cut with green leaves on it.
> Baking wood is actually an old idea from back when you had to have a wood pile as big as the house to make it through the winter... hard to get ahead that way and keep the farm.


I'm not arguing that it has been done successfully, I'm just making people aware of pyrolysis, that in general it is not a safe practice to bake wood on the stove, and that wood can and does ignite at a much lower temp than most would think sometimes.
This was cut from the last line of the first paragraph of that article...
"The available practical guidance—i.e., the fires that have been documented to have occurred when 
wood members were exposed to heating sources at 77ºC (170ºF) or higher—forms a reliable, scientific basis for 
concluding that an ignition hazard exists if a heat source at 77ºC or higher is applied to a wood member for a protracted period of time."


----------



## begreen (Nov 1, 2016)

I was introduced to a fellow once on a visit to his house. When invited in I saw he had a Lopi Liberty heating the house. On top were about 6 thick splits of damp doug fir that he was drying out for the next reload. Needless to say I was more than a little shocked. It may be true that the large mass of wood is not going to ignite in a few hours that it sat on the stove, but the small debris that falls off of these splits can dry out and ignite much more quickly. He got the message, but still limped through that first winter in the PacNW this way. I'm glad to say he survived and the next spring he had made a wood shed and was stocking it up.


----------



## bholler (Nov 1, 2016)

rowerwet said:


> That link says less than 250C for years, I'm talking about 2-4 hours on maple cut with green leaves on it.
> Baking wood is actually an old idea from back when you had to have a wood pile as big as the house to make it through the winter... hard to get ahead that way and keep the farm.


Yes we know it can be done but that does not mean it should be done.  You can run single wall stove pipe up through your house to it was done for years that way but that does not make it safe.


----------



## Log Splitter (Nov 21, 2016)

Hello all.  Now that I've gotten some good use out of the stove, I'll point out some things I've noticed and questions I have.

*Specific to the PE Summit*
- This is a massive stove.  Being able to load E/W and N/S is a huge plus.  Having purchased some wood, with some of it being very poorly sized, I can get even the longest of pieces in by going corner to corner.
- The lip in front of the stove is convenient in catching the few embers that try to escape.
- The fan can get quite loud, especially when it gets the stove rattling a bit up against the face plate.
- If I pack the stove about 80% I can get about a 7-8 hour burn down to a bed of coals.  The temperature tapers off pretty quickly when air flow is restricted, but it stays hot enough to do the job.
*
General Wood Burning*
- Properly seasoned wood makes a world of difference.  It lasts longer, gets hotter quicker, and gets hotter overall.
- For milder temps during the day, I find the most efficient thing to do is add 1-2 pieces every few hours.  It keeps the fire going, but doesn't heat too much.  Not sure if this is the best, but works for my needs.

*Questions.*
1. Any suggestions on longer burn time?  I find my best/longest burns start with the hot bed of coals, and then immediately filling the stove with the seasoned wood I have.  Maybe I need some harder woods?
2. How often do 24/7 burning users clean their liner?  I know "it depends", so what should I look for when checking out the liner?  What's too much creosote?
3. When using 24/7, what's the best way to clean out ashes?


----------



## begreen (Nov 21, 2016)

The blower should not be too loud, find the rattle and isolate. There is probably metal to metal contact that shouldn't be happening. Get dealer help if necessary. We have no rattle on our stove (Alderlea) even with the fan on high, but I almost never take it above medium speed and it's quite reasonable at that level. You might try running the stove for a few burn cycles with the blower off to see how that affects burn time. Dry wood and thick splits also help a lot. Pack it full to within an inch or two of the baffle and fill the gaps with smaller splits. Maybe try a load loaded E/W to see if that improves burntime. I don't always get it perfect but for us 8-10 hrs is average. When I get it perfect 12 hrs happens. 

Our flue stays remarkably clean burning mostly doug fir. Burning dry wood with a straight up chimney helps this. I clean out ashes as infrequently as possible. One of the benefits of burning doug fir is that it is exceptionally low ash producing. When I do clean out ash I move the coals to one side as best possible then shovel out the ash side. Then I reverse the process and to the other side. Then I move the coals to the front and reload.


----------



## Log Splitter (Nov 21, 2016)

begreen said:


> The blower should not be too loud, find the rattle and isolate. There is probably metal to metal contact that shouldn't be happening. Get dealer help if necessary. We have no rattle on our stove (Alderlea) even with the fan on high, but I almost never take it above medium speed and it's quite reasonable at that level. You might try running the stove for a few burn cycles with the blower off to see how that affects burn time. Dry wood and thick splits also help a lot. Pack it full to within an inch or two of the baffle and fill the gaps with smaller splits. Maybe try a load loaded E/W to see if that improves burntime. I don't always get it perfect but for us 8-10 hrs is average. When I get it perfect 12 hrs happens.
> 
> Our flue stays remarkably clean burning mostly doug fir. Burning dry wood with a straight up chimney helps this. I clean out ashes as infrequently as possible. One of the benefits of burning doug fir is that it is exceptionally low ash producing. When I do clean out ash I move the coals to one side as best possible then shovel out the ash side. Then I reverse the process and to the other side. Then I move the coals to the front and reload.



I've tried everything to eliminate the rattle.  At first I thought it was the face plate up against the uneven masonry.  Some parts touch it, but there are tiny gaps on other parts since the masonry isn't flat.  But that wasn't it.  Then it seemed like it was coming from where the stove contacts the front of the face plate.  So I tried to move the stove around a few centimeters where possible.  It has quieted down since.  Occasionally I'll hear it and it'll be in an intermittent pattern, almost like a roaring sound that's getting closer, than further.  Hard to explain.  I have found that I'm almost always able to eliminated the sound by placing downward pressure on the top of the stove...

As for the increased burn time suggestion, you think running the fan my shorten the burn time?  Unfortunately, without the blower on, there's no hope to heat the far bedrooms.  It does a good job with the fan on, but without it, it barely seems to heat the immediate room!


----------



## begreen (Nov 21, 2016)

To eliminate the surround as the source maybe try running the stove for a day or two with it off? If that doesn't work it could be the joint where the front casing meets the bay top. Or where the front casing joins the rear casing. But at that point I would be calling the dealer.


----------



## Log Splitter (Nov 21, 2016)

And what about the fan being the cause of slower burn times?  Is that something you've noticed yourself?


----------



## begreen (Nov 21, 2016)

We don't run the blower much unless it's pretty cold, so I am not a good judge. Others have reported is affecting their burn times, perhaps because they need to open the air up more to maintain stove temperature?


----------



## Squisher (Nov 21, 2016)

I am burning mainly doug fir too and am seeing similar burn times to Begreen for my overnight loads. I pack big splits and pack it tight with smaller splits as full as I can get it usually for my overnight burn. The more wood the merrier. Usually it's eight hours until I load again in the morning.


----------



## bcrtops (Nov 22, 2016)

You all with the large fire boxes aren't getting longer burn times than I do with the smaller, mid-sized, unit.
I hardly ever load our stove full, & typically have enough coals in the morning to get a fire going w/o a restart.
Try logs, instead of splits, if you have them -- they burn longer (my manual even states this).

Currently burning a mix of hemlock, douglas fir, & true fir(s).  3-- 4" logs stacked in a triangle kept the fire going 10 hrs. last night.  That is like 1/2 a full load in my stove.  Maple splits or logs work great when I have them.  Alder never holds a fire overnight, unless you have a real "snarly" piece or two.  We do a lot of burning like the OP, using 2 or 3 small pieces to keep the fire going &/or building the fire up, then adding wood when it is down to just enough coals to get it going again (cycling).  We even do quick short burns on chilly days in the summer.  Clean the stack 1x/yr.  ~cup from the flue & ~cup laying on top the baffle -- all brown powder.  (Free standing stove, no blower, corner of room, w/short 12-13' stack).


----------



## Squisher (Nov 22, 2016)

IVe heard very good things about the smaller firebox as far as burn times. I have a super size insert to install in my fireplace that I can hardly wait to try out.


----------



## Ashful (Nov 22, 2016)

bcrtops said:


> You all with the large fire boxes aren't getting longer burn times than I do with the smaller, mid-sized, unit.
> I hardly ever load our stove full, & typically have enough coals in the morning to get a fire going w/o a restart.


I also load my stove at dinner time, and also have enough coals left in the morning for an easy reload... but since it's a Blaze King, I'm referring to the morning 36 hours later.


----------



## Squisher (Nov 22, 2016)

bcrtops said:


> You all with the large fire boxes aren't getting longer burn times than I do with the smaller, mid-sized, unit.
> I hardly ever load our stove full, & typically have enough coals in the morning to get a fire going w/o a restart.
> Try logs, instead of splits, if you have them -- they burn longer (my manual even states this).
> 
> Currently burning a mix of hemlock, douglas fir, & true fir(s).  3-- 4" logs stacked in a triangle kept the fire going 10 hrs. last night.  That is like 1/2 a full load in my stove.  Maple splits or logs work great when I have them.  Alder never holds a fire overnight, unless you have a real "snarly" piece or two.  We do a lot of burning like the OP, using 2 or 3 small pieces to keep the fire going &/or building the fire up, then adding wood when it is down to just enough coals to get it going again (cycling).  We even do quick short burns on chilly days in the summer.  Clean the stack 1x/yr.  ~cup from the flue & ~cup laying on top the baffle -- all brown powder.  (Free standing stove, no blower, corner of room, w/short 12-13' stack).



I have family with a super 27 so I'm pretty familiar with the different PE sized fireboxes and their associated burn times. Not to mention I've serviced probably close to 50 different PE appliances this year.  They are most certainly the number one brand of stove in my area. 

Burn times are highly subjective, sounds like you've got things figured out well. But if I wanted to truly extend my reload times out further I'm sure I could. There is no replacement for displacement when you're comparing appliances that utilize the exact same technology.


----------



## bcrtops (Nov 22, 2016)

Ashful said:


> I also load my stove at dinner time, and also have enough coals left in the morning for an easy reload... but since it's a Blaze King, I'm referring to the morning 36 hours later.



Hearth.com needs a dedicated sub-forum for you cat-lovers & make you play in your own house!  Hey.....there is a long BK thread going for you already!
Cat stoves have such a horrendous reputation in my locale that I know of absolutely no one that would even consider installing one.  

A little sarcasm & jest keeps things fun..............but it can get a little old after a while.   I think the cat technology is neat to look at & I am glad that it has people committed to it, as, eventually the particulate standard may require everyone to have a cat or hybrid type stove.  For the time being, we want a stove that will last 20-30 yrs. (rest of my life), relatively maintenance free, super - easy to clean, & most of all -- easy for others in the household to run without having to follow some horrendous complicated flow-chart.  (The PE line of stoves is one of the mechanically most simple stoves on the market & it buys me and others a lot of creed -- we usually don't go around rubbing others noses in the fact of how easy they are to clean though).


----------



## bcrtops (Nov 22, 2016)

Squisher said:


> I have family with a super 27 so I'm pretty familiar with the different PE sized fireboxes and their associated burn times. Not to mention I've serviced probably close to 50 different PE appliances this year.  They are most certainly the number one brand of stove in my area.
> 
> Burn times are highly subjective, sounds like you've got things figured out well. But if I wanted to truly extend my reload times out further I'm sure I could. There is no replacement for displacement when you're comparing appliances that utilize the exact same technology.



You are correct -- very subjective.  I just thought those bigger stoves would burn longer -- definitely not dissing the stoves.
My secret to long burns is simple.  I pick out the heaviest, dense (most growth rings/inch) wood I can find in the pile-- logs if I have them.  I never pack it "tight" & almost never fill the box up & still get some good overnight burns.  I will use a piece of hardwood when I have some (Ash, wild cherry, or maple) & they tend to hold coals longer than even dense "fir" types.


----------



## Squisher (Nov 22, 2016)

Sounds similar to what I do. I too am always eyeing up those real dense chunks for the overnight load. I'd say the one thing I do differently though is I load my box right up full, espescially when we're hitting overnight lows into the freezing range. I look at it as more wood is more potential btus that I can either extract quickly or spread them out longer.  

My definition of a successful overnight burn is one that I can load a full load of full size splits on what's left in the morning and have it light off and get up to temp in a timely fashion. Species makes such a difference, I ran some Norway maple through last winter that once coaled up would seem to last in definetly. I prefer Douglas fir though just for the almost complete lack of ash.

I burn three to four loads a day. One in the morning, one after work and one at night. In colder times I'll up my demand on the after work load and run a extra load between then and the bedtime load. Usually has to be a smaller load though otherwise I won't have the fire ready for the overnight load.


----------



## bcrtops (Nov 22, 2016)

Squisher said:


> Sounds similar to what I do. I too am always eyeing up those real dense chunks for the overnight load. I'd say the one thing I do differently though is I load my box right up full, espescially when we're hitting overnight lows into the freezing range. I look at it as more wood is more potential btus that I can either extract quickly or spread them out longer.
> 
> My definition of a successful overnight burn is one that I can load a full load of full size splits on what's left in the morning and have it light off and get up to temp in a timely fashion. Species makes such a difference, I ran some Norway maple through last winter that once coaled up would seem to last in definetly. I prefer Douglas fir though just for the almost complete lack of ash.
> 
> I burn three to four loads a day. One in the morning, one after work and one at night. In colder times I'll up my demand on the after work load and run a extra load between then and the bedtime load. Usually has to be a smaller load though otherwise I won't have the fire ready for the overnight load.



Right on..........successful overnight burn = not having to use any kindling to get it going good the next morning.
Being we're retired, we tend to burn smaller fires during the day & feed the stove more frequently -- letting it burn hotter & faster when temps @ or below freezing.  When we leave during the day, I like to put a single "smolder" log on.........to make a little smoke = looks like we're home fire.  Then, burn a hot fire when getting back to burn out any creosote it may have made.

(Hoping not to hi-jack this thread too badly!)


----------



## Squisher (Nov 22, 2016)

Sounds like that t-5 is working really well for you. I just cleaned one the other day for people who had just purchased a new house. They had no idea about stoves , only had burned in a open masonry fireplace previously. So they 'lucked' into a mint t-5 with double wall straight up to class a straight through the roof for about 15' total. 

Do you monitor your flue or stove temps at all?  Myself I find my thermometers to be very handy in hitting the types of burns I'm looking for.  But I also have to load and run quite a bit. Or monitor it from a different floor while I'm doing something else. 

Sounds like from the amount/type of soot you're finding you've got it burning quite cleanly. I see from your sig you upgraded in 2008. I'm on my second year with my summit and am still in the honeymoon phase about how much more efficient this stove is than the previous smoke dragon (old lakewood in my shop now).


----------



## bcrtops (Nov 22, 2016)

Squisher said:


> Sounds like that t-5 is working really well for you. I just cleaned one the other day for people who had just purchased a new house. They had no idea about stoves , only had burned in a open masonry fireplace previously. So they 'lucked' into a mint t-5 with double wall straight up to class a straight through the roof for about 15' total.
> 
> Do you monitor your flue or stove temps at all?  Myself I find my thermometers to be very handy in hitting the types of burns I'm looking for.  But I also have to load and run quite a bit. Or monitor it from a different floor while I'm doing something else.
> 
> Sounds like from the amount/type of soot you're finding you've got it burning quite cleanly. I see from your sig you upgraded in 2008. I'm on my second year with my summit and am still in the honeymoon phase about how much more efficient this stove is than the previous smoke dragon (old lakewood in my shop now).


 
I installed a dbl. wall stovepipe to the class A just for efficiency, not for clearance reasons.  I do have a chimney therm sitting on top the stove, on the dbl. wall stove pipe -- mostly for the wife.  We don't really monitor it much by temp -- it usually runs 300-400F there when a good fire is burning.  I have only hit 500F there when burning a load of alder (that would have made the stovetop (under the wing-outs) around 750F -- we don't like it that hot. We burn ~5 cords/yr with it which includes some summer quickie fires.  The old Fisher would be using ~6-8 cords for the same heat output. (Plus 100# of creosote from the monthly or bi-monthly chimney cleanings from that miserable, disgusting triple wall chimney they sold in the '70's as "good" product. The only way to keep that cold chimney from creosoting up was to run that Fisher wide-open all the time = not doable.)


----------



## Log Splitter (Dec 8, 2016)

Still working on getting those overnight burns, but really struggling to hit much more than 5 hours now.  It seems that by the time the stove is hot enough to choke the air down, the wood is already quite a bit burned away.  And then once I finally get it down low enough, choking it completely off drops the temp to below the safe zone within an hour.  Still struggling to find a balance!

I think the majority of the problem is simply he wood is just too damn wet.

So I'm about to buy some wood and allow the stuff I have to season until next year.

There's a place with a good reputation around here called Cord King.  They sell seasoned and kiln dried wood.  $225 for a seasoned cord, and $325 for a kiln dried cord.  The claims are 18-22% moisture on seasoned, and 8-10% on kiln dried.

With proper burning techniques, can this additional cost be justified?  And is there a point where moisture content is going to be too low and I may end up with even more issues of shorter burn times?


----------



## Woody Stover (Dec 8, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> Still working on getting those overnight burns, but really struggling to hit much more than 5 hours now.  It seems that by the time the stove is hot enough to choke the air down, the wood is already quite a bit burned away.  And then once I finally get it down low enough, choking it completely off drops the temp to below the safe zone within an hour.  Still struggling to find a balance!
> I think the majority of the problem is simply he wood is just too damn wet.


Running the Buck 91, with a lot of steel to heat up, I would burn a few medium-small splits in the front of the box to pre-heat the stove, then load up on the coals and finish getting it up to temp without burning too much of the main load.
Yep, you are finding some of the problems with using wet wood. You have to burn the heck out of it to get it going, and a lot of the heat is going to evaporate water instead of heating up the stove. Then when you try to cut the air, the wet wood won't keep burning.


----------



## Log Splitter (Dec 8, 2016)

Any thoughts on the 8-12% dried wood vs the 18-22% seasoned?


----------



## begreen (Dec 8, 2016)

Claims often are just that. The kiln dried wood should be drier, but sometimes this is just the outside of the wood and not dry to the core. Unless you can visit them with an axe and moisture meter and test on the freshly split face of wood we'd just be guessing.


----------



## brenndatomu (Dec 8, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> Any thoughts on the 8-12% dried wood vs the 18-22% seasoned?


Maybe a cord of each and then mix it half n half when you load...that gives you about the ideal "average" moisture.


Log Splitter said:


> I think the majority of the problem is simply he wood is just too damn wet


I think you nailed it.

Another thought here, what about just not burning much this year so your wood can get another year on it...gas/oil is pretty cheap right now...maybe not much more than buying wood


----------



## Log Splitter (Dec 8, 2016)

Yeah, I've noticed oil prices are cheap.  $2 and change around here.

I'm going to be a bit more liberal than intended about the oil use and actually allow the thermostat to see the "heat" position on the cold cold nights.

I had been thinking of doing a cord kiln dried and a cord seasoned.  Anything will be light years ahead of the stuff I'm burning.  They also claim to only sell hardwood.  Oak, hickory, maple, ash and cherry.  They also allow you to select length size.  16' or 18" on seasoned, and 16" or 22" on kiln dried.

I've heard great reviews from the locals, including hearth shop owners in the area.  They say it's the only place they know of where you get a legitimate full cord that's actually at the moisture content they advertise.


----------



## gregbesia (Dec 8, 2016)

How about wood bricks. I know a lot of people burn and like  them . http://www.woodpellets.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/WOODBRICKS1.jpg


----------



## Ashful (Dec 8, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> Still working on getting those overnight burns, but really struggling to hit much more than 5 hours now.  It seems that by the time the stove is hot enough to choke the air down, the wood is already quite a bit burned away.  And then once I finally get it down low enough, choking it completely off drops the temp to below the safe zone within an hour.  Still struggling to find a balance!
> 
> I think the majority of the problem is simply he wood is just too damn wet.


Yes, what you describe above is classic wet wood performance.  Too slow to get going, and then stalling after you do.  I also fumbled my way thru my first year with this, as there was no way I was going to let anyone convince me to not burn my new stove the first year!

Taking a year off is the best and easiest solution, while your wood dries.  But there are other solutions for the persistent.  Mixing your half-seasoned wood with dry wood brick products is a popular choice for folks in your situation.  Mixing your wood with lumber (pallets, cutoffs from lumber mills, etc.) is another.  Most lumber ships around 8% MC.


----------



## Log Splitter (Dec 8, 2016)

Yeah, I'm just going to have to let the stuff I have split another year.  And make sure it's in a good spot so it actually gets some sun & air flow.

I'm going to get some firewood from this place around here that everyone speaks very highly of.  I'll do a combination of that, plus a little bit of oil at night time.  With oil as cheap as it is now, I won't feel as guilty


----------



## Log Splitter (Dec 12, 2016)

I got the wood delivery I had previously mentioned.  I decided to go with 1 cord seasoned (18-22%) and one cord kiln dried (8-12%). 

This stuff is light years better than what I was using.  I feel like I have great ingredients, but I still need to work on my recipe!  I'm struggling to get these longer burn times.

For instance, last night, around 8:00 PM, I had a nice bed of coals left from my last fire.  I decided to load the oven up with the kiln dried wood.  I went north south as I feel I can best utilize the space available.  I loaded it up to the max, and within just a few minutes, the oven was blazing!  I let it go with the higher airflow for only 10 or so minutes until I choked it down halfway.  Then 5 minutes later, I completely closed it off.  The temperature kept rising, and even with the lowest airflow, was approaching the danger zone for temperature!  Fortunately (also unfortunately) then fan for the insert 100% cools off the stove, so I turned the fan on, got the heat out into the room and the temperature stopped rising.  It was still pretty high, but was no longer climbing.

Unfortunately, I was never able to get a lazy flame type of fire going.  It was a roaring fire almost the whole 5 hours it was going  I certainly did not get the 10 hour burn time I was hoping to get.  Since it was so hot, the wood just burned down too quick.  I did still have a nice coal bed 10 hours later, but the temperature was no longer above 350F, which is the lowest I like to let it get.  When we're talking about "burn times" I would assume we mean the time the oven is running at a "house warming" temperature, right?

The door also turned foggy/black too which I was surprised to see, but I guess the ends of the wood were very close to the door.  Any thoughts as to why this may have happened?

If anyone has any other suggestions on longer burn times, I'd love to hear it.  E/W, mixing woods, larger splits etc.  All I know is I don't think I'll go 100% kiln dried again.  It was actually quite frightening when I opened the door.  The sound of the flames was crazy!


----------



## Squisher (Dec 12, 2016)

Sounds like you're doing pretty good.  The key to avoiding the runaway hot fire is to cut your air back a bit sooner. Too soon can stall secondary combustion sometimes. So it's a combination of getting your insert up to temp so it has good secondary's but not letting your flue gasses get to out of hand. The more you heat the flue the stronger your draft is. The key is finding that sweet spot, so you're not to cool and not promoting secondary combustion, but not to hot so you run borderline overdraft and the load burns up fast. 

But ten hours to coals is decent if the coals are still hot enough to throw full size splits on and you're off to the races again. Atleast for me with primarily softwood that's a good overnight burn.


----------



## Log Splitter (Dec 12, 2016)

I'm actually running only on oak, hickory, maple and ash, so I'm surprised that my unit stops producing the needed heat after 4-5 hours.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what "10 hour burn time" actually represents.


----------



## Squisher (Dec 12, 2016)

Well certainly the heat is a cycle. It's not like it's going to be 600-700 stovetop temp for 10hrs. I usually build a buffer of heat in the house during the day for overnight. It seems like you're thinking it'll run kind of like a cat stove, just lower output and steady for longer. But it won't. The heat will peak and valley throughout the 'burn time'. I think most describe burn time as the time between loadings. And it's highly subjective, yes you can get a longer burn time if you let the stove cool down more and shorter if you're reloading hot. 

I'd say just keep doing what you're doing and if you are finding it chilly overnight. Try to burn a little harder during the day to heat the house up more.


----------



## Log Splitter (Dec 12, 2016)

Squisher said:


> Well certainly the heat is a cycle. It's not like it's going to be 600-700 stovetop temp for 10hrs. I usually build a buffer of heat in the house during the day for overnight. It seems like you're thinking it'll run kind of like a cat stove, just lower output and steady for longer. But it won't. The heat will peak and valley throughout the 'burn time'. I think most describe burn time as the time between loadings. And it's highly subjective, yes you can get a longer burn time if you let the stove cool down more and shorter if you're reloading hot.
> 
> I'd say just keep doing what you're doing and if you are finding it chilly overnight. Try to burn a little harder during the day to heat the house up more.



Good points.  I suppose it is going to cycle if not tended to, which in nature, happens during the overnight burn.  

I'll aim to really heat the house late evening, fully load on a smaller coal bed, and try to hit that sweet spot.

Any importance to E/W loading, or mixing the kiln & seasoned dried wood?


----------



## brenndatomu (Dec 12, 2016)

Try loading N/S on the bottom then E/W on top of that...


----------



## Ashful (Dec 12, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> Any importance to E/W loading, or mixing the kiln & seasoned dried wood?


Air flow (which is into the firebox above the front door glass, on most stoves) will play games with the wood, when debating N/S vs. E/W.  But for the most part, those looking at fireshow love E/W, and those using the stove as a heater relish N/S loading.  When loading N/S, if your stove permits it, you can usually load the box fuller without concern for logs rolling against the glass (or out of the stove before you close the door).

Most EPA stoves like wood in that 15 - 20% range.  Much drier, and the stove can go nuclear.  Much wetter, and secondary combustion fails, or it becomes impossible to burn at a low rate (which can also lead to nuclear, when the wet wood finally dries, mid-burn).



brenndatomu said:


> Try loading N/S on the bottom then E/W on top of that...


Only if you like wasting space.  The way most folks split, you're going to be able to pack it in tighter if you pick a direction, and stick with it.


----------



## Squisher (Dec 12, 2016)

I've heard that e/w loading can slow things down a bit but I only load n/s, and I pack it tight as can be when I want a long burn. 

Just as you said timing is everything. Time your overnight load just right and you've got much less of a temp dip overnight.


----------



## begreen (Dec 13, 2016)

When doing a full reload on a hot coal bed don't go just by the clock. The air can be closed down fully in as little as 5 minutes with very dry wood especially if the draft is strong due to cold outside temps.


----------



## Log Splitter (Dec 13, 2016)

What about wood size?  If the volume of total wood is the same, does it matter how many total splits there are?  Is it better to will larger splits burn longer, or is total volume the only thing that matters?


----------



## begreen (Dec 13, 2016)

Larger splits will have less exposed surface area, they will burn slower. Load with large splits and use smaller splits as gap fillers if possible.


----------



## Woody Stover (Dec 13, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> I did still have a nice coal bed 10 hours later, but the temperature was no longer above 350F, which is the lowest I like to let it get.  When we're talking about "burn times" I would assume we mean the time the oven is running at a "house warming" temperature, right?....I'm actually running only on oak, hickory, maple and ash, so I'm surprised that my unit stops producing the needed heat after 4-5 hours. Maybe I'm misunderstanding what "10 hour burn time" actually represents.......1200 sq ft


I'm claiming a 10-hr. burn time from my little 1.5 cu.ft. stove....on an average winter day here, and not too windy, I can get enough heat  to hold at 70 or so when the stove top is 250+. I have to open up the air on the coals at the end of the burn to keep the stove above 250. 1000 sq.ft, insulation and air-sealing are marginal. If it were better, I wouldn't even need 250 to hold room temp. I realize that it's colder where you are but if a 3 cu.ft stove doesn't keep 1200 sq.ft. warm for more than 5 hrs, with a stove temp of 350, either your house is losing a ton of heat, or your definition of a "warm house" is a much higher temp than mine.  The fact that you are referring to your heater as an "oven" implies that you expect to be baked...  


begreen said:


> Larger splits have less exposed surface area, they will burn slower. Load with large splits and use smaller splits as gap fillers if possible.


The larger splits should flatten out the peak-and-valley effect, extending higher heat output later into the load.


----------



## Ashful (Dec 13, 2016)

Log Splitter said:


> What about wood size?  If the volume of total wood is the same, does it matter how many total splits there are?  Is it better to will larger splits burn longer, or is total volume the only thing that matters?


Total exposed surface area is the dominant factor in combustion rate and temperature.  An equal volume of smaller splits has more surface area, and therefore will burn hotter and faster, supplied with adequate air.  On stoves where it is not possible to shut down the air as far (eg. non-cat stoves), it can be tougher to limit the amount of air and maintain a controlled burn, if you stuff the stove full with toothpicks.


----------



## Log Splitter (Dec 14, 2016)

Woody Stover said:


> I'm claiming a 10-hr. burn time from my little 1.5 cu.ft. stove....on an average winter day here, and not too windy, I can get enough heat  to hold at 70 or so when the stove top is 250+. I have to open up the air on the coals at the end of the burn to keep the stove above 250. 1000 sq.ft, insulation and air-sealing are marginal. If it were better, I wouldn't even need 250 to hold room temp. I realize that it's colder where you are but if a 3 cu.ft stove doesn't keep 1200 sq.ft. warm for more than 5 hrs, with a stove temp of 350, either your house is losing a ton of heat, or your definition of a "warm house" is a much higher temp than mine.  The fact that you are referring to your heater as an "oven" implies that you expect to be baked...
> The larger splits should flatten out the peak-and-valley effect, extending higher heat output later into the load.



I cannot tell a lie, I certainly do like it warm!  I've lived in Florida for the past 6 years, and I became accustomed to the heat.  

However, with that said, I'm 70 degrees is warmer than I need it this time of year.  I'm surprised to hear that your oven at only 250ish is able to keep your area heated to 70 degrees with marginal insulation.  

I had a late night last night, so I loaded the oven up maybe 2/3rds around 3:00 AM.  Seven hours later I still have a stove with many hot coals.  I have to sift through a bit and bring the coals to the front along with open the airflow, but with that, the stove is running around 350 degrees.  The blower is off now as it pretty quickly decreases the temperature once it's running.

The hallway in the raised ranch is 66, and the far end of the living room, the room with the stove, is running around 68.

Since writing this, I hit the fan on the stove, and we're now down to 300.    Hoping it can hold steady there for a couple hours as the bed of coal volume is quite impressive.

So with that said, the house is by no means an ice box.  I think maybe I just misunderstood "10 hour burn time".  I keep forgetting that burning wood is not a binary action with an on/off, but more of a gradual progression from giant logs to smaller coals.  7 hours later from a partial load, I guess I should be happy with a 300 degree stove?


----------



## Log Splitter (Dec 14, 2016)

And about 30-60 minutes later, it seems we're settling around 225-250 degrees with the fan on the lowest setting.  Main room temperature hovering around 70 degrees, hallway 65+ and bedrooms at the end are low 60s.

From a few days ago, but both dogs now have found the heat.  The little Boston fell in love day 1.  Took the bigger Boston a few weeks to get comfortable


----------



## Squisher (Dec 14, 2016)

Settling in around 225-250 seems cool to me. This is measured on the front of the insert correct?  Do you have secondary combustion running at that temp?  If you can't tell from the flames can you look outside and see if you have smoke exiting the chimney?


----------



## Log Splitter (Dec 14, 2016)

Squisher said:


> Settling in around 225-250 seems cool to me. This is measured on the front of the insert correct?  Do you have secondary combustion running at that temp?  If you can't tell from the flames can you look outside and see if you have smoke exiting the chimney?



There's no smoke at this point as it's nothing more than a bed of coals.  But yes, I certainly lose quite a bit once the fan is on.  About 100 degrees it seems.  I'm measuring temp on the face of the insert.

I just threw a decent size split on of super dry hardwood.  Within 30 minutes we're back up to about 375 degrees with the fan on low.


----------



## begreen (Dec 14, 2016)

Looking at the size of the fire and coal bed I have to agree, 250-200F seems low. Our T6 stove top would be more like 450-500F at that stage of the burn with the blower on.


----------



## begreen (Dec 14, 2016)

Here is a shot of the fire, burning  a load of doug fir and alder after 3 hrs. Stove top with blower on medium is 485F. If this was hardwood the stove temp would be around 550F at this stage. This is verified with an IR thermometer. I suspect the insert face temps you are reading are on the low side which is ok, just relative to the thermometer location. The stove tends to burn front to back so this may just be a verification that the stove is hotter in the back at the later stage of the burn. I'll take some IR readings at multiple locations to check.




Face readings on the top of the door are in the 320-330F range.


----------



## Squisher (Dec 14, 2016)

I read face temps with a magnetic thermometer as pictured on my super insert and 200-250 would be low. 375 not bad, but I regularly see 450-500+.

It seems when I have decent secondary combustion the face temps jump right up.


----------



## Squisher (Dec 14, 2016)

Here's my summit nearing the end of my morning load about seven/eight hours ago. Pipe temp 214. Stovetop around 300 still.  This load hit 600 plus stove top and then over the course of the burn drifted down to the 300. I also hit single wall exterior flue pipe temps of 500+ while off gassin the load and getting the stove temp up. I had lots of coals overnight for a hot morning reload burning some birch.


----------



## Log Splitter (Dec 17, 2016)

Burns are starting to get a little better.  I think I'm getting what's expected.  I think my expectations were possibly off.

I can have my temperature range between the mid 300s and the low 700s over a 10 hour period.  

The two main factors effecting my stove temperature are the air I give it, and the air being blown out by the blower.  If I open up the airflow, early in the burn I can easily eclipse 700 with a fully loaded stove.  I make sure that air is choked at no later than 500 degrees.  If the stove temp keeps increasing, I continue to amp up the blower.  This undoubtedly stabilize and then begins to lower the stove temp.

When I do a load tonight, I'll keep track of times/temps/stove settings just to see if you guys thing my stove is behaving properly.


----------



## Squisher (Dec 17, 2016)

Sounds like you're getting it dialled in.


----------



## chimneyED (Dec 18, 2016)

I agree! scoop that stove up for $950 before its gone then find someone or install yourself


----------



## chimneyED (Dec 18, 2016)

chimneyED said:


> I agree! scoop that stove up for $950 before its gone then find someone or install yourself


Also - a block off plate is not standard (youll prob have to fight for one lol) but def worth it. demand one!


----------



## Ashful (Dec 18, 2016)

chimneyED said:


> Also - a block off plate is not standard (youll prob have to fight for one lol) but def worth it. demand one!



Or just DIY it afterward.  Asking any contractor to do anything different than what they usually do almost always yields frustration and disappointing results.


----------



## Log Splitter (Dec 29, 2016)

So this was weird.  Figured you guys would know the answer!

Loading up my stove before on a nice bed of coals.  Had a few larger pieces of wood to throw in.

I did not realize that my bottom layer of wood was slightly angled up at the back, and what I went to slide a large piece on the second layer, It hit the baffle.  At that point, I don't know if I was distracted or what, but I felt like this piece of metal fell from the top?  Maybe it didn't, maybe it popped up from the bottom?  No idea.  Can't for the life of me figure out where it came from or where it's supposed to go!

Embarrassed to even ask, but after staring at my stove, watching install videos on youtube, and scouring the manual, I'm still clueless.


----------



## begreen (Dec 29, 2016)

That's the boost manifold. It sits on the bottom front lip of the stove with the holes facing the back of the firebox. I'll see if I can can dig up a picture.

Here you go:
https://www.hearth.com/talk/threads/summit-t6-boost-maniflold.26806/#post-357839


----------



## Log Splitter (Dec 29, 2016)

Ah, I thought it might be that!




#21 at the bottom.

The reason I hesitated was because the stove is full of ashes there, and if it had popped up, I feel like I would have seen this imprint of where it was.  And it seemed quite clean too.  Still very confused how it could be that, but I supposed it makes the most sense.  Picture also shows to sets of holes which does match.

What does this piece do?


----------



## Log Splitter (Dec 29, 2016)

begreen said:


> That's the boost manifold. It sits on the bottom front lip of the stove with the holes facing the back of the firebox. I'll see if I can can dig up a picture.
> 
> Here you go:
> https://www.hearth.com/talk/threads/summit-t6-boost-maniflold.26806/#post-357839



You guys are the best.  Glad to keep this thread alive!


----------



## bcrtops (Dec 29, 2016)

*"What does this piece do?"*

Distributes air to the front of the fire, especially when air valve is opened most of the way, to get the fire going good -- one of the reasons the fire burns front to back (w/the air wash system).

Needs removed & cleaned occasionally as can get plugged up with ash.


----------



## Squisher (Dec 29, 2016)

Make sure to orient it properly. That is the exact piece that another local sweep put back into a customers stove flipped 180 so it was effectively blocking off all the primary air. The poor customers were new to the home with no previous experience with this stove. They called me in six weeks later, chimney nearly plugged and about ready to give up on the stove(they had successfully burned for years at their previous home). I checked their wood, good. I checked their chimney setup, ideal(straight up double wall to class A. I was stumped until I was vacuuming out the stove and was like, wait a minute? 

It was an alderlea t5, gorgeous stove and capable whole home heater for their scenario. I haven't heard back from them at all so I assume alls well now.


----------



## Log Splitter (Feb 9, 2017)

Figured I'd revive my old thread with a new question!

For the past week, I've noticed a little bit of a different odor outside.  I used to either smell nothing, or a nice wood smell.  Now, from time to time, I'll get a whiff of wood smell + almost some sort of burning plastic or something?  Can't put my finger one what it smells like, but it's certainly not just burnt wood smelling anymore.

Any ideas?


----------



## Woody Stover (Feb 9, 2017)

A little creosote, maybe? Is it stronger some times than at other times, or about the same all the time? My guess is that there may be a small of creo that gets deposited toward the end of a burn, then burns off when stove and flue temps go higher at the beginning of the next burn. IIRC, your wood is marginal dryness; Have you gotten up there yet to take a look at the top of the flue to see how clean you are burning?


----------



## Log Splitter (Feb 9, 2017)

Woody Stover said:


> A little creosote, maybe? Is it stronger some times than at other times, or about the same all the time? My guess is that there may be a small of creo that gets deposited toward the end of a burn, then burns off when stove and flue temps go higher at the beginning of the next burn. IIRC, your wood is marginal dryness; Have you gotten up there yet to take a look at the top of the flue to see how clean you are burning?



Last December I got a delivery of some seasoned and some kiln dried wood, so I'm only using the good stuff now.  Throw a spark at the kiln dried stuff and it'll erupt in flames.

With that said, could be creosote I suppose?  I'll keep my eye on it during this burn.  Just started the burn and it's very very hot and I definitely caught a whiff of the odor outside.  As the heat drops down a little i'll check again to see if I smell it.

I was up on top of the roof at the end of December, but have not checked since.  It was in pretty good shape at that point.


----------



## Log Splitter (Feb 9, 2017)

As I continue to watch this, I have another question.

Are there any ways to restrict airflow even more?  I regularly choke this thing down 100%, but I still feel like I have too big of a flame and it's burning too quickly, especially the kiln dried wood.

Maybe I need to purposely start mixing in some unseasoned.


----------



## firefighterjake (Feb 10, 2017)

Log Splitter said:


> Figured I'd revive my old thread with a new question!
> 
> For the past week, I've noticed a little bit of a different odor outside.  I used to either smell nothing, or a nice wood smell.  Now, from time to time, I'll get a whiff of wood smell + almost some sort of burning plastic or something?  Can't put my finger one what it smells like, but it's certainly not just burnt wood smelling anymore.
> 
> Any ideas?



... or perhaps a metallic, almost chemical like smell? If so ... that is most likely the smell of the secondary burn. It's not as fragrant as wood smoke ... heck even that heavy smoke smell of creosote smells better in my opinion ... but nevertheless that is the smell of a clean burn.


----------



## Log Splitter (Feb 10, 2017)

One of these days the internet will have a way to bottle up a smell and reproduce it online, right?


----------



## Woody Stover (Feb 10, 2017)

Log Splitter said:


> One of these days the internet will have a way to bottle up a smell and reproduce it online, right?


If I ever run out of Black Cherry to burn, I'll have to look online for some of that fragrance...I will just miss it too much!


----------

