Anyone have any experiences with both stoves? I currently have a large non-cat model and I'm finding it much more difficult to operate than my dutchwest cat model. It is also hard to replicate results, with every load contributing a different twist to operation. My cat model was easy to get started, get up to temp, and then switch to catalytic mode, often times within 20 minutes of lighting a new fire - high heat output and no smoke from the chimney. There were very few times, likely caused by atmospheric conditions beyond my control, where backpuffing or less-than-optimal draft were remedied by burning hotter than normal.
The non-cat model, however, has given a variety of results when doing things that, in my opinion, are consistent. The everburn system seems to be very finicky, even when running the stove at high temperatures. Sometimes when I think I'm going to see my chimney burning as clean as the catalytic model, there is smoke billowing out, as if I have a smouldering fire below (when in reality I have lots of flames in the firebox and high firebox temperatures.
The catalytic model almost always preformed flawlessly as long as a) firebox was above 450 F and b) there was constant flame in the stove. Also, the catalyst probe thermometer always let me know within minutes if things were going well.
Why did I switch? My house was too big and drafty for the small dutchwest catalytic model. After researching, I settled on the the large non-cat model beacuse of it's high heat output, utilization of my existing 6" chimney (the large dutchwest cat model needs 8"), price, and because of the elimination of the need to replace the catalyst every five years or so. But that was when I believed that it was "easier to operate" than the cat model, as stated by sales reps and sales literature. I don't know, maybe many people don't care how much smoke is coming out of the chimney, so to them, it's "working flawlessly". But keep in mind that that is one of the factors contributing to the stove's efficiency - tons of smoke out the stack equate to energy lost that is not going toward heating your house. That's the beauty of the catalytic model - smokey emission are easier to control and much less frequent than I am finding with my non-cat.
I'd like to hear what others think...
The non-cat model, however, has given a variety of results when doing things that, in my opinion, are consistent. The everburn system seems to be very finicky, even when running the stove at high temperatures. Sometimes when I think I'm going to see my chimney burning as clean as the catalytic model, there is smoke billowing out, as if I have a smouldering fire below (when in reality I have lots of flames in the firebox and high firebox temperatures.
The catalytic model almost always preformed flawlessly as long as a) firebox was above 450 F and b) there was constant flame in the stove. Also, the catalyst probe thermometer always let me know within minutes if things were going well.
Why did I switch? My house was too big and drafty for the small dutchwest catalytic model. After researching, I settled on the the large non-cat model beacuse of it's high heat output, utilization of my existing 6" chimney (the large dutchwest cat model needs 8"), price, and because of the elimination of the need to replace the catalyst every five years or so. But that was when I believed that it was "easier to operate" than the cat model, as stated by sales reps and sales literature. I don't know, maybe many people don't care how much smoke is coming out of the chimney, so to them, it's "working flawlessly". But keep in mind that that is one of the factors contributing to the stove's efficiency - tons of smoke out the stack equate to energy lost that is not going toward heating your house. That's the beauty of the catalytic model - smokey emission are easier to control and much less frequent than I am finding with my non-cat.
I'd like to hear what others think...