confused

[sarata]

I've been warned, but my husband and I need advice. My husband and I are considering changing from wood to gas (propane) to heat our home. The two stoves that we are considering are the Regency U39 or the Jotul GF 400. I have tried to find ratings to compare the two, but can't. I like the looks of the Jotul, it seems to be a better constructed stove. The five year warranty has me concerned though (the Regency has a lifetime warranty). This will be our primary source of heat, our home is just under 1500 sq. ft., very well insulated, very tight. Ideas, pros and cons would be appreciated.

 

[Fsappo]

Both are great products. Buy what you like. On gas stoves the warranty, 5 years, lifetime, normally applies to the stuff that never goes wrong. If you look at the items that normally need to be replaced, thermocouples, blowers, valves, the warranty across the board is normally only 1 or 2 years. That GF400 is a fine piece of equipment. Buy it and enjoy it

 

[DAKSY]

Neither unit, & both are high quality, will heat your "just under 1500 sf" home.
Either one will heat about HALF of that area, IF you can get the heat to move sideways...
So, you'd better get one of each, two the same, or close some
of the doors to other rooms that don't require heat.

 

[R&D Guy]

I agree with DAKSY. Another drum I always beat from the perspective of an industry insider is to pay little attention to the efficiency listings in a brochure. The numbers are not regulated like say the EnergyStar rating for a fridge or air conditioning unit meaning that the manufacturer can post whatever they want and no independent agency verifies that it is correct.

 

[Fsappo]

I agree. When a customer asks me "well, your stove is 81% efficient and the other guys is 82.5%, his brochure says 1600 SF and yours says 1500 SF , his is 31,000 BTUs, yours is 30,000 BTUS" One of those people...I just give them a good hard crack in the chops and tell them to snap out of their geekiness. No no, not really..But I do explain that when I make a suggestion on heating a room or area, Its based on real life results and feedback from 25 years worth of customers. I try to explain that what a stove maker stamps on the brochure is what they stamp, nothing more. The btu input on gas and cubic feet of a wood firebox is how I teach them to compare.

It still comes down to (To the husband) "Do you think you want small, medium or large based on our conversation and my reccomendation?" He says, "Medium" I will then just say to buy whatever medium stove the wife wants.

Mind you, the wife won't say "I want that one because it's pink" Not at all. 50% of the time, the wives have much more technical questions than the husbands do.

 

[Inside Guy]

I agree with DAKSY. Another drum I always beat from the perspective of an industry insider is to pay little attention to the efficiency listings in a brochure. The numbers are not regulated like say the EnergyStar rating for a fridge or air conditioning unit meaning that the manufacturer can post whatever they want and no independent agency verifies that it is correct.

P4 is one of the more accurate and formal listings out there. Although not perfect, P4 does require testing by an independent certified testing agency... this does create a much more HONEST efficiency number. Very difficult for the manufactures to manipulate the test standard. Agree, I would recommend ignoring brochure data that lists AFUE, Thermal, or Steady State data. Here's the link:

http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/residential/business/manufacturers/search/fireplace-search.cfm?attr=4

 

[R&D Guy]

I agree with DAKSY. Another drum I always beat from the perspective of an industry insider is to pay little attention to the efficiency listings in a brochure. The numbers are not regulated like say the EnergyStar rating for a fridge or air conditioning unit meaning that the manufacturer can post whatever they want and no independent agency verifies that it is correct.

P4 is one of the more accurate and formal listings out there. Although not perfect, P4 does require testing by an independent certified testing agency... this does create a much more HONEST efficiency number. Very difficult for the manufactures to manipulate the test standard. Agree, I would recommend ignoring brochure data that lists AFUE, Thermal, or Steady State data. Here's the link:

http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/residential/business/manufacturers/search/fireplace-search.cfm?attr=4

You know IG, I use to have a little faith that P4 was at least on a level playing field meaning that even though their test method is FUBAR'd everyone was performing the same test to a degree with an independent lab witnessing. ITS aka Warnock-Hersey aka Intertek has something called a Satellite-3, and a Sat-4 program which allows mfg to just submit all certification data including P4 which they in tern submit to CSA and HPBA-Canada for the new EnerGuide listing. I found that out in the last year when they came by wanting to sell the program to us and was politely surprised. Crazy huh? So I hope I'm wrong, but I wouldn't be surprised if all the sudden we start to see (if we haven't already) mfg's with basic non-heat exchanger fireplaces with 80-90% P4's.

 

[Inside Guy]

I agree with DAKSY. Another drum I always beat from the perspective of an industry insider is to pay little attention to the efficiency listings in a brochure. The numbers are not regulated like say the EnergyStar rating for a fridge or air conditioning unit meaning that the manufacturer can post whatever they want and no independent agency verifies that it is correct.

P4 is one of the more accurate and formal listings out there. Although not perfect, P4 does require testing by an independent certified testing agency... this does create a much more HONEST efficiency number. Very difficult for the manufactures to manipulate the test standard. Agree, I would recommend ignoring brochure data that lists AFUE, Thermal, or Steady State data. Here's the link:

http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/residential/business/manufacturers/search/fireplace-search.cfm?attr=4

You know IG, I use to have a little faith that P4 was at least on a level playing field meaning that even though their test method is FUBAR'd everyone was performing the same test to a degree with an independent lab witnessing. ITS aka Warnock-Hersey aka Intertek has something called a Satellite-3, and a Sat-4 program which allows mfg to just submit all certification data including P4 which they in tern submit to CSA and HPBA-Canada for the new EnerGuide listing. I found that out in the last year when they came by wanting to sell the program to us and was politely surprised. Crazy huh? So I hope I'm wrong, but I wouldn't be surprised if all the sudden we start to see (if we haven't already) mfg's with basic non-heat exchanger fireplaces with 80-90% P4's.

I hope you're wrong to, I like to see p4 get more teeth. But I gotta tell ya, it's a little humbling reporting p4 data in the 60% range

 

[R&D Guy]

Yeah I hear you on those 60's. It use to be that no one really cared about P4 too, but now that there is a program (HPBA-C) that has incentives for certain efficiencies coupled with a lax requirement by certain labs I've become pessimistic.

Personally I think there should be an efficiency method like steady-state with a "blowers on" test since I'd think if someone wanted efficiency they'd be burning the unit with the blower running especially if they are standard.

My $0.02.

 

[Ironhorse74]

I agree with DAKSY. Another drum I always beat from the perspective of an industry insider is to pay little attention to the efficiency listings in a brochure. The numbers are not regulated like say the EnergyStar rating for a fridge or air conditioning unit meaning that the manufacturer can post whatever they want and no independent agency verifies that it is correct.

P4 is one of the more accurate and formal listings out there. Although not perfect, P4 does require testing by an independent certified testing agency... this does create a much more HONEST efficiency number. Very difficult for the manufactures to manipulate the test standard. Agree, I would recommend ignoring brochure data that lists AFUE, Thermal, or Steady State data. Here's the link:

http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/residential/business/manufacturers/search/fireplace-search.cfm?attr=4

You know IG, I use to have a little faith that P4 was at least on a level playing field meaning that even though their test method is FUBAR'd everyone was performing the same test to a degree with an independent lab witnessing. ITS aka Warnock-Hersey aka Intertek has something called a Satellite-3, and a Sat-4 program which allows mfg to just submit all certification data including P4 which they in tern submit to CSA and HPBA-Canada for the new EnerGuide listing. I found that out in the last year when they came by wanting to sell the program to us and was politely surprised. Crazy huh? So I hope I'm wrong, but I wouldn't be surprised if all the sudden we start to see (if we haven't already) mfg's with basic non-heat exchanger fireplaces with 80-90% P4's.

Those Sat-3 and Sat-4 are audited by Warnock-Hershey. It wasn't too long ago that one of the big manufacturers lost there in house lab. I believe P4 is about as fair as you can get. Especially the limits on venting. Only fair way to do it.