With a cat stove you can just run with the bypass open a bit longer as well. No matter what stove it is wet wood is going to seriously reduce performance. Even in old pre epa stoves
Dealer wants me to buy a Blaze King
- Thread starter mayhem69
- Start date
-
Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.
We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.
We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil.
- Status
Ashful
Minister of Fire
Been there, done that. Can vouch it works just fine, but as noted, with increased frustration and decreased efficiency.
Nealm66
Minister of Fire
Ashful
Minister of Fire
My first year was tainted by wet wood. And like nearly everyone else, I was so sure it wasn't the wood.
ratsrepus
Minister of Fire
ILL take my 24 hr burns any day. Id rather replace a cat than baffles, tubes and what have you
No tubes in his PE and the baffle can last the life of the stove.
Ashful
Minister of Fire
Meh... we've had this argument so many times, that even I'm tired of it. And that's really saying something.
Both work great. Cat's provide the ability to maintain clean secondary reburn at lower temperatures, but you have to replace a combustor every few years. Non-cats give a more vigorous secondary flame show, but can't turn down as low or burn as long, for a given firebox volume. Yadda, yadda...
Any argument about complexity, parts, etc. seems pretty trivial at this point. Both technologies have examples that are far more or less reliable than some examples of the other. A good cat stove is more reliable than a crappy non-cat, and a good non-cat is better than a crappy cat stove. Brand and model dictate reliability and ease of operation, far more than the tech upon which they're based. Anyone saying otherwise can come view one of my BK Ashfords that's seen over 50 cords with zero maintenance or repairs, other than one routine combustor replacement a few years back. There are users of PE and other top non-cat brands who can say the same about their non-cats.
Both work great. Cat's provide the ability to maintain clean secondary reburn at lower temperatures, but you have to replace a combustor every few years. Non-cats give a more vigorous secondary flame show, but can't turn down as low or burn as long, for a given firebox volume. Yadda, yadda...
Any argument about complexity, parts, etc. seems pretty trivial at this point. Both technologies have examples that are far more or less reliable than some examples of the other. A good cat stove is more reliable than a crappy non-cat, and a good non-cat is better than a crappy cat stove. Brand and model dictate reliability and ease of operation, far more than the tech upon which they're based. Anyone saying otherwise can come view one of my BK Ashfords that's seen over 50 cords with zero maintenance or repairs, other than one routine combustor replacement a few years back. There are users of PE and other top non-cat brands who can say the same about their non-cats.
You only replace tubes if you severely abuse your stove and honestly if you do that the stove is probably shot. Don't hit the baffle or get a stove with a more durable one if that's a concern. I have a stove that can burn 24 hours but honestly only do it a couple times a year. It just puts out so little heat at that I never use it.
The bottom line is you need a stove that will heat a relatively small space with the occasional need to push a little harder to heat a sun room; correct? A CAT stove will work better in this situation because it can be run lower. If you choose to heat the sun porch all the time then either would work. BK is one of the leaders in CAT technology; PE is one of the leaders in non-cat technology; smaller spaces often require closer clearances, clad stoves in both lines help with that so have a look at this requirement when selecting.
I received one quote from a California store (I had to pick it up) for $5344. I received another quote from a Utah store for $3600. (I had to pick it up there also). Neither had the blower - it would have been extra. Unfortunately no one has the stove and is a minimum of 6 months until delivery. These prices are stove only.
Ashful
Minister of Fire
$3600 is mighty low compared to some of the prices we've seen posted lately. Almost looks like a pre-pandemic number.
What exactly is the definition of “the life of the stove” for a PE? Does the manufacturer give a number?
Last edited:
Hard to say. There are several that have passed their 20th and some their 30th year of service. The oldest had a mild steel baffle and most have had to replace them with the stainless version. I think they went stainless in the late 1990s. Our stove is 14 yrs old and doing fine. I just replaced a few rear firebricks and side-rail insulation for the first time. Other than that all it's had is a door gasket. All told, less than $100 so far. There is a 10yr warranty on major parts.
But teens and single digits, when he had to bump it up all the way to medium...
I skimmed through this thread to see if anyone mentioned this - maybe I missed it, but there is a tax credit of 26% on the price of the stove and install for the high efficiency stoves - they are considered "green" energy. That will take a bit off the price if that stove qualifies - though you won't get the tax credit till you pay your taxes for the year you bought the stove.
Woodsman on the Plains
New Member
I will tell you that I just had mine installed in October. 24' of class A insulated pipe, approx 4' double wall, Sirocco 30.2. Grand total was $8,500. And that was with a slight discount because they were having a sale on pipe.
BKVP
Minister of Fire
Just to clarify, it's not the year you purchased the stove, it is the year in which a "safe and complete installation is completed." Many folks did purchase qualifying units in December of 2022but won't take delivery until after the 12/31/2022 deadline. The move to 25(C) on 1/1/2023 means you get 30% but has the $2,000 cap.
BKVP
Minister of Fire
Product warranties are defined by each state. In Canada, I have no idea. A simple Google search of the topic is mind numbing....
There are BTUs and then there are BTUs per hour - big difference.
Sorta like the difference between Miles Per Gallon and Gallons Per Hour.
Go real fast, use lotsa gas. Go real slow, save lotsa gas,
Yes I am aware. In general we are almost always talking about btu per hour when talking about stove outputs
Yep. I am aware that you are aware.
I am sure there are some folks that don't get it, and may be confused by jargon. As you know, the fuel contains a fixed amount of BTUs that is liberated when it burns. Some of that heat goes to vaporize the water, some goes up the stack, and hopefully some will heat the room.
The design of the stove and it's appurtenances combined with the skill of the operator influences where BTUs end up, and when they get there.
I know you know all of this. Users like you, that offer their years of experience to dumb guys like me, is why I have been hanging around on Hearth.com.
Thanks
Ashful
Minister of Fire
Our system is so screwed up, due to... history. BTU is technically a measure of energy, or power times time. Then we have BTUh, which you'd think would be "BTU times hours", just like kWh is "kilowatts times hours". But no, it's the opposite in our stupid backwards historic system, BTUh is BTU divided by hours = power.
For this reason, that even us engineers and physicists sometimes have to stop and think about these terrible stupid unit systems, everyone has taken to just calling both BTU (energy) and BTU/hour = "BTUh" (power) as "BTU". This isn't a convention of this forum, or anything new, my great grandfather was a boiler engineer and did the same in his notebooks ca. WW1.
When I was going thru school and taking coursework in thermodynamics, we would all swear under our breath everytime the prof would give us a problem in imperial units. W/m°K (SI / metric system) is much easier than Btu·in·h⁻¹·ft⁻²·°F⁻¹, even though they mean exactly the same thing. The smart kids would cheat, switching everything to metric to run the calculations, then convert the answer back to imperial. Those of us who wanted to prove our mettle would do it all in imperial units... and then get it wrong due to the insane units and conversions.
For this reason, that even us engineers and physicists sometimes have to stop and think about these terrible stupid unit systems, everyone has taken to just calling both BTU (energy) and BTU/hour = "BTUh" (power) as "BTU". This isn't a convention of this forum, or anything new, my great grandfather was a boiler engineer and did the same in his notebooks ca. WW1.
When I was going thru school and taking coursework in thermodynamics, we would all swear under our breath everytime the prof would give us a problem in imperial units. W/m°K (SI / metric system) is much easier than Btu·in·h⁻¹·ft⁻²·°F⁻¹, even though they mean exactly the same thing. The smart kids would cheat, switching everything to metric to run the calculations, then convert the answer back to imperial. Those of us who wanted to prove our mettle would do it all in imperial units... and then get it wrong due to the insane units and conversions.
- Status
