For the EPA stove burners..

[Backwoods Savage]

i like the tubes but we had a cat in our old house cat got longer burn times but it needed to be cleaned the tubes don't nead to be cleaned and put out a ton of heat

Our cat has to be cleaned also. This year we do not plan on cleaning it until next summer's annual stove cleaning. However, if we did do it in the winter months, it takes only a couple minutes to do and is child's play. So is this really a concern that someone would need to take about 3-4 minutes of his busy schedule to clean a cat?

btw, with our cat stove, it is simple.
1. Lift top lid.
2. Reach in with one hand and pull out the cat.
3. Brush with an old paint brush.
4. Replace cat.
5. Smile.

 

[Backwoods Savage]

I really like the flexibility of the cat stove... When its close to zero in the dead of winter I can crank the heat, but also burn low and slow on a 40 degree day using only a couple of splits and not have to do cold restarts.

For the ambiance of the fire though the cat stove is not so great. But when I feel the need i've got two open fireplaces for that. There is no stove that can match the feeling of nothing but a screen between you and a raging fire.

For the ambiance of the fire, there should be no problem with a cat stove. We watch the fire very regularly. However, if you want the open fireplace, so be it but it is not very efficient.

 

[hookspacken]

I currently have a Lopi Endeavor, tube style stove. Took me a bit to learn how to use a tube style stove, but now that I have the hang of it, i like it ok. Puts out good heat..
My previous stove in my last home was a VC dutchwest cat stove. Once I figured that one out i liked that as well.
I think the cat stove was more efficient, giving me longer burns, on less wood with good heat output. Seems like to keep the secondaries burning, you have to burn more wood.
All in all, if I had to choose...I think i would go back to the cat stove, just for the efficiency.

 

[Backwoods Savage]

So while answering other posters, I forgot to answer the OP question.

Yes, I probably would stay with the cat stove. If we moved into a different home or area, I might consider a different stove but doubt we will ever buy another.

 

[BrowningBAR]

Hard to say since I have never owned a cat. I'm told if you are always pushing your stove hard a cat will be of no real benefit. And if indeed they do use less fuel does that really outweigh the maintenance cost. Questions to ponder.

This is accurate. Pushing a cat stove hard is less efficient than a non-cat stove and you do lose the main benefit of the longer burns. This is why I usually suggest going larger than you feel you need for the flexibility and comfort a larger stove can provide, whether it is a cat or non-cat.

Also, it is a fact that the general wood burning community is awful when it comes to maintaining a cat stove.

 

[Backwoods Savage]

Totally wrong. There is no loss of efficiency. Naturally when you burn the wood hotter the length of time shortens. However, this pushing the cat is pure bull anyway. We simply do not have to push our cat at all and we still enjoy the flames.

 

[BrowningBAR]

Unfortunately it isn't wrong. Burning a cat stove at a high output is less efficient. I believe VC and Blaze King both offer charts showing that the efficiency of a cat stove does drop as the output increases.

 

[HotCoals]

Well you don't really have to "push" much to get flames and big heat with a cat.
If you open the air way up and get her roaring I'm sure the efficiency does drop off..but you really get warm..lol.

 

[Flatbedford]

t the efficiency of a cat stove does drop as the output increases.

I'm thinking that that will happen with any stove, or any machine. My car is much more efficient cruising at 60 mph on a flat highway. If I wanted to go 70 mph up a steep hill with 3 more grown men in the car, the efficiency would drop off. You need more input for more output.

To answer the question. Though I've never used a non cat EPA stove, based on my experience with the Fireview and what I have read here about non cats, I'd stay with the cat.

 

[wkpoor]

Yesterday we got our stove top to 600+ with only 2 splits!

I had the Elm to 600 today also on 2 splits (albeit not for very long). But 600 is pretty cool considering I see 800+ on a daily basis unless its warm out like today.

 

[David Tackett]

Well, I have owned both types and will currently take the Cat. I have owned 2 tube stoves and only 1 Cat stove. Also my experience with Cat is new, but it seems a lot nicer than my tube stove for what I need it to do.

 

[jharkin]

For the ambiance of the fire, there should be no problem with a cat stove. We watch the fire very regularly. However, if you want the open fireplace, so be it but it is not very efficient.

Unless its a very cold day I can't burn the encore hot enough to get roaring flames for long without bakeing me out of the room.

We use the fireplace for ambiance, not for heat. For the couple hours it gets used a couple times a month I really don't care about the inefficiency. Most folks outside this group here do far more wasteful things in the name of entertainment

And besides, to have 200 year old house without a real working traditional fireplace would be an absolute crime

 

[Sprinter]

Unless its a very cold day I can't burn the encore hot enough to get roaring flames for long without bakeing me out of the room.

We use the fireplace for ambiance, not for heat. For the couple hours it gets used a couple times a month I really don't care about the inefficiency. Most folks outside this group here do far more wasteful things in the name of entertainment

And besides, to have 200 year old house without a real working traditional fireplace would be an absolute crime

That's such a good point.

Oh, I guess I should vote. I'd love to try a cat, but without a real need for long burn times, I'm happy with the PE.

 

[BrowningBAR]

Oh, I guess I should vote. I'd love to try a cat, but without a real need for long burn times, I'm happy with the PE.

Aren't you getting some really good burn times from the Super, though?

 

[corey21]

I would also like to try a cat stove.

 

[Sprinter]

Aren't you getting some really good burn times from the Super, though?

I haven't had the chance to go for long burn times yet. It's been too warm here to load up and the house stays pretty warm overnight. We are home most of the time, so reloading the stove every few hours is not a problem. But if I were away at work for 15 hours at a time like I used to be, especially in a colder climate, I'd be more inclined to go cat. And I like the idea of higher efficiencies.

But yes, It seems like the Super 27 has the potential for overnight pretty easily.

 

[SlyFerret]

I love my 30-NC. Starting my 5th season with it, I would absolutely buy one again. I might consider its little brother, the 13. The 30 is a bit oversized for our place.

-SF

 

[eclecticcottage]

Probably...but I'd have to try a Sirocco to be sure. Since that's not in the budget I guess I'll go with yes. Pretty happy with the Republic.

 

[MnDave]

I just installed my first non-cat EPA stove. So-far-so-good. I have read a little about cat stoves. I think that I would like it because I like the science of it and it is more efficient. I like that it can have a nice looking fire on high and burn very efficient on low. I do think that the cat-stove operator has to be more tuned in to what the stove needs so that the cat does not get clogged.

Our non-cat stove will last our life-times so I don't think we will ever get to use a cat stove.

MnDave

 

[WidowMaker]

If for some reason I had to buy another stove it would be a BK Princess. That said I'm happy with the Lopi Endeavor I have, house could stand to be better insulated and truth be told, I should add at least 1 more section of Class a pipe, may haps even 2...

 

[madrone]

Nearly zero maintenance on this stove in 14 years. I'd probably stick with it.

 

[evilgriff]

On my second cat stove, first an Intrepid II, now the BK Sirocco. Intrepid was here for 12 years. The Sirocco is a huge improvement. I live in a small house so control is important. When my Sirocco is turned down very low, I see little flame activity. That's fine with me. It lets me know that there will still be fuel in the stove hours later. I will enjoy the flames when it's cold outside and I need the extra heat. In a big house or an undersized stove a cat might not make as much of a difference. But with well insulated homes, shoulder seasons, smaller houses I would go with a cat. My neighbors notice less smoke also. I vote for cat. And unless this Sirocco gives me any problems, my next stove would be a BK.

 

[jnorthway]

I just replaced a cat insert (VC Winterwarm) with a tube insert (Jotul 550). I don't really see much of a difference from a burn standpoint so far, but I like the idea of not having to buy a new cat. Decent burn times (6-8 hours in general).

They both crank out the heat, although the Jotul runs a little hotter because it's bigger and newer.

And I get the nice dancing flames in the new stove just like the old one...

 

[hotprinter]

If you want a stove for the purpose of heating your house, get a cat stove. Blaze kings are the best. We heat our 2200 sq ft house with an ultra king and I keep the upstairs at 70-78 degrees all winter. I live in interior Alaska and right now it is -35 outside and supposed to get cold this week. Long clean burns with constant heat. If you want to cook a chicken get a Harmon. If ambience is your goal get a gas log. But if heating your house is your goal just get the BK and heat away. You will not be disappointed !

 

[bag of hammers]

I'd love to try one of the new cats based on what I read here - just because I'm intrigued by the reports of crazy long burn times and efficiency. But I know a decent size tube stove will heat my place pretty easily, and I can get a decent overnight burn now, so if I was buying for this same house, i might stick with tubes, but maybe another brand (e.g. PE).