Help in picking a stove size

[Woody Stover]

With the cat stove, you can run it at low output and long burn times, should you eventually get the place tightened up to where less heat is needed. But I don't think the Woodstocks have optional blowers so you might use a box fan to pull heat off the firebox if you haven't fired the boiler and are trying to get the place up to temp quicker.

 

[branchburner]

I see the Ideal Steel having a similar size firebox, but considering these stoves burn so much more efficiently - I figure I could go with a smaller stove. I understand the idea of getting a larger stove, than just running a partial load, but I've heard that kills the efficiency, increases pollution etc, that it why I was leaning towards the Absolute.

With the cat hybrid, running a smaller load will not kill efficiency as badly as with other technologies, so long as you get it up to temp... and yes, that might take a bit longer with the larger model, but not to the degree that would significantly matter in your ability to get the house warm. I ran the Absolute last year, and just up-sized to the Ideal for this season. I have only run a few fires so far, and am equally happy with the output of small loads in the new stove, but am convinced I will prefer the larger firebox once we are in the dead of winter (and am heating a smallish but drafty house).

For the same money, I would go with the bigger stove. And FYI, I believe the open house is next weekend (10/22?) and West Leb is not too far from you. By all means, go, if you haven't been yet.

 

[Ashful]

With the cat hybrid, running a smaller load will not kill efficiency as badly as with other technologies.

Please explain. Does a hybrid somehow burn less wood during a cold start, getting up to light-off temperature? We know that the hybrids are generally not any more efficient than catalytics:

Woodstock Ideal Steel Hybrid 210: 77%
Woodstock Ideal Steel Hybrid 211: 82%
Woodstock Progress Hybrid 209: 81%
Travis Industries Lopi Cape Cod: 80%

Blaze King Ashford 30.1: 80%
Blaze King King Catalytic: 82%
Blaze King Princes Cat: 81%

 

[branchburner]

Please explain. Does a hybrid somehow burn less wood during a cold start, getting up to light-off temperature? We know that the hybrids are generally not any more efficient than catalytics:

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that cat hybrids were better than cats, but rather that cats and cat hybrids are better than burn tubes and downdrafts, so far as losing efficiency with smaller fires. I mentioned only the hybrid because that is the stove I have, and the OP was comparing the two sizes of hybrids.

Any technology is going to be highly inefficient on a cold start up, but I have found it far easier to get secondary combustion with a small fire in my cat hybrids, whether the 2.5 cu ft AS or the 3.0 cu ft IS, as opposed to my Oakwood or Jotul. Not only quicker to achieve it (which was all but impossible with the Oakwood) but then to run the stove under secondary combustion for a longer time, at lower flue temps.

It seems to me that non-cats, to burn efficiently, are more likely to require the entire mass of the stove to come up to temp. I do wonder though: is that just my observation, or is it fair to put it forth as a general rule?

 

[begreen]

Pumice firebrick seems to help with this. Our big stove can have nice secondary combustion after startup with a 250ºF stove top. The well insulated firebox helps the fire get hot in short order before the whole stove is hot.

 

[kguarnotta]

I thought I'd give an update.

Well I got the Absolute Steel. I went to the factory - had a tour, then returned a week or two later to pick one up during their open house Very nice people to work with, obviously take pride in their work.

I've been using it for almost two months - and here are my initial thoughts.
Aesthetically - the stove looks nice and clean, a modern look. It is nice to have glass (my old stove did not). I went with some dragon andirons

Functionally - it is pretty easy to get the stove going, and hot. Side loading is what I'm used to, the opening is a bit smaller than my last stove, so it is a bit harder to get the wood in, but overall it works, and seems to work well. The installers put a 6" flex liner into my existing chimney. I thought they would have gotten a pre-insulated liner, but they insulated here in my yard. I think I'k getting a decent draft. I don't see any smoke coming out the top - so this appears to be burning a lot cleaner. I don't smell it outside or inside my house.

I seem to have a LOT more ash in my stove. I am generally burning this just on weekends. I used to only clean out my old stove a couple times a winter. This stove seems like I need to clean it out every couple days. I'm not sure if this is because I'm doing long slow burns? It is to the point that I have way more ash spilling out of the stove. Seems like I get as much ash spilling out of the stove over a weekend as I used to get in a month with my old stove.

I also don't feel like I can get my place hot like I used to. It is warm - but my old stove we could crank it up, and get the place really hot. We haven't had any really cold nights up here yet (at least not when I've been here). So I am thinking this stove is not big enough for our house -ie our house is too drafty. I plan on contacting them to get some advice about the excess ash production, and maybe talk about upsizing the stove to the Ideal Steel. I think that will fit too - a bit tighter. It is front load only. Anyone else have a front load only - is that harder to load?

 

[Woody Stover]

I like side loading, but front-loading the Buck 91 worked OK too. I found I needed gloves more with the big front-loading Buck where the coal bed could be big and very hot.
It sounds like you will either want the bigger IS, as begreen suggested, or hang in there until you can tighten up the envelope a bit. With a bigger stove, though, you may even be able to get heat further upstairs, if you can figure a way to move the heat and not cook yourselves out downstairs.
Did you get the ash pan? It will make dealing with ashes so easy, you will never go back. I would recommend it if you up-size to the IS.

 

[kguarnotta]

The stove does have the ash pan - The manual suggests that you may need to clean the pan out every 7-10 days. I feel like I need to clean it out every 3 days.

The tightening of the envelope is a long term plan - so I don't think it makes sense to wait. I am going to talk to the stove company about this - and see what they say. They recommended the Absolute Steel - so that is what I went with. I think I can fit the Ideal Steel too.

 

[BuckyBeaver524]

The stove does have the ash pan - The manual suggests that you may need to clean the pan out every 7-10 days. I feel like I need to clean it out every 3 days.

The tightening of the envelope is a long term plan - so I don't think it makes sense to wait. I am going to talk to the stove company about this - and see what they say. They recommended the Absolute Steel - so that is what I went with. I think I can fit the Ideal Steel too.

7-10 days may be a bit optimistic. I have the WS Progress Hybrid and I like to empty the ash pan every 5 days when burning 24/7. But I will say that the WS grate system/ash pan is mighty fine. Perhaps the species of wood and or the moisture content makes a difference on the amount of ash.

 

[Hogwildz]

Wood species play a big role in amount of ash accumulated. During the day, I burn maple, birch, ash. And get a crapload of ash. When I burn mostly oak, I won't need to scoop out ash for a couple weeks or so. If everything is burning up to ash, slow burn has nothing to do with it then.

 

[Woody Stover]

Wood species play a big role in amount of ash accumulated.

That's what occurred to me as well; If he's burning Aspen or Poplar, maybe they make a lot of ash?

 

[snavematt]

That's what occurred to me as well; If he's burning Aspen or Poplar, maybe they make a lot of ash?

Poplar makes a lot of ash, since its not really cold here thats the majority of what we have been burning, takes more tending too as well

 

[Woody Stover]

Poplar makes a lot of ash, since its not really cold here thats the majority of what we have been burning, takes more tending too as well

I'm assuming you mean Tulip "Poplar" which is what we have here in IN as well, which is actually in the Magnolia Family. Up there, they have true Poplar..I don't think it even burns as long as Tulip, and may produce more ash as well, I don't know.

 

[snavematt]

I believe its called yellow poplar, big tall trees that grow fast, its free BTUs for me, I also have a healthy supply of locus on my property too

 

[Ashful]

Anyone else have a front load only - is that harder to load?

I have had five front-loading stoves, the first three being shallow east-west loaders, and the last two having square fireboxes that could be loaded just as easily north-south or east-west.

If the firebox is wide and shallow, such that it requires east-west loading, then run away! This configuration makes a pretty fire, but it's simply awful for anyone trying to actually fill their firebox to the top several times per day, and get long burns for the purpose of heating a house. The only thing that saved me on those old east-west stoves was that they also had a top-load door, so I could close the front doors and fill them up to the gills (against the glass). That worked, for getting a filled firebox, but didn't give me any option to open the front doors without burning logs tumbling out.

If the firebox is deep, and can be loaded north-south, then it works beautifully for heating. It's essentially the same as your current side loader, in that regard.

The best of both worlds is a square firebox, if you can afford the floor space, since you have both options. Load it north-south for daily heating, or east-west when you want a pretty fire for entertaining. I have to say I haven't bothered building a single east-west fire, in the two seasons I've been running my Ashfords, even though they provide both options.

 

[branchburner]

As I recently wrote in another thread, having used both (for a few months each) I can say that I now prefer the AS over the IS (contrary to my earlier opinion posted above). It is easier to achieve and maintain secondaries and active cat in the slightly smaller firebox (and stove with less mass). Neither stove gives the intense blast of radiant heat that I got with my Oakwood, so don't expect upsizing to the IS to replicate the intensity of heat the old Defiant gave. I get what you are saying about the heat not feeling as hot from the Woodstock... it's more of a warm heat than a hot heat. But the heat seems to linger, especially with the bigger stove.

Two things that I like better about the AS: 1) I prefer side-loading to front loading, as there is less ash spillage AND less smoke spillage, as well as the ability to more easily stuff the stove to the gills; 2) the ash grate in the AS is larger relative to the size of the firebox, while the design of the IS seems to make the ash pan and grate not quite as functional. Compared to several other stoves I've had with ashpans, the IS requires more shuffling of ash to get it to fall through the grate, leading to more airborne ash in the house. If you don't like the ash spillage you get with the AS, I think you will like it even less with the IS. (I have been burning lots of poplar, so do get lots of ash.) I also seem to have a little harder time burning down excess coals with the IS compared to the AS.

With reference to Ashful's observations about N/S and E/W front-loading: while the IS has a deep enough box to allow for front-to-back placement of splits, the angled roof of the firebox makes this difficult except for the lower layer of splits. To fill the stove, you are going to have to put the last split in E/W. If a split shifts and fall on the glass, you will, have trouble if you need to open the door, where this is not an issue with the side-loader. Practically speaking, even while the IS has a larger firebox, because of the door setup for me it has proven logistically easier to shove roughly 2 cu ft of wood into the AS than into the IS.

Having used all three, my order of preference is top-loader over side-loader over front-loader. As far as size I don't think I would bother downsizing at this point, but knowing what I know now, for my house, I would prefer the AS over the IS. Your space may justify the slightly larger stove, but my space is showing just the opposite. Once the larger IS is cranking, it is a freight train that can only be dialed down so much. While you can slow the fire itself, once all that 600+ lbs of mass is hot, its going to keep radiating.

 

[kguarnotta]

I am back again - overall we like the Absolute Steel, side loading good, nice view of fire. It does take a bit of stirring to get the ashes into the ash dump. The one and I think only problem with the stove - we want more heat for our space.

I am leaning towards the ideal steel. I understand a front loader - can't be jammed full of wood, but the box is 30% larger, and they rate it to produce 25% more heat. That 25% more heat is the real selling point for me at this point. I am approaching the end of my trial period, so I've got to return the stove I got, and order a new one.

Thanks for your tips and advice, I understand this is a bit counter to your descriptions branch burner, but our house is so drafty I need a more heat. ..

 

[begreen]

Bigger can be better. Invest this summer in sealing up those leaks. It will pay back quickly.

 

[Ashful]

Why not keep this stove, and add a second? Don't discount the flexibility and horsepower of running two stoves, if you're up to the task of keeping them fueled.

 

[kguarnotta]

a second stove - needs a 2nd chimney, and additional floorspace.

 

[branchburner]

the box is 30% larger, and they rate it to produce 25% more heat. That 25% more heat is the real selling point for me at this point.

our house is so drafty I need a more heat. ..

I can relate to the drafty house, but here's my observation: even in my fairly small house, when it's really cold and windy out, the slightly bigger IS stove doesn't seem to make the house that much warmer than the slightly smaller AS. I'm sure the peak BTU output is greater, but it's not like the stove is twice the size. After all, a space heater is a space heater, and the draftiness and poor insulation work against that.

What I notice with the larger firebox is a longer burntime, and perhaps longer in terms of the HIGHLY effective peak heat output. But neither stove can sustain that peak output for an extended time. So that means on a really cold day, the house might start feeling cooler well before the end of the burn cycle, with either stove.

Now, it is very nice that I will have a deeper bed of coals that will potentially last longer... but the fact remains that even with the bigger stove, I have to reload sooner than I might want to if I want max BTUs. In the coldest conditions, having the potential for longer burns is a moot point, because the later portion of the burn cycle simply won't produce the output I need. If I have to reload to get back up to a higher output, the peak output of the smaller stove will suffice. But later in the burn cycle, neither stove is going to cure the drafty, leaky windows and such.

So I'm not saying you won't notice a difference with the bigger stove, just saying that my experience is that I most notice the difference when I actually LEAST need it. That is, when it's warmer out, it becomes much easier to make the house TOO hot.The difference in having a bigger stove becomes quite obvious. Then there also is the sweet spot when it is moderately cold and not too windy, when I can perceive the greater heat output of the bigger firebox, and I can make use of its longer burn cycles and more easily reload from coals. But on the coldest and windiest days, when I will MOST want to feel the effects of having a bigger stove, having the bigger stove actually seems to make less of a difference.

You might discuss this with the folks at Woodstock. Not saying you shouldn't upsize and that you won't get more output, but just saying it might not end up feeling like as big of an upsize as you are hoping for, due to the factors of the house. I imagine the 20% size difference is far more dramatic in a well-insulated house or, as I said, in more moderate temps. But to me, both stove fall into the medium-large size category. To put it in football terms, both are solidly-built players that differ in their abilities only by degree, with skills and power that put them in the same league. Even the best pros have their limits.

 

[Ashful]

I most notice the difference when I actually LEAST need it. That is, when it's warmer out, it becomes much easier to make the house TOO hot.The difference in having a bigger stove becomes quite obvious....

You might discuss this with the folks at Woodstock.

Or... just buy a Blaze King, and turn it down to 40-hour burn mode, when it's warm out.