I didn't know this: Cat vs non-Cat

[BKVP]

Ok but the 10 yr warranty means nothing at all.

Sorry, that is not fair. If the cat goes bad in year 9 or up to year 10, it's replaced, no questions asked under 100% warranty.

Thousands upon thousands of owners get upwards 10 years service. Yes...they diminish in performance over time, but they typically do not go bad.

Users on this forum are exceptional, highly tuned wood burners. They can perceive the slightest slip in performance. Heck, many have lab equipment attached to their stoves.

 

[Tennessee.Pilgrim]

Start a new thread on the topic and tell us in that thread a bit more about the house, heating requirements, stove location, etc..

I started a new thread titled, “Looking for a new stove”

 

[begreen]

Sorry, that is not fair. If the cat goes bad in year 9 or up to year 10, it's replaced, no questions asked under 100% warranty.

Thousands upon thousands of owners get upwards 10 years service. Yes...they diminish in performance over time, but they typically do not go bad.

Users on this forum are exceptional, highly tuned wood burners. They can perceive the slightest slip in performance. Heck, many have lab equipment attached to their stoves.

It seems like most are replacing them when they start seeing smoke coming from the chimney. I think there has only been one person report 10yr life for their cat. Only a few folk have a manometer attached and they are engineers or have had issues with the stove and the dealer wasn't much help.

 

[BKVP]

It seems like most are replacing them when they start seeing smoke coming from the chimney. I think there has only been one person report 10yr life for their cat. Only a few folk have a manometer attached and they are engineers or have had issues with the stove and the dealer wasn't much help.

Yes "most" here, on this site. There might be 25-35 (estimate) active BK owners on hearth.com. Respectfully, there are hundreds of thousands of owners and the numbers favor them.
But yes, if they see smoke, they should investigate the cause. Sometimes it will be the cat.

 

[begreen]

Unfortunately, most stove owners, including cat stove owners just burn them and ignore what's happening out of the stack. Could be a large percent are running them with failed or clogged cats after 5yrs or more. That's what the Oregon report from 1998 showed at least. Maintenance is not the average stove owner's strong point. It's why we're here, to help improve that.

 

[BKVP]

Unfortunately, most stove owners, including cat stove owners just burn them and ignore what's happening out of the stack. Could be a large percent are running them with failed or clogged cats after 5yrs or more. That's what the Oregon report from 1998 showed at least. Maintenance is not the average stove owner's strong point. It's why we're here, to help improve that.

Agreed..but look at the more recent CHC study. Nevertheless, you are correct. All stove owners need to "Go out, Look Up". I've posted/supported this for years, still do!

 

[lsucet]

I will see how many years I can go with mine. Both stoves has the original cats with one since late 15 -16 winter when it was installed. Early this year I thought it was ready for replacement due to more smoke than normal and the cat not lighting off like it used to. Before replace it ( I have two new ones) I remembered that I was using wood from a different pile that was behind the stables and I forgot about. I measured MC and some pieces and they were all high 20s of MC.
Somehow water get to that pile. I started using from the other pile low MC for sure and I did burn hot a couple of loads before dial it in. The cat started acting back again like always and I went the rest of the winter with no issues.
. Like mentioned here and all over, wood MC is very important.

 

[bholler]

Sorry, that is not fair. If the cat goes bad in year 9 or up to year 10, it's replaced, no questions asked under 100% warranty.

Thousands upon thousands of owners get upwards 10 years service. Yes...they diminish in performance over time, but they typically do not go bad.

Users on this forum are exceptional, highly tuned wood burners. They can perceive the slightest slip in performance. Heck, many have lab equipment attached to their stoves.

What I meant was that that 10 year warranty doesn't mean anything about how long the cat will last.

But you are absolutely right I didn't word that well at all.

 

[Ashful]

You have always been a man of few words, bholler. Sometimes too few. [emoji3]

The reality is that you rarely hear any complaint from those actually running cat stoves, over the cost of cat replacement. It is an issue that proponents of non-cats fixate on, but it is really a nothing issue. $160 for every 15,000’ish hours of burning... no one is losing sleep over that kind of cost, esp. when you consider how much wood can be saved in these very highly efficient stoves, for those who run the majority of the time on lower settings.

... and that’s not unique to BK, or any other brand. Woodstock is another fantastic cat stove option, with tech, quality, and support that appears to be every bit as good as BK. They all require you to replace this key component every few years, which may be 10+ years for part-time burners.

Citing those who don’t maintain their stoves as relevant to, well... anything, is really showing a pretty clear bias. I don’t see that as constructive, or relevant to this thread.

 

[bholler]

You have always been a man of few words, bholler. Sometimes too few. [emoji3]

The reality is that you rarely hear any complaint from those actually running cat stoves, over the cost of cat replacement. It is an issue that proponents of non-cats fixate on, but it is really a nothing issue. $160 for every 15,000’ish hours of burning... no one is losing sleep over that kind of cost, when you look at how much wood can be saved in these very highly efficient stoves.

... and that’s not unique to BK, or any other brand. Woodstock is another fantastic cat stove option, with tech, quality, and support that appears to be every bit as good as BK. They all require you to replace this key component every few years, which may be 10+ years for part-time burners.

Citing those who don’t maintain their stoves as relevant to, well... anything, is really showing a pretty clear bias. I don’t see that as constructive, or relevant to this thread.

The many cat stoves I work on do not have working cats in them. Many have never had the cat replaced at all. Many don't even have a cat in at all any more. I quite often hear them say oh yeah that fell apart years ago and I am not paying for a new one. I am not bashing cat stoves at all. But for most average people the less maintenance there is the better.

 

[Rickb]

The many cat stoves I work on do not have working cats in them. Many have never had the cat replaced at all. Many don't even have a cat in at all any more. I quite often hear them say oh yeah that fell apart years ago and I am not paying for a new one. I am not bashing cat stoves at all. But for most average people the less maintenance there is the better.

How many stoves do you service that have burned out burn tubes that the same non-maintenance people use and don't want to take the time or money to fix so they just burn as is? I'm actually just curious about this. I'm not trying to argue any point.

 

[bholler]

How many stoves do you service that have burned out burn tubes that the same non-maintenance people use and don't want to take the time or money to fix so they just burn as is? I'm actually just curious about this. I'm not trying to argue any point.

I have seen very few burnt out tubes. I would say 5 or 6 total. Most of those had other serious issues as well making them unusable. Cracked baffles are not uncommon but those typically don't cost that much.

 

[begreen]

You have always been a man of few words, bholler. Sometimes too few. [emoji3]

The reality is that you rarely hear any complaint from those actually running cat stoves, over the cost of cat replacement. It is an issue that proponents of non-cats fixate on, but it is really a nothing issue. $160 for every 15,000’ish hours of burning... no one is losing sleep over that kind of cost, esp. when you consider how much wood can be saved in these very highly efficient stoves, for those who run the majority of the time on lower settings.

It's more like $200-300 depending on the stove brand and cat. 10,000 hrs. is an average lifespan, assuming perfect running and no errors due to contamination, thermal shock, etc.. Over 10 yrs this adds up if one is burning 24/7 in a colder climate. This is not including the additional maintenance and parts required for a bypass stove and cat gasket. The best solution is often the simplest. Very few folks run their stoves at the lowest setting during the coldest months of winter. Quite the opposite, folks frequently report wanting even more heat than the stove can produce during that time.

 

[Ashful]

Very few folks run their stoves at the lowest setting during the coldest months of winter. Quite the opposite, folks frequently report wanting even more heat than the stove can produce during that time.

One or two forum members per season, eg. Marshy, doesn’t add up to “frequently”. I read nearly every post on this forum, and have for most of the last decade, and I do not recall these “frequent” posts of people unable to get sufficient heat out of a cat stove.

Even bholler reported that the stove was able to keep up with demand, although it held no advantage for him over a non-cat, at the higher burn rate he was running. Completely understood, and a fair assessment, on his part. And if you’re speaking of me, there is no single stove on earth that can heat my cave.

I do believe the majority of BK owners (and all stove owners) are running their stoves at a relatively low setting, for most of the year. But that wide range of output is the primary advantage of the cat stove, burn it high or burn it low, your choice at the turn of a knob. If you only ever need medium to high (Marshy), you might as well KISS, and go non-cat.

 

[begreen]

Agreed that the nicest feature of a BK stove is the thermostatic operation. This discussion is not specifically about BK vs the rest of the stove world. There are many other cat stoves on the market.

 

[Highbeam]

Agreed that the nicest feature of a BK stove is the thermostatic operation. This discussion is not specifically about BK vs the rest of the stove world. There are many other cat stoves on the market.

It's not the thermostat that allows for such a wonderfully wide range of available outputs, its the catalyst's ability to burn clean at different output levels. Some woodstock stoves without thermostats have nearly the same output range.

 

[begreen]

I was thinking back to when we had a VC Resolute I many years ago in a small house. The thermostatic operation was its nicest feature. It allowed us to heat very comfortably in shoulder and winter seasons.

 

[Highbeam]

I have seen very few burnt out tubes. I would say 5 or 6 total. Most of those had other serious issues as well making them unusable. Cracked baffles are not uncommon but those typically don't cost that much.

I agree. The soft baffle boards bust all the time but the tubes are remarkably durable. My tube stoves have always been run hard with glowing tubes but the tubes are holding up just fine. Replacement cost of all four tubes exceeds the cost of a single catalyst replacement but I am not willing to call the tubes a normal wear item.

Cat replacement is a hassle. It's worth the money to me but it's still an ongoing cost and requires some effort every few years to notice the old one failed, shop for a new one, order a new one, fight the porch pirates to get it shipped, replace the cat, and trash the old one.

One other odd thing. Warm up time. The cat stove smokes like crazy for quite some time when starting a cold stove. The noncat is much quicker to burn with no visible smoke.

 

[BKVP]

I'm off to Alaska today but will summarize what we all are saying.

1) Cats do wear out over time. Baffles crack and sometimes tubes crack. In the end, regardless of replacement costs, users of wood stoves MUST maintain their stoves. If you read comments over the years by test lab experts, a cracked tube, poor weld, failing cat, warped baffle all lead to more emissions.

2) EPA, regulators, test labs and even industry was 100% involved in the development of Method OM7, which later became Method 28. Method 28 clearly demonstrates a WEIGHTED AVERAGE, with the vast majority of emissions test results tied to low and medium low burn rates. The reason is self evident, most wood burners burn on low. Manufacturers recognize this in 100% of their literature by providing low burn times. Can you show me a high burn time in a brochure or web site.

3) ADEC has submitted, prematurely in our opinion, a SIP to EPA suggesting that non catalytic wood heaters only, be required to be subjected to additional testing. The data they attached (vastly insufficient and limited in scope) show higher emissions on start up for one technology versus another. To be 100% clear, emissions at all burn rates vary greatly based upon user interface. Something as simple as a piece of wood falling forward can impinge air flow and cause a stove to smoke.

We are all 100% on the same page. All wood stoves can heat homes. Some are more efficient and cleaner burning than others IN A LAB, but it all comes down to the user, proper installation and properly conditioned fuel. The rest is easy. People come here for support and education. If they want politics they can watch the Mueller hearings.

 

[bholler]

I'm off to Alaska today but will summarize what we all are saying.

1) Cats do wear out over time. Baffles crack and sometimes tubes crack. In the end, regardless of replacement costs, users of wood stoves MUST maintain their stoves. If you read comments over the years by test lab experts, a cracked tube, poor weld, failing cat, warped baffle all lead to more emissions.

2) EPA, regulators, test labs and even industry was 100% involved in the development of Method OM7, which later became Method 28. Method 28 clearly demonstrates a WEIGHTED AVERAGE, with the vast majority of emissions test results tied to low and medium low burn rates. The reason is self evident, most wood burners burn on low. Manufacturers recognize this in 100% of their literature by providing low burn times. Can you show me a high burn time in a brochure or web site.

3) ADEC has submitted, prematurely in our opinion, a SIP to EPA suggesting that non catalytic wood heaters only, be required to be subjected to additional testing. The data they attached (vastly insufficient and limited in scope) show higher emissions on start up for one technology versus another. To be 100% clear, emissions at all burn rates vary greatly based upon user interface. Something as simple as a piece of wood falling forward can impinge air flow and cause a stove to smoke.

We are all 100% on the same page. All wood stoves can heat homes. Some are more efficient and cleaner burning than others IN A LAB, but it all comes down to the user, proper installation and properly conditioned fuel. The rest is easy. People come here for support and education. If they want politics they can watch the Mueller hearings.

Well no we all agree tubes almost never need replaced. The only ones I have seen were cases of extreme abuse or neglect. Broken baffles although somewhat common can be easily avoided. The ones in my regency are about 15 years old with no problems. And most baffles are in the 100 to 150 range.

 

[begreen]

Generalizations are often not too helpful. There are pros and cons to every stove design. Early Lopis and Avalons had steel tubes that did burn out. Travis learned and corrected the issue by replacing them with stainless tubes, over 25 yrs ago. There are no tubes in PE stoves nor in many others like some Jotuls, Hamptons, etc.. And not all baffles are made from fragile board. Lopi and Osburn's are pretty tough and durable. Others are stainless, combining baffle with secondary air ports. FWIW, our baffle box looks fine after a decade. Likewise, there are several different cat stove designs, some more successful than others. Some are easy to maintain and some are a pain in the butt.

Ultimately it's what works for and best fits the customer's needs and desires. After that, the most important part is the person that is running the stove. The very best stove can be turned into a poor heater by improper setup or operation. And conversely, a cheap or old design can burn relatively efficiently in the hands of a competent operator.

 

[jetsam]

I think there's actually a fairly small number of people that would consider 'cat vs noncat' a polarizing subject, let alone a political one. Our problem is that they are all concentrated right here.

 

[SpaceBus]

I think there's actually a fairly small number of people that would consider 'cat vs noncat' a polarizing subject, let alone a political one. Our problem is that they are all concentrated right here.

Occasionally threads here suffer the issue of "too many engineers"

 

[Ashful]

Occasionally threads here suffer the issue of "too many engineers"

That, and this subject has been re-hashed too many times for the old-timers here, but hopefully it’s always for the benefit of the (usually) new person asking the question.

Like the sexes, for which we are also encouraged to pretend there are no differences, there are differences between cat and non-cat. Find the trade-offs that work best for you. As long as we truthfully acknowledge these differences, and the trade-offs that come with them, it’s a useful conversation for the benefit of those asking. Unfortunately, certain people here exaggerate one point or another, almost always in reference to a stove they have never operated. Maybe I’m guilty of that, in some cases, but not nearly as guilty as some others.

It’s just hard for all of us to believe that others can have different priorities, or weigh their pro/con decisions differently, after each of us have spent our own time thinking about it and working up our own routines.

It’s all good though, I’m not sure why these threads so often get shut down, just when the arguin’ is getting good. I enjoy the debate... because I’m right! [emoji3]

 

[SteveKG]

I changed to a cat stove about five years ago. I also bought a new cat from Woodstock a few months ago. First replacement. It was something like $140, perhaps a few bucks less.

Meanwhile, I burn a lot less wood. I fell, cut, split all my own and have for the past 45 years, so I am rather in tune with my supply. By a lot less, I mean I used to burn 4 1/2 cords on a normal winter, now it is more like 2 1/2 cords. Considering the sweat equity and effort, though I enjoy doing it, $75 a year in cat cost is very minor.