In the market for a new woodfurnace

[N.Fo]

Have you checked out the Fire Chief EPA models? I have only seen the 1000. I really want to see the 1500. I have a FC500 that is awesome but pre-EPA. I am totally content with my current heat production.
Efficiency stats & the fancy math behind it is fine & good, but anything that heats like my Fire Chief for a 14 hour burn time gets my purchase. And that is what I have heard about the Shelter which I understand is the twin to Fire Chief.
laynes69, I promise you my Pre-EPA Fire Chief 500 would be enough furnace for your house. My mind is on honest burn length. 8, even 9 hours of unsupervised burn time has been pushing it. Please chime in if you have seen the EPA Fire Chief !!

 

[laynes69]

Have you checked out the Fire Chief EPA models? I have only seen the 1000. I really want to see the 1500. I have a FC500 that is awesome but pre-EPA. I am totally content with my current heat production.
Efficiency stats & the fancy math behind it is fine & good, but anything that heats like my Fire Chief for a 14 hour burn time gets my purchase. And that is what I have heard about the Shelter which I understand is the twin to Fire Chief.
laynes69, I promise you my Pre-EPA Fire Chief 500 would be enough furnace for your house. My mind is on honest burn length. 8, even 9 hours of unsupervised burn time has been pushing it. Please chime in if you have seen the EPA Fire Chief !!

I don't doubt it would be enough, I will NOT go back to a pre EPA firebox period. I burned wood for years and wouldn't put myself back thru it. I've been looking online at the firecheifs, but their overall efficiency ratings are not that high compared to the others. I'm going to ride out this winter and see what comes up for reviews on other furnaces.

 

[motoguy]

I relatively agree with you. I totally agree with the low emissions and build quality. The only 4 - 5 % more efficient has some murky water in that statement. 1) low emissions coincides with efficiency on wood heat. 2) heat transfer, 2 identically efficient units the same size and 1 can produce more heat than the other. 3) 5% is huge! Take an 85% efficient gas furnace, Add 5% efficiency and you now have a condensing furnace using PVC for a flue pipe. Compare the prices between the 2 of them.
Lastly add the computer that makes it load and go. No loading and waiting for it to get to temp (20 minutes?) then walk away. Then add the end of the burn, even with the T-stat not calling the damper will open and burn the coals down. No other furnace operates like this, No wood stove does either. I realize its hard to appreciate it without living through both. I sleep for 8 hrs a night and am gone for work for 11 hours a day. The EPA wood stove was a nightmare, the Kuuma is slightly more work than my oil boiler was.
My brother has a $4,000.00 new Hearthstone wood stove. He cannot heat as much space, cannot control the temps in the house, he can't zone all the rooms, can't burn near as long, can't load and go, has to deal with coaling, also has to do ashes every day, and does not produce domestic hot water. I can also attest that his chimney is MUCH dirtier than mine. ( its not the wood because that mooch burns mine, Which is very dry) So even comparing the Kuuma's price or emissions to a wood stove is intellectually disabled. I guess we should agree to disagree, Please note that I am debating with you and its not personal or meant as disrespectful, even if it sounds it.

I was "John Q Public" 3 years ago, when I started my search for a wood furnace. At the time, I was very impressed with the heat output per wood used of the Avalon Arbor wood stove in our (recently purchased) home. I was also very impressed at the (unexpectedly large) reduction in LP usage, when using this little stove.

I was NOT, however, impressed with the time/dance necessary to go from "loading" to "in reburner mode". Too long, too finicky, too much of a PITA. I knew I wanted an EPA furnace, due to the heat output per wood volume experience with the Avalon. I ALSO knew I wanted something much more "load and forget" than the little Avalon. Something the wife or kids could safely load if I was gone. Or, hell, something I can reload within 5-10 minutes, and then leave the house without worries.

The efficiency/praise of the Kuuma turned me on to them, but the "load and go" and safety aspect of the Kuuma computer was likely what sold me on them. I knew I could save a good amount by NOT buying a Kuuma, but long after the money was gone, I'd be bitching about that "loading ritual" with other offerings. I'm on the opposite side of that coin, now. The money is gone, so it doesn't "hurt" anymore...however, I LOVE just opening the door, raking coals/ash, throwing wood in, closing the door, and forgetting about it.

Firebox gets warmer than normal? The audible alarm wakes me up (our bedroom is above the furnace). Power goes out? The Kuuma is rated for gravity flow, and shuts up tight to smother the fire down. I don't worry about runaway fires, or the glowing-red flu that I occasionally saw with the little Avalon stove.

For me, the Kuuma was a higher cost, but represented a much better value over the long term. Convenience, safety, etc.

 

[Mrpelletburner]

I really want to see the 1500. I have a FC500 that is awesome but pre-EPA. I am totally content with my current heat production.

My mind is on honest burn length. 8, even 9 hours of unsupervised burn time has been pushing it. Please chime in if you have seen the EPA Fire Chief !!

I know this is an old post and you might not even visit this site, but I have the 1500 and only getting 4-5 hours.

Couple questions for you regarding the 500 you were using.

Do you have a biometric damper installed? If so, what is it set to?

Do you set the thermostat and let the draft blower kick on?

 

[JRHAWK9]

At zero degrees, the heat loss calculation was around 75 to 80 thousand btus an hour.

Just curious, do you have any records of past LP or oil use? Just curious as to what you used per year, on average. You live in a warmer climate than we do, but I'd think your heat bill would have been pretty darn high.

 

[laynes69]

Just curious, do you have any records of past LP or oil use? Just curious as to what you used per year, on average. You live in a warmer climate than we do, but I'd think your heat bill would have been pretty darn high.

No, at one time our house had 2 oil furnaces, one up and one down. The house was insulated in the late 70's with ureaformaldyhyde foam, but it shrank quite a bit. I think dad would burn probably 8 cord of wood and use a tank or two of LP a year. We have been almost 100% wood for quite a while now.