Jotul Firebox Comparison

  • 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
Not open for further replies.
CentralVAWoodHeat

CentralVAWoodHeat

Minister of Fire
Nov 7, 2015
704
Virginia
Hi everyone. I've come to the conclusion that I really like my Jotul F400....for someone else. It has been my first EPA stove after 30 years of wood burning and I would highly recommend it, but it's not for me. My major complaint is the firebox size. It is just simply way too small. It needs to be deeper and higher.

I've looked at the specs between the Oslo and the F400 and it looks like the Oslo has roughly a 3/4 cubic feet more firebox size. For those of you that have experience with the two stoves, will this make any perceptible difference to me or should I just go with another brand entirely. I'm looking at that Regency F5100 but really am not into the idea of a catalytic stove.

To be honest, I've been taking a walk down memory lane on some old Riteway threads and really miss my old model 37.

Thoughts?
 
I have a shiny new Oslo. I can't compare it to the F400, but the Oslo has a damn big firebox hard to imagine that it is too small. How big is the space you are trying to heat.
 
I also own a Oslo and you are able to put a large amount in the firebox. I never have had the 400 but the 500 is pretty big. That being said there is always something bigger out there how much area are you trying to heat.
 
I'm heating an open concept ranch house at 2,200 square feet. We have 10 foot ceilings as well. The house is very well insulated and very energy efficient.
 
IIRC the Castine is around 1.7cu ft usable, the Oslo ~2.4 cu ft and the F600 ~3.0 cu ft.. Note that the F500 and F600 are side loaders primarily and will need 16" hearth on the side door side. They are not ideal for corner installations.
 
Is the door side always on the left as you face them or do them make ones that load from the right as well?
 
The 500 side door is on the left. The 600 side door is on the right.
 
Why not look at the F55, it's a big firebox and a more usable shape you can even North/south load and really pack it full.
 
Toploader said:
Why not look at the F55, it's a big firebox and a more usable shape you can even North/south load and really pack it full.
Click to expand...
Interesting...I never considered it. Looks like a large firebox that is more square. It looks like it can handle logs that are 18" both long and front ways as opposed to longer logs front ways. This looks like a good choice as I wouldn't be splitting wood that is 24" in length like the F600 can accept anyway. Most of my splits are around 18" or less. I would just have to start ensuring my max split length was under 18". Thanks!
 
CentralVAWoodHeat said:
Interesting...I never considered it. Looks like a large firebox that is more square. It looks like it can handle logs that are 18" both long and front ways as opposed to longer logs front ways. This looks like a good choice as I wouldn't be splitting wood that is 24" in length like the F600 can accept anyway. Most of my splits are around 18" or less. I would just have to start ensuring my max split length was under 18". Thanks!
Click to expand...
Just looked into it and it does not have an ash pan. I'm assuming you would just have to shovel ash out through the front. That is a deal breaker for me. Interesting design though.
 
Well if you can't live without the ash pan the maybe the F50 would work. I really think the wider firebox of the F500 and 600 is limiting because you need 20 or 22 inch wood to benefit from it's large size and it's a drag, speaking from experience, dealing with wood that long. Having said that the F600 will take 16 inch wood north/south.
 
CentralVAWoodHeat said:
Just looked into it and it does not have an ash pan. I'm assuming you would just have to shovel ash out through the front. That is a deal breaker for me. Interesting design though.
Click to expand...
The F50 and F55 are similar to our T6 which has a cast iron jacket on a steel stove body. This is a nice setup. It solved our corner install problem with large stoves. There's an ashpan on the T6 but we never use it. Ashpans are overrated IMO.
 
begreen said:
Ashpans are overrated IMO.
Click to expand...
If you have to scrape 'em down a hole, it's not too bad but once I used a grated ash-handling system I vastly preferred it to any other solution. Shoveling 'em out is a non-starter for me. Different stroke for different folks. Looks like the Oslo has a grate...
 
The problem I always had with grated stoves was as many good coals as ash fell into the ash pan. After two seasons I let the pan fill up with ash and never pulled it again. In fact the ash pan in my 21 year old stove was filled with 19 year old ash when I pulled it out to replace it.
 
The Oslo is advertised as accepting up to 24" pieces of wood, but you'll only be able to maybe get 3 in there because of the shape of the firebox. I cut all of my wood to 18" - 20" now.
 
BrotherBart said:
The problem I always had with grated stoves was as many good coals as ash fell into the ash pan. After two seasons I let the pan fill up with ash and never pulled it again. In fact the ash pan in my 21 year old stove was filled with 19 year old ash when I pulled it out to replace it.
Click to expand...
Yes, I used the ashpan for a couple months on the Castine, then let it fill up and forgot about it. I think the stove ran better with a bed of ash at the grate level.
 
BrotherBart said:
The problem I always had with grated stoves was as many good coals as ash fell into the ash pan.
Click to expand...
Huh. The grate gaps on the Keystone are about 1/4" wide; All that falls through is ash and maybe a few tiny coals. Couldn't measure the grates on the Dutchwest...got a load going right now. How did you know what fell into the pan ? Whenever I take my pan out and dump it, any coals that fell through have long since burned away to nothing (and given me heat in the stove.) When I had a shoveler, and didn't want to let the stove burn all the way out, there was quite a few big coals coming out with the shovels-full of ash. Then I had to walk it outside before it burned me through my gloves. If you live in the semi-tropics like begreen, you can just let your stove burn out for a couple days which makes it a lot easier. Heheh. If not, it's way too much work trying to shove the coals to one side, then the other, trying to get just ashes (which you never do.) And too much work trying to gently slip loads of ashes off the shovel and into the shallow pan as I hold it right beneath the door to minimize any dust escaping. Doesn't sound too bad, once or twice, but you gotta do it thousands of times over the life of a stove. No thanks; Nothing about the process appeals to me whatsoever.
begreen said:
I think the stove ran better with a bed of ash at the grate level.
Click to expand...
I knock only a small amount of ashes through the grate moving coals forward for a reload, none on a top-down start. They pretty much fall through on their own. I'm always loading on top of a pretty thick bed of ash.
 
I like the ash pan on my Oslo . . . for some reason it works really well . . . I rarely see large coals in there . . . heck, there usually isn't any coals in there other than the fine ash. When I restart a fire from scratch I tend to gently stir the ashes which seems to allow the fine ash to drop down, keeping the large coals.
 
I have the F55. The firebox is just big enough for me. Not having an ash pan is one of the reasons I bought it.
 
I agree with firefighter jake I never have a problem with large coals in the ash pan. It seems the stove works better with a small level of ash in the stove any ways. Depending on how you burn just empty the pan when needed. My first year or two I used to clean firebox down to just a few hot coals but always made getting fire going again a pain leave what is in the firebox just empty the pan it helps for restarting the fire.
 
heavy hammer said:
I agree with firefighter jake I never have a problem with large coals in the ash pan. It seems the stove works better with a small level of ash in the stove any ways. Depending on how you burn just empty the pan when needed. My first year or two I used to clean firebox down to just a few hot coals but always made getting fire going again a pain leave what is in the firebox just empty the pan it helps for restarting the fire.
Click to expand...
I also never have problems with coals in the ash pan, even if I stir the bed of coals around a lot before reloading. I really like the ash pan and do not find the idea of shoveling ash an idea I'm willing to entertain.

I'm starting to think that Jotul may not be the brand to look at for what I want. I want a big, relatively square firebox, that has an ash pan and handles at least 18" logs front and back as well as side to side.
 
The Alderlea T6 has a big squarish firebox and comes with an ashpan. I don't use it, but it's there. So does the Jotul F50. The T6 has swing away trivet top sections, regulated secondary burn and a stainless baffle system. The F50 has top loading and a grille options (free right now). Both are excellent heaters. Ash is dumped down a hole into the pan, no grate.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

P
Smoke issue with brand new Jotul 500 Oslo
Replies
14
Views
1K
Jotul
Wisco Shepherd
Wisco Shepherd
R
Jotul F3 vs F400 or wasting my time?
Replies
14
Views
2K
Jotul
begreen
begreen
R
Jotul Series 8 AP (Catalytic)
Replies
2
Views
596
Jotul
bigealta
bigealta
R
Jotul Oslo F500 V3 Defective?
Replies
31
Views
4K
Jotul
PAres
P
R
Jotul Oslo V3
Replies
33
Views
5K
Jotul
Barry C
B
Top Bottom
Back