King KE40 as an insert?

[EbS-P]

Put some numbers to it 5k btus heat in the house (assuming 20% MC and 75% efficiency) per pound of wood. So let’s call 30% of 60k btus 20k that’s 4 pounds an hour or let’s just say 100 pounds of wood a day.

Can you fit 100# in a KE40??? If not you’re doing 12 hour reloads. See where this is going? If you can’t do a 24 loading cycle the only times of year when the BK is better is when a PE30 can’t do 12 hours. How much of the year is this?

 

[BKVP]

I've put 100lbs of 22% mc into a King..but it was walnut!

 

[P0234]

You know, EPA still allows for beta-testing! Unfortunately, the demand for such a large insert (based on real-world fireplace sizes) is fairly limited. And no one is building huge masonry fireplaces. But I'll put you on the list of 4 or 5 guys that have asked to be on the King Insert Beta Test list....

BKVP

Yeah, I can't argue with that, masonry fireplaces in general are a dieing breed. Building a insert kit for the KE40 would probably never recoup the ROI.

I'd settle for a Princess XL! Adding 8" of depth wouldn't be much of a bother would it??? That would take us right around 4 cubic feet with minimal engineering.

Anyway, thanks for chiming in, I really appreciate your time!

 

[bholler]

Yeah, I can't argue with that, masonry fireplaces in general are a dieing breed. Building a insert kit for the KE40 would probably never recoup the ROI.

I'd settle for a Princess XL! Adding 6" of depth wouldn't be much of a bother would it??? That would take us right around 4 cubic feet with minimal engineering.

Anyway, thanks for chiming in, I really appreciate your time!

Making a princess xl would still require retesting and recertification. There just isn't much market for a really large insert. There is one on the market and that one is either an insert or a freestanding stove.

 

[Highbeam]

All great points. Let me weigh in here.

Our stoves are not tested to be operated without a base! All clearances to combustibles are established using a base. The group here is correct, the thermostat will not operate or function as intended when stuffed into a masonry fireplace. Number 3, BeGreen is correct in that all the controls are on the right hand side of the firebox and won't be accessible to all but the smallest hands.

I also what to clarify the comment that "Cat stoves give you longer burn times by burning less hot". I can't speak for the other cat stoves on the market, but our thermostat is why you get longer burn times. Yes, with catalytic technology you can often operate the stove at a lower burn rate, but not always. Some "low" burn rates on cat stoves are above 1.0 kg/hr. Ours are lower, yes.

Regardless of the burn rate, whether it is low or high, the thermostat responds to the setting for heat output of the customer. Wood does not have a metered property, it burns erratically because that is how it burns. The thermostat responds to these ebbs and tides and automatically adjusts the air input to stay in the same burn rate set by the user. It is this "straightening out" of the burn curves that stretches the burn times.

Otherwise, everything here is spot on.

BKVP

Thank you for the helpful post. I've been reading into other cat stove brands and they can be very efficient and even test at a very low burn rate but they just don't get the same burn times as a thermostatic BK, by a long ways. For example, the 2.5 CF kuma stove at 81% efficiency only has a 12 hour burn time on lowlow. That's too much heat for a relatively well insulated home.

Kuma makes a big deal about cordwood testing vs. crib wood testing. As if crib wood gives nonrepresentative results. BK uses cribwood for testing.

Regency, @bholler 's favorite F3500, has bolt in bypass gasket retainers! Yes!

 

[P0234]

Making a princess xl would still require retesting and recertification. There just isn't much market for a really large insert. There is one on the market and that one is either an insert or a freestanding stove.

Agreed, the market is small, and it would require them jumping through regulatory some hoops but extending is probably a lesser effort than making the KE40 insert.

BK could probably get away with charging another $1500 for it. Engineered smartly, it probably wouldn't have any other different parts other than the chamber walls.

 

[bholler]

Thank you for the helpful post. I've been reading into other cat stove brands and they can be very efficient and even test at a very low burn rate but they just don't get the same burn times as a thermostatic BK, by a long ways. For example, the 2.5 CF kuma stove at 81% efficiency only has a 12 hour burn time on lowlow. That's too much heat for a relatively well insulated home.

Kuma makes a big deal about cordwood testing vs. crib wood testing. As if crib wood gives nonrepresentative results. BK uses cribwood for testing.

Regency, @bholler 's favorite F3500, has bolt in bypass gasket retainers! Yes!

I have never used a 3500 other than testing in customers houses. But their entire bypass assembly is removable which is really nice for doing the bypass gasket

 

[bholler]

Agreed, the market is small, and it would require them jumping through regulatory some hoops but extending is probably a lesser effort than making the KE40 insert.

BK could probably get away with charging another $1500 for it. Engineered smartly, it probably wouldn't have any other different parts other than the chamber walls.

But it would need re engeneered for the increased firebox volume. If your getting close to the king volume it would need an 8" outlet. No one has been able to pass testing on a 4+ cubic foot stove on 6"

 

[Highbeam]

I have never used a 3500 other than testing in customers houses. But their entire bypass assembly is removable which is really nice for doing the bypass gasket

Okay, I confused 3500 with 3100, my mistake. I never really looked at Regency, they don't seem too common out here. The removable bypass is quite smart for ease gasket replacement and to be able to replace melted parts.

 

[P0234]

But it would need re engeneered for the increased firebox volume. If your getting close to the king volume it would need an 8" outlet. No one has been able to pass testing on a 4+ cubic foot stove on 6"

Fair point, but this is hopefully where @BKVP says hold my beer, challenge accepted. I could live with 3.9 cubes. The jump from my existing stove, 2 to 2.57 is just not worth it, which is why i was eyeing the KE40 in the first place.

 

[Highbeam]

Fair point, but this is hopefully where @BKVP says hold my beer, challenge accepted. I could live with 3.9 cubes. The jump from my existing stove, 2 to 2.57 is just not worth it, which is why i was eyeing the KE40 in the first place.

I don't know, I went from a 2.3 (supposedly) hearthstone to the 2.9 CF princess and the difference was huge. Much more room to work in there and for fuel capacity. It's significant.

 

[bholler]

Fair point, but this is hopefully where @BKVP says hold my beer, challenge accepted. I could live with 3.9 cubes. The jump from my existing stove, 2 to 2.57 is just not worth it, which is why i was eyeing the KE40 in the first place.

Why I thought all you wanted was more burn time which the princess will easily do.