I'm looking for the largest wood stove. The biggest I could find was the Jotul F500. It can take a 24" piece of wood heats 2300 sqft. Others take smaller splits with a bigger fire box. Does anothe know a bigger stove?
Largest wood stove
- Thread starter tsquini
- Start date
-
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.
Hey, welcome back! There are many. The F500 firebox is about 2.3 cu ft IIRC. There are 3.0, 3.5, and even 4.0 cu ft stoves available from a variety of manufacturers. Note that the biggest stoves may require an 8" flue system. The appropriately sized stove will depend on where the stove is located in the house, how open the floorplan is, and how well the house holds the heat.
Blaze King King 40 is 4.35cu ft fire box
Regency F5200 is 4.4 cu ft fire box
Buck 91 is 4.4 cu ft fire box
Regency F5200 is 4.4 cu ft fire box
Buck 91 is 4.4 cu ft fire box
The largest wood stove I'm aware of is the JA Roby Ultimate, 4.6 cuft and utilizes a 6" flue. Although it's not certified to EPA standards and is only for sale in Canada.
I get 4.64cuft using the dimensions provided in the manual.
What ever it is, it's a big stove, the local home hardware has one sitting on display and it's massive. I'm not aware of a whole lot of places that could utilize a stove like that.
What ever it is, it's a big stove, the local home hardware has one sitting on display and it's massive. I'm not aware of a whole lot of places that could utilize a stove like that.
kennyp2339
Minister of Fire
Also many reviews of this stove show that there's a lot of smoke roll out when the door is open, perhaps because its to small of a flue.
Very well could. Seems to me to be a niche stove, it would heat a very large space, and would require a considerable effort to maintain a winters worth of wood for it. I've been watching it for a while at the hardware store, the other ones get sold and replaced with new inventory, this one just sits there collecting dust.
Nick Mystic
Minister of Fire
Keep in mind that on a practical level you can't generally cut your wood according to the specs the stove manufacturer states in their literature. A stove that can take 24" splits might only handle that size in certain sections of the firebox. And even in those areas where it might be possible to fit the wood inside the stove you would likely need to cut your wood 2" - 4" shorter. My Jotul 600F stove can take 24" wood, but I cut my rounds around 20".
I just switched to a new & current production Lopi Liberty, which 3.65 cu.ft. firebox (24"+ wide and 19"+ deep).
It's a big belly, but the listed specs look optimistic. The manual says the firebox width - 20.5", depth - 25.25", & height 15.5", but a quick look at the firebrick layout shows that is not what is loadable with wood. Realistically the load capacity is roughly 20" x 24" x 13" (3.6 cu ft) and that doesn't account for the loss created by the sharp front slope of the firebrick. If they submit this stove for EPA testing, this is closer to what I think the lab will report.
I selected one of the biggest on a 6” flue to heat a shop. I would have gone bigger if there was a good option to do so but one you’re up in the mid 3 cubic foot area, that’s about it unless you go the nuclear option which is a wood furnace or even wood boiler. Those folks with too much demand for woodstoves either get more than one woodstove or step up to boilers/furnaces.
There are some very efficient and automated wood burning boilers/furnaces since the 2020 regs kicked in. Previously these boilers/furnaces were exempt from regulation so not all brands were good.
There are some very efficient and automated wood burning boilers/furnaces since the 2020 regs kicked in. Previously these boilers/furnaces were exempt from regulation so not all brands were good.
This is another case where the EPA listed volume for the firebox differs from marketing. Though it's marketed as 3.5 cu ft, in the lab report it's measured at 2.9 cu ft. (21x20x12)
That’s for the nc30? Actually it can’t be because the nc30 never underwent 2020 testing. Perhaps you mean the nc32?
Either way, it has been shown that some manufacturers are honest about firebox volume and some flat out lie. Even premium brands lie. Measure yourself if it’s actually important.
Or just look for high output stoves. Does the OP actually want “big” or does he really want “big output”?
For the 32-NC, same size firebox, no? The firebrick pattern looks the same.
Last edited:
Maybe. Things were changed. I think I would rather go to a big drolet if looking for big budget stoves.
Kuma is a great, simple stove, American Made, great support and very large capacity. I have a classic and heating about 3000 sq ft. In Montana
Thanks for that correction, yes I believe with in achieving the EPA standards they got rid of the bigger stove product I was thinking about. They are a very nice stoves. I do believe bigger requires the 8" flue, which I didn't have room for in my existing chimney. To get more coverage, I have thought about installing a 2nd CLASSIC in the other end of my home, instead of a SINGLE LARGE stove, to more evenly distribute the heat. But I realize that's complicated and more fires to manage.
Yes, not too much though, the 30-NC was a clean burner already. The firebrick pattern looks the same. They may just have tweaked the secondaries, added more insulation on the baffle?
Kuma still sells a 2.5 cu ft line in addition to their 1.8 cu ft line. That's more like a medium and medium-large.
the largest I've ever seen is my now retired custom made JUCA
about 12 cubic feet internals (for sale).. it'd swallow logs
put out a load of heat and used a butt load of wood per season
switched Buck 91 which didn't put out as much heat
but reduced wood consumed about 50% per season
but needs DRY wood seasoned preferably 3+ years
vs JUCA would burn green wood in a pinch cleanly with little to no smoke once full temps were reached
about 12 cubic feet internals (for sale).. it'd swallow logs
put out a load of heat and used a butt load of wood per season
switched Buck 91 which didn't put out as much heat
but reduced wood consumed about 50% per season
but needs DRY wood seasoned preferably 3+ years
vs JUCA would burn green wood in a pinch cleanly with little to no smoke once full temps were reached
Last edited:
Similar threads
