Yeah- I understand that harder woods are the ideal for a long burn- but I cant't get my hands on it for free...................
Ken45 said:I read a comment somewhere where the poster suggested that square spit wood could be stacked tighter (less air space) and would result in a longer burn. I haven't tried it yet (and I didn't split any wood like that) but it might be worth a try.
Ken
Ken45 said:I read a comment somewhere where the poster suggested that square spit wood could be stacked tighter (less air space) and would result in a longer burn. I haven't tried it yet (and I didn't split any wood like that) but it might be worth a try.
Ken
johnnywarm said:most of my wood is done in square and it does burn longerKen45 said:I read a comment somewhere where the poster suggested that square spit wood could be stacked tighter (less air space) and would result in a longer burn. I haven't tried it yet (and I didn't split any wood like that) but it might be worth a try.
Ken
My brother inlaw does it like this.he lives on this stuff.
BrotherBart said:Ken45 said:I read a comment somewhere where the poster suggested that square spit wood could be stacked tighter (less air space) and would result in a longer burn. I haven't tried it yet (and I didn't split any wood like that) but it might be worth a try.
Ken
It works. And burntime is right. The heartwood without bark and punk is tighter grain, all fiber, and burns longer.
rich81 said:i second that about the heartwood. i think i might have to split some more of my wood square. i never thought about that but it makes sense, when trying to fill firebox to the MAX
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.