Looking for the best match for my large room - wood stove with high efficiency...

[Ashful]

I have about 10% of my 401k in that fund. Not a bad mover, but diversify, diversify!

Now we're getting even farther OT. I've said many times here before, that burning wood is not a great way to save money. It's just one of the more enjoyable ways. Splitting wood is far more fun than analyzing MorningStar reports. If I put my wood processing time toward managing my portfolio, I'd surely be farther ahead financially, but not better off emotionally.

How can we help with the stove choice?

 

[HotCoals]

You're on track now.
Put a nice stove in the fireplace then invest a 100k in something that may return 10% a year on avg. That should pay your heat bill. Or just work more hours at your job to pay for the oil.

 

[rsilvers]

For the stove choice, I think I need a back-exhaust large stove. Can we rename/consolidate that list?

 

[Grisu]

For the stove choice, I think I need a back-exhaust large stove. Can we rename/consolidate that list?

I think they were all mentioned before:

Jotul F600 and F55.
Woodstock Progress Hybrid and Ideal Steel
Quadrafire Isle Royale
Hearthstone Manchester and Mansfield OR as the probably best choice the Hearthstone Equinox if you can fit an 8" liner in that chimney. The others all need only a 6" liner but have only a firebox ~3 cu ft while the Equinox has 4 cu ft.

You need to make sure the lintel of your fireplace is high enough to fit the rear exhaust pipe underneath. I think 26" is about the minimum to fit the Woodstock Progress in, above ~33" you can probably install all those models if I remember correctly.

 

[rsilvers]

The summary is very helpful.

At first glance, Jøtul looks great.

Jøtul says that the F55 is 84% efficient. EPA says 63.

Jøtul says 83,000 BTUs. EPA says 30,000.

What gives? How they can over-rate their product by such a ridiculous amount?

Quadra-Fire Isle Royale is 46,800 BTUs and 63% efficient.

Manchester is 47,509 BUTs and 63% efficient.

The Woodstock Progress Hybrid is truly 81% efficient and 73,171 BTUs, and Ideal Steel is 82%. Is there something about the other stoves that is nicer such that it helps them make up for their lower efficiency?

 

[Grisu]

Because the EPA does not test for efficiency but for particulate emissions. See here:
(broken link removed)

 

[rsilvers]

I see. So the EPA is steering companies to optimize for their test, which is not the way that people actually use their stoves.

Still, one has to wonder, if the EPA under-rates BTUs, why the Progress got 73,171 BTUs on the EPA test.

 

[rsilvers]

BTW, I got a moisture meter and tested wood that I had sitting outside uncovered. I was hoping that it was not required to cover wood stored outside. Amazingly to me, the wood was all about 18-22% moisture. So I don't think I need to build a wood storage cover.

 

[Grisu]

BTW, I got a moisture meter and tested wood that I had sitting outside uncovered. I was hoping that it was not required to cover wood stored outside. Amazingly to me, the wood was all about 18-22% moisture. So I don't think I need to build a wood storage cover.

For drying the wood you don't need to cover it when it receives enough sun and wind although I still think it dries faster with a top cover. However, you will want to move it to a shed or similar in the fall to protect it from snow and ice or the outside will be wet when you put it in the stove. Moving it close to the house then will also make things more convenient.

Still, one has to wonder, if the EPA under-rates BTUs, why the Progress got 73,171 BTUs on the EPA test.

I vaguely remember reading that manufacturers can pay extra to have efficiency testing done at the same accredited labs that perform the EPA tests and then the "real" numbers are posted. There are people here who who will know that better than me. Be also aware that cat stoves automatically get a higher efficiency rating although I am not sure if the difference between cat and non-cat is still as large as the EPA assumes.

 

[begreen]

BTW, I got a moisture meter and tested wood that I had sitting outside uncovered. I was hoping that it was not required to cover wood stored outside. Amazingly to me, the wood was all about 18-22% moisture. So I don't think I need to build a wood storage cover.

Was the wood re-split and tested on a freshly exposed face in the middle of the split or was the wood tested on the end grain?

The Progress and other hybrids can be very efficient burners. They can burn fuel with the cat and secondary reburn at the same time. This allows some of them to report higher peak temps (during the outgassing stage and secondary bloom). Think of it as burning with an afterburner kicking in. Of course when pushed like this, the fuel consumption goes up and the burn time goes down. Woodstock has made a serious heater with the Progress. It is a relatively new stove and not totally without problems, but Woodstock stands behind their products and customers. They have been refining the design since first released and folks are generally happy with the results.

 

[Grisu]

Maybe let me add that you should not get too hung up on the tested efficiency numbers of a particular stove model. Oil and gas furnaces/boilers use standardized fuel and computer controlled combustion. Thus, their posted efficiency ratings are close to their real world performance. In contrast, wood stoves burn a fuel that is very variable in density and dryness, rely on the user for combustion control, and the particular installation for draft which controls air flow. IMHO, the actual efficiency of the unit based on its design plays a minor part in the overall heating efficiency of a wood stove and most models are close enough in their designed efficiency that user input becomes far more important. That said, the Woodstock hybrids can probably squeeze out a few more BTUs from a given amount of wood as BeGreen explained. Nevertheless, all that high efficiency is moot when user does not use dry wood, adjusts the air appropriately, and the install does not allow proper draft.

 

[SteveKG]

I just bought one of the smaller Woodstocks, the Keystone [my entire house is only 1000 ft. sq.]. I think you may find their stoves to be quite attractive if you get to see one. Call them for their catalogue, good color photos. And you can chat with them about your situation and get their input. We live in Colorado but were up there in New England and stopped by their factory in February. They are quite good about taking you around and showing you the building process and the stocks of soapstone. Plus, their "showroom" has the models of stove all sitting there so you can look them over to your satisfaction.

 

[rsilvers]

The F600 really looks attractive. Is non catalytic more enjoyable on a day-to-day basic?

 

[begreen]

It's a very good looking stove. So is the Isle Royale. The rest depends on what you're enjoying. Day to day I don't think one thinks much about the technology.

 

[avsmusic1]

The F600 really looks attractive. Is non catalytic more enjoyable on a day-to-day basic?

For what it's worth, I've heard wonderful things about the f500. I also think it's one of the best looking stoves out there

 

[rsilvers]

There is a local guy who buys wood stoves, blasts them bare, checks for cracks and warp, paints them with silicon stove paint, replaces the gaskets, and resells them. Is an older F600 the same thing as a new F600 CB?

 

[Ashful]

I see. So the EPA is steering companies to optimize for their test, which is not the way that people actually use their stoves.

Still, one has to wonder, if the EPA under-rates BTUs, why the Progress got 73,171 BTUs on the EPA test.

Yes, one does have to wonder. I think I mentioned earlier, this this very thread... no stove is magic. You put a fixed number of BTU's into the box (lb's of wood), and then you control the release rate. The primary difference in one stove to the next is how much of the heat goes up the pipe (efficiency). Two stoves with the same size firebox and even remotely similar efficiency will have very similar max BTU output, or BTU/hour over a given period.

 

[avsmusic1]

There is a local guy who buys wood stoves, blasts them bare, checks for cracks and warp, paints them with silicon stove paint, replaces the gaskets, and resells them. Is an older F600 the same thing as a new F600 CB?

Is it the person in Kingston that posts on Craigslist regularly? I thought about reaching out to him but never did

 

[rsilvers]

Yes. That is very close to me. I am driving by Kingston tomorrow.

How is the F600 CB different from the F600?

 

[begreen]

There is a local guy who buys wood stoves, blasts them bare, checks for cracks and warp, paints them with silicon stove paint, replaces the gaskets, and resells them. Is an older F600 the same thing as a new F600 CB?

It should be, if it's an F600. The predecessor to the F600 was the F12 Firelight. This is a cat stove with top loading. If this is what he is selling, it is a much liked model and owned by a few posters here.

 

[rsilvers]

The F600 CB is not listed a cat stove:

(broken link removed to http://jotul.com/us/products/stoves/jotul-f-600)

Did you mean another one was a cat stove?

I think CB means "Clean Burn." I am wondering what they changed to make the F600 CB clean burning that the F600 didn't have.

 

[Ashful]

You misunderstood begreen's post.

Firelight 12 = top loading cat stove
Firelight 600 CB = non-cat descendent of F12

Not sure there was ever a non-"CB" 600.

 

[bobdog2o02]

CB600. That's a Honda.

 

[jdp1152]

You're in Boston area. Get the mass save audit, get the. 25k interest free heat loan, get off oil and put in a geothermal system. Unless you've got a few months dedicated to stocking wood each year, you're not going to heat that place with wood efficiently.

 

[jdp1152]

And that's assuming you can't get natural gas