Lopi Evergreen vs Hearthstone Clydesdale for wood insert install

  • 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.
  • Super Cedar firestarters 30% discount Use code Hearth2024 Click here

neohioheat

New Member
Jan 10, 2023
20
NE Ohio
Hi there!

I am trying to decide between a Lopi Evergreen and Hearthstone Clydesdale. I am currently in NE ohio and house is a little less than 2000 sq ft. It has 2 levels (ground and basement).

I currently heat my house primarily off of oil and would like to use the wood insert as my primary heat source. My understanding so far is that the Evergreen heats up faster while the Clydesdale heats slower because of the soapstone material but then maintains the heat longer once the fire is out. I personally like the look of the Clydesdale over the Lopi but am looking for recommendations or opinions on which is the better option!

Thanks in advance!
 
Better is quite subjective. They are both made by companies that have been in the business for a long time. The new Clydesdale design is new to the market this year so there is not a lot of feedback on it yet. The Evergreen has been out for about a year. Structurally, they are quite different. The Lopi is a true steel stove with a welded firebox. The Clydesdale's body is made of castiron panels bolted together and is slightly larger. The Lopi is a very efficient non-cat, The Clydesdale 8492 had a cat added to meet the EPA 2020 regs. Overtime, the 8492 will require more maintenance. Visually, the Lopi has a clean, contemporary look. The Hearthstone has a very attractive classic look with the option of an enamel finish. It's a beautiful insert.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mdocod
Will the insert be on the main floor heating 1000sq ft or in the basement trying to heat both floors?
 
@begreen It will be on the main floor in the existing fireplace which is in the living room. Are you familiar with what changed with the new Clydesdale design this year? Has the Evergreen that's been out for a year had good reviews?

Also, when you say more maintenance over time for the Clydesdale is that just because of the cat? Or are there any areas/pieces that will likely need replaced?
 
Great. These are right-sized for the area being heated.

The Lopi is a conventional design tube-secondary burn insert. It is a refinement of a design by Travis that has a long history. I don't expect any surprises there. Hearthstone revamped their entire line of stoves by adding a catalytic combustor to meet the 2020 EPA requirements. Their new stoves are all hybrids. Some of the adaptations have been better than others. How well this will work out in the Clydesdale is TBD. Ash buildup and cleaning of the cats is an ongoing maintenance process. Cat replacement is TBD, but can be expected at about 3 yrs or 10-12,000 hrs of service.

Explore user feedback here keeping in mind that people come here most often to solve problems. There are thousands of stove owners that never post here, often because everything is working great.

 
Oh, wow. While I love the look of the Clydesdale, replacing the Cat every 10,000-12,000 hours or 3 years would be a big downside in my opinion. Looking online it looks like the OEM Cat from Hearthstone is $357 before tax/shipping. Also, that's $357 per cat and my understanding is that there is 2.

Say if I had the insert for 10 years that's over $2100 in just the Cat alone, not including other parts that might need replacing.

I do like the look of the Lopi Medium Flush insert a lot more than the Evergreen but unfortunately that model doesn't seem to be covered in the tax credit.
 
Oh, wow. While I love the look of the Clydesdale, replacing the Cat every 10,000-12,000 hours or 3 years would be a big downside in my opinion. Looking online it looks like the OEM Cat from Hearthstone is $357 before tax/shipping. Also, that's $357 per cat and my understanding is that there is 2.

Say if I had the insert for 10 years that's over $2100 in just the Cat alone, not including other parts that might need replacing.

I do like the look of the Lopi Medium Flush insert a lot more than the Evergreen but unfortunately that model doesn't seem to be covered in the tax credit.

The catalyst is Hearthstone part #3050-010, which can be found in hearthstone branded replacement kits of 2 for ~$400 online.

It's also an Applied Ceramics ACI-6M2. It's a standard form factor cat used in a number of other products. The 6M and 6M3 may be drop-in replacements as well.

The 3rd party Midwest Hearth MH-6M appears to be the same product, for $120 each.

By the time these things start needing to be replaced more regularly I would expect to see them become more widely available at more competitive pricing.

The life of the cats in these stoves is still unknown, however, I would expect them to be longer than 3 years in most applications.

These are hybrid stoves, not pure-catalytic stoves. Every hour of stove operation doesn't equate to an hour of catalytic combustion when operated at recommended burn rates. A typical burn cycle in a Hybrid design only transitions the wood-gas combustion to the cat during the transition from active flames in the box to coaling. There's a period there where there's still hunks of mixed charcoal/wood lumps still in the box, but they are not off-gassing fast enough to sustain active flames anymore. That's when you will hear the distinctive "tink tink tink" of a catalyst ramping up and down.

In my experience, the catalyst in these stoves is taking over as the primary point of wood gas combustion for around 1-3 hours out of a typical 6-12 hour burn cycle (I burn softwoods here), and is otherwise playing "cleanup" of a very small percentage of combustion gases during the first 2-4 hours of that burn cycle while flames are active in the firebox. If I burn 2 cycles a day, (1 late afternoon/evening, then an overnighter), that's about 4-6 hours of actual "combustion-time" per day. Assuming an average of 2 burn cycles per day for 6 months a year, that's around 1000 hours of "combustion" time per year on the cats.

Time will tell, but I expect these will last more like a decade in this application, and I would expect the cost to replace them in a decade from now to be ~$300 equivalent (inflation will probably make is $600, but everything else will also be double).

--------------------

With all of that said, the Lopi in this case appears to be a better stove design. It achieves efficiency comparable to cat stoves, without a cat, reasonable emissions, and a wider range of thermal output. Personally if I were buying an insert I'd be inclined to avoid cats as they will be more difficult to clean/service in there. A secondary tube combustion system is going to be the more trouble-free approach.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VintageGal
Thank you for the helpful info @mdocod !

It's interesting.. when I Googled that part number the kit appears to be only listed on one site and in the product info the Clydesdale is not listed.

I originally started leaning towards the Clydesdale because of the look and soapstone but at this point think I'll be going with the Lopi Evergreen because of cost and ongoing maintenance with the Clydesdale.
 
The soapstone firebrick will not give you any noticeable increase in heat. It’s a sales pitch in my opinion.
To access the cats for service you must remove a cast iron panel that’s bolted down, after removing the baffles. It might be possible to clean them without removing the iron access panel though, as long as you don’t dislodge them.
We’ve only installed one so far, it’s likely our last. The customer wanted the door reversed. That’s a nice feature, however when I did, both of the holes stripped out. So I returned the door to its original location only to find those holes were also stripped out! I had to go but larger screws and a tap to make the repair. Another deal killer for me is they left no clearance between the door and the ash lip. In fact when the door was reversed it would drag the ash lip, and there was no adjustment to correct this. If there’s any debris on the ash lip, the door won’t close.. I’d choose the evergreen all day long.
 
  • Like
Reactions: neohioheat
Thank you for the helpful info @mdocod !

It's interesting.. when I Googled that part number the kit appears to be only listed on one site and in the product info the Clydesdale is not listed.

I originally started leaning towards the Clydesdale because of the look and soapstone but at this point think I'll be going with the Lopi Evergreen because of cost and ongoing maintenance with the Clydesdale.
The soapstone firebrick will not give you any noticeable increase in heat. It’s a sales pitch in my opinion.
To access the cats for service you must remove a cast iron panel that’s bolted down, after removing the baffles. It might be possible to clean them without removing the iron access panel though, as long as you don’t dislodge them.
We’ve only installed one so far, it’s likely our last. The customer wanted the door reversed. That’s a nice feature, however when I did, both of the holes stripped out. So I returned the door to its original location only to find those holes were also stripped out! I had to go but larger screws and a tap to make the repair. Another deal killer for me is they left no clearance between the door and the ash lip. In fact when the door was reversed it would drag the ash lip, and there was no adjustment to correct this. If there’s any debris on the ash lip, the door won’t close.. I’d choose the evergreen all day long.
This is my first winter with the evergreen insert and it’s straight forward what you’d expect and we couldn’t be happier. It’s very quick and easy to get up and running and puts out plenty of heat. Only downside is we only get probably 5-7 hrs of burn time stuffed with ash before bedtime on low. 8 hrs later the stove is a hair under 200 degrees with blower off but with plenty of coals for easy startup. Wish I had a hair longer burn time but I had size restraints. Overall I’m happy I didn’t go with a cat for the ease of getting it up and running especially since I get called into work randomly throughout the night, it’s easy to put 2-3 minutes of effort into it and not worry for another 8 hrs. Looking it over the fiberboard baffle and secondary tubes appear to be the only things that I’d expect to wear out overtime. Not many things to go wrong it appears
 
I put a deposit down on an evergreen and will have it installed in the next few weeks.

Is it required to have the chimney cleaned/inspected before having an insert installed?

@Nvernon91 are you using yours as the primary heat source in your house? Mind me asking how many sq ft that is if so?
 
I had a whole new liner installed along with the insert (which is also included in the tax credit) I’d get it at least inspected if you aren’t sure.

As for heating it’s a 1800 sq ft bungalow with 18 ft ceilings in the fireplace room, I installed a ceiling fan which wasn’t fun but it helps spread the heat. It fully heats the house however its uneven. If we have the fireplace room around 76, the kitchen and dining room will be around 73 and the other far living room 70-71….bedrooms upstairs will be upper 70’s if the doors are open but if they are closed 71-72 so the doors really control the heat up there. Either way the furnace doesn’t come on as long as the stove is above 300 degrees and that is down to the mid teens outside. Unfortunately I work on power lines and was stuck at work the week it was 0 degrees for a couple days and didn’t get to see how it worked personally but my wife threw a log on every couple hours to keep it up and running and she said it kept up and didn’t think the furnace came on. If we get another cold snap and I get to be home for it I’ll post how it seemed to do
 
Time will tell, but I expect these will last more like a decade in this application, and I would expect the cost to replace them in a decade from now to be ~$300 equivalent (inflation will probably make is $600, but everything else will also be double).
A dead cat has already been reported for the Green Mountain (60?) at 3 yrs. in service. Of course, this will vary. Many people are not full-time burners. That's why the hours in service are more accurate. Inflation, the supply and cost of platinum/palladium, and the commonality of the size will determine the price a few years from now.
 
A dead cat has already been reported for the Green Mountain (60?) at 3 yrs. in service. Of course, this will vary. Many people are not full-time burners. That's why the hours in service are more accurate. Inflation, the supply and cost of platinum/palladium, and the commonality of the size will determine the price a few years from now.
If the stove is operated at full-choke, forcing heavy use of the combustors through each burn cycle, then the math also agrees with the possibility of these stoves burning through combustors in 3-5 years. Can you point to the report of this early cat death? I would be interested in understanding how the stove was operated, as that information would certainly allow for some tuning of my theories here.

Interestingly... the GM60 and similar size Heritage 8024, have the lowest low-burn rates of any of the Hearthstone models tested by the EPA all other things being equalized. The much smaller GM40 and slightly smaller Castleton, both have higher minimum burn rates despite being smaller stoves. In order for a larger firebox like the GM60 to burn at a lower pace than the GM40, would require a significantly different looking fire situation. The Heritage/GM60 at ~12K BTU/hr would probably look more like a BK stove smoldering the wood and clinking the combustors though much of the burn cycle. Meanwhile, the Clydesdale appears to have a higher minimum burn rate than even the larger Mansfield that I burn in, so it might be less inclined to operate as a gassifier.

Of course, ALL of this depends on the draft situation, which will vary from installation to installation. The "minimum" burn rate is not a fixed thing, it is highly variable depending on all of the variables introduced by the installation, the fuel type, moisture, loading strategy, etc.

If someone is using their GM 60 (or any of the Hearthstone stoves) in a manner that is catalytic combustion heavy at full choke all the time, they would have probably been better served by either a smaller stove like the GM40 burned at faster rates (active flaming combustion, shorter cycles) or a stove designed to be operated as a wood gasifier like a BK for long burn cycles.

Personally, I try to operate the Hybrid stove as a Hybrid, I want to see steady rolling flames in the firebox until MOST of the wood gas has been expelled from the wood. When operated in this manner I would expect long life from the catalysts.
 
All of this is TBD and theoretical with the new Hearthstones. 5yrs is definitely possible for those that don't burn as many hours. Stove operation varies very widely with the installation, wood, size of the cat, stove design, and operation of the stove. We'll have more data to compare in the coming years with these hybrids and those from Lopi, et al. Woodstock stoves probably have the longest track record for hybrid operation. IIRC, folks are seeing 3-5 yrs out of them depending on hours of use.
 
If someone is using their GM 60 (or any of the Hearthstone stoves) in a manner that is catalytic combustion heavy at full choke all the time, they would have probably been better served by either a smaller stove like the GM40 burned at faster rates (active flaming combustion, shorter cycles) or a stove designed to be operated as a wood gasifier like a BK for long burn cycles.
I am curious what makes you think a smaller stove burned at a higher rate would be better than a larger one burnt low? If the stove can be turned down to a point it matches the minimum heat requirements that's a good thing it allows more top end for when the temps drop.

And bk stoves are not gasifiers they are cat stoves there is a very big difference
 
I am curious what makes you think a smaller stove burned at a higher rate would be better than a larger one burnt low?

I didn't say it was better in general, I stated a very specific set of conditions wherein someone might be better served by a smaller stove or a catalytic optimized stove. Don't start debates over something that hasn't been said.

If the stove can be turned down to a point it matches the minimum heat requirements that's a good thing it allows more top end for when the temps drop.

Everything has a cost. The option to turn a stove down to a smolder for 90% of days and up for those 10% of really cold days, may come at the cost of significantly higher wear-and-tear on a combustor. That "range" of operation is often not "free," especially in a Hybrid stove that is not well optimized for regular operation at ultra-low burn rates.

Flames are "free," catalysts are not. If a stove can burn off most of the wood gases with flames, that will necessarily put less combustion load on the catalysts (if they are present).

And bk stoves are not gasifiers they are cat stoves there is a very big difference

What do you want me to call a stove that is capable of smoldering wood gases out of wood with little to no visible flames, and then burning those wood gases in a separate combustor away from the fuel source? You just tell me whatever you need me to call them to not offend your sensibilities or sensitivities about these stoves and I will happily comply.

Why not just provide that answer to begin with? Why holdout?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rich L
didn't say it was better in general, I stated a very specific set of conditions wherein someone might be better served by a smaller stove or a catalytic optimized stove. Don't start debates over something that hasn't been said.
Well you did say they would have probably been better. But I get your point
 
Everything has a cost. The option to turn a stove down to a smolder for 90% of days and up for those 10% of really cold days, may come at the cost of significantly higher wear-and-tear on a combustor. That "range" of operation is often not "free," especially in a Hybrid stove that is not well optimized for regular operation at ultra-low burn rates.

Flames are "free," catalysts are not. If a stove can burn off most of the wood gases with flames, that will necessarily put less combustion load on the catalysts (if they are present).
That really isn't how a cat works. Actually it's generally better for them when run low without any flame impingement.
 
What do you want me to call a stove that is capable of smoldering wood gases out of wood with little to no visible flames, and then burning those wood gases in a separate combustor away from the fuel source? You just tell me whatever you need me to call them to not offend your sensibilities or sensitivities about these stoves and I will happily comply.

Why not just provide that answer to begin with? Why holdout?
A stove that is capable of running with little to no flames and then burns the smoke with a cat is a cat stove. A gasifier uses a secondary combustion chamber with air introduced into it to burn the smoke. There are only a couple stoves like that and honestly they don't work all that well. There are some very good gasifier furnaces though.
 
That really isn't how a cat works. Actually it's generally better for them when run low without any flame impingement.
If a stove has flame impingement issues then that's a separate matter that will destroy a cat faster than using the cat as the primary combustion location for wood gases. Again, you're creating a debate out of something that wasn't said.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rich L
If a stove has flame impingement issues then that's a separate matter that will destroy a cat faster than using the cat as the primary combustion location for wood gases. Again, you're creating a debate out of something that wasn't said.
No I am correcting inaccurate information being given again.
 
A stove that is capable of running with little to no flames and then burns the smoke with a cat is a cat stove. A gasifier uses a secondary combustion chamber with air introduced into it to burn the smoke. There are only a couple stoves like that and honestly they don't work all that well. There are some very good gasifier furnaces though.

I figured the reason you were holding out the "answer" was for the sake of having one of those really awesome self-evident punch lines that nobody would have guessed but everyone is forced to agree with because of its remarkable elegance and perfection. "Cat Stove" just doesn't hit the high bar I had worked up in mind mind for your response to this.

Any system which extracts the various combustible gases from wood, to be burned in a separate combustor or burner or reciprocating piston or turbine engine, is a form of wood gasification. BK stoves operated at low burn rates do precisely this. Is there something about this that bothers you? Like, does the word "gasifier" sound like an insult? Like, I could see how someone might hear the word "gasifier" and think that someone is trying to insult a stove for being some form of fart burner. Is that what is going on here? What's the actual problem with describing the way these stoves operate on low, as a wood gasifier?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rich L
What's the actual problem with describing the way these stoves operate on low, as a wood gasifier?
Because there are wood gasifiers and then there are cat stoves. They are not the same thing
 
Because there are wood gasifiers and then there are cat stoves. They are not the same thing
Maybe you should go back and read what was said. I said that a BK can be operated like a wood gasifier, which it absolutely can be. I did not say that a BK stove is a wood gasifier by classification.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rich L