Just got the stove in the spring and have been using it the last several weeks. CAT has finally "calmed down" and it's no longer doing a 360 in the temp gauge and is a lot more predictable and stable after a few weeks of burning. But one thing I swear is happening is if I turn on the fan kit, burn times are noticeably reduced. Am I crazy or is this really a thing? If so, it doesn't seem to make sense to turn the fan on, even if I'm matching the fan speed to the thermostat setting because turning the fan on just makes the burn times way less, aiming the stove way less efficient and means I have to reload more often.
Reduced burn times with fan kit on?
- Thread starter Mustard Tiger
- 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. -
Super Cedar firestarters 30% discount Use code Hearth2024 Click here
Had no idea about that. If I did I probably wouldn't have added it as a feature along with the useless ash pan! Otherwise, the stove is awesome.
You can run it with the fan off, right? I didn't see anything in the manual about having to run it. I just ordered my Princess 32 and the shop strongly encouraged me to get the fan kit, which I did. But I was thinking I could run it without the fan unless I need it.
Of course you can run it with the fan off. Probably wouldn't have had it added on though if I knew it reduced the burn time is all.
Another thing I noticed is despite having the fan on, I didn't notice any improvement in circulation of the warm air to the more distal areas of the house, so for me the fan really offers no noticeable benefit.
It's still useful for situations where you are maxing out the heat output; cooling down the stove with the fan (leading to the thermostat remaining open longer) will put more heat into the room than if the fan was not on.
Reduced burn times just means more BTUs per hour shed. And if your flue temps remain the same or are lower it means more BTUs per hour shed *into your room*. So it does have a benefit in situations where you run at full bore.
Also it may help move heat farther away if directed in the right direction (is what some folks say; I do't have a fan so I can't say and I have my doubts given the turbulence (mixing) created by a fan).
I do notice it. Of course, it won't reach the bedroom three hallways away, but it distributes better than with the fan off (I do have the ceiling fan on as well)
But since I usually only require a lot less than maximum output, I mostly place the fan on "low". That still helps.
I have the fans and they are off more than 99% of the time. I use them when I need max output or when it is bitter cold outside I think the extra volume of heated air travels to the far corners slightly better.
I think if I could go back in time I might not buy the fans. I really enjoy silent heat.
I think if I could go back in time I might not buy the fans. I really enjoy silent heat.
Me, too. But on low they are really only audible if you listen closely.
TV's on? No biggie.
Reading a book? Maybe so.
I agree, the fans on high make quite a racket. Nature of the beast.
Similar threads
