If stainless is very durable, gets hot fast, reflects heat, could burn off gases, doesn't rust, and is often used in secondary combustion, how come they don't line the inside of the wood stove with it?
Webmaster said:Stainless, depending on grade, is $1.50 to $4.00 or more (fancy grades).
Firebrick is very cheap - maybe 30 cents a brick.
But a bigger reason may be that stainless allows heat to transfer through it, while firebrick reflects inward and allows for higher temps and cleaner combustion..thereby allowing a stove to pass EPA standards easier.
It is possible that stainless could be used for afterburners in certain stove - in fact, I think it is used for baffles and some secondary tubes.
Webmaster said:I'm talking manufacturer prices - have not bought in a decade or so, but I used to get small quantities of split bricks for about 60 cents....not as an OEM, but buying them delivered by a masonry yard.
30 cents may be a little low, but I'd guess manufacturers are paying well less than a buck for splits (1/2 firebricks used in stoves).
I'm a bit behind the times as I have not been in the physical stove biz for about 8 years now (sold my shop in 1998).
The stainless prices I gave are also quantity prices for manufacturers....although the spread on metals is not usually as much - you can buy some stainless sheet on ebay for 2 bucks a pound plus shipping.
Corie said:Think about it too, the regular steel stoves seem to last forever as is makes me think it would be kinda hard to justify the overall cost of a completely stainless stove.
However, imagine how neat a non painted stainless stove would look after being fire a while. All rainbow colored and such. Oh well, guess I just like the way metal looks.
stoveguy2esw said:stainless would be impractical due to not only material cost, but also you would not be able to weld it with mig machines and wire, would likely have to be tig welded which is a more time intensive procedure, as well as one which requires a high degree of skill. there are other concerns as well already mentioned in this thread, but looking from a manufacturers standpoint the cost of materials and labor time per unit would make for an extremely costly unit. i do not think any manufacturer would attempt to field a line of this type for these reasons alone , much less so looking at the points raised about refractory rates and heat transparency
BeGreen said:Aren't some of the new European stoves clad in stainless? At least that's what they look like. If there wasn't a fire burning in them you might think it's a circular refrigerator.
Webmaster said:Stainless is great to spot weld - and also electron beam weld. So we can have a spot welded stove!
Heck, it works fine for cars. If stainless was used, a stove might be able to be much thinner and lighter, which would make up for some of the price diff. Then you still have the paint problems.....cause the surface of stainless is generally smoother - chrome and nickel in it.
You would also burn your skin easier on it.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.