Trying to pick a good, small cat insert......
- Thread starter woodgeek
- 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
Heard back from the outfit that sold the Osburn and the Enerzone....they don't sell those anymore.
Now they (and the other outfits near here) sell Lopi's and FXR's (which have the same parent co and firebox).
(broken link removed to https://www.lopistoves.com/products/wood/premium-steel-wood-inserts/)
The Lopi he recommended was the 'Medium Flush Next-Gen Fyre Rectangular' which I have to say is the worst name ever. LOL.
This is their medium sized flush hybrid insert they have sold for years, but now the word 'hybrid' has been swapped for 'Next Gen Fyre' with the update for EPA 2020.
Their quote for the Lopi hybrid was only $400 less than the BK. Install price and venting price same as the other vendor to the penny.
If you've been reading this thread, you can guess that I like the hybrid idea just fine.
EDIT: a little research indicated that the Next-Gen is NOT hybrid, and that they sell both Next-Gen-Fyre and Hybrid-Fyre models with very similar fireboxes.
The salesman was calling the next-gen a 'catalyst assist' and an improvement on the hybrid. But the manual for the next-gen makes no mention of a catalyst anywhere. This makes me distrust the salesman.
Now they (and the other outfits near here) sell Lopi's and FXR's (which have the same parent co and firebox).
(broken link removed to https://www.lopistoves.com/products/wood/premium-steel-wood-inserts/)
The Lopi he recommended was the 'Medium Flush Next-Gen Fyre Rectangular' which I have to say is the worst name ever. LOL.
This is their medium sized flush hybrid insert they have sold for years, but now the word 'hybrid' has been swapped for 'Next Gen Fyre' with the update for EPA 2020.
Their quote for the Lopi hybrid was only $400 less than the BK. Install price and venting price same as the other vendor to the penny.
If you've been reading this thread, you can guess that I like the hybrid idea just fine.
EDIT: a little research indicated that the Next-Gen is NOT hybrid, and that they sell both Next-Gen-Fyre and Hybrid-Fyre models with very similar fireboxes.
The salesman was calling the next-gen a 'catalyst assist' and an improvement on the hybrid. But the manual for the next-gen makes no mention of a catalyst anywhere. This makes me distrust the salesman.
Last edited:
Looks like the Lopi medium stove is the same guts as the Cape Cod. Comes in hybrid/cat and non-cat. The non-cat looks like the same as the hybrid, with the catalyst removed.
It also looks like a lot of folks around here have mixed results with the Cape Cod.
It also looks like a lot of folks around here have mixed results with the Cape Cod.
Rattan’s was very prompt in getting back to me. I have a price list of a bunch of the inserts they stock if you want it I can email it to you if you pm me your email.
Where are you in SE PA? I'm also in SE PA and ordered an Ashford 25 locally. They also sell the Sirocco 25. I'm all in around 5300 on the AShford and I believe the Sirocco is about 300 dollars cheaper. This is including the insulated liner, and all installation costs. They are even hardwiring the electrical.
Last edited:
Read the fine print and see how they are determining efficiency. This is important. If they are going by the EPA listed overall efficiency then no, many do not exceed 75% unless they are pellet stoves. If this is the case, Regency and Blaze King may be the best choices for the rebate.
Last edited:
Yeah, the close by BK dealer is pretty high for the works ($6600). I'm in Delaware county.
I called @xshmoo recommendation, and he came in $700 cheaper on the Sirocco stove itself...still waiting on the quote.
I am not excited about the QuadrFires or the Montpellier, bc of the lack of air control.
The FPX medium and clones are much prettier, and completely flush. But look like they will end up costing nearly the same amount as the Sirocco. At that point, I'll probably pick the BK, even if it is overkill for what I need. Its just a nice unit for the price.
I called @xshmoo recommendation, and he came in $700 cheaper on the Sirocco stove itself...still waiting on the quote.
I am not excited about the QuadrFires or the Montpellier, bc of the lack of air control.
The FPX medium and clones are much prettier, and completely flush. But look like they will end up costing nearly the same amount as the Sirocco. At that point, I'll probably pick the BK, even if it is overkill for what I need. Its just a nice unit for the price.
Where are you in SE PA? There's an ace hardware in Pennsburg 18073 that sells blaze king. You can probably get the Sirocco with installation for about 5k.
Oh yeah I completely forgot the blaze king dealer fireplace and chimney professionals up in kintnersville, up by lake nockamixon had a leftover Ashford I was gonna pick up for 3k but it’s not gonna fit. but that was a little bit ago you could call and see if he still has it
Hey did you ever find out if this unit was still available? My dealer in Pennsburg said my estimated arrival date was 10/30 on the unit and now its been pushed back to 11/30.
No you’d have to call them I went a different route. Also Rattan’s I know had them in stock
I am still waiting for sweeps and installers to get back to me, but have hit a snag.
The first installer cam out and flagged my clearances for the Sirocco.
My mantle is quite high, at 52" off the floor. But I have combustible facing which is just 38" off the floor.
The manual says the minimum clearance to facing is 39 1/2" off the floor. Installer suggested a mantle shield, but had not done that before.
And in an earlier thread here, @BKVP suggested there is no rated mantle shield for this unit?
www.hearth.com
The first installer cam out and flagged my clearances for the Sirocco.
My mantle is quite high, at 52" off the floor. But I have combustible facing which is just 38" off the floor.
The manual says the minimum clearance to facing is 39 1/2" off the floor. Installer suggested a mantle shield, but had not done that before.
And in an earlier thread here, @BKVP suggested there is no rated mantle shield for this unit?
Blaze King Sirocco 25 clearance requirements
Either I'm misreading something or there's conflicting information between the brochure and the manual. The brochure states the clearance required from top of door opening to mantle as 38", however the manual, on page 12, states that it's 20". Am I missing something? Is the brochure intending to...
www.hearth.com
BKVP
Minister of Fire
Correct..I am still waiting for sweeps and installers to get back to me, but have hit a snag.
The first installer cam out and flagged my clearances for the Sirocco.
My mantle is quite high, at 52" off the floor. But I have combustible facing which is just 38" off the floor.
The manual says the minimum clearance to facing is 39 1/2" off the floor. Installer suggested a mantle shield, but had not done that before.
And in an earlier thread here, @BKVP suggested there is no rated mantle shield for this unit?
Blaze King Sirocco 25 clearance requirements
Either I'm misreading something or there's conflicting information between the brochure and the manual. The brochure states the clearance required from top of door opening to mantle as 38", however the manual, on page 12, states that it's 20". Am I missing something? Is the brochure intending to...
OK, regrouping a bit.
I had looked at the manual for clearances, which have an arrow from the unit to the underside of the mantel. And since my Mantel is 52" I figured I was fine....but the words say combustible facing.
A quick scan of all the flush inserts discussed in this thread shows that they ALL require 39-40" from the floor to combustible facing, versus my 38". While some of the others may allow shields, I don't like the look of the shields. (I'm ok with a mantel shield tbh, but the slanted metal shield poking out from the unit, looks ridiculous on a flush mount imo).
The one exception is the PE Neo. It is only 34" from the floor to combustible facing. But the unit itself is pretty tiny, and would need a large custom surround to cover my large fireplace opening, which is 31.5" tall.
My house was the first house build by a small house builder....it has a LOT of weird, non-standard features that make it hard to retrofit. The guy got pretty 'creative' with a lot of details.
There is hearth protection, which is a12" 16" 'deep' slab of slate which is sunk flush into the poured concrete slab floor. So I don't NEED hearth protection on the front, but I would need to have a strip of 4-6" of unfinished poured concrete exposed before carpeting...and which is already covered in black mastic, which might contain asbestos and so I don't want to grind it off. Little easter eggs all over this house.
So, I was already going to lay a 20" deep slab of slate or other stone over the hearth.
I am now looking at covering the crappy red brick surround (with badly patched and stained mortar joints) with a stone surround 'kit'. This would allow me to slightly drop the height of the fireplace opening, so I could so with a small metal surround, instead of a large surround.
I would match the stone surround to the hearth slab.
I don't love the wood surround/mantel that is there, which shows some OLD pyrolysis damage, puttied and painted over (another Easter Egg). Its a cheapo choice (I can see similar at Home Despot for $500).
While I don't want to climb on my roof with a liner kit, I could see myself doing the demo on the wood mantel, glueing up a new stone surround and hearth extension, and buying a new mantel/wood surround to go around that. I would pick something that fits the contemporary features of my house and the insert to be installed. It would be spiffy.
Sound crazy to anyone here?
I had looked at the manual for clearances, which have an arrow from the unit to the underside of the mantel. And since my Mantel is 52" I figured I was fine....but the words say combustible facing.
A quick scan of all the flush inserts discussed in this thread shows that they ALL require 39-40" from the floor to combustible facing, versus my 38". While some of the others may allow shields, I don't like the look of the shields. (I'm ok with a mantel shield tbh, but the slanted metal shield poking out from the unit, looks ridiculous on a flush mount imo).
The one exception is the PE Neo. It is only 34" from the floor to combustible facing. But the unit itself is pretty tiny, and would need a large custom surround to cover my large fireplace opening, which is 31.5" tall.
My house was the first house build by a small house builder....it has a LOT of weird, non-standard features that make it hard to retrofit. The guy got pretty 'creative' with a lot of details.
There is hearth protection, which is a
So, I was already going to lay a 20" deep slab of slate or other stone over the hearth.
I am now looking at covering the crappy red brick surround (with badly patched and stained mortar joints) with a stone surround 'kit'. This would allow me to slightly drop the height of the fireplace opening, so I could so with a small metal surround, instead of a large surround.
I would match the stone surround to the hearth slab.
I don't love the wood surround/mantel that is there, which shows some OLD pyrolysis damage, puttied and painted over (another Easter Egg). Its a cheapo choice (I can see similar at Home Despot for $500).
While I don't want to climb on my roof with a liner kit, I could see myself doing the demo on the wood mantel, glueing up a new stone surround and hearth extension, and buying a new mantel/wood surround to go around that. I would pick something that fits the contemporary features of my house and the insert to be installed. It would be spiffy.
Sound crazy to anyone here?
Last edited:
![[Hearth.com] Trying to pick a good, small cat insert......](/talk/data/attachments/266/266475-6af8d1f2db3053bfdd2a30e4cabb6ac5.jpg?hash=QrkGLFW5QI)
Front ember protection is 16 inches. Don't you already have that? What's begging the wood surround? More brick?Behold!
![[Hearth.com] Trying to pick a good, small cat insert......](https://www.hearth.com/talk/attachments/hearth-jpg.266448/?hash=8f118f9980260d90daab42d9915c5de9 "[Hearth.com] Trying to pick a good, small cat insert......")
Its just 16" from the brick, but won't be from the door of any insert.
Looks like (3) 16x16" slate tiles sunk into the slab.
Last edited:
SpaceBus
Minister of Fire
This looks like it is becoming a much larger project than you planned. I think any fireplace improvement would be a great feature when you go to sell. Your idea bout pulling all the wood and doing a stone veneer sounds great, then you could have some more freedom on insert if you push the mantle up higher.
I believe the tiles count as ember protection. Are the tiles included in the 16"?
The slate tiles are fine but not deep enough. The tiles beyond that look like either vct or lenolium both of which are combustible
Maybe a custom cut piece of granite that would cover the mastic and tile and go into the firebox, then insert on top of that?
Agreed. I need to pop up the 60 yo linoleum and cover at least a few inches of the slab past the square slate 'tiles' in the front (which have ugly joins in them). The installer suggested a slab that did not extend into the firebox, and building up the firebox floor with something cheaper, like (rated) cement board. But reduces the clearance to combustible spacing above by another inch or two, dropping it to 36", which is where they stalled out.
Adding stone facing and heath protection, and getting a new wood mantle surround around that also allows a smaller metal surround on the insert, which looks a lot better IMO.
Elsewhere in my house I have a lot of beige fieldstone (blasted from the bedrock of the site, I assume) and slate detailing. So slate would look like it was always here, tbh.
I'm not a big fan of granite, honestly, don't have any anywhere in the house, and was told that granite needs to be thicker in that application, than slate. Opinions?
Adding stone facing and heath protection, and getting a new wood mantle surround around that also allows a smaller metal surround on the insert, which looks a lot better IMO.
Elsewhere in my house I have a lot of beige fieldstone (blasted from the bedrock of the site, I assume) and slate detailing. So slate would look like it was always here, tbh.
I'm not a big fan of granite, honestly, don't have any anywhere in the house, and was told that granite needs to be thicker in that application, than slate. Opinions?
Similar threads
