Unique Situation...I need a bigger stove

[Dairyman]

Welcome to the forum djc.

If we stick with steel I am certainly going to keep my QF 5700 as it has served us very well and is close enough in size/efficiency to the other steel stoves out there. The other option I am considering is to go with a soap.

If I go this route I will be waiting and hoping that the newest Woodstock will be larger than the Progress (and a front loader).

What are the Pro's and Con's of soap? What will happen if it's over-burned (momentarily or continuously)? Are there long term maintenance issues? Are there maintenance perks (I am told that there is no fire brick...that sounds like a perk to me!).

Thanks again for all comments!

I a confused as to why you wouldn't consider any steel stoves but you are looking at Woodstocks steel stove. The big plus of soapstone to me is that it evens out the heat.

The con's are that the stone could crack, it takes longer to heat up, (not too long IMO) and eventually you'll have to rebuild it.

If you have to go with one stove I wouldn't go any smaller than a 4 cu. firebox.

 

[Dairyman]

Look..lets say you have soapstone.
More heat will go up the flue heating that soapstone up then what would go up a flu heating up a steel stove of the same design...it would have too.
Now once they both reach temp I still think more would go up the flue with the soapstone stove all through the load.
You will get a small amount back with the soapstone stove compared to the steel stove when they both run out of wood and coals..no doubt but imo it will never make up the diff lost up the flue with the soapstone stove.
That is my opinion and I'm sticking to it...lol.

That said those soapstone stoves sure look pretty!
Don't make me get into thermodynamics!l lol

Running high flue temps is my biggest complaint with the mansfield. But when you add a cat magic happens.

 

[HotCoals]

Running high flue temps is my biggest complaint with the mansfield. But when you add a cat magic happens.

Cat's do make magic!

 

[HotCoals]

You guys ever see soapstone on a furnace?

You will see metals that will transfer the heat the fastest though.

 

[HotCoals]

Lets say 25 million btu's /cord and lets go with the 3 cord.
That's 75 million.
Lets go with 80% for efficiency...that leaves 60 million btu's.
I burn from maybe Nov. till the end of March..maybe somewhat sooner and latter but don't use much then.
Maybe 170 days lets say.
How many btu's is that for a day..I suck with big numbers..lol..

ok another guy on here did the math...lol.
and if we did it right with those numbers it comes out to roughly 14,700 btu's per hour avg. for the season.
Sound about right?

 

[Waulie]

If two stoves were exactly the same in every way but one had soapstone on it are you trying to tell me the soapstone one would heat up just as fast as the one with only steel?
So more heat had to go up the flue if air opening were the same on both.

No, more heat did not have to go up the flue. The heat is in the firebox same as the steel stove. For the same given interior firebox temp, the soapstone will take longer to heat up than the steel. This in no way means you are "wasting" any heat. You will get the same heat back out that you put in. The heat isn't going up the flue. It's going into the soapstone.

 

[HotCoals]

No, more heat did not have to go up the flue. The heat is in the firebox same as the steel stove. For the same given interior firebox temp, the soapstone will take longer to heat up than the steel. This in no way means you are "wasting" any heat. You will get the same heat back out that you put in. The heat isn't going up the flue. It's going into the soapstone.

The blue means more went up the flue..you proved my case..thank you! cheers!

It has too...it took longer.

The flow rate through both stoves would have been the same.
The fire in the soapstone would not say..oh I gota slow the flow rate down to heat the stones.

 

[laynes69]

I know there's many people against wood furnaces, but I would look into that route if it was me. A furnace like the Max Caddy had a very high btu rating, while having clean burning technology. This would distribute more heat across the home. I don't know your ductwork layout, but our furnace keeps the basement warm while heating both floors above. With that square footage, even a large wood furnace may not be quite enough during the coldest weather. If that's the case, the stove is there. I would love a stove, but it's just not feasible for the size, age and layout of our home.

 

[HotCoals]

I know there's many people against wood furnaces, but I would look into that route if it was me. A furnace like the Max Caddy had a very high btu rating, while having clean burning technology. This would distribute more heat across the home. I don't know your ductwork layout, but our furnace keeps the basement warm while heating both floors above. With that square footage, even a large wood furnace may not be quite enough during the coldest weather. If that's the case, the stove is there.

I concur!

Wood furnace and a stove!

 

[Dairyman]

The blue means more went up the flue..you proved my case..thank you! cheers!

It has too...it took longer.

The flow rate through both stoves would have been the same.
The fire in the soapstone would not say..oh I gota slow the flow rate down to heat the stones.

I'm guessing that the slow cat burn gives the soapstone more time for heat transfer. But on the progress this isn't always the case. So Woodstock added the metal heat exchanger.

 

[Waulie]

The blue means more went up the flue..you proved my case..thank you! cheers!

It has too...it took longer.

The flow rate through both stoves would have been the same.
The fire in the soapstone would not say..oh I gota slow the flow rate down to heat the stones.

This is a really silly thing to argue about, but when people keep stating something that is definitively not true it's hard not to react.

The heat is being absorbed by the soapstone it is not going up the flue. Obviously, given the same flow rate at the same temp, more time = more heat up the flue. This is true, but what does it have to do with anything? At the same flow rate and the same temp, you sent exactly the same amount of heat up the flue in an hour with a steel stove as a soapstone stove. Heat that doesn't go up the flue goes into your home. As for heating up the stone, you get every bit out that you put in unless you pick up and carry your hot stove outside.

Cheers!

 

[HotCoals]

This is a really silly thing to argue about, but when people keep stating something that is definitively not true it's hard not to react.

The heat is being absorbed by the soapstone it is not going up the flue. Obviously, given the same flow rate at the same temp, more time = more heat up the flue. This is true, but what does it have to do with anything? At the same flow rate and the same temp, you sent exactly the same amount of heat up the flue in an hour with a steel stove as a soapstone stove. Heat that doesn't go up the flue goes into your home. As for heating up the stone, you get every bit out that you put in unless you pick up and carry your hot stove outside.

Cheers!

You can twist it all you want .

But I'll take the blue for now.

What you said is true but the steel stove gave off heat faster without the stone being attached to it..I'm sure you would agree.

Heat will transfer faster to a colder object then it will to a warmer object and since the steel will transfer heat faster then with stone attached to it,it should be concluded that bare steel is better for getting the heat out of the stove and into the living space.

A completely glass wood stove would really be efficient in transferring heat fast.

 

[HotCoals]

I'm guessing that the slow cat burn gives the soapstone more time for heat transfer. But on the progress this isn't always the case. So Woodstock added the metal heat exchanger.

We are talking about two stoves being the same in every way but one has stone on it.
My money is on the stove without stone to get more out of the btu's from a load.
It only makes sense.

 

[Waulie]

Heat will transfer faster to a colder object then it will to a warmer object and since the steel will transfer heat faster then with stone attached to it,it should be concluded that bare steel is better for getting the heat out of the stove and into the living space.

You've concluded that, but unless heat transfer and physics are completely wrong, it most definitely should not be concluded.

Steel, cast iron, and soapstone will "get the heat out into the living space" differently, but none is really "better" at doing so.

We are talking about two stoves being the same in every way but one has stone on it.
My money is on the stove without stone to get more out of the btu's from a load.
It only makes sense.

The thing, it doesn't make sense. You are completely ignoring time and mass. You could put 4,000 lbs of stone on it, but if you send the exact same amount of heat up the flue, you will ultimately get the exact same amount of heat into your house. There are only 2 places the heat can go. It can go out of your house or it can go into your house. That's what makes sense.

 

[HotCoals]

You've concluded that, but unless heat transfer and physics are completely wrong, it most definitely should not be concluded.

Steel, cast iron, and soapstone will "get the heat out into the living space" differently, but none is really "better" at doing so.




The thing, it doesn't make sense. You are completely ignoring time and mass. You could put 4,000 lbs of stone on it, but if you send the exact same amount of heat up the flue, you will ultimately get the exact same amount of heat into your house. There are only 2 places the heat can go. It can go out of your house or it can go into your house. That's what makes sense.

I suggest we agree to disagree.

But it only makes sense that the thicker the stove by whatever means will slow the transfer rate from the inside of the stove to the room, it's called insulating.
Basic stuff.
You guys can twist it and say all you want but I know I'm right..just ask me!..lol.

 

[HotCoals]

Stand by a soapstone stove.
Where do you feel the most heat..I bet it's from the glass.
I have already read plenty of post about how the stove top temps are considerably less then a plain steel stove.

 

[Waulie]

Where do you feel the most heat..I bet it's from the glass.

That's true for part of the burn, but I'm glad you brought it up. Later in the burn, the most heat is felt from the soapstone. Why? Because it is radiating all the heat it has stored up in the early part of the burn while the glass has cooled down with the fire. Right now, after 12 hours with a half load of wood, I'm down to just a few coals in the firebox. The glass is barely warm, the soapstone is still at 240 degrees. If I had a steel stove, the steel would be much cooler right now and I wouldn't be getting much heat from the stove at all (don't forget about mass here to). I would have gotten more heat out of the first several hours, but less heat out of the last several hours. What you're saying is the same as someone saying that a BK on low is inefficient or not getting as much BTUs out of a load because it never gets up to 700 degrees. A NC30 is definitely kicking more heat an hour into the burn than a Princess on low. Does that mean it's more efficient? What about 12 or 18 hours into the burn?

See, I agree with most of what you're saying. A steel stove will get hot faster. A steel stove will get hotter overall (for a short time). The problem is that stuff does not equate to "getting more BTUs out of a load" or efficiency in general. It just doesn't.

 

[HotCoals]

See, I agree with most of what you're saying. A steel stove will get hot faster. A steel stove will get hotter overall (for a short time). The problem is that stuff does not equate to "getting more BTUs out of a load" or efficiency in general. It just doesn't.

IMO it does if all else is the same.

And to keep on the topic the op needs lots of btu's and in the deep cold he is not going to care about the stove giving good residual heat when it's down to a small bed of coals..he will need to reload way sooner then that.
He needs to transfer big amounts of heat fast.
That's why I suggest the biggest ,baddest steel tube burner out there that can take the btu's that he is going to need and not melt down..crack stones or destroy refractory parts.
Don't bring a knife to a gun fight they say..lol.

 

[Waulie]

I don't think he'd find much difference is a big, bad, steel tube burner, a big, bad cast stove, or a big, bad soapstone "tube burner" or hybrid. Whatever stove he gets, he's not going to be feeding it every couple hours to keep it at max temp. I agree that a pure cat stove doesn't make a lot of sense because he won't be burning low. But, nobody is going to feed a stove so often as to keep it at it's max temp so the material isn't really going to matter. Soapstone would still be my choice for 24X7 burning just to limit temp swings and avoid the melt-your-face spikes of a steel stove at 700+ degrees, but any will work fine. If he's doing many cold starts with that huge place, then a steel stove would definitely be the way to go. Although, I cringe to think about many cold starts with that huge place.

 

[HotCoals]

I don't think he'd find much difference is a big, bad, steel tube burner, a big, bad cast stove, or a big, bad soapstone "tube burner" or hybrid. Whatever stove he gets, he's not going to be feeding it every couple hours to keep it at max temp. I agree that a pure cat stove doesn't make a lot of sense because he won't be burning low. But, nobody is going to feed a stove so often as to keep it at it's max temp so the material isn't really going to matter. Soapstone would still be my choice for 24X7 burning just to limit temp swings and avoid the melt-your-face spikes of a steel stove at 700+ degrees, but any will work fine. If he's doing many cold starts with that huge place, then a steel stove would definitely be the way to go. Although, I cringe to think about many cold starts with that huge place.

Well i disagree on the first part of your post but hey!
Actually I disagree with most of it.
4500 sq.ft. is a lot to heat with one wood stove if he is serious.

The blue..soap stone to limit temp swings in that big house with one stove?
He will need 700 stove top to just begin to heat that house in the deeper cold.
I'm sure he plans on running the furnace then also..might even be two of them..lol.

 

[Waulie]

Man, you like to argue. Look, no one is going to feed their stove every couple hours. So, over the coarse of the burn there will be swings in heat coming off of the stove. The swings will be least with soapstone, medium with cast, and most with steel. But, like I said, I don't really think it matters much in his case.

Also , people like to pretend that steel stoves are indestructible. It sure seems like there are more busted welds, warped parts threads on steel stoves then there are on cast and stone put together. That's my perception, not a fact, but stuff can happen to any material especially if you're trying to run it at max all the time.

Really, the OP needs two stoves (of whatever material) or a wood furnace. He already has a pretty nice heater.

 

[HotCoals]

Man, you like to argue. Look, no one is going to feed their stove every couple hours. So, over the coarse of the burn there will be swings in heat coming off of the stove. The swings will be least with soapstone, medium with cast, and most with steel. But, like I said, I don't really think it matters much in his case.

Also , people like to pretend that steel stoves are indestructible. It sure seems like there are more busted welds, warped parts threads on steel stoves then there are on cast and stone put together. That's my perception, not a fact, but stuff can happen to any material especially if you're trying to run it at max all the time.

Really, the OP needs two stoves (of whatever material) or a wood furnace. He already has a pretty nice heater.

Not trying to argue with you..just stating my opinions.
Look, the soapstones are real nice looking stoves no doubt.

 

[begreen]

I suggest we agree to disagree.

But it only makes sense that the thicker the stove by whatever means will slow the transfer rate from the inside of the stove to the room, it's called insulating.
Basic stuff.
You guys can twist it and say all you want but I know I'm right..just ask me!..lol.

Not necessarily. There is another factor in play called heat retention. Soapstone is particularly good at this, though a large mass of metal or masonry can do similarly. The btus are not necessarily going up the flue, they are going into the stone or metal. This is the principal behind masonry heaters. Soapstone holds twice as much heat per pound (specific heat) as iron or steel.

(broken link removed to http://www.greenstoneheat.com/why-soapstone/)

 

[mellow]

I had to go find this thread, I think I have found the perfect stove for you 6 cu ft firebox, that should hold you for a while.

(broken link removed)

(broken image removed)

(broken image removed)

 

[ddahlgren]

Sounds to me like you need a coal burner to replace that stove. I highly doubt you will see the heat your looking for along with longer burn times, out of a wood stove.

+1 here it was my first thought that wood is just not going to get it done on all needs of 11k btu and long burn time and glass front etc.