My PH shipped 2/9/12 and I have noticed at least one difference in it from others in some videos. My top stone is 3 separate pieces. This really does not matter to me and I assume it's easier to install and remove the top this way. But I'm just curious if every production PH has the same top configuration.
Another difference I've noted is in comparison to the Fireview. This is that the draft control on the PH is just a bent piece of square steel rod with a PLASTIC handle, with reference only to horizontal and vertical, while the Fireview has a cast iron handle with setting reference numbers on the adjacent housing. All of which make the control on the PH seem a step down in quality and "quaintness"(?) in comparison. It also simply does not feel as solid or durable as the FV draft control. Now, my comparison is from memory of my parent's FV which I admittedly have not operated too much, but I believe I am correct on the differences. Also, my PH arrived with the draft control rotated pointing down (full open), so I first assumed the manual was in error on the operation. But during my first burn it rotated past horizontal full closed into handle UP for full open, which agrees with the manual. Has anyone else experienced this? What do any of you other PH owners think of the draft controls?
Please don't take my post the wrong way - I am ecstatic with the PH overall and have no qualms with Woodstock over what I received for the price and customer service. But in all honesty, I am a bit disappointed with the draft control as the square rod and plastic insulator handle are completely out of character with cast iron & soapstone. And I suspect that WS wants ALL of our feedback in determining the ultimate production configuration. Sitting here looking at it, I guess the door handle and bypass control also are a bit out of character. But, get to thinking about it, I guess the bypass control is also out of character on the FV but it is also somewhat hidden on the back of the stove. I definitely prefer the PH door handle over the FV door handle and I absolutely prefer the (under-the-hood) cam action door latch of the PH. But I feel the door handle and bypass control could have been a little better matched to the style of the rest of the stove. What do you all think? Could Woodstock have given the controls and the door handle a bit more thought on the PH? I personally feel that cast parts, ornate or plain (probably plain on the draft control on the back and ornate for the bypass control on the front), would have blended much better with the rest of the stove.
I guess I can summarize my preferences as that I'd prefer my PH to appear 100% original "model T" with visibly hidden technology to make it perform like a Kenworth Prius (which it does). I'll gladly compromise the former for the latter, but I'd prefer to have both.
Another difference I've noted is in comparison to the Fireview. This is that the draft control on the PH is just a bent piece of square steel rod with a PLASTIC handle, with reference only to horizontal and vertical, while the Fireview has a cast iron handle with setting reference numbers on the adjacent housing. All of which make the control on the PH seem a step down in quality and "quaintness"(?) in comparison. It also simply does not feel as solid or durable as the FV draft control. Now, my comparison is from memory of my parent's FV which I admittedly have not operated too much, but I believe I am correct on the differences. Also, my PH arrived with the draft control rotated pointing down (full open), so I first assumed the manual was in error on the operation. But during my first burn it rotated past horizontal full closed into handle UP for full open, which agrees with the manual. Has anyone else experienced this? What do any of you other PH owners think of the draft controls?
Please don't take my post the wrong way - I am ecstatic with the PH overall and have no qualms with Woodstock over what I received for the price and customer service. But in all honesty, I am a bit disappointed with the draft control as the square rod and plastic insulator handle are completely out of character with cast iron & soapstone. And I suspect that WS wants ALL of our feedback in determining the ultimate production configuration. Sitting here looking at it, I guess the door handle and bypass control also are a bit out of character. But, get to thinking about it, I guess the bypass control is also out of character on the FV but it is also somewhat hidden on the back of the stove. I definitely prefer the PH door handle over the FV door handle and I absolutely prefer the (under-the-hood) cam action door latch of the PH. But I feel the door handle and bypass control could have been a little better matched to the style of the rest of the stove. What do you all think? Could Woodstock have given the controls and the door handle a bit more thought on the PH? I personally feel that cast parts, ornate or plain (probably plain on the draft control on the back and ornate for the bypass control on the front), would have blended much better with the rest of the stove.
I guess I can summarize my preferences as that I'd prefer my PH to appear 100% original "model T" with visibly hidden technology to make it perform like a Kenworth Prius (which it does). I'll gladly compromise the former for the latter, but I'd prefer to have both.