I didn't see anywhere... Insert or free standing?? Looks like an interesting stove for sure.
Free standing.
I didn't see anywhere... Insert or free standing?? Looks like an interesting stove for sure.
Down boys. Remember the Equinox is putting out 120K btus.
I bet when you get up in the morning there will be more wood in the stove than was in it before you went to bed.
I use to scratch my head and think that with my Blaze King every morning. I think they had some kind of pact with the aliens to sneak in and load the stoves while your asleep.I bet when you get up in the morning there will be more wood in the stove than was in it before you went to bed.
This keeps getting more and more interesting:
There's a reason I put "EPA" in bold and italics. See the numbers here on the EPA website, (broken link removed to http://www.epa.gov/oecaerth/resources/publications/monitoring/caa/woodstoves/certifiedwood.pdf)
EPA numbers are going to be the industry standard in the not too distant future and few stoves have them listed for BTU output.
I don't buy for a minute that the Keystone and Equinox have roughly the same potential heat output, do you? The big rock just takes longer to get going.
The monitoring software sounds awesome.
Do we need an LCD screen to remind us? It's just a fire after all.
Not too many numbers needed when you see a Keystone next to an Equinox! A tiny stove simply will not out perform a huge stove! It's exhaust might be a little cleaner, but that does not make up for all the extra mass.Where do the other manufacturers get their numbers?
Not too many numbers needed when you see a Keystone next to an Equinox! A tiny stove simply will not out perform a huge stove! It's exhaust might be a little cleaner, but that does not make up for all the extra mass.
I think you're right on the money Brian. It's EPA versus a hunch. I'll bet on EPA everytime.How is a consumer expected to compare BTU output if stove manufacturers do not use standardized numbers in their advertizing?
I like the fact that there is some outside testing behind the BTU ratings claimed by Woodstock.
Where do the other manufacturers get their numbers?
Sounds like a headache to me!
All stoves go through several tests for emissions, efficiency, max temp clearances, etc.. Most marketing is going to cherry pick the numbers that say the best about the stove. BK, publishes understated numbers but you have to know that if the throttle is opened up on a 4.2 cu ft King it is going to put out some serious heat. I find their specs more meaningful than most stoves.
KING
(Extra large catalytic wood stove)
Heats 1,500 – 3,000 Square Feet
40 Hour Low Burn Times
Thermostatically Controlled
4.32 Cubic Foot Firebox
Max Heat Input 703,390 BTUs
88% LHV Efficiency (82% HHV)
51,582 BTU's/h constant output for 12 hours
Up to 23" Log Length
EPA Emissions 1.76 gr/hour
I am so glad that BK started publishing the high output, but then also publishes a more reasonable constant BTU ratings over an extended time.
Brian, I am very excited for you for getting the opportunity to test the new Woodstock stove. It sure does look like it is going to be exceptional.
We are just having fun now Brian. I'm sure you will be very objective when the testing starts. After all is said and done, you and me and all the other members on this board just want what's best for the industry.Thanks Dave.
Yes, I'm on the list for Beta testers so that probably means 1) I'm really excited about this stove and 2) I'm not being very objective on these threads about it.
Yes they do....Dittos.
Do they read this forum?
Thanks Dave.
Yes, I'm on the list for Beta testers so that probably means 1) I'm really excited about this stove and 2) I'm not being very objective on these threads about it.
Do you have, or have you had any other EPA stoves to compare it to?
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.