C
charly
Guest
Why do you feel that you liked the PH better?Good choice. I too would choose the Woodstock over the Cape Cod, having burned both units.
Why do you feel that you liked the PH better?Good choice. I too would choose the Woodstock over the Cape Cod, having burned both units.
It doesn't sound like you chose the WS on the basis of it being a better stove as much as because you might get a smoking deal and you have an idea that only woodstock can offer such great service. Both are good reasons to tip the scales in favor of the PH.
The fireview is a dang efficient stove. You want more heat so you will be asking for more btus from the PH. I would repeat the earlier post and strongly disagree with this idea that you will get twice the heat from the same amount of wood. This concept implies, no, requires that the efficiency of the PH is double that of the fireview and that is just false.
It may not be more efficient in the amount of heat it extracts from the wood, but it is much more efficient in the amount of that heat that it delivers to the living space.
In other words, the efficient rating per say does NOT tell you how much HEAT a stove will put out. It simply tells you how well the stove burns the fuel. .
According to Omni Tedt Labs
PH 81.0 HHV
FV 80.9 HHV
I will most certainly admit that the fuel load and burn rates in these tests are likely not real world. However, this method involves precisely measuring the heat given off by the stack (including the H2O levels, which carries higher thermal load) and subtracting it from the approximate heat input. This has nothing to do with measuring emissions. I will also admit I have yet to experience a PH burning. However, I am willing to bet the real world efficiency deference is quite minute.
I think the PH will work out great for the OP!