Obviously the secondary plate in the top of the stove gets hit once in a while, causing it to loosen. There were 2 bolts that became loose and I simply tightened them and my question is: does any castine owners know if these 2 bolts tap/screw into an unseen nut, or into the stove lid/top somehow? Thanks!
-
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.
- Status
Can you post a pic? Every Castine iv'e seen or worked on just has two swing tabs located on the sides to release the secondary baffle. You rotate the tabs toward the front on the stove the release the baffle and push them toward the back to lock them back in place. If you do remove it try your best to get the gasket that it rest on back in place.
Yes, I have the swinger hangers, but there is also 2 bolts I had to tighten. I'll post pics tomorrow night when the stove is cool. Oh, I am not looking to remove it. Thx
You know Backwoods, I'm recalling that the secondary baffle is independent of the stove top plate. I've only had it apart once though, a year ago. I can't recall what exactly backed up the bolts. It might simply be a female thread through the secondary baffle itself..I'm thinking that was the case. I don't recall a backing nut, or it going all the way through to the top plate. The expanded diagram in the manual might show it in more detail maybe, have you checked that?
Just checked the exploded view...doesn't show nuts backing up the baffle bolt inserts...must be a thread. I'm definitely recalling the bolts don't reach all the way to the top plate...that is secured only by the two bolts in the front corners, outside the secondary chamber.
So why do you ask?
So why do you ask?
barnuba
Member
I had mine apart in the fall and the bolt goes into a thread that is cast into the stove itself if I remember correctly.
ploughboy said:
The secondaruy plate was just loose, so I tightened it a bit but not a lot, and out of curiousity wondered what the bolts went into. Didn't want to over tighten it, just in case it went into the lid. all is well.... thx
Just got off the phone with Jotul Tech the bolt your talking about is not listed in the parts exploded diagram. Part number 31 in the diagram is the bolts that holds the swing tabs on per Jotul tech. Any way he didn't know if their was a nut inside the baffle or if its a tapped hole but was willing to bet their is a nut inside. The baffel is an assembled part and I was advised not to try to seperate it to find out whats inside. So Jotul's recomendation was to just snug up that bolt but don't over tighten. So that bolt must have something to do with the baffel assembly?
Cory
Cory
The swing tabs on my Castine's secondary baffle are riveted on, not bolted. And I found over the past three years that, yes, the baffle is "loose" fitting, meaning I can nudge it and it moves. That movement is because the gasketing that is toward the front, on the baffle "steps", is mostly gone. Its a cheap flat gasket and early in its life just came loose and fell into the firebox. I just stuffed some Kaewool in these two sections, right and left, with a butter knife. That snugged up the baffle, and I don't have secondary air coming into the firebox at these two points instead of through the holes, where it is supposed to.
That said, I am going to have to replace this stainless steel secondary plate next summer in the off-burning season. Mine is rusted badly, and small pieces are falling off each time I run a wire brush over it. Such is the saga of burning beach harvested firewood, I presume. In my case, I have no choice, its the only wood available out here where there are no growing trees. Changing it once every 4 years I can live with. I am not too happy that Jotul wants nearly $300 for it, though. With a good piece of stainless, one can be bent to the correct shape on an aviation metal break. The holes would be no problem to drill. I plan to buy a new one, but take the old and make a pattern and try it. Nothing to loose. May even go with a slightly thicker piece of stainless.
On another subject, two years ago I installed the "euro" primary inlet plate on my stove, replacing the "usa" plate. I think my stove runs better with it, as it has more airflow potential through it. I still plan to take my old "usa" plate and modify it, too, by putting several more smaller holes in it.
One other thing: Since the stove can only be loaded with wood east/west, I found long ago that it isn't easy to get the fire going well from a cold start, UNLESS I put down a couple of pieces of short (6" long) of fatwood on the floor of the stove laying north south. Then the subsequent longer (I cut my wood at 16") load on top of these sacrificial pieces of fatwood. The end result is the primary air, when the primary lever is full open to the right, can rush across the entire bottom of the wood load, and my fire gets going much faster. I also purposely leave a 1/2" of airspace at the back of the stove so the burn can run up the back before it runs across the top toward the front where the exhaust outlet leaves the firebox. Then I had an idea: why keep using sacrificial wood? I would like to use two cast iron rounds, or squares, perhaps 1/2" stock, 6" long and just lay them on the firebox floor. Easy to take out when removing ashes and put back in when done. Be like andirons, just no vertical portion. Ceramic blocks would work equally as well.
I'm also looking real hard at one of the new Jotul F55's, or would consider another stove similar sized that has the same close rear clearances. The F55 would sit exactly where my Castine is without any change needed to my existing stack or hearth pad.
Sorry to go off topic here. By the way, its -38 F and the wind is blowing at 23 mph. Puts the wind chill at about -58 F. The F400 is working hard heating my 1300 sq ft ranch. It sure beats having to pay $6.13 per gallon for home heating fuel.
Stay warm, mates.
That said, I am going to have to replace this stainless steel secondary plate next summer in the off-burning season. Mine is rusted badly, and small pieces are falling off each time I run a wire brush over it. Such is the saga of burning beach harvested firewood, I presume. In my case, I have no choice, its the only wood available out here where there are no growing trees. Changing it once every 4 years I can live with. I am not too happy that Jotul wants nearly $300 for it, though. With a good piece of stainless, one can be bent to the correct shape on an aviation metal break. The holes would be no problem to drill. I plan to buy a new one, but take the old and make a pattern and try it. Nothing to loose. May even go with a slightly thicker piece of stainless.
On another subject, two years ago I installed the "euro" primary inlet plate on my stove, replacing the "usa" plate. I think my stove runs better with it, as it has more airflow potential through it. I still plan to take my old "usa" plate and modify it, too, by putting several more smaller holes in it.
One other thing: Since the stove can only be loaded with wood east/west, I found long ago that it isn't easy to get the fire going well from a cold start, UNLESS I put down a couple of pieces of short (6" long) of fatwood on the floor of the stove laying north south. Then the subsequent longer (I cut my wood at 16") load on top of these sacrificial pieces of fatwood. The end result is the primary air, when the primary lever is full open to the right, can rush across the entire bottom of the wood load, and my fire gets going much faster. I also purposely leave a 1/2" of airspace at the back of the stove so the burn can run up the back before it runs across the top toward the front where the exhaust outlet leaves the firebox. Then I had an idea: why keep using sacrificial wood? I would like to use two cast iron rounds, or squares, perhaps 1/2" stock, 6" long and just lay them on the firebox floor. Easy to take out when removing ashes and put back in when done. Be like andirons, just no vertical portion. Ceramic blocks would work equally as well.
I'm also looking real hard at one of the new Jotul F55's, or would consider another stove similar sized that has the same close rear clearances. The F55 would sit exactly where my Castine is without any change needed to my existing stack or hearth pad.
Sorry to go off topic here. By the way, its -38 F and the wind is blowing at 23 mph. Puts the wind chill at about -58 F. The F400 is working hard heating my 1300 sq ft ranch. It sure beats having to pay $6.13 per gallon for home heating fuel.
Stay warm, mates.
The early F-400's used bolts to mount the locking tabs and you are right they are now using rivets now. My 400 is around 7 years old and also uses rivits to mount the locking tabs. And when I talked to Jotul the other day that's the first thing he said was their are no longer using bolts any more on that baffle they were using rivets and once I explained the bolt in question was more in the front center of the baffle he new then what I was talking about and said that bolt helped keep the baffle assembly together.
Cory
Cory
I’m also looking real hard at one of the new Jotul F55’s, or would consider another stove similar sized that has the same close rear clearances. The F55 would sit exactly where my Castine is without any change needed to my existing stack or hearth pad.
The New F-55 will be interesting with the loss of the top load and true N to S front loading should be Abel to easily out perform the Rangley in regard to max heat out put and burn time due to the larger capacity firebox. I personally always felt the Rangley's top load setup consumed to much of the firebox. But after playing with one at the shop for a few weeks it did heat well and did close to what Jotul claimed. If your looking for steel construction the F-55 could be a winner I personally prefer cast.
Cory
The New F-55 will be interesting with the loss of the top load and true N to S front loading should be Abel to easily out perform the Rangley in regard to max heat out put and burn time due to the larger capacity firebox. I personally always felt the Rangley's top load setup consumed to much of the firebox. But after playing with one at the shop for a few weeks it did heat well and did close to what Jotul claimed. If your looking for steel construction the F-55 could be a winner I personally prefer cast.
Cory
- Status
Similar threads
