stove size and creosote

For 1200 sq ft of a mostly not so well insulated home I would definitively recommend a medium size stove with a ~2 cu ft firebox. You will need that size to achieve overnight burns and still have hot coals in the morning. The general consensus here is that wood with a moisture content of less than 20% will not give you problems with creosote. However, that will mean you will have to dry your wood split and stacked for 2 better 3 or more years in a sunny and windy location if you have not done so already. Using dry wood will also cut down on your wood consumption and give you more heat. Given your budget I would look at the following models: Pacific Energy True North (same firebox as the PE Super who achieves some of the longest burn times of all medium size stoves), Lopi Republic 1750, Drolet Escape 1800, Napoleon 1450. The list is certainly not exclusive; other people here will chime in with more models.

I say get the biggest stove your money and room can fit. Modern EPA rated stoves cat or non-cat generally produce little smoke which means little creosote when burning seasoned wood. Wood moisture is probably the biggest factor in creosote production. There's other factors too like draft, chimney height and location- but I don't believe the firebox size really matters.

Meant to add to get a big stove because you can build a small hot fire in a large stove but can't make a small firebox expand!

philaphire said:

...but can't make a small firebox expand

Click to expand...

Unless you start your fires with gasoline

I have a similar set up as you, 1100 sq ft built in the mid 70's isnulation in the walls has compacted, but my celing has good blown in. I have a 2.2cu ft stove, Clean her about every month or month in a half and life is easy, Pick up one of the kits that you install on a drill and just run it from the top and bottom a few times a season, once a year have a professional come out, to double check your own work and make sure you have not missed anything.

So yes go with a 2ish cu ft secondary stove

Go with the bigger option. We have 2.3cf for 1400sq of even older construction. In the shoulder season you have to keep it to only a short morning and eve fire to not bake, but on any icy Jan day we really need that horsepower full time to keep up.

If you want a cat, why not go for a used Fireview or Keystone from Woodstock? I don't know how much there are refurbished from Woodstock, but you could check and see if they have any now or that they know are coming in, and what the price is. You might be able to arrange a payment plan with them. Anyway, you could ask. A used stove would be considerably less expensive than new and comes with full warranty, is completely rebuilt. Or you could watch ads or post an ad here. Lots of people are replacing Keystone or Fireview with PH, so more are available than would normally be the case.

Yes, you can get "too big", but in this case, I'd be in the 2 cf camp. I could probably have gotten by with a smaller stove, but I've found that I can feed my Super 27 small fires when needed with no creosote buildup at all so far. Just keep the fire hot enough that the secondaries are firing and flue temps above creosote levels.

begreen said:

Just to clarify, the PE True North does not have the same exact firebox as the Super 27.There are some significant differences between the two stoves. The True North is a fine stove, but it's an economy line with a conventional tube secondary design and ceramic board baffle. The secondary air is unregulated on the True North, where on the Super 27 (and Spectrum) line it is linked with the primary air regulation. The Super 27/Spectrum also has the unique, stainless steel box baffle that incorporated the secondary air feed with the insulated baffle. These differences contribute to the Super 27's long burn time. When you go to the dealer, ask to see these differences.

Click to expand...

Oops; mea culpa! I guess my memory is lapsing. Then the PE Super would probably be the better choice. I have the insert and can wholeheartedly recommend it.

If you call around you might be able to pickup a Cat stove shipped for $1600, I got mine brand new on sale for around that with shipping, the Appalachians can be either Insert or Free Standing and work on a 6" liner.

thinwirenail said:

Hello! I'm an old woodburner finally needing to replace my Consolidated Dutchwest Large Federal catalytic (circa 1987, if memory serves) with something newer. The old (about 150 years) part of my house is approximately 850 square feet with low ceilings and is leaky as all get-out, while the newer (about 25 years) part covers about 400 square feet with larger rooms and cathedral ceilings and is substiantially tighter. The stove is located in a 13' x 13' room in the old part that is central to that old part and connected to the new by a formerly exterior window that has been left open for circulation. The chimney set-up is through-the-wall into a mostly exterior masonry chimney with a 6" liner. My budget ($1500 - $1600) will not cover another cat stove, which would be my preference for longer burn times, so I'm looking at non-cats. My dilemma is whether to go with a "small" stove (1.4 - 1.6 firebox) or a medium one (around 2.0 - 2.2). It's a dilemma because I don't know if going with the larger size stoves will necessarily create more creosote in the chimney on overnight burns or in mild weather because of burning cooler than smaller stoves, or if it's just a matter of maintaining a given temperature and getting longer burns in the larger stoves. Back in the day, the thinking used to be smaller stove = hotter fire = less creosote, but I don't know if that still applies in today's brave new world of wood burning. Plus, I would rather not be heat-blasted out of the stove room (at least, any more than I'm used to with the old Dutchwest!). Any input will be greatly appreciated! Thanks, Brad

Click to expand...

Welcome to the forum Brad.

Just to clarify here, it is not the size of the stove that will cause creosote but the wetness of the wood. For sure in the "old days" folks would cut their wood in the fall and that is what they used in the winter. It is as bad of an idea today as it was then. Folks mostly just did not really understand what caused creosote and it was simply their method of putting up wood for the winter. Or in other words, if you don't give your wood long enough to properly dry before you burn it, you are going to get creosote. Until we learn how to burn water, this will continue to be the case.

Just to let you know what can happen, in 2007 we installed our latest stove, a Woodstock Fireview and it is a cat stove. After burning for 2 full winters (and this is our only source of heat in winter), we decided to clean the chimney just to see what we would get. We got about a cup of soot and fly ash but absolutely no creosote. We have not cleaned our chimney since because it simply has not needed it. So why do we not have creosote?

We go by the 3 year rule, which says to always be 3 years ahead on your wood supply. Actually we are further ahead than that. We do all of our splitting of the wood in the spring and stack it immediately after that (sometimes due to physical problems it might drag on a bit). We then leave the wood as is until just before the snow flies the next winter. Then we top cover the wood and simply wait. This year, for example, we will be burning wood that was split and stacked in April 2009. It will burn very nicely too and we won't get creosote.

So I'd highly recommend you begin (if you haven't already) to get your wood split and stacked way ahead of the time before you need it. Some wood can be ready to burn after a year in the stack but others, like oak can take up to 3 years before it should be burned. Check out the Wood Shed here on hearth.com

There are some good ways of moving the air in your house too that are simple and easy. Good luck.

Backwoods Savage brings up the single most important factor in burning. With modern stoves, there is little chance of creosote buildup if you use properly dried wood and operate according to directions. Full loads are not necessary. These stoves are a whole new breed and require a new way of thinking about burning. I had an old stove in the 80's as well, and creosote was a problem, now I have none. But I know the moisture content of my wood with a moisture meter, and keep it below 25%.

Most anything smaller than 2 CF is a decorative stove in the non-cat world. You want it to burn overnight and that requires 2 CF.

Modern non-cat stoves do not allow the user to turn them down too far so that they burn cleanly (and hot) all the time. Don't worry about creosote but do worry that an oversized stove will run hot whether you want it to or not.

Highbeam said:

You want it to burn overnight and that requires 2 CF.

Click to expand...

Not it all cases. I'm on the wet side of Wa also, but I think I only burned through the night a couple of times last year when it was in the teens. Most of the time, the fire was nearly depleted by the time we went to bed and it was still about 64F in the morning when I would start a new fire. Overnight burning has never been a priority for us, but that assumes that the house is pretty well insulated and that you don't mind building a fire in the morning. Which, for a firebug like me, is part of the fun

I understand that 12 hr+ burns are a priority for many, just not always. I could have gotten away with a smaller stove, although I'm happy with the 2 CF that I have and I do think that for the OP, a 2 cf would be the best choice.