Another large stove thread...Alderlea T6, Progress Hybrid, something else?

There is no "disassembling" to clean the PH cat.

You swing up the griddle top and rest it in its groove at the middle-back of the stove top. Slip the cat out, take it outside and brush the surface with a paint brush, reinsert after flipping 180 degrees to even wear.

Takes maybe 5 minutes.

Many folks don't need to do this at all...I think most who do have to have both a tall chimney and no ashbox.

If the PH is the stove you want, you'd be making a mistake not buying it because of the cat.

The stove not only puts out a lot of heat, it is also very efficient. I burn the same amount of wood I used in the much smaller Fireview, and get a lot more heat. This stove is very good at delivering to the living space the heat it generates...very little goes up the flue.

so why not a F600, F50, or F55?

i know the f50 does rear vent. Not sure if they have short legs but i would ask. You are only 2" off. Oh and its 6"

I was looking at the f500. Glad I went with the F50. I was told it would be too hot. When it was bellow 0 I was glad I had the larger stove!

Wow, tough choice. Dealing with a local dealer you have had previous good luck with, for a stove that promises romance and cost less, verses new burn technology from what most folks would consider a great soapstone stove company. and one big beautiful hunk of stove

Some say always go with romance, and some say go big or don't go at all. Which will it be?

Personally, I can't see loosing with either choice, but would go with the bigger stove, as I see no advantage at all to the screens in the door for open fires, and I like a cat stove, they have less maintenance requirements than anyone you are trying to romance.

Also, there is really zero maintenance on Woodstock stoves. Things don't break on them, they are not fragile. Changing a cat every five or more years, cleaning it from time to time is no big deal. The cats are extremely accessible and easy to remove, clean or replace and reinsert. They cost way less than the tome you save in wood processing by their increased efficiency. I wouldn't personally want a non-cat.

I believe cats are a non-issue in terms of cons. At least, they are with the Woodstocks, which is where my personal experience with cats is. Our woodstove when I was growing up was a massive cookstove...massive. ( Unfortunately, my aunt gave it away just shortly after I built. I had no idea the stove was being taken out of the kitchen. Was still in beautiful shape, used daily. Was from before the depression. My great=grandfather bought it. )

Random thoughts . . .

I think you cannot go wrong with either a Jotul or a Woodstock stove . . . both are very well liked here with many real life users and fans (fanatics?) of both brands.

I think you may do OK with the Oslo . . . but at 2,200 square feet I think you may be close to its limits. Perhaps folks with homes larger than mine in your area (I'm coming from a 1970s, two-story, 1,800 square foot cape here in Maine so changing those variables -- going further south, better insulated home, size of the home, etc. -- can change things.

I will say I don't think the Oslo is particularly inefficient . . . just not as efficient perhaps as a stove that uses a cat. It's not like it's using technology from the 1800s. That said, the only real way to get those crazily long burns are with cat stoves . . . but you can do overnight fires with large enough secondary burners . . . which is good, otherwise I would have a tough time of it.

Ash pan . . . I wouldn't let this be a deciding factor. If you come from a stove that had a useful, functional ash pan, it's understandable that it may be a consideration. However, folks who have stoves without ash pans typically do not mind the loss of the ash pan. That said, I know I would miss having an ash pan as the Oslo's ash pan is nice.

Screen . . . this is one feature I would not even bring into the equation. Like a lot of folks I thought about this as well . . . I mean the idea of having a fireplace like experience in my woodstove . . . what's not to like . . . until you see that nice view of the fire, hear the snapping and crackling and feel the heat . .. and then you realize that buying an expensive item like a screen that folks who have bought say is rarely used is not all that needed or desirable.

Maintenance . . . a non-issue. All stoves need some maintenance . . . I think you will find most cat users will say the occasional brushing off or vacuuming of the cat is a quick, simple procedure . . . and for many having to replace the cat in X number of years is a good trade off for being able to get those super long, low burns in the Fall and Spring as they can save money on the wood usage.

Reliability . . . I would say this is a wash. Both Jotul and Woodstock are near legendary for their reliable stoves. One plus is Woodstock's habit of sending free replacement parts when issues are found with newer stoves . . . this says a lot about a company when it finds an issue or improves on itself and remembers its past customers.

Customer service . . . Woodstock's customer service is legendary . . . and their parties are pretty fine as well. With Jotul I suspect it would come down more to your experience with the dealership which seems to be pretty good.

Wood length . . . sure, it may take some time to zing down the wood smaller if need be . . . but I would not let this potential one time event be the deciding factor for a stove that I would be using for many, many years.

One thing that may not have been mentioned . . . the hearth . . . what is the hearth you have currently and will it meet the R-value requirements for both stoves or will it need to be beefed up?

Final thought . . . as stated before . . . I don't think you can go wrong with either company. Both manufacturers and models are pretty darn nice. Truthfully, if I didn't love my Oslo so much I would probably have sprung for the PH.

Joe . . . when I mentioned the hearth I was partly thinking about the weight . . . but also thinking about what you have currently for the hearth and what the PH requires for a hearth.

What I am trying to say in such a round-about way is that with many Jotul stoves -- including the Oslo -- only ember protection is needed so pretty much any non-combustible material can be used (i.e. slab, slate, brick, etc.) whereas some woodstoves require more protection (i.e. air space, insulation, etc.)

While making a hearth is not a really difficult thing to do and I suspect from the sounds of it you would be more than capable of building a hearth if need be . . . and again . . . I am not sure if the PH has a specific R value requirement. . . but you should be aware that for some stoves the existing hearth may or may not work.

begreen said:

From the look of it the hearth is going to be too shallow for a wood stove anyhow. If so, I would rebuild instead of tacking on an extension. That will provide a more uniform look and will allow you to control the height. Remember that you want the horiz. connector to be pitched uphill toward the chimney at least 1/4" per ft. A little more pitch won't hurt if possible.

Click to expand...

Great advice from both Jake and BG

JoeOxfordCT said:

Morning Gents, thanks for the responses. The current hearth projects 42" into the room by 53" across the back. I was planning for top, front, or left loading, preferably top or left though. I am not quite sure I understand about the R-value of the hearth. If the stove has non-combustible clearances and I can meet them then what am I missing ? I will have to be careful when loading about burning embers falling out but that's a given regardless ? I really did not want to increase the footprint of the hearth into an already somewhat narrow (13'), albeit long (46') area.

Click to expand...

F50 has top and side load. Also, in another post, you said something about needing rear stove pipe outlet. F55 has either top or rear. F50, I think as both options too. FYI, check CL for used or new Jotuls. I got my my F55 brand new on crate from a local guy for $1600.

JoeOxfordCT said:

Morning Gents, thanks for the responses. The current hearth projects 42" into the room by 53" across the back. I was planning for top, front, or left loading, preferably top or left though. I am not quite sure I understand about the R-value of the hearth. If the stove has non-combustible clearances and I can meet them then what am I missing ? I will have to be careful when loading about burning embers falling out but that's a given regardless ? I really did not want to increase the footprint of the hearth into an already somewhat narrow (13'), albeit long (46') area.

Click to expand...

Clearances to combustibles and the R-value or insulation value of the hearth on which the stove rests are two different items. Some stoves require only ember protection . . . other stoves need a bit more for a hearth. The issue deals partly with the chance of hot embers spilling out (even the most careful person has this happen), but also on the heat conducting down through to any combustibles underneath . . . if the stove were on a cement slab with nothing combustible underneath of course this would make it a non issue. When you narrow down your choices owners should be able to give you more info on clearances and what is required for a hearth.

For what it's worth, Woodstock sells a prefab hearth pad that is 60 inches wide, 48 inches deep, has front corners cut at 45 degrees, is 1 1/2 inches high, and provides the hearth protection required for Woodstock stoves.

I bought one in 2004 for my Fireview, am using the same one for my PH (Woodstock tweaked the PH until they had it where it tested to accommodate the Fireview setup, specifically for the convenience of Fireview owners who were stepping up to a PH).

My surface is a dark blue marbleized tile, light grey metallic stove. Very attractive, and the hearth pad looks as nice as the day I got it. It just sits on top of my wide board white oak floor. The cut off corners are great, as one does not stub one's toe when walking near the stove. Plus, the appearance is more attractive.

If you have to remove or renovate your hearth anyway for a modern stove, you could remove the bricks, finish the floor to the level of the wood and sit a prefab pad on top, or you could cut out the wood to the size of the pad and insert it.

You can get a pad custom made from Woodstock as well; if you elected to do that and got the ash lip on the front of the stove, then you can significantly cut the front to back dimension needed for the pad.

Just a thought. If you want the PH, call Woodstock back and discuss with them the possibilities re converting your hearth to one that is acceptable for the PH, looking for minimal work necessary and minimal cost, or whatever your requirements are. They'll be quite willing to work through that with you.

"if you elected to do that and got the ash lip on the front of the stove, then you can significantly cut the front to back dimension needed for the pad."

You can"t use the 8" front clearance if you use the short legs

JoeOxfordCT said:

I am reading more & more on the Woodstock Progress Hybrid. ... In fact the scary part now becomes getting it into the house & onto the hearth. ....

Click to expand...

I punted, by hiring a moving company to take it from the freight terminal to the house. I think it cost ~$300, the mover showed up with 6 men. They uncrated it and fastened on the legs (I provided the socket wrench)