Ok to have an insert stick out an extra inch?

My thoughts exactly BG, with that much open space I cant see a freestander getting in the way and that way you'll have a stove cabaple of heating that amount of space and many more optoins apperance wise.

I have installed certain inserts in this method - an extra inch or more out - as long as there is a tight fitting sheet metal block off, and the pipe from the unit can go up through the damper - then the surround panels are purely decorative. In fact, we have added small angle returns to panels in some cases - or even mounted panels further back on the stove......

Look at the Lopi Revere... similar to the Answer, but deeper from the surround panel out, but I believe that has some level of adjustability also

If you use a "return" from the panels so that they still hit the front of the fireplace, then the regular mantle clearances should work out. That said, if you are really close as far as top mantel clearances, you probably don't want to pull 3" out (1" would be better)...of course, it depends on the design of the unit, etc. - if the unit has a double wall top in that area it will not be a big deal.

will this fit????? http://www.englanderstoves.com/13-nci.html unless i misread your post (possible) i think it will

Not to bust your bubble, but to install any insert into a fireplace it has to be installed into a NFPA211 compliant fireplace. From the pictures you provided, this fire box isn't even close to being compliant. Cmmon bricks do not qualify missing or old motar does not qualify. tTere is no way I would issue a permit, or approve any insert in that fireplace.

also consider 18" hearth protection is now required in front of loading doors. your mantel also calls in clearance to conbustiable issues to boot

I'm not the code guru that Elk is, but essentially in order to install an insert, the fireplace basically has to be safe according to modern standards (NFPA 211, etc.) If you have a fireplace that was built in 1897, it likely wouldn't meet modern standards even when new, let alone after 110 years of aging... Your chimney needs to be in good shape, though most problems there will be addressed by doing a full SS liner, WITH INSULATION. However the firebox itself also needs to be up to snuff, meaning no missing bricks or mortar, no major cracks, and made from firebrick, not common red clay brick... Photos can be decieving, but the shots you posted looked kind of rough, which is probably what got Elk upset. Part of the reason for this is an insert is basically a normal wood stove in a box, with no legs, etc. It is depending on the existing fireplace to provide the needed thermal protection and clearance to combustibles. If the existing box isn't up to snuff, then it can't be trusted to do this.

OTOH, if you put a rear exit standard stove in front of the firebox, and connected it with a "T" fitting to a liner coming down the chimney, then all you have to worry about is meeting the clearance requirements for the stove. Most of the hearth can be extended by cutting out that floor and filling back in with non-combustibles, staying flush so it won't be a big traffic hazard. (See the hearth construction article in the Wiki for more details)

Gooserider

Let me crarify a few points yes common bricks can be used in a fire box providing there is 12" of solid masonry support behind it

Common fire brick is heat fired to withstand heat where common fire brick may not also fire brick is set in refractory motar bby setting them on the sides one eliminates 2" of the solid concrete mass behind them so it becomes a cost saving as well..

An insert can only be installed ina safe fireplace according th NFPA standards. As an inspector, and knowing the age, I would require a full fireplace chimney and flue condition report from
a licenced mason or chimneysweep. the time is now to figure out safety. Hoping it may be safe is not a consideration. After I have that full evaluation report in my hands then I can make a sound value judgement. It might be that to comply, an insulated liner is required.. No one here can say for sure, viewing a few pictures, but the age factor does kick in questions ,
that have to be answered.

In terms of the fireplace construction, keep in mind that most inserts AND stoves put in front of the fireplace put VASTLY less strain and heat on the actual masonry of the firebox, so although it is important for ANY fireplace to be in decent condition, the stove or insert will make the existing setup MUCH safer. In fact, I would say that it is virtually impossible for heat radiation from a double wall insert or even a single wall stove to soak through typical fireplace walls with any negative effect....common sense tells us that an open fire in a masonry fireplace is MANY times hotter than a contained fire.

Another point is that some fireplaces built long ago are often built better than those from 1950-2000, because they were actually used! Of course, time can wear them down, but at least the "art" of building fireplaces was in full swing when yours was constructed.

You do want to be concerned about the mantel, front hearth clearances and also any wood that might be embedded in the masonry close by (usually in the front above the fireplace or close to the sides)....in that regard, a double wall insert gives an extra margin of safety.

If you can get the fireplace to be code compliant as per Elk's email, here's another insert for you to consider. Regency has just launched the I1200 insert. It's a new version of the I1100. Same inside firebox dimensions but it's been redesigned to use a new flue adaptor that reduces the minumum required height.

Mininmum fireplace opening dimensions for I1200:
width: 23"
depth: 13-3/4"
height: 19"

Check with the Regency dealer again and if he doesn't have the information yet, his sales rep will.