Everything Drolet Tundra - Heatmax...

I still think this is the most retarded thing I have ever seen. And I still cannot for the life of me find a damn copy of the Csa code. They want $150 for it. Once again Canada proves our regulatory body isn't in touch with reality. I don't see how my house would burn down or have any issues due to a parrallel install. My ducts get warm to the touch just like any other furnace ever made. Oh but I can drive 50km to the states and parrallel is ok. Money hungry Csa strikes again. " Canadian stupidity agency"!

DoubleB said:

My insurance company said they'd cover the Tundra if it was installed per the manufacturer's instructions. Your insurance company may likely do the same. If your house burns down and your furnace was installed in direct conflict to SBI's instructions, you might find yourself on your own.

Probably is inconvenient for some houses. But one option is to add a couple large registers dedicated for the Tundra. Short and large ducts. Works well for my house with more than enough airflow. I understand that might not be practical or desirable in many houses.

Click to expand...

Probably incovienient. Ya for sure incovienient. For anyone with more than one story like myself. How would I get ducting to upstairs without major renos. Or even lower floor for that matter where I have all ceramic and custom hardwood flooring that I'm not about to go cutting more registers into.

Well after contacting Csa, drolet(sbi), t.s.s.a, and wett nobody has given me a straight answer as to why it's not allowed to be hooked up in parrallel with the proper backdraft dampers. I have an email into the guy that approves the code for clarification after speaking with him on the phone. He wants me to pose my exact question in an email but said it has to be worded as a yes or no question. This is like chasing rainbows

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...4cFPa5KMFbriaZrdg&sig2=U-e795u3LcqRaPIqr5GMvg

Here is a link that might help you out. I know the codes for Canada are much more strict than the U.S.

brenndatomu said:

FWIW, I'd just drop that Tundra in there and be done with it. You already had the inspection last time, and you really aren't changing anything...pretty much just gonna jack up the pipes and slide a new furnace back under. The Tundra is gonna run a cooler stove pipe and duct temps than the HotBlast, so if it was OK with it, then things will be fine with Tundra.
Chances are you still have the inspection report from the Hotblast install, if something happens, just whip that inspection report out...it would take an eagle eyed insurance guy to catch that the furnace is not the same...if it even says the furnace name on the report in the first place.
I don't think there would be any way to ID a Tundra if there was a fire anyways...there is no metal ID tag...just a sticker on the blower housing...think they will be able to read it after a fire? I think not

Click to expand...

Agreed I think this is exactly what I will do. Thanks for all the help guys!

Go ahead, your house. And I certainly understand your reluctance to cut more holes in your floor. A couple follow-ups nonetheless:

One potential reason to prohibit parallel installations is because when both the Tundra and the other furnace run together, you need >4x the static pressure to get 2x the airflow through your ductwork. Result is you get less airflow through both furnaces. Not a problem in some installations that have extra factor built in, but many installs don't have enough margin for the furnaces to compete for airflow. @STIHLY DAN may have better perspective.

Also I don't get too hung up on having ductwork go upstairs. Heat rises, and my upstairs is warm enough without ducts. Just my experience.

What would be the difference in the tundra than the caddy be? Is this question larger than we think at this point. Or is it just a financial thing, not paying to have certification tests done?

DoubleB said:

Go ahead, your house. And I certainly understand your reluctance to cut more holes in your floor. A couple follow-ups nonetheless:

One potential reason to prohibit parallel installations is because when both the Tundra and the other furnace run together, you need >4x the static pressure to get 2x the airflow through your ductwork. Result is you get less airflow through both furnaces. Not a problem in some installations that have extra factor built in, but many installs don't have enough margin for the furnaces to compete for airflow. @STIHLY DAN may have better perspective.

Also I don't get too hung up on having ductwork go upstairs. Heat rises, and my upstairs is warm enough without ducts. Just my experience.

Click to expand...

My 2nd floor (at least 1 end) absolutely needed ductwork for a supply. I have no idea why parallel would not be ok. If a hot blast can do it........sheshhh anything should. How does the worst wood furnace out there make code but not the tundra. That's a good question for SBI. "hello SBI, why is your furnace not code compliant when the worst furnace ever made is?"

brenndatomu said:

PSG offers a simple relay kit for the Caddy to "lockout" the fossil fuel furnace while the wood furnace is running...no reason you couldn't adapt one to use on a Tundra.

Click to expand...

They offer the interlock, which is required in Canada....not sure about the U.S, and the Caddy has cutaways on either side for a series install. There's also strict duct sizing that's needed, and the static pressure must remain the same after the install.

jb6l6gc said:

Agreed I think this is exactly what I will do. Thanks for all the help guys!

Click to expand...

well that and don't burn your house down with the stove.. so long as its not the stove that burns it down your good.

Still struggling w this temp measuring. Seems no matter what I do the probe on the mypin varies. I tried tuning the mypin by using a setting that adjusted the read out from actual temps. I used my multimeter that measures temp to the degree up to 1500 to see what temps actually were, then adjusted mypin read out to match. Would not stay consistent. So now my pin probe is much closer but still off at different temps. When am I gunna quit trying to fix a cheap probe and just buy a better one?




I realize where and how im measuring an have reasons for that but cannot understand why I cant get accurate, consistent readings from mypin.. Other than cheap probe I refuse to replsce. Still feel like Im missing something.. Any thoughts?! Here's the adjustment setting I was using. Changed value of read outs.

Turns out Stihly the cheap o magnet therm on the stove is not too terrible far off about 1-30 deg varying.. I mean for an analog style spring wound thing its fairly close. lol. Still seems to be leading to cheap probe.

brenndatomu said:

Ever try switching the polarity of the TC? Dunno if it matters or not...
FWIW, my TC was only $6.99 shipped...seems to work fine...both of 'em

Click to expand...

Yup. lol I've hooked that thing up every which way, tried dif input settings, re set and re set. Got it to read up to 850 no problem. Celsius.. when temps where around 80. found a way to adjust the actual temp reading up or down so tried to match the multimeter readings but still pulls away from multi meter readings which i feel are very accurate. Got be that probe.

Im going to order a better one. was told good probes cost more. maybe you got lucky Brenndatomu. I dunno. I'll shut up about it till I at least try a new probe at this point I guess. lol. NO WAY its me

Use that rock wool and insulate both probes. Then see what you get.

I tried this fellas



Results not much better.

Was thinking probes may be off if not insulated such as in pipe. cool at diff temps.. thought about that.. should be the same even if insulated far as dif cooling temps go I'd think. maybe not. anyhow still same issues. values get off as temps change can't get mypin probe to match multimeter probe and still peaking out at 600 having to use celsius and adjust it down or it just peaks out. Da%5it!

DoubleB said:

Go ahead, your house. And I certainly understand your reluctance to cut more holes in your floor. A couple follow-ups nonetheless:

One potential reason to prohibit parallel installations is because when both the Tundra and the other furnace run together, you need >4x the static pressure to get 2x the airflow through your ductwork. Result is you get less airflow through both furnaces. Not a problem in some installations that have extra factor built in, but many installs don't have enough margin for the furnaces to compete for airflow. @STIHLY DAN may have better perspective.

Also I don't get too hung up on having ductwork go upstairs. Heat rises, and my upstairs is warm enough without ducts. Just my experience.

Click to expand...

No they don't run together I'm either on wood or electric separate never at the same time. If I'm burning my thermostat for my electric is off and vice versa. Not an issue but thanks for the concern

STIHLY DAN said:

My 2nd floor (at least 1 end) absolutely needed ductwork for a supply. I have no idea why parallel would not be ok. If a hot blast can do it........sheshhh anything should. How does the worst wood furnace out there make code but not the tundra. That's a good question for SBI. "hello SBI, why is your furnace not code compliant when the worst furnace ever made is?"

Click to expand...

Actually checked yesterday
On hotblast manual apparently it's not permitted either.

Its official. I've tested er pretty good and the current model Tundra runs much cooler on the outer surfaces all around and is heating the house I feel a little better than the old one did. So far so good pretty happy with it. The new snap disc set up is spot on. Chimney never gets much over 800 before it comes on. Thats with draft dialed at -.06 max. left house today at 7 am was 71 deg inside. At 7 pm was 66. Cold day here very windy. Wind is hard on my house. Not bad considering Tundra is in separate garage heating that too, piped into the house. I didn't load it terribly hot today either. The fan timer switch is perfect and at this point the temp controller is simply working as a coal burn off limit for me. I am choosing to always burn the stove out as hot as I can safely so well I guess the temp controller limits that too but honestly the snap disc is just set at the right point so doesn't really matter. I am finding the hotter I burn out the load rather than trying to conserve and get the longest secondary burn I can, the warmer the house is period. there is still a ton of secondary action and the wood consumption is very very low. I find myself building smaller fires now. less wood, burn it hot = more heat in my house. More wood, burn it at cruise reburn temps all day = less heat in my house. You see it will run all day on that reburn setting blowing flames from anywhere to 3 hrs up to 4 or 5 hrs depending on the wood.. all the same I get a warmer house by letting the thermostat open it up a little more through the day. For example load it at 7 and let it burn wide open by 10 or 11 am instead of waiting till 12-2 pm to let it burn wide open. I wind up with more higher temps when I get home if I turn er loose earlier in the day. My stove is remote control from my phone. Its way passed addiction and well thru obsession. lol

Nice report @Digger79 . You're one step ahead, I'm finding similar results even if on my older model Tundra. That by starting to burn the coals a few hours into the burn, once most offgassing from my box elder is finished, that it's easier to keep the house warmer. I originally had used the "burn coals" switch just for cold days, but now I'm using it on warmer days too, and it just seems to improve the overall cycle and heat.

800F on the chimney still seems rather hot as a general practice. I don't think you're going to lose much heating power by lowering your controller to 600-650, but would probably save potential wear-n-tear on the furnace. I'd just hate to see problems that could be easily avoided.

Just keep in mind, this is the WARMEST winter in the history of the world. Nearly impossible to compare performance from last year to this year.