Blaze King Efficiency Claims

jophysx · Oct 24, 2016

ohlongarm said:
LOL,me defensive,more like you are.I'm just debating isn't this what you do on internet forums,i'm not denigrating anyone here,irregardlous what you burn,and that includes a 55 gallon drum stove if it works for you.Fifteen years ago I thought an NC 30 was the cats buttocks,how times have changed.

The topic here was whether or not BK stoves are 4x more efficient. You are debating whether or not BK stoves are good stoves in general. I'm not sure who you were debating with since nobody claimed they are not good stoves. You won that debate . . . against your own imagination.

2fireplacesinSC · Oct 24, 2016

2fireplacesinSC · Oct 24, 2016

BKVP finished it. Thanks! Good thread.

jatoxico · Oct 24, 2016

Re; off the rails I disagree. The OP questioned, or rather stated that the BK video was inaccurate in saying they were 4X more efficient. Others agreed saying that while they are great stoves the claim was not possible. After some fan boying, BKVP came along and said in fact, the video was inaccurate. Some tried to re-frame the argument to claim victory despite the evidence but 2pts for the OP, nothin' but net.

lsucet · Oct 24, 2016

Hi to all. i will like somebody to tell me how I need to address in the future the performance of BK when somebody ask me about them. The reason is cause I have more than a few people asking me about them, two of them already bought the ASHFORD 30.1.
For me, the different between secondary burn tube stoves and the Bk is BIG. I know I have no experience like most of you here but I am capable of notice the difference. That saying, the amount of wood I was using with tube stoves compare to what i am using now with the BK, i think if i am not living the experience I will say, THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE. When the temperature was above or a little under freezing point I can say the tubes were doing Ok. bu when gets real cold outside the stoves use to take off on me and that was scary. i know was due to the draft but the wood consumption was insane.

the stoves are built with automatic air system that shut primary air when reach certain temp, and tons of heat coming out of them that sometimes we didn't need. tried everything, got with tech support, installed flue damper , tried barometric damper, make the stack short at one time when cold to balance the draft, trust me on this one. when all that had an impact and help some, i was not happy about it.

Block with magnets the holes for secondaries. That make me run the primary air open a little to compensate cause if not wood smoldering on the way, smoke outside and a dirty chimney. if i make small load, anyway i have to be an slave of the stove. secondaries going thru the wood like nothing.

by 6 am i have to be up and reload again. YES, PLENTY OF COAL INSIDE TO RELOAD but what is the point if temp on the stove was about 250 df.
not usable heat and dropping more and more if i don't reload. in my days off I wasn't able to stay in bed longer than normal. LOL crazy.

That was my experience and now i feel in paradise. For me that was efficiency over the tubes stoves that i use before but looks like i was using the wrong terms accord to what is going on here. Is performance not part of efficiency? Is saving good amount of wood compare to the others was not efficiency neither? have a better confer of steady heat and be able to control it better, is not efficiency?.

I really will like to know the way of call that that way i don't give the wrong information in the future. i know lot of people is saying, OH your wood was not good, OH you have no experience burning, etc etc etc. HEY, TRUST ME ON THIS ONE. I tried everything. For every time i load the BK i have to load the others for sure three times and when temp went up during the day but still chilli i was scare of burn just a few pieces cause eventually secondaries will take off and here goes, open doors and windows. I don't have that with this one. sending a similar amount of heat inside the house in a short period of time compare to a better distribution of that heat in a long time and a better adjustable way is the same? well maybe you are right and i see the point that it is not so many times more efficient. but taking all that into consideration for me is not even close. yes, i take all that into account and the results for me is way better efficiency aside of what lab test says.

I hope i am not creating a bad impression and misunderstanding with this post cause is not my intentions at all.

regards to all
Leandro

bholler · Oct 24, 2016

lsucet said:
That was my experience and now i feel in paradise. For me that was efficiency over the tubes stoves that i use before but looks like i was using the wrong terms accord to what is going on here. Is performance not part of efficiency? Is saving good amount of wood compare to the others was not efficiency neither? have a better confer of steady heat and be able to control it better, is not efficiency?.

Again yes bks are more efficent than non cats yes they burn longer we have been through al of this. We never said otherwise just that the 4x claim was inaccurate. And that was confirmed by bkvp. And I am sorry you had a bad experience with a tube stove but that is not typical of most tube stoves.

jatoxico · Oct 24, 2016

Leandro there are probably many things that could be said and many ways to approach this but for me the thing with tube stoves (like mine) is that they put heat out in a cycle that goes warm hot warm. During the hot stage you may be getting more heat than you need and during the warm ends maybe not enough. The wood itself is being burned fairly efficiently though. For a cat stove the wood is consumed more uniformly without the large highs and lows. As for BK they seem to be tops in class with efficient combustors and auto dampering just not 4X more efficient with respect to combustion of wood.

lsucet · Oct 24, 2016

jatoxico said:
Leandro there are probably many things that could be said and many ways to approach this but for me the thing with tube stoves (like mine) is that they put heat out in a cycle that goes warm hot warm. During the hot stage you may be getting more heat than you need and during the warm ends maybe not enough. The wood itself is being burned fairly efficiently though. For a cat stove the wood is consumed more uniformly without the large highs and lows. As for BK they seem to be tops in class with efficient combustors and auto dampering just not 4X more efficient with respect to combustion of wood.

I really understand you guys and i can see the point. just it didn't work for me like i was wishing for the fact and how was giving me those BTU and when. going to bed at midnight, waiting for everybody else to light it up or reload and be up by 6 am again. i was getting traumatize. i end just running a lot of times the pellet stoves in low. i felt that every time i reload with the family around, half hour later they looking at me like: "this crazy guy". in some way they let me know is time to open the windows or we force to go to bed. LOL LOL.

I will tell you this, I loved the way that the madison burns. nice secondaries, a pleasure to look at it. Please don't get me wrong. but i was looking after awhile for something more controllable and at the same time enjoy the wood burning experience. I am planning on installed one of those in the stables when i finish them for real cold nights. "hope not to find a barbecue of horses in the morning". LOL LOL, just kidding.

Leandro

bholler · Oct 24, 2016

lsucet said:
I will tell you this, I loved the way that the madison burns. nice secondaries, a pleasure to look at it. Please don't get me wrong. but i was looking after awhile for something more controllable and at the same time enjoy the wood burning experience. I am planning on installed one of those in the stables when i finish them for real cold nights. "hope not to find a barbecue of horses in the morning". LOL LOL, just kidding.

You do realize that you are comparing an entry level tube stove to a top of the line cat stove right? That is not exactly a fair comparison of the 2 technologies.

drstorm · Oct 24, 2016

bholler said:
Yeah I get it they are great stoves but they are not pretty lol. For me it would not matter it sits in the basement so I could not care less what it looks like but if it was in my living room I would not go for the looks of them. I assumed you were adding another because it is rather odd to replace a 5 year old stove that you love so much but I get it.

They sure do have some ugly stoves,but I think the Ashford,and more so my Chinook 30 are as pretty as any.

bholler · Oct 24, 2016

drstorm said:
They sure do have some ugly stoves,but I think the Asford,and more so my Chinook 30 are as pretty as any.

Yes I did say later that I know they do have some very good looking ones as well.

lsucet · Oct 24, 2016

bholler said:
You do realize that you are comparing an entry level tube stove to a top of the line cat stove right? That is not exactly a fair comparison of the 2 technologies.

you are right and i just saying for what i went thru and i start digging and finding information about different stoves and i read this forum for months and months plus other forums and there is 5 houses of family on our land, it is all family land and they all heat with wood all they life, that all what they know plus using different stoves over all this years and i noticed they all little by little switched to cat stoves. aside me there is a family member that bought an ASHFORD 30.1 just awhile ago and they love it.

With all respect, don't matter which brand of tubes i look into it including the brand of tube stoves that i think is made by Blaze king also. maybe a I am wrong on that but i think that what he says , at the end always the point of the way that that technology distribute the heat was under the same concept. that one brand can do better than other and be better balance , i understand that but i think it is more about how the technology behave. but of course a better quality, better made stove, can give you a different experience.
That's why i said well i really don't want to be spending here and there and trying this and that plus i set with this independent dealer that is just him and we went for two days thru the talking. the first days i have something to do and them we decided to continue next day. I comeback and we spend hrs going over everything. Floor plan bla bla bla etc. I saw the briarwood too, we talked about it. but i have to confess that my heart was set on the PRINCESS. well you know the rest of the story. LOL

tarzan · Oct 24, 2016

lsucet said:
Hi to all. i will like somebody to tell me how I need to address in the future the performance of BK when somebody ask me about them. The reason is cause I have more than a few people asking me about them, two of them already bought the ASHFORD 30.1.
For me, the different between secondary burn tube stoves and the Bk is BIG. I know I have no experience like most of you here but I am capable of notice the difference. That saying, the amount of wood I was using with tube stoves compare to what i am using now with the BK, i think if i am not living the experience I will say, THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE. When the temperature was above or a little under freezing point I can say the tubes were doing Ok. bu when gets real cold outside the stoves use to take off on me and that was scary. i know was due to the draft but the wood consumption was insane.

the stoves are built with automatic air system that shut primary air when reach certain temp, and tons of heat coming out of them that sometimes we didn't need. tried everything, got with tech support, installed flue damper , tried barometric damper, make the stuck short at one time when cold to balance the draft, thrust me on this one. when all that had a impact and help some, i was not happy about it.

Block with magnets the holes for secondaries. That make me run the primary air open a little to compensate cause if not wood smoldering on the way, smoke outside and a dirty chimney. if i make small load, anyway i have to be an slave of the stove. secondaries going thru the wood like nothing.

by 6 am i have to be up and reload again. YES, PLENTY OF COAL INSIDE TO RELOAD but what is the point if temp on the stove was about 250 df.
not usable heat and dropping more and more if i don't reload. in my days off I wasn't able to stay in bed longer than normal. LOL crazy.

That was my experience and now i feel in paradise. For me that was efficiency over the tubes stoves that i use before but looks like i was using the wrong terms accord to what is going on here. Is performance not part of efficiency? Is saving good amount of wood compare to the others was not efficiency neither? have a better confer of steady heat and be able to control it better, is not efficiency?.

I really will like to know the way of call that that way i don't give the wrong information in the future. i know lot of people is saying, OH your wood was not good, OH you have no experience burning, etc etc etc. HEY, THRUST ME ON THIS ONE. I tried everything. For every time i load the BK i have to load the others for sure three times and when temp went up during the day but still chilli i was scare of burn just a few pieces cause eventually secondaries will take off and here goes, open doors and windows. I don't have that with this one. sending a similar amount of heat inside the house in a short period of time compare to a better distribution of that heat in a long time and a better adjustable way is the same. well maybe you are right and i see the point that it is not so many times more efficient. but taking all that into consideration for me is no even close. yes, i take all that into account and the results for me is way better efficiency aside of what lab test says.

I hope i am not creating a bad impression and misunderstanding with this post cause is not my intentions at all.

regards to all
Leandro

How to address the performance of the Blaze King? You did a pretty good job in this post!

Don't get bogged down with spouting out numbers that mean little to nothing to most folks anyhow, just tell them about your real world experience.

lsucet · Oct 24, 2016

thank you tarzan.
those are really my experieces.

RopeS · Oct 24, 2016

I will chime in again here since I saw the Madison was mentioned. As many have reiterated in this thread, the BK stoves, and probably most cat stoves will provide a more steady, efficient burn. Leandro, before you use that Madison again and potentially become [more] disgruntled with it, check out the threads on here by myself and other Madison owners. While Englander stoves are a great bang for your buck, the 'automatic' feature on the Madison is not well executed IMO. I never use it because the stove does in fact get way too hot before it shuts the air down automatically, and that does eat through the wood, amongst other problems. If you use the Madison again, just use it like a regular stove and turn the primary air off manually after the fire gets going. That will make you much happier with that stove, and reduce fuel consumption by quite a bit, I'd wager. As bholler said too, it's an apple and oranges comparison, an $800 stove to one several times as expensive. If I could afford a BK, I'd have one. Since I can't, I'll use what's available to me and learn how to use it well. So far, I love it.

lsucet · Oct 24, 2016

RopeS said:
I will chime in again here since I saw the Madison was mentioned. As many have reiterated in this thread, the BK stoves, and probably most cat stoves will provide a more steady, efficient burn. Leandro, before you use that Madison again and potentially become [more] disgruntled with it, check out the threads on here by myself and other Madison owners. While Englander stoves are a great bang for your buck, the 'automatic' feature on the Madison is not well executed IMO. I never use it because the stove does in fact get way too hot before it shuts the air down automatically, and that does eat through the wood, amongst other problems. If you use the Madison again, just use it like a regular stove and turn the primary air off manually after the fire gets going. That will make you much happier with that stove, and reduce fuel consumption by quite a bit, I'd wager. As bholler said too, it's an apple and oranges comparison, an $800 stove to one several times as expensive. If I could afford a BK, I'd have one. Since I can't, I'll use what's available to me and learn how to use it well. So far, I love it.

I love it too and for me the madison burn a lot better than the big brother but i was looking for a bigger stove and replaced it with the big brother. yes, i stop using the AAS for better control but when temp droped on teens and single digits for a few days was insane how the secondaries like to take off eventually. everything start fine and looks under control but for sure with those temp outside little by little it will happen. at that point the air was completed shut and nothing else to do.

become sooty and if i give a little of primary it cleans up some but the trade off was getting hotter and hotter. the wood out gassing to fast with that kind of draft, a no no for me, sorry. i spoke with Mike several time,"real nice guy" and with tried everything. i bought a monometer and my draft was anything from 0.15 to 0.2 WC, CRAZY DEAL. some time more than that with only 19' from stove top of chimney. the barometric damper was the one that control it way better but everybody says that i was not suppose to use a baro with wood stove. I end up taking it out and i said this is it. I know you can say that there is a lot of people with way longer stacks than me and dont have any of those issue but for some reason mine DRAFT GOOD with just 19' trust me on that.

lsucet · Oct 25, 2016

I did want to use them and i don't think that this is about to have the money or not, that is not the point. believe me i can use that money for something else if those stove work for me in the way that i want it. i still having them but of course not hook up. and i think that i can have some use for them in the future. i don't think about sale them of nothing like that , is just they didn't work for me. it is possible that i read to thread cause i was reading at that time up and down, all over, asking etc, cause i was trying to make it work. family members doing this for long time helping me and all that and when looks like we narrow down and find the source of the issue, hell no. if temp start getting on the low 30s into high 20s here goes.

i said already that i am not an experience wood burner and i have long way to go but so is everything in this life. the big brother of the madison the improved the air system like Mike told me and i tell that for me that one was a crazy deal connected it to my stack. the madison was more controllable but i was looking for bigger stove as mentioned before. well at the end problem solved. lol

sincerely i wish one day you buy a blaze king like you want or who knows maybe at that time you will want something else. nothing is impossible in this life and nobody knows what the future brings.,
hey i am from Cuba and i came in 1994 and English is not my language but i am hanging in there.

Regards Leandro

ohlongarm · Oct 25, 2016

bholler said:
And I think that is probably the best stove for the money available now. Yes you are defensive because You keep defending blaze kings even though none of us are putting them down. We all agree with you they are great stoves. They just are not 4x more fuel efficient than all non cat stoves and bkvp agrees with that I think he may know more about them than you do.

Dude you are delusional.I'm only dealing in facts,and real world experience.Not co-signing on a topic that's been proven time and time again.And doyou think I give a hoot if anyone did put BK's down,you're the one that got bent out shape over an advertisement.I never made the claim or the commercial.

bholler · Oct 25, 2016

ohlongarm said:
Dude you are delusional.I'm only dealing in facts,and real world experience.Not co-signing on a topic that's been proven time and time again.And doyou think I give a hoot if anyone did put BK's down,you're the one that got bent out shape over an advertisement.I never made the claim or the commercial.

Ok just keep arguing a point no one has contested. And yes I know you are dealing with facts and experience. So am I. I see and hear how many different stoves perform in many different situations with different people running them.

ohlongarm · Oct 25, 2016

bholler said:
Ok just keep arguing a point no one has contested. And yes I know you are dealing with facts and experience. So am I. I see and hear how many different stoves perform in many different situations with different people running them.

Isn't that what this forum is all about,for once we agree.Have a nice day,I'm heading to the squirrel woods,day off.I'l give you a holler at the BK's 24 burn cycle.

Ashful · Oct 25, 2016

Any idea what year that video was produced? If made prior to the introduction of tube stoves (a newer technology), then it may have been true at the time of production.

Beyond that, the only justification I can imagine they have in their heads for that claim is that their stoves may be "4x less inefficient" than any other stove, during some small part of the burn cycle. This is mathematically much different than "4x more efficient", as stated. Think 4*(n-1) versus 4*n. If the rest of the stoves on the market have a peak efficiency during some part of the burn cycle of 80%, they would only need to hit a peak efficiency of 95% during a similar small part of the burn cycle, to make the 4x less inefficient claim. Again, this is not what was stated in the video, just trying to think of all angles they might consider.

RAPhomme · Oct 25, 2016

My bet is that the figure came from particulate emissions rather than thermal efficiency. So the (perhaps confused) basis for the claim would be: "roughly 4 times more efficient at minimizing emissions over the range of most frequent heat outputs." Not that that's what "efficiency" usually means. And not that that's what they said---but maybe the convoluted path leading up to it.

Ashful · Oct 25, 2016

Yeah, the number might be more justifiable, if that were the case. However, they then leveraged the "4x more efficient" claim directly into less wood consumed.

BKVP · Oct 25, 2016

The video has been pulled down for clarification, as promised. Now, we can close this thread and go back to the Performance Thread.

OhioBurner© · Oct 26, 2016

Efficiency can be measured in many ways. An Indy car can be more efficient than a hybrid at getting one person to a destination if it's just time we are comparing, while the hybrid will win if we look at fuel, or semi truck may be more efficient if we need to get one person plus 50,000 lbs of cargo to a destination.

So to discuss efficiency we need to know what is being compared... one way the BK could be almost 4x efficient is if we are talking about burn time per loads. We don't have to define what a load is, or how much heat the stove puts out, just that it is possible that BK will burn for 4x longer for 1 load of fuel. I don't think that is too much of a stretch as most non-cats are probably under the 8hr range with a few maybe a bit more.

Blaze King Efficiency Claims

Burning Hunk

Burning Hunk

Burning Hunk

Minister of Fire

Minister of Fire

Chimney sweep

Minister of Fire

Minister of Fire

Chimney sweep

Burning Hunk

Attachments

Chimney sweep

Minister of Fire

Minister of Fire

Minister of Fire

Member

Minister of Fire

Minister of Fire

Minister of Fire

Chimney sweep

Minister of Fire

Minister of Fire

Member

Minister of Fire

Minister of Fire

Minister of Fire

Similar threads