Are new stoves more efficient?

Qweaver · Dec 22, 2008

In reading the specs on a Napoleon Pellet Stove NPS40, the hopper size is 55 lbs and max burn time is 54 hours. My current stove is a 5 year old whitfield of about the same hopper size and I use a forty lb bag per day on the lowest setting. It would be great to have a stove that would burn for 2 days on low while I was away for a day...plus that new stove must be more efficient than my older Whitfield. Any ideas on the most efficient stoves available?
Thanks!

Lobstah · Dec 22, 2008

I don't believe that a stove that will go 54hrs on 1.5bags of pellets means that you're getting more heat out of it due to efficiency. They just have the ability to drop their feed rate low enough to accomplish that. In addition, it could be a marketing claim and maybe they CAN'T accomplish that.

Either way...general rule of thumb?...quality stoves are more efficient than cheap stoves, i.e. you get what you pay for.

Jim

Wet1 · Dec 22, 2008

I can get just over 50 hours out of a single 40 lb bag of pellets with my 2008 Harman P38. I can't come close to this with my 2000 (or is it a 2001) Englander, which is basically the same stove they still sell today. And even at that low consumption rate, the Harman runs way cleaner than the Englander does eating twice as many pellets. So while I agree with what Lobstah is saying, I do think some stoves burn significantly cleaner and more efficiently than others.

smirnov3 · Dec 22, 2008

Some stoves are cleaner and more effient than others, true.

BUT....

how much heat does the stove put out?
does the low setting on the P38 kick out the same amount of heat as the Englander?

I suspect that the big differances in how long diffrent stoves run has to do with what their minimum feed rate is.
the combustion efficiency of all pellet stoves is going to be within a a couple of percentage points of each other (ie in the upper 90s)
the transfer efficiency may vary some more (though I doubt it would be more than 10%)

buring pellets is not rocket science - the main issue are reliability, ease of maintanance, aeshtetics, etc.

I would be very surprised if two diffrent (CLEAN) stoves burning pellets at the same rate would consume substantially (ie 10% or more) diffrent amounts of pellets

MCPO · Dec 23, 2008

Anton Smirnov said:
Some stoves are cleaner and more effient than others, true.

BUT....

how much heat does the stove put out?
does the low setting on the P38 kick out the same amount of heat as the Englander?

I suspect that the big differances in how long diffrent stoves run has to do with what their minimum feed rate is.
the combustion efficiency of all pellet stoves is going to be within a a couple of percentage points of each other (ie in the upper 90s)
the transfer efficiency may vary some more (though I doubt it would be more than 10%)

buring pellets is not rocket science - the main issue are reliability, ease of maintanance, aeshtetics, etc.

I would be very surprised if two diffrent (CLEAN) stoves burning pellets at the same rate would consume substantially (ie 10% or more) diffrent amounts of pellets

I have a Harman P-38 and my friend has a Englander PDVC. Mine burns very low on #1 (48 hrs @40lb bag) and at that setting it produces just barely enough heat for the fall and spring (temps at 35+ degrees)
My friend`s Englander burns twice as much fuel on low but he probably gets twice the heat output too.
Our conclusion is that both stoves are probably equally efficient or close but that the Harman design allows for a slower burn and the Englander wants to burn hotter . In the midst of the heating season I`d be happy with either one.
Another stove maker might be somewhare in between these two.

Search

Search

Are new stoves more efficient?

Qweaver

New Member

Lobstah

New Member

Wet1

Minister of Fire

smirnov3

Feeling the Heat

MCPO

Minister of Fire

Similar threads