I have a Regency F2400 that probably has the same baffles as the F3100 (is that material called vermiculite?), anyway I was a little curious about this set up at first, but after using and removing them a few times they seem to me to be a good idea.
You asked for opinions, so I'll give you mine, but you should keep in mind I have not used a stove with a steel baffle to compare it with, and only have part of a season of use out of my new stove.
The "vermiculite" baffles are easy to install and remove, even when the metal in the stove is still a little hot the baffles don't seem to retain the heat like metal does. This has come in handy when I wanted to clean the chimney as I don't have to wait until the stove has completely cooled down before removing the baffles. (you want to remove the baffles when cleaning the chimney)
I don't think it's likely that I will break them from inserting wood since the wood tends to bash the secondary burn tubes first rather than hit the baffles and even if I did stick something thin enough to slip between the metal tubes and hit the baffles they are just sitting loose on top of the tubes, not held rigidly in place, so the impact will simply nock them out of place slightly at most rather than damage them. Unlike my fire bricks at the back of my stove which does not give at all when I slam some wood into them (I notice a couple of them already have cracks in them). I'm so abusive.
Obviously I can't tell you anything about the long term wear and tear on these baffles other than so far them seem to be holding up better that the fire bricks.
One last thought, the fire box have brick lining to hold the heat in and protect the outer metal out case from warping, it makes sense to use a similar material on the baffle too rather than using a chunk of metal. It seems metal is the CHEAPER way to go, so maybe that speaks to the performance you can expect from the two different materials solutions.
Give me a couple more years of using my stove,,, maybe I'll change my view point.