Choosing the right size stove

I can't advise you on the current generation of VC stoves, but have a suggestion. If you build a hearth out of material that is a heat sink, it will help you come home to a warm house. Even if you have to rebuild the fire, as long as it's still at the point where the thermal mass (hearth, walls, floor, furniture, etc.) is holding heat, then you're ahead of the game.

As I'm sure you know, the type of wood you burn and the tricks you learn about your stove will make an impact on how long a burn time you can get out of the stove. Sounds like you've got the right ideas about circulating air in the house, and I assume you're already putting wood aside for this winter and next.

I'm sure you'll have plenty of VC owners chiming in here eventually. Kinda quiet around here in the summer.

Vermont Castings Encore 2 in 1 ?
https://www.hearth.com/econtent/index.php/forums/viewthread/66655/P44/

WSForever said:

I have been running a new Encore 2N1 for the last month. The stove is a vast improvement over the prior non 2N1 version. The refractory is no longer built of a delicate styrofoam and is now composed of a much harder firebrick type material. The catalyst is half the size of the older one and that translates to half the cost to replace. I have been told it runs about $100. . . .
I have easily achieved 10 hour burns but not the 14[12] hour advertised burn times. I have also not yet achieved overnight burns but I am still getting used to the stove and believe it is more of a user issue. Very, very nice stove and it pumps out some serious heat into my 2,300 sq foot cape. My prior stove was a Encore CAT non-2N1 stove. This new 2N1 stove is tougher and more flexible than the prior version, but performs similarly. I give it 4.5 thumbs up out of 5 as I feel there is always room for improvement.

Click to expand...

That is the best thread I've seen on the new VC's. Yes, it would appear that the mfr burn time spec is optimistic, like most mfr specs. If you're after long burns, I'd go with the larger model. You're talking about heating 2000 sq ft. The Encore spec = 1800 sq ft max, probably optimistic, so you'd probably be running the stove hard while trying to heat that space. Running harder = shorter burn time. The Defiant spec = 2400 sq ft, but too much heat shouldn't be a problem since your space is open. Sq ft specs are pretty much universally viewed as optimistic, ~ for a tight house in a moderate climate. A popular proverb around here says that you can always burn a smaller load of wood in a larger stove, but not the opposite. Too much heat also shouldn't be a problem if the VC 2n1 burns well on low like a proper cat stove will.
http://literature.mhsc.com/vermont_castings/brochures/VC1310_Two_In_One_Brochure.pdf


If you're really after long burns, take a look at the Blaze King stoves. They don't come in Bordeaux enamel, but they are the burn time champs.


+1 on the thermal mass tip, as long as the mass is not part of an exterior masonry chimney.




p.s. You'll probably get more responses if you change the title of this thread to something like VC 2N1 Burn Times.

My Dad swapped out an Englander air tight stove, I believe in the late 80's, with a VC Defiant Encore cat stove. It was the most beautiful woodstove I'd ever seen. At the time, we thought the VC stoves were the best. In hindsight, the stove never lived up to expectations. The old Englander out heated it and the VC was a creosote factory - not as bad as the Englander, but bad. Part of the problem was the wood being burnt and the low temps burns. It seemed my Dad could never get the cat to light off very well. Other than that, it was a fine stove. I know it has been sold twice since my Dad owned it and spoke with the present owner who is still burning it. No refractory problems to my knowledge on that stove.

When I was looking at buying myself a woodstove last year, I thought VC pretty much from the get-go. Searching and reading posts on this forum, I learned that VC has been through some pretty tough times and put out a lot of crap stoves, expensive replacement parts and crummy warrantee claims.

All of that may be behind VC as we are hearing some good reports over this past burning season, however, I am not ready to dump several thousand of my hard earned/hard to get dollars on a VC product (other than the Dutchwest Cat stoves).

IMHO for the "Defiant" look, but DEAD SOLID quality, I'd have a look see at the Jotul Oslo or Firelight woodstoves.

BTW, I like the long low burns of the cat stoves and wound up getting a Woodstock Keystone.

Good luck,
Bill

Like others I saw the problems that VC were having and opted to not go the VC route, but took a long, hard look at some other cast iron stoves with similar good looks . . . ended up with a Jotul. I suspect VC will turn themselves around though in time and will regain their claim to fame that they had back in the 1980s.

I have to agree with some of the other posts on here regarding the VC stoves. You may have an attachement growing up with VC but today things are altogether different. My suggestion would be to shop around some and research other stoves. This forum will also direct you in several differnt ways, all by word of mouth with the best information available anywhere. Good luck

I also grew up with a VC. A few years ago it was time for my own stove in my own house. I went directly to VC without checking anywhere else. Didn't know about Hearth.com yet. I ended up purchasing an Encore CAT (not 2n1). Lets just say I was less than thrilled and that is how I discovered hearth.com. The encore never performed to expectations and I ended up selling it this summer.
I then did ALOT of research... mostly on this site and ended up with a Jotul Oslo.
If you are looking for advice this is a great site. Do your homework. Shop around. There are options out there I never even considered before. VC "COULD" be a good product now but I wasn't willing to take the chance and get burned again.
As far as the larger firebox... better to have than to have not. You'll be glad in jan, feb. Shop around and Good luck.

There are a few other top loaders on the market. Some look very much like a VC. I dunno if any of them will burn for 11+ hours. . .that's getting into cat stove territory, and the only TL with a cat is VC. Still, I agree with all of the reservations voiced about VC. I would not consider buying a VC at this time without a significant $ incentive. Maybe they are getting list price for all the stoves that they can build, but I wouldn't buy one at list price. Also, I think a stove with a deep firebox that allows north-south loading of logs from the front or a stove with a large side door would allow the most wood to be packed in, because you can fit the splits in like pieces of a puzzle. I can't imagine packing as efficiently from the top, but I have no experience with a top loader.


Recent thread on top loaders
https://www.hearth.com/econtent/index.php/forums/viewthread/75881/

You said, "My fear is that the Defiant may be too large of a stove for my application."

Personally, I'd rather have a stove that was bigger than needed, than to have a stove that wasn't big enough. Just like clothes for the kids, they need growing room.

-Soupy1957

Agreed. "Better looking at it than looking for it". You can always open a window.

MazC.......Just a quick aside: Check your fire code, if applicable to your locale regarding open vents between floors. A/K/A "Direct Fire Path Between Stories." Some care, some don't about that, but it never hurts to raise it if you've not considered it. As for what size stove you'd need.....beats all crap out of me.

I've a friend who bought a Defiant 2-1 last fall. Burned it 24/7 all winter in cat mode, now swears by it. 2400 sq.ft 2 story well insulated home. He swears he had coals enough to refire after 12 hrs. No issues to date that I'm aware of.

I'm going to go contrarian here and be the voice for the just-right-sized stove rather than the `get it big so's they can grow into 'em' stove. (Soupy, you awakened some childhood memories that could have just as well kept snoring. For all you parents out there, let's just say there are some garments to which this advice does NOT apply.)

I researched this exhaustively (mostly, it was the people I was pestering for information that found it exhausting), and in the end felt like I made the right choice. I have a mid-sized stove heating a 2000 sf house; had weeks of -30F and colder, including forrays down to -40, and the stove worked like a champ. I was able to keep fires burning in it hot enough to keep the stove and the pipe clean and the fire burning efficiently, without having overfired the stove. By not going bigger, I was able to spend less money for the stove, and chimney, too, since going up would have required 8", and got away with a smaller footprint of not only the stove but the hearth. Due to its location, this was a pertinent factor.

My so-called research consisted of asking people a lot of questions, some of which some of them answered, and some of which some folks ignored. The data I was trying to shake loose allowed me to apply data from houses with different construction and in different climates to mine. I wanted to know:
how big their houses were,
how well-insulated,
what the layout was,
what the orientation was to the sun,
how efficient their chimney system was,
how they heated their houses before they had wood,
how much fuel they had used with prior heating system,
how much they reduced that fuel use once they started heating with wood,
what their burning habits were (full-time/p-t; supplemented vs. supplemental vs. primary),
what kind of wood stove they had,
how happy they were with their choice.

As you can imagine, some folks inched away, some fled screaming, and others perseverated right along with me, perfectly happy to find someone who was finally interested in their nattering (the underlying purpose of this site). Other people had no idea--they were like the folks who, when asked what kind of mileage their car gets, will tell you that they only have to fill their tank once a week. :smirk:

I started to assemble this database in my head (picture lots of plates spinning on sticks) and also had several conversations with the local stove dealer and eventually made the decision that worked well for me. Eventually, I found someone who has a house that is practically the twin of mine in terms of size, orientation, climate, and type of construction/insullation, and learned that they were burning a BKK to get the same results. This confirmed for me that I really didn't need to go bigger than I did. The information that helped me the most was the "how much fuel did you burn before?" question, and for some folks, that's like asking how much money they have in the bank.

I plan to go into next and subsequent winters with better firewood lined up, and better prepared all around, so I figure last year was as bad as it's going to get. If the stove shone through that, then it's all I need. I was able to learn my stove well enough to get almost 12 hour burns out of it, even at -25F (by this I do not mean that I just had a few embers gasping for life in their--I had a 70F house at the end of those 12 hours).

I know there are stoves out there that get longer burns, including ones made by the same manufacturer I went with, but honestly, I didn't mind the pittance of time involved to throw a fire together, or resurrect one from the coals. I ended up with a stove that gave me such even heat that the norm was about a 2-4 degree spread between heat in the hearth room downstairs and heat upstairs, even in extreme cold outside, without eating up a passel of wood. Couldn't have been happier with the outcome.

I knew there would be a loud chorus of "Go long!" on here, so wanted to at least voice the alternate, and unpopular, concept that "enough is a feast". (I'm afraid it's mostly us stone-burners that take this view. Just sayin'. )

First consider how well insulated your house is.

It seems that when MOST companies rate stoves and say "heats up to 2000 sq ft", 2000 is solid if your house is EXTREMELY tight. If your house is drafty, I'd insulate first. Caulking and weatherstriping and other low hanging fruit should be done. If you consider your house average for insulation, I'd get something rated closer to 2500 sq ft.

As mentioned above, moving air into and out of the stove room is something else to think about. Good luck.

-PB- said:

I also grew up with a VC. A few years ago it was time for my own stove in my own house. I went directly to VC without checking anywhere else. Didn't know about Hearth.com yet. I ended up purchasing an Encore CAT (not 2n1). Lets just say I was less than thrilled and that is how I discovered hearth.com. The encore never performed to expectations and I ended up selling it this summer.
I then did ALOT of research... mostly on this site and ended up with a Jotul Oslo.
If you are looking for advice this is a great site. Do your homework. Shop around. There are options out there I never even considered before. VC "COULD" be a good product now but I wasn't willing to take the chance and get burned again.
As far as the larger firebox... better to have than to have not. You'll be glad in jan, feb. Shop around and Good luck.

Click to expand...

I, too, grew up with a VC Defiant in my parents home and heated my home here with a VC Vigilant for three years. Just went through a liner replacement, and figured I might as well get a new stove while i was at it (my Vigilant was a 1978). After a lot of research I went with the Jotul F600. If looks are important to you, this is a really sharp looking stove. Also is a monster heater from what I have read and heard. Just thought I would provide you with another option.