is there such a thing as a stove too big?

mike8937 said:

i defiantly dont want to buy an undersized stove but is there any benefit to buying a stove thats recommended for a larger home? my house is 1600 sqft, not big. it looks like the epa stoves need to run at a decent heat level to do what they are suppose to-low emission/high efficiency. i am wondering if i were to get a stove that had a 3 cu.ft. firebox and i ran it choked down a little more to take advantage of a much longer burn time, would it become inefficient in producing heat and reducing emissions? i was looking at the jotul olso f500, the lopi endeavor, and some of the englanders are hard to ignore at their prices. these stoves have around 2.2 cu.ft. fireboxes, i see they are advertised to burn 8-10 hours but is this effective heat or untill the coals go out? there is just too many options and not knowing the price of most stoves makes narrowing my chioces very hard. i am currently thousands of miles away so i just cant hop in the car too see them myself. i guess to sum up this -- is a 3.0 cu.ft too big too benefit from in my size house? i dont want an over grown wood eating heater

Click to expand...

Advertise burn times are more marketing gimmicks than they are factual information. Burn times usually mean that there are some coals left to restart. Burn times do not indicate usable heat output.

As an example: The Hearthstone Heritage is listed as an 8 hour burn. 5-6 hours is more accurate.

1,600 square feet is not a large home, but it is not a small home either. If you have a well insulated home that is not drafty, than your heat retention will be quite good. If you have a drafty or leaky home, it will not. This dictates the size of your stove you will need.

I think, in your location, with your home size, the F500 should work (if your floor plan is relatively open). The F500 is a 2+ cu ft firebox, a little larger than my Heritage, which has a claimed 2.3 cu ft firebox.

If you have a drafty, leaky home, than a larger stove will be needed. Also, if this ends up being a a basement install, than a larger stove will be needed, as well.

mike8937 said:

im not sure what an open floor plan is but i have a 2 story home somewhat drafty, i plan on fixing that along with purchasing a new stove. this will be installed on the first floor, not far from the stair way to the second floor. i feel it is a decent location but not the most ideal. there is already a stove there so i am just upgrading. chimney is in great shape, its a 6 inch round flue lined masonry chimney. it might be 7'' i.d. but pretty sure its 6. i would also prefer my wife saying its too hot in here over her saying its cold. so thats why i am wondering if a good 3 cu.ft. burner losses its efficiency when used in an application like mine. i may be thinking the wrong way about this, so if i need to be put in place on this please do so

Click to expand...

An open floor plan is just that, a layout that is not boxy like an older home. And usually when someone posts that there home is 'somewhat drafty' it usually means it is just plain drafty... like my house. Keep that in mind when making your stove purchase.

Yes, too hot is better than not warm enough. I am a fan of over-sizing. You can always open a window when it gets too warm. What is your current stove?

If you are concerned that a 3 cu ft firebox is too large, you may want to look at a catalytic stove that will allow you to efficiently run your stove at a lower temperature. Look at Buck, Country Flame, and Vermont Castings for cat stoves that have a 3+ cu ft firebox.

Mike, besides the size of the firebox and the secondary or cat setup, the most important thing for determining a long burn is the wood you burn and, of course, how you operate the stove. For example, our Woodstock Fireview can boast of some really long burn times and even longer for the BK stoves. However, if one burns a softer wood or even softwood, the burn times will be much shorter than one will get with, say, oak, hickory, locust, ash, etc., etc.

For your size house it would seem that from 2-3 cu ft firebox should do the trick. I would not hesitate on putting in a 3 cu ft firebox in your home from what you describe.

I heated my 1600 SF house last yeast with an Endeavor pretty easily. It is probably cooler where you are at than in these mountains of southern Appalachia. I would say the you can get 8 hours out of the stove and still have coals to reload. These EPA stoves (in my vast one year of experience) like to run on the hotter side. But it is nice that your neighbors cannot tell you burn wood (hardly) and there is not smoke coming from your chimney. If you want to damp down a bigger stove I would look at cat stoves.

I would never consider a bigger stove for my house unless it was a cat stove I could run at a low burn otherwise I think it would run us out of here too often.

I'm putting a 4+ft³ stove in my 1600 ft² home, but everybody said it would be ok because it's a Blaze King.

Seems like the 1400-1800 ft range is always kinda gray. It depends A LOT on tightness and insulation. Like they say, you can always build a small fire in a big box. But it seems to me that you still have to get that big box up to temp so the secondary combustion system does its job. In your case though, I don't think I would hesitate to buy a 3 ft³ stove. Or a Blaze King, I guess (hope :smirk

IMHO - Most folks need two stoves, a small one for the shoulder seasons of spring and fall and one for when its gets cold. Of course that gets expensive. Many folks dont like to start fires so they want to have one that runs continuously. In order to run an EPA stove continuosly you should have a smaller stove as EPA stoves just dont damper down like the old pre EPA stoves do (Many EPA stoves have hidden air inlets so that they cant be damped down). Of course the big bneifti with an EPA stove is that because it cant be damped down, you prodcue far less smoke and creosote. If you go to large, you will end up having cycles of overheating and underheating with the stove and will get good at starting fires when the heating load is low as you will need to let it go out and then restart when the place cools down.

I admit that I do prefer a somewhat smaller stove. I tend to run it hot and clean.
The Jotul Oslo 500 works great for my purpose.
You can't go wrong with it or any Jotul purchase.

I've always been a big believer in figuring out what you need for a stove and then going one size larger in most cases . . . as mentioned there are some exceptions when you might want to go even larger with uninsulated basement installs, drafty houses, etc.

However, I also believe you can go too big . . . when you're having to open your windows a good portion of the time because you're drenched in sweat or you're standing outside on the front porch wearing nothing but boxers as the snow falls down on you -- the stove may be too much . . . it can be uncomfortable, not to mention you will be plowing through a bunch of wood and creating wasted BTUs that are now being used to keep Chip N' Dale (the chipmunks outside, not the dancers) warm.

That said, I have seen far more folks here complain about getting a woodstove that is too small for their needs than folks who have bought one too large. You can of course build smaller fires in a larger woodstove, but you may not be able to burn as efficiently since there will always be that temptation to fill up the firebox.

As for burn times . . . as mentioned a lot of this is manufacturer spin . . . I suspect most of us naive customers picture a fire burning for the full 8-10 hours . . . my experience with my own Jotul Oslo is that I get 4-5 hours of good, usable heat out of it and some heat (and hot coals) for 6-8 hours. Something folks need to consider really is your home's layout (open -- think a kitchen that flows into a dining room that flows into the living room without two foot doors and walls leading into every room vs. a traditional layout -- think lots of doors, walls, halls, etc.), insulation, winter temps and winds, etc.

In my own 1,800 two story Cape here in Maine in middle of the winter the Oslo heats up the room where the stove is located at 72-80 degrees, adjacent room is typically 70-74 degrees F and the master bedroom located farthest away (and the mudroom) is around 66-68 degrees usually . . . rooms upstairs are about 68-74 degrees. Insulation is moderate as most walls have fiberglass insulation batting in 2 x 4 walls. Most windows in this 1970s vintage home have been replaced, but we do have a few "leakers" that need to be replaced at some point. House layout is a mix of open and traditional. For me the Oslo works . . . I do the final load at 9:30 a.m. and the next morning I still have enough coals to easily get the fire going again -- using less than primo wood (i.e. no oak, very little sugar maple, black locust, etc.) Temps in the home typically drop down to 62-64 degrees . . . at 60 degrees I have my oil boiler to kick on . . . it's rare enough to have the boiler come on so that when I do hear it start up early in the morning the sound usually wakes me up out of a dead sleep.

Location of the stove is important . . . hopefully the existing location is in or near where your family will spend a lot of time. I've often felt sorry for folks who put a stove into a basement if it isn't used as a living space or family room . . . having the woodstove in our living room is great -- you get the benefit of the heat, the visuals of the fire, you can tell when you need to reload, potpourri simmers on top filling the room with nice smells (to counteract me and my bad smells), etc.

Plus 1 on all of the above advice. Some really good stuff pointed out.

No there is no such thing.

I know several just said it, but I was reading your first post thinking to myself "3cu ft sounds like it would be about the right size"

Only problem with a big stove is that they can eat more. I'd rather have that problem than be too cold

I have a 3.2cf insert in a very drafty 1700sf ranch. It works out very well, but I think if my house was tighter a smaller stove would be fine. Having the larger firebox does make things a bit easier. I only really pack it when its super cold or I need a really long burn. I have gotten over 13 hour burn with this monster.

A top ten list would be easy to come up with on your own with a little reading here. Pretty much anything with a cat or secondary burn tubes from a major manufacturer should make you happy. Some have good luck with downdraft stoves, some not so much. It mostly boils down to cat or non, and steel, cast or soapstone. Whatever you (she) want to look at.

jeff_t said:

A top ten list would be easy to come up with on your own with a little reading here. Pretty much anything with a cat or secondary burn tubes from a major manufacturer should make you happy. Some have good luck with downdraft stoves, some not so much. It mostly boils down to cat or non, and steel, cast or soapstone. Whatever you (she) want to look at.

Click to expand...

Well said. Your budget will also be major player here as well. A top ten list really is subjective.

What did you end up going with??

I could be wrong, but in all the 100's of posts I have read, I don't remember one saying they were trading down in stove size. That tells you something. But trading UP? Now we read those posts all the time (including mine!). I agree, go one size bigger than you think you need.

Have a look at the new Blaze King Chinook. It's about the same size as the Princess, but IMOpinion, it looks a lot better. I would be pleased to have a Chinook in my living room - the Princess would have to be in the basement!

You would do well with the Jotul 600 or even the F500 Oslo. My friend heats his house in Massachusetts with 2,200 sf, very well with the Oslo. If NE Pa is much colder than Central Mass., then go with the F600. You'll be fine. Just make smaller fires if it gets too hot. Or take some clothes off!

I've got one of the true 'monsters' on the market. A Buck 91 with a 4.4 cu ft fire box that weighs in at 571 pounds. http://www.buckstove.com/wood/model91.html

I did't have the luxury of hunting around and considering all of the new stove options because of budget. I just kept hunting Craigs List until I stumbled on this one. I also was confined to looking for an insert. That being said, I couldn't be happier with it. I've got a 70's two story Cape Cod with the original windows and insulation and my better half would tell you there is no such thing as too much heat. In Oct Nov we were burning smaller fires with pine/poplar and were able to control the heat output nicely. Now we are burning pine/poplar/gum/hickory mixes and stuffing it full in the morning and evening and pretty much getting 12 hour burns from it. I've got about 1/2 cord of 2 year old Oak I'm saving and a couple of cords of 1yr Oak which I may mix in later in the year if I need to.

I'm starting to get a handle on the air movement in my house now and that has evened things out a lot. I think where a lot of people run in to problems with a larger stove in a smaller house is if they can't get the air moving to the rest of the house so the stove room gets sweaty while the rest of the house, not so much. A small fan sitting on the floor blowing cool air into the stove room really is the ticket as far as I'm concerned.

+1 to fire_man's comment about people trading 'down' to a smaller stove. Not something you hear around here. "Man, I sure wish I had a smaller one". This is AMERICA after all. :cheese:

FWIW I'm heating 1200 sq ft with a firebox a little over 2 cf and have windows open even when it's in the teens outside. Go big. Better lookin' at it than lookin' for it.