Battenkiller said:
I feel that if thermostats were that effective, the major makers would be all over them. It's not cutting edge technology or anything.
That seems a very valid conclusion, and I pondered it long and hard--why don't more manufacturers use thermostats, when they work so well on some stoves (Blaze Kings, etc.)?
Here's my theory, submitted for your approval.
With the advent of EPA stoves, stoves became more finicky and thermostats became more problematic. Secondary burn is critical for stoves to meet the EPA emissions limits, and anything that might throw them out of secondary burn is a problem.
Primary air and efficient burning is clearly an issue, and many have complained that they can't shut their EPA stoves down enough with their strong drafting chimney due to the "Bungalow Effect". To pass EPA, stoves have to burn clean in conditions simulating a Florida bungalow--low chimney and relatively high outdoor temps, which means poor draft. So stoves have their primary air control configured so that someone in a FB can't choke it out of secondary burn, which means someone with a good drafting chimney may not be able to turn down the stove enough. I've seen a number of such posts.
This is particularly an issue with thermal (non-cat) smoke burners, for a not-too-low stove temp is required to keep the secondaries firing. This is less of an issue for cat stoves, which can ignite smoke at lower stove temps (once the cat ignites, it gets warmer).
Likewise for thermostats--finicky EPA stoves may fall out of secondary burn if a thermostat cuts back the primary air. So perhaps the explanation is that it is a PITA to get an EPA stove to work with a thermostat, that cat stoves do it more easily, and getting an EPA stove to work with a thermostat
is a relatively sophisticated and new technology?
We do see Woodstock, who has a reputation for making sophisticated cat stoves, hinting about putting a thermostat on their next stove.
Thoughts?
