Blaze King's New Stove Update

[BrowningBAR]

The king has a plug in the floor. I used it once, but by the time ash needs emptying, the stove is so deep it takes a lot of trips to get it all with the ash pan. Easier to shovel.

Will the Sirocco be big enough for you, Highbeam? As much as you are looking at burn times, 1.8 cu ft is pretty small.

If it is 1.8 cu ft of useable firebox, it's not much smaller than the Heritage. Also, Highbeam has mentioned he rarely gets the Heritage about 500 degrees, so I don't think he needs big horse power, just longer burn times.

 

[Todd]

It definetly isn't as deep as the Princess or King but I usually don't like more than an inch of ash in the box anyways or it starts to take away from loading capacity. Blaze King says to keep about 1/2" in there but then boast about how you can burn a full cord before emptying the King.

I think they really improved the efficiencies of these new 20/30 fire boxes so that's why the numbers are as good or better than the Princess.

 

[Highbeam]

Will the Sirocco be big enough for you, Highbeam? As much as you are looking at burn times, 1.8 cu ft is pretty small.

The firebox is significantly larger than my heritage which I measured at under 1.5 CF and it is true that I never ran that heritage above 550 on purpose, never above 575 at all, 600 is redline for the stove per the manufacturer. The sirocco is rated to heat up to 1500 SF but so is the princess which members tell us is conservative. I have 1700 SF of pretty well insulated 50 year old house in a relatively warm climate. We get into the teens once a year for less than a week and then 9 months of 40 degrees and rain.

The burn time is 20 hours. Same as a princess. If a princess would fit my hearth, then it would be a strong canidate. Then there is the looks, the princess is just not pretty. The sirocco is basic looking but it gets 20 hours burntime, that beats all of woodstock's offerings and really any stove out there from other brands.

Yes, I wish it were bigger. Wider would be my ideal direction of growth but of the current offerings, the sirocco seems to be the best.

 

[Ashful]

Comes out to 1.75 CF assuming you stay inside the bricks. Not bad, pretty close to spec.

They state 1.75 cu.ft. right in the manual, I believe. No surprises, there!

As much as you are looking at burn times, 1.8 cu ft is pretty small.

Advertised 20 hours at min output, or 8 hours at 38,000 BTU's.

 

[jeff_t]

I'm glad to see somebody getting one. Two of you would be great.

My sister is in the market for a stove, and we're waiting to see a bigger Sirocco, or the cast stove. Or maybe she will get a Chinook or Princess. She really likes running my stove, and isn't really hung up on the looks. Just want to see what's coming, if it is fairly soon. It may or may not happen this winter for her, anyway.

 

[Todd]

What really sold me is the t-stat. I like the extra control which gives longer more even burns.

 

[Ashful]

Yes, I wish it were bigger. Wider would be my ideal direction of growth but of the current offerings, the sirocco seems to be the best.

Same thoughts on the Sirocco here. I was just looking at dimensions and clearances on the Chinook 30, debating whether an Ashford 30 might even work for me. Man, that thing is narrow and deep! Still fits my spot, though. Also debating the Sirocco, but would like to see the cast beast first.

 

[Highbeam]

Yikes, I reran the numbers using the more exact dimensions from the manuals and the princess actually ends up being a about an inch shallower overall. I'll need to research some more since it will fit on the hearth. The low burn on the princess is only 6400 btu, not specified on the sirocco.

Lesson to all, don't build your hearth to just barely fit your chosen stove. Go bigger to allow flexibility.

 

[jeff_t]

What really sold me is the t-stat. I like the extra control which gives longer more even burns.

I'll be interested to see what you think of the thermostat after you've burned it for a while. It's not what I expected. It works more like a good primary air control than the way I expect a thermostat to work. One would think it should end up wide open at the end of a load, but that isn't what happens. With the cover off, I've seen very little, if any, movement at all.

 

[rdust]

I'll be interested to see what you think of the thermostat after you've burned it for a while. It's not what I expected. It works more like a good primary air control than the way I expect a thermostat to work. One would think it should end up wide open at the end of a load, but that isn't what happens. With the cover off, I've seen very little, if any, movement at all.

If it did that your burn times would greatly suffer. I would expect it to open back up to the setting on the dial but no more. When I set it on "1" as the stove cools I would never expect it to open past that.

 

[Todd]

I'll be interested to see what you think of the thermostat after you've burned it for a while. It's not what I expected. It works more like a good primary air control than the way I expect a thermostat to work. One would think it should end up wide open at the end of a load, but that isn't what happens. With the cover off, I've seen very little, if any, movement at all.

I think it works opposite of what most people think. Maybe they figured out the bare minimum of air required for the cat to stay active and the t-stat actually closes if it detects the fire going too strong? I don't know for sure but they sure kill everyone else in burn times and this t-stat has something to do with it imo.

 

[jeff_t]

Perhaps that is the case. I remember some of them were wound backwards a few years ago.

I would expect a thermostat to maintain a somewhat constant temperature, opening up as the load burns down. So maybe 'thermstat' isn't the proper term. I just think it is a very precise air control, adjusted with a dial instead of a lever.

 

[rdust]

I don't know for sure but they sure kill everyone else in burn times and this t-stat has something to do with it imo.

I'm pretty sure BKVP said they define burn time by how long the cat stays active. The Princess I think they list at 20 and it does that pretty easy if I can burn it on low, that's with a belly full of ash so you can't fit as much wood in the stove. Once it's cold a low burn is a no go I think I remember seeing 14+ when it was in the teens and I'm heating nearly 2K.

I can't wait to read your review on the new stove, it really won't be long before we have to start firing them up again.

 

[rdust]

Perhaps that is the case. I remember some of them were wound backwards a few years ago.

I would expect a thermostat to maintain a somewhat constant temperature, opening up as the load burns down. So maybe 'thermstat' isn't the proper term. I just think it is a very precise air control, adjusted with a dial instead of a lever.

I think it does maintain a constant temp while the fuel is available to do so. It also does open up as the stove cools just not past your initial setting. If I set the stove on 1 it's not going to open past that point. My stove top temps are darn near rock steady for a good part of the burn. I still don't think it makes sense to open the air control up as the stove burns down past your setting on the dial. Burn times would be no where near what they are if it worked that way. It would also not be a simple bi-metallic t-stat at that point.

When I have a fresh load and dial it down to just the right point were I can hear the t-stat close and the flames go out I can watch the coals go dark and bright, sometimes it will even flame back up when the coals brighten up. I assume this is when the t-stat is fluctuating the air flapper. I've let it run at a higher setting before with full flames and as the temp increases on the stove I can watch the fire become less active due to the t-stat closing the air down.

Regardless of how it is I approve of the way it's currently implemented.