Cast Iron Stove that gets hot fast, and stays hot?

[sciencefan]

My home is 1800 sf , 2 story , 100+ years old , ( up dated/up graded ) and i run a 100,000 BTU stove.

When looking for a stove look at the rating as being 2/3 of what it is listed as.

If you NEED 50,000 BTUs of heat per hour then you need to be looking at 70k-100k BTUs stoves.

I didn't realize that before you explained it to me.

 

[Roospike]

My home is 1800 sf , 2 story , 100+ years old , ( up dated/up graded ) and i run a 100,000 BTU stove.

When looking for a stove look at the rating as being 2/3 of what it is listed as.

If you NEED 50,000 BTUs of heat per hour then you need to be looking at 70k-100k BTUs stoves.

I didn't realize that before you explained it to me.

Thats what we expect the stove dealers to do for us and even at that it dont always work.
My stove dealertold me i should buy the stove the next size down , well , that would of worked for 50° ~ 25° days but when its gets down below 25° it wouldnt of been enough stove. We have had weeks of below 0° temps in Nebraska and we would of had a problem with the middle size stove as we heat 100% with wood.

Now for a home for spot heating or extra heat a smaller stove you can get away with but you cant expect 100% home heating from a smaller stove.

#1 look for a bigger stove.
#2 cast / steel are going to be about the same unless you get a real thin steel plate stove and then you will get faster heat but when the fire goes out so too will the heat , the thicker plate steel and cast stoves will hold heat longer even after the fire has gone out.
#3 the less fancy options the better bang for the buck you can get and a bigger stove for less.
#4 fancy options are great because its on your home full time and your going to have to live with it year around.
#5 ash pan clean outs systems are a great option.

 

[sciencefan]

My home is 1800 sf , 2 story , 100+ years old , ( up dated/up graded ) and i run a 100,000 BTU stove.

When looking for a stove look at the rating as being 2/3 of what it is listed as.

If you NEED 50,000 BTUs of heat per hour then you need to be looking at 70k-100k BTUs stoves.

I didn't realize that before you explained it to me.

Thats what we expect the stove dealers to do for us and even at that it dont always work.
My stove dealertold me i should buy the stove the next size down , well , that would of worked for 50°-25° days but when its gets down below 25° it wouldnt of been enough stove. We have had weeks of below 0° temps in Nebraska and we would of had a problem with the middle size stove as we heat 100% with wood.

Now for a home for spot heating or extra heat a smaller stove you can get away with but you cant expect 100% home heating from a smaller stove.

#1 look for a bigger stove.
#2 cast / steel are going to be about the same unless you get a real thin steel plate stove and then you will get faster heat but when the fire goes out so too will the heat , the thicker plate steel and cast stoves will hold heat longer even after the fire has gone out.
#3 the less fancy options the better bang for the buck you can get and a bigger stove for less.
#4 fancy options are great because its on your home full time and your going to have to live with it year around.
#5 ash pan clean outs systems are a great option.

Thanks for all your help. I appreciate that.

I guess we're going to keep what we've got. It's only supplemental anyway.

If I want to warm up my feet I can use a space heater;-)

 

[Roospike]

Not a problem , thats what we do and were all just hanging out. Stay warm and be safe . ;-)

 

[stoveguy2esw]

CAST??? I see LOTS of welds. I'll give odds that it's largely STEEL plate.

dylan is right , i looked at th picture blown up , thats a steel stove , ya cant weld cast iron like that. when i was little , we had an old franklin that heated like you described, but dang it used a ton of wood. if you want a hot running unit that will build heat quickly, look into the new "non cat" reburn type units , large firebox models , elk can fill ya in on the VC units that he has seen built. the 30-nc ESw stove would be a good fit as well, check with BB about that unit , he has one, i think PE has a fairly large firebox unit as well. any of these larger firebox non cat units will likely give you not only the heat you like fairly quickly but extremely long burn times to keep the house warm overnight without having to reload and above all they are much safer units that will allow closer clearances than older stoves allow. biggest thing with the old radients like your unit is that they simply arent made any more due to efficiency levels and safety considerations.

 

[precaud]

Can anyone suggest a cast iron wood stove that gets really hot really fast?

Steel/cast iron doesn't matter much, honestly, except that the material dictates design geometry choices. The Quadrafire 2100 heats up astoundingly fast.

 

[elkimmeg]

Well Science fan you got quite a response the first day on the forum the introduction to modern wood stove burning 101.

I differ with you about wood consumption if one add a split an hour you are using more wood. Here is where the difference is after the initial load and a good bed of coals are established,
I load my stove with 4 of 5 decent size splits I let ther burn air open and get them establisedd into the second phase of the burning cycle stove su top surface temp 550 to 650 I damper it down or engage the secondary Cat combustion At that point I will no be reloading the stove for more that 6 to 10 hours and get 500 plus degree heat over that time period
Adding on split an hour would mean 8 splits to my 4/5 Really this is how these modern stoves are designed to opperate a good amount of heat over a decent time period.

Roo did a great job explaining other functions and sizing as did many other members here
so now you have come full circle and are going to stick with your current stove. Probably a bit smaller than your needs, but still provides relief and lessens dependency
on your central heating system. You are still comming out ahead. The next thing you should be concerned about is your installation and clearances to combustiables.
get your manual out and check that you have safe distances. Also look at your floor protection and single wall pipe protection distances

 

[Andre B.]

Just to add to the iron vs. steel thing they will be indistinguishable as long as.

1. Both stoves are of the same design, size, shape, primary and secondary air path, location and thickness of the firebrick, etc..
2. The thicknesses of the bottom, sides, and top are the same.
3. The steel stove has the same contours and patterns stamped in as are cast into the iron or the iron is cast as simple flat plates, in other words the same external surface area.

In short iron and steel have, for our practical purposes, the same specific heat and thermal conductivity numbers. I fact many charts of such numbers will have the list for the different metals and many times you will see one that is "Iron / Steel".

 

[wg_bent]

Just because the 118 in the store was not making the store 85 degrees, doesn't mean anything. That stove should be able to cook you out of a 500 sqft basement EASILY!!

How can you be so sure about that?

The 118 is a fairly large stove with a 55,000 btu rating. Same as the Jotul 400 Castine. That's only slightly less than the rated output of my Osburn (65,000) and I believe in the real world, where there is differences in wood, chimney and house characteristics, My Osburn 1800 and a Jotul 400 would have very similar heating capabilities, and so would the 118.

A stove in a showroom might be just loafing along with the air cut way down, so unless you saw the thing ripping away with a huge fireball inside it, I'd say it might be just loafing. Thus I can't be sure of anything. What I do know is that if I put a stove the size of my Osburn in my 450 sqft basement room even before I insulated it the heat produced would cook the room.

My livingroom can be pushed to 85 within an hour of loading up the stove with a large load of wood and a hot fire

 

[precaud]

The 118 is a fairly large stove with a 55,000 btu rating. Same as the Jotul 400 Castine. That's only slightly less than the rated output of my Osburn (65,000) and I believe in the real world, where there is differences in wood, chimney and house characteristics, My Osburn 1800 and a Jotul 400 would have very similar heating capabilities, and so would the 118.

Sorry, but I completely disagree with this reasoning. If you had any experience with the F118, I'm certain you wouldn't put it in the same class as these other two stoves. For a stove of it's size, the firebox is quite small, and you won't get any long burns out of it.

 

[wg_bent]

The 118 is a fairly large stove with a 55,000 btu rating. Same as the Jotul 400 Castine. That's only slightly less than the rated output of my Osburn (65,000) and I believe in the real world, where there is differences in wood, chimney and house characteristics, My Osburn 1800 and a Jotul 400 would have very similar heating capabilities, and so would the 118.

Sorry, but I completely disagree with this reasoning. If you had any experience with the F118, I'm certain you wouldn't put it in the same class as these other two stoves. For a stove of it's size, the firebox is quite small, and you won't get any long burns out of it.

So your saying the BTU output that Jotul claims is that far off? No I don't have experience with it, so if someone here does ie you precaud, then I'll have to defer to that. I was just looking at Jotul's ratings. It also seems like a fairly large stove... capacity to take a 24" log. so if you put in a very long 24" log it won't burn for long? I would guess the firebox is just as large as the Castine, just a different shape. But again...no experience here.

 

[precaud]

So your saying the BTU output that Jotul claims is that far off?

This is specmanship at it's finest. Remember, the max btu figure is a rate of output; duration of said output is not a part of the spec. It's possible that it could achieve that rate of output for a short time in it's short-lived burn cycle.

No I don't have experience with it, so if someone here does ie you precaud, then I'll have to defer to that.

Do a search for "F118" or "Black Bear" on this site and you'll see. I was technically intrigued by the F118 when it was first announced and unfortunately (and regretfully) influenced a couple people into buying one. They each lasted a couple weeks before being replaced, in one case by a Morso 3610 and the other by an F400.

I was just looking at Jotul's ratings. It also seems like a fairly large stove... capacity to take a 24" log. so if you put in a very long 24" log it won't burn for long?

The firebox volume is deceptively small. The firebox may be 24" long, but it's the same height and width as the little F602.

I would guess the firebox is just as large as the Castine, just a different shape. But again...no experience here.

The chamber above the firebox on the F118 (can't really call it a secondary chamber, 'cause very little combustion occurs up there...) is quite large compared to the F400's. There's honestly no comparison between the two. You can stuff alot more wood into a Castine.

Also, there's a good reason why you don't see more stoves with such extreme length-to-width geometry. Streams of primary air that are strong enough to reach the back of the firebox are also strong enough to burn the wood in the front much quicker than you want...

 

[wg_bent]

So your saying the BTU output that Jotul claims is that far off?

This is specmanship at it's finest. Remember, the max btu figure is a rate of output; duration of said output is not a part of the spec. It's possible that it could achieve that rate of output for a short time in it's short-lived burn cycle.

No I don't have experience with it, so if someone here does ie you precaud, then I'll have to defer to that.

Do a search for "F118" or "Black Bear" on this site and you'll see. I was technically intrigued by the F118 when it was first announced and unfortunately (and regretfully) influenced a couple people into buying one. They each lasted a couple weeks before being replaced, in one case by a Morso 3610 and the other by an F400.

I was just looking at Jotul's ratings. It also seems like a fairly large stove... capacity to take a 24" log. so if you put in a very long 24" log it won't burn for long?

The firebox volume is deceptively small. The firebox may be 24" long, but it's the same height and width as the little F602.

I would guess the firebox is just as large as the Castine, just a different shape. But again...no experience here.

The chamber above the firebox on the F118 (can't really call it a secondary chamber, 'cause very little combustion occurs up there...) is quite large compared to the F400's. There's honestly no comparison between the two. You can stuff alot more wood into a Castine.

Also, there's a good reason why you don't see more stoves with such extreme length-to-width geometry. Streams of primary air that are strong enough to reach the back of the firebox are also strong enough to burn the wood in the front much quicker than you want...

Well, now that you mention your earlier experience I DO remember that. Crap... I forgot about that. I guess it's like that Morso 2ub stove then. Looks really cool, but that has got to be the smallest firebox I've ever seen. Good point about how long it will sustain a BTU output.
I'll just go back in my hole now...

 

[seaken]

INDEED,sf, I was funnin' ya. The Oslo is an excellent stove.

BUT, let's review....cause I'm a little confused. Your original stoves heated likle gangbusters, correct?? If so, that's prolly because it's a rather large stove with LOTS of radiant surface. Personally, I'm surprized, though, that you weren't going thriough wood mighty fast.

Yes. about one stick an hour

Next, you purchased, installed the Napolean, but were disappointed...correct?? Is this likely because the Napolean is small?? Anyone?? Certainly it should be more stingy with the wood. Again, anyone??

Right, but it's what we could afford. We got a floor model for $999.

Lastly, sf, you're clear on the difference between cast-iron and steel stoves?? Cast will afford NICE (decorative) design features that are often neglected by the marketers of steel stoves.

The looks don't matter too much because it's more of a utilitarian stove. We don't have seating nearby to sit in front of it and watch it. It's just to supplement our oil heat.

From what I have been told about the difference between radiant heat and convection heat, I'm guessing the reason I don't like the way the stove "heats" (doesn't heat) is because I have just learned that I prefer radiant heat.

My appologies for being direct - you bought the wrong stove. It is not the stoves fault. You need a bigger stove. Sell that Napolean and buy a big Drolet or Century. You can't afford what you really want (a Defiant) so get the biggest steel stove you can afford and be done with it.

Sean
(In a hurry, gotta go. Not normally so atagonistic)

 

[jjbaer]

Hi,

Been reading all the info and since I have a steel Buck Stove (non air tight) insert, I thought I'd chime in.

My guess is that between you old stove being non-air tight and having a much larger firebox than the 1100, that it heats up much faster and actually puts out more heat than the Napoleon 1100 but at lower efficiencies...i.e., you burn more wood but get more heat. Let me explain:

Your 1100 has a 1.7 cu ft firebox but your old stove has a 27% larger firebox (2.16 cu ft based on the dimensions you provided). This means that (all other things being equal), your old stove could hold and burn more BTU's than the new stove.......27% more to be exact. While the new stove is more efficient, the added BTU's in the old stove may trump efficiency in the new stove...i.e. the heat output of the new stove (its lower BTU's times its higher efficiency) may actually be LOWER than the heat output of the old stove (its higher BTU's times its lower efficiency).

Another factor favoring the old stove.....the 1100 has 110 lbs of firebrick in it.........your old stove had none......firebrick takes time to heat up and so with the old stove, you not only have the capacity to burn more BTU's but you also radiated it almost immediatley into the steel and into the room but with the new stove, it takes time to heat the firebrick and start producing useful heat. I know this from my own experience......my Old Buck Stove insert starts throwing heat from the fan within 15 minutes of starting a fire and, being non-air-tight I can get a good roaring fire going really quickly and putting out serious heat.....much faster than a cat or non-cat newer stove....the drawback is that I burn much more wood...that is, while I have a large firebox and can put wood having many BTU's inside it, I burn it inefficiently but the product of the two (useful heat) is large. I suspect that the combination of the smaller firebox and firebricks that take time to heat up, both mean that unless you run the 1100 long-term, you'll be disappointed in the first few hours output when compared to your old stove.

That said, my advice is that for those who only run a stove a few hrs, buy a bigger one to compensate for the lower initial heat output but if you run it long term, you can get away with a more modest stove like you have now. It would be interesting to see if you're satisfied with the 1100 if you were to run it longer periods of time but at moderate heat output settings, in which case I'd guess that the product of less max heat output (compared to your old stove) times running it longer might just give you what you want (more overall total heat output). Before I dumped the new stove I'd try that technique. Let us know what you do.