Contemplating a Garn, Switzer or ??

  • Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.

    We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.

    We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil.
Status
Not open for further replies.

MrWarrups

New Member
Nov 25, 2010
3
east of CA
I am planning to move into my family’s old house in S. New England this winter and looking for guidance regarding the choice of an OWB that will best meet my needs. I have been doing rigorous research, talked with dealers and narrowed down my preference to the Garn (2000 gallon) or perhaps another model. I have spoken with Garn but not yet Switzer. Specifically I would like to know:

a) is the model I am aiming at (Garn) the best choice for my circumstances?
b) is the Garn over-rated and would I do better with another company?
c) Which is the most efficient model (least waste of heat)?
d) Is the Switzer a preferred choice?
e) Is the UL issue with the Switzer too big an obstacle for insurance companies and building inspectors?

Here are my specifics:

• 1840 farmhouse with moderate insulation— 4,400sf on first & second floors (9 and 8’ ceilings respectively); 1500sf basement and full-sized attic.
• Current heat source: 3 oil-fired units. #1: heats domestic hot water and 2nd floor through an air handler in attic. #2 is a hot air furnace in basement, which heats most of first floor. #3 is a smaller forced air furnace at opposite end of basement and heats ½ of basement plus one large room on 1st floor.
• The house has storm windows throughout. An energy audit was completed last year and after some improvements were made it was recommended that we insulate the attic floor, and the ductwork seams. The chimney’s flue lengths are from 30’-35’. There is no central air. The building axis is east-west and it receives full sunlight in winter so there is some passive solar gain.
• Oil use: two years ago the occupants burned around 3000 gallons of oil, and set the thermostat very high (75-80F). Last winter the house was not occupied and I kept it at 40-50F and burned only 500 gallons of oil.
• I don’t want to use an indoor (within the house) boiler or wood furnace because of the older chimney maintenance and the traveling distance to the boiler room in the basement.
• There is another 1200sf building next to the main house that I would eventually like to tie into the system.
• The owb/woodshed would be sited 25 feet away from the house with a run of about 100’ of insulated pex pipe from house to shed.

My research:

• I have checked out the Central Boiler E-Classic and the Heatmor 200SSR2. I read that while they are both efficient, the also may burn more wood than the Garn for the same amount of BTU’s produced. An efficient unit would cut down on the work involved.
• I am seriously considering the Garn 2000, despite its relative high cost and the building preparation required. I understand the Garn has a relatively long life—is that true?
• I have read with interest the Switzer literature, yet cannot yet tell if that would be a better choice than the Garn. Can anyone convince me of the Switzer’s superiority for my circumstances?

Thank you very much for your help.
 
MrWarrups said:
I am planning to move into my family’s old house in S. New England this winter and looking for guidance regarding the choice of an OWB that will best meet my needs. I have been doing rigorous research, talked with dealers and narrowed down my preference to the Garn (2000 gallon) or perhaps another model. I have spoken with Garn but not yet Switzer. Specifically I would like to know:

a) is the model I am aiming at (Garn) the best choice for my circumstances?
b) is the Garn over-rated and would I do better with another company?
c) Which is the most efficient model (least waste of heat)?
d) Is the Switzer a preferred choice?
e) Is the UL issue with the Switzer too big an obstacle for insurance companies and building inspectors?

Here are my specifics:

• 1840 farmhouse with moderate insulation— 4,400sf on first & second floors (9 and 8’ ceilings respectively); 1500sf basement and full-sized attic.
• Current heat source: 3 oil-fired units. #1: heats domestic hot water and 2nd floor through an air handler in attic. #2 is a hot air furnace in basement, which heats most of first floor. #3 is a smaller forced air furnace at opposite end of basement and heats ½ of basement plus one large room on 1st floor.
• The house has storm windows throughout. An energy audit was completed last year and after some improvements were made it was recommended that we insulate the attic floor, and the ductwork seams. The chimney’s flue lengths are from 30’-35’. There is no central air. The building axis is east-west and it receives full sunlight in winter so there is some passive solar gain.
• Oil use: two years ago the occupants burned around 3000 gallons of oil, and set the thermostat very high (75-80F). Last winter the house was not occupied and I kept it at 40-50F and burned only 500 gallons of oil.
• I don’t want to use an indoor (within the house) boiler or wood furnace because of the older chimney maintenance and the traveling distance to the boiler room in the basement.
• There is another 1200sf building next to the main house that I would eventually like to tie into the system.
• The owb/woodshed would be sited 25 feet away from the house with a run of about 100’ of insulated pex pipe from house to shed.

My research:

• I have checked out the Central Boiler E-Classic and the Heatmor 200SSR2. I read that while they are both efficient, the also may burn more wood than the Garn for the same amount of BTU’s produced. An efficient unit would cut down on the work involved.
• I am seriously considering the Garn 2000, despite its relative high cost and the building preparation required. I understand the Garn has a relatively long life—is that true?
• I have read with interest the Switzer literature, yet cannot yet tell if that would be a better choice than the Garn. Can anyone convince me of the Switzer’s superiority for my circumstances?

Thank you very much for your help.
I have never seen one bit of info on the Switzer outside of a few tidbits on Hearth here. As to where you got literature? They sure don't come up on a Google search. Gary might be a great guy & build a teriffic product, I'd need to use my imagination though as input. The Garn has a rep that I don't believe is 2nd to any here. My vote would be for the Garn, Randy
 
That's a pretty big heat load! 3000 gallons in 6 months is over 16 gallons per day! Granted, you'd be using much less when you drop the thermostat down to 70 or so....

I just installed a Garn and I'm happy with the unit. I heard of Gary and his boilers....but I never did make the trip over to see him and his shop, and it is just a couple of hours from me I believe. I heat (or will once it is all ready to go) 3500 sq ft of house, all using radiant, and 2200 sq ft of garage/shop (though only planned to be heated to 50 or so). I put in the 1500. My system is by no means yet optimized, but I'm pleased with how it is working.

Sounds like you have all forced air...which has some different requirements. My understanding is you need rather hot water all the time in the water to air HX to get good heat. That will limit the usefulness of the storage, i.e. you won't be able to use water down below 140 degrees or something like that...I'm sure others will chime in and correct me. So your temp swing in the Garn will be from 200 to 150 say. The 2000 should be about 16000BTU per degree, so you'd get 50*16000 or 800000 BTU's from a "tank". Seems like that would be about 1/2 of your load....so you'd be firing twice a day. Or maybe three times a day when really cold, and once in the shoulder seasons. That's pretty reasonable....and seems right up the Garn alley.

Not sure how quickly you are planning to move on this. Garn has developed a new digital controller for the units, as opposed to the mechanical timer. This should be an improvement in overall efficiency and ease of use. But, these units are not yet shipping...though hopefully by Jan they will be out. I'd guess you aren't looking to move this quickly, so likely not an issue for you.

You are obviously familiar with the Garn price tag. I'd say count on about 1/2 to 3/4 of the Garn price additional for your buried lines, building, HX, etc. Not sure how much the water to air HX are...and it sounds like you need three. All the plumbing adds up in a hurry. I have over $20K in my system, OUCH, and that is with me doing ALL the installation work. This includes a good part of my outbuilding the Garn is in and 80' of microflex buried line (23.50/foot). And don't forget the microflex fittings. $70 each....they count in the bottom line.

But, so far, I'm very happy. In my search, I came to the conclusion that a downdrafter gasser (like the Biomass, Eko, Econoburn, etc.) PLUS adding storage wouldn't be a whole lot less than the Garn.....so I just bit the bullet.

In all of my searches, I never heard an unhappy Garn customer...yet I heard a lot of people say they wished they had the Garn. It's a tank...quite literally...and hopefully it will last a good long time. It does require the water maintainence, but I believe that to be a simple task and relatively low cost.

As far as installation in your state, which I assume is MA, I'm not sure how happy they are with Garn units. I know MA is very particular. But since it is not pressurized, that may remove all the concerns. Others will chime in I'm sure. You've come to the right spot for information and help!
 
Garn is a good, proven unit. Thats my vote.

I have an E-classic dealer in my area. I looked into this unit briefly. The E-classic dealer told me to figure 1 cord of wood will equal 100gals of oil. I wanted the lowest wood use for the buck. A gasser with storage( or Garn) is 1cord of wood= 150 gals of oil. Once you get tuned in on firings, and getting very well seasoned wood you might push 1 cord= 175 gals. i think you're headed in the right direction.

Now one thing to consider doing sooner than later. Wood. You need to have well seasoned wood no matter what you get for a wood burning unit. Needs to be cut/split/stacked for a year. In my rough estimate you will need 13 maybe as much 20 cord a year. But 20 cord will figure on leaving the t-stat at 75-80. Wood storage, a cord is 128 cu/ft. x 20 cord= big wood shed.

Put your wood up now? if possible. Big under taking(especially if located in Calif now). Be wary of anyone selling you seasoned wood. Generally, a wood dealer is not going to put up many cords of wood, store on property for at least a year. Well seasoned wood should have a M/C of 15% to 18%, although you can make the 20's work well. Just the drier the better.


Good Luck

BTW, insulation is a very good investment in the building.
 
One of our members EFOREST has a Switzer. He seems to love it. I would search his name as he posted alot of info on the Switzer. Here is a link to his boiler install:

http://s297.photobucket.com/albums/mm210/forestfamily64/

That said, Garn has many many satisfied customers on this web site : )
 
As a garn owner, and a friend of gary switzer they are both good boilers. You are about to spend a fair ammount of money and alot of time with your boiler. if your knowledge is limited to brochures I would suggest contacting each for installs in your new area to view in operation. I believe chris holley covers maine for the garn, and call gary switzer. They both also handle installation and can answer about your particulars.
tom
 
Or just get a barrel stove :coolsmile: They look cool!
 
Your home and ours is very similar in size (ours 4800sf) and age. Our construction is frame and lap sliding. Mediocre insulation and no storm windows (I'm goofy about preserving the historic look). Recent weather finally tested the value of our total redo of our underground system. So although we're in Tennessee, we've been having mid-20 evenings and nights. Our Biomass 60 has been able for the first time to easily stay ahead, keep the house 66-68F, and not burn large quantities of wood. We only heat the downstairs with forced air so our upstairs is cooler for sleeping. It appears Garn owners love their systems. This is the only system I've ever owned, but I like what I have. I don't have storage and trying to decide if I want it (for me I hate starting new fires and getting a new bed of coals). I'm a second season user and may do storage yet. Bottomline, our homes are similar and at least for mid-20 temps the BioMass 60 (rated 220 kbtu/hr) is doing the job comfortably. BTW, I really like having our boiler, splitter, stack, wood, etc. displaced from the house. It's in a barn about 120' behind the house. Although less efficient, I'll never put a wood boiler in our old home. Read a lot here. Lots of experienced users and you'll soon formulate impressions about various boilers.
 
Thank you all for your replies; they have been extremely helpful to me. I am going to look at a neighbor's Garn setup on Friday, and am still plowing through information about other models. In general this site has been very valuable. To clarify, we have an unlimited supply of free firewood (if you don't count the work involved working it up). The heat use two years ago involved keeping an elderly person very warm, and would not be necessary when my family and I move there. I still have to figure out the indoor connections and the electronic controls, such as the feedback mechanisms for the household thermostats, so you may still be hearing from me!

Best to all.
 
I am starting the second heating season with my garn 2000. I do like it but is taking more wood than we thought it would. We have a 1912 three story farm house that has been insulated pretty well with newer windows. We heat basement and first floor to 75 degrees and the second floor at 65 degrees and the third floor at 55 degrees most of the time. About 4000 square feet total.All the house is heated with coils in furanaces so we keep the water temp up as much as possiable. I also heat my shop 20 by 60 with 16 foot side walls it has floor heat set at 45 degrees air temp. I also have a furance in the shop with a coil in it and I turn it on when I am in the shop to warm the air up a little. I did all the work my self inculeing putting the coils in only hired the digging and foaming the lines to the house and foaming the Garn and the Garn barn. I ended up with 15,000 in the Garn and 20,000 in the install. It works great but it that a fair amount of time to operate it as I burned 12 cords of hedge wood last winter. I hope you have acess to hard wood I could not image how much wood I wood have burned if I would have used elm. I have a farm that needs a lot of hedge that needs cut. I have bought another SS 2200 gallon tank and hope to get it hook up for next heating season so we could be gone for a while with no worrys. Don't buy the 1500 Garn it won't be big enough. Good luck with your descion.
 
[quote author="sparke" date="1290887407"]One of our members EFOREST has a Switzer. He seems to love it.

True, true. I do love my Switzer and every year I get a little wiser with it's use and my wood management. If you want to talk send me a PM with your number and I'll call.
This weekend I'm putting the finishing touch's on the piping to the (2 story) barn and hope to have the slab heated for the first time. The second floor RADs will have to wait till my xmas to New Years vacation.
 
My research continues, and I spent the very stormy day on the phone and online, trying to probe what would work best for my situation. The very helpful Garn dealer suggested I also look at Portage and Main Optimizer 350 (ready at the end of December). Indeed the P&M compares favorably. It is a more compact unit, compared to a Garn and does not have storage beyond the 250 gallon boiler. It comes in at a savings of around 5K, including the housing and wood storage building cost. For the models I have reviewed, the P&M and Garn seems to have the highest efficiency burn. As I've said before, I would like to burn the least amount of wood. We have another large woodshed on the place and burn mostly hardwood-- sugar maple, oak, ash and cherry.

I have two new concerns: comparative efficiency of the Garn vs P&M, and the size of the inlet and outlet pipes. Please bear with me:

1. I have heard that the forced air heat exchanger (which I have) water needs to be run with a steady supply of water hotter than radiant heat systems. I have 3 forced air furnaces in the building. In the opinion of the readers, which of the two (Garn vs P&M) units would be likely to burn less wood? If the Garn choice results in less work (though more money) it would likely be a better choice. Both presumably produce almost no heat exhaust.

2. The P&M dealer recommended 2 sets (4 total) of 1" insulated boiler transmission pipes going into the house from the boiler, rather than 2 1-1/4". This would be to avoid a heat loss by the time it gets to the third heat exchanger. I imagine that the circulation will be constant, even when the fire goes out. Anyone else recommend this approach?

Friday I visit a Garn in operation. I have yet to check in with Switzer. By the end of the day this makes my head spin.

Hope this is some help to others in similar situations.
 
If you figure on a 20 degree drop in the water to air HX then yes, by the time you get to the third, seems like you'd be lacking in hot water. So, I think your dealer may be suggesting a good approach. Coming in at 180, then 160 for #2, and 140 for #2 is cool. Be careful with the 1" lines. 10gpm with a 20degree drop is 100,000 BTU/HR. How long are the lines to be? 10gpm through 1" lines is perhaps pushing it a bit. Many stories around here about folks installing too small of buried lines. Don't skimp here.

I looked at the P&M briefly before I bought the Garn. Since I have radiant, I can use the storage of 1500 or 2000 (I have 1500) down to 120 or below for heat. DHW is another story. You situation is different and it seems that you need to have hot water nearly all the time. This may lend itself to having a fire going more steadily...especially if that fire heat output can match that of your heat load.

What is the P&M burn rate? Does it match your expected heat load? If you have 100,000 BTU/HR (which is large) then I suspect that may be in the sweet range for the P&M. 250 gallons of storage may be enough to allow you to keep some kind of buring efficiency.

As far as less wood....that boils down then to efficiency. If you have a steady load on the P&M that keeps your fire buring hot, then you should be efficient. But if it creates more heat than you use, and then has to smolder, that's when your efficiency will drop significantly. But perhaps the 250 gallons will help tide this over. I'd suspect your efficiency would drop considerably in the shoulder seasons, like now, when it isn't quite cold enough to keep the fire burning full time. Then you heat the storage, then you idle.

The other issue would be how often you need to fill the boiler...

250 gallons * 8 = 2000 BTU/degree. If you figure a 40 degree rise (say 200 to 160), then you can store 80,000 BTUs. If your burn rate is 120,000 per hour, seems like you are in good shape. The Garn is about 300,000 per hour...very fast and hot flat out, to maximize efficiency.

Seems to me that you have a good argument for something that burns more constantly...AS LONG AS the fire stays active most of the time. Idle time is inefficient. If the burn rate can be matched to the load, seems like you are in good shape. That's the beauty of the Garn.

One other thing that really won me over to the Garn.....Longevity. Heaterman on here installs them often and he spoke of visiting one of the earliest Garns produced back in the 80's. With something like 25 years of service, it was near its life. And when he talked about the water maintainence, the owner said "What maintainence?" So presumably with proper water management, the unit should last a long time. I'm 41 and I'm hoping mine will outlast me.... Based on what we seem to hear, that seems possible (not sure about likely). I don't think this can be said for many of the other gasser's on here....but I don't know. I know I was concerned, for example, with replacing the refractory cement in the Econoburn outdoor units. Presumably they will break over time, then the nozzles down to the secondary chamber are messed up, and have to be replaced. My local dealer couldn't answer me on this one....Seems like it is poured in place. With the Garn, there's firebrick in the firebox and the refractory lining in the secondary chambers. All of these things are readily replaceable by me (as long as I can buy them from Dectra). My searching led me to believe the Garn has the best proven long term track record out there for my money. But the others might be there too.

How about the firebox size for the P&M? Loading it 6 times a day may be a drag...or having to cut wood to 18" as well. Just a thought.

Efficiency is all about keeping the fire burning at full tilt....keep that in mind. Match the burn rate to the load and you should be OK. Now, what is the real burn rate? Hmmm.

Don't skimp on underground lines either! That's another way to waste wood.

And remember with your need for high water temps you will always be operating with the highest losses, i.e. higher losses at higher temps due to greater temperature differential. But nothing you can do about that....besides insulation everywhere on your pipes.


Also make sure that your choice is OK with local codes....

Obviously, just some rambling thoughts.

One more thought....what about freeze protection? Does your price include Glycol? It's not cheap and with 250 gallons of storage, you'd need a lot! The Garn can either have interal electric elements....or you can just fire the thing up hot and then not take any heat out of it. If well insulated, you'd have 2 weeks of protection easily from freeze. Again, Heaterman tells the story of a customer's unit he monitored exactly this way. After 10 days, it was down to around 120 or so. Would easily get a lot longer time out of a single burn. Again, just abother rambling thought....
 
The MAJOR difference between a Garn and Switzer is that a Switzer is pressurized which equates to minimal heat loss and NO chemical treatment. Just something else to consider.
 
I never looked at the Switzer....very well may be my loss.

I just looked at the P&M 250, and I see it is 300,000 BTU/HR (up to). I guess that would be my focus of questions....if you burn it at a lower rate, what happens to efficiency? Without storage, that 300,000 rate will have you idling quite a bit....
 
MrWarrups said:
My research continues, and I spent the very stormy day on the phone and online, trying to probe what would work best for my situation. The very helpful Garn dealer suggested I also look at Portage and Main Optimizer 350 (ready at the end of December). Indeed the P&M compares favorably. It is a more compact unit, compared to a Garn and does not have storage beyond the 250 gallon boiler. It comes in at a savings of around 5K, including the housing and wood storage building cost. For the models I have reviewed, the P&M and Garn seems to have the highest efficiency burn. As I've said before, I would like to burn the least amount of wood. We have another large woodshed on the place and burn mostly hardwood-- sugar maple, oak, ash and cherry.

I have two new concerns: comparative efficiency of the Garn vs P&M, and the size of the inlet and outlet pipes. Please bear with me:

1. I have heard that the forced air heat exchanger (which I have) water needs to be run with a steady supply of water hotter than radiant heat systems. I have 3 forced air furnaces in the building. In the opinion of the readers, which of the two (Garn vs P&M) units would be likely to burn less wood? If the Garn choice results in less work (though more money) it would likely be a better choice. Both presumably produce almost no heat exhaust.

2. The P&M dealer recommended 2 sets (4 total) of 1" insulated boiler transmission pipes going into the house from the boiler, rather than 2 1-1/4". This would be to avoid a heat loss by the time it gets to the third heat exchanger. I imagine that the circulation will be constant, even when the fire goes out. Anyone else recommend this approach?

Friday I visit a Garn in operation. I have yet to check in with Switzer. By the end of the day this makes my head spin.



Hope this is some help to others in similar situations.

I have two sets of 1 inch lines (four lines total) and my lines are over 300 ft to the house and I run three furances and dosmetic hot water with them it work no problem. I can't see how you will be able to live with no storage and try to get the boiler to come up to temp when the furances call for heat. I would think you would get a lot of cold air before the boiler gets up to temp.
 
My first install was for 3000 SQ Ft house 1988 good insulation (baseboard and domestic) plus a 2784 Sq ft radiant slab barn. I ran 150' each way from the OWB. Oil for the house was ~1000 gallons a season (plus or minus a bit with Tstat at 65). Once I went to wood, my oil went to zero (0) and my usage went to 20 cords of wood per season (October - May). I burned everything I could get my hands on. Ash, birch, maple, apple, pine, wet pine -ANYTHING.
My OWB is now in a better place using "real" underground pipe at a 1830 three story farmhouse. You can read my earlier posts about using cheaper pipe. So with the old farmhouse I'm using a forced air system where the oil in the tank lasts 3-4 weeks -period. At $600 a pop, it's not cheap to run. I'm actually using wood from last year that I started to store, but I need a log load soon as my usage should be ~8-10 cords this year.
I'm running 1 1/4 ID underground LOGSTOR piping with a Wilostar 30 (9-11 GPM) going to the 250,000 BTU Exchanger. Delta is ~10 degrees. I still have another outlet on my boiler that could be used for the domestic and another heating system. The temp on the boiler is currently set for 190f as the forced air exchanger can use all the heat it can get for this old house. I was told that at 206, the water will turn to steam and that is not good for any system. I prefer to load my machine once in the AM and once at night, whether it needs it or not. I like it outdoors so the bugs and the mess can stay outside and I don't have to move the wood more than twice. Cut it/stack it then pick it and throw it in the machine.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.