Cords per month?

[Tansao]

Hi folks!

I just installed a VC Merrimack and have been burning it 24/7 since last weekend. I know it's a long learning experience to perfect the burn with your house. I am only getting maybe a 6 hour burn instead of the advertised 12 hour. Although, I wonder what the 12 hour burn is defined as? 12 hours until all coals are out and no longer red? I live in Central MA. It has been between 10 and 20 out the last week or so.

Anyway, I've gone through more wood in this last week than I would have liked. I turned my oil thermostat down to 54 and the house is between 64 and 72. How many cords have folks gone through?

Any suggestions on keeping it 24/7 and reducing wood use? I keep the air flow down to half or closed most times, with it all the way open to restart it.

 

[BrowningBAR]

Hi folks!

I just installed a VC Merrimack and have been burning it 24/7 since last weekend. I know it's a long learning experience to perfect the burn with your house. I am only getting maybe a 6 hour burn instead of the advertised 12 hour. Although, I wonder what the 12 hour burn is defined as? 12 hours until all coals are out and no longer red? I live in Central MA. It has been between 10 and 20 out the last week or so.

Anyway, I've gone through more wood in this last week than I would have liked. I turned my oil thermostat down to 54 and the house is between 64 and 72. How many cords have folks gone through?

Any suggestions on keeping it 24/7 and reducing wood use? I keep the air flow down to half or closed most times, with it all the way open to restart it.

Amount of wood depends upon your location, house layout, insulation, type of stove, and type of wood.

Most people in my area go though about 4 cords. I go through 8.

 

[Wood Duck]

I have read somewhere that a cord a month is a good estimate. Maybe I wrote that based on the many similar threads we have had here. Results vary.

I am burning around a cord a month in my small stove, burning 24/7 or close to it. If I burn with the air too far closed for too much of the burn cycle I end up with excessive coals, so much of the time I am burning only a few splits on top of a pile of coals, with the air wide open. I am not sure how this is affecting my wood use, but I hate to throw out coals, so I have to burn them. If I try to burn them on low air, the stove gets too cool and is not effectively heating the house. I too am in a learning curve.

 

[RNLA]

I am bound and determined to not run out or be short again. I estimate 4-6 cords for the year, weather dependent of course... I will buy logs and process if I have to.

 

[Battenkiller]

I wonder what the 12 hour burn is defined as?

Depends on if you're buying or selling. %-P

FWIW I go through about a cord a month in the cold weather, maybe a little more in January and February. I think the best way to save wood is to not fill the stove up every time. The only time I fill my stove more than half way is when I am leaving for the day and when filling for the overnight burn. I work at home, and there is always the temptation to add a few more pieces to keep the stove hot and reduce the reload frequency. I try to resist because it doesn't seem to make the place all that much warmer but the wood is now burned and gone for good.

Meter the wood out instead of stuffing it to the gills. I can hit 750º stove top on my stove filled only a third full. I don't know where the extra wood goes if I fill it to the brim, but I think the heat is just passing through the house walls faster and heating up the great outdoors for the rest of you guys.

I have been getting what I would call a 8-10 hour burn, defined by me as:

1. The stove is still warm but not hot

2. There are plenty of active coals to start a new fire.

Doesn't mean they'll all be red-hot, just able to rekindle themselves with a few small pieces of dry kindling and me blowing on the coals.

Last night it went to -5ºF. I got the stove going real hot during the evening, stoked it full at 11 PM and went to sleep. I woke up and the place had dropped to 66º, but I didn't restart the stove until 9 AM. When I went down, there was a nice bed of coals, but the stove was only 150º because there wasn't a strong enough draft left to get the coals red. I piled them up in front of the air intake holes, put some dry wrist-size ash on top and I was back in the zone in no time. Was that an 10 hour burn? I'm calling it so.

 

[BrowningBAR]

I wonder what the 12 hour burn is defined as?

Depends on if you're buying or selling. %-P

FWIW I go through about a cord a month in the cold weather, maybe a little more in January and February. I think the best way to save wood is to not fill the stove up every time. The only time I fill my stove more than half way is when I am leaving for the day and when filling for the overnight burn. I work at home, and there is always the temptation to add a few more pieces to keep the stove hot and reduce the reload frequency. I try to resist because it doesn't seem to make the place all that much warmer but the wood is now burned and gone for good.

Meter the wood out instead of stuffing it to the gills. I can hit 750º stove top on my stove filled only a third full. I don't know where the extra wood goes if I fill it to the brim, but I think the heat is just passing through the house walls faster and heating up the great outdoors for the rest of you guys.

I have been getting what I would call a 8-10 hour burn, defined by me as:

1. The stove is still warm but not hot

2. There are plenty of active coals to start a new fire.

Doesn't mean they'll all be red-hot, just able to rekindle themselves with a few small pieces of dry kindling and me blowing on the coals.

Last night it went to -5ºF. I got the stove going real hot during the evening, stoked it full at 11 PM and went to sleep. I woke up and the place had dropped to 66º, but I didn't restart the stove until 9 AM. When I went down, there was a nice bed of coals, but the stove was only 150º because there wasn't a strong enough draft left to get the coals red. I piled them up in front of the air intake holes, put some dry wrist-size ash on top and I was back in the zone in no time. Was that an 10 hour burn? I'm calling it so.

Okay, then I got a 21 hour burn from the Heritage last week.

 

[BrotherBart]

For me a twelve hour burn is either last night when it was supposed to get into the mid-twenties so I loaded three monster splits which is two thirds full for the 30-NC at nine o'clock and get up this morning at nine with 71 degrees downstairs and coals to fire off three more big splits. Or like will happen here in a couple of days it will be headed for the low teens at night so I load it full with five monster splits at nine o'clock and get up the next morning at nine to 70 or 71 downstairs and coals to fire off three big splits. Colder than that, I get up at seven.

I don't care what the stove temp is when I get up. I do care about the temp in the house and those coals. I don't do twigs and blowing on coals anymore. Used to. In the odd case that the coals are too far gone I toss a chunk of a Super Cedar in there and start breakfast.

As to wood usage, since we don't get the bone cracking cold a lot of folks get, but do not have another heat source, average is 3/4 cords a month in the coldest months. Three cords a year total.

 

[remkel]

I figure a cord a month- but temps this winter have been cold (6 tonight and dropping). Aleady know I am running short this year and have begun scrounging for next year. May have to buy a cord or two for next year, but I will not give in for a little while longer.

 

[Battenkiller]

Okay, then I got a 21 hour burn from the Heritage last week.

H-m-mmm... Maybe I should line the Vig with soapstone.

BTW, what happened to the word "lifesaver" after the Vigilant in your sig line? All I know is that mine is sitting down there in the basement keeping this whole place very comfy. Go to bed most nights at 70º, wake up most mornings at 70º. I don't even need the extra two stoves. ;-P

 

[nate379]

Been burning more or less 24/7 since October (keep in mind we have had snow since before Halloween) and I've burned roughly 1.5 cords.

 

[BrowningBAR]

Okay, then I got a 21 hour burn from the Heritage last week.

H-m-mmm... Maybe I should line the Vig with soapstone.

BTW, what happened to the word "lifesaver" after the Vigilant in your sig line? All I know is that mine is sitting down there in the basement keeping this whole place very comfy. Go to bed most nights at 70º, wake up most mornings at 70º. I don't even need the extra two stoves. ;-P

That was when the furnace died and only had the one stove. If it wasn't for that stove for that one month it would have been a mess. The upstairs was still 40 degrees, though, and we pretty much lived in one room of the house for a full 34 days.

The Vigilant is a hell of a stove, but it is a hungry SOB. Having two other stoves only highlights it's hunger. I go through 8 cords a season now and can see the value of replacing the vigilant with a modern stove like a Castine or a Fireview.

 

[Battenkiller]

The Vigilant is a hell of a stove, but it is a hungry SOB. Having two other stoves only highlights it's hunger. I go through 8 cords a season now and can see the value of replacing the vigilant with a modern stove like a Castine or a Fireview.

I look at stoves like hungry teenage boys. You want a lot of work out of 'em, you really gotta feed 'em.

Be that as it may, I seem to be burning pretty close to what others in my area are using in their EPA stoves of similar size - a cord a month. Half a cord a month on a 2.5 cu.ft. stove that is cranking above 650º almost 24/7? Yeah, I'd jump all over that, but I don't see that when the usage numbers get reported here. Four cord a season seems to be the rule for a non-cat EPA stove. I might burn five. I can live with that. I'm buying nice black birch for next year now. $140 for a fat cord. An extra $140 won't even be noticed, but a $2500 stove would put a serious crimp in my cigar budget for years.

I was in the local VC repair shop buying an andiron for the left side. While I was there, I walked over to the place that used to sell VC, but now sells Jotul and Quad. I was looking at the Castine and thought it was a pretty nice little stove. The owner and I got talking (he's 30 years in the business and knows I have a Vigilant) and I asked him how he thought it compared to the Vigilant as far as heat output. He just laughed. "No way. Not even close." And he doesn't even sell VC products anymore. He wasn't even sure the Oslo could match it for heat, although he allowed it would use less wood trying.

I think you should at least look at something the same size if you want to heat the same space. Fuel economy aside, you want the heat when you need it the most. So far, the Vigilant hasn't let me down in that department. But if I hit the lottery, I'd go up to the Firelight in a heartbeat before I'd ever step down to a Castine, at least in my situation.

 

[BrowningBAR]

The Vigilant is a hell of a stove, but it is a hungry SOB. Having two other stoves only highlights it's hunger. I go through 8 cords a season now and can see the value of replacing the vigilant with a modern stove like a Castine or a Fireview.

I look at stoves like hungry teenage boys. You want a lot of work out of 'em, you really gotta feed 'em.

Be that as it may, I seem to be burning pretty close to what others in my area are using in their EPA stoves of similar size - a cord a month. Half a cord a month on a 2.5 cu.ft. stove that is cranking above 650º almost 24/7? Yeah, I'd jump all over that, but I don't see that when the usage numbers get reported here. Four cord a season seems to be the rule for a non-cat EPA stove. I might burn five. I can live with that. I'm buying nice black birch for next year now. $140 for a fat cord. An extra $140 won't even be noticed, but a $2500 stove would put a serious crimp in my cigar budget for years.

I was in the local VC repair shop buying an andiron for the left side. While I was there, I walked over to the place that used to sell VC, but now sells Jotul and Quad. I was looking at the Castine and thought it was a pretty nice little stove. The owner and I got talking (he's 30 years in the business and knows I have a Vigilant) and I asked him how he thought it compared to the Vigilant as far as heat output. He just laughed. "No way. Not even close." And he doesn't even sell VC products anymore. He wasn't even sure the Oslo could match it for heat, although he allowed it would use less wood trying.

I think you should at least look at something the same size if you want to heat the same space. Fuel economy aside, you want the heat when you need it the most. So far, the Vigilant hasn't let me down in that department. But if I hit the lottery, I'd go up to the Firelight in a heartbeat before I'd ever step down to a Castine, at least in my situation.

When you have an EPA stove and a Pre-EPA stove you see the difference. Right now I am loading literally twice as much wood in the Vigilant as I am in the Heritage. That is not always the case, but it has been for the last several days.

In regards to the future replacement stove it will either be a Castine or a Oslo sized stove (example only as I will probably buy used again and you can not be too picky when you are buying used). The castine is rated at 55k btus and the Vig is 50k. I have a slight concern about an Oslo sized stove as it is rated much larger than the Vig. I like the idea of a Fireview as I can run it up to 700+ degrees but still 'choke' it down during the shoulder season which is important for my setup. I still want to replace the Intrepid with something larger so I get longer burn times, which is really important when dealing with three stoves. But, I am limited to a Lopi Declaration or a Hampton H300 at this point... unless I have somehow missed a stove in my vast research (doubtful).

It is just a shame that VC is still a dodgy company. I'd pick up cat defiant or encore in a heartbeat.

 

[Battenkiller]

When you have an EPA stove and a Pre-EPA stove you see the difference. Right now I am loading literally twice as much wood in the Vigilant as I am in the Heritage. That is not always the case, but it has been for the last several days.

Well, you know I can't speak from personal experience, all I am doing is relating what has been told to me by more than one pro in the field. These guys have everything to gain from telling me the Castine will outperform my stove, but they tell me otherwise based on personal experience from their own use and that of hundreds of customers.

I listen to what some say here who have compared stoves "A & B" style, and I am not doubting them. If I thought for a minute I could get the same amount of heat from a stove using half the wood, it would certainly be wonderful getting by with 2 1/2 cord a year. Who here in the north is burning 24/7 from a basement install and heating their home with 2 1/2 cord a year? It doesn't even make sense to me, that's why I question it. You can only get so much heat out of a cord of wood. I run my stove hot and clean on minimal air, so half my heat isn't going up the chimney. Half my wood isn't going up in smoke or I'd see some from time to time.

If someone can clearly explain how I'll be able to heat this place on 2 1/2 cord from late October to early April, I'd consider taking the plunge. I'm not a stubborn man, but I read over and over about experienced folks having trouble getting enough useful heat from the new stoves, and I am a bit afraid to jump when what I have works perfectly fine for me. If the new stoves are working better for others, I am happy for them. But I'm a New Yorker from Missouri. You have to prove it to me first.

I don't know if you caught the thread about a study comparing old conventional stoves with highly efficient designs. One of the stoves used was a VC type stove, but was burned in updraft position only (in order to simulate a conventional air-tight). Even burned in that less efficient manner, it still averaged about 63% overall efficiency burning seasoned oak. I would not doubt the figure in that study at all, based on my own use of this stove. Obviously in your case, the saying YMMV is appropriate.

Regarding max output, it is physically impossible for a radiant heater to put out more heat than the sum of its radiating surfaces can produce. The Oslo and the Vigilant are just about the same size, and they have just about the same surface area. How can the Oslo put out 55% more heat than the Vigilant at the same operating temperature? The Castine is noticeably smaller. How hot would it need to get to significantly outperform a Vigilant running with a stable 750º temperature?

The Vig is certainly a dirtier running stove, there is no getting around that one. In the study I mentioned, it put out 38 grams/hours of PM into the air. That's 5 times the maximum amount allowed in a non-cat EPA stove. So how much extra fuel is lost in that exhaust? Well, at a steady 24/7 emission rate of 38 gr/hr, the stove would emit 912 grams of particulate matter. In 30 days it would emit 27,360 grams. After six months that would be 164,160 grams, or 362 pounds of wasted fuel... slightly less than 1/10 of a cord of seasoned black birch, hickory, hard maple, black locust, or beech... the kind of wood I am currently using to heat this joint. So even if an EPA stove had 0 g/hr of PM, it would only save me $14 of wood per year in physical fuel losses. And the kicker? The same stove burning green oak at about 40% MC had only 20 g/hr in PM emissions, so that is only $7 of fuel a year lost into the air... and it still got a 58% overall efficiency. Not too shabby, I'd say.

It's all of these things that give me pause when I get to thinking about making the switch. These new stoves are a lot of money, and I'm burning to save money. The opinion of professionals in the field who I know and trust not to lie to me refuse to make the same "you'll get twice the heat from half the fuel" claims, at best saying things like, "You'll definitely use less wood." or, "If you're burning 7 cord now, you'll burn 6 1/2 with the newer stoves." Why are they lying to me when telling the truth would put steak on the table instead of fish sticks?

I'm not saying anyone here is lying, or even that they are mistaken in their observations, but I'm not standing there filling their stoves, or sitting half-naked in their living rooms, so I have to wonder where all the claims are coming from. I've also been doing research on this for a while, and it just doesn't add up so far. I wish someone would explain what I'm missing, because I really want to drink the Kool-Aid and become a true believer, but anecdotal tales just won't make the folds of my wallet open up, not while it's 11ºF outside and I'm sitting here sipping whisky in my sweats and t-shirt at 2:30 AM, hours after I filled the stove that's sitting in the basement on the other side of the house.

Of course... it could be the whisky.

 

[OhioBurner©]

We [I mean my folks] had a vigilant from around '83 until a few years ago, so for nearly 25 years. They recently replaced it with a Quad Isle Royale. I remember the first year my folks were amazed at how much less wood they were feeding it and how much lower the thing would idle and burn clean still. I can say thier old Vigilant was on a 1-2 month cleaning schedule, I am sure some of that might have been less than ideal wood and my folks probably not running it the best. Anyhow, at the end of the year he said they burned around 4 cords. They were averaging 7 cords for 20-some years. I think he said he has cut down cleaning to 1 or 2 for the burn season.

How can the Oslo put out 55% more heat than the Vigilant at the same operating temperature?

Well for one, you dont know the average of the temperature across all surfaces I am guessing. I mean ALL surfaces. And maybe the Oslo puts out the same amount of heat but just burns 55% less fuel to do it? (or maybe 25%-33% less to be more realistic).

After six months that would be 164,160 grams, or 362 pounds of wasted fuel… slightly less than 1/10 of a cord of seasoned black birch, hickory, hard maple, black locust, or beech…

Well be carefull comparing the wasted fuel to seasoned hardwood, as I am sure the fuel content between 500º dried out smoke particulate is far greater than the equivelent weight of cordwood sitting there at 15-20%MC and room temperature.

 

[BrowningBAR]

When you have an EPA stove and a Pre-EPA stove you see the difference. Right now I am loading literally twice as much wood in the Vigilant as I am in the Heritage. That is not always the case, but it has been for the last several days.

Well, you know I can't speak from personal experience, all I am doing is relating what has been told to me by more than one pro in the field. These guys have everything to gain from telling me the Castine will outperform my stove, but they tell me otherwise based on personal experience from their own use and that of hundreds of customers.

I listen to what some say here who have compared stoves "A & B" style, and I am not doubting them. If I thought for a minute I could get the same amount of heat from a stove using half the wood, it would certainly be wonderful getting by with 2 1/2 cord a year. Who here in the north is burning 24/7 from a basement install and heating their home with 2 1/2 cord a year? It doesn't even make sense to me, that's why I question it. You can only get so much heat out of a cord of wood. I run my stove hot and clean on minimal air, so half my heat isn't going up the chimney. Half my wood isn't going up in smoke or I'd see some from time to time.

If someone can clearly explain how I'll be able to heat this place on 2 1/2 cord from late October to early April, I'd consider taking the plunge. I'm not a stubborn man, but I read over and over about experienced folks having trouble getting enough useful heat from the new stoves, and I am a bit afraid to jump when what I have works perfectly fine for me. If the new stoves are working better for others, I am happy for them. But I'm a New Yorker from Missouri. You have to prove it to me first.

I don't know if you caught the thread about a study comparing old conventional stoves with highly efficient designs. One of the stoves used was a VC type stove, but was burned in updraft position only (in order to simulate a conventional air-tight). Even burned in that less efficient manner, it still averaged about 63% overall efficiency burning seasoned oak. I would not doubt the figure in that study at all, based on my own use of this stove. Obviously in your case, the saying YMMV is appropriate.

Regarding max output, it is physically impossible for a radiant heater to put out more heat than the sum of its radiating surfaces can produce. The Oslo and the Vigilant are just about the same size, and they have just about the same surface area. How can the Oslo put out 55% more heat than the Vigilant at the same operating temperature? The Castine is noticeably smaller. How hot would it need to get to significantly outperform a Vigilant running with a stable 750º temperature?

The Vig is certainly a dirtier running stove, there is no getting around that one. In the study I mentioned, it put out 38 grams/hours of PM into the air. That's 5 times the maximum amount allowed in a non-cat EPA stove. So how much extra fuel is lost in that exhaust? Well, at a steady 24/7 emission rate of 38 gr/hr, the stove would emit 912 grams of particulate matter. In 30 days it would emit 27,360 grams. After six months that would be 164,160 grams, or 362 pounds of wasted fuel... slightly less than 1/10 of a cord of seasoned black birch, hickory, hard maple, black locust, or beech... the kind of wood I am currently using to heat this joint. So even if an EPA stove had 0 g/hr of PM, it would only save me $14 of wood per year in physical fuel losses. And the kicker? The same stove burning green oak at about 40% MC had only 20 g/hr in PM emissions, so that is only $7 of fuel a year lost into the air... and it still got a 58% overall efficiency. Not too shabby, I'd say.

It's all of these things that give me pause when I get to thinking about making the switch. These new stoves are a lot of money, and I'm burning to save money. The opinion of professionals in the field who I know and trust not to lie to me refuse to make the same "you'll get twice the heat from half the fuel" claims, at best saying things like, "You'll definitely use less wood." or, "If you're burning 7 cord now, you'll burn 6 1/2 with the newer stoves." Why are they lying to me when telling the truth would put steak on the table instead of fish sticks?

I'm not saying anyone here is lying, or even that they are mistaken in their observations, but I'm not standing there filling their stoves, or sitting half-naked in their living rooms, so I have to wonder where all the claims are coming from. I've also been doing research on this for a while, and it just doesn't add up so far. I wish someone would explain what I'm missing, because I really want to drink the Kool-Aid and become a true believer, but anecdotal tales just won't make the folds of my wallet open up, not while it's 11ºF outside and I'm sitting here sipping whisky in my sweats and t-shirt at 2:30 AM, hours after I filled the stove that's sitting in the basement on the other side of the house.

Of course... it could be the whisky.

So am I going to get a lengthy rant every time I mention that the Heritage is burning less wood than the Vigilant?

 

[remkel]

Well, never ran an EPA stove (grew up with a VC Defiant in the house and now am running a VC Vigilant) and think I have just been conditioned to prepare to burn a lot of wood. The heat thrown off from the vigilant is AWESOME and i have come to not mind the extra chimney sweepings each burning season. House is warm and that is all I care about.

 

[SolarAndWood]

I wish someone would explain what I'm missing, because I really want to drink the Kool-Aid and become a true believer, but anecdotal tales just won't make the folds of my wallet open up

While I don't buy the 1/2 the wood stories either and the consumption difference for me has been negligible, the biggest advantage to me comes in burn control. It allows me to put a big stove in the middle of the living space. It sits in the same place a mid-size stove sat that forced us to open windows and moves the heat well enough that there is not a hot spot even when its cranking. It cut the number of reloads (not wood) in half and requires no alteration in sleep or work schedules in January. Lastly, the stove lets you fill it up all the way every time and meter it out at the rate you want as opposed to what the stove is capable of.

I'm pretty sure the majority of my wood savings, 12 to 8 currently, has come from windows, foam and insulation with a lot of each still left to do.

 

[Hanko]

we have had what I believe a pretty rough winter here in Mich as far as temp is concerned. I'm probably going through 1 cord a month between two stoves, maybe a tad more

 

[Backwoods Savage]

Hi folks!

I just installed a VC Merrimack and have been burning it 24/7 since last weekend. I know it's a long learning experience to perfect the burn with your house. I am only getting maybe a 6 hour burn instead of the advertised 12 hour. Although, I wonder what the 12 hour burn is defined as? 12 hours until all coals are out and no longer red? I live in Central MA. It has been between 10 and 20 out the last week or so.

Anyway, I've gone through more wood in this last week than I would have liked. I turned my oil thermostat down to 54 and the house is between 64 and 72. How many cords have folks gone through?

Any suggestions on keeping it 24/7 and reducing wood use? I keep the air flow down to half or closed most times, with it all the way open to restart it.

Welcome to the forum Tansao.

Amounts will vary but a good rule of thumb to figure on would be 4 cord. It may be more and very likely less, depending upon the weather, your house and the fuel you are burning.

This is a good time for you to also learn some fundamentals on wood burning and the best suggestion I can make to you is to not only think about your fuel for this year, but also be thinking about next year and the year after. No matter if you cut your own wood or buy it, you need to be 2-3 years ahead on your wood supply. It is difficult for new wood burners to understand this importance and it is difficult for them to imagine the huge difference in good dry wood vs. marginal or poor wood. To burn right, wood needs time and air. It needs to be stacked out in the wind for anywhere from 1 to 3 years, depending upon what type of wood it is. So, make sure you get next year's wood put up as soon as you possibly can. Also, keep in mind that wood won't dry until it has been cut to length and split and then stacked out in the wind. When stacked, keep it up off the ground too.

 

[Battenkiller]

So am I going to get a lengthy rant every time I mention that the Heritage is burning less wood than the Vigilant?

Geez, BBAR, just because I quoted a fragment from one of your posts doesn't mean every last word is directed as a "rant" against you. What can I say? You don't have to read it... nor do you have to quote it in it's entirely. As for me, I'll try to remember not to quote you at all in the future and that should eliminate the problem, eh? :coolsmirk:

I really enjoy writing, especially when I can't get to sleep at 2 AM. Craig allows us 6000 characters per post to express our views. Sometimes I feel like using them all, sometimes I don't. That's my right, like it or not. He has specifically asked that we not quote the parts of others' posts that don't relate directly to the points we are making in our own posts in order to make the thread easier for others to follow and to save bandwidth here. Out of respect for his wishes, I do that on virtually every post I make here.

Back to the OP, I burn about a cord a month in the coldest weather and the place is plenty warm. That's all that really matters to me, and it is not out of line with what most northern burners are reporting.

 

[BrowningBAR]

So am I going to get a lengthy rant every time I mention that the Heritage is burning less wood than the Vigilant?

Geez, BBAR, just because I quoted a fragment from one of your posts doesn't mean every last word is directed as a "rant" against you. What can I say? You don't have to read it... nor do you have to quote it in it's entirely. As for me, I'll try to remember not to quote you at all in the future and that should eliminate the problem, eh? :coolsmirk:

I really enjoy writing, especially when I can't get to sleep at 2 AM. Craig allows us 6000 characters per post to express our views. Sometimes I feel like using them all, sometimes I don't. That's my right, like it or not. He has specifically asked that we not quote the parts of others' posts that don't relate directly to the points we are making in our own posts in order to make the thread easier for others to follow and to save bandwidth here. Out of respect for his wishes, I do that on virtually every post I make here.

Back to the OP, I burn about a cord a month in the coldest weather and the place is plenty warm. That's all that really matters to me, and it is not out of line with what most northern burners are reporting.

I started a new thread geared towards this topic. You can find it here:
https://www.hearth.com/econtent/index.php/forums/viewthread/68801/

Ask questions and I will answer them.
Request experiments and I will attempt them... within reason (which factors heavily on how lazy I feel at the time)

 

[Tansao]

Thanks for the replies everyone.

I am concerned about the amount of wood I burned in the two weeks since the stove has been in. I had a cord delivered (my first ever!) on December 14 to use in my fireplace. I installed the insert on Dec 31, and started the break in fires that week. It has been burning 24/7 since about Jan. 5? I can't remember how much I used in the fireplace, but I don't have much of a cord left. Even though it's been between 0 and 18 degrees, I believe I've gone through close to 3/4 of a cord since Jan. 5. I have another cord being delivered later this week (weather depending). I bought the insert to keep the oil man away by saving money, but with a cord of wood $200+ in my area its not saving me that much. Though I do more thoroughly enjoy it as a hobby.

My house is about 2500 square feet. The chimney is on an inside wall with about the top half of it outside. Not all windows are new. The attic insulation should probably be replaced.

The wood is dry and seasoned. It splits very very easily. Most pieces are not large, about 16" in length and between 3-5" thick. It is a combination of birch, oak, maple, maybe some hickory.

As for loading, when we are home, we keep it going with a few pieces every couple hours, or whenever the last piece is down to coals. When we go to bed, I load up every inch I can, same as when I go to work and if I come home for lunch. During the planned long burn times I close the air flow and open it half to full when we are home.

Am I doing anything wrong or any advice? Seems I will use almost 2 cord a month this way for the deep winter months, which seems a lot to me?

 

[wood-fan-atic]

Tansao---welcome....- just b/c it splits easily does NOT mean its 'dry and seasoned. Even if the woodseller says it is. Most wood purchased 'seasoned" is , well...NOT. And less than dry wood burn MUCH faster than dry, seasoned wood. This could be a major contributing factor to your wood burning too fast.

 

[OhioBurner©]

Thanks for the replies everyone.

I am concerned about the amount of wood I burned in the two weeks since the stove has been in. I had a cord delivered (my first ever!) on December 14 to use in my fireplace.

Well you dont seem too far off. One other thing to consider is if you really got a full cord. There are two thing wood sellers will tend to screw you on, one is quality (rarely ever seasoned) the other is quanity (they say its a full cord but its not). So basically they lie about everything lol! I dont know about your area but around here anyway. A cord is 128 cu ft so if the delivered wood is stacked, measure it. It would be normal to be 2/3 or 3/4 cord. What was it delivered in? Was it just tossed in or stacked? Just some things to consider.

At $200 / cord that really does cut into your savings. It will save you some, but when your at that cost or higher I hope your burning wood more so because you want to and not just for the cost savings. When you cut your own wood on your own land is were you can save a boatload.