Great Wall of FAIL

[firemark]

Well, the Grate Wall of Fire, or should I say, FAIL, arrived today. It looks nice, and I had no problem putting the fireback and grate in. I followed the directions, and got a nice bed of coals as claimed, but , the heat wasn't impressive. The fireback keeps falling over, and fell flat just a moment ago since the wood is burned.

My first impression is less smoke, more coals, less heat, and a crappola fireback design. I'll give it a few more runs for the next few days, but, so far, I see no value here. I'm going to contact the company tomorrow.

I am tremendously underwhelmed.

 

[atomix]

I bought a grate wall of fire this year and have had maybe a dozen fires with it. I also have their "non-decorative" fireback.

Mine has decent supports on the fireback that let you sit it against the back of your fireplace, while the supports hold it from falling over. Is yours different? The grate itself is nice and sturdy, and I have no fear piling it high. I have the "tall" version that is ~24" wide.

I have mixed feelings on it, decent heat for the amount of wood, but I'm still learning the art of building a fire with it. Wish we'd make the plunge on a stove instead...

 

[CarbonNeutral]

There was a post about a week ago about them - I like the design of them, and am thinking about getting one - my fireplace does tend to leak smoke into the room. With that said, I would never expect them to produce much more heat than my current method (no grate at all). In the other forum thread I posted information that Consumer Union had done showing that the best way to get heat from a fireplace is no grate - this is certainly true in my experience with a traditional grate vs. no grate. However, I have a problem with rolling logs and smoke...

The reflective back looks like it's supposed to hook under the grate to give it stability - how close is your grate? Also, are you using comparable amounts of wood? I'm just making sure we're not comparing apples to oranges before I make any decision to not buy one.

And, despite their claims, I would never regard this as even close to the performance of the worst stoves out there - just isn't going to happen - if you want to heat your house and funds are tight, buy a second hand stove....


PS. Atomix - welcome to the forum....

 

[pen]

is this what you guys are talking about? http://www.woodlanddirect.com/Fireplace-Accessories/Self-Feeding-Grates/Grate-Wall-of-Fire

pen

 

[jharkin]

That site is hilarious. Shows people will believe anything written online in bold italics... If I had to guess Id figure it *might* increase your efficiency from the typical 10% up to 20%...... But no way is it getting close to the typical EPA stove 70-85% range. You still have all the convection sucking the heated air in your house up the chimney at 400-500CFM.

Smokey fireplaces are usually due to poor firebox design. There are formulas that give the optimum ratio of the cross sectional area of the firebox opening (width x height) to the area of the flue. I think smoking means that the flue is too small for the opening. This can actually be corrected by bricking in the firebox to reduce the opening size - either laying one or two courses down on the floor or sides or a bit more challenging, a new course and lintel at the top to lower the height. One of my old house books had a chapter on how to do the calculations and ideas to fix it. I can dig it out if interested.

~Jeremy

 

[firemark]

is this what you guys are talking about? http://www.woodlanddirect.com/Fireplace-Accessories/Self-Feeding-Grates/Grate-Wall-of-Fire

pen

Yep. I'll give it another try over the next couple of days before giving up. I'm going to load that sucker up and see how it performs. I did not rely solely on the "bold italics" on the web site. I searched high and low all over the web for reviews, and could not find a negative one. I sent the company a message, so maybe they have suggestions.

 

[jharkin]

I was not directing that statement at you... just pointing out that online "reviews" can say whatever they want... but Im sure that if a trade group or Consumer reports or such tested this in a lab they would find the heat output is not even close to a stove, regardless of the claims.

 

[firemark]

I was not directing that statement at you... just pointing out that online "reviews" can say whatever they want... but Im sure that if a trade group or Consumer reports or such tested this in a lab they would find the heat output is not even close to a stove, regardless of the claims.

No problem. I'll post up the results on the next burn, and keep up with my 30 day return grace period.

 

[pastera]

I welded up my own from about $15 worth of 1/2" gas pipe.

It works OK once you get a good bed of coals built up but nothing for the first hour so so of burning.

For what it's worth, I have already ordered an insert for the fireplace and will be cutting the one i made up to make something for the firepit.


Aaron

 

[DanCorcoran]

In her cabin, my sister has a woodstove at the kitchen end of her kitchen/living room and an open fireplace at the living room end. She uses the fireplace for ambiance, not for heat (the woodstove provides plenty). This product sounds great for her: reduces heat loss from the fireplace, but maintains the ambiance.

 

[atomix]

Should have given a bit more praise in my post. The grate does seem to cure my smoking problem with my undersized flue (good call Harkin), and it allows for good ambiance with a smaller fire (think of a 2 dimensional fire instead of 3 dimensional). It's also easier to sit back, relax and not rearrange logs all the time to keep the fire going in my over sized fireplace.

That said, I certainly knew this would be a drop in the bucket on efficiency. I've spent enough time around wood stoves to know what I'm missing, and lurking here to want one badly! Wife Acceptance Factor, <3 years in my current house, and resale value all play a part in me holding off on a real heating appliance purchase.

 

[firemark]

Day 2.

I loaded more wood, and tonight it worked much better. After a little over an hour, a NICE bed of coals had formed, and after using MUCH LESS wood over a 4 hour burn, there is a lot more radiant heat.

No smoke. No need to crack a window. Just a nice bed of HOT coals, and a lot less work to keep a hot fire going.

Tonight I am impressed.

 

[firemark]

Day 3. FAIL.

No difference in heating from my old grate, even though it's not even below freezing. The fireback doesn't reflect heat as well as my old brick, and the bed of coals gives off no more heat than a good, established fire on the old grate.

I surrender. Wood burning will be my emergency heat until I decide otherwise. I'm going to let the Grate and Fireback cool, ship it back at my expense, and chalk this up to gimmick marketing and paying the "stupid tax".

If it's too good to be true, it's false.

FAIL. FAIL. FAIL.

Save your money.

 

[begreen]

You'll need an insert in the fireplace for real heat using a lot less wood.

 

[Mr A]

I have used the Grate Wall of Fire 21" Fireplace Grate. It is not designed for the big flames everybody wants to see in the fireplace. It gets an arm load of wood going using the fire building method recommended in the literature- paper, kindling ,bigger pieces at the top. Using a fireplace is just for looks in my opinion. It looks nice watching a fire, and hearing the crackling, but not much for heat unless you are sitting 2 feet in front of it. my couch sits about 10 feet in front of the fireplace and I feel more warm using the grate wall grate. Plus it builds up more embers warming up the bricks in the masonry fireplace. I had a drape across the passage way opening(6'-8"x8') to the living room, it kept the living room warm, and me and the GF often slept on the floor in front of the fireplace.