How much more efficient will a new Jotul Oslo be than my old Resolute?

[Frisha]

I've been reading and learning from these forums for a while, and now am hoping for some advice. We bought a beautiful blue enamel Resolute back in about 1987. We've been burning it every winter since, varying from 1/2 cord to maybe 3 cords a winter. It's been a great stove, we've replaced the gasket for the top loading plate and that's been about it for maintenance. It holds a fire overnight so there's a decent bed of coals the next morning. The stove is vented through a fireplace into a masonry chimney. The chimney is between the house and garage, so pretty cold. It looks like about 8X11 flue tiles. The chimney sweep says we are getting some glazed creosote and should put a liner in. From what I've learned here I will ask him to add vermiculite poured insulation.

The Resolute is a little small for our house which is about 2,600 feet. I wouldn't mind being warmer! My thought was that if I'm going to pay to get a chimney liner installed I should buy a new stove at the same time to take advantage of the tax credit. The old Resolute is looking a bit grungy, lots of bits of enamel have flaked off the top surface. I just crawled around behind it to see how old it was. There's a metal plate that includes, "Safety Tested 1980". The back casting has "1979" cast in it. It actually made me a little sad looking at the beautiful castings and thinking how a once great company, known for their craftsmanship has really changed and no longer makes such good products.

My husband is resisting the whole idea, he likes the old stove and doesn't want to change it. Since he does a lot of the work getting our wood worked up I thought I might be able to persuade him that a new stove will save him some labor. So my question is, how much more efficient will a Jotul Oslo be than a 1980ish Resolute? Will we get a lot more heat from a cord of wood? I guess that's the bottom line.

 

[begreen]

Greetings Frisha, good choice. It is a first rate stove and you will like the quality of the enamel. The process for the blue-black and ivory enamel is different than the majolica porcelain finish (on the Resolute). It's tougher and has a more subtle look that stands up well over time. The old Resolute was a nice stove and moderately efficient. But the newer generation stoves run much cleaner. Craig (webmaster) may be able to give some more specifics, but I would estimate that an F500 would burn about 20% more efficiently.

However, if you want more heat, you will be using more wood. And for hubby there will be a learning curve with the new stove. They burn differently than the Resolute. Besides being a side-loader, it does not have the thermostatic damper. However, it does have a very nice fireview and glass that stays pretty clean. It also takes longer wood, which makes loading less fussy.

 

[jbrown56]

Frisha,

After using my Timberline steel box stove, circa 1979 for 26 years, we changed stoves three seasons ago and have never looked back. We heat 2100 sq. ft., 24/7, open concept home with vaulted ceilings and skylights on the second floor. It does a better job heating the house than the old stove. With only one damper control lever, it's simple to burn. Different than the two stage damper on the VC. We used to burn 4 - 5 cord a season and with the new stove, we burn 3 - 4 cord. The heat through the glass is really intense and the secondary burn is a blast to watch. The ashpan works well and we empty every three days.The one thing with this stove is it likes dry wood. I'm always at least two years ahead, so my wood is nice and dry. If you get a new stove, I hope you enjoy it as much as we enjoy our Oslo.

Jim