Is this stove safe or a piece of junk?

[Battenkiller]

The size of the stove has little to do with clearances. The stove radiates a lot of heat and was tested to the clearances listed on the back label posted above. I'm not sure if PFS is an accepted lab. If not, without the UL label, it would have to be 36". This could be reduced with wall shielding.

I agree that if it was me, for a cabin installation, I would put in a safe flue system and hearth and would try it out. Perhaps the cost of installation is the deciding factor and not the stove?

The size of the stove may not have anything to do with how its clearances were determined during testing, but it has everything to do with how much heat is actually radiated at a given surface temp. A stove with 1 sq.ft. of radiating surface would need to get about 1400ºF in order to need 36" of clearance. That is based on a maximum amount of 600 BTU/hr/sq.ft. that actually reaches the wall (roughly twice the amount of energy coming from the sun at it's highest point on a summer day). 600 BTU/hr is about the amount of heat necessary to raise the exposed surface temp to 250ºF, the temperature at which wood that has been pyrolyzed over a long time period can ignite. At 900ºF, the distance would be reduced to 18". That's why I said it seems conservative, not because I am in possession of the test data. But don't misinterpret me, I see nothing wrong with being conservative when it comes to a box full of fire in your living space.

At any rate, you are correct in saying that there is no getting around the cost of a safe chimney. Once that has been accomplished, however, this stove can safely be slid underneath it at the proper clearance distance (including a proper hearth). If it doesn't work out, a better stove can be slid in its place under the same flue at any point in the future. My gut tells me that this stove will work fine for a number of years in a cabin installation.

 

[Battenkiller]

OK how bout this one

http://www.vogelzang.com/browse.cfm/frontiersman/4,21.html

If thats not good enough, I guess Ill have to do without unless I can find a good used one.

H-mmm... 102,000 BTU from a 2 cu.ft. firebox? Weighs 165 pounds, internal firebrick and all? Sounds intriguing.

Seriously, look at a small Englander instead.

 

[begreen]

The size of the stove has little to do with clearances. The stove radiates a lot of heat and was tested to the clearances listed on the back label posted above. I'm not sure if PFS is an accepted lab. If not, without the UL label, it would have to be 36". This could be reduced with wall shielding.

I agree that if it was me, for a cabin installation, I would put in a safe flue system and hearth and would try it out. Perhaps the cost of installation is the deciding factor and not the stove?

The size of the stove may not have anything to do with how its clearances were determined during testing, but it has everything to do with how much heat is actually radiated at a given surface temp. A stove with 1 sq.ft. of radiating surface would need to get about 1400ºF in order to need 36" of clearance. That is based on a maximum amount of 600 BTU/hr/sq.ft. that actually reaches the wall (roughly twice the amount of energy coming from the sun at it's highest point on a summer day). 600 BTU/hr is about the amount of heat necessary to raise the exposed surface temp to 250ºF, the temperature at which wood that has been pyrolyzed over a long time period can ignite. At 900ºF, the distance would be reduced to 18". That's why I said it seems conservative, not because I am in possession of the test data. But don't misinterpret me, I see nothing wrong with being conservative when it comes to a box full of fire in your living space.

At any rate, you are correct in saying that there is no getting around the cost of a safe chimney. Once that has been accomplished, however, this stove can safely be slid underneath it at the proper clearance distance (including a proper hearth). If it doesn't work out, a better stove can be slid in its place under the same flue at any point in the future. My gut tells me that this stove will work fine for a number of years in a cabin installation.

A small stove, particularly if it is unlined, can easily raise the surface temperature of surrounding combustible surfaces to over 200 °F, even at 18" away. Consistent heating of wood can lower it's ignition point considerably. It seems prudent when introducing a raging fire in one's home to raise clearances to the point where pyrolysis is not possible which I believe is the intent of the code.

 

[begreen]

Robert, invest in a good, safe flue system and hearth for this stove. Maybe overkill it a little bit. The Scandia is not going to fall apart on you. If it's essentially new and it is only going to get occasional usage in a cabin, it could be fine for several years. Go ahead and install it. And be sure to feel free to ask any questions you may have about the installation. If the hearth and flue are done well, and you burn dry wood in this stove, it will likely be fine. A new stove is not going to be 100% safer because the one variable is still going to be the person running the stove. Like my dad used to say - the most dangerous part of a car is the nut behind the wheel. Go for the stove you have and run it safely. I think you will be fine.

 

[Delta-T]

It is my impression that when stoves are tested they are setting clearances based on the 185 °F threshold (which also happens to be the min. combustion temp for wood, i thinks). The human body can deal with temps up to about 140 °F, so they put little sensors on the machines and move the walls around it to find the clearances. Pretty neat stuff. I got this info from firefighter not from some codebook, so I could be wrong.

 

[vvvv]

Robert, invest in a good, safe flue system and hearth for this stove. Maybe overkill it a little bit. The Scandia is not going to fall apart on you. If it's essentially new and it is only going to get occasional usage in a cabin, it could be fine for several years. Go ahead and install it. And be sure to feel free to ask any questions you may have about the installation. If the hearth and flue are done well, and you burn dry wood in this stove, it will likely be fine. A new stove is not going to be 100% safer because the one variable is still going to be the person running the stove. Like my dad used to say - the most dangerous part of a car is the nut behind the wheel. Go for the stove you have and run it safely. I think you will be fine.

glad 2 hear voice of reason

 

[DAKSY]

Like my dad used to say - the most dangerous part of a car is the nut behind the wheel.

I tell folks that wood stoves are as safe as the nut on the handle.
I agree with you, BG, that little guy in a code compliant install & burned
correctly, will do exactly what the OP wants - heat his cabin SAFELY.

 

[begreen]

Yeah, I think this thread got off on the wrong foot because of the question posed in the title. I see the Scandia somewhat similar to a Yugo. Would I recommend one, no. But if my uncle gave me one with a hundred miles on it, would it be ok to drive it occasionally? Yes. I would recommend putting on some good tires (hearth), make sure the exhaust wasn't rusted out or bent (flue), use only good, dry fuel, and drive it safely within it's limits. If you only drove it for a 1000 miles a year, under 50mph, you could get many years of driving out of it. I still wouldn't recommend it for a daily commuter on the freeway because that would start to bring in reliability questions, stability and braking at high speed. But for taking a weekend drive in the country, it should be fine.

As long as the Scandia's integrity is good, it is not going to overfire any more than any other stove as long as it is driven responsibly. Like driving, just make sure you are aware and sober when burning the fire. You might just want to have fires in it while you are awake and use the propane heater for overnight until you are familiar and comfortable with the stove's operation. If you see signs of defects developing, let the fire go out. Then take a picture of the concern and post it here.

 

[Battenkiller]

600 BTU/hr is about the amount of heat necessary to raise the exposed surface temp to 250ºF, the temperature at which wood that has been pyrolyzed over a long time period can ignite. At 900ºF, the distance would be reduced to 18".

A small stove, particularly if it is unlined, can easily raise the surface temperature of surrounding combustible surfaces to over 200 °F, even at 18" away. Consistent heating of wood can lower it's ignition point considerably. It seems prudent when introducing a raging fire in one's home to raise clearances to the point where pyrolysis is not possible which I believe is the intent of the code.

?

We're not in disagreement here. I'm not recommending that this stove should be installed with an 18" clearance. If you read what I wrote, I clearly say that at 900ºF, a stove of this size will (eventually) raise the temperature of a surface 18" away to 250º. Nowhere did I say this is a safe temp. Pyrolysis can occur at sustained temps as low as 200º. But let's face facts, no one is going to be running that stove at 900º, not for very long anyway. I see no compelling reason to have to increase the clearance beyond what is stated on the tag (24" from the sides, 26" from the back). PFS seems to be an independant testing facility that used to test stoves for the hearth industry, but these days are only testing for the wood products industry. The tag says the unit is U.L. compliant, so why is everybody worrying the owner of the stove? He's got a free stove, let's get together and help him get it installed safely and burning in it properly.

For the record, I don't ever let anything near my stove get above 140º ('cept the cement floor below it). That's about 36" clearance from the (unlined) sides during my hottest fires, about 42" clearance in the front, 20" from the top of my single wall flue pipe elbow, as measured right here at BK Laboratories using a cheap IR thermometer. ;-)

 

[Jags]

and sober when burning the fire.

Whoa - slow down, now your just getting carried away.

 

[begreen]

I knew that would get a rise out of the peanut gallery. But for a new woodburner i think it correlates with a good measure of safety.

 

[fossil]

I never get behind the wheel of my Yugo without a few stiff drinks under my belt. :coolsmirk:

 

[BrotherBart]

Where do ya go to find the "required hearth heat shield (HHS-150)" required by the label?

 

[vvvv]

Where do ya go to find the "required hearth heat shield (HHS-150)" required by the label?

NFPA 211?

 

[begreen]

I never get behind the wheel of my Yugo without a few stiff drinks under my belt. :coolsmirk:

I prefer the drinks in my mouth. Under the belt gets uncomfortable and damp.

 

[begreen]

Where do ya go to find the "required hearth heat shield (HHS-150)" required by the label?

Docs for the stove are in the Hearth.com wiki section. They show an optional hearth heat shield that bolts about halfway down on the legs. Looks like it wouldn't be hard to fabricate one.

https://www.hearth.com/econtent/index.php/wiki/Scandia_Stoves/

 

[Battenkiller]

Where do ya go to find the "required hearth heat shield (HHS-150)" required by the label?

Docs for the stove are in the Hearth.com wiki section. They show an optional hearth heat shield that bolts about halfway down on the legs. Looks like it wouldn't be hard to fabricate one.

https://www.hearth.com/econtent/index.php/wiki/Scandia_Stoves/

Thanks, BG. Almost 20 years after I first got the stove, I finally have an owner's manual...

... one year after I stopped using it. :roll: :lol:

 

[vvvv]

Where do ya go to find the "required hearth heat shield (HHS-150)" required by the label?

Docs for the stove are in the Hearth.com wiki section. They show an optional hearth heat shield that bolts about halfway down on the legs. Looks like it wouldn't be hard to fabricate one.

https://www.hearth.com/econtent/index.php/wiki/Scandia_Stoves/

Thanks, BG. Almost 20 years after I first got the stove, I finally have an owner's manual...

... one year after I stopped using it. :roll: :lol:

nonsensical joke= math dont work

 

[robertjp]

Im getting more amazed by the minute with the knowlege you guys have about these. Now I even have an owners manual. Thanks. Sounds like if it is installed correctly and strict guidelines are followed with the chiminey, maybe I could use it. Mind you it is occasional use in fall and on weekends. I wonder if Franklin is the same as Lavec since it is a "Scandia" model and both from Warick RI?. It does have an external heat shield except it is not halfway down the legs as in the diagram but maybe 1/8 down. Thanks everyone for your input. You guys are awesome.

 

[gibson]

Is anyone else thinking "patio stove"? I would love to have that, leave the door open, and fire up on the patio. Cast iron chiminea.