Separate names with a comma.
Post in 'Classic Wood Stove Forums (prior to approx. 1993)' started by smitty81, Aug 21, 2013.
Helpful Sponsor Ads!
That explains my initial point of confusion: the 2010 join date.
We had a couple old smoke dragons years ago they where crap in comparison to EPA stoves. That said there are times I miss it but that's pure nastalga on my part. Truth be told I wouldnt ever go back after using both. In my experience the stove itself was hotter but for much less time between loads and used way more wood. No joke we went from around 8 full cords a winter to 3.5 to 4 with an EPA stove which equals far less work.
Well I am confused BB quotes my one post and puts nothing in the text and now yu bring up the join date, what am I missing?
As far as the old stoves, I am sure there are better ones then others, never made the claim my old one was better then the new one, it kicked out tons of heat compared to my new one though and did not "eat wood" in my opinion by any means.
Was not a cheap stove $940 in 1980
Am looking forward to using it in the shop after only burning the summit for 3 years, it will have a straight up chimney in the shop so interested in how it works.
I will let you people know what my thoughts on how it compares when I have both going (amount of wood, amount of smoke, ect).
Not sure why some of you basicaly accused me of lying.
I was referring to this:
? I don't think anyone was doing that! Bone-headed, stubborn, abrasive... sure! I don't think anyone called you a liar!
joful-I dont understand what does he having a pe-27 have to do with our discussion about the older stoves.
Well I love it when people tell me how my stove worked and what it did, you have to burn correctly no matter what the stove new or old, for the ones that remember batten killer, he made some of the same claims about his older stove and he got hammered over it also.
Here is an interesting link about old stoves vs new ones, you will see different opinions and results but the point is there are tw0 sides to the story, the N 24 Nashua mentioned in the thread was (is) my old stove.
I had to change a couple of things in my house (for the better needed to be done) to get the Summit to heat the house like I needed, the old stove had no problems with heating the house the way it was before.
So I burn less wood but the house has been made tighter, so hard to get a good comparision but I am sure the summit uses less wood at the same heat level.
I like the glass door on the summit and it takes up less room partly do the the flue exit position.
All in all I am happy with the new stove, I just wish I had more reserve heat as 0 temps with a south wind makes it struggle.
WOW.... I'm not getting beat up this time
Sometime's you want to fly the F-18 and sometimes you like the DC3
I like the old stoves old spark, oh well, I like vintage!
thanks guys, I don't feel I'm getting beat up here at all.
I know its an old stove that's not as efficient as what the new ones are.
The guy's above are right in "many" respects! I look at it as a $$$ thing. I've bought a few old fishers and the most I paid was $300. The new stoves are BIG $$$$$ but your getting the technology and all the good stuff that comes with it. The old stoves are plain and simple, yes with draw backs of some kind. Differences aside, all these guys are the "BEST" to learn from, and the forum is loaded with knowledge. I've been burning now for +30 years and my folks had a stove when I was a kid, " Not that long ago" .... . Get what is right for you and your pocket book and make it work
Well I derailed the thread defending MY old stove, many people can not believe some of the old stoves worked fine but that's there problem not mine, as I said many times in this thread I never said it was better then my new stove other then it puts out way more heat.
Nothing wrong with using an older stove when you know what you are getting into.
Good luck with the stove, come back and tell us how it works.
No you didn't, It's fun being a spectator..... Some of us are on your side, "sometimes"
The Nashua was an exceptionally good and tough design. No one denies this. It was a very different design from the average smoke dragon. We know you like this stove. No need to defend it. The only reason you get some chaff is because this has been hashed over probably more than any other stove thread. There's no need to keep repeating it. We get the point. You love your old stove.
begreen I am well aware of your point, they sorrta jumped on me first (read the thread), I am sure there were many old stoves just as good as my Nashua, every time I say some of the old stoves were good some body has to tell me I am full of it. Seems some should be a little more open minded. If you notice I was just joining in the conversation, I will defend it as many times as it takes in those cases.
I guess I just wont post any more, I thought it was a worthy point to show people all the old stoves weren't bad, I guess not, this is even in the old stoves section, what ever.
And on that note.