OSBURN and REGENCY Wood Stove Reviews ??? asap

[jimmyb7]

Hi... yes...I have three manufacturers to pic from - that's what the store carries... Vermont Casting, Regency, Osburn.

GOOD NEWS -- we have our pick of alternative stoves !!

The store cautioned that the BIG one Regency F3100 may be too big. Yes you can make a smaller fire in it, but doing so the stove won't be hot enough to heat the distance --- Sounds like a good point.

ALSO - said there were a lot of problems with the Osburn 2300 (Before the Added baffle redesign, and not sure about the redesign)

It's looking like a choice of Osburn 2400 and Regency either F2400 or..maybe Regency 3100.

The problem is, the stove goes in the corner of our living room, facing the back end. The back end has the living room and 2 bed, BUT behind the stove is a long hallway where another 2 rooms come off, the kitchen and bathroom. SO, a big stove may just over-power the living room and do nothing for the other end of the house. A blower again would only blow to the back end, but not the hall section.

THOUGHTS ?

Also---- ANYONE WANT TO MEASURE THEIR FIREBOX DIMENSIONS ?
Regency F2400, F3100
Osburn 2300, 2400

Thanks guys. Supposed to make a choice Monday.

Jim

ps- all the replies are really appreciated and really helping.

 

[charger4406]

Regency F2400
E-W=18"
N-S 15" floor or 17" to glass"
height is 10"

 

[Lumber-Jack]

Regency F2400
E-W=18"
N-S 15" floor or 17" to glass"
height is 10"

Charger you might want to recheck your measurements (or your model of stove), I have a Regency F2400 and read your measurements in the post above and wondered if my thinking that the fire box was square was wrong all these years??? Nope, I just got a tape measure and checked. The N-S measurement is a solid 18" front to back, to the glass would add a little more. All your other measurements are correct. I might add though that the door opening size is 17" x 7 3/4" .

 

[jimmyb7]

hey, is a 7.75: opening really enough to stog it with big wood?

 

[Lumber-Jack]

hey, is a 7.75: opening really enough to stog it with big wood?

"Big" is relative to the size of firebox you have. There are some monster sized stoves out there that can take some "big" splits of wood, but for the size firebox the Regency has that is only 10" high, 7 3/4" is plenty. Keep in mind too, as long as one side of your firewood split is 7 3/4", or less, the other side can can be much bigger.

 

[Justin M]

Regency F2400
E-W=18"
N-S 15" floor or 17" to glass"
height is 10"

Charger you might want to recheck your measurements (or your model of stove), I have a Regency F2400 and read your measurements in the post above and wondered if my thinking that the fire box was square was wrong all these years??? Nope, I just got a tape measure and checked. The N-S measurement is a solid 18" front to back, to the glass would add a little more. All your other measurements are correct. I might add though that the door opening size is 17" x 7 3/4" .

X2 - His measurements are the same as my I2100 which was later replace by the 2400.

 

[Lumber-Jack]

Talking about "Big" splits got me thinking about when I first got my Regency stove. It was my first (only actually) EPA certified stove. I had not burned wood for many years and all my old stoves were old technology stuff (smoke dragons), and like most people learned with those old stove, if you want long burns you wanted to really load them up with "BIG" splits and let em smolder all night. It took me a while to realize that my new Regency doesn't respond to that kind of a burn very well. LOL I don't need those great big pieces for long burns anymore, I just make sure the stove is hot and coals are raked forward, and that those medium sized splits I have are packed fairly tight to the back (E-W is best), and turn down the draft for a nice long controlled burn.
The way I look at it, you are getting more out of less, a 7" round log in a new EPA stove is equivalent of a 10 or 12" log in an old stove.

 

[dafattkidd]

Talking about "Big" splits got me thinking about when I first got my Regency stove. It was my first (only actually) EPA certified stove. I had not burned wood for many years and all my old stoves were old technology stuff (smoke dragons), and like most people learned with those old stove, if you want long burns you wanted to really load them up with "BIG" splits and let em smolder all night. It took me a while to realize that my new Regency doesn't respond to that kind of a burn very well. LOL I don't need those great big pieces for long burns anymore, I just make sure the stove is hot and coals are raked forward, and that those medium sized splits I have are packed fairly tight to the back (E-W is best), and turn down the draft for a nice long controlled burn.
The way I look at it, you are getting more out of less, a 7" round log in a new EPA stove is equivalent of a 10 or 12" log in an old stove.

That's interesting, carbonlib. You find this to be true even with all the log pole pine you burn?

 

[Lumber-Jack]

Talking about "Big" splits got me thinking about when I first got my Regency stove. It was my first (only actually) EPA certified stove. I had not burned wood for many years and all my old stoves were old technology stuff (smoke dragons), and like most people learned with those old stove, if you want long burns you wanted to really load them up with "BIG" splits and let em smolder all night. It took me a while to realize that my new Regency doesn't respond to that kind of a burn very well. LOL I don't need those great big pieces for long burns anymore, I just make sure the stove is hot and coals are raked forward, and that those medium sized splits I have are packed fairly tight to the back (E-W is best), and turn down the draft for a nice long controlled burn.
The way I look at it, you are getting more out of less, a 7" round log in a new EPA stove is equivalent of a 10 or 12" log in an old stove.

That's interesting, carbonlib. You find this to be true even with all the log pole pine you burn?

I assume it's the (not needing large splits for long burns) part you find interesting (or surprising). As I said, I tried that, but what I found was it was harder to get the volume of wood in that I wanted. Bigger splits often meant bigger air gaps (just like when you are stacking), but by reducing the split size a little I found I could stuff more wood in the firebox. As long as I make sure I pull the coals away from the back before putting a load in, I can get the fire to burn evenly from front to back by controlling the draft.
If I just throw those same splits on top of the coals they will burn from all sides and I'll end up with excessive off-gassing, and the wood will burn up too fast (especially if loaded N-S), which is the usual problem with softer woods. It's a little more work to pull all the coals to the front and stuff those pieces all the way to the back, so it's usually something I'll only bother with if I know I won't be reloading for a while and want to keep a fire going, otherwise I just toss the wood in, adjust the draft and let her rip. :cheese:

 

[dafattkidd]

Yes that's what I meant. Are you using a rake to do this? I need to get a rake. it get's annoying using the poker. I noticed your stove isn't in your sig??? Also when Jimmyb7 starts asking about covering his wood are you going to melt his face off with your devastating woodshed/bomb shelter?

Jimmy, sorry to get off topic.
Here are the dimensions of the firebox:
21 3/4†NS (to the glass)
23 EW
13 1/2" H

But there is a shelf in the front of the firebox that goes from the door into the firebox about 5" then drops down on an angle about 3" to the floor of the firebox. From there it is about 16" from the bottom of the angle to the back fo the firebox. Hope that makes sense. This shelf keeps all ash and coals from falling out when you open the door. I really like this shelf it is a great safety feature for front loaders.

The opening is Width: 19 1/2" Height: 8 1/4" (I do wish the door opening was higher)

 

[Lumber-Jack]

I made a rake (of sorts) out of an old stove shovel. Folded the flat shovel part over 90 deg and cut slits spaces out of the folded part, Voilà rake!

You never know, Jimmy may already have a fine woodshed, Jimmy already burns, Jimmy just needs a new woodstove.
I hope Jimmy knows I'm just trying to be funny.



BTW. I listed a lot of equipment in my signature, are you sure my stove isn't listed in there somewhere?

 

[dafattkidd]

I made a rake (of sorts) out of an old stove shovel. Folded the flat shovel part over 90 deg and cut slits spaces out of the folded part, Voilà rake!

You never know, Jimmy may already have a fine woodshed, Jimmy already burns, Jimmy just needs a new woodstove.
I hope Jimmy knows I'm just trying to be funny.

sounds like that Sienfeld episode, "Jimmy likes Elaine." "You're making Jimmy mad!"

 

[charger4406]

Checked my measurements again and they are right.
Back of stove reads Regency medium freestanding,
R3/R9 Jan 1991
I bought this stove from a friend many years ago,he had
told me it was a 2400 but by the age and size from what you
guys are saying I'm guessing it's a 2100,still is a great stove anyways.
Come to think of it he may have said 2100

 

[jimmyb7]

I can appreciate the humor discussing one's wood, no worries (though I won't usually join in)

Rake the coals to the front ???? this has me perplexed... WHY?

My VC stove you just leave a bed there and drop wood directly on top.

Please explain before committing to one of these types of stoves....

___
Well guys - THANKS FOR THE REPLIES.

It looks like a fair fight between the Osburn 2300 and Regency 2400
The Osburn 2400 is a close second.
Decided against the Regency 3100 (too big)

****The big decision with Osburn is this --- is the Bypass in the 2300 that big a deal?
In fact, it seems the 2300 has a TALLER firebox, Bigger door opening than 2400 and is only 1/2 inch shorter north-south than 2400.
So...Getting thr blower and Bypass for basically the same price seems logical ?

THOUGHTS?

Also-- anyone see any reason to go Regency 2400 over either of the osburns? (regency has a tiny 8" max opening height, and no special features to speak of...... also, the firebox seems to be only 15 inches ...17 inches to the glass)


((ANYONE WITH THE OSBURN 2300...... Firebox depth, is the 18.5" to the Glass? or is it with an inch or two away from the door? Book does not say.
ALSO - STAINLESS BAFFLE ? Does it not have Firebrick in the top like the 2400 and Regency models? ))

THANKS ! --- we go back in with our decision tomorrow

 

[Lumber-Jack]

Rake the coals to the front ???? this has me perplexed... WHY?

My VC stove you just leave a bed there and drop wood directly on top.

Please explain before committing to one of these types of stoves....

It's not that I can't just drop wood on top of my coals, in fact I mentioned that that is exactly what I do most of the time, but to get the longest burns out of a given load of wood, the best technique is to pull the coals forward and load the back of the stove with wood, and burn the load from front to back. This is something I have seen many members of this forum say they do to get long, clean burns.
If you just throw the wood on top a hot bed of coals the coals will begin burning and baking the wood from below and it will start off-gassing (releasing the flammable gasses) and those gasses will (should) start to burn near the secondary burn tubes. When that happens your wood is effectively burning above, and below. If you are burning a hardwood, or wood that is higher in moisture content, this may be a good thing, but if you are burning dry softwood like I usually burn, what will happen is you'll get too much off gassing from the bottom and you won't be able to burn off all that excess gas without opening the air more (you'll be running too rich). If you open the air more you'll effectively end up burning your load faster and hotter, which may be what you want sometimes. If you don't want a faster, hotter burn, the solution is to adjust the coals and wood load so it only burns from one side (not two sides), that's why I (and many others) rake the coals to the front and put the new wood at the back for longer (clean) burns.

The ideal long burning load (in secondary tube stoves) would be to have the wood load on the bottom of the box and load the hot coals on the top of the wood, this would burn only from the top side thus keeping the cleaner burning secondary action going. But getting the wood on the bottom and the coals on top is kinda harder to accomplish than just raking the coals forward and placing the wood at the back.

Hope that clears up your question and you're not quite as "perplexed".
As I mentioned before, I'm not familiar with the Osburn stoves, but I'll bet you could get longer burns in them as well, using the same method.

 

[burleymike]

I actually prefer to burn big splits. When I split my wood this fall I made about 1/3 of it 8"x8x20" just the right size to get through the door. Since it has not been really cold lately I usually put a 3-4" split on the back bottom then one of the 8x8 splits on top. The big split burns better on top next to the burn tubes. I then place 2 smaller splits on top of each other in front of the 8x8 in the back. I pack it all tightly which is not too hard since I split all my wood as square as possible.

When it is really cold 5°F or less I will put 2 large splits in back to front and pack the front and bottom with smaller stuff. It burns hot and long this way, too hot for these mild 25° nights. My wife thinks I am nuts for loading the wood like a puzzle but it sure is nice to wake up to a 73° house in the morning.

I too rake the coals forward, I find that I can stack my wood in the back better without the coals in the way and secondly with the coals in the front they start to burn the fresh load from the front back which makes it burn longer. If I just stack the load on top of the coals half of them die out and once the fire does start after much smoking it burns very hot and faster than I like. I am burning only lodgepole so I cannot say how my stove would behave with hardwood.

 

[Swedishchef]

Jim,

Unfortunately you're asking the questions at the wrong time of the year. It's not easy to take a measurement with a fire going HOwever, since I only have a bed of coals, I stuck my tape measurer inside for you. IT's 22.5-23 inches from the back firebrick (not to the back of the stove) to the glass door..so add another inch and that would give you a 23.5-24 inch depth. However, there is a ledge before the firebox. The 24 inches measurement is to the GLASS as you asked. The firebox itself (where the wood sits) is only about 20-21 inches deep.

There is no insulation on top of the baffle whatsoever. The baffle is made of a high temperature ceramic compound. It heats quite fast and give off secondaries quick as well. From a cold start I can get secondaries going in 15 minutes or so. According to Fyrebug who is an SBI (parent company of Osburn) rep, here's what he said about the Osburn baffle: "We use ‘C-Cast’ in some of our premium brands and furnaces since it outperforms many of these in Strength, insulation, abrasion resistance, resistance to shrinking, weight loss & environmental exposure. It will handle close to 3,000 F. We use these not because it is less expensive, as a matter of fact it is much more expensive than all of the above but because it has a better overall performance. As far as breakage, well yes you can break them especially if a sweep do not remove them first and hit them with their brushes. From a user point of view, I cant understand how you would break one of those since the tubes are in the way, so logs would hit those first. Unless you are very over zealous with a poker it’s not an issue. However, there is a 7 year warranty".

As I mentioned in a PM, the bypass is nice. Why a bypass? I presume it has to do with the exaust opening size. Once your chimney is warm (with the bypass open) close it the bypass, keep the door open for 10 mins and get the stove warm/hot. Close door, turn down the primary air and voila, you're set for hours.

I loaded 2 bug pieces of maple at 10 AM and just reloaded with a big bed of coals.

Cheers

Andrew

 

[jimmyb7]

Swedishchef- Thanks mate. Exactly what I was looking for..... So, the Baffle is a Ceramic, but inmy literature they claim Stainless Steel. They say the baffle is connected to the tubes/pipes like one piece of metal ?

Thanks mate

 

[Swedishchef]

Hey Jim.

It is one integral unit. If you ever need to replace the baffle, the secondary air tubes go as well. All in one.

Like I posted above, the quote was from a company rep who is often on this forum (not sure why he has not posted here yet...). I am certainly pleased with the stove. I always find it comes down to 4 things (warning: I am not a pro like most people on this forum): what size house are you trying to heat, how much insulation do you have, how drafty is the house and get at least 2 years ahead on your wood pile...dry wood is key to this stove (or any non CAT EPA stove for that matter).

Andrew

 

[FyreBug]

Swedishchef- Thanks mate. Exactly what I was looking for..... So, the Baffle is a Ceramic, but inmy literature they claim Stainless Steel. They say the baffle is connected to the tubes/pipes like one piece of metal ?

Thanks mate

Sorry guys, getting in late in the conversation. The 2300 is one of the few Osburn stove who doesn't use the C cast. If I stated as much in the past I apologize. Due to its design it is not possible to use this material. The baffle is thick stainless steel. See diagram below.

Also, the 2300 is a 3.1 cu ft firebox while the 2400 is 3.2. Regency literature states F2400 at 2.3 and the F3100 at 2.9.

 

[jimmyb7]

Frybug ! Thank you...just could not picture it properly.

And thanks everyone. We ARE going with an OSBURN (even though the store is not displaying the 2300 or 2400, ahhh) and even though the 2300 is more expensive than the bigger 2400, we are leaning that direction.

Right now the only thing stopping me from pulling the trigger on the 2300 is the C-Cast Baffle in the 2400 ---> Sustained Heat is the BIGGEST factor in our decision. -17C nights with only 1 wood stove for heat guys..... burrrr if a weak choice is made. And I'm seriously tired of getting up every 3 hours.

MANY THANKS !

Will let ya know how it goes. (pray for a couple warmer days so we can make a swap !)

 

[jimmyb7]

AND THE WINNER IS ........ (insert drum-role)

OSBURN 2400 !

The one I didn't think we'd do. I really have to take my hat off to our local store that sells these (and regency, and vc)
Gave us full freedom to pick what we needed.

And after talking with the fellow today (very knowledgeable) we had to agree and pass on the 2300.
As a past metalsmith, I'm too concerned with the long term affect on that thin metal bypass --- and when dealing with these high temps and extended time (we burn 24/7), all metal 1/8" and under (except for titanium) is going to buckle, at least enough to allow too much smoke to escape up the chimney.

I really wanted the 18 inch NS load and taller door opening, but he had a 2400 out back and showed me. WOW That's a big box ! And the 8 inch opening is surprisingly big enough to actually load the box. 16 inch NS and 20 inch EW is a nice thing I think -- plenty of creative puzzle making opportunities !

Now just gotta wait for it to get in.

Anyone with a Osburn 2400 stove who wants to discuss how they get long burns, please feel free to PM me, it would be warmly welcomed (pun intended)

THANK YOU FORUM.

 

[FyreBug]

AND THE WINNER IS ........ (insert drum-role)

OSBURN 2400 !

The one I didn't think we'd do. I really have to take my hat off to our local store that sells these (and regency, and vc)
Gave us full freedom to pick what we needed.

And after talking with the fellow today (very knowledgeable) we had to agree and pass on the 2300.
As a past metalsmith, I'm too concerned with the long term affect on that thin metal bypass --- and when dealing with these high temps and extended time (we burn 24/7), all metal 1/8" and under (except for titanium) is going to buckle, at least enough to allow too much smoke to escape up the chimney.

I really wanted the 18 inch NS load and taller door opening, but he had a 2400 out back and showed me. WOW That's a big box ! And the 8 inch opening is surprisingly big enough to actually load the box. 16 inch NS and 20 inch EW is a nice thing I think -- plenty of creative puzzle making opportunities !

Now just gotta wait for it to get in.

Anyone with a Osburn 2400 stove who wants to discuss how they get long burns, please feel free to PM me, it would be warmly welcomed (pun intended)

THANK YOU FORUM.

congrats and let us know how it goes. Remember, it never really happened until you post pictures.

 

[Swedishchef]

Glad to hear that you pulled the trigger. I am certain that you will be pleased with your 2400. As Fyrebug mentioned, no pics=didn't happen

Andrew

 

[jimmyb7]

Thanks Andrew.... you almost sold us on the 2300 til we got in there, and I considered the 1/8" steel over time. Having a 2400 to actually see (luckily there was one out back in he crate still). WOW that is one big box, and the small opening isnt a problem. We just have to get 1/2 our wood this year cut smaller. Probably 1/2 18" and 1/2 16"

And yes folks, shall post a pick as soon as it's up and running !!

jim