No science behind this just observation a candle (the stinky ones in a glass jar) on the stove and how dirty the glass was. so far I have tried Premier,Lg, Fireside,Green team,Barefoot,Maine Woods,Dry Creek,Lignetic,Okanagan,andCubex. so here is my opinion so far this was done with my stove on the lowest setting of 1-1. 1) Number one for me Okanagans they burned hotter than all the rest melted the candle in no time and had the least ash and the glass looked as clean as when I started burning it. 2)Number two Barefoot burned very hot melted the candle fast and didn’t have much ash at all light film on glass hardly noticeable very hot burning 3) number three for me is the Cubex it burned as hot or maybe a little hotter than the Barefoot not alot of ash just a light film on the glass but the reason the Barefoot came out ahead is because in the area I live the barefoot is quite a bit less and it is about the same Quality 4)number four this one will sound crazy to most of you but I found the Green Team pellets to be my number four pellet it put out great heat melted the candle pretty fast it did have more ash than the barefoot but not so much that it would make it a problem the glass had a light gray film and had to be wiped after each bag but it was worth the effort 5)Number five Dry Creek burned fairly hot it melted the candle completely but took about 40 min to do it not too much ash but enough that it filled the burn pot over 1.5 in slight brown film enough for it to show up black on a white napkin 6)Number six Premier even though this is the first pellet I had burned through the stove it put out heat it melted the candle after it was put on the stove and didn’t make the glass dirty enough to have to wipe it but it may have had something to do with it being the first bag through the stove. 7)]Number seven Lignetic burned OK not as hot as the rest the candle melted but it took a long time and never quite got there completely the top layer only ended up with a center hole the right side of the glass was dark brown and it had a lot of ash 8)eight Lg they burned but no ware near as hot as the others the candle didn’t melt all the way through a lot of ash and dark brown glass 9)Number nine Fireside the candle melted all the way after a while but the glass got very dirty even before the bag was done the glass was brown enough that you could see it when you looked at the flame and the ash in the pot built up to the point that I had to empty the pot before the burn was through 10)Number ten sorry to say because I live in Maine but it is Maine Woods I would never buy these again they don’t put out much heat never even melted the candle more than half way and they had quite a bit of ash but no ware near what the firesides had the glass was light brown but did I mention they don’t burn hot
pellet choice for me so far(cubex added)
- Thread starter bfgmt
- Start date
-
Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.
We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.
We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil.
- Status
schmeg
Member
I burned Premier, Okies, and Cubex this winter. Okies were best, until I just took delivery on a ton of Barefoots. Wow! Hot, hot, hot. And clean. Even marginally cheaper than the Okies.
I'm putting 4 more tons in the garage this spring.
I'm putting 4 more tons in the garage this spring.
H ADVANCE I will post as soon as I burn the Cubex , schmeg for me I just liked the Oakies slightly better but it is so close I almost wish I could have two number ones it was only the light film on the glass with the barefoots and (that is kinda nit picking because it was just slightly dirty) that made them number two
UncleAnthony
Member
bfgmt said:
bfgmt,
Thanks for the great info. Actually does not surprise me. Been burning Green Team & Premier, and prefer
them over LG and Lignetics, the Premiers sure burn hot !
Yep, Maine Woods are a real disappointment, really woulda like to buy in Maine, but not these stinkers.
Maine Choice aren't bad though. Thought I saw somewhere that another pellet plant is opening in maine,
so it would be good to get some more competition.
stevie73
New Member
Any Okie/Barefoot/Dragon Mountain/Spruce Points/Turmans or Cubex lovers know where I could get some?
I am in North Jersey.
I am in North Jersey.
Now I have to say that all these tests were done on the lowest heat setting of 1-1. The results may be much different in January with the stove on a higher setting I only posted what I have observed in this situation. And if it gets cold again before summer I will find another brand to try and post the results. But I am glad that i have sampled enough brands this spring to know what to buy and what not to buy for next winter. Maybe next winter I will buy a few bags here and there and repeat the test.
I wouldn't even know where to start if I was going to do a volume comparison, Like I said it was in no way a scientific test I suppose I could somehow measure how much is left over after I filled the hopper all the way because it never takes the whole bag. I'll have to figure that out but it wont be this spring and if anyone has any suggestions on how to do this please let me know
It isn't something that I paid much attention to so I can't tell you about all of them so it isn't a fair assessment but I do recall a few that stood out the Okanagans had a fine white ash and I kept looking at the ash pot trying to figure out where it was going because it didn't look like the ash pot was filling up, the barefoot was also a fine ash,the Cubex pulled out in one big clump that broke up at the end of the burn pot and I thought that was kind of strange, and the firesides filled the pot to the point that it was choking the flame as far as all the others nothing stands out but I will pay more attention next time.H ADVANCE said:
Much Thanks.
I presume your stove is a top feed?
Mine is a bottom feed so I presume the Cubex ash will not be the same.
This helps all of us with different stoves determine what might work best!
Of course testing personally before big purchases if possible is a good idea.
LEN
I presume your stove is a top feed?
Mine is a bottom feed so I presume the Cubex ash will not be the same.
This helps all of us with different stoves determine what might work best!
Of course testing personally before big purchases if possible is a good idea.
LEN
jtakeman
Minister of Fire
What most of us do is try to see how long the pellets last in hours burned. I try to do a temp average and how long they last. The hottest pellets can have the stove feed reduced. Which increase's burn time.
Pellet volume is pretty easy. Take a 1 cubic foot box. Most pellets at 40 lbs should be a full box. If there is more pellets than can fit in the box the density is too low(you will need to increase feedrate if temps are lower). If the pellets fill the box and still have room the density is high(you will need to comp with feedrate to get equal burn times). That is if you want to bother.
Very hard to compare pellets per say. Nothing short of lab testing will please some people. I personally want the hotest pellet and adjust feed to where I get good burntime and house stays comfy. I thinx a pellet that does't have the heat to start with, Takes more feedrate to get the heat out. thus more pellets used when cold!
What if the stove will be at its highest setting and the house is cold? Get a hotter pellet and turn the stove down!
Pellet volume is pretty easy. Take a 1 cubic foot box. Most pellets at 40 lbs should be a full box. If there is more pellets than can fit in the box the density is too low(you will need to increase feedrate if temps are lower). If the pellets fill the box and still have room the density is high(you will need to comp with feedrate to get equal burn times). That is if you want to bother.
Very hard to compare pellets per say. Nothing short of lab testing will please some people. I personally want the hotest pellet and adjust feed to where I get good burntime and house stays comfy. I thinx a pellet that does't have the heat to start with, Takes more feedrate to get the heat out. thus more pellets used when cold!
What if the stove will be at its highest setting and the house is cold? Get a hotter pellet and turn the stove down!
jtakeman
Minister of Fire
bfgmt said:
bfgmt,
I gotcha, NOT directed towards you. It was directed to the crap I got during my testing. Looks like your drawing attention with someone saying you need to check the volume to compare correctly! hogwash!
I have one thing to say about the lab results. It does not consider stove feedrate(real world!). Most of us want the heat in the middle of the stoves heat setting. Running a stove on max is excessive to the stoves vitals for long periods of time. Get the heat at medium feed and allow room to advance slightly if need be.
Compare heat between the brands. Do a time study on length of burn time. If a cooler pellet has a bit longer burn? Then maybe it will average out with a slight advance in feedrate(more fuel=more heat). But if the cooler pellet has less burntime. Purchase the hotter pellet.
Just adding my 2 cents worth. Test the pellets the way it suites you. Your stove is the judge on what it wants for fuel. To many variables in the real world!
peace!
jay
I would have loved to do a test at a little higher setting but I got the stove too late in the season and I have been driving the family out of the house.All winter we kept the house at 60-65 (because propane was 4-4.50 per gallon) now it is hard to get used to 78-80. But I bet it will feel great when I walk into the house from outside next January and the windchill is 20 below! I may find that the choice I make for next winter may not be the best one but at least I have an idea how a few of the brands will burn in the stove on low
jtakeman said:
Jay,
Your right on!
I did a volume comparison with the Pennintons & the Currans.
Both burn near similar temp.
However the currans had less volume & burned slower.
I fly thru the penningtons.
As with the excessive variables...
Pellet density just may be important.
Would like to do a test taking the same wood of a
low ash & high ash pellet & run them thru a pellet mill at low & high density.
Then test each against itself.
"in a perfect world"!
bfgmt,
I almost bought your stove I think.
Just looked the owners manual up.
Cant tell if it is a bottom feed.
The burn pot looks totally different than my harman.
I think once we get to know our own stoves by burning a few different ranged pellets.
It becomes a "well educated" guess of what others are posting here of how their stoves burn
in relation to how that same pellet could burn in our own "type" stove.
However heat then ash content then ash type are IMO-key.
I am a pellet newbie & am really appreciative for all I have learned here by the hard work
your doing for our benefit.
I had to learn the hard way at times.
I gave up on propane at 3.87 a gallon few months ago & know it is higher now.
My used harman has already paid for itself for what I saved burning pellets just a few months.
Unplugged the ceramic heater &...
Piped the ceiling hot air into my office & am also saving 60-100.00 a month in electric!
Cant wait till next season.
If only I could get my hands on those Okies/Hammers/Cubex/Barefoots without a 3-hour round trip!
High end Pellets are scarce in these here parts!... of N NJ.
I would buy 10-bags of each if I could get my hands on them.
LEN
jtakeman
Minister of Fire
BLIMP said:
PFI doesn't even measure volume in there standards(hence the hogwash). They measure density. You may feel your getting a better deal with a puffy bag(more volume), Because it takes less bags to fill the hopper. But a dense bag(less puffy) may crank out more BTU's and or last longer.
In theory a dense pellet should have more BTU's per pound then a less dense pellet. But I don't know how to prove the theory! What may prove the theory is heat and burn time. The hottest pellet that last the longest is most likely higher in BTU's per pound.
BTU's are what I buy per 40 pound bags. In other words a big bag of heat. I want the most BTU's I can get per bag at the cheapest price. Not a puffy bag of air without much heat.
If my theory isn't right please prove it wrong! Or explain your theory a bit better.
Sure would be nice if we could all agree on one particular way to test the heat output and compare.
jtakeman
Minister of Fire
BLIMP said:
Well after checking the PFI standards it says Bulk density, Lbs.per cubic foot. Should be 40 to 46lbs.. So if the 40 lbs bag fits in 1 cubic foot. It passes spec's!
Find a 1 cubic foot box and be sure the 40 lbs fits in the box. If it doesn't fit all in, there not up to spec! So they would be considered less dense. Correct?
- Status
Similar threads
