Separate names with a comma.
Post in 'The Hearth Room - Wood Stoves and Fireplaces' started by wood4free, Jan 25, 2012.
Progress Hybrid=side loading rear ventable Mansfield
Helpful Sponsor Ads!
I"m really not sure why but this thread seems to be taking a tone of bashing Woodstock and I do not think it is warranted. We are also seeing so many posts comparing the Progress to the BK. Why? They are two different stoves and the Progress was not put on the market to steal from BK; it is simply the next step in design. There have been some problems as usually are when introducing new products but I've seen nothing serious but just small problems that have either been fixed or are working on fixing right now.
I like what BeGreen posted: "I suspect thatâ€™s not all folks are looking for in this stove. Many want a fantastic fire view and not a smolder blackened window on a black box to look at. I think the Progress will be picked up by a different market segment than the BK stoves."
That is correct. I don't think anyone at Woodstock expected to see a mass migration from BK stoves to Woodstock stoves nor do they expect it in the future. There are fans of BK stoves and rightly so just as there are fans of Woodstock stoves. Each has their positive points. Dang, now I wish I had a Progress....
I'm not trying to bash Woodstock but I have to say I'm a little disappointed about the whole t-stat thingy. I received an email from the main man at Woodstock last Summer that they were looking at 3 different t-stat options for this stove but it doesn't sound like there will be one any time soon. The stove still looks like a winner to me even though it doesn't have everything I want. Who knows, I may fall in love with it at the next bbq and throw one in the back of my truck.
You're not missing much by not having a t-stat...well,maybe if was actually sensitive..maybe.
Look at the title of this thread. The thread was not intended to be pro-woodstock. As hard as it is for some to believe, not everything said about this company must be positive. There are plusses and minuses to everything including the progress.
I still find woodstock to be the superior stone stove maker. Many of their practices make them a top notch business. Woodstock is not perfect though and it's about time for some folks to accept that just like I have accepted that a cat stove isn't all too complicated to run.
I think what is being missed in this discussion is the extra burn flexibility that the hybrid concept SHOULD provide. When burnt at high output rates, the secondaries will extract more heat earlier in the gas path than a cat-only stove and this will do a couple of things: 1. unload the work load on the cat in this burn mode, presumably extending cat life in high demand installations. 2. Extract more heat from the fuel because more of the secondary combustion is accomplished earlier in the gas path, which gives the mass of the stove more time to absorb and radiate the extra heat, which equals greater efficiency.
The hybrid will also be able to burn clean at very low burn rates once the catalytic fires off, same as any other cat stove. Even though the primary combustion might be at low temps, the cat will maintain the temps necessary for secondary combustion as long as sufficient fuel & oxygen are available to it. That said, a second, secondary combustion air source at the inlet of the catalytic may be of benefit in future development.
All things considered, I believe the hybrid design will become a common offering from the continued successful industry participants as it potentially provides more efficiency in both high and low output burn modes. I.E., the "best of both worlds". I've read a lot of testimonials on the BK cats burn times, but do not recall seeing any on the BK efficiency at high output burn rates. I bet a good hybrid stove would prove to be considerably more efficient at high outputs than the BK cats. This may or may not be the current PH design, but a good comparison between the two would be very interesting.
All of that said, I believe the current WS PH draft control may be designed for the lowest common denominator user in that it is a single control. I believe an operator with a GOOD understanding of how heat is extracted in both burn modes could achieve a higher efficiency if the primary and secondary drafts had separate controls. But EPA requirements may have tied WS's hands on the draft control. (My 100+ year old Round Oak has separate primary and secondary draft controls).
Regardless of the outcomes, WS deserves respect for the pioneering investment they've made in merging the 2 methods of achieving a clean burn. As one in the business jet manufacturing industry, I fully understand the costs of R&D and the financial necessity of getting a new design safely to market ASAP. YES, first customer's experiences do serve to refine and tweak a new design to full potential. That is a given as the costs of perfecting a new design before go-to-market are exorbitantly prohibitive. But I believe from the experience of those I know and the WS devotees on this site, and my own experience with WS thus far, that WS WILL do everything possible to ensure the experiences of early PH customers do not tarnish their reputation. WS's business plan is a rarity in today's monopoly of profit-only driven businesses (which is the type I work for, and for which it is suffering today).
Nicely put roundoak16.
PS: do you fly as well? WE sold our plane about 5 years ago (when prices were high). At the time I was sad to see it go-now I count my lucky stars since the bottom has fallen out on prices.
AND I've been told that anything they improve/upgrade will retrofit on the first stoves--can't beat that!
It is not correct to suggest that the T5 can replicate the performance of the Progress. As I said in the previous thread, what you get with the Progress is basically two stoves. One is the most efficient secondary stove ever built, which is beautiful, well built, and can certainly throw way, way more heat for a lot longer than a T5. The second is a cat stove slightly larger than a Keystone.
Loading the stove 60% full does not make it perform like a T5. It makes a perform like a Keystone. Low, slow, yet clean cat burns that last for a long time.
I understand people were under the impression you could fully load the Progress and have it perform like a BK. That is not what it is. I, however, am very happy with what it is. I don't need burn times longer than 12 hours (although you can get them with the Progress). I don't need to fully load the firebox when it's relatively warm out and I only need a bit of steady low heat for 8 to 12 hours.
Like Tony, I am 99.9% happy with the stove. I am NOT happy with the darn screen, but that is my only complaint so far.
Never professionally and no longer privately. I decided a long time ago that I'd hate to be a slave to something I loved to do. I used to love what I do now, but I think it matters not what you are doing, if your dependent on a paycheck the signer of the check will always endeavor to make you hate your job. I think it's kind of a sadistic-get-even thing for expecting pay and benefits for your efforts. You (or the company you worked for) were lucky to sell when you did. Supposedly, things are starting to turn around now.
When I say we, I meant our family. We had real nice PA 32 Saratoga.