questions about advantage of newer epa stoves vs older steel stoves

[D Hershy]

I am new to this forum and enjoying it very much, but did not see a specific answer to my question.
I am quite familiar with wood heat but only with the old style stoves. We are considering a wood insert and with so many options and price ranges, I was wondering what the negatives would be in buying a used stove non-epa which cost a lot less, or just straight out buying a new (or newer) efficient stove.

Our house is an old 2200 sq. ft. farm house not insulated that well.​

Would an old steel stove work just fine at a fraction of the price, or am I better off spending more money up front?​

Also are their cautions to buying a used stove.​

Thanks​

 

[mellow]

I would suggest doing more reading, this has been covered quite a few times. But to recap:

1. Have a professional chimney sweep come by and check out your chimney to make sure it is up to code and clean it
2. Either get quotes or DIY to have a Stainless Steel liner installed, either 6" or 8" (Depending on insert) and an insulated liner is always better and sometimes required
3. Many insert reviews on here, read up and see what will fit you best, going with a newer EPA insert will save you money on wood
4. Either get quotes or DIY the insert install keeping a close eye on manufacturers spec's

Buying a used stove can be a gamble if you are not sure what to look for, plenty of threads on here to help you learn what to look for.

TLDR: Go for a newer EPA insert, and have it professionally installed, pay for it once and be safe for the rest of the years you use it

 

[Wood Duck]

I think it depends how much effort you plan to put into burning wood. If you will use the stove a lot and if you will take the time to have a supply of well seasoned firewood, then a modern stove will get more heat out of the wood you are burning, create less pollution, and keep the flue more clean, and so it is probably worth it.

If you plan to burn only occasionally and/or if you are not going to take the time to have well seasoned firewood, then maybe an older, lesss efficient but cheaper insert makes sense.

 

[Grisu]

EPA stoves provide more even heat (especially when it is a cat), are way more efficient i. e. consume less wood (people here report a ~50% reduction), and burn more cleanly i. e. you are not polluting the air as much. If you need to buy your wood you will probably save money after a few years. If you cut your own an EPA stove will be less work. Overall, I think going for an EPA stove is money well spent.

 

[firefighterjake]

I really like WoodDuck's answer . . .

For me going with the cheap non-EPA woodstove or more expensive stove came down to one thing and one thing only . . . and it wasn't about being all green and burning cleanly (although now I really like that feature as well) -- I liked the idea of using less wood since regardless of whether you burn only on weekends and evenings or burn 24-7 . . . and regardless of whether you process your own wood or buy it . . . there is only so much time and money you want to spend on working with the wood . . . unless you're Zap . . . or Quads.

 

[Hickorynut]

If you are low on funds and don't mind cutting more wood, get an older non epa stove. In my case, I got more heat and faster with the old stove. But I was fighting creosote all the time, the black tary stuff too. With the newer stove I get very little of anything in the chimney liner and the glass door stays cleaner much longer although it does get dirty. It just takes longer to get the house up to temperature.

 

[BrowningBAR]

Five years ago I bought my first wood stove. It was a Pre-EPA Vigilant. Great stove and threw a ton of heat. It also ate a ton of wood.

The problem with the wood consumption was that it also resulted in shorter burn times. For the same money that I bought the Vigilant, I got an EPA Defiant used which has 2-3 times the burn times. And The 30, which was bought new for a little more than the Vigilant, offers twice the burn time as the Vigilant did.

All three stoves are about the same size in terms of firebox usage. So, a modern stove will give you much longer burns, which also means less wood consumption.

 

[Highbeam]

I am dealing with this with a shop stove right now. The things pushing me towards an EPA non-cat stove:

1) The law: In my state, and perhaps all states?, it is illegal to install (buy or sell too) a non-epa stove. You will fail inspection on your permit. Then they have these burn bans in my region where non-epa stoves and fireplaces may not burn but certified stoves are okay to burn.

2) Wood consumption: I don't think you get 50% better mileage from your wood but consumption goes down. You need dry wood with an epa stove.

3) Safety: The EPA stove is much much less likely to gunk up your chimney which means lower chances of chimney fires. And if you install a non-EPA stove you will have done so illegally which means your insurance may not pay out in the event of the much more likely chimney fire.

4) View of the fire: The EPA stoves have big windows that stay clean so you can see the excellent fire inside. This is enjoyable.

Good things about a non-epa stove:

1) Cheap or free.
2) More easily burn trash.
3) More durable.

With the englander brand available at big box stores you can be into a new modern stove with great reviews for under 1000$.

 

[corey21]

I think the safety and wood consumption is much better then an old smoke dragon just my thoughts.

 

[Jackfre]

I think Highbeam hit the nail on the head. I would add that you cannot overlook your homeowners insurance...limitations. Insurance companies of all types hire sales people to sell policies and attorneys to deny coverage. We are playing with fire here.

My own experience on this topic...I had an old Earth Stove insert in the house with a nice Dura-liner system in the flue. It consumed mass quantities of wood and provided little heat. I pulled it and gave it to a friend, but told him not to operate until the units damper was repaired. He didn't listen and consumes mass qtys too I installed a 2550 VC Encore in front of the fireplace and connected it to the liner. Worked great and blew us out of the house. I didn't want an insert and as we continue down the road with the remodel, I'm going to tear down the chimney and move the stove to a freestanding position. My point is that you may want to look at a freestanding stove rather than an insert

 

[damien]

I myself am a subscriber to less trips to the woodpile when it's 5 degrees outside. I love the new EPA stove and would never go back to the old pre EPA. Since I used to clean these for a living I can tell you personally that the difference in creosote buidup is night and day. I love customers who have new stoves. That black nasty tar goo that the old ones seem to be so famous for producing is a nightmare.At least around here anyway.

 

[raybonz]

EPA stoves provide more even heat (especially when it is a cat), are way more efficient i. e. consume less wood (people here report a ~50% reduction), and burn more cleanly i. e. you are not polluting the air as much. If you need to buy your wood you will probably save money after a few years. If you cut your own an EPA stove will be less work. Overall, I think going for an EPA stove is money well spent.

I agree cat stoves are very good but so are secondary burn stoves. The stoves you and I run are around 80% efficient and cat stoves are virtually the same. Either technology will reduce wood consumption about 50% over a pre-epa wood stove while reducing emissions and that's a good thing.

Ray

 

[BobUrban]

My practical experience from burning last winter with a non EPA vs. my new EPA stove this year has been night and day. Quicker start ups and heat output, longer burn times with similar sized fire box and it has not had a hiccup.

Went with the non EPA last year because the chimney install was my price point for the season but knew I would upgrade by spring. Did my homework(thank you Hearth.com) and bought an Englander 30 for 649.00 delivered to my door and a Fifty spot to get the delivery guys to bring it into the house. 699.00 and delivered to within 4' of it's final destiny is a damn good deal. I could spend a lot more but cannot imagine getting more stove without going CAT.

I am a DIY guy so my wood, heart, install(sans chimney) was all done myself so that helped greatly with the cost.

If you want an old defiant I have one sitting in my living room as a very heavy lamp stand you can have on the cheap if you bring enough muscle to get it out of here

BTW - I had to get a 1yr reprieve from my insurance company to burn the old stove last year so not changing stoves was not an option - check with your insurance company 1st and make sure they know the stove you plan to burn.

 

[raybonz]

My practical experience from burning last winter with a non EPA vs. my new EPA stove this year has been night and day. Quicker start ups and heat output, longer burn times with similar sized fire box and it has not had a hiccup.

Went with the non EPA last year because the chimney install was my price point for the season but knew I would upgrade by spring. Did my homework(thank you Hearth.com) and bought an Englander 30 for 649.00 delivered to my door and a Fifty spot to get the delivery guys to bring it into the house. 699.00 and delivered to within 4' of it's final destiny is a damn good deal. I could spend a lot more but cannot imagine getting more stove without going CAT.

I am a DIY guy so my wood, heart, install(sans chimney) was all done myself so that helped greatly with the cost.

If you want an old defiant I have one sitting in my living room as a very heavy lamp stand you can have on the cheap if you bring enough muscle to get it out of here

BTW - I had to get a 1yr reprieve from my insurance company to burn the old stove last year so not changing stoves was not an option - check with your insurance company 1st and make sure they know the stove you plan to burn.

Congrats Bob! BTW going to a cat stove will not give you more stove but will give you a different stove. I ran a cat stove for over 20 years and am pleased with my secondary burn stove! The NC-30 is a very good stove and the stove of choice for many people here at the forum and one the reasons I wanted a secondary burn stove was the great view of the fire with the secondaries burning and I have not been disappointed! Enjoy!

Ray

 

[Backwoods Savage]

Welcome to the forum D. Hershy.

There is much knowledge here on hearth.com and although we do not always agree on some points we do debate them. However, on the epa vs the older stoves I think almost all will agree the newer epa stoves are the best way to go.

You can check my signature line to see that we are not new wood burners and we've owned a few different stoves over the years. Our last stove was a smoke dragon and we burned an average of at least 6 full cord of wood each winter and we still about froze in December-January-February. We had this stove over 20 years and saved our pennies. So in 2007 we finally figured it was time to get a better stove. I'll try to make the story short.

In our research we got a bit gun-shy about cat stoves because of some bad reports. One stove we were definitely going to check out was the soapstone stoves by Woodstock. We remembered wanting one many years ago but did not have the needed cast at the time. But then to our surprise, the Woodstock stoves had catalysts! Oh no! What to do?

The final tripping point was when we visited a family who owned one of these stoves that we liked and they graciously brought us into their home and we talked about the stove and the company. As it turned out, I had done some business with this man and some of his family many years before and I knew him to be a very fair man. But my first thought was, "How can that little stove throw enough heat to keep our drafty old house warm?" Even so, some of the stories he told us about Woodstock were almost unbelievable. We did end up buying the stove in March of that year and installed it in September.

Here are some of the benefits we are receiving since installing the stove:

1. First and foremost is that we now burn only half the wood we used to burn and sometimes even less.
2. What we like the most is that we are now toasty warm in our house. We used to close off rooms in the winter but after installing the new stove we have never closed off a room in winter.
3. With our old stove we used to have regular chimney cleanings multiple times every winter. I think the most was six times in one winter. We've had the new stove for 5 full winters now and have cleaned the chimney one time and got about a cup of soot; no creosote.
4. I no longer have to get up during the night to add wood to the stove. It is nice and warm when we get up for breakfast.


Please keep in mind the above is for a free standing stove and not an insert. Rather you would gain the same benefits with the insert I can not say. Another thing to keep in mind is that with the new epa stoves, one really needs to pay attention to the fuel. No longer can someone go out in the fall and cut the wood they will burn that same winter. Your wood must be dry. But then, even if those with the old stoves would burn good dry wood they would reap great benefits and the best would be that they would get more heat from less wood. Also, we never count wood as drying until it has been cut to firewood length and split, then stacked outside in the wind for a minimum of a year. Some wood though, like oak, needs 3 years to dry properly before burning. Please keep this in mind no matter which stove you buy.

Good luck.

 

[D Hershy]

Thanks to everyone for your response, it has been very helpful,
D, Hershy

 

[Woody Stover]

it wasn't about being all green and burning cleanly (although now I really like that feature as well)

Another benefit is that less smoke means happier neighbors. If your neighbors' throats and eyes are burning every time they step outside, they'll have a dim view of wood-burning in general and will be more likely to support anti-wood heat legislation.

I also agree that you should seriously consider a free-standing stove. They get the heat out to you more effectively.

 

[fire_man]

Another benefit is that less smoke means happier neighbors. If your neighbors' throats and eyes are burning every time they step outside, they'll have a dim view of wood-burning in general and will be more likely to support anti-wood heat legislation.

That's one of the primary reasons I stopped burning my old smoke dragon VC Resolute. I used to literally choke on the air outside when that thing was dampered down for a long "horizontal burn". The smoke actually made me gag. With the new stove we don't even notice the smoke.

 

[NextEndeavor]

I've not had anything but this EPA stove but assume with the higher temps inside the box lined with fire bricks that there is less ash to deal with. I can tell you we empty about once/week during 24 hour operation weather. I've lit over a dozen shoulder fires this fall and just now emptied but it didn't need it. Probably should have left some in there to help insulate the next bed of coals.