How do people feel about the Woodstock built in ashpans? Has Woodstock gotten around the problems reported on other stoves - air leaks, difficult to use, useless, etc? Do you use them or not?
fire_man said:Todd:
Does the ash pan cause the coals to cool down faster in the keystone than in the fireview? If you placed equal amounts of wood in the Fireview and Keystone (assuming the same starting temperatures) would the coal beds be the same at the end of the burn?
You are a perfect test case, you have similar stoves - one with and one without the ash pan.
HollowHill said:How do people feel about the Woodstock built in ashpans? Has Woodstock gotten around the problems reported on other stoves - air leaks, difficult to use, useless, etc? Do you use them or not?
fire_man said:Come on Woodstock-onians, lets hear some opinions! I'm interested in this one,especially since the new stove will have an ash pan as an option. Woodstock does a pretty good job making things work, but I have heard other stove designs where the ash pan was more of a nuisance.
One complaint is that the coal bed cools off too much because the insulating quality of the ashes evaporates into the ash pan, so re-loads are harder to light.
Backwoods Savage said:I have not posted before here because the Fireview had no ash pan. However, I will state this is the first stove (of several) we've owned without an ash pan. We like it this way.
Highbeam said:I own a stove with a crappy ash pan. It is so so easy to shovel the ashes out every couple of weeks that I can't imagine why anyone would want an ashpan with the additional gaskets and door latch issues. My local woods produce ash chunks, like clinkers, that wouldn't just fall through the slots.