1. Welcome Hearth.com Guests and Visitors - Please enjoy our forums!
    Hearth.com GOLD Sponsors who help bring the site content to you:
    Hearthstone Soapstone and Cast-Iron stoves( Wood, Gas or Pellet Stoves and Inserts)
    Caluwe - Passion for Fire and Water ( Pellet and Wood Hydronic and Space Heating)

Woodstock Soapstone Progress Hybrid Stove

Post in 'The Hearth Room - Wood Stoves and Fireplaces' started by Kruegerw, Jul 30, 2012.

  1. rideau

    rideau Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2012
    Messages:
    1,920
    Loc:
    southern ontario
    Best way to limit heat output is to burn one or two large splits. Keep your fuel quantity down, split size up, air closed down. You get a long, slow, low burn.

    Helpful Sponsor Ads!





  2. Waulie

    Waulie Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,010
    Loc:
    Nothern Lower Michigan
    Like Rideau said, find the right load size that will give you an all cat burn. It will vary with different setups, but you should be able to put the right amount in for a very long burn, with little heat for 12 hours or so. Large splits will help get more wood in while still keeping the secondaries from kicking off. Just wait until it gets cold. You'll fall in love all over again. We're finally getting some cold weather and I think I'd forgotton just what an impressive heater this is.
  3. BrowningBAR

    BrowningBAR Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2008
    Messages:
    7,607
    Loc:
    Doylestown, PA
    There are a lot of things wrong with that chart.
  4. Joful

    Joful Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2012
    Messages:
    5,945
    Loc:
    Philadelphia
    I'm skeptical anytime something disagrees with both physics and marketing. ;lol I guess we need more info under the obviously disparate conditions under which each stove was tested.
  5. rideau

    rideau Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2012
    Messages:
    1,920
    Loc:
    southern ontario
    Obviously disparate conditiond? I thought one thing we could all agree on is that the EPA tests test all the stoves under the same conditions? In a test lab, loaded with a full firebox of dimensional Doug Fir?
  6. BrowningBAR

    BrowningBAR Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2008
    Messages:
    7,607
    Loc:
    Doylestown, PA
    Do you really think the 3.4 cu ft Drolet puts out twice as much heat as the 30NC?
    Do you really think the Mansfield puts out more heat than the Equinox?
    Do you really think the Encore puts out more heat than the 30NC?
    Do you really think the Fireview puts out more heat than the Equinox?
  7. Machria

    Machria Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2012
    Messages:
    1,113
    Loc:
    Brookhaven, Long Island
    For example..? Are you saying the EPA does not do the tests correctly? or...?


    I'm not defending the EPA's tests as I know nothing about them. But any stove can output completely different than any other stove of the same type (cat, non-cat...) and size, based on the rest of it's design characteristics. How the air flows through it, materials, how it exhausts, does the exhaust exit the stove too hot (aka wasted heat) or is the heat extracted and emmited from the stove.... these can ALL make a huge difference. You seem to have this very weird idea that all things the same size are made and work exactly the same. With my scientific and engineering background, I can assure you that is not the case.

    Having said that, the one thing that does bother me about the EPA numbers is, their focus is surely on emmisions/polution or lack of, not how well a stove works heating. So surely their tests could be made to be more beneficial to us users, instead of to the EPA's interest in limiting emmisions.


    As rideau mentioned, the one thing we do know is they are all tested in the exact same manner. I do scientific tests all the time, you would be suprised at how different the results are normally from what we "thought" they would be. It's like Mythbusters, and their sometimes suprising outcomes. A Duct-tape boat really can float for days! :)
  8. BrowningBAR

    BrowningBAR Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2008
    Messages:
    7,607
    Loc:
    Doylestown, PA
    Let's pretend that is all true for a moment.

    Explain how a non-cat, burn tube and baffle board, 3.4 cu ft steel stove puts out twice as much heat as a non-cat, burn tube and baffle board, 3.5 cu ft steel stove.

    Explain how a non-cat, burn tube and baffle board, 3.2 cu ft stove soapstone stove puts out more heat than a non-cat, burn tube and baffle board, 4 cu ft stove soapstone from the same manufacturer.

    [​IMG]
    Joful likes this.
  9. rideau

    rideau Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2012
    Messages:
    1,920
    Loc:
    southern ontario
    BB, I'm not vested enough in this to get in a long discussion. About a year ago read all I could find on EPA testing...not too inclined to reread at the moment. But my recollection is that all the stoves are tested the same way. That is all I am saying. So, the tests should give a level ground for some sort of comparison. I'm not famliar with the different stoves, and cannot even venture an opinion about output on anything but Woodstocks, except by reference to the manufacturer's literature and the comments of owners on this forum.

    I can state that Woodstock's stoves meet or exceed their stated heating capacity and burn times. And their stated heating capacity and burn times are in line with those stated in the EPA tests.

    My common sense tells me that it is not just the size of a firebox that determines the output of a stove. ALL else being equal (air flow design, quality of construction, burn technique, air mix, automatic adjustments of air mix, materials of construction, tolerances, shape of firebox, ability to load firebox full, etc), I'd expect similar results from two stoves with the same size firebox. ANY variable, and I'd expect to start to run into some differences in burn time and heat output. MANY differences, and I would anticipate the possibility of a significant set of differences in burn times and heat output.
  10. Machria

    Machria Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2012
    Messages:
    1,113
    Loc:
    Brookhaven, Long Island
    LOL! Love that video!

    Easy, as noted, the 3.5 might not burn all the fuel, maybe a good portion of it goes up and out the chimney. And even if it does burn the fuel, maybe all the heat goes up and out the chimney, instead of into the room via a proper conducting or convention design. The exhaust path for the 3.5 might go straight out from the top of the firebox and out the top of the stove, therefore sending all the heat right out the chminey. The 3.4 exhaust might wind around the top of the stove (as I have noticed the PH does under the cooktop), and release all it's heat into the stove materials BEFORE it goes up the chimney which results in more heat into the room, and less into the neighborhood. Therefore they both burn the same wood, yet one puts out 50% more heat into the room it is located in. One stoves burn tubes might introduce 10 liters of air and fresh oxygen into the stove every minute, which would create a huge amount of added fuel to the wood fuel. Oxgen is fuel too! While the other stove only allows 2 liters of fresh air into the stove per minute. 8 liters of extra fuel (oxygen) alone could more than double the heating output of one stove over another. Remember, wood does NOT burn, without oxygen. This could also result in a much HOTTER burn of the same wood. Hotter= more heat.

    Then there are things like, maybe they both put out the same exact amount of BTU's of heat into the room. BUT, one of them does it all in 1 hour, while the other does it over a 5 hour period. So one is rated at 50k btu's per hour, while the other is rated at 10k btu's per hour. What you don't see in the number is, the first one puts out 50k btu's per hour, BUT needs to be fed every hour a full load, while the 2nd one does not need fed for 5 hours.

    I could go on, and on, and on about what could be different. And I know close to nothing about stoves. It's just simple science, and science rules the world my friend. ;)
  11. Machria

    Machria Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2012
    Messages:
    1,113
    Loc:
    Brookhaven, Long Island
    One more comment, since this is the PH thread, about my experience with the PH so far. I've noticed I can put alot of wood into it, and burn it all very quickly (2 or 3 hours) putting out an immense amount of heat in a very short period (aka requiring almost ALL the windows in the room to be open!#!$). But, I can also put in about the same amount of wood, and it can burn for 12 hours with a much softer/comfortable heat ouput, all controllable by the air damper control.

    So that coincides with Woodstocks claim of the widest range of output in this size stove, and some of the EPA testing.

    Pretty amazing control of the this stove. I don't know how that compares to other stoves, but when I was shopping everyone kept telling me "you will have great control of the PH". I didn't really understand that fully, but I do now.
  12. BrowningBAR

    BrowningBAR Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2008
    Messages:
    7,607
    Loc:
    Doylestown, PA
    I mean, I'm CURRENTLY RUNNING an Encore and a 30. The chart shows the Encore puts out more heat even though I experience that every day that is not the case. Not even close to the case. The 30 out heats the Encore and Heritage (which I have also owner) by massive leaps, both of which in the chart put out more heat than the 30.

    The chart is useless, inaccurate, and does more harm than good.
  13. rideau

    rideau Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2012
    Messages:
    1,920
    Loc:
    southern ontario
    I completely believe your experience with the stoves. So my question would be WHY isn't the 30 testing that way? You own the 30. Why don't you call and discuss it with the manufacturer? They should have an interest in seeing that their stove is properly represented. And, out of curiosity, what does THEIR literature say about real life heat output and burn time of the 30? Do they list it with a more accurate representation?
  14. BrowningBAR

    BrowningBAR Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2008
    Messages:
    7,607
    Loc:
    Doylestown, PA
    That is just one of many inaccuracies with that chart. The Mansfield/Equinox is equally laughable.

    Should I call every manufacturer and ask them about the inaccuracies or would it be best to chalk it up as a useless graph that does more harm than good when it comes to purchasing a stove?
  15. Waulie

    Waulie Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,010
    Loc:
    Nothern Lower Michigan
    The reported epa outputs don't mean much. The EPA doesn't really care about ouput, it cares about pollution. Yes, each stove is tested with the same fuel, the same way. But, it is not tested in a way that makes sense from a maximum/minimum output standpoint. Ignore the specific numbers and instead look at the big picture. The PH is a medium sized stove that can put out some serious heat which is in line with bigger stoves. It also has a wide range of heat ouput. It also puts out very little pollution.

    Does it put out twice as much heat as the 30? No. Does it put out twice as much heat as the 30 in an hour with EPA test fuel and testing procedures? Clearly. Does that mean anything? No.
    rdust, Joful and BrowningBAR like this.
  16. Joful

    Joful Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2012
    Messages:
    5,945
    Loc:
    Philadelphia
    Unfortunately, you are both incorrect. The EPA test for emissions uses a load of varying size, based on firebox size. Because this graph was presented as data based on the EPA emissions testing, the conditions are disparate, in that the various size stoves are tested with different loads of wood.

    http://www.woodheat.org/emissions-testing.html

    I don't think anyone here is knocking your beloved Woodstock's performance, so there's no need to get heated over this, rideau.

    edit: Waulie nailed the underlying theme.
    BrowningBAR likes this.
  17. Machria

    Machria Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2012
    Messages:
    1,113
    Loc:
    Brookhaven, Long Island

    Agreed, they use the correct size load, for the size of the firebox. That makes sense. That still makes a proper comparison, one burns 10 lbs of wood with xx ouput, the other burns 8 lbs of wood with xx output. Graph them, and that is what you get. I have no problem with that.

    And as I have mentioned several times, and Waulie repeated, the tests are very likely based and focused on emissions, not heat output. But the heat output is used as a reference for "classing" the stoves. Similar to how cars and trucks are on a certain "class", and must meet the emmisions rules for that "class". So the heat ouputs might not be dead on (as I think we all agree), but they do make a decent reference point.
  18. BrowningBAR

    BrowningBAR Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2008
    Messages:
    7,607
    Loc:
    Doylestown, PA
    No. They do not.

    The Progress does not put out three times as much heat as the 30.
    The Drolet does not put out twice as much heat as the 30.
    The Oslo does not put out more heat than the Encore and the 30
    The Mansfield does not produce more heat than the Equinox.
    The Fireview does not put out more heat than the Equinox.
    The Encore and Heritage do not put out more heat than the 30.

    Some of these I know from personal experience (30, Encore, Heritage, Fireview, Oslo). Others are purely common sense. It is a chart that should be ignored and offers zero value in terms of how a stove will heat your home.
    TreeCo likes this.
  19. rdust

    rdust Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2009
    Messages:
    3,795
    Loc:
    Michigan
    +1, exactly what I've been thinking as I've been reading along!
  20. Rich L

    Rich L Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2008
    Messages:
    654
    Loc:
    Eastern,Ma.
    Forget the EPA it's still a crap shoot to know if a stove that works well for others will work well for your situation.
  21. Machria

    Machria Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2012
    Messages:
    1,113
    Loc:
    Brookhaven, Long Island

    I don't think you are reading this correctly. Are you taking into consideration the fact it is ONLY comparing MAXIMUM BTU OUTPUT? The chart is not saying "a Progress puts out 3 times as much heat as a 30". It is saying, with a full load of EPA test wood, the MAXIMUM heat each unit will put out is xxx btu's. That does not mean it can do it for very long, or very short, or any lenght of time for that matter. Just that it can do it.

    Here's an experiment for you to try someday. Load all three of your stoves with the same amount of the same type wood. Say, two 4 lb splits of oak for examle in each stove. Light them up, and leave them full blast open. Now measure (as best you can), how much heat each seems to put out, and how long it takes each one to burn down to the same point (10 or 20% left in coals). THAT, is what I believe they are showing you in the graph.

    Does it show you exactly what a stove will do in your home? of course not. Nobody is saying that. It is a reference point.
  22. Waulie

    Waulie Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,010
    Loc:
    Nothern Lower Michigan
    Right, but it is implied by comments like "highest output ever". Look, I don't really blame WS for touting the test results. At least they actually are test results. Plenty of manufacturers come up with claims which seem to be based on nothing at all.

    The interesting thing to take from the test results is that the PH must still be heating very efficiently to put out that much heat with the draft full open. While other stoves are probably sending a lot of the heat up the flue with the draft full open, the PH is still sending it into the room. I've noticed that while you get lots of air with the draft full open, the stove still heats up very fast. If I leave the draft full open very long on a hot coal reload, I'll often have secondaries like crazy before the flue is even indicating cat range. The heat exchanger fins definitely helps. Also, the slanted baffle pointed directly out the window sends a lot of heat into the room quickly.

    Or, it could just mean the PH burned through that EPA test load very fast with the draft full open. It's probably a combination of the two.

    Of course this doesn't really mean anything for heating our homes. It is interesting, but that's about it. I suppose it goes to the efficiency since you aren't losing as much heat up the flue as you're getting your fire going and getting your stove up to temp.

    The chart is not inaccurate. It just reports the EPA test results. However, it is certainly misleading.
  23. BrowningBAR

    BrowningBAR Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2008
    Messages:
    7,607
    Loc:
    Doylestown, PA
    It is ridiculously wrong.

    No, it is not what they are showing. AND, the 30 easily puts out more heat with the same amount of wood than the Encore. Which isn't even what the original chart is showing.

    A really bad reference point that offers no value.
  24. Machria

    Machria Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2012
    Messages:
    1,113
    Loc:
    Brookhaven, Long Island
    Exactly. And that is exactly all I am saying. However, I do give the results more merrit than most, I don't think it is misleading at all, except for those that do not really understand what they are looking at (as with anything). For example, BB seems to think it is stating one stove puts out "more heat with the same load as another stove". It says nothing of the sort. It's simply a measure of the SPIKE of maximum heat output of each stove with the appropriate amount of EPA test wood based on firebox size. I beleive it is the best reference point we currenlty have besides user input, but user input tends to be off kilter even more.
  25. BrowningBAR

    BrowningBAR Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2008
    Messages:
    7,607
    Loc:
    Doylestown, PA
    Please point out the post in which I have said that. You are the one that stated this: "Load all three of your stoves with the same amount of the same type wood. "
    And I believe it is completely worthless and offers no value as to how a stove heats your home.

    But, if you want to think a Woodstock Keystone will heat your home nearly as well as an Equinox or that a Fireview will heat your home better than an Equinox, then god speed and enjoy. Let me know how that works out for you....

Share This Page