Woodstock's new stove; some updates

[Backwoods Savage]

I didn't see anywhere... Insert or free standing?? Looks like an interesting stove for sure.

Free standing.

 

[BrianK]

Given the numbers posted so far, this stove could end up with a wood stove industry trifecta:
-highest EPA BTU output
-lowest EPA emissions
-highest EPA efficiency

And it might be premature to engage in conjecture but this seems possible too:
-longest burn times?

Plus top or rear vent, cook top, and anticipated retail of $1500-$2000.

This stove could really shake up the industry.

 

[begreen]

Down boys. Remember the Equinox is putting out 120K btus.

 

[BrotherBart]

I bet when you get up in the morning there will be more wood in the stove than was in it before you went to bed.

 

[BrianK]

Down boys. Remember the Equinox is putting out 120K btus.

There's a reason I put "EPA" in bold and italics. See the numbers here on the EPA website, List of EPA Certified Wood Stoves August 2013.


EPA numbers are going to be the industry standard in the not too distant future and few stoves have them listed for BTU output.

 

[fire_man]

I bet when you get up in the morning there will be more wood in the stove than was in it before you went to bed.

Only if it was loaded with Dennis wood.

 

[Todd]

I bet when you get up in the morning there will be more wood in the stove than was in it before you went to bed.

I use to scratch my head and think that with my Blaze King every morning. I think they had some kind of pact with the aliens to sneak in and load the stoves while your asleep.

 

[lumbering on]

This keeps getting more and more interesting:

The monitoring software sounds awesome.

 

[begreen]

There's a reason I put "EPA" in bold and italics. See the numbers here on the EPA website, List of EPA Certified Wood Stoves August 2013.


EPA numbers are going to be the industry standard in the not too distant future and few stoves have them listed for BTU output.

I don't buy for a minute that the Keystone and Equinox have roughly the same potential heat output, do you? The big rock just takes longer to get going.

 

[BrianK]

I don't buy for a minute that the Keystone and Equinox have roughly the same potential heat output, do you? The big rock just takes longer to get going.

How is a consumer expected to compare BTU output if stove manufacturers do not use standardized numbers in their advertizing?

I like the fact that there is some outside testing behind the BTU ratings claimed by Woodstock.

Where do the other manufacturers get their numbers?

 

[webby3650]

The monitoring software sounds awesome.

Sounds like a headache to me!
Just think, you can look at the SERVICE light all the way home in your car, then come home a monitor on your stove that says SERVICE. Wow! Sounds great!

Seriously, it's a little overkill don't you think? We all know how efficient they are. I love the new technology as much or more than anyone, but come on. Do we need an LCD screen to remind us? It's just a fire after all.

 

[lumbering on]

Do we need an LCD screen to remind us? It's just a fire after all.

I'm thinking an iPad app.

 

[webby3650]

Where do the other manufacturers get their numbers?

Not too many numbers needed when you see a Keystone next to an Equinox! A tiny stove simply will not out perform a huge stove! It's exhaust might be a little cleaner, but that does not make up for all the extra mass.

 

[BrianK]

Not too many numbers needed when you see a Keystone next to an Equinox! A tiny stove simply will not out perform a huge stove! It's exhaust might be a little cleaner, but that does not make up for all the extra mass.

I agree completely.

But we still need objective numbers from third party tests. When some stove manufacturers start using EPA BTU numbers to compare their stoves to those of other manufacturers' EPA BTU numbers, hopefully it will force all the manufacturers to do likewise so that consumers can compare apples to apples.

Right now the only way to really compare is by firebox size. That's a good guide but probably not the bottom line. Is there a conversion table for firebox cu ft to estimated BTU output?

Does a hybrid wring more BTUs out of the wood than a CAT or non-CAT?

 

[Tenn Dave]

How is a consumer expected to compare BTU output if stove manufacturers do not use standardized numbers in their advertizing?

I like the fact that there is some outside testing behind the BTU ratings claimed by Woodstock.

Where do the other manufacturers get their numbers?

I think you're right on the money Brian. It's EPA versus a hunch. I'll bet on EPA everytime.

 

[begreen]

All stoves go through several tests for emissions, efficiency, max temp clearances, etc.. Most marketing is going to cherry pick the numbers that say the best about the stove. BK, publishes understated numbers but you have to know that if the throttle is opened up on a 4.2 cu ft King it is going to put out some serious heat. I find their specs more meaningful than most stoves.


KING

(Extra large catalytic wood stove)

Heats 1,500 – 3,000 Square Feet
40 Hour Low Burn Times
Thermostatically Controlled
4.32 Cubic Foot Firebox
Max Heat Input 703,390 BTUs
88% LHV Efficiency (82% HHV)
51,582 BTU's/h constant output for 12 hours
Up to 23" Log Length
EPA Emissions 1.76 gr/hour

 

[lumbering on]

Sounds like a headache to me!

As cool as it would be to be able to geek out on graphs and data, you have a point about simplicity.

Don't need another appliance to maintain. Just a fire in a box.

Still sounds awesome, though.

 

[webby3650]

All stoves go through several tests for emissions, efficiency, max temp clearances, etc.. Most marketing is going to cherry pick the numbers that say the best about the stove. BK, publishes understated numbers but you have to know that if the throttle is opened up on a 4.2 cu ft King it is going to put out some serious heat. I find their specs more meaningful than most stoves.


KING

(Extra large catalytic wood stove)

Heats 1,500 – 3,000 Square Feet
40 Hour Low Burn Times
Thermostatically Controlled
4.32 Cubic Foot Firebox
Max Heat Input 703,390 BTUs
88% LHV Efficiency (82% HHV)
51,582 BTU's/h constant output for 12 hours
Up to 23" Log Length
EPA Emissions 1.76 gr/hour

I am so glad that BK started publishing the high output, but then also publishes a more reasonable constant BTU ratings over an extended time.

 

[BrianK]

I am so glad that BK started publishing the high output, but then also publishes a more reasonable constant BTU ratings over an extended time.

Consumers need all the manufacturers to publish both numbers. Apples to apples.

 

[Tenn Dave]

Brian, I am very excited for you for getting the opportunity to test the new Woodstock stove. It sure does look like it is going to be exceptional.

 

[BrianK]

Brian, I am very excited for you for getting the opportunity to test the new Woodstock stove. It sure does look like it is going to be exceptional.

Thanks Dave.

Yes, I'm on the list for Beta testers so that probably means 1) I'm really excited about this stove and 2) I'm not being very objective on these threads about it.

 

[Tenn Dave]

Thanks Dave.

Yes, I'm on the list for Beta testers so that probably means 1) I'm really excited about this stove and 2) I'm not being very objective on these threads about it.

We are just having fun now Brian. I'm sure you will be very objective when the testing starts. After all is said and done, you and me and all the other members on this board just want what's best for the industry.

 

[charly]

Dittos.

Do they read this forum?

Yes they do....

 

[webby3650]

Thanks Dave.

Yes, I'm on the list for Beta testers so that probably means 1) I'm really excited about this stove and 2) I'm not being very objective on these threads about it.

Do you have, or have you had any other EPA stoves to compare it to?

 

[BrianK]

Do you have, or have you had any other EPA stoves to compare it to?

I've used a Woodstock Fireview 205 for the last two seasons.