black bart with crack in the back

[thejdcook]

I have a black Bart that was used in my grandma’s house for years. It has been sitting in the garage now for a few years and I am planning on putting it back into the fireplace. I think I need to replace the blower temperature sensor. I noticed a crack probably 10-12 inches long in the back of the stove. It is where there appears to be a seam. I have it in the back of a trailer to take it to a welding shop and have it welded. Is this a reasonable idea? I have read on the internet that black Barts are not well regarded and that they have a design flaw? I was disappointed to read this but I am still considering having it fixed and reinstalling it. My grandma never had too much trouble with it. Also is it supposed to be lined with fire brick?

Thanks Dave

 

[thejdcook]

My parents have a buck stove I could put in the fireplace instead, but it is rusty from being in the barn for years and will requirer sanding or sandblasting and refinishing. also they will want something for it. It has a blower and a glass front door. What might it be worth? Should I use it instead of the black bart. The black bart will be free and probably easier to fix. It will go back in my grandmas house which is now a rental property.


Thanks Dave

 

[webbie]

The bart had the problem of not being lined at all - just bare steel and relatively thin.

The old Buck - value depends on if the thermostat and blower 100% work. If not, these parts can be expensive. Paint and gasket (and elbow grease) are cheap, but electronic parts cost money.

Either way you , you will be dealing with relatively ancient technology - make certain that you install it correctly and pipe it up above the damper with a metal seal off plate (see other threads here about that stuff) - this is especially important with these two models as they have read mounted fans which could suck chimney air down and spew it into your room!

 

[thejdcook]

Well, both stoves have a rectangular opening on top (about 4x12) instead of a round stove pipe hole. The black Bart has a rectangular sheet metal piece that bolts to the top of the stove and is several feet tall. Now I guess I could make a sheet metal piece to block this off just below the damper as I read in the post but then any trash that comes down the chimney when it is cleaned will collect on the top of the block. So Then instead of just removing the fireplace/stove trim and sweeping it out I will have to remove the block and possibly the stove to get to the block. This seams like a great deal of work for a yearly chimney cleaning. I don’t remember my grandma ever having problems with smoke entering her house with out the block off. I am not as concerned with heating efficiency as I am safety because this is a rental property. Is there a way to convert the rectangular opening on top of the stove to a round stove pipe and then I could buy a longer round stove pipe to extend further up the chimney? Would this be a benefit? If I understand correctly I think Buck Stove Company told me the stove didn’t even need any kind of pipe on top of the stove just push it into the opening and trim it out. However I think that would likely result in the blower blowing smoke out.

Back to the crack in the black Bart:
I guess that is because of your statement that it was made of thin steal. There are actually several small cracks (1-2 inches) near the mounting bolts for the rectangular stove pipe. I wasn’t really planning on fixing those, but I was going to have the large crack in the back fixed. Do these cracks present a danger? I would think the worst case scenario would be smoke leaking into the house and this should only happen from the rear crack or if another large crack developed again.


Thanks Dave

 

[BrotherBart]

Stove shops can order an insert adapter that will adapt that flue opening to a six inch round pipe or chimney liner. They run around a hundred bucks and several styles are available. But honestly you are trying to get a glue factory horse ready for a race.

With that much evidence of structural problems there is no way you should be looking at lighting up a fire in that thing in inhabited space. That comes from a guy that replaced a lot better built fireplace insert than the Black Bart last year because of metal stress issues. After spending the hundred bucks for the adapter.

That whole rig is now the firebox for a meat smoker. Out back. A long way from where we sleep.

 

[elkimmeg]

I would think the worst case scenario would be smoke leaking into the house and this should only happen from the rear crack or if another large crack developed again.

Sir do you have a death wish? First of all the Black bart stove should now be sitting in the scrap yard No inspector would issue a permit to re-install that stove
Here on Hearth.com we are about safety and leaving a gentley footprint on our enviorment Installing the smoke damaged smoke dragon for yesteryear goes againt all out efforts for clean responsible safe installations. Illegally installing a damaged smoke dragon is not going to garner too much support here.

The second Buck stove can not be code compliant installed by the slam in approach I know Buck manufacturing and I doubt the told you this was acceptiable it may have been back in the 1970's but not compliant to todays code. If that stove is not UL listed it can not be legally installed or permitted. What it worth nothing but another smoke dragon headache. It worth what the scrap yard is paying for scrap iron. I can't believe you are contemplating installing a damaged stove into a rental unit It is one thing to take your own life you value so little. but to put this in to an rented apartment? Neither these stoves are safe for installation I would require a full detailed condition report on the condition of a stove that old before I ever issued a permit for installation

 

[Eric Johnson]

Steel plate scrap goes for $120/ton these days. Elk pretty much summed it up

Sounds to me like the only thing these stoves have going for them is sentimental value. You'd be way ahead, in every way, to invest in a stove or insert that complies with current codes. If nothing else, you'll burn a lot less wood, a lot more safely.

 

[thejdcook]

Well so the opinion here is definitely that the Black Bart is dangerous even if the crack in the back is re-welded. Why though are you also saying that the buck stove is a dangerous dinosaur? I see no damage other than rust and I thought Buck was supposed to be a good brand. So are you saying that wood stoves need to be replaced at a certain time frame even if no damage is apparent?

I did not say that I planned to slap the buck in and trim it out with out any kind of pipe on top, but that is how I interpreted the buck representative response to my e-mail. The following is our exchange. Maybe you can clarify for me.

If you are going to insert it into a fireplace there is no connector to the pipe you have to seal of the fireplace with a trim kit.
----- Original Message -----
From: Dave and Pam
To: [email protected]
Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2007 12:53 PM
Subject: parts to hook up stove

I have an old Buck stove that I am thinking about installing in a fireplace. It has a rectangular opening on the top about 4inch by 12inch with a damper. What do I need to attach this to the chimney? There was a number on the stove I think it was 752189
Thanks
Dave


My renter has central heat and air so she does not need to use the chimney but she mentioned that she wants to save money by using the fireplace. Therefore I planned to reinstall the stove so that heating would be more efficient and safer. I thought it would be safer because I wouldn’t have to worry about any coals popping out of the fireplace.

So do you think it would be safer for her to use the fireplace with out an insert instead of using an older buck stove with no noticeable damage other than rust?

Sounds like the best thing to do is just tell her she can’t use the fireplace at all. Kind of sad, but I can’t justify buying a new wood stove for a rental house with central heat and air.

Thanks Dave

 

[Gooserider]

Your description of the Black Bart is that it is emphatically dangerous.

The problem with the Buck is less a matter of it's physical condition than it is a question of it's age. Stove technology has advanced more in the last 20 years than it had for centuries, and the difference between a modern stove and an older stove (Pre-EPA technology) is immense. The Buck stove may have been a good stove for it's day and time, but that day and time is long past. It's about like comparing a modern car to a Model "A" Ford - The Model "A" might be in perfect showroom condition by its manufacturing date specs, but I don't think you'd want to take it on the racetrack.

I appreciate that you want to help out your tennant (who would probably LOOSE money running the fireplace since a fireplace tends to be a net energy waster) but this stove would not be doing her a lot of favors, especially if she was planning to buy the wood to burn in it.

It might be worth trying to make a deal with her to share the costs of PROPERLY installing a more modern stove or insert.

Gooserider

 

[jjbaer]

My parents have a buck stove I could put in the fireplace instead, but it is rusty from being in the barn for years and will requirer sanding or sandblasting and refinishing. also they will want something for it. It has a blower and a glass front door. What might it be worth? Should I use it instead of the black bart. The black bart will be free and probably easier to fix. It will go back in my grandmas house which is now a rental property.


Thanks Dave

I sold my medium sized Buck stove insert a few months ago on E-Bay. I got $290 for it.

Also, at one time there was a cat conversion kit available for the Buck stoves. Mine was a non-cat and while it used a lot of wood, it also put out a lot of heat. I dumped mine for several reasons: 1) I wanted longer burn times, 2) wanted less wood consumption, 3) wanted to know that I would not burn my house down when burning overnight/unattended and 4) wanted a stove that polluted less.....................

 

[Eric Johnson]

I think Craig should do a survey of board members to see how much money they've spent on new stoves/chimneys/etc. since joining this website. I bet it's a substantial sum. It would be a good marketing tool if Google wasn't already scooping up the ad revenue.

 

[webbie]

At the lowest end, you have to re-weld and install it with a flue adapter - and a metal plate below the damper.

This stuff can be done for a low price if DIYer. etc......

But as mentioned earlier, it would be good to make certain that all fans and thermostats were working correctly, as they can cost a few bucks to replaced. As others have mentioned, these are ancient technology- yet at the same time, they have been used by the tens of thousands and if installed properly and used on occasion, they should be relatively safe. But as a Landlord or homeowner, you have to weigh all the costs and benefits and decide if it is worth doing. In general, allowing renters to use wood stoves is now always the best idea.

 

[Bill]

I owned rental property for 25 years, I would never let a renter use any wood burning device in my building. Better ask your insurance company if the tenants burn down the building are they paying. I don't even let friends and relatives play with my wood stove in my cabin, don't want inexperienced people over-fireing my new stove, or burning my cabin to the ground.

 

[jtp10181]

IMO, scrap heap with both of them.

 

[elkimmeg]

At the lowest end, you have to re-weld and install it with a flue adapter - and a metal plate below the damper.

This stuff can be done for a low price if DIYer. etc......

But as mentioned earlier, it would be good to make certain that all fans and thermostats were working correctly, as they can cost a few bucks to replaced. As others have mentioned, these are ancient technology- yet at the same time, they have been used by the tens of thousands and if installed properly and used on occasion, they should be relatively safe. But as a Landlord or homeowner, you have to weigh all the costs and benefits and decide if it is worth doing. In general, allowing renters to use wood stoves is now always the best idea.

Craig am I hearing you correctly? What about label and listings and permitting? Are you advocating he install a questionable and make an un permitted illegal installation?

I'm very disappointed. I expected more from a 5 star general / Webmaster I expected leadership by example and this example is counter to what we have been advocating for years

I thought you were environmentally responsible and took safety serious . never mind scoffing codes. Yeah you talked tough when Burning Issues approached you, but this response is the most damning one we have had promoting safety and responsible clean burning.. Are you a closet BI member.

Go ahead ban me again for calling you out. I'm not sure I belong here, if this is the example and trend / tone of this forum. I try to save lives and alert people from making dangerous life threatening mistakes. What the hell are you doing?

 

[thejdcook]

Mr. Elkimmeg,

First off I did feel a little attacked by your first post, and since you also became angry with another poster I have decided to respond.

No I do not have a death wish, and I have respect for my renter as well. I started my internet search and ended up joining this forum to learn all I can and be as safe as I can.

You may be right that the black bart is a cheap stove and I shouldn’t bother to fix it. However I think it was reasonable for me to assume that fixing the crack would be sufficient to return it to safe working order. My grandma used it for many years with out problems and it was the sole source of heat for her house back then. I have a hard time understanding how it is so dangerous. It is installed in a fireplace where wood can be burned with no stove. So I hardly see it as being dangerous even if I didn’t have the crack fixed.

Now since the Buck stove is supposed to be a better stove, there are no signs of structural damage, and I believe it is lined with fire brick I see absolutely no reason it cant be installed correctly and safely in a fireplace that does not need protection from burning wood anyway.

I grew up in a house with two black barts, although it was a local made wood stove we used for our main heat source and my grandma used this black bart for 20 years.

Now as far as codes are concerned, I never even thought to check if I was supposed to get a permit. I assume there are permits required in some areas and not in others. I had to pay 600 dollars for a permit to build my house several years ago, but there are no permits required except for septic several hours south of here. By the way I think it is a crime that I have to pay for a permit to build a house on my property with my money ( and it was my money not the banks) They send the same man out to inspect my foundation, framing, plumbing, and electrical. I guess he was probably an engineer, mason, electrician, and plumber. Of course not, so I paid to be told how to build my house by someone who knew less than me. And if my house falls is he responsible since he inspected it? Building permits are just one more infringement on my personal freedom. There is always a good reason to give up our freedoms mainly safety. But I believe what Thomas Jefferson said, “He who sacrifices freedom for security shall have neither” Oh wait a minute my mind drifted and I thought we were talking politics.

So if the choice is between the fireplace with no stove or the buck stove installed with a pipe and metal seal off plate, which is safer? I personally would feel safer with the buck stove installed in the fireplace just so there would be a door to make sure no wood or coals rolled out of the fireplace. I Guess I will probably just tell her no fires in the house


Dave

 

[Gooserider]

Dave,
Elk comes across more than a bit "Crusty" at times, but you also have to understand that Elk is a building inspector, who is also a professional carpenter with over 100 homes that he has built, so he does have considerable knowledge about what goes into building a home - From what I have seen and heard from different sources, this is more than many inspectors have to offer. However he is coming from a code enforcement standpoint, and does draw a hard line in the sand about what is safe and what isn't - One can argue whether or not this is a proper viewpoint or not, but it's where he is coming from.

I tend to agree with you about the freedom infringing aspects of permits, and if you look you will find threads where Elk and I have gone around the topic more than once and have basically agreed to disagree in order to keep the peace. I agree with Elk about the desirability of being safe, and doing things properly, our only argument is whether or not some blue suited thug with a gun (He's from the Gov't and is there to HELP you....) should have the right to FORCE you to be safe...

Now to discuss the issue without dragging the heavy duty emotions into it. You wonder what is wrong with burning the stoves you grew up with, and burned "safely" then, today. Momentarily leaving aside the question of what the time spent sitting might have done to them, it is a question of standards changing... I have sometimes heard the code books referred to as "The Books of the Dead" because everything in them is supposedly there because somebody DIED that didn't do it that way. Every time there is a fire or other problem, they are supposed to do an analysis to find out just what failed, and then add the result into the book as "Don't do that" Thus the standards have evolved in part because people have learned the hard way that what they thought was safe really isn't....

It's just like school busses - I doubt you'd be happy to put your kids on a 1960 school bus, even if that bus was in perfect condition and 100% fully compliant with all the standards existing in 1960 when it was built... You would probably insist on a modern bus, built with modern technology, and meeting modern standards that incorporate 40 years of what we've learned about how to protect kids in case of an accident. Stoves have improved more than school busses in that time, so why burn a 1960 stove - even if it is in good shape and "safe" by the rules under which it was built.

From an economic standpoint - A new stove or insert is moderately expensive, though an "economy model" EPA stove such as an Englander, isn't that bad. Careful shopping can lead to your getting a used MODERN stove for even less. Thus it doesn't take a lot of money before you'll have spent as much trying to make a smoke dragon functional as you would have spent on a newer EPA stove, especially if you try to install it in a safe way.

From a legal standpoint - MOST jurisdictions today *DO* require some kind of permit and / or inspection of a new stove installation, or even a replacement of an existing stove. You may not like it, (I don't) but that's the way it is. In ADDITION, you need to check with your insurance company. Most will REQUIRE that you pull whatever permits are needed (and show proof of passing all required inspections), some may want to do their own inspection, and some may want to charge you an additional premium. Failure to have told your insurance company MAY result in them getting nasty about paying off if you do have a fire. On top of that, if your tennant's "tennant insurance" policy gets involved, you may have them coming after you as well. IOW, there is considerable risk in an unpermitted stove. However most inspectors these days will insist on any stove they look at having a UL label, and in many places they will also require that the stove be EPA certified for low emissions.

So what's in it for you to get a modern stove (BTW, Modern = Any stove in good condition, built after about 1990, that is certified as being "EPA-II Emissions Compliant" on the label that the stove MUST have on it.)
1. Greater safety - a newer firebox, built with modern materials and design technology
2. Greater efficiency - Will need about 1/3 less wood than the stoves you are used to for the same amount of heat. What used to go up your chimney in an old stove gets burned by secondary combustion giving more heat and...
3. Cleaner environment - A modern stove, burned properly, with dry wood, puts out almost no smoke - less than 1/10th the amount put out by your old stoves - It does this by burning what used to be going up the chimney as smoke and creosote. Aside from being good for the environment in general, this also means fewer deposits in the chimney and...
4. Less Work - With less creosote, you don't need to clean the chimney as often, and you'll have smaller deposits when you do. This gives you...
5. Greater safety - Less creosote = lower probability of chimney fires, and if you do have one, less likelyhood of damage.

Gooserider

 

[elkimmeg]

Let me put it this way when the fire dept is called out, who do you think pays for this convience? we all pay. Our tax money pays so that some one responds.
They do not just respond to the people that pulled permits but to all where an unsafe stove results in a disaster we all pay not just the homeowner. A situation where a good inspector could have reviewed and avoided the disaster in the first place. Your experience with your inspector may not have been stellar ,but believe me I doubt you have more s building skill or code knowledge as I do. For all that doubt me I wish I could take you along and view the damage when things go wrong. Like condeming the home . I walk away wishing I could have prevented it in the first place if only they had pulled a permit. It is not a real joyest moment to review a disaster 4 AM christmas morning. Which I did 4 years back, caused by a wood stove vented threw a closet with single wall pipe. Actually touched off the paper wrapping of the presents. People got out ok Labador retriver did not make it.. BTW your home is condemend and will have to be demolished. You are not allowed entrance as it is not structurally sound. When it becomes other tax payers money, then it is not k just your own so it does make a difference what you do on you own property. Codes are miniun protection not needed if everyone used safe building and appliance installations neither are police if all abide by the law. I know my advise has saved lives
the same advise I was giving to you.

Deep breath are both stoves labled and listed? if not they can not be permitted to be installed. That is in the first administrative section of every code book the same officials you know more than they do so I guess I telling you nothing new after all you know more than code officials. I had to do expensive studying testing and continued contact hours to stay certified.
As for code all 50 states adopted the International body of codes But again I'm telling you nothing that you did not already know So all states t counties and towns adopted the international Mechanical code which spells out lable and listing requirements no state has not adopted the codes. Unless you live in mexico we all have to prescribe to the same code body.

Then again you know more than code officials and you already knew this. In my state I have presented seminars to all 351 towns to help their code officials administed and inspecct Mechanical codes. nothing has ben mentioned about cross-sectional requirements of the chimney you and planning to install a stove into I did not see any info that any stove was being installed into an NFPA211 Compliant chimney and fireplace. No discussion has occured about the new 18" requirements infront of operating doors and clearance to combustiables. No condition report of the existing chimney also required by code...

Are there any other codes That I may have missed you want to educate the forum members with? And yes I did not apply all.. As hard as I sound I can't help a person that knows it all and takes unon himself without asking. I can only help one to become safe if they want to be.

 

[jjbaer]

Mr. Elkimmeg,

First off I did feel a little attacked by your first post, and since you also became angry with another poster I have decided to respond.

No I do not have a death wish, and I have respect for my renter as well. I started my internet search and ended up joining this forum to learn all I can and be as safe as I can.

You may be right that the black bart is a cheap stove and I shouldn’t bother to fix it. However I think it was reasonable for me to assume that fixing the crack would be sufficient to return it to safe working order. My grandma used it for many years with out problems and it was the sole source of heat for her house back then. I have a hard time understanding how it is so dangerous. It is installed in a fireplace where wood can be burned with no stove. So I hardly see it as being dangerous even if I didn’t have the crack fixed.

Now since the Buck stove is supposed to be a better stove, there are no signs of structural damage, and I believe it is lined with fire brick I see absolutely no reason it cant be installed correctly and safely in a fireplace that does not need protection from burning wood anyway.

I grew up in a house with two black barts, although it was a local made wood stove we used for our main heat source and my grandma used this black bart for 20 years.

Now as far as codes are concerned, I never even thought to check if I was supposed to get a permit. I assume there are permits required in some areas and not in others. I had to pay 600 dollars for a permit to build my house several years ago, but there are no permits required except for septic several hours south of here. By the way I think it is a crime that I have to pay for a permit to build a house on my property with my money ( and it was my money not the banks) They send the same man out to inspect my foundation, framing, plumbing, and electrical. I guess he was probably an engineer, mason, electrician, and plumber. Of course not, so I paid to be told how to build my house by someone who knew less than me. And if my house falls is he responsible since he inspected it? Building permits are just one more infringement on my personal freedom. There is always a good reason to give up our freedoms mainly safety. But I believe what Thomas Jefferson said, “He who sacrifices freedom for security shall have neither” Oh wait a minute my mind drifted and I thought we were talking politics.

So if the choice is between the fireplace with no stove or the buck stove installed with a pipe and metal seal off plate, which is safer? I personally would feel safer with the buck stove installed in the fireplace just so there would be a door to make sure no wood or coals rolled out of the fireplace. I Guess I will probably just tell her no fires in the house


Dave

As time goes on, we tend to question previous standard practices because of what we have learned in the interim. While it may have been previously acceptable to weld a stove and reuse it, as a mechanical engineer, my opinion is to not do it as too much can go wrong and you risk your home and family members lives if it fails. As for the Buck stove, I had one for 7 years. Built like a tank, put out plenty of heat but consumed a lot of wood and was not clean by current standards. Also, I never felt comfortable allowing overnight burns. That said, I opted to replace it with a new EPA approved stove which is much safer and uses far less wood and puts out more heat. In addition, I consulted Elk and others and even though (like you) I had a chimney in good working order, they convinced me of the wisdom of using a full stainless steel liner from the stove to the chimney top AND a full 1/2" thick high-temp insulation blanket. Now when I burn at night I know with 100% certainty that even if I have a 2000F chimney fire that there's no way for it to burn through a stainless steel liner (it's rated to survive multiple fires) AND through the insulation blanket AND then also burn through my flue tiles and burn my home down. So........Elk and others speak from experience when they say NOT to weld the stove and to probably also pass on the older Buck Stove, especially with the liability involved with a rental unit. Some of the ways they convey this might border on "abrupt" but they mean well and their advice could save your life. I know the advice they gave me was sound and I sleep better at night knowing that I have the best installation possible. I think that's what they're trying to convey to you.

As for the Buck stove, I'd dump it or sell it. Buck stoves are great stoves but opt for a modern EPA approved one, not the older one.

 

[webbie]

No doubt the Buck was UL approved anyway. The Bart was built as cheaply as possible, as that was their whole idea...mass produce a stove and sell it cheap (less than $500 new with fan)....

So the real issues are the installation, fans/thermostats and the renter use of a stove - if we are talking about the Buck.

It always depends on the $$$ situation......although we all wish folks would step up to the new cleaner burning models, the reality is that not everyone has the money to do so right away.

It's similar to putting an old car on the road.....more parts and service, worse MPG and pollution.....but, if you are a fairly good mechanic, you can make it work safely. As opposed to some others here, I don't tell folks what to do or not to do (on such matters, I agree with Goose....), but simply try to give you the information you need.

Speaking of that, you can get adapters to take the Buck to an oval stainless pipe at Stove Parts Unlimited - they also have blowers, thermostats, etc.

It is less "safe: than most modern EPA units, especially since it is subject to more chimney fires, etc. BUT, it was approved and tested by UL who determined that it was safe enough.....

 

[elkimmeg]

No doubt the Buck was UL approved anyway.

In all the situations I have seen Not on stove that was manufactured for slam installation had a UL testing lable
How x can you have no doubt Buck stoves were manufactured before 1979 prior to the UL safety listing No one has confirmed it is UL listed.
Thousands of buck stoves were manufactured prior to the listing and UL approval

No mention of the stove's condition, which for safety reasons, should he asked dealing with potentially burning a 30 year stove.

The caR ANALOGY IS A GOOD ONE. IN ORDER FOR IT TO BE PLACED BACK IN SERVICE ON THE ROAD, IT HAS TO MEET AND PASS A SAFETY INSPECTION.

As an inspector I can require a full condition report of said stove from a reconsized Licenced chimney sweep. I would also require a report concerning the chimney condition.
that it would be installed in. I require what code has been printed meaning I require the stove to be labled and listed. I will not issue a permit for on this is not. Unless it is a decoritive antique cooking stove with a favorable condition report.

Web what's been a couple month since we had this same arguement so here is the latest cut and past of the Intrenational Mechanical codes. I can't see where it has exemptions, none are listed so how can you promote stove installations that are deffecient to begin with. Do you have some special code book I don't have?

Don't tell me about generic clearances from the NFPA 211, which is not a national reconized body of codes, I am quoting from the code which is. I can apply the NFPA211 if the stove manufacturer say his stove was tested to that standard. Untill 2006 the international code body did not reconize NFPA211 Not all jusisdictions have adopted 2006 Intrenational codes bbut still working in 2003 In 2006 the international Mechanical code refferenced NFPA 211 in the chapters dealing with solid fuel combustion appliances. By refference The International codes still are the governing code, but one can use the sections refferenced in the NFPA as well So applying generic clearances are to t stoves that are labled and listed but for some reason the clearance requirement are unreadable. IT is not a waver to install a stove un listed or un approved..

International Mechanical codes Recognized by all states
Chapter 3 general Regulations.

301.3 Listed and Labled
All appliances regulated by this code shall be listed and labled

301. 4 Labeling
shall be in accordance with the procedures set forth in Sections 301.4.1 through 301.4.2.3

301.4.1 Testing An approved agency shall test a representative sample of the mechanical equipment and appliances being labeled to the relevant standard or standards. The approving agency ( Ul in the case of wood stoves) shall maintain a record of all test preformed. The records shall provide sufficient details to verify compliance with test standards.

301.5 Label Information
A permanent factory- applied name plate(s) shall be affixed to the appliance on which shall appear in legible lettering the manufacturer’s name or trade mark, the model number, serial number and the seal or mark of the testing agency
3. Fuel burning units the hourly rating in Btu/h (w): the type of fuel approved for use with the appliance; and the required clearances

301.6 Conflicts
Where conflicts between this code and the conditions of the listing or manufacture’s installation instructions occur, the provisions of this code shall apply


I placed this in bold because some here think manufacture listing trumps code, But it does not as one can read

Web what part are you having a hard time understanding. Perhaps I can dig into the code comentary at the office to see if there is any further explanations

Seems to be self explanitory
All appliances regulated by this code shall be listed and labled

 

[BrotherBart]

In all the situations I have seen Not on stove that was manufactured for slam installation had a UL testing lable

There is a label attached to the stove out back and an owner's manual sitting here on my desk that both say a 1985 Sierra Royale insert that only shows a "slammer" installation in the manual was tested and approved to UL standards and listed.

I don't think the old Buck or the BBart should be used again but I am seriously starting to question that any old stove made by Vermont Castings can be used, abused, neglected, overfired and run over by a bulldozer but still be rebuildable to perfectly safe condition while any stove made by anybody else has to go to the scrap yard just because it is old. :coolsmirk:

 

[elkimmeg]

There will not be a whole lot of rebiulding VC stoves anymore. due to no parts . Now that VC is moving ag way from Refractory cement seams to gaskets ,the casting are different and do not replace earlier stoves. Chances are if your stove was manufactured befor 1995 and parts to not match the models of today there will be few parts to rebuild and those will have to come from old Inventory. Discontinued colors ,a blue and forest green parts are not being made anymore.

After I have run the stove over with my buldozer, usually that is a sign I do not intend to rebuild it ,but compressing it and breaking it for the trip to the scrap yard.

I would love to rebuild a Jotul or Moroso, but if you think parts support by Vc is bad. Try finding parts for an 1990 Jotul The rebuilding days are seriously numbered or already gone.

Few dealers will put the time in to do it, they would rather sell new.

BB nothing you said was not true. Rebuilding stove is a lost art, getting much harder to do replacing parts .The only parts suppor was available from VC. No other company is selling 20 year old castings or even manufacturing them. In USA parts support only has to be supported up to 5 years after model run production has ended. The parts Vc told me they could get to help goose rebuild his stove, have to be cast from old molds. That is why it is taking so long they have to find a day when they find time from their schedule to do it. They do not intend to keep supplying 20 yr or older parts anymore.

Now BB if your post were intend to get a dig in at me insulting VC, the company who made my stoves, Name one other company who was gererous to donate a stove to help an aging Vet.

And if another company is willing to do so, I will support it As I did with VC.. VC also has said they will supply the parts to rebuild goose's stove. I would be really interested for some other company to step froward to help those in need. Actions speaks louder than words, so far VC actions have spoken

The only reason I would rebuild another stove is to help a similar person in need . On my to do list is to seek approval From BB ,before I proceed with any rebuilding ,to help aging Vets or other needy famillies

 

[BrotherBart]

I am getting curious as to what model Buck that is?