Cat or No

[summit]

Cat or non Cat is the big question.... One allows you better efficency by maybe 5-10%, but the other runs under many more variable conditions (really wanna hear what u got 2 say about this, BB) with acceptable ratings... I'll admit (and many of U know) I am a non cat guy , and we had a good convo on the cat/ non cat a mfew posts ago about a BK... whaddya know?

 

[randy1]

The way I see it, if you have a CAT, then you will have to do more maintence. The way I see it, from the very begining, a CAT will start losing some of the effiency due to the CAT getting dirty. Even with cleanings, it is not as good as a brand new one. That's why I chose to go with a non-CAT.

 

[Dirtgrain]

Why this thread?

 

[Rockey]

Even if I had to buy new cat combustors every other year, which I wont, it would still be an easy decision to stick with a cat. I have both and just knowing that each and every time that I load the stove that it is much easier to maintain long hot burns gives me the peace of mind I want.

 

[EatenByLimestone]

My wife was intimidated by the cat. At the end of the first season Lowes clearanced all their stoves and I picked up a non cat. Wife was thrilled. I like my wife being happy.

Matt

 

[Slow1]

To some this is one of those "Ford vs Chevy" kinds of debates. Sometimes I wonder if it may really come down to that level in the end. There are differences, but are the differences really material or are they all personal preferences?

I would like to have an opportunity to burn a good (i.e. burn tube vs the downdraft style) non-cat stove sometime so I would really know what it is like. However I don't think another new stove is on the horizon for me...

I believe that both technologies have matured to the point that they can provide comparable efficiencies and reliable service lives. The main objection that I have heard recently is the whole "Cats require more maintenance" in reference to having to replace the cat (and perhaps also the need to clean it?). I honestly don't see the financial argument on this one as being all that material - after all I fully expect the cat in my stove to survive more than the 3 years that it is under full-replacement warranty, thus even if it wasn't pro-rated after that and I had to pay $120 to replace it that isn't much per year compared to what I'm expected to pay annually to service my oil burner for my backup heat source.

Do cats lose efficiency as soon as you start using them? I'm sure they do and I'll bet someone can post a link to the charts that back that up. But then the question is at what point does that loss of efficiency become enough to really matter. It seems that as soon as one can actually notice the changes it is time to replace the cat.

The benefit that I gain - the nice long clean burns at lower temperatures - has been great during this somewhat extended shoulder season. I've read others (cat and non-cat burners) post about burning during this time of year and it seems rather clear to me that the cat stove owners have a bit of an advantage here. At least we do if we care about trying to burn clean and want to steady the temperatures in the house without opening windows. Not a big deal to everyone, but I happen to value this.

 

[North of 60]

To some this is one of those "Ford vs Chevy" kinds of debates. Sometimes I wonder if it may really come down to that level in the end. There are differences, but are the differences really material or are they all personal preferences?

I would like to have an opportunity to burn a good (i.e. burn tube vs the downdraft style) non-cat stove sometime so I would really know what it is like. However I don't think another new stove is on the horizon for me...

I believe that both technologies have matured to the point that they can provide comparable efficiencies and reliable service lives. The main objection that I have heard recently is the whole "Cats require more maintenance" in reference to having to replace the cat (and perhaps also the need to clean it?). I honestly don't see the financial argument on this one as being all that material - after all I fully expect the cat in my stove to survive more than the 3 years that it is under full-replacement warranty, thus even if it wasn't pro-rated after that and I had to pay $120 to replace it that isn't much per year compared to what I'm expected to pay annually to service my oil burner for my backup heat source.

Do cats lose efficiency as soon as you start using them? I'm sure they do and I'll bet someone can post a link to the charts that back that up. But then the question is at what point does that loss of efficiency become enough to really matter. It seems that as soon as one can actually notice the changes it is time to replace the cat.

The benefit that I gain - the nice long clean burns at lower temperatures - has been great during this somewhat extended shoulder season. I've read others (cat and non-cat burners) post about burning during this time of year and it seems rather clear to me that the cat stove owners have a bit of an advantage here. At least we do if we care about trying to burn clean and want to steady the temperatures in the house without opening windows. Not a big deal to everyone, but I happen to value this.

Great post and Ditto to all of the above. I own both types of stoves. A BK CAT and the Napoleon 1400p non cat. You cant even compare the two. Control and long low clean burn times is what works for me. And we do get winter here.

 

[rickw]

I don't think its a Ford v Chevy thing at all; its a different animal. The cat allows clean combustion at much lower temps; so you get a clean, very long burn - at a heat output that doesn't cook you out of the house. As far as maintenance and ease of use goes I think a well-designed cat stove is really hard to beat. Once the cat's engaged you don't have to mess with it. Getting and keeping a non-cat stove in a good secondary burn requires some attention - and often provides more heat than is desired. In some cases a non-cat stove needs its air tubes or baffles to be cleaned, replaced or repaired every few seasons; is this really much different from replacing a cat element every few years?

After 3 cords of wood over the last year (2 oak and one crappy pine) I have never once got up in the middle of the night to feed it; and I have not once needed to build a fire in the morning.

 

[BrowningBAR]

My wife was intimidated by the cat. At the end of the first season Lowes clearanced all their stoves and I picked up a non cat. Wife was thrilled. I like my wife being happy.

Matt

How was your wife intimidated by a Cat stove? I have two stoves, one is cat and one is not. I do not see how one would be more intimidating than the other.

 

[BrowningBAR]

Cat or non Cat is the big question.... One allows you better efficency by maybe 5-10%, but the other runs under many more variable conditions (really wanna hear what u got 2 say about this, BB) with acceptable ratings... I'll admit (and many of U know) I am a non cat guy , and we had a good convo on the cat/ non cat a mfew posts ago about a BK... whaddya know?

My only issue with cat stoves is with VC cat stoves. Cat parts seem to be two to three times more expensive than other manufacturers and the wait time for the parts to come in can be 4 to 8 weeks.

If/when I buy a new stove at least one of the three stoves will be a cat stove (probably the Living Room stove and the kitchen stoves will be the cat stoves).

 

[fattyfat1]

I have Both. Cat every time. less 'fiddling' to keep the cat at a constant temp, and the cat itself is supposed to last 6 - 10 years. Been burning since my dad taught me @ 6 years old, we never had a cat stove growing up. here is a good example. the whole fam left the house @ 9:30 this morning, I half -filled the firebox, put her on low, turned off the fan, and we left. just got home tonight at 9:30pm, turned the stove themostat on high (cat was still active) in five minutes the low burn was a high burn, added three splits, and now have a cooker I will turn back down to low @ 11:00pm, just before bed. left house @ 73 degrees this morning, house was 71 when we got home, and will be 73-74 before bed, will wake up to house being 70-71 in the morning. we typically have a four degree temp swing on the average day. I touched the stove THREE TIMES in 24 hours.(less if i loaded firebox full) outside temps are 45 days, and right at freezing @ night. impossible with my lopi to keep a 4 degree swing. my 2cents

 

[Bigg_Redd]

Cat or non Cat is the big question.... One allows you better efficency by maybe 5-10%, but the other runs under many more variable conditions (really wanna hear what u got 2 say about this, BB) with acceptable ratings... I'll admit (and many of U know) I am a non cat guy , and we had a good convo on the cat/ non cat a mfew posts ago about a BK... whaddya know?

With the exception of BK I'm a non-cat guy.

I view cats as needless complication.

Eff cats.

 

[Bigg_Redd]

Why this thread?

Because all the cat people need to get put in their place, DUH!

 

[Bigg_Redd]

To some this is one of those "Ford vs Chevy" kinds of debates. Sometimes I wonder if it may really come down to that level in the end. There are differences, but are the differences really material or are they all personal preferences?

I would like to have an opportunity to burn a good (i.e. burn tube vs the downdraft style) non-cat stove sometime so I would really know what it is like. However I don't think another new stove is on the horizon for me...

I believe that both technologies have matured to the point that they can provide comparable efficiencies and reliable service lives. The main objection that I have heard recently is the whole "Cats require more maintenance" in reference to having to replace the cat (and perhaps also the need to clean it?). I honestly don't see the financial argument on this one as being all that material - after all I fully expect the cat in my stove to survive more than the 3 years that it is under full-replacement warranty, thus even if it wasn't pro-rated after that and I had to pay $120 to replace it that isn't much per year compared to what I'm expected to pay annually to service my oil burner for my backup heat source.

Do cats lose efficiency as soon as you start using them? I'm sure they do and I'll bet someone can post a link to the charts that back that up. But then the question is at what point does that loss of efficiency become enough to really matter. It seems that as soon as one can actually notice the changes it is time to replace the cat.

The benefit that I gain - the nice long clean burns at lower temperatures - has been great during this somewhat extended shoulder season. I've read others (cat and non-cat burners) post about burning during this time of year and it seems rather clear to me that the cat stove owners have a bit of an advantage here. At least we do if we care about trying to burn clean and want to steady the temperatures in the house without opening windows. Not a big deal to everyone, but I happen to value this.

Ford

 

[greythorn3]

To some this is one of those "Ford vs Chevy" kinds of debates. Sometimes I wonder if it may really come down to that level in the end. There are differences, but are the differences really material or are they all personal preferences?

I would like to have an opportunity to burn a good (i.e. burn tube vs the downdraft style) non-cat stove sometime so I would really know what it is like. However I don't think another new stove is on the horizon for me...

I believe that both technologies have matured to the point that they can provide comparable efficiencies and reliable service lives. The main objection that I have heard recently is the whole "Cats require more maintenance" in reference to having to replace the cat (and perhaps also the need to clean it?). I honestly don't see the financial argument on this one as being all that material - after all I fully expect the cat in my stove to survive more than the 3 years that it is under full-replacement warranty, thus even if it wasn't pro-rated after that and I had to pay $120 to replace it that isn't much per year compared to what I'm expected to pay annually to service my oil burner for my backup heat source.

Do cats lose efficiency as soon as you start using them? I'm sure they do and I'll bet someone can post a link to the charts that back that up. But then the question is at what point does that loss of efficiency become enough to really matter. It seems that as soon as one can actually notice the changes it is time to replace the cat.

The benefit that I gain - the nice long clean burns at lower temperatures - has been great during this somewhat extended shoulder season. I've read others (cat and non-cat burners) post about burning during this time of year and it seems rather clear to me that the cat stove owners have a bit of an advantage here. At least we do if we care about trying to burn clean and want to steady the temperatures in the house without opening windows. Not a big deal to everyone, but I happen to value this.

Ford

FORD and NONCAT unless its the blazeking king ultra cat!

 

[SolarAndWood]

My only issue with cat stoves is with VC cat stoves. Cat parts seem to be two to three times more expensive than other manufacturers and the wait time for the parts to come in can be 4 to 8 weeks.

+1 x 2. FWIW, I would be all over a cat stove with a firebox twice the size of the king as long as it burned as low.

 

[Backwoods Savage]

The way I see it, if you have a CAT, then you will have to do more maintence. The way I see it, from the very begining, a CAT will start losing some of the effiency due to the CAT getting dirty. Even with cleanings, it is not as good as a brand new one. That's why I chose to go with a non-CAT.

Spoken like a true hater of cat stoves! More maintenance? Okay, we do clean our cat 2 times per season. Each time it takes less than 5 minutes (I've done it in 2 minutes). So let's say it takes you 10 minutes to clean that cat over a year's time.

Now lets compare the chimney cleaning. In our old stove we cleaned our chimney 3-4 times per year normally. It took us about 15 minutes by the time we got the tools around and then put back. Even if we cleaned only 3 times, that is 45 minutes of maintenance.

Forward to our cat stove. It takes 10 minutes per year for the cat. I have cleaned the chimney once in 2 years and would not have had to do it then but I decided I'd run the brush just to see what I could get. Not much for sure; maybe a cup or less of soot. It took 10 minutes to clean the chimney this time. Divide that by 2 years and you get 5 minutes per year.

So 5 minutes per year to clean chimney and 10 minutes to clean the cat. That is a total of 15 minutes per year. That is not what I call high maintenance! Plus with our cat stove we use 50% less wood and stay a lot, lot warmer in the house.

I was against cat stoves when we began shopping for a new stove but changed my mind and am very glad I did.

 

[carinya]

Perhaps one of the moderators :cheese: could give a seat of the pants analysis of which type of stove gets the most comments as far as overfire or potential overfire....

 

[BrotherBart]

Who knows. Just like everything else having to do with wood burning just do what ya wanna do with what ya got. Or buy what ever you want to buy and make it work for ya. There is BS about cat stoves that I don't buy and there is BS about non-cats that I don't buy. I have three non-cats and am fine with them and would probably be fine with a cat stove.

I do understand dealers pushing non-cat stoves over cat stoves. The average stove buyer can just put some sticks in a non-cat and start a fire and be fine with watching the pretty flames and get more heat than with a fireplace. With a cat stove if they put the same crappy wood in it that they most likely put in the non-cat then they are back on the dealer's door step with an attitude. And hearth.com aficionados are going to wanna burn in their non-cats the way they see people talk about it here instead of the way the manual that came with the stove tells them to. That being, run it up over five or six hundred as fast as you can and then slam the primary air closed and play cat stove with it with the inferno up top. Personally I run my large firebox non-cat pretty much like all the manuals say and the same way I ran my large firebox pre-EPA stove. Bring it up to temp, in my case 500-550, and level it out and the hell with light shows and the primary air is never closed all the way down. Never was on the old stove either. Doing that last night with a load of dry oak and a 34 degree night I loaded the stove at eight pm and thirteen hours later I had a 300 stove top and coals to start a morning burn in a large 73 degree house. That is all I want or need out of a wood stove. Low and slow works just fine with a non-cat. Ya just have to have dry wood. And forget that those damned tubes are up in the top of the stove. And I have no real desire to have one small part of my stove cranking at 1200 degrees and having to migrate it to the rest of the stove body. I would just as soon have it evenly distributed as it is in a non-cat. Personal preference.

We have funky weather here where it is in the twenties at night and in the fifties and sunny the next day so I am not heating a house in the Yukon. But I use this same drill with two loads a day in mid-winter when we are in the twenties in the day and low teens or single digits at night and hold the place in the low to mid seventies. I am sure a Blaze King Princess or Woodstock Fireview could do that as well. I just have no reason to find out.

But 20+ hour burns with useful heat is a crock.

 

[Todd]

Cats don't start to lose their efficiency til the end of their life according to the companies that make them. It's not like you lose a little bit with every fire. I've burned both and prefer my current cat stove because it gives me what I want, long even burns, higher efficiency and less fiddling with air controls. The last 3 years I've averaged 1 full cord less per year burned than my previous non cat. I'm sold on cat technology and think it will get even better with the new ss cats.

 

[BrotherBart]

Cats don't start to lose their efficiency til the end of their life according to the companies that make them. It's not like you lose a little bit with every fire. I've burned both and prefer my current cat stove because it gives me what I want, long even burns, higher efficiency and less fiddling with air controls. The last 3 years I've averaged 1 full cord less per year burned than my previous non cat. I'm sold on cat technology and think it will get even better with the new ss cats.

And your experience with a cat stove is why I don't throw rocks at them.

Well, except for North of 60. He is just plain fun to pick on. :lol:

 

[Todd]

But 20+ hour burns with useful heat is a crock.

You better belive it BB! If I can get 12-14 hour burns with useful heat in my little fire box I'm pretty sure a larger firebox with t-stat control can easily go 20 hours.

 

[EatenByLimestone]

My wife was intimidated by the cat. At the end of the first season Lowes clearanced all their stoves and I picked up a non cat. Wife was thrilled. I like my wife being happy.

Matt

How was your wife intimidated by a Cat stove? I have two stoves, one is cat and one is not. I do not see how one would be more intimidating than the other.

This was my first year burning and the stove was a CDL Rocky Mountain. Wood was not as dry as I would have liked it either.... Yada, yada yada... first year burning stuff. The stove, being a wood/coal stove also wasn't as user friendly as they probably are now.

I believe it was the separate damper lever that she didn't like. She has no problem setting air on the non cat, but kept forgetting to open the damper before she opened the cat stove. The smoke pouring out the stove didn't help anything. The stove also had a microscopic window that didn't have an airwash system. It had the old dial air intake dials... one at wood level and one below the shakers for the coal. It was a combination of things.

Wood burning redeemed itself with the new stove. Perception is everything.

I liked the lower air intake. You could open it up to get the fire going and that nice fresh air would come up from beneath the shaker grate... it was like cracking the door on steroids.

Matt

 

[wellbuilt home]

I liked my dutch west cat stove . It burned hot and slow we heated a 3000sft house .
It was very efficient , made almost no creosote. It could heat the house up fast .
I replaced the cat 2 or 3 times in 15 years . One thing i didn't like was the glass would get black .

I have a hearthstone Equinox now . I like it, but it burns alot of wood . It has a huge fire box .
After a full year of burning i cleaned 3 gallons of creosote out of the flue .
I would of bought a cat stove if I found one larger then the DW . I want to add a great room and i need the EQ to heat more space .
I mite need a second stove for the real cold nights any way . John

 

[rdust]

I think most dealers steer their customers away from CAT stoves due to the quality of wood they know most customers are going to burn. People on the internet talking about stove choices, proper ways to burn wood, store wood, season wood etc are the exception and dealers know that. The majority of people will walk into a dealer buy a stove order some unseasoned wood and continue to get unseasoned wood every year or even monthly during the winter due to storage restrictions.

How many times do we see posts about a new stove not performing and their wood is always "seasoned". A good number of times it turns out to be the wood.