central boiler redomends and comsumption

[chumscustoms]

i have been rying to read up on these outdoor boilers on this site and thanks to everyone for the info that is on this site.
I have a odd set up
i have a 20 x 100 home mildly insulated,
a rental house that is 5 foot away from my house
that is 650 sq ft
i would like to heat both of them with a outdoor boiler,
so far i have read good things about central boiler,
i am thinking that a 6048 would be the correct size for me
i am not too worried about the water heater part
the only thing i am concerned about it wood consumtion
I dont want to install one of these and go through 15 cord of dried locust a year
is there anyone out there that has a similar square footage and a true example of what they have used for cords of wood

to cheapen up the cost i may hook it into my neighbors house also and go with a bigger model
please help

 

[webbie]

An OWB is likely to consume quite a bit of wood - I have rarely heard of a user here that does not use 8-10 cords a year or more.

The problem is efficiency. Standard OWBs burn at a very low delivered efficiency.....a guess would be 25%.

That means, in our normal terms, a lower MPG.

On the positive side, the area that you have to heat is not too large.

You can do a bunch of research here and elsewhere on the pros and cons of standard OWB vs. higher efficiency new models (indoor and outdoor).

 

[flyingcow]

Take your time and research. My house is twice the load as my neighbor who has a E-Classic. I burn (approx) the same amount of wood, and heat my DHW year round. He shuts his boiler off for a few months.

 

[Classic6048]

I have the 6048, best decision I ever made some dealers were pushing the eclassic but the dealer I ended up using had both but swore by the 6048. Well low and behold if you read around alot of people are having alot of problems with eclassic . That being said my 6048 is just as efficient as any eclassic believe me I know I have two neighbors with one and they all smoke the same. As far as wood consumption it is temperature related last winter here was long and cold I burned about 8 cord I heat 2500sqft. with 14ft. cathedral's and alot of window space. I heat with radiant heat and also my hot water. I'm happy with that.

 

[altheating]

The 6048 is as efficient as the E-Classic? WOW, and I thoought that by spending $11,500 on an E-Classic the user would be geting something much more efficient than the old smokers!
I got it figured out ( Model 6048) 60 cord of wood at 48% efficient or an E-classic (Model 2300) Five equal payments of $2300.00 = $11,500.00, same smoke, same wood usage. Hmmm, lets see a real efficiency test from CB. Something sounds a bit fishy here if Classic6048's reports is valid.

 

[Classic6048]

I have no vested interest in these stoves I just like to live by real world results I personally think the eclassic is way over rated and way to complicated thats why there's some much troble with them. I thought that when I was looking at them. The "old smokers" are the best design cb has had. As for wood consumption my neighbor(with his eclassic) and I were neck and neck for wood usage hes about 1600sqft I'm 2500sqft and that my friend is real world results. The only difference I could see is I have radiant heat and put the optional draft door blower on my 6048. Those are my results I have no reason to post fishy reports. Frankly if people want the eclassic good luck to each his own. It is however rumored that some states will only allow the eclassic to now be sold which is total b.s. I believe my state is one of them thank god I got my 6048 when I did!

 

[flyingcow]

I'm in one of those states, maine. EPA approved only. My neighbor E-classic seems to have a few too many problems, in the first year. I think when he first started using it, it smoked a lot less. But at the end of season, it was smoking pretty good. But as far as wood consumption goes, a lot has to do with the user. Timing is everything, just can't fill the firebox anytime. Takes time to figure the routines, and peak usage. I'm using less wood than I was when I first started, still room for improvement.

 

[Classic6048]

dido

 

[heaterman]

I'm hearing the same kind of comment from E-Classic users in my neck of the woods. Most are saying that it doesn't live up to the claims made by CB and their sales force along with being somewhat more problematic.

 

[altheating]

We are hearing the same thing. When we hear reports from Econoburn, Tarm and Eko users they are telling us how little wood usage they have vs the E classic users who are burning twice that of the Econoburns, Tarms and Eko's. If the indoor gassers are known to be about 85% efficient how come such a difference in wood usage in a e classic which is supposed to be about the same efficiency? I think somebody phonied up some numbers.

 

[heaterman]

We are hearing the same thing. When we hear reports from Econoburn, Tarm and Eko users they are telling us how little wood usage they have vs the E classic users who are burning twice that of the Econoburns, Tarms and Eko's. If the indoor gassers are known to be about 85% efficient how come such a difference in wood usage in a e classic which is supposed to be about the same efficiency? I think somebody phonied up some numbers.

Knowing what the EPA test consists of, I think what we are seeing is lab generated efficiency numbers vs real world operation numbers. Much the same as the bogus CAFE ratings for cars and trucks. How many wood users do you know who fuel their stove with 4x4 sawn wood, dried to exactly 20% MC, run with constant load and perfect delta T? Yah, I don't know anyone who does that either. But that's the criteria for the EPA test.

You can't do any better than a well designed burner with adequate storage and that is tough to do with any design based on a typical OWB. I haven't seen anything yet from any of the OWB manufacturers that meet those parameters. They have to get out of the "box" they are in design wise.

 

[ISeeDeadBTUs]

I live in CB country. I'd say they have 75-80% market share. I'm seeing the eclassics, but not much dialog yet with owner/operators.

I think the creosote formation in the upper chamber is part of idiling with a gassifier. To the GW's credit, having the primary combustion chamber made of refractory instead of steel and not having water behind it makes for no creosote in the primary combustion chamber. Lord knows it DOES end up in some other places >:-(

I also thing that it takes some time (more for some, less for others) to get in a groove when it comes to optimal burning.

Though I've never run storage, I have to believe that it could greatly improve efficiency compared to overloading/idiling. But loaded appropriatly, I would guess that storage increases efficiency much less dramatically. In my case though, I think storage would have elleviated some of the creosote on the HX and other places on the GW, which would have made it hold up better.

I don't care who it is or what brand they are selling, salesmen are misleading at best ("eliminates the need for storage") and big fat liars at worst("87% percent efficiency", "Burns so little wood you'll need to take wood OUT of the boiler from time to time")

Jimbo

 

[ken999]

Just talked to a fellow from CB. I've got a 2300 that I have had since Jan. but have not run yet. The new models (including the 1400) have thicker metal in the fusion chamber. Hopefully that will fix things.

According to CB there are relatively FEW units with these problems. I'm hoping mine is not one of them when I get it online here in the next few weeks.

 

[altheating]

I don't think thicker metal in the fusion chamber will be the answer. Steel just cant handle the temps created at that point in the process. I once attempted to place a 1" x 4" piece of square stock welded to a 1/2" thick piece of flat plate into the gasification nozzle of my Econoburn EBW200 in an attempt to cut my btu output for summertime domestic hot water. This was three and a half years ago. Within 4-5 days the hot flames eroded almost half of the 1" square stock including the 1/2" plate holding it into the nozzle. It looked like it was cut by a acetylene torch. I might be wrong, but I think a thicker fusion chamber will only extend the breakdown a bit longer into the heating season. If the breakdown is happening in a boiler that is rated at 500,000 btus what will happen if the boiler is actually being pushed to the max output? I think you will see it occurring even faster in the 1400 model. The 1400 will actually be burning more than the 2300, so that means it will be pushing more heat down the tube instead of idling.

 

[heaterman]

Steel vs ceramic = no contest. File it under things that make you go Hmmmmmmmmmmm.

I think you hit the nail on the head with your illustration Altheat. If.........and that is an if, CB is actually getting gasification temps in their "fusion" chamber any piece of steel will eventually burn through unless they go to titanium or something similar. Do some looking on the European websites and notice how many of the Euro's, who have been doing this for years, are using steel in their gasification chamber. Betcha don't find a single one. I wonder why?...............

 

[heaterman]

i have been rying to read up on these outdoor boilers on this site and thanks to everyone for the info that is on this site.
I have a odd set up
i have a 20 x 100 home mildly insulated,
a rental house that is 5 foot away from my house
that is 650 sq ft
i would like to heat both of them with a outdoor boiler,
so far i have read good things about central boiler,
i am thinking that a 6048 would be the correct size for me
i am not too worried about the water heater part
the only thing i am concerned about it wood consumtion
I dont want to install one of these and go through 15 cord of dried locust a year
is there anyone out there that has a similar square footage and a true example of what they have used for cords of wood

to cheapen up the cost i may hook it into my neighbors house also and go with a bigger model
please help

Only a good heat loss calculation will give you an idea of the amount of wood you'll burn. That being said, plan on burning from 30-50% more fuel for the same btu output than you would in a true gasification type boiler.

 

[SE Iowa]

Hello Neighbor. I'd look at this from a different perspective;
What are you currently heating with? Propane? NG? Electricity? Would you like to change the thermostat up a few degrees, etc?
Either way, you should know what your average monthly or at least yearly usage of fossil fuel is for most years. You won't know what this years weather is going to be but neither would anyone burning wood. Calculate the average daily btu's that you have historically used. For example, I use 500,000 btu's ON AVERAGE per winter season. My supossed efficiency is 92%, so I would say that my home needs 500,000btu times 0.92 = 460,000btu's to maintain the heat at 70F. Take 460,000 btus divided by an CB real efficiency of lets say 35% (460,000/.35) to equal ~1.3milion btus of INPUT per day. Divide this by the btu content per pound of wood (example 7000 btu/lb) would give ~185 lbs of wood per day of INPUT. Of course this assumes dry wood and an efficiency of 35% etc. This should be close in my opinion. Then multiply times the 3 of days you typically heat at that level for a total yearly lbs of wood consumed. Then divide by lbs of wood per cord and you'll have a good ballpark #. This seems hard but is not that difficult in my opinion. Good luck.

 

[OldDedHed]

Chums:

Maybe a dumb question, but given your address, why are you passing up a corn burning appliance? Corn Btu varies (just like wood does), but averages about 9000 Btu per pound. From personal experience I know you'll burn less corn than wood to heat the same space. I would think you could get corn pretty darn cheap by the ton out there and they make large output boilers. Have a big woodlot or something?

 

[flyingcow]

Chums,
One other thing I forget to mention. When I started looking into wood furnaces, the cost of CB, Wood Doctor, etc. was pretty close to buying a gasser and storage. Granted install costs are higher, but the 1/3++ less wood usage was the winner. Don't have to have storage now, could always put in it later, or not at all.
-
Only smokes for a minute or two at start up, then smoke free burning. Still impresses the sh!t out of me. Also look at the Garn. Good unit.

 

[SE Iowa]

Old Deadhead, Actually, corn isn't that much cheaper here than you'd think. I am a farmer in se iowa and grow primarily corn and soybeans. If you are close to the river (Mississippi) the price of corn goes up. Pretty much every 25 miles along the river is some sort of corn processer macking starch, ethanol, feed or corn syrup. In addition, Iowa is the #1 producer of corn, soybeans, ethanol, corn syrup, pork, eggs and in the top 2 to 3 for beef, chicken and corn by-product production. We grow alot but there are hog sheds (2400 head) everywhere. Interestingly enough, GPC (Grain Processing Corp) in muscatine (se Iowa on the river) has the highest priced corn bid by 20 to 30 cents per bushel. You have to go up to north central iowa where they are land locked and it cost alot to ship the corn before basis widens out enough to get cheaper corn.

 

[ken999]

I'm not so sure that the thicker fusion chamber steel IS the answer either. Time will tell. The CB guy did say that VERY few of the units are having the problem. That sounded kinda odd as most owners posting online have had the issue. He did mention the online griping as well...one has to wonder if CB is trying to sweep the whole thing under the carpet....???...something else that makes you go hhhhhmmmmmmm.....

As to overall efficiency of an OWB like the e-classic, one has to wonder if setting them up with storage, low temp radiant heat, etc etc. like a 'normal' gasser would cut consumption enough to be comparable. Typical OWB mentality is "packer full and forgetter" and I doubt many owners (myself included, at least for now...) have no provision for storage. It would be interesting to swap out a traditional gasser for a e-classic, just to get the best apples to apples comparison. And like has been mentioned, properly timed and thought out feedings might trim some comsumption. Heck, I've talked to alot of traditional OWB owners and some of the stories I heard about junk piping jobs, no drainage, unsealed pex soaking wet from ground water etc. make me cringe. It's no wonder some people burn a boatload of wood with them.

Also...the e 1400 is smaller than the 2300. IIRC, it's 170k for 8 hrs, vs 209k for the 2300. The online spec's don't appear to be correct, according to what the tech told me.

 

[rowerwet]

living up here in the peoples republic of Maine (north MA) I had only two options for outdoor heat, pellet boiler (rare) or the E classic or equivalent. I looked at everything to do with OWB and found that the Eclassic is just the answer to Govt. created problems, not a market need. Good for CB for beating the EPA regs in the test and having something for these loony states. The complaints about the Eclassic are like the problems that came from early EFI in cars back in the '70s and '80s, we got cars straightened out, OWBs will be someday as well.

 

[Gooserider]

I'm not so sure that the thicker fusion chamber steel IS the answer either. Time will tell. The CB guy did say that VERY few of the units are having the problem. That sounded kinda odd as most owners posting online have had the issue. He did mention the online griping as well...one has to wonder if CB is trying to sweep the whole thing under the carpet....???...something else that makes you go hhhhhmmmmmmm.....

As to overall efficiency of an OWB like the e-classic, one has to wonder if setting them up with storage, low temp radiant heat, etc etc. like a 'normal' gasser would cut consumption enough to be comparable. Typical OWB mentality is "packer full and forgetter" and I doubt many owners (myself included, at least for now...) have no provision for storage. It would be interesting to swap out a traditional gasser for a e-classic, just to get the best apples to apples comparison. And like has been mentioned, properly timed and thought out feedings might trim some comsumption. Heck, I've talked to alot of traditional OWB owners and some of the stories I heard about junk piping jobs, no drainage, unsealed pex soaking wet from ground water etc. make me cringe. It's no wonder some people burn a boatload of wood with them.

Also...the e 1400 is smaller than the 2300. IIRC, it's 170k for 8 hrs, vs 209k for the 2300. The online spec's don't appear to be correct, according to what the tech told me.

I suspect that a lot of the reason we don't see as many problems as you might expect w/ the steel fusion chamber is that most of the OWB installs I've seen are way oversized w/ respect to their loads, and are run like traditional OWB's, which means they aren't spending much time actually running as gassers, so there isn't as much strain on the chambers. The melt downs are probably only happening to the people that try to burn efficiently and size the boiler to match the load...

Gooserider

 

[ken999]

GR- Interesting thought on the e-classics...I hadn't looked at it that way. I'm still hoping for a ceramic or other fusion chamber. That would likely solve the issue. I'm crossing my fingers that I can get 7-10 years out of my CB. After burning 5-6 chord and 1200 gal. of fuel oil every year for the last 5 years, if the CB lasts and keeps us warm on 7-10 chord, I'll be happy. In the mean time, we are trying to tackle a room or two a year, re-insulating as we go with spray foam...we did 450 sq. feet downstairs this year. I'd also like to add evacuated tubing to the mix taking more load off the boiler. just don't have the money right now.

 

[ecrane99]

I'm not so sure that the thicker fusion chamber steel IS the answer either. Time will tell. The CB guy did say that VERY few of the units are having the problem. That sounded kinda odd as most owners posting online have had the issue. He did mention the online griping as well...one has to wonder if CB is trying to sweep the whole thing under the carpet....???...something else that makes you go hhhhhmmmmmmm.....

As to overall efficiency of an OWB like the e-classic, one has to wonder if setting them up with storage, low temp radiant heat, etc etc. like a 'normal' gasser would cut consumption enough to be comparable. Typical OWB mentality is "packer full and forgetter" and I doubt many owners (myself included, at least for now...) have no provision for storage. It would be interesting to swap out a traditional gasser for a e-classic, just to get the best apples to apples comparison. And like has been mentioned, properly timed and thought out feedings might trim some comsumption. Heck, I've talked to alot of traditional OWB owners and some of the stories I heard about junk piping jobs, no drainage, unsealed pex soaking wet from ground water etc. make me cringe. It's no wonder some people burn a boatload of wood with them.

Also...the e 1400 is smaller than the 2300. IIRC, it's 170k for 8 hrs, vs 209k for the 2300. The online spec's don't appear to be correct, according to what the tech told me.

I'll bet there are alot of folks out there that don't even know that their chamber is blown. The only way I knew was that I keep tabs on this forum.
My dealer claims I am the only one with this problem. Folks wont know until the chamber breaks so bad it won't burn properly.

Ed