clean operation: side loaders vs front loaders

[Roger]

We are trying to decide on a stove to purchase with a fire box in the 2+ cubic foot range. I have heard that side loaders are cleaner to operate, and in that category local vendors offer Jotul's Oslo and Quadra-Fire's Cumberland Gap. I would appreciate any information/opinions on side loader vs front loaders as they affect the operation of stoves. Also, how easy is it to obtain spare parts for Jotul, Quadra-Fire and Pacific Energy products? Thanks!

 

[Ashful]

Jotul is pretty good on parts availability, although its all made in Scandinavia, so if you need a part not stocked by Jotul USA, the wait to get it from headquarters is more than six weeks. That has happened to me, but my stoves are old, and they should be better about keeping stock on a newer stove.

Never used a side loader, but I've read more negative than positive comments about side loading. I'm sure someone will be along shortly to contradict that.

 

[begreen]

Not sure where that advice came from. There have been comments from Oslo owners that they find them much cleaner to load from the side than from the front. Top loaders, may be cleaner, but I haven't heard this about sideloaders before. Parts are pretty easy to get for all the listed brands, especially if you have a good dealer.

 

[webby3650]

I had an Oslo for a few years. I loved the side door, it makes the firebox more usable. I would load from the side 99% of the time, occasionally adding a piece or two from the front for over night burns. Unless the stove has a deep floor, like the Blaze King, it's gonna make a bit of a mess when the front door is opened. A side door will eliminate some of that.

 

[begreen]

Yes, I think the deep floor is more important than front or side door. Our stove is nice and deep.

 

[Woody Stover]

Haven't done much front loading except with the Dutchwest. It's handy for building a top-down load for a cold start but for reloading, side loading shields you from the heat if the previous load isn't burned down to a small coal bed. I could load more wood from the side, with the Dw anyway. Might be harder to remove ashes from the side if you don't have a pan. I like side loading when you have andirons; No worries about a split falling into the glass, so you can pack it full.

 

[Ashful]

Not sure where that advice came from.

I can't remember either, but it was within the last two weeks! I will have to see if I can dig up that thread...

 

[TreeCo]

Jotul F600CB here and I almost always side load. In fact I haven't had the front doors open yet this year as the glass stays perfectly clean.

 

[Laurent Cyr]

Same here. I have a Jotul F600 and always side-load. The configuration of the front doors on the F600 makes it a pain in the butt to load from the front anyway....

Jotul F600CB here and I almost always side load. In fact I haven't had the front doors open yet this year as the glass stays perfectly clean.

 

[Nonprophet]

We used the side door mostly on our Oslo because the front ash lip was poorly designed. We almost always got ash on the floor when using the front door. We now have an Isle Royale which has a great ash lip for the front door as well as a top-load door which eliminates any worries about ash spill. We really love the IR, best stove we've ever owned! It would be a "perfect stove" IMHO if it had a one-piece front door instead of the two doors......

NP

 

[madison]

If the model's you are considering have double hinged front doors vs a single hinged front door, the side load option would probably be easier to operate.

More important maybe the firebox dimensions in relation to the doors, ie, if the depth (is less than the width) and firebox necessitates E/W loading - then side loading would be easier, and quite possibly safer to load.

Personally, I would like as few moving parts and gaskets, so a single front door would be my preference.

 

[Waulie]

If the stove can only be loaded EW, a side loading door is a must. I had a EW stove with only a front door and it was a messy PITA. I would never buy a stove with that setup.

An EW stove (e.g. Oslo) with a side door and a NS stove (e.g. the PE's) with a front door are going to be about the same. Really, loading a stove NS through the front door is not much different than loading a stove EW through the side door. The mess should be similiar in those cases.

 

[Roger]

Thanks everybody for your helpful replies which will enable us make a better informed choice of stove. Roger

 

[Ashful]

Hah... I forgot to come back to this. Here are some of the most recent comments, to which I was referring above. This is just from last week, there are many, many more, if you care to search (I'm surfing from a phone... no fun to search on).

I went from a top loading VC to a side loading Jotul. The side loading takes a little time to get used to, I think. I like the top loading better.

My old stove was a side loader and my new stove is a front loader. I like the front because it is a wider opening then the side.

Not saying one method is better than the other, as most posters agree its not a big deal either way, just that preferences vary. There were also a few posts (in the same thread) stating welding gloves are desirable for side loading, as burns are likely.

A big help is a good pair of extra long welding gloves that allow me to reach way in and not burn myself.

 

[madison]

Excellent info Joful. I think Corey21 hit the nail on the head: I would go with the largest opening.

 

[BrowningBAR]

Which is cleaner in terms of dirt and ash around the hearth? The answer is that either style can be messy.

 

[Ashful]

Yep! In fact, I suspect top load is cleanest, and front load the most messy, with respect to ash spillage. Side loading seems to provide less ash spillage than front loading, but more bumps with your shirt sleeves, according to the reviews given.