Has any one noticed a difference with ash and there Hamers this year? Same great heat but seams to be allot more ash in the drawer.
MrOletta said:I noticed this exact same thing. I've burned about 10 bags out of 100 and boy its the ashiest pellet I've burned to data. If fireside ultra is 1%, then this batch of hamers is easily 1.25 or 1.5, its absurd.
Somersets were 10x better than this.
MrOletta said:I noticed this exact same thing. I've burned about 10 bags out of 100 and boy its the ashiest pellet I've burned to data. If fireside ultra is 1%, then this batch of hamers is easily 1.25 or 1.5, its absurd.
Somersets were 10x better than this.
Easternshore Bob said:Has any one noticed a difference with ash and there Hamers this year? Same great heat but seams to be allot more ash in the drawer.
j-takeman said:MrOletta said:I noticed this exact same thing. I've burned about 10 bags out of 100 and boy its the ashiest pellet I've burned to data. If fireside ultra is 1%, then this batch of hamers is easily 1.25 or 1.5, its absurd.
Somersets were 10x better than this.
PFI rates Ash content by its weight, Not its volume. What looks to be loads of ash by volume can actually still be within PFI spec's. One of the reasons I tried to show volume and weight in my tests. Just so peeps could see the difference. When I stated the ash content on my tests its by actual weight. A light fluffy ash could have a higher ash volume but yet actually have less ash content overall than ash that was heavy and dense that was much lower in volume. Just FYI and that the looks of ash can be very decieving. And if you going to state its content it has to be by its weight. You really can't state its content by its looks and volume.
If I can find some Mt Hope Hamers, I can try to see what the ash content by weight might be.
Tony K said:j-takeman said:MrOletta said:I noticed this exact same thing. I've burned about 10 bags out of 100 and boy its the ashiest pellet I've burned to data. If fireside ultra is 1%, then this batch of hamers is easily 1.25 or 1.5, its absurd.
Somersets were 10x better than this.
PFI rates Ash content by its weight, Not its volume. What looks to be loads of ash by volume can actually still be within PFI spec's. One of the reasons I tried to show volume and weight in my tests. Just so peeps could see the difference. When I stated the ash content on my tests its by actual weight. A light fluffy ash could have a higher ash volume but yet actually have less ash content overall than ash that was heavy and dense that was much lower in volume. Just FYI and that the looks of ash can be very decieving. And if you going to state its content it has to be by its weight. You really can't state its content by its looks and volume.
If I can find some Mt Hope Hamers, I can try to see what the ash content by weight might be.
Jay, let me know if you still need Hamers from Mt Hope plant and we could arrange something. I believe the ones I have are from Mt Hope but crs is getting the best of me....
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.