Hard wood or soft??

[freddy]

Obviously most prefer hard over soft but when I put a piece of doug fir roughly the same size as oak they burn about the same amount of time or with in 15-30 min. (3 hours or so total burn time) I do get longer coaling with the oak but that isn't really putting out any heat. I guess I don't see the advantage when the price is a HUGE difference not to mention the availability of the fir in our area. Isn't the hard stuff suppose to burn longer like most people say?

Basically I am putting a piece of oak or fir on a hot coal bed and leaving the air control settings the exact same and timing the burn time of actual flames.

If I am not doing something wrong then I will just burn the fir instead of worrying about having hard wood.

 

[BrotherBart]

When I burn pine I get heat until the flames die. With oak when I have that puppy full that coaling stage not only puts out a bunch of heat but lasts a long time after the flames have died.

Burning one chunk of each isn't any kind of comparison test.

 

[bluefrier]

are you using a thermometer to measure stove temps for a true burn time comparison?
Hardwood should keep the stove hotter longer.

 

[jpl1nh]

It's my understanding that Douglas fir is pretty much the king of softwoods. It's BTU rating is about 85%+ of red oak, so it's a pretty good wood. If the price of Doug fir is less than 85% of the oak, I'd say burn the Doug fir.

 

[jpl1nh]

When I burn pine I get heat until the flames die. With oak when I have that puppy full that coaling stage not only puts out a bunch of heat but lasts a long time after the flames have died.

Burning one chunk of each isn't any kind of comparison test.

BB, we've got white pine and red pine up here. I burn plenty of both though the red gives more heat than the white. As you point out, neither really coal at all so it burns and its over. What types of pine do you have in your area?

 

[Corey]

Pound for pound, there isn't much if any difference, and you can probably get the stove as hot with either wood, but most people buy wood by volume (cord), or at the very least haul it and move it by volume. Doug Fir is about 18 million btu/cord and the oaks average about 25 MBTU/ cord. So any time you can get a cord of oak priced 1.4x a cord of fir (or less) you're money ahead in the btu game - ie if a cord of fir is $100 and a cord of oak is anything less than $140, buy oak.

Equal sized log to equal sized log, the oak should put out more heat by the same ratio - about 1.4 times as much. There is a lot of heat in the coals, especially if you have a big pile of them, so don't let the fact that it 'seems like' there isn't much heat in the coals from a single small split misguide you.

 

[Rockey]

It's my understanding that Douglas fir is pretty much the king of softwoods. It's BTU rating is about 85%+ of red oak, so it's a pretty good wood. If the price of Doug fir is less than 85% of the oak, I'd say burn the Doug fir.

That plus the piece of Douglas fir that he burned could have been heartwood, which is much denser than the sapwood, hence more BTU's

 

[BrotherBart]

BB, we've got white pine and red pine up here. I burn plenty of both though the red gives more heat than the white. As you point out, neither really coal at all so it burns and its over. What types of pine do you have in your area?

Yellow Virginia pine and some red. You are right. The red is like a rock.

 

[Backwoods Savage]

Obviously most prefer hard over soft but when I put a piece of doug fir roughly the same size as oak they burn about the same amount of time or with in 15-30 min. (3 hours or so total burn time) I do get longer coaling with the oak but that isn't really putting out any heat. I guess I don't see the advantage when the price is a HUGE difference not to mention the availability of the fir in our area. Isn't the hard stuff suppose to burn longer like most people say?

Basically I am putting a piece of oak or fir on a hot coal bed and leaving the air control settings the exact same and timing the burn time of actual flames.

If I am not doing something wrong then I will just burn the fir instead of worrying about having hard wood.

Putting only one piece of wood on a hot coal bed is not the best way to get the most heat.

Try an experiment some time. In an outdoor fire pit, try to burn 1 or 2 pieces of wood. It just doesn't work worth a hoot. But try 3 pieces and it is a huge difference. So, why not try putting in 3 pieces of wood at a time and see if there might be a difference.

 

[smokinj]

I use both depending on the temp right now all soft!

 

[mikepinto65]

Many I talk to around town are very anti pine in wood stoves. They all moan it will clog up your chimney, how much truth is in this?

 

[fossil]

Where I live, if there was no Pine, there would be no woodstoves. I don't even know what it's like to burn hardwoods. What more can I tell you? Rick

 

[Sealcove]

What kind of pine are you burning in the Bend area? It may be that it is quite a bit different than eastern white pine, which is extremely sappy. I am sure people burn eastern white though, but it's not ideal.

 

[fossil]

Lodgepole Pine and Ponderosa Pine. Also Western Larch (Tamarack), Douglas Fir, and Juniper. I've no doubt that different woods have different burning characteristics beyond density/BTU content. I've also no doubt that (after proper installation of the physical system) proper seasoning of the fuel is the single most important factor involved in the process of burning in a woodstove. My available fuel probably doesn't burn as "cleanly" as the really nice hardwoods available elsewhere. But if I install my system properly, operate it and maintain it properly, and season my fuel properly, I can git 'er done safely and efficiently. Rick

 

[Bigg_Redd]

When I burn pine I get heat until the flames die. With oak when I have that puppy full that coaling stage not only puts out a bunch of heat but lasts a long time after the flames have died.

Burning one chunk of each isn't any kind of comparison test.

Your pine and our fir is no kind of comparison, either.

 

[Ken45]

As cozy said, it's pretty much all the same PER POUND of wood. If one species weighs 20% more per cord (or cubic foot), then you will get about 20% more heat per cord (or pound). Of course, this assumes that they are all seasoned to the same moisture content (not always a valid assumption).

Of course, with a more dense wood, you can put more pounds in the same firebox for warmer overnight burns.

Ken

 

[RedRanger]

Bigg Red is right. I haven`t really tried for a true overnite burn yet because it just isn`t cold enough. But just haphazard loading at night I am getting still a warm insert after 7 hours. "least the wife says the top of the insert is still warm- I don`t get up as early as her". %-P So am just taking her word for it.

Most I have stuffed in there so far is 2 big splits of douglas fir. When it gets really cold I will try and get 3 biggies in there without smashing those fandangled burn tubes. And I will load it E/W instead of just being lazy and shoving the wood into the firebox N/S. I can fit longer splits N/S. (20) inch.


Been a fairly warm autumn so far in these parts, only 4 nites with frost to date. Day time temps have been averaging between 48F and up to 62F.

 

[woodconvert]

I have never burnt any pine....that said, I have burnt a lot of elm. It's sorda a hardwood but it's not on the level of ash/oak/locust. There is little similar between the two other than elm burns thus giving off heat. I can't get a good overnight burn with elm....it burns to quickly. The other hardwoods I listed I can easily get a good hot overnight burn. But, if it were cold out and my options were burning balsa or running the furnace i GUARANTEE i'd be burning the balsa. Burn what ya got.

 

[RedRanger]

I have never burnt any pine....that said, I have burnt a lot of elm. It's sorda a hardwood but it's not on the level of ash/oak/locust. There is little similar between the two other than elm burns thus giving off heat. I can't get a good overnight burn with elm....it burns to quickly. The other hardwoods I listed I can easily get a good hot overnight burn. But, if it were cold out and my options were burning balsa or running the furnace i GUARANTEE i'd be burning the balsa. Burn what ya got.

You are bang on!! Here on the island we don`t have pine, so have never burned it. Mostly what is available is fir,balsam, soft maple,alder, and lots of cedar. and hardwood is scarce as hen`s teeth.

Softwood is just fine, sure beats the heck out of burning oil!! And the douglas fir does have one nice benefit in that you can split and stack it in april and it`s ready to burn come Oct. And like you say-"you gotta burn what is available".

 

[jpl1nh]

What kind of pine are you burning in the Bend area? It may be that it is quite a bit different than eastern white pine, which is extremely sappy. I am sure people burn eastern white though, but it's not ideal.

This people burns eastern white pine. Sap is very volitile and burns quite well though the pine I burn is so dry there's not much sap. Its great for a start up fire or getting a fire burning again quickly, and I mix it with medium hard woods like white birch and red maple in warmer weather when I don't want too much heat. I can damp my stove down easily to keep it from burning too fast which some people with lots of draft may have trouble with. Mikepinto65, I always like all the people that say it clogs their stoves. Pine is the one wood you can easily get for free around here because everyone thinks that.

 

[mikepinto65]

Yea, being new to the game i wasn't to sure....just used enough common sense though to realize it would be fine for fire starting. After reading the posts guess i can be sure its good enough to sustain good strong burns too (at a much better price here in the east).

 

[bokehman]

Softwood pros:
* Costs less
* Grows quicker
* Fells easier
* Weighs less
* Splits easier
* Seasons faster
* Gets up to temperature quicker than an H bomb

Hardwood pros:
* Can fit more BTUs in a limited size firebox
* Burns slower

 

[gpcollen1]

I prefer some soft wood - or just softer - when trying to get the stove up to temp quickly and or begin to develop a coal bed b/c it usually burns a bit quicker. The colas wont last as long for sure but it helps the machine get a rolling. I don't really get too much soft wood except for a few pine and spruce I cut down here a while back. Then again, someone just promised me a few cords of pine rounds - I'll take em.

Try burning that soft wood and see what mind of coals you have after 12 hours. Some nice red oak in my Olympic will give me coals for a long time.

 

[Adios Pantalones]

I'm burning white pine this year for the first time ever. I'm pretty happy- this wood that might have gone to waste, is light, lights easily, and one stove load is enough for the night this time of year anyway.

However- I would probably trade my pine for hardwood- pound for pund- because I find the hardwood to be more versatile. If all you have is hardwood, split is small and it heats up the stove lickedy split anyhoo.

 

[bokehman]

I'm burning white pine this year for the first time ever. [...] lights easily, and one stove load is enough for the night this time of year [...] I would probably trade my pine for hardwood

When I first got my woodburner I only had pine. Later when I got some oak I thought something had gone wrong with the stove it took so long to get up to temperature.