Harman 2.0

[Mwinder98]

I'm looking to purchase a harman 2.0 wood stove to replace my old brunco firelite for my 1500ish sq ft house, I was wondering if anyone has any experience with the harman 2.0, or if you think this stove might be too much for my house. My house has a really open floor plan except for the 3 back bed rooms. Any info ya'll have would be great appreciated.

 

[branchburner]

Welcome to the forums. A 2 cu ft stove sounds like a good size for your house. Is the Harman new or used, and why a Harman? They can be a bit trickier and more demanding than other stove designs, requiring a good-drafting 6" flue and dry wood and a bit of learning to run smoothly. What is your current flue setup?

 

[Mwinder98]

The stove will be new and the reason I chose to go with harman is the long burn times and the outstanding reviews they get, my current chimney is a 6" through the ceiling set up, I currently have no draft issues and I currently have 6-7 cord that's been split and stacked since last October.

 

[tarzan]

I have doubts about there burn time claims.

I should add that I've never seen one in action but they claim up to17 hours? They do have three sizes in that series so maybe that burn time refers to the largest, 3 cubic foot model.

 

[Mwinder98]

realistic burn times im sure vary, but if they claim 17 and get 12 thats great, as others claim 8-10 and maybe get 6...

 

[begreen]

I strongly doubt a 2 cu ft stove will be too much for a 1500 sq ft house unless it is super insulated. As for the burn time claims, take them with a huge grain of salt. You'll note they are very vague. When temps are in the single-digits don't be surprised if they are half of what is claimed. Also, be sure there is enough chimney on the stove. For good performance, try to exceed the minimum requirement for height. And of course, have an adequate supply of fully seasoned wood on hand. Keep us posted on your results. We don't hear much about this model.

 

[branchburner]

While my stove is the cast iron version, it is the same technology and same firebox size. I get great variation in burn times depending on wood, weather, and how well my afterburner is functioning, but they have proven (for me anyway) to be far shorter than expected. While it is not unusual to have plenty of coals after ten hours when the stove is set low, when it is really cold out and the stove is opened up a bit I will need to reload in half that time.

The happiest Harman owners by far seem to be those with the larger TL300. While I am generally satisfied with my stove, and have gotten used to its quirks, it would not be my top recommendation. It seems best suited to 24/7 burning in the deep of winter, as it loves to burn hard and hot.

But this makes it less well-suited to this time of year, when I find myself burning smaller, smokier fires that send a lot of heat (and particulate) up the flue. To get a good secondary combustion requires a deep coal bed and a longer burn, and I end up over-heating the house (about your size). But I would not want a smaller stove with even shorter burn times, either.

My next stove will probably be a cat stove, made by Woodstock, BK or Buck. I have no firsthand experience, but users here indicate better control, long burn times, and greater effective heat output per cord of wood used (less heat and/or unburnt smoke sent up the flue).

That said, Harman makes a good stove. Just be aware, getting a long sustained secondary combustion can take a little practice and tweaking of your technique. In addition, the afterburner is prone to degrading after several years (anywhere from 2 to 10) and works best with a good cleaning at least once or twice a year. But don't be surprised if you need to shell out $300 for a new one in five years or so.

 

[Mwinder98]

I really appreciate all the input y'all have given me, I'm off to the local dealer to take a look at the 2.0 in action and see what they have to say about it and other comparable stoves.

 

[bholler]

i would recommend many other stoves over the harmans they are quirky and hard to learn. most of our customers that have them are not thrilled at all

 

[begreen]

For a long burn in a 2 cu ft stove I would be looking at either a cat stove or in non-cat, the Pacific Energy Super 27/Spectrum/ or Alderlea T5.

 

[Mwinder98]

I just left the dealer and he recommended the regancy s2400, any thoughts on this? They also sell osburn with the same technology...my budget limits me to $2,300 and that's stretching it. Any input will help me, thanks again.

 

[bholler]

I sell and install regency stoves They are good reliable stoves. Quadrafires are very similar as well.

 

[begreen]

I just left the dealer and he recommended the regancy s2400, any thoughts on this? They also sell osburn with the same technology...my budget limits me to $2,300 and that's stretching it. Any input will help me, thanks again.

That's a popular fire box and a good heater. Regency has a good warranty and makes a well built stove.

 

[Mwinder98]

My only thought on the regancy and osburn is that they pretty much look like and have the same features as, I hate to say it but, as the box store stoves for $600-$800, with all the same claims...

 

[begreen]

Price out a PE Super 27 in comparison. It should fall under the budget limit and has a good long burn time.

 

[branchburner]

pretty much look like and have the same features as, I hate to say it but, as the box store stoves for $600-$800

As mentioned in MANY threads here, you won't do badly with the Englander stoves sold at Lowe's and HD. Great bang for the buck.

 

[bholler]

As mentioned in MANY threads here, you won't do badly with the Englander stoves sold at Lowe's and HD. Great bang for the buck.

I totally agree i think the higher priced stoves are definatly better quality and will hold up longer but for the price the englanders are great stoves

 

[begreen]

The main caveat with Englander stoves is their hearth insulation requirement. Check that the existing hearth complies with requirements.

 

[Mwinder98]

I appreciate all your input, I think I'm still stuck on harman, now the question is, should I step up to the tl2.6? Or will the smaller 2.0 be enough for my open 1500 sq ft home?

 

[tarzan]

Well, I heated 1500 drafty square feet just under you in southern WV with a 2.1 cu ft stove. It DID heat the house down to -10*f, the coldest I remember it being while I had that stove.

That being said, I quickly found I wanted a larger stove for longer burn times.

 

[Mwinder98]

Good advise, last winter we experienced -20's with wind chills to -30's, it would probably be worth it to have the slightly larger unit. Thanks again.

 

[branchburner]

should I step up to the tl2.6? Or will the smaller 2.0 be enough for my open 1500 sq ft home?

The 2.0 should be enough, but for a few hundred more I myself would go for the bigger firebox, for longer burns and higher max output when it's subzero out.

With either stove you will find there are times, when it is not too cold out, that a full firebox and good secondary burn might cook you out of the house, or at least out of the stove room. But having the extra firepower is nice. I wouldn't want to go much smaller than the 2.2 that I have now, even in a fairly small house (small, but drafty).

Don't forget to get the grill option!!

 

[Mwinder98]

Yeah I can get my house to 85 degrees no problem with the brunco, so I'm no stranger to opening up doors and windows, but when it was -20 out I had this monster cranking and would keep it about 72.