Have NC30, need more stove

[Beetle-Kill]

Will work on it, Where abouts?

Ummm....where did that picture go? I saw lots of potential from that photo.

 

[rideau]

I think you are putting too much value in the BTU ratings. They mean so little when it comes to actual burning. There are a few manufacturers that claim 100,000 BTUs from smaller fireboxes than the PH. Doesn't mean they heat better.


Keep in mind, the OP is only using 2.25 cord of wood. Not exactly a lot of wood by anyone's measurements.


Nothing wrong with the PH, but in this particular instance, wouldn't just moving up to the BK King make more sense?


My opinion on this is that trying to heat 6,000+ sq ft with one stove is going to be tough. For more even heat a second heat source would seem to be the way to go.

I don't put a lot of stock in manufacturer's BTU claims...hence my disclaimer re don't know how they test or what burn times...and I know that Woodstock has a policy of being deliberately conservative in its claims. BK for instance in its manual says you can get a very high BTU output...then says to look at the overleaf, where they explain that you can do that by filling the stove, burning very hot, and filling the stove every few hours. So OK --seems BK says you can maybe get the same BTU output as a PH, running BK absolutely maximum with a lot of wood and a lot of attendance, while a PH chugs happily along on one load....

On the other hand, while the PH will burn with a lower minimum BTU output than the Fireview (don't recall exactly, but about 11,000 vs 14,000) it isn't designed to low burn in the manner the BK manual says the BK is designed to, and it can't approach the low rates of the BK. So for sure it seems to me the BK is a better stove for a large home in the relatively mild Pacific NW, while the PH is better for a large home in my climate in So Ontario. For many folks with smaller homes and/or in different climates, either a BK or a Woodstock is a great stove.

And yes, I didn't need to burn a lot of wood last year. Still have close to a cord of the wood I had set aside for last year. Thank you, PH and Mother Nature.

 

[Osceola]

My house is ICF construction, our walls are 12"thick.

http://www.buildblock.com/?gclid=CImUzfnEu7ICFad7QgodozoAUQ

Our utility bills are less than our neighbors with half the square footage we have. During the summer, our home will stay 78 degrees or below even when the temps hit over 100. I have had the home for near 3 years and have turned on the central AC 3 times, mostly to make sure it was still working. As for windows, we have energy efficient windows and have added double honeycomb binds behind our insulating drapes. The attic has been insulated to Energy star ratings as well. We are pretty close to being an Energy Star home. The floor of the basement is not insulated, but unlike our other homes with a basement, oddly the floor is never cold in this one. We do have area rugs over quite a bit of the floor though. As far as putting a second stove in, we have given it some thought. But if you look up how the home was built, anything that is on the inside that needs to go outside really needed to be in place when the concrete was poured into the walls.To have holes cut through concrete/rebar is pretty tough and the Styrofoam has to be cut quite a bit away to keep it from melting.

As I said, the Englander comes close. It keeps the house warm, I can not remember at what temperature, but in the 70's I am just looking to see if the other stoves are more efficient with longer burn times. BTW, the stove is in the basement, working with the heat rising

edited to add...yeah, 18'celing in the main room on the main floor but it opens up right into the upper level

To drill through the 12" concrete wall would only take about 15 minutes with an 8" diamond tip core bit - rebar and all, we do it all the time at work up to 12" in diameter. Ask around about a good concrete contractor

 

[jharkin]

Wow... what a thread. Amazing that there is any stove that even can come close to heating such a house. My house would probably fit in your living room and we struggle with a 2+ cu ft. firebox.

Kudos to you for being concerned about your wood and energy consumption. Most people Ive met who own houses so large don't seem to care where their energy comes from or how much they use and just write a check......

 

[Ashful]

Kudos to you for being concerned about your wood and energy consumption. Most people Ive met who own houses so large don't seem to care where their energy comes from or how much they use and just write a check......

I dunno... paying mortgage, taxes, and utilities on a big place has a way of making you acutely interested in what you're paying for oil or gas.

 

[blades]

Something doesn't quite jive here, Located in Utah at 5800 ft elevation and only gets down to -3, me thinks she forgot a zero, and the the wind can howl pretty good up there. In that area I think that there primary wood burn wise is going to be a type of pine, area not noted for hard woods. Normal winter usage on nc-30 24/7 in my home consumes about 6-7 or so cords of mixed hardwood. full load in morning before and again in evening which is about 180 cubic ft per month elevation 960 ft next to Lake Michigan not super insulated but best I can due without tearing it 1/2 apart 2200sqft ranch.
Best option another stove on main floor. After all any stove is a local area heating appliance.
Other option is to use wood furnace specifically designed for wood only, not wood as an after thought to a unit made to use coal ( heck they have a lot of that out there also) This is not inexpensive as these units run south of 4 grand.