Hearth Stone Clydesdale Insert compared to Jotul 550 insert Pros & Cons . Please let me know what you think. The Clydesdale is new for 2009.
Thanks
Thanks
Hearth Stone Clydesdale Insert compared to Jotul 550 insert Pros & Cons
- Thread starter burn one
- Start date
-
Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.
We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.
We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil. -
Super Cedar firestarters 30% discount Use code Hearth2024 Click here
- Status
The Clydesdale is gonna take longer to heat up while the soapstone bricks absorb the heat,
maybe an hour or more, but it'll radiate heat long after the wood's gone.
The Rockland will start throwing heat in less than a half hour & will cool down faster...
Both look nice, & are quality products...
The Clydesdale does allow some adjustment for shallower fireplaces,
has a surface to put a humidifying steamer on, protrudes out onto the hearth...
& will probably require a hearth extension...
The Rockland doesn't have anywhere to put a steamer.
The flush mounting of the Rockland may save you from installing additional hearth protection...
Guess it's your call...
maybe an hour or more, but it'll radiate heat long after the wood's gone.
The Rockland will start throwing heat in less than a half hour & will cool down faster...
Both look nice, & are quality products...
The Clydesdale does allow some adjustment for shallower fireplaces,
has a surface to put a humidifying steamer on, protrudes out onto the hearth...
& will probably require a hearth extension...
The Rockland doesn't have anywhere to put a steamer.
The flush mounting of the Rockland may save you from installing additional hearth protection...
Guess it's your call...
- Status
Similar threads
