Help Comparing a Harman TL300 and a BlazeKing

  • 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.
Status
Not open for further replies.
From all I have read here this would be a no-brainer and choose the BK! I like the looks of the BK better and the performance appears to be top notch.Seems the TL can be difficult at times but never hear that about the BK stoves..

Ray
If you can get past the looks of the stove. wouldnt want it in my living room ,possibly in the basement. As far as the TL goes one guy posted a few hundred negative comments here last year before we helped him figure out his problem.He had an open flue tee inside is fireplace flue .
about the equivelent of trying to operate the stove with a 6 Ft chimney. After he corrected it ,he loved the stove and praised it. After you use a top loading stove for awhile you realize what a hassle it is load from the front. Both these stoves are top of the line though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: raybonz
If you can get past the looks of the stove. wouldnt want it in my living room ,possibly in the basement. As far as the TL goes one guy posted a few hundred negative comments here last year before we helped him figure out his problem.He had an open flue tee inside is fireplace flue .
about the equivelent of trying to operate the stove with a 6 Ft chimney. After he corrected it ,he loved the stove and praised it. After you use a top loading stove for awhile you realize what a hassle it is load from the front. Both these stoves are top of the line though.
Wow an open Tee would explain that draft problem! I am glad to hear your stove works very well! MY BIL has the same one but he burns wet wood and cranks it all the time. I tried to explain he should be burning dry wood but some people won't listen to reason. He goes through a ton of wood but we all know it's because the wood is wet and he has to crank up the air to compensate. In the interest of good relations I say no more about it to him as he knows all there is to know since he has been burning wood for decades albeit incorrectly! How do you find the wood consumption on your TL-300?

Ray
 
As i said i have 2 other brands of stoves as well and none comes close to the burn times of the TL-300. I already heated a half-double for the whole winter on 2 cords of oak and some tear out lumber as i rehabbed the house. THe walls were so open you could see daylight in many places. I would use the pine during the day and load it up with seasoned oak about 6PM .when i came back at 9AM the next day all i had to do was put more wood in and let er rip. Iv had this stove in 2 different locations so far and it performed excellent in both locations. I burned a lot of pine lathe boards known to produce a lot of smoke but the TL burned completely clean zero smoke.I also burn lathe in my NC-30 englander but i do get smoke from that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: raybonz
I dont know what the efficiency penalty is for burning wet wood ,but i would not be surprised if its 50% or more. A friend of mine has an open fireplace that works OK with dry wood but one day he ran out of dry wood and it was all he could do to keep it lit let alone produce heat. smoked up the house and produced just about nothing for heat.
 
Wet wood requires many BTU's just to drive the water out so you get little heat value, burn more wood, create more creosote and have trouble getting the fire lit plus cat or secondary burn will not happen until the wood has dried out..

Ray
 
After you use a top loading stove for awhile you realize what a hassle it is load from the front.
I gotta say, I've never had a front load only stove until I got the 30. Didn't know what to expect. I like it a lot more than I thought I would, and I have owned four top loading stoves. It's not as convenient as a top loader, but it not a hassle at all.

I find side loading as the bigger pain in the ass.
 
My CDW was front and side loading and when I 1st got it I used the double front doors until a log rolled onto the carpet lol.. Side loaded from that point on and it was easier on that stove as well.. Side loading is best in an EW stove and front loading is best in a NS stove in my opinion..

Ray
 
Yes, there are other cat stoves than BK. For looks, the best thing going is the woodstock. All the others look like something that was designed in the 70s because they were. The other cat stoves just look really weird and dated and yes this includes my goofy looking BK.

For function, nothing comes close to the performance of a BK for burn times which is really the most important thing when heating a 2000 SF home. See, just about any stove on the market can make enough raw heat to cook you out of your 2000 SF home, so the real trick is the longest burn times which will allow you to load the stove and walk away for 24-40 hours. Only the BK can do that with ease. 24 hours is nearly double what the next closest competitor can do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: raybonz
I v already reloaded my harman after 27 hours without a relight,but usable heat probably around 18-20 hours .not bad for a 3.0 CU ft stove.
 
I v already reloaded my harman after 27 hours without a relight,but usable heat probably around 18-20 hours .not bad for a 3.0 CU ft stove.
Impressive for a secondary burn stove!

Ray
 
I choose the harman cuz i didnt want to buy a catalyst every few years.

Everyone keeps saying the Harman isn't a cat stove but the Harman dealer told me the compustor in the Harman needs to be replaced every 5 years (or so). In addition, he mentioned several customers have broken their compustors since it has to be removed to clean the stove. What say you?
 
Everyone keeps saying the Harman isn't a cat stove but the Harman dealer told me the compustor in the Harman needs to be replaced every 5 years (or so). In addition, he mentioned several customers have broken their compustors since it has to be removed to clean the stove. What say you?
It's not a cat stove. It has a refractory package for secondary burn instead of burn tubes. It's kind of like Vermont Castings non-cat Everburn stoves.
 
Since both stoves use a "consumable core" (that had to be replaced on a regular basis) to burn secondary gases, I don't see where either stove has an advantage in that area of comparison.
 
Since both stoves use a "consumable core" (that had to be replaced on a regular basis) to burn secondary gases, I don't see where either stove has an advantage in that area of comparison.

In regards to maintenance and expense you are correct (I think there is probably room for arguments from both sides in this, but in the end, I think cost would end up similar over time.).

However, the cat in a BK and others only needs to be at about 500 degrees to operate, whereas the firedome needs to be at the same temps as a non-cat to function which I believe is about 1000 degrees. Mode of operation is different, even though high heat ceramics can be involved in both. The firedome is a chamber constructed of a fiber that resists heat, allowing the high heat in that chamber to burn the gasses. The cat is a honeycomb of ceramic or stainless steel that is coated with metal materials that allow the gasses to burn at a lower temperature. The cat ceramic is not quite as fragile as the firedome, and usually installed in an area that will be less likely to be damaged when loading the stove. The cat coating can be damaged by burning inappropriate items, and by handling it too rough when cleaning it. Cats will plug with ash, but so will the firedome if not cleaned on a regular basis.

In my opinion, the firedome should in theory last the life of the stove, I think most get replaced because of damage done while loading or cleaning. A cat does lose its effectiveness over time, and does finally "wear out" and need replaced, and that is when they are usually replaced, but there are times when burning something inappropriate ruins it, or in cleaning, it breaks, falls apart, or loses some of its coating and needs replaced. I feel better with a cat stove than the firedome.
 
Since both stoves use a "consumable core" (that had to be replaced on a regular basis) to burn secondary gases, I don't see where either stove has an advantage in that area of comparison.
This is the 5th year i have my stove and there is no sign of degredation of the firedome. Iv heard estimates of 10 years before the firedome may need attention. Its protected by hard ceramic Tiles with air holes at the entrance inside the stove. its very easy to clean these air holes with a shop vac once a month or so. I cant imagine how you could damage the softer refractory material cuz its up inside the firedome where you would have to literally jam the ash vac or a piece of wood up in there somehow. You can also see the soft refractory materiel by removing the flue pipe and looking straight down into the back of the stove. After several inspections this way i see no need even for vacuuming or cleaning as its clean. Maintenance and cleaning of the combustor seems to be greatly exaggerated on this site usually by those who do not own the stove.
 
Another reason i did not want ta cat stove is because i occasionally burn wood that may have some varnish or paint or glues on it as i burn a lot of wood i tear out of rehab jobs. I did not want to worry about ruining expensive cat combustors. So far the TL-300 has handled every thing with ease that i have burned ,all with zero smoke. Yes you do need closer to 1000 deg internal temp to light off a firedome where only around 500 for a cat stove,but 1000 deg internal temp is quite easy to achieve in about 15-20 minutes from a cold stove in my case,especially with all the pine i burn. After the combustor is lit up it is pretty much self sustaining. Looks like a blast furnace in back of the stove even with the air turned way down and the wood itself having no visible flame.
 
I v already reloaded my harman after 27 hours without a relight,but usable heat probably around 18-20 hours .not bad for a 3.0 CU ft stove.

That is excellent performance from a non-cat. I wonder why you don't see many of these harmans?

Stick to your guns seasonedoak, you're doing great.
 
  • Like
Reactions: raybonz
I choose the harman cuz i didnt want to buy a catalyst every few years.

I sometimes see this posted, and really don't understand the issue. My cat costs $150, and most others are in the $100 - $200 price range. A full-time burner will typically replace their cat every 6 years, and those burning less frequently can go much longer, as evidenced by the 19 year old (still functional) cat I just replaced on an semi-frequently used Jotul 12 I inherited last year. Even at $300 for some of the more expensive cat's, amortized over 6 years is $50 per year, and more typical cat's amortize to $25 per year. Not exactly a good reason to give up on what could be a far superior stove for many applications.

Another reason i did not want ta cat stove is because i occasionally burn wood that may have some varnish or paint or glues on it as i burn a lot of wood i tear out of rehab jobs. I did not want to worry about ruining expensive cat combustors.

Now that is a good reason to avoid a catalytic combustor, and one of the biggest problems Jotul says they had with selling catalytic stoves in the 1990's.
 
I sometimes see this posted, and really don't understand the issue. My cat costs $150, and most others are in the $100 - $200 price range. A full-time burner will typically replace their cat every 6 years, and those burning less frequently can go much longer, as evidenced by the 19 year old (still functional) cat I just replaced on an semi-frequently used Jotul 12 I inherited last year. Even at $300 for some of the more expensive cat's, amortized over 6 years is $50 per year, and more typical cat's amortize to $25 per year. Not exactly a good reason to give up on what could be a far superior stove for many applications.
But, it is still added cost and maintenance. And, you can still destroy a cat by running the cat at temps that are too high. Buying a $200-$300 cat every few years may not sound like much if you break it down by cost per year, but it is still a couple of hundred dollars out of your pocket at that time. And for some, that is added cost that just isn't worth it. At $250, that is nearly a third of the price of a new 30. Nearly 40% if you got your 30 at $650. That can't be ignored.

Cat stoves are great, but, there is added cost and maintenance to the stoves.
 
I have nothing at all against cat stoves.ill probably buy one someday. Woodstoves are like woman and cars to me,i pretty much like them all in general and some of them intensely.
Having used 3 other types of EPA afterburn stoves i d like to compare the experience with a cat stove.
 
That is excellent performance from a non-cat. I wonder why you don't see many of these harmans?
.
They are only made in one small factory in PA and probably not adequately advertised nationwide. Also one VERY important factor is their Service and support is very weak and spotty with most users reporting very poor product support. THe factory leaves it all up to the dealers so there are as many different support experiences as there are dealers. I can and do install and service all my own stoves so its not a problem for me.Any dealer can get parts. Cheers.
 
But, it is still added cost and maintenance. And, you can still destroy a cat by running the cat at temps that are too high. Buying a $200-$300 cat every few years may not sound like much if you break it down by cost per year, but it is still a couple of hundred dollars out of your pocket at that time. And for some, that is added cost that just isn't worth it. At $250, that is nearly a third of the price of a new 30. Nearly 40% if you got your 30 at $650. That can't be ignored.

Cat stoves are great, but, there is added cost and maintenance to the stoves.

IMO cost is recouped in the lesser amount of wood burned; less chainsaw fuel and oil, chain, chainsharpening, fuel to get to scrounges, wear and tear on vehicles & trailers etc over the six or so years of a cat's life; and convenience and less work of longer burns. Half a cord a year saved = 3 cords saved per cat, and that is conservative. That half cord or more of wood saved per year costs you $30 in cat. Who wouldn't buy good wood at $60/cord? At that price, not worth the effort or expense of getting it yourself /

Maintenance? Less work getting the wood more than makes up for "maintenance" time, as does infrequency of chimney cleaning. Brushing a cat once or twice a season takes less time than sweeping a chimney....,my chimney has gone 2 years between sweeps, less than 2 cups fine soot, all in lower part of stovepipe. I know of no other maintenance peculiar to a cat. Replacing a cat takes a total of under 10 minutes. No longer or harder than removing ash. It's minor routine maintenance.
Five + years with Fireview, cleaned chimney max 1 x year, sometimes every other, checked cat once a year, never needed cleaning...never had one cell clogged. A bit of powder would come out, but very little. Probably would have been better off just leaving it alone too. Essentially no maintenance. No problem ever with the stove. Unless other cat stoves are vastly different than Woodstock's, don't really understand why this is even a subject for debate.

IMO it's just a question of which you prefer, whether you are willing to take and are interested in taking the little time it takes in the first week or so to learn when to engage a cat; whether you are prepared to burn only clean wood (no used wood with finishes, etc); whether you will not overfire your stove. If you do those things, your cat will last many years and more than pay for itself.

The large new stainless cat for the PH is $175. That means you can replace your cat three times before you are within striking distance of the cost of a $650 30. Stove comes with a cat =6 years. Three new cats = 18 years. Total 24 years before you are within $125.00 of the cost of the 30. So IMO you can ignore that.

Low end cat stoves may be more expensive up front than low end secondary burn stoves...I don't know; and it may well be hard for many people to come up with $200 suddenly for a replacement cat. If you are in that catagory and have a cat stove, you can budget for the cat. You know you'll likely need one every 6 years...so put $3/month aside for the stove, or buy a replacement as a present for yourself a year or two in advance. be aware the warrantee runs from the date of purchase.

Finances are a valid concern, and for some the most important factor in choosing a stove will be the net out of pocket expense. And that is fine. We ideally should all be getting the stove that is best suited to us..that's a big part of what this forum is all about. For some, who do all their firewood c/s/s primarily by hand on foot on their own property, there may be little oop cost in acquiring firewood, and the cat may cost more than non-cat. But very few. The vast majority are spending a heck of a lot more on toys.

And it is interesting to see the same people advocating spending $60 on Super Cedars, for convenience, who are concerned about spending $30 on cats, for efficiency.

Cat stoves are frequently burned much cooler most of the time, and I seriously wonder whether that doesn't equate to longer stove life and less true routine maintenance during the course of the life of the stove.
 
You can rationalize all you want, and you bring up good points. But, in the end, there is more maintenance and cost on a cat stove than there is on a non-cat stove. You can say it is minimal. Or that if you break it down by each year it isn't much. But, there is more cost and maintenance.
 
You can rationalize all you want, and you bring up good points. But, in the end, there is more maintenance and cost on a cat stove than there is on a non-cat stove. You can say it is minimal. Or that if you break it down by each year it isn't much. But, there is more cost and maintenance.

So we'll have to agree to disagree. :)
 
But, it is still added cost and maintenance. And, you can still destroy a cat by running the cat at temps that are too high. Buying a $200-$300 cat every few years may not sound like much if you break it down by cost per year, but it is still a couple of hundred dollars out of your pocket at that time. And for some, that is added cost that just isn't worth it. At $250, that is nearly a third of the price of a new 30. Nearly 40% if you got your 30 at $650. That can't be ignored.

Cat stoves are great, but, there is added cost and maintenance to the stoves.

I've read maybe a dozen stories here of damaged or broken reburn tubes in non-cat stoves, but I can think of only one example of a damaged cat during the same time period. While advertised otherwise, stories posted here seem to indicate the non-cat stoves are the ones with added (and unexpected) additional cost and maintenance.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.