Help understanding the numbers: Regency ci1150 vs Regency i2450

[reforminded]

Looking for a fireplace insert to help heat roughly a roughly 400 square foot living room with vaulted ceilings that go from 9 feet at the short side to 16 ft at the tall side. It is adjacent to a roughly 200 square foot kitchen with a big wide, open doorway I would also like a little heat to get too (going to put a little fan in the corner of the doorway to draw heat). I'm hoping you guys can help me understand the numbers for these two fireplace inserts:

If I am reading this correctly, the smaller ci1150 actually puts out more BTUs in EPA (real world?) testing despite far lower potential max BTUs, and is slightly more efficient with the wood? Given the 43% difference in box size I was surprised to see only a 20% difference in burn times. Given what I am looking to heat, it seems like the smaller unit should be plenty. Aesthetically my wife and I prefer the looks of the ci1150, but want to make sure we aren't buying too small of a stove. I will admit, it doesn't make much sense to me that the bigger stove puts out less heat, less efficiently--which is why I am here asking the experts.

	ci1150	i2450
Maximum BTUs/hr	55,000	75,000
EPA-Tested BTUs/hr	39,100	34,612
Higher Heating Value Efficiency (HHV)	70%	67%
Lower Heating Value Efficiency (LHV)	75%	71.7%
Firebox Capacity	1.3 cu. ft	2.3 cu. ft.
Burn Time	up to 8 hrs.	up to 10 hrs.
Typical sq. ft. heated	600-1200	1,000-2,200

 

[reforminded]

Bump--really hoping for some input guys--need to get the order in for one of these two in the next couple days

 

[Todd]

Manufactures numbers are all over the place and don’t always make a lot of sense. A 1.3 cu ft fire box is pretty small and sometimes hard to stack wood full enough for an overnight burn. Expect a 4-6 hour burn with it. A 2.3 cu ft firebox is a better size in my opinion. You should have easier time loading and can always build a smaller fire when needed or pack it full for a good overnight burn or for colder weather.

 

[Dix]

Go as big as you can, IMHO (which is always ).

You won't regret it.

The difference in burn times in relation to the size of the firebox, makes a huge difference.

I love my 13, but with a 1.3 CF box, 4-6 hours max (including heat output, burn time 2-4 hours).

My PE with a 2.0 CF box gets 7-9 hours, and heat output for another 2-3 (depends on wood used, outside temps, etc).

Welcome to the Forums

 

[begreen]

Something is wrong with the numbers and/or the EPA database is wrong. Looking at their spreadsheet they have the CI1150 rated with a tested output range of 12,777 to 39, 101 BTUs. The CI 2450 is rated at 14,169 to 34, 612 BTUs. But get this, the freestanding F2450 is rated at 14,179 to 53,563 BTUs. That's an odd discrepancy considering the firebox is almost the same.

Bad day or bad wood at the testing lab?

 

[reforminded]

Something is wrong with the numbers and/or the EPA database is wrong. Looking at their spreadsheet they have the CI1150 rated with a tested output range of 12,777 to 39, 101 BTUs. The CI 2450 is rated at 14,169 to 34, 612 BTUs. But get this, the freestanding F2450 is rated at 14,179 to 53,563 BTUs. That's an odd discrepancy considering the firebox is almost the same.

Bad day or bad wood at the testing lab?

I got some clarification from Regency:

"Here are a few additional details from our product manager: The Ci1150 is a cast iron unit, which during EPA testing (a very specific testing procedure, which is not indicative of real world use) produces a higher temperature. However, in real world use, the amount of BTU is determined by firebox size (the more wood you can load, the higher the BTU)."

Also I wanted to add the Regency's customer service is really awesome. I called to ask about this, and the sales rep I talked to said they didn't have the ability to fully explain that discrepancy but that they would email me back later after talking to others in the company. I get those kind of responses a lot and never hear back, so I wasn't expecting much. Much to my surprise, within a half hour I received two different emails from the rep with information from two different people on the product side of things at Regency! A product is only as good as the company that stands behind it, and so far I am impressed.

(I should add I bought a regency freestanding F2450 last year burned about 2 cord through it and the stove has been awesome).

 

[begreen]

The discrepancy is between the low numbers for the i2450 vs the freestanding F2450, same firebox as I can tell. Did they explain that?

 

[reforminded]

The discrepancy is between the low numbers for the i2450 vs the freestanding F2450, same firebox as I can tell. Did they explain that?

Not directly--the person I talked too said they were disappointed with the EPA test on the i2450 and it did not match their in house testing. They said that next year when the i2450 is re-certified they expect the numbers to be more in line with the F2450. They confirmed that the i2450 and the F2450 are the exact same fire box.

 

[Todd]

The catalyst placement of the 2450 worries me a bit. Not sure it’s a good to place a cat right under the flue pipe where soot can fall down the pipe into the cat?

Some stove manufactures did this years ago when the EPA first came out with their burning regs and they weren’t very successful.

 

[NorthernFireplaceFool]

I've been using the older model of the Ci1150 for about 3 winters now. The small firebox size sucks terribly, but I was limited in my need for a flush insert. Close combustibles and the small fireplace opening. The model I have is pre-2020 edition. Excellent heater and fits the bill for my limited options(was dirt cheap too as it was a floor model). If you have the room to do the one with a 2.3 cu/ft box, do it. My only complaint is the amount of cold starts I have to do with the short burn times. Either Regency will serve you well, but the bigger one will make less work for you I believe.

 

[NorthernFireplaceFool]

I've been using the older model of the Ci1150 for about 3 winters now. The small firebox size sucks terribly, but I was limited in my need for a flush insert. Close combustibles and the small fireplace opening. The model I have is pre-2020 edition. Excellent heater and fits the bill for my limited options(was dirt cheap too as it was a floor model). If you have the room to do the one with a 2.3 cu/ft box, do it. My only complaint is the amount of cold starts I have to do with the short burn times. Either Regency will serve you well, but the bigger one will make less work for you I believe.

I forgot to mention, we have use it as secondary heat for our 1907 home. Centrally located chimney/fireplace. I can heat our 2000 sq/ft house almost entirely with it once it is up to temp and I have fans moving air around through the house. One of the best things about the center chimney is the fact it becomes a huge thermal mass when I have been burning all day. Good luck with the fireplace!

 

[begreen]

The catalyst placement of the 2450 worries me a bit. Not sure it’s a good to place a cat right under the flue pipe where soot can fall down the pipe into the cat?

Some stove manufactures did this years ago when the EPA first came out with their burning regs and they weren’t very successful.

The 2450 is non-cat, the 2500 has the cat.

 

[Todd]

The 2450 is non-cat, the 2500 has the cat.

Oops nevermind

 

[begreen]

This tripped me up too when the 2500 first came out.

 

[Dix]

This tripped me up too when the 2500 first came out.

Yes, the Dixette has the I2500, and it's a cat.

 

[ElPedro]

From a purely non-scientific point of view - I have an Hi2450 and an Hi1150 in our home. The 1150 is tiny.