How big is your stove.... really.
- Thread starter Highbeam
- 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.
- Status
BrotherBart said:
Not much of a beer drinker.. how many bottles of Eagle Rare do you reckon will fit in there?
rdust said:
I'm getting 18.25 x 18.25 x 10, coming in just a little short of the tubes. (unless you're loading dimensional lumber, there will be air space at the top.) 1.9 is what I get. About 9% less than advertised. Seems to be a measurement of air volume in an empty stove. You'd need a castable wood slurry to actually utilize the full volume. A real-world standard would sure be helpful when comparing stoves.
I find Natural Light refreshing. Beats grape soda any day.
All this talk about specs of the firebox size. Interesting from an academic point of view... However what does it really mean anyway?
I agree that advertisers shouldn't be telling lies - and I find the whole specs game disgusting; "technically if you fill it with water it will hold xyz, we realize you can't use it, but that is what it is so we'll advertise it that way so it looks better against our competitors" bah humbug. But we already know many manufactures essentially do this with burn times and estimated sqft heating ratings etc (not to mention some of the pretty pictures in the advertising that likely could never pass clearances to be legal installs).
I bought my first stove based on what I thought was a good analysis of the specs given for different stoves. So much was very close for the class of stove I was looking for so I made the best decision I could using what I thought were the optimal features (EPA numbers, BTU, etc). The only really subjective input I used (unfortunately) was the brand reputation. Well, I neglected to really talk to or read information from actual owners/users and get enough of that good ol' subjective input and regretted my decision.
Second time around the reviews and discussion drove the decision - not the numbers. As many have said here in this discussion, it doesn't really matter that much exactly how large the firebox is as long as it performs they way it should - i.e. you get the burn times and heat out as you desire. Sure relatively speaking it is important to know if you have a 1.5 vs 3 cuft stove as this clearly is a big difference but if you know folks burning the type of wood you have available can heat your size/type of home well with the burn times you desire with stove X then does it matter if it really has a 1.3 vs 1.5 cuft box?
All this to say this is an interesting discussion but what does it really mean? Oh - and even if you aren't burning in the stove all summer I think it is a poor place to store beer, it is next to impossible to keep it cold enough in there and the ice melt makes a mess of the leftover ash no matter how well you try to clean the stove.
I agree that advertisers shouldn't be telling lies - and I find the whole specs game disgusting; "technically if you fill it with water it will hold xyz, we realize you can't use it, but that is what it is so we'll advertise it that way so it looks better against our competitors" bah humbug. But we already know many manufactures essentially do this with burn times and estimated sqft heating ratings etc (not to mention some of the pretty pictures in the advertising that likely could never pass clearances to be legal installs).
I bought my first stove based on what I thought was a good analysis of the specs given for different stoves. So much was very close for the class of stove I was looking for so I made the best decision I could using what I thought were the optimal features (EPA numbers, BTU, etc). The only really subjective input I used (unfortunately) was the brand reputation. Well, I neglected to really talk to or read information from actual owners/users and get enough of that good ol' subjective input and regretted my decision.
Second time around the reviews and discussion drove the decision - not the numbers. As many have said here in this discussion, it doesn't really matter that much exactly how large the firebox is as long as it performs they way it should - i.e. you get the burn times and heat out as you desire. Sure relatively speaking it is important to know if you have a 1.5 vs 3 cuft stove as this clearly is a big difference but if you know folks burning the type of wood you have available can heat your size/type of home well with the burn times you desire with stove X then does it matter if it really has a 1.3 vs 1.5 cuft box?
All this to say this is an interesting discussion but what does it really mean? Oh - and even if you aren't burning in the stove all summer I think it is a poor place to store beer, it is next to impossible to keep it cold enough in there and the ice melt makes a mess of the leftover ash no matter how well you try to clean the stove.
What does it really mean?
First off you can't compare firebox volume to the other purely marketing specs such as burn times and SF heated. Those specs are not rock solid since so many factors outside of the stove design affect them. Firebox volume is a measurable and provable specification that has nothing to do with the installation and operation of the stove. We have found in this thread that the manufacturer specifies a false figure every time. Further, we have found that the falseness of that figure varies greatly so that you can't compare apples to apples, you have to actually measure. This isn't the difference between 1.3 and 1.5 (12%) this can be 1.5 vs. 2.3 (65%). From a guy with a mail order stove you should know that the purchaser has to trust some things such as specs. What if your stove came with an 8" flue? That's only a 33% error.
The reason that these specs are published and "what this means" is that we use published specs in place of real world experience to compare those stoves that are new to the market or those for which we can't find sufficient reviews or discussion. If the specs are just wrong then what good are they?
For me it was the woodstock Keystone. Only a few people own the stove and it is rated by WS to be teensy weensy and only heat a small area. Well it turns out that it is no more teensy weensy than my "medium" sized heritage.
First off you can't compare firebox volume to the other purely marketing specs such as burn times and SF heated. Those specs are not rock solid since so many factors outside of the stove design affect them. Firebox volume is a measurable and provable specification that has nothing to do with the installation and operation of the stove. We have found in this thread that the manufacturer specifies a false figure every time. Further, we have found that the falseness of that figure varies greatly so that you can't compare apples to apples, you have to actually measure. This isn't the difference between 1.3 and 1.5 (12%) this can be 1.5 vs. 2.3 (65%). From a guy with a mail order stove you should know that the purchaser has to trust some things such as specs. What if your stove came with an 8" flue? That's only a 33% error.
The reason that these specs are published and "what this means" is that we use published specs in place of real world experience to compare those stoves that are new to the market or those for which we can't find sufficient reviews or discussion. If the specs are just wrong then what good are they?
For me it was the woodstock Keystone. Only a few people own the stove and it is rated by WS to be teensy weensy and only heat a small area. Well it turns out that it is no more teensy weensy than my "medium" sized heritage.
Retired Guy said:
Don't pick on the folks who drink beer without flavor. Those are beers made with rice and/or corn for those who don't like the flavor of beer. Historical fact that the adjuncts were added to lighten the flavor, or remove the 'beer' flavor. Folks drink what they want to drink. We will have to look to the next generations to keeping the Craft beer movement going...
Highbeam,
Maybe it's time to get rid of that tiny weeny Heritage and upgrade to the larger Fireview? :coolgrin: Or wait til the new Woodstock comes out?
Maybe it's time to get rid of that tiny weeny Heritage and upgrade to the larger Fireview? :coolgrin: Or wait til the new Woodstock comes out?
I have often questioned the actual load volume of the Quad, now I'm gonna have to get the tape out and measure it.
Oh, and for the record, I have never met a beer I wouldn't drink.
Oh, and for the record, I have never met a beer I wouldn't drink.
BrotherBart said:
BB,
I assumed from your picture you were burning that Natty Light in an effort to rid the world of it. For that, I commend you, sir!
Of course, I'm joking. Drink whatever you want. I've put down a fair share of Blatz in my days, so I don't judge.
I like beer. I make beer. I am now drinking a Mak-n-jaks amber that is 6% alcohol and a fairly heavy beer. However, you will also find in my fridge about a dozen cans of MGD because sometimes you just want to drink something lighter. I'll drink any of the canned beer and it's all pretty good. I have actually dumped out some of the fancy craft beer that just tastes bad.
I bet that Equinox is only 3CF or less. It is based on, or at least looks a lot like, my heritage and given the company's measurement methods as demonstrated on this thread I would bet a can of MGD on 3 or less CF.
I bet that Equinox is only 3CF or less. It is based on, or at least looks a lot like, my heritage and given the company's measurement methods as demonstrated on this thread I would bet a can of MGD on 3 or less CF.
If the Equinox is 3cu ft or less I bet you could get away with a 6" chimney. Who's got one to measure?
Had to chime in (about the beer). A favorite of mine is Corona Light (never seems to give me a hangover!), everyday cheap beer is Coors Light. I like all types really, but save the heavier beer for fall, winter and spring.
quads said:
Your smoke dragon could eat my smoke dragon for breakfast.
I measured my Vigilant's interior last season. I think it was just a shade under 2.5 cu.ft, but it sure seems to hold a lot of wood. It's a top loader, so I can always slip a decent size round in on top and still get the door to close. They all drop down magazine style, so even though I wouldn't call the upper portion "firebox", it still counts toward an overnight burn. With the bypass closed, it burns horizontally across the bottom anyway, so it's real hard to say where the fire ends and the "hopper" begins.
I throw that pic up in a firebox size thread once every year and the thread always goes to hell when they see that Natural Light. :coolgrin:
Battenkiller said:
Yeah, the beginning of the first year burning I was concerned with over stuffing the stove. The second year... not so much concern.
Highbeam said:
I just checkout mine and the 10" deep might be understating things. Even measuring from the edge of the interior door lip to the vertical bar in back gives me 11". It's a bout twelve if you measure from the furthest point. Actual box size is probably about 2 cubic feet of space.
Doesn't matter either way. It will be a lot more efficient than the Vigilant. Should burn longer, too.
- Status