I am marginally disapointed in pellet stoves at the moment.

[MountainStoveGuy]

Just curious....
How much area are you trying to heat with the stove?

Even though there is no radiant heat, the XXV can melt your eyeballs
if you stand too close.

My main level of my house is 25x50. The footprint is basic, the 25x25 is the main room the stove is in, the back of the house is 25x25 where the bedrooms are. The main room has vaulted ceilings that opens up to a 25x25 loft.

This is not a review of the XXV, i think the stove is doing exactly what it is supposed to do. It WILL melt my eyeballs, just not heat my house like the wood stove did. I think its a function of the different types of heat, and how the heat is delivered more then the unit i picked.

MSG,

do you utilize the loft area? do you have a ceiling fan for that vaulted ceiling? not trying to be a smart butt here... just asking. i have 1100 sq ft(yes, half of what you have), and i keep the ceiling fan in the living poom pushing down, and the one in the dining room pulling up, and it seems to move my heat around quite well...but then again, i am not heating alot of vaulted space either. just a suggestion.


mike

I do have the fan on reverse, and low speed. I have burned pellet stoves in the shop for years and years, its very very surprising to me that i do not like it in my home.

 

[CrappieKeith]

While I'm still laughing with you guys.....what about a furnace....sure there's no asthetic value but I'm not hearing about that bottle of wine a bear rug and the wife.
what I am hearing is that the whole home is not being heated evenly.
A wood furnace would do that without the aide of your liquid fuel furnace.

As to your btu list.....curve....
I have a BJ90 heating a 1400 s/f home in northern Mn.
I load it 4 pieces 10"-12" round 2 foot long of ash...twice a day and it runs 24/7 in 20 below keeping my home 74 degrees.

Just something to think about.
Stoves do not hook to ducting and can not do what a "good" furnace can do.
A furnace has way more heat exchange surface area with a fan & limit switch cycling a blower. Add in a barometric draft regulator set to .03" W.C. and an afterburn loaded with thermal mass.....stoves may have there place in some home layouts and or mild climates,but not in cold country.

 

[MountainStoveGuy]

The whole home is being heated less evenly then the woodstove did. With the woodstove, the main room was toasty with radiant heat, and the warm air from the main room made it back to the bedrooms better. The current pellet stove feels like furnace heat in the main room, with cold rooms everywhere else.

 

[MountainStoveGuy]

the wood stove space heater made my house more comfortable. the pellet stove is more like a furnace. pook your a smart ass.

thanx& heres proof= pstove is point located source of heat & the heat emanated will carry humidity to cold extremes of the house where condensation will happen & grow funk! furnace delivers heat to cold areas where the humidity is warmed & drying of the area minimizes funk growth. & baseboard is similar,eh?

pook, im sittin on about 5% relative humidity year round lol. I live in a high desert.

 

[BrotherBart]

Glad you didn't buy that bazillion dollar pellet stove you originally had your eye on. :ahhh:

And I really don't think a ton a month would be excessive pellet consumption in your climate and in that house. Which would put you lugging bags and feeding the stove the same number of times a day that you had to feed the Mansfield. You remember the Mansfield don't ya? The one ya sold! Dummy. :lol:

 

[MountainStoveGuy]

Yep. I am not going to confirm im a complete dummy yet, i was going to upgrade to the EQ anyway. For the price i got the XXV for, it was a worthy experiment. Harman has a fanstastic burn credit for employees this year. I am not hanging up the towel yet, and i will give honest reports through out the season. I will be using this stove this season, or until i run out of pellets. I just have this sinking feeling that once it gets to 30* below, there is no way this stove is going to keep up like the woodstove did. Time will tell!

What does not work for me does not mean it will not work for you readers. I live in a super cold high altitude climate. The house is well insulated, but on the dark side of a mountain. I thought my BTU math meant something.

 

[freeburn]

Did you put an OAK on your stove? Maybe your pellets are crap too???

 

[stoveguy2esw]

here's a theory , not sure how much impact it has on your situation bro , but here it is.

in a higher altitude low humidity situation , radient heat (which heats up not only the air but the surrounding surfaces) is going to do what its going to do heat said surfaces. convective heat is supplying heat to the air , not to the surfaces , now since you are high and dry so to speak , there is less "air" going through the stove into the room , even the humidity in the air gets heated to some extent. so convection without as much substance to "convect" means a lesser transfer of energy per BTU released due to the method of transfer.

make sense????

if im right , you would realise much more result from the radience of a woodstove and less from strictly convective heat , therefore the lesser performance. just a stab in the dark mind you , but it makes sense to me though i havent studied it out fully.

 

[MountainStoveGuy]

here's a theory , not sure how much impact it has on your situation bro , but here it is.

in a higher altitude low humidity situation , radient heat (which heats up not only the air but the surrounding surfaces) is going to do what its going to do heat said surfaces. convective heat is supplying heat to the air , not to the surfaces , now since you are high and dry so to speak , there is less "air" going through the stove into the room , even the humidity in the air gets heated to some extent. so convection without as much substance to "convect" means a lesser transfer of energy per BTU released due to the method of transfer.

make sense????

if im right , you would realise much more result from the radience of a woodstove and less from strictly convective heat , therefore the lesser performance. just a stab in the dark mind you , but it makes sense to me though i havent studied it out fully.

That is really really really good. I tell you i learn something new here everyday. I have never tried to heat in a humid environment, so i would have no basis to compare to. It is so dry where i live, you can leave a bag of potato chips on the counter open, for two weeks, and they do not get stale. Dont ask me how i know :roll: You add that to the altitude, (9000+ feet) and that could be a bad combination for a pure convection stove.

 

[MountainStoveGuy]

Did you put an OAK on your stove? Maybe your pellets are crap too???

No on the OAK, im burning rocky mountains.

 

[stoveguy2esw]

here's a theory , not sure how much impact it has on your situation bro , but here it is.

in a higher altitude low humidity situation , radient heat (which heats up not only the air but the surrounding surfaces) is going to do what its going to do heat said surfaces. convective heat is supplying heat to the air , not to the surfaces , now since you are high and dry so to speak , there is less "air" going through the stove into the room , even the humidity in the air gets heated to some extent. so convection without as much substance to "convect" means a lesser transfer of energy per BTU released due to the method of transfer.

make sense????

if im right , you would realise much more result from the radience of a woodstove and less from strictly convective heat , therefore the lesser performance. just a stab in the dark mind you , but it makes sense to me though i havent studied it out fully.

That is really really really good. I tell you i learn something new here everyday. I have never tried to heat in a humid environment, so i would have no basis to compare to. It is so dry where i live, you can leave a bag of potato chips on the counter open, for two weeks, and they do not get stale. Dont ask me how i know :roll: You add that to the altitude, (9000+ feet) and that could be a bad combination for a pure convection stove.

give the credit to POOK , had he not started on that tangent about mold bringing you to mention the "high desert" thing , i wouldnt have thought about it that way, theory was strictly off the top of my head , i dunno if someone has published similar though i might look around for it sometime. guess you caught the gist of what i was thinking anyway. BTW im flattered by your reply.i consider you to be a very smart guy, so im taking that as a complement if ya dont mind ;-)

 

[MountainStoveGuy]

i would give pook way more credit if i could understand what he says. I totally do not see the correlation between the mold comment and yours. I am sure there is allot of good info encrypted in his posts. Thanks pook!

I appreciate your kind comments, thank you very much!

edit: now i have gone back and read pooks post, i do understand it now.. sort of.

 

[tinkabranc]

i would give pook way more credit if i could understand what he says. I totally do not see the correlation between the mold comment and yours. I am sure there is allot of good info encrypted in his posts. Thanks pook!

I appreciate your kind comments, thank you very much!

Glad I am not the only one that has no idea what Pook is saying half the time.
No offense Pook.. ;-)

 

[jtakeman]

I wonder if you added a little humidity. Would it seem warmer to you? On the real muggy days the humidity is up. and it always seems warmer than the day before with no humidity

I had a water pot on both my wood stove and Now my pellet stove. I don't like the dry heat.

Just a poke at it.

jay

 

[stoveguy2esw]

here's a theory , not sure how much impact it has on your situation bro , but here it is.

in a higher altitude low humidity situation , radient heat (which heats up not only the air but the surrounding surfaces) is going to do what its going to do heat said surfaces. convective heat is supplying heat to the air , not to the surfaces , now since you are high and dry so to speak , there is less "air" going through the stove into the room , even the humidity in the air gets heated to some extent. so convection without as much substance to "convect" means a lesser transfer of energy per BTU released due to the method of transfer.

make sense????

if im right , you would realise much more result from the radience of a woodstove and less from strictly convective heat , therefore the lesser performance. just a stab in the dark mind you , but it makes sense to me though i havent studied it out fully.

That is really really really good. I tell you i learn something new here everyday. I have never tried to heat in a humid environment, so i would have no basis to compare to. It is so dry where i live, you can leave a bag of potato chips on the counter open, for two weeks, and they do not get stale. Dont ask me how i know :roll: You add that to the altitude, (9000+ feet) and that could be a bad combination for a pure convection stove.

give the credit to POOK , had he not started on that tangent about mold bringing you to mention the "high desert" thing , i wouldnt have thought about it that way, theory was strictly off the top of my head , i dunno if someone has published similar though i might look around for it sometime. guess you caught the gist of what i was thinking anyway. BTW im flattered by your reply.i consider you to be a very smart guy, so im taking that as a complement if ya dont mind ;-)

DUH, TOP OF STOVE IS STILL RADIATING AT CEILING pstove radiates into chamber where blower converts to convective & delivers sideways & towards floor like my 25 pdvc= i disagree but weigh the wood & pellets on your way. BTW wheres the specs?

his model is not as good a radiator as the pdvc due to the pdvc having a lot of the firebox exposed to outside, its still a great stove though more of a "true convective" design so your stove having that one sheet of steel between the fire and the room gives off more radience. also , you are in a more humid more air dense area than he is so there is more "stuff" coming out the vent at your house than his. the more density in the air the more transfer you get due to more molecules to reatain and carry heat, simply more molecular surface area in denser air. at least thats the gist of my thought on it. as for spec's i'll check again , but remember corie is a busy lad with a lot on his plate, he likely has forgotten my request.

 

[Todd]

Maybe try a coal stove next? Then you can give us the run down on all three.

 

[stoveguy2esw]

I wonder if you added a little humidity. Would it seem warmer to you? On the real muggy days the humidity is up. and it always seems warmer than the day before with no humidity

I had a water pot on both my wood stove and Now my pellet stove. I don't like the dry heat.

Just a poke at it.

jay

might have some merit though not a long term solution i expect would take a ton of water addition to bring up the humidity enough on a constant basis to make it practical in the long haul.

i'll tell ya what would be EXTEREMLY interesting , that would be to have 2 people who have this model MSG being one , and someone who is at a lower altitude and a more humid climate, to record stack temps. if im right MSG should have higher stack temps at due to "refusal of heat" at a lower temp than in the other climate. or the heat exchanger would be hotter due to lower absorbtion rate. would make for a hell of an experiment!

 

[amick780]

I am just glad I am not at 9000 feet....too much trouble. But the skiing is good.

 

[Vermont-XXV]

MountainStoveGuy,

I stopped heating with wood several years ago, here in Vermont, for some of the same reasons you did. So far we are enjoying our XXV. I 've never really liked the hot water baseboard heat. Sometimes very expensive and if it's warm enough to watch tv in the living room wearing normal clothes it's too hot to sleep in the bedrooms. So this is my first season with a pellet stove. I have the same stove you have and about the same quantity of pellets. I will follow your pellet career with interest.
best of luck,
clifford

 

[jtakeman]

I wonder if you added a little humidity. Would it seem warmer to you? On the real muggy days the humidity is up. and it always seems warmer than the day before with no humidity

I had a water pot on both my wood stove and Now my pellet stove. I don't like the dry heat.

Just a poke at it.

jay

might have some merit though not a long term solution i expect would take a ton of water addition to bring up the humidity enough on a constant basis to make it practical in the long haul.

i'll tell ya what would be EXTEREMLY interesting , that would be to have 2 people who have this model MSG being one , and someone who is at a lower altitude and a more humid climate, to record stack temps. if im right MSG should have higher stack temps at due to "refusal of heat" at a lower temp than in the other climate. or the heat exchanger would be hotter due to lower absorbtion rate. would make for a hell of an experiment!

Interesting! It would be a real world test and compare. Wonder if heat exchanger config would help any?

 

[tinkabranc]

I think Mike is onto something with the humidity level.
It would be an interesting experiment for sure.

 

[MountainStoveGuy]

Mike: I have a flue probe thermometer. I will install and post the temps. That will be interesting.

Todd: Cant burn coal here, its a illegal fuel here.

Amik: Skiing is the only thing 9000' has going for it. Well, the 40*/70* summers are a bonus too. To bad they only last about 6 weeks.

Vermont: I want to like this stove to. I just need to be warm. I will post as the year goes along, hopefully things will change, but based on the science presented here, this might be the wrong stove for me. I might need a pellet stove that has a 500* top surface.

This thread has been great. Thanks to all the posters.

 

[stoveguy2esw]

I wonder if you added a little humidity. Would it seem warmer to you? On the real muggy days the humidity is up. and it always seems warmer than the day before with no humidity

I had a water pot on both my wood stove and Now my pellet stove. I don't like the dry heat.

Just a poke at it.

jay

might have some merit though not a long term solution i expect would take a ton of water addition to bring up the humidity enough on a constant basis to make it practical in the long haul.

i'll tell ya what would be EXTEREMLY interesting , that would be to have 2 people who have this model MSG being one , and someone who is at a lower altitude and a more humid climate, to record stack temps. if im right MSG should have higher stack temps at due to "refusal of heat" at a lower temp than in the other climate. or the heat exchanger would be hotter due to lower absorbtion rate. would make for a hell of an experiment!

Interesting! It would be a real world test and compare. Wonder if heat exchanger config would help any?

not sure , harman has a great system to transfer heat its just the substance its being "transferred to" that makes the difference here. the heat is being released by combustion, the heat exchanger is getting hot. the loss is going to be in one of just a couple places , by eliminating possibilities we find the truth in the "leftover" as S. Holmes was supposed to have deduced , by eliminating all that it isnt, what it is will be the only thing left. or somthing like that , anyway , if the stack temps are not higher in the high altitude than low , and the heat exchanger is the same as well , the only thing left is simply that the thinner air simply cannot absorb and thus carry the energy into the room. or, that it can but being of lesser substance cannot contain it or prevent its dissipation. remember heat (as with any form of energy) cannot be destroyed ,only dissipated. good thing im sipping John Jamison tonite , the cheap stuff wouldnt leave me this lucid %-P

 

[MountainStoveGuy]

Consider that the Mansfield (80k but's) heated my house, and that i would even consider next time to bump up to the EQ (100k+ Btu's) and not even worry about over heating my self. I only need to heat about 1500 square feet on two levels. This would explain why the radiant heat does so much for me and the convection does not. I think the amount of convection off the Mansfield was greater then what i am getting out of the pellet stove, plus i had the radiant to boot. If the air has a hard time saturating it self with warm air, then this would be a fundamental issue with a pure convection stove. This is going to change how i do things in the shop for my high altitude clients.

 

[jtakeman]

I wonder if you added a little humidity. Would it seem warmer to you? On the real muggy days the humidity is up. and it always seems warmer than the day before with no humidity

I had a water pot on both my wood stove and Now my pellet stove. I don't like the dry heat.

Just a poke at it.

jay

might have some merit though not a long term solution i expect would take a ton of water addition to bring up the humidity enough on a constant basis to make it practical in the long haul.

i'll tell ya what would be EXTEREMLY interesting , that would be to have 2 people who have this model MSG being one , and someone who is at a lower altitude and a more humid climate, to record stack temps. if im right MSG should have higher stack temps at due to "refusal of heat" at a lower temp than in the other climate. or the heat exchanger would be hotter due to lower absorbtion rate. would make for a hell of an experiment!

Interesting! It would be a real world test and compare. Wonder if heat exchanger config would help any?

not sure , harman has a great system to transfer heat its just the substance its being "transferred to" that makes the difference here. the heat is being released by combustion, the heat exchanger is getting hot. the loss is going to be in one of just a couple places , by eliminating possibilities we find the truth in the "leftover" as S. Holmes was supposed to have deduced , by eliminating all that it isnt, what it is will be the only thing left. or somthing like that , anyway , if the stack temps are not higher in the high altitude than low , and the heat exchanger is the same as well , the only thing left is simply that the thinner air simply cannot absorb and thus carry the energy into the room. or, that it can but being of lesser substance cannot contain it or prevent its dissipation. remember heat (as with any form of energy) cannot be destroyed ,only dissipated. good thing im sipping John Jamison tonite , the cheap stuff wouldnt leave me this lucid %-P

Real world test would have to have close to exact installs to call this. The only different factor should be the low humidity. Maybe MSG should post the details on his setup/install. Maybe more heat could be extracted with a smaller dia flue?? Isn't there an altitude factor on that??