Large Stove Comparison

Squisher

Minister of Fire
Nov 1, 2015
1,623
vernon BC, Canada
If they can, then why is no one writing about it? You also seem to forget that manufacturers state a lot but its these forums that people like us find real results. Your also kinda using Wheel horsepower mentality, my car puts down 1000 horsepower so its more powerful then yours.

What do you think The reason for them upgrading from old smokey? Is it becasue it only burned for 2 -4 hrs, cant control it, come on man i don't know crap about stoves, but It only took me one year buring with a smoke demon in our new house we just bought(years ago) that i new it was a piece of crap. Yea it produced a lot of heat, but i had to refill the dam thing every 3-4 hrs. Even on low i couldnt get it to burn for more then 4-5hrs and it ashed like crazy so ihad to clean it every other day. O and it a hug firebox and i wrote all about in my beginning years on the forum.
Well. Man. Did you not read what I wrote? I was born and raised on wood heat. The fall before this last I upgraded to the summit, heats well and dropped my wood usage off substantially. That's why I upgraded, also picked a stove that I feel confident will cost me next to nothing for maintenance. Time will tell the tale I suppose of how that works out. My being a Canadian and the potential cost of replacement cats was definetly part of the decision, but the main part was wanting a stove with a lot of wheel horsepower as you put it. Obviously 8-10hr burn time and less wood usage, as well as still having incredible heat output is a giant step forward from a old smokey. For me I chose the right stove. I sure don't think it's for everyone though.
 

bholler

Chimney sweep
Staff member
Jan 14, 2014
19,506
central pa
If they can, then why is no one writing about it? You also seem to forget that manufacturers state a lot but its these forums that people like us find real results.
Those of us working in the feild every day and talking to customers about their stoves ect get to see and hear plenty of real results to.
 

Niko

Minister of Fire
Nov 12, 2013
521
Dutchess county, NY
Well. Man. Did you not read what I wrote? I was born and raised on wood heat. The fall before this last I upgraded to the summit, heats well and dropped my wood usage off substantially. That's why I upgraded, also picked a stove that I feel confident will cost me next to nothing for maintenance. Time will tell the tale I suppose of how that works out. My being a Canadian and the potential cost of replacement cats was definetly part of the decision, but the main part was wanting a stove with a lot of wheel horsepower as you put it. Obviously 8-10hr burn time and less wood usage, as well as still having incredible heat output is a giant step forward from a old smokey. For me I chose the right stove. I sure don't think it's for everyone though.
Yes i read that you have owned many different wood stoves.

I posted in this forum to state that not many big wood stoves can burn 24hrs on low. You started posting about high btus.

Just out of curiosity why cant your summit achieve long burn times? I mean it is a epa wood stove? I have a cat you have tubes. I use one technology you use another.

Wheel horsepower is great, but it doesnt mean you get to the quarter mile faster and if you did im pretty sure you used more fuel.
 

Niko

Minister of Fire
Nov 12, 2013
521
Dutchess county, NY
Those of us working in the feild every day and talking to customers about their stoves ect get to see and hear plenty of real results to.[/QUOTE

Ok, well i still have not read from the professionals on this forum stating about their customers saying they are acheving 24 hr burn times on low.


All im saying everyone has high heat outPut everyone, but very few have low heat ouput pver 24hrs.
 

VirginiaIron

Minister of Fire
Dec 19, 2013
1,040
Central Virginia
Well, here are the numbers for the Blaze King King. http://www.blazeking.com/EN/wood-king.html

Performance (LHV) Performance (HHV B415)
Maximum heat input 703,390 BTU's 703,390 BTU's
Efficiency 88% 82%
Constant Heat output on High 51,582 BTU's/h for 12 hours 48,065 BTU's/h for 12 hours
Constant Heat output on Low 15,475 BTU's/h for up to 40 hours 14,419 BTU's/h for up to 40 hours
CO% Weighted Average 0.29%


Square Feet Heated 2000 – 3000
Maximum Log Size 23"
Burn Time Up to 40 hours on low
Emissions (grams/hour) 1.76 g
Firebox Size 4.32 cu. ft.
Unit Dimensions (Ultra)

Width 31" / 787.4mm
Height 39" / 990.6mm
Depth 31 3/4" / 806.45mm
Weight 435 lbs. / 197.3kg
Flue Diameter 8" / 203mm
 
  • Like
Reactions: Squisher

Marshy

Minister of Fire
Dec 29, 2016
820
NY
I run my King full tilt >95% of the time. Thats just what my heat demand is. Obviously heating demands change through the day because outside conditions change but on average I load it every 6 hour. If it's warmer out then I load less wood in it. If I'm doing an over night burn then I pack it like a Mexican drug smugler. I will have a respectable abount of coals after 7-7.5 hours but it's not enough to keep the house "warm" and temps have dropped to around 66F when it was 71F at bedtime. I'm OK with that honestly, getting my wife to be OK with that is a little more challenging but hey, I don't have to load it every 4-5 hrs like my old sheanandoah. Btw, I felt like that was a really good stove for what it was. The thermostat air control on it works just like the BK stoves and it would control an even heat output but it was just inefficient. That being said, the max surface temps I've seen on the King were approx 800F using a FLIR IR gun.

IMG_20170115_082326247.jpg IMG_20170115_082343180.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:

bholler

Chimney sweep
Staff member
Jan 14, 2014
19,506
central pa
Yes i read that you have owned many different wood stoves.

I posted in this forum to state that not many big wood stoves can burn 24hrs on low. You started posting about high btus.

Just out of curiosity why cant your summit achieve long burn times? I mean it is a epa wood stove? I have a cat you have tubes. I use one technology you use another.

Wheel horsepower is great, but it doesnt mean you get to the quarter mile faster and if you did im pretty sure you used more fuel.
Well there you are wrong most big stoves in the 4 cu ft range can burn 24hrs. That is because most are cat or hybrid stoves when they get that big.

Listen none of us are putting down blaze kings. We all agree they are great stoves and if you need long low burns they without a doubt are the best stove. And yes you can turn them up and get high heat output for sure but in that case you are paying allot of money for the ability to burn low and slow even though you don't really use it much at all. I for one cant justify spending that money especially when I can get stoves like mine for little to nothing when people replace them or get rid of them ect. My current 3100 was absolutely free. And it heats my first floor to the low seventies even in single digit outside temps. And contributes enough heat to the second floor that I only burn about a tank of oil a year. I am happy with that it means I keep my first floor a comfortable temp without over heating.

The fact is that different stoves are right for different situations just those of us who choose not to use blaze kings get pretty tired of hearing how our stoves cannot be used by people who work and are going to use 4x the wood ect ect.
 

black smoke signals

Feeling the Heat
Nov 6, 2016
389
Wyoming Colorado
Bravo well said!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Marshy

Marshy

Minister of Fire
Dec 29, 2016
820
NY
Well. Man. Did you not read what I wrote? I was born and raised on wood heat. The fall before this last I upgraded to the summit, heats well and dropped my wood usage off substantially. That's why I upgraded, also picked a stove that I feel confident will cost me next to nothing for maintenance. Time will tell the tale I suppose of how that works out. My being a Canadian and the potential cost of replacement cats was definetly part of the decision, but the main part was wanting a stove with a lot of wheel horsepower as you put it. Obviously 8-10hr burn time and less wood usage, as well as still having incredible heat output is a giant step forward from a old smokey. For me I chose the right stove. I sure don't think it's for everyone though.
I couldn't have stated it any better, that's exactly what I was looking for when I shopped for a new EPA rated stove. I just decided to go with BK and cat technology because 2 reasons. Easy to operate with a thermostat air control (that was a must and I enjoyed it a lot with my old stove) vs the secondary types stoves and low maintenance. I know I have to replace a cat once in a while and that seemed easier than than replacing secondary air tubes.
The problem when choosing a stove is knowing how big you need. In some cases bigger is just right so I got the biggest there was and found out it could use more HP. It's either get more HP or get more efficiency (from the house, stove efficiency is fixed). The way I understand it is if I want more HP then I would likely have to sacrifice some efficiency of the stove to get it. That or switch to a high tech boiler.

Honestly though, I didn't start this thread to debate burn times of a large stove on low or med. Im more interested in knowing what are the comparable size stoves to a BK King and how long do they burn with a full load on high (HP talk!). With most all manufacturers listing their peak BTU/hr and trying to compare them to a BK it's nearly impossible because the best they communicate is BTU/12hr on high. Great info but if I burn it all in 8 hrs I guess I have to do the math and hope it's right. The water is anything but clear.
My stove is boarderline too small (output) for my house and the current conditions (IE heat losses). I know my options are limited to increasing the efficiency of the house or getting more stove. A larger less efficient stove might be the cheaper option in the short term and possibly the long term when you start considering the price difference between some of these stoves.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Squisher

heavy hammer

Minister of Fire
Jul 18, 2015
1,512
Kirtland Ohio
I run the kuma sequoia in my basement with the summit insert on the first floor. I'm heating about 4000 sq feet with the finished basement. On days where the outside temps are about 25 on up the sequoia heats the whole house comfortably. Like others have stated everyone's heat requirements are different, I personally like a very warm house. I have only seen burn times over 12 hours once, but that is because I add more wood to keep the fire going. Right now my house is almost 80 and the stoves haven't seen any wood since 430 am. With that said the sequoia is still over 800 and the summit is about out. If I wanted the summit could heat the entire first floor itself it would have to be reloaded every six to eight hours probably more if it was real cold. I to looked a blaze kings, I really liked them I just wanted something that put out the heat. To me 24 hour plus burn times didn't interest me I wanted heat. Not saying blaze king doesn't offer that but it seems here when blaze King owners need some real heat to get through those really cold times that 24 hour burn time drops a lot. Cat and non cat technology have there pluses and minuses, I have a stove with each and I like both. The summit is a beautiful stove where the glass is never dirty, to some that might not matter but many don't want to look at a dirty glass door. Anyways there are plenty of good stoves out there that are either cats or non cats, your personal heating requirements will decide which is better.
 

Squisher

Minister of Fire
Nov 1, 2015
1,623
vernon BC, Canada
Well, here are the numbers for the Blaze King King. http://www.blazeking.com/EN/wood-king.html

Performance (LHV) Performance (HHV B415)
Maximum heat input 703,390 BTU's 703,390 BTU's
Efficiency 88% 82%
Constant Heat output on High 51,582 BTU's/h for 12 hours 48,065 BTU's/h for 12 hours
Constant Heat output on Low 15,475 BTU's/h for up to 40 hours 14,419 BTU's/h for up to 40 hours
CO% Weighted Average 0.29%


Square Feet Heated 2000 – 3000
Maximum Log Size 23"
Burn Time Up to 40 hours on low
Emissions (grams/hour) 1.76 g
Firebox Size 4.32 cu. ft.
Unit Dimensions (Ultra)

Width 31" / 787.4mm
Height 39" / 990.6mm
Depth 31 3/4" / 806.45mm
Weight 435 lbs. / 197.3kg
Flue Diameter 8" / 203mm
See I've read those numbers but if high output is only 51,000btu than that solves the burn time vs horsepower issue as the summit(a considerably smaller 3.0cf stove) lists 99,000btu as max output. So for those like Niko who keep asking why noncats can't burn 24hrs well I would ask how can a stove a full cu/ft smaller produce twice the heat?

Now I figured these numbers are possibly skewed in some manner which is why I've repeatedly now asked about it?

And to the poster that mentioned they'd rather just replace a cat than tubes. Well on a summit there are no tubes and unless you somehow grossly overfire and warp the baffle it is not going to need to be replaced anywhere near the frequency of a cat and possibly never need replacement. So it's not like you're either replacing cats or tubes. I'll be replacing neither.
 
Last edited:

Marshy

Minister of Fire
Dec 29, 2016
820
NY
See I've read those numbers but if high output is only 51,000btu than that solves the burn time vs horsepower issue as the summit(a considerably smaller 3.0cf stove) lists 99,000btu as max output. So for those like Niko who keep asking why noncats can't burn 24hrs well I would ask how can a stove a full cu/ft smaller produce twice the heat?

Now I figured these numbers are possibly skewed in some manner which is why I've repeatedly now asked about it?

And to the poster that mentioned they'd rather just replace a cat than tubes. Well on a summit there are no tubes and unless you somehow grossly overfire and warp the baffle it is not going to need to be replaced anywhere near the frequency of a cat and possibly never need replacement. So it's not like you're either replacing cats or tubes. I'll be replacing neither.
Well I was the one who said something in regards to replacing cat vs tubes but obviously I don't know all the secondary burn type stoves and their maintenance. The ones I was looking g at did...

Anyways, I know the peak output for the BK King is larger than 51K BTU/hr. That the average oner 12 hrs. So if you take the amount of available fuel (full load, 700K some BTUs) and multiply that by the stoves 82% efficiency and the divide that by 12 hrs you'll get the 50 or 51K BTU/hr. However, if you burn that amount of fuel in say 8 hours, which I know if verification possible then the average output increases a fair amount.

The troubling part is no one knows what the real peak output is. It might be able to put out 110k BTU/hr for one hour but it's averaged into the 12 hr burn cycle they list in the specs. It's hard to know if you'll have the horsepower you need.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Squisher

Squisher

Minister of Fire
Nov 1, 2015
1,623
vernon BC, Canada
I figured the king was capable of greater output which is why I've asked about it a couple of times in the 'all things BK' thread and now in this thread. But I've gotten no real quantifiable answer as to why/how then the king lists 51,000 max output whereas my stove lists 99,000. This is just going by the available stated outputs by the manufacturers. I'm more curious if there are any meaningful real world numbers out there?

I believe you when you say that the king is capable of more output than 51,000btu but is there a meaningful way to quantify that? Is PE's claim of 99,000 bs? I have no idea.
 

rdust

Minister of Fire
Feb 9, 2009
4,528
Michigan
I'm more curious if there are any meaningful real world numbers out there?
The published BK numbers are the most meaningful to real life use. Max BTU's means very little for most people. How often do you run your stove at max output? If you have to load after load chances are it's the wrong stove for the environment.

Marshy has a heat load that I'm guessing no stove on the market today would be able to keep up with. He was torching a load of wood greater than a king can hold over 4 hours! Most tube stoves would be full of coals to the tubes after a couple cycles like that.(or a puddle on the floor, at least the king has the tstat to prevent the puddle). ;lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: Highbeam

bholler

Chimney sweep
Staff member
Jan 14, 2014
19,506
central pa
Marshy has a heat load that I'm guessing no stove on the market today would be able to keep up with. He was torching a load of wood greater than a king can hold over 4 hours! Most tube stoves would be full of coals to the tubes after a couple cycles like that.(or a puddle on the floor, at least the king has the tstat to prevent the puddle).
Can you tell me how a king burns that much wood that fast without making excessive coals? And how it does it for that matter the thermostat that is supposed to protect the stove when run on high is supposed to give you a 12 hour burn. So how does one cut that burn time to 1/3 of that? It is stuff like this that gets me about some bk guys they don't have some magical combustion going on if you burn that much wood that fast you will get coals. And if you burn 4 cu ft of high btu hardwood in 4 hours you are putting allot of heat stress on that stove no matter what stove it is.
 

Niko

Minister of Fire
Nov 12, 2013
521
Dutchess county, NY
Well there you are wrong most big stoves in the 4 cu ft range can burn 24hrs. That is because most are cat or hybrid stoves when they get that big.

Listen none of us are putting down blaze kings. We all agree they are great stoves and if you need long low burns they without a doubt are the best stove. And yes you can turn them up and get high heat output for sure but in that case you are paying allot of money for the ability to burn low and slow even though you don't really use it much at all. I for one cant justify spending that money especially when I can get stoves like mine for little to nothing when people replace them or get rid of them ect. My current 3100 was absolutely free. And it heats my first floor to the low seventies even in single digit outside temps. And contributes enough heat to the second floor that I only burn about a tank of oil a year. I am happy with that it means I keep my first floor a comfortable temp without over heating.

The fact is that different stoves are right for different situations just those of us who choose not to use blaze kings get pretty tired of hearing how our stoves cannot be used by people who work and are going to use 4x the wood ect ect.

Im not putting down anyone else stove either. But all i keep hearing from you guys is how hot is the top lol. And I'm like how low can you go :).

BK aren't cheap, but either is fuel and my time. But since you keep bringing up price either is a Vermont castings defiant flexburn, its got a bigger firebox then the princess, its more expensive and does not even get no where near the same burn times.

must be a reason then why you don't find Blaze kings like you say when people get ride of them or replace them.

I am looking into another wood stove myself because I don't even like turning my king up that high because the downstairs gets too hot, but I also will be insulating, I just cant imagine dedicating a whole floor like I have been reading just for a wood stove to heat my house, I mean we all pay taxes and I'm gonna use every square inch to enjoy my place. I cant do that if my stove is at 1000 degrees every day.
 

rdust

Minister of Fire
Feb 9, 2009
4,528
Michigan
Can you tell me how a king burns that much wood that fast without making excessive coals? And how it does it for that matter the thermostat that is supposed to protect the stove when run on high is supposed to give you a 12 hour burn. So how does one cut that burn time to 1/3 of that? It is stuff like this that gets me about some bk guys they don't have some magical combustion going on if you burn that much wood that fast you will get coals. And if you burn 4 cu ft of high btu hardwood in 4 hours you are putting allot of heat stress on that stove no matter what stove it is.
The king will have a coaling problem too! It's a big stove you will get by a "little" bit longer before the coals are to the ceiling. ;lol I never said Marshy is burning a load in 4 hours, I said he was with his old stove. His king is 7 hrs give or take. The tstat makes it so he can't burn a full king load in 4 hours.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bholler

bholler

Chimney sweep
Staff member
Jan 14, 2014
19,506
central pa
Im not putting down anyone else stove either. But all i keep hearing from you guys is how hot is the top lol. And I'm like how low can you go :).
And we all agree clearly if you need to go low and slow bks are the best but many of us do not need to go low and slow.

BK aren't cheap, but either is fuel and my time. But since you keep bringing up price either is a Vermont castings defiant flexburn, its got a bigger firebox then the princess, its more expensive and does not even get no where near the same burn times.
Yes and I would not install a vermont castings stove in my house if it was given to me. Vc stoves have been over priced unreliable under preforming stoves for many years now.

must be a reason then why you don't find Blaze kings like you say when people get ride of them or replace them.
Yes because they are not common in this area because the nearest dealer is nearly 100 miles away.

I am looking into another wood stove myself because I don't even like turning my king up that high because the downstairs gets too hot, but I also will be insulating, I just cant imagine dedicating a whole floor like I have been reading just for a wood stove to heat my house, I mean we all pay taxes and I'm gonna use every square inch to enjoy my place. I cant do that if my stove is at 1000 degrees every day.
The floor I "dedicate" to heating is the basement of a 110 year old house. It has low ceilings an uneven floor it is dusty ect. It is used for storage and for heating that is it. It really is not very usable for much else.
 

bholler

Chimney sweep
Staff member
Jan 14, 2014
19,506
central pa
The king will have a coaling problem too! It's a big stove you will get by a "little" bit longer before the coals are to the ceiling. ;lol
Fair enough but any stove that you can put that much wood in is going to be big.
 

lsucet

Minister of Fire
May 14, 2015
1,578
San Ysidro, New Mexico
Guys, I burnt with tube stoves, YES, low end brand but technology the same as the expensive ones. Some brands have ceramic board, other ceramic blanket, SS, bricks etc. they all work the same. I was able to keep the house real hot till the point that it feel uncomfortable. At least for me and my family. But for that to be possible i have to reload every 4 to 5 hrs and take all that temp rising and talking to that secondary burn takes off on those hot reloads. The stoves were into the living area where we spend some quality time. At night i always the last one going to bed, cause i have to reload for the night.

Get up early cause just some coals and the house dropping like crazy. Again 4 to 5 hrs window at most when cold outside. I said, i need to stop. This is it. I am better installing the propane furnace that i ripped back and pay for the propane. At this rate i was not seeing any differences between wood consumption and all this work. For me was not worth the saving. Including CSS my own wood, was not worth it.

The cat stove changed my life and i am now able to sleep, save, stay warm with a more comfortable and more equal temp around the house. Now We watch movies in the same room of the stove, spend more time in the family room all together and everything is good. Before everybody used to go to their rooms and let this crazy old man toasting alone. The other stoves were just putting lots of heat up the flue cause metal can transfer some X amount of heat in those 2 to 3 hrs. if those BTU those stoves are rated, they really put them out in that short period of time they will be glowing and melting.

A good percentage of that heat is going where? i don't know, I used to love to see secondaries on those stoves but i will keep the ugly one. after all i did joint the dark side. here are some pictures after reload for almost 3 hrs into the burn at this temp and no flames. My tubes used to burn the whole box in that time.
 

Attachments

  • Like
Reactions: jatoxico

bholler

Chimney sweep
Staff member
Jan 14, 2014
19,506
central pa
But for that to be possible i have to reload every 4 to 5 hrs and take all that temp rising and talking to that secondary burn takes off on those hot reloads. The stoves were into the living area where we spend some quality time. At night i always the last one going to bed, cause i have to reload for the night.
What stove were you using? Those burn times are really low. I easily get 8 hours of good use able heat. And have enough coal to reload on with no kindling after 12 hours.
 

lsucet

Minister of Fire
May 14, 2015
1,578
San Ysidro, New Mexico
The stoves i was using are on my signature. I really can get more time than that and maybe i exaggerate a little but i am not that far off. The coaling stage after secondary was not enough in some cases to keep the house temp and all that heat used to go i don't know where. The back of the house always cold. With this stove it is different. I installed flue damper, including i installed for a few days a barometric damper to control the draft better. also bought a manometer, get with tech support multiple times. The best control over was the installation of the barometric damper keeping the draft to 0.05WC or what ever was recommended. I should have pictures of the baro damper installed.

But at some point of the burn if i load that socker tight little by little will take off those secondaries and the baro pegged all the way open. i know that it was not recommended for solid fuel and i end up taking it off. My draft for some reason is strong. I block the dog house, the holes for the the secondaries i blocked them a little, i just tried everything. When temperature used to drop teens and under that was an inferno. Burnt E/W, N/S load tight, load loose.
I did make an appointment to see a psychology.lol. but the BK shows in time and i got cure.lol.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Squisher

rdust

Minister of Fire
Feb 9, 2009
4,528
Michigan
Guys, I burnt with tube stoves, YES, low end brand but technology the same as the expensive ones. Some brands have ceramic board, other ceramic blanket, SS, bricks etc. they all work the same. I was able to keep the house real hot till the point that it feel uncomfortable. At least for me and my family. But for that to be possible i have to reload every 4 to 5 hrs and take all that temp rising and talking to that secondary burn takes off on those hot reloads. The stoves were into the living area where we spend some quality time. At night i always the last one going to bed, cause i have to reload for the night.

Get up early cause just some coals and the house dropping like crazy. Again 4 to 5 hrs window at most when cold outside. I said, i need to stop. This is it. I am better installing the propane furnace that i ripped back and pay for the propane. At this rate i was not seeing any differences between wood consumption and all this work. For me was not worth the saving. Including CSS my own wood, was not worth it.

The cat stove changed my life and i am now able to sleep, save, stay warm with a more comfortable and more equal temp around the house. Now We watch movies in the same room of the stove, spend more time in the family room all together and everything is good. Before everybody used to go to their rooms and let this crazy old man toasting alone. The other stoves were just putting lots of heat up the flue cause metal can transfer some X amount of heat in those 2 to 3 hrs. if those BTU those stoves are rated, they really put them out in that short period of time they will be glowing and melting.

A good percentage of that heat is going where? i don't know, I used to love to see secondaries on those stoves but i will keep the ugly one. after all i did joint the dark side. here are some pictures after reload for almost 3 hrs into the burn at this temp and no flames. My tubes used to burn the whole box in that time.

I had a similar experience with my Lopi Endeavor in regards to the silly temp swings. It was a good enough fit when my wife worked out of the house. It had to change when she went back to work at an office.
 

lsucet

Minister of Fire
May 14, 2015
1,578
San Ysidro, New Mexico
I had a similar experience with my Lopi Endeavor in regards to the silly temp swings. It was a good enough fit when my wife worked out of the house. It had to change when she went back to work at an office.
I came to USA from a country that i never saw snow, just in movies.lol. In the 23 years here I never been getting used to the cold weather. I like it but if i can choose, better no cold at all. What i trying to say is the i like it warm/hot, you know, but at the same time i like it just a nice room temp. I was saying in the BK performance thread the other day that in my house in town for the last 20 years since i bought it the thermostat stay at 70 during winter.
Maybe when my mom comes and spend a weekend or something like that I go up to 71 or 72 but i try not.lol It give me headache and i start feeling wear.
But i can be outside in the summer and i am ok with that. LIFE, LIFE, lol
 

Niko

Minister of Fire
Nov 12, 2013
521
Dutchess county, NY
Im very happy that my King is my first purchase and hopefully my last in my lifetime.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Highbeam