Large Stove Comparison

[VirginiaIron]

I would be very impressed if that wood caught fire and burned completely and I would become a believer.

As a sidenote those 3 x 10 splits, or whatever size they are, are a favorite of my stove too.

Edit- dictation

 

[Marshy]

I just stuffed my BK King with 108 lbs (and 5 oz!) of Ironwood (Eastern Hophornbeam). Should be good until early Sunday morning. And it's supposed to be below zero tonight. Yay Blaze King!

View attachment 192680

I load my King east-west because I have my wood cut ~20" in length. I think I'm going to start cutting shorter to load north-south. I load my stove like that (almost, that's tight!) and run it on high and have a good bed of coals in the morning 8-9 hours later. Now that I put the fans on the stove it reduced the amount of coals I have in the morning but improved the heat output. I lost some cycle time when I need to load the stove by an hour or two.

At least that has been my experience burning red maple so far. I have some better wood to try, hopefully there is a notable difference.

 

[VirginiaIron]

so, I'm assuming that load is supposed to be good for 30 or 31 hours. Technically, 108 pounds of wood will only produce a certain amount to BTUs, is that correct? The catalytic heater doesn't multiply the btu's does it?

 

[Marshy]

so, I'm assuming that load is supposed to be good for 30 or 31 hours. Technically, 108 pounds of wood will only produce a certain amount to BTUs, is that correct? The catalytic heater doesn't multiply the btu's does it?

30 hrs maybe on low, 12 hrs on high (in theory) but subject to your heating demand because the end of the burn cycle might not be usable heat depending on your needs. That's why I say his would last 8-9 hours for me before the heat is not enough to keep the house from losing temp (running it on high).

 

[VirginiaIron]

THat is what I was wondering. Thank you for clarifying that. Maybe I'm just at a place in my mind right where I can comprehend that I don't know. Because I was brainstorming his post and I realized that 30 hours would be good for someone if they already had their space temperatures up and it was mild temperatures outside (his were cold) and the BTU demand was low. It's still nice to know, however, that one could load the stove and return 30 hours later and have some Coals to start a new fire.

 

[Marshy]

THat is what I was wondering. Thank you for clarifying that. Maybe I'm just at a place in my mind right where I can comprehend that I don't know. Because I was brainstorming his post and I realized that 30 hours would be good for someone if they already had their space temperatures up and it was mild temperatures outside (his were cold) and the BTU demand was low. It's still nice to know, however, that one could load the stove and return 30 hours later and have some Coals to start a new fire.

Correct. People with a well insulated house and keep the stove in their living space (and not in their uninsulated basement like me) could reasonably operated the stove on low-med and get enough usable heat from a full load to only have to refuel every 24 hrs. It varies from one house to another and climate also plays a big factor as well.

 

[VirginiaIron]

With that minimal amount of coal, how long does it take those splits to come up to a charred temperature for efficient burning?

 

[Marshy]

With that minimal amount of coal, how long does it take those splits to come up to a charred temperature for efficient burning?

Once the coals are raked and wood is loaded 5-10 mins realistically before the cat is in the active zone and the bypass can be closed. Then I wait to see the needle is climbing up higher in the active zone before I turn on the blower fans. Then in another 15 mins the cat thermometer well be at the very high end in the active zone. That's been my experience.

 

[Niko]

Correct. People with a well insulated house and keep the stove in their living space (and not in their uninsulated basement like me) could reasonably operated the stove on low-med and get enough usable heat from a full load to only have to refuel every 24 hrs. It varies from one house to another and climate also plays a big factor as well.

Even if ones house is air tight very few stoves will burn for 24hr+.

 

[bholler]

Even if ones house is air tight very few stoves will burn for 24hr+.

I am not sure that very few will burn for 24hrs is accurate but regardless they dont have to be burning for 24 hrs to make enough heat to keep a house warm for 24hrs.

 

[Niko]

I am not sure that very few will burn for 24hrs is accurate but regardless they dont have to be burning for 24 hrs to make enough heat to keep a house warm for 24hrs.

You can take Air tight home and install a modern woodstove like a osbourne 2400( i like the look of it) put it on low and it will not burn for 24hr. If im wrong im sorry, but i have never read from anyone on this forum saying they have a air teat home and because of it their stoves are now burning twice as long.

 

[bholler]

You can take a air tight home and install a modern woodstove like a osbourne 2400( i like the look of it) put it on low and it will not burn for 24.

No but if it is sealed and insulated well enough especailly if there is a large thermal mass inside the envelope of the house you may only need one fire in 24 hours to heat it.

 

[Niko]

No but if it is sealed and insulated well enough especailly if there is a large thermal mass inside the envelope of the house you may only need one fire in 24 hours to heat it.

just trying to explain that keeping a house air tight does not make the stove burn longer or shorter technically. Because the house is leaky, that in turn makes you turn your stove up to replenish the heat that is lost threw the cracks. Turn up the stove you loose burn time.

Take a tight house now, no reall need to run the stove so hot because less heat is escaping. Turn the stove down you gain burn times.

The problem is so many manufacturers still have not done this effectively, no matter how low you turn down the other stoves you still wont get 24 hr burn times. Regardless of the thermal mass in the house, im speaking of the Stove itself. They just dont burn that long...

 

[rdust]

No but if it is sealed and insulated well enough especailly if there is a large thermal mass inside the envelope of the house you may only need one fire in 24 hours to heat it.

Sure but the house temp won't be flat, it will be a roller coaster ride. Big difference in the way the heat is delivered. I rode the non cat roller coaster for two seasons, that was enough.

IMO A quality cat stove is the only way to heat if you want to turn off the furnace and haven't retired yet. It's nice that I get to decide if I want to release 60lbs worth of heat into the house in 8 or 24 hrs.

 

[rdust]

so, I'm assuming that load is supposed to be good for 30 or 31 hours. Technically, 108 pounds of wood will only produce a certain amount to BTUs, is that correct? The catalytic heater doesn't multiply the btu's does it?

Turned down it will probably burn 40 hours or more. Pictures are deceiving, that a 4+ cubic foot stove. He should put a beer can in the picture for perspective.

 

[Squisher]

just trying to explain that keeping a house air tight does not make the stove burn longer or shorter technically. Because the house is leaky, that in turn makes you turn your stove up to replenish the heat that is lost threw the cracks. Turn up the stove you loose burn time.

Take a tight house now, no reall need to run the stove so hot because less heat is escaping. Turn the stove down you gain burn times.

The problem is so many manufacturers still have not done this effectively, no matter how low you turn down the other stoves you still wont get 24 hr burn times. Regardless of the thermal mass in the house, im speaking of the Stove itself. They just dont burn that long...

Conversely some manufacturers that can greatly control their burn time, to get say a 24hr burn seem to lack the ability to match that with substantial heat output. Like my summit, which will never go anywhere near 24hrs, but will go very near 99,000btus of output. So while the idea of this super tight home and 24hr burn times is great, my reality is, I don't need 24hr burntime. What I need is available heat output. I'm certainly happy with my modern EPA 3.0cu ft stove and it's output. This after a lifetime of burning huge, pre EPA stoves.

Now we often all read on here about people upgrading from an old smokey and not being happy with the heat they can get out of their clean/regulated stove. That's not the case with the summit, it delivers the heat.

 

[rdust]

Conversely some manufacturers that can greatly control their burn time, to get say a 24hr burn seem to lack the ability to match that with substantial heat output .

When the temp in your house waivers only a couple degrees over the course of a burn you don't need big output. There is usually only a couple times a winter where I need to run my stove hard to warm up a cold house.

With that said there are different types of stoves available for a reason.

I recall a time ago when someone here swapped an old Natasha for a Summit and dumped the Summit not long after. It was never able to deliver the heat he needed. I think he replaced it with a cheaper steel stove and was happier. So while you're happy with yours there are times when a stove that works in one environment may not work in someone else's.

 

[Squisher]

Well as a burner of various pre EPA stoves and the last one a huge Lakewood that I still have. I feel qualified to say that the summit is capable of big heat. Some people may not get that heat out of it if they don't learn how to burn a newer stove but through careful monitoring of temps my learning curve was quick.

I agree that it's a great thing that there are all different types of stoves and I greatly respect the cat technology. Really hope to score a deal on a king king one day to replace the Lakewood that I've moved to my shop where it still heats for me.

I've run the big Lakewood, a wood circulator, a harbercraft(fisher knock off), a fisher, and one or two old stoves from my youth that I can't recall the brand. A lifetime(42 years young lol) of heating with big old smokeys up until last year. The transition to the summit has been easy and satisfying for me.

Obviously the 'cycle of heat' that all non cat stoves have is something I'm ok with. It's all I've ever known.

I do seem to read more often than someone being disappointed with a summit say, about people being disappointed with the shear brute output available(or not so much) from long burning cats. I obviously can see that being equalled out by the consistent long burn time. But in the end for me my choice of the summit was driven by not wanting to lose the ability to have a stove really crank it out.

 

[TX-L]

Well, quite a bit of chatter on this thread. Here is an update a full day later:

At 24 hrs after the loading, stove top temp was 400F. That's some pretty good usable heat, not just a few leftover coals available for a restart. I raked the coals up in a pile at the front of the firebox and turned the air to full. Stove top temp went up to 475/480 and stayed there for a few hours. At 27 hrs into the burn, stove top is above 450F. This load could easily go into Sunday, but I don't want to stay up nor do I want to get up at 2 or 3 AM to fill the stove. It got down to +4 last night and went up to 25 today. Photos attached for your cosideration.

 

[Squisher]

That seems like quite a respectable cruising temp to me. If you crank it up, and I don't know maybe you don't ever. What sort of stove top temps are you capable of reaching?

I've never run a cat, heck I don't know if I've ever even been in a home with a cat stove running(I've cleaned a bunch) so definetly part of my decision was that fear of the unknown commodity of that even but potentially lower heat output of a cat vs that punch in the face heat that I've always known.

I asked in the BK thread but it was lost in the sea of responses that thread sees about what the actual max btu output of the king king is? Not what it can do over 12hrs or even 8. But all out as hot as it gets, how many btu are we talking?

 

[rdust]

What sort of stove top temps are you capable of reaching?

I've had my stove top in the 750 range at times. I don't think that tells the whole story but it can throw the heat if you want it.

 

[TX-L]

I don't know how many BTUS are produced. A tube stove, or an older pre-EPA stove will produce more heat at any given time, I think because those stoves are actively burning and as a result, the entire mass of the stove is warmer. A cat stove's heat is concentrated in the cat area only, and the rest of the stove is cooler, relatively speaking. This was my stove a few weeks ago, with no flame in the box.

 

[bholler]

The problem is so many manufacturers still have not done this effectively, no matter how low you turn down the other stoves you still wont get 24 hr burn times. Regardless of the thermal mass in the house, im speaking of the Stove itself. They just dont burn that long...

I agree most will not burn that long no but there are plenty out there that will.

IMO A quality cat stove is the only way to heat if you want to turn off the furnace and haven't retired yet. It's nice that I get to decide if I want to release 60lbs worth of heat into the house in 8 or 24 hrs.

I and many many others heat just fine with non cats and work full time. To me releasing all that heat is not an issue that is what I need I vary the heatoutput by the wood species. And it works fine. I am also heating from my sealed and insulated basement. So no temp swings either. I agree for many cat stove are the right answer but non cats are the right answer for others.

When the temp in your house waivers only a couple degrees over the course of a burn you don't need big output. There is usually only a couple times a winter where I need to run my stove hard to warm up a cold house.

While I agree to some extent it does take more btus to bring the heat back up you cant say that you dont need big output just because you have even heat every house has its heat loss and you need a certain btu input to balance that out constant or not.

 

[Niko]

Conversely some manufacturers that can greatly control their burn time, to get say a 24hr burn seem to lack the ability to match that with substantial heat output. Like my summit, which will never go anywhere near 24hrs, but will go very near 99,000btus of output. So while the idea of this super tight home and 24hr burn times is great, my reality is, I don't need 24hr burntime. What I need is available heat output. I'm certainly happy with my modern EPA 3.0cu ft stove and it's output. This after a lifetime of burning huge, pre EPA stoves.

Now we often all read on here about people upgrading from an old smokey and not being happy with the heat they can get out of their clean/regulated stove. That's not the case with the summit, it delivers the heat.

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.


But to my original low burn times is this, from the day of time every piece of wood when light on fire is meant to burn hot and fast, when you csn control this power you can direct and force it to do your bidding

 

[Squisher]

I don't know how many BTUS are produced. A tube stove, or an older pre-EPA stove will produce more heat at any given time, I think because those stoves are actively burning and as a result, the entire mass of the stove is warmer. A cat stove's heat is concentrated in the cat area only, and the rest of the stove is cooler, relatively speaking. This was my stove a few weeks ago, with no flame in the box.

Cool. I really do think the king would be perfect for my shop, I look forward to it one day.

At times right now I'm running the summit in my basement, super insert upstairs, and the Lakewood in my shop. It's practically a second job at times keeping all three fed.

Let's say I load four times a day, like I do when it's cold out like it's been here this year. That's 12 loads a day to keep everything going full tilt.

Full disclosure I don't run the insert 24/7 or I would get to hot.

Cat stoves make a lot of sense to me. But I'm pretty happy with my 'tube' stoves. Honestly the only one I really don't like anymore is the Lakewood, I appreciate it's brute heating ability, but man oh man the inefficiency is almost to much to bare.