Looking for Blaze King Experience

[Woody Stover]

Seems the February 2019 list has been removed from epa, and March is being written.

Not sure what you're looking at, but this is labeled March...
https://www.epa.gov/compliance/list-epa-certified-wood-stoves

 

[Highbeam]

Not sure what you're looking at, but this is labeled March...
https://www.epa.gov/compliance/list-epa-certified-wood-stoves
View attachment 242873

Might be my phone vs a desktop. March is newer than February so that’s good.

 

[BKVP]

I have looked at the list and it is missing key information like what you wrote above. It’s a list in transition. Will old stoves that previously tested clean enough to pass 2020 gph limits (such as the nc30) now have to be retested using a new test method?

Seems the February 2019 list has been removed from epa, and March is being written.

100% of all wood and pellet stoves tested and sold prior to the new rule, released in March 2015, must be tested, regardless of original passing grade.

The efficiency numbers you referenced earlier were "self calculated" by manufacturers for the 2008 Tax Credit.

There were 3 formulas that could be used by inputting data from original emissions tests.

Now, the efficiency is calculated by the test lab of record.

I'm working with EPA to add a column for heaters test with cordwood or crib fuel (dimensional lumber) and add another column for Firebox Volume.

Consumers need to pick the best stove for their needs, which starts with FBV.

 

[begreen]

That would be good. Are there clear rules for measuring and publishing Firebox Volume? This is an area where it seems like some marketing depts. come up with different numbers than what is actually the useable volume. It's as if they are measuring the area above the tubes and baffle. Other companies never report it so the user is left to guess or trust the sales person.

 

[BKVP]

That would be good. Are there clear rules for measuring and publishing Firebox Volume? This is an area where it seems like some marketing depts. come up with different numbers than what is actually the useable volume. It's as if they are measuring the area above the tubes and baffle. Other companies never report it so the user is left to guess or trust the sales person.

What marketing folks do is not material. The test lab measures "usable space". You as the consumer can always check marketing info and compare to test reports...which must be published on manufacturer websites.

 

[begreen]

Really? I don't recall seeing test lab results available to the consumer on most stove websites.

EDIT: It's there if one digs deeper.

 

[jetsam]

Really? I don't recall seeing test lab results available to the consumer on most stove websites

Which won't matter if all manufacturers are required to get the stoves tested.

The manufacturer can make a tactical decision to not publish the results, but the results will still be available in the EPA's stove list.

 

[begreen]

Which won't matter if all manufacturers are required to get the stoves tested.

The manufacturer can make a tactical decision to not publish the results, but the results will still be available in the EPA's stove list.

BKVP just said publishing is required, though I wasn't been able to find this info. Further searching shows it if you dig a bit. The EPA list currently does not provide firebox volume.

 

[BKVP]

Which won't matter if all manufacturers are required to get the stoves tested.

The manufacturer can make a tactical decision to not publish the results, but the results will still be available in the EPA's stove list.

They can't get around it! All data, other than dimensional drawings must be in the test report....which must be posted before EPA signs off on the certification request.

 

[BKVP]

BKVP just said publishing is required, though I wasn't been able to find this info. Further searching shows it if you dig a bit. The EPA list currently does not provide firebox volume.

The rule does not say it has to be easy to find! I can assure you, if a stove meets 2020, the test report is somewhere on the manufacturer's web site.

 

[BKVP]

Remember Begreen, the FBV is part of the formula that is used in calculating gr/hr....read between the lines.

 

[jetsam]

Remember Begreen, the FBV is part of the formula that is used in calculating gr/hr....read between the lines.

How does that make sense?

I know it once did- a big old smoke dragon is gonna burn hotter than a small one, and burning hotter is the only way that you can make a smoke dragon burn cleaner.

However, with a modern cat stove? Not following. Seems like a small stove with a well sized cat might have lower emissions than a large stove.

Then again, I usually think of my stove at low burn rates, and the testing probably doesn't.

 

[BKVP]

How does that make sense?

I know it once did- a big old smoke dragon is gonna burn hotter than a small one, and burning hotter is the only way that you can make a smoke dragon burn cleaner.

However, with a modern cat stove? Not following. Seems like a small stove with a well sized cat might have lower emissions than a large stove.

Then again, I usually think of my stove at low burn rates, and the testing probably doesn't.

Testing is four runs (five if you run fan confirmation run) low, medium low, medium high and high. The total "score" comes in the form of a weighted average. About 80% of the weighting is from the low and medium low run results.

80% was selected after multiple sources confirmed 80% of wood heaters spend 80% of use time in low and medium burn rates. And before anyone says that's nuts, well industry, regulators, states etc were all involved in the method.

Off the Alaska...second time in 10 days!

 

[mar13]

The EPA reports for the Pacific energy stoves give the dimension, as found in PEs website.

 

[Woody Stover]

Which won't matter if all manufacturers are required to get the stoves tested.
The manufacturer can make a tactical decision to not publish the results, but the results will still be available in the EPA's stove list.

BKVP is talking about more detailed results than what you would see on the EPA list I posted...

BKVP just said publishing is required, though I wasn't been able to find this info. Further searching shows it if you dig a bit. The EPA list currently does not provide firebox volume.

FBV is listed in one of the PE links I saw...the T6 LE maybe?
https://www.pacificenergy.net/support/support/epa-test-data/

 

[begreen]

The EPA reports for the Pacific energy stoves give the dimension, as found in PEs website.

Yes, as I dug deeper I started finding them. They are in different locations on different sites. Some have them on their support pages, some like Jotul have them in the docs for the individual stoves.

 

[Woody Stover]

The EPA reports for the Pacific energy stoves give the dimension

Yes, as I dug deeper I started finding them.

I guess we finally have firebox volumes we can believe.

 

[BKVP]

EPA has brought a level of comparison to "reported efficiencies".

FBV issues wasn't on their radar. In a recent meeting with EPA it was effectively communicated that FBV pis critical....before selecting efficiency, gr/hr, etc.

 

[Nz3000owner]

I just finished reading through EPA reports for the Ashford 30.2 and the T6 LE. After reading through that I personally, unless I'm way off base don't think the 2 stoves even come close to comparing in output. I didn't even try to understand what all of the numbers meant in regards to the efficiency. Personally I'm not buying one vs the other because one puts out less pollution. I want the best stove that will heat the most for the longest time. It appears to me that the BK wins that hands down easy. The test list the BK firebox as 2.9 CF and the T6 at 2.5 CF.

BK ran one of their test out for 10 hours and the firebox top temp ran from high to low of 604-336 Degrees (note that it was only below 400 for the first 47 minutes of the test, after that it never went below 417 for over 9 hours) and the average overall stove temp ran from high to low of 353-271 degrees (the temp remained above 300 for all but the first 80 mins of the test)! Max stack temp was 302 Degrees. They used 14.9 lbs of wood at 20.64% MC. That test was on low air setting with the fan on low the entire time. Compared to the T6 longest test time of just over 6 hours and the fire box top temp ran from high to low of 599-178 degrees and the average overall temp ran from high to low of 403-248 degrees. Max stack temp was 452 Degrees with the air set on low. The fan was on high for the test. This test used 16 lbs of wood at 21% MC.

The T6 test with air fully open and fan on high went for 2 hours and burned 15.96 lbs of wood at 21% MC. Firebox top temp ran from high to low of 814-340 degrees and the average overall stove temp ran from high to low of 539-380 degrees. Max stack temp was 812 Degrees. The BK test with air fully open and fan on high went for 3 hours 22 mins and burned 15.6 lbs of wood at 21.58% MC. Firebox top temp ran from high to low of 867-487 degrees and the average overall stove temp ran from high to low of 524-400 degrees. Max stack temp was 535 Degrees.

The BK is obviously pulling more heat out of the same amount of wood and dissipating it through the stove vs up the flue. At least thats what I got out of analysis the numbers for the last 3 hours.

 

[begreen]

That is not how one would ever run the stove. Testing the T6 with the air wide open is definitely going to decrease efficiency. Most of the heat will head up the flue and poor secondary burn will occur. I'm surprised the stack temp stayed so low. Our stove setup would have had a stack temp of >1200º under those conditions, but that is with a full load of wood.

 

[Sawset]

The real question is why do you care about what happens at 100% output? That should pretty much never happen! In summary, both great stoves. I am more worried that you care about maximum output. That’s a red flag that might lead to more problems than the nuances of those two stoves.

The T6 test with air fully open and fan on high

I didn't even try to understand what all of the numbers meant

Concerns in post #2
And coming back straight away in post #95
Hmm.

 

[Highbeam]

That is not how one would ever run the stove. Testing the T6 with the air wide open is definitely going to decrease efficiency. Most of the heat will head up the flue and poor secondary burn will occur. I'm surprised the stack temp stayed so low. Our stove setup would have had a stack temp of >1200º under those conditions, but that is with a full load of wood.

I’m one of those oddballs that really does run a big noncat at maximum safe output load after load. I have a big blower too. As begreen said, the flue temps rise to unsafe levels if you just leave the intake fully open. There exists a particular intake air setting somewhere between minimum and maximum that delivers the most heat to the room. Very few of us will care to find it.

 

[begreen]

I’m one of those oddballs that really does run a big noncat at maximum safe output load after load. I have a big blower too. As begreen said, the flue temps rise to unsafe levels if you just leave the intake fully open. There exists a particular intake air setting somewhere between minimum and maximum that delivers the most heat to the room. Very few of us will care to find it.

How do you run the 30-NC in mild weather? Still pedal to the metal or a more moderate long burn?

 

[BKVP]

Before you all need weedwackers..I think there needs to be a new thread on this topic. BeGreen, start one called Wood Stove Testing or something of the sort. Let me know if you do this....

 

[Ashful]

I didn't even try to understand what all of the numbers meant in regards to the efficiency. Personally I'm not buying one vs the other because one puts out less pollution. I want the best stove that will heat the most for the longest time.

The most efficient stove is the one that will put out the most heat for a given time, it is the same thing. I think you’re confusing efficiency with particulate output, when you talk about “puts out less pollution.” Efficiency simply means less heat up the flue, more in your house.

BK ran one of their test out for 10 hours and the firebox top temp ran from high to low of 604-336 Degrees... Max stack temp was 302 Degrees... Compared to the T6 longest test time of just over 6 hours and the fire box top temp ran from high to low of 599-178 degrees... Max stack temp was 452 Degrees with the air set on low.

This agrees with what many others have already posted as the generic differences between cat stove and non-cat stove.

That is not how one would ever run the stove. Testing the T6 with the air wide open is definitely going to decrease efficiency.

Of course it would, but here he posted data with the T6 “air set on low”.