Medium or Small Insert for 1200 sq ft Ranch?

[joneo]

Hello, new to forum, been reading ALOT about stove inserts recently and am in the market for one now. I've been to several local merchants and going to another one tomorrow. This site has been helpful in teaching me things as well as (broken link removed)

As I narrow down the list of potential wood burning stove inserts, I am having a bit of trouble deciding to go with a small or medium size. Here are some specs:

1200sq ft older single story, low ceiling ranch style home with adequate insulation, masonry fireplace at one end of house (3 sides exposed to elements) and bedrooms are at other end of house. Sq footage includes currently unfinished attached garage, with door to main living area where fireplace insert will go. We live near Portland, OR where it rarely gets down into the 20s F even in the dead of winter; may be more like 30s-40s during the winter months.

Had an installer come out the other day and he recommended the Regency I2400 insert, partly given that the smaller one with a 1.8 cu ft firebox can be a bit of a PITA to load. I understand that if I go too big we may be tempted to not burn as hot and thus not efficiently which would produce more creosote buildup. If we go too small then I'm constantly feeding the stove and have to cut smaller pieces, and it ultimately may not be enough stove to adequately heat our house. I am leaning towards the Regency insert at this time, but decided to look around at others before making this big $ decision.

The stoves in that midsize category that are currently in the running are:
Regency I2400 • Pacific Energy Super • True North TN20 (P.E.) • Country / Ironstrike Performer C210 • Avalon Rainier • Lopi Flush Wood Plus • Enerzone Solution 2.3-I • Osburn 1800 Bay Window • Drolet 1800-I

I like being warm, but we don't want to burn ourselves out of the living room either. Should I be looking at smaller stoves instead, like the P.E. Vista, Regency Alterra 1250, or Enerzone 1.8-I?

Thanks for your input!

 

[begreen]

A 2 cu ft stove should do the job. My preference is for a firebox that can load N/S.

Note that if the dealer is selling the Rainier it should be at a discount. The Avalon line is discontinued. The Lopi Revere and 1750i should be added to this list.

 

[blacktail]

I'm a couple hours north of you with a very similar house. Similar size, layout, and insert location. With a 1.6cf Lopi my electric heat rarely kicks on. My insert does the job, but if I was shopping again I'd probably go with a slightly larger model for longer burn times.

 

[Woodsplitter67]

A 2 cu ft stove should do the job. My preference is for a firebox that can load N/S.

Note that if the dealer is selling the Rainier it should be at a discount. The Avalon line is discontinued. The Lopi Revere and 1750i should be added to this list.

Back when i was looking at stoves i looked at the lopi 1750 and the revere.. lopi has a good reputation. I know alot of people who have a travis Industries stoves and have had no issues. I remembering liking the 1750 its a good stove

 

[Smoky Stoker]

Have you considered a Blaze King catalytic stove?

I have a regency i2100 (the smaller discontinued brother of the i2400) in our basement. Regency makes a good stove, but I barely get it to last through the night. We burn it when the is in the teens or less outside, but otherwise find it to be a hassle.

We have a BK Princess on our main floor (catalytic stove) and it has great burn times. If you're running on High, you'll see similar times to other stoves (4-6 hrs), but on low you might only need to load once per day. Catalytic stoves have the benefit over others that they can operate extremely efficiently on low without building up creosote.

To break down creosote, most stoves need to at least reach ~1100F. A stove with a catalytic combustor can breakdown creosote around 400f (steel) cat to 500F (ceramic). Indirectly, that means you can run a larger firebox at a lower temperature... and get amazing burn times.

Owning both... I strongly recommend a catalytic combustor stove. Follow the owners manual and you won't be disappointed. A lot less effort, hassle, and wood! Saving you $$$$

 

[begreen]

To break down creosote, most stoves need to at least reach ~1100F.

A non-cat reaches that temp in the firebox quickly, especially with a top down start. Often in less time than it takes to warm up a cat from cold. We are usually cruising and smoke free in 10-15 minutes with a top down, cold start. This morning's start off of hot coals was up to temp in less than 10 minutes.

 

[Rickb]

As many people say on these forums.. You can always put less wood in a bigger stove. That said you are near 1 of the better cat stove manufacturers. (Blaze king)

Both the cat system or non cat system have there benefits and drawbacks and all have been discussed on here extensively. Just search and you will get more reading material then you will know what to do with.

 

[Hogwildz]

All depends on what you want as far as looks. Most inserts perform well these days, given the right set up.
Do you want a fancy cast iron insert, PE Alderlea, Hampton HI300, Jotul makes a few. Do you want standard steel insert? You have many options.
Cat, secondary burner? Secondary burners can burn just as well on smaller loads, and on low, as they do on high. Actually , most secondary burners are run on low or close to it once the fire is established. Don't be mislead by those saying otherwise. All stoves will smoke some at start up. Most will burn similarly at same fire box size. The cat will burn longer during shoulder seasons, and when operated on low, burn times will even closer secondary burner when run on high. Take your time, do much research, and narrow it down to 2 or 3 stoves. Check them out in person if you can, and narrow down what fits your wants & needs the most.

 

[Smoky Stoker]

A non-cat reaches that temp in the firebox quickly, especially with a top down start. Often in less time than it takes to warm up a cat from cold

I never have to start my CAT stove from cold from October to April... My non-cat... yes, every morning.

Rickb is right, there's pros and cons of both. I'd recommend a little larger firebox, and from my personal experience (burning both cat and non-cat), I'd recommend the cat. I have yet to see a non-cat that can provide the long burn times. If you're only heating 1200 Sqft, you can easily dial back a cat stove and get a loooong burn. I wouldn't worry about running yourself out of the room.

Hogwildz is also right, on high, the burn time between the two becomes much more similar.

 

[EbS-P]

For a point of comparison we have had maybe five nights down to the mid to upper twenties this winter. We have 2000 sq ft up stairs that we were heating with 1.8 cu ft stove. As an experiment I tried to see if it could keep up it running on the colder nights and it really couldn’t if the temps were below 30. It took a lot of reloading. My recommendation is go as big as is reasonable. I have a 1200 sq ft walkout basement that if I choose to put an insert in I would choose the Blaze king Princess. As the load it, light it, set it, extended operation would be very appealing.

 

[begreen]

I never have to start my CAT stove from cold from October to April... My non-cat... yes, every morning.

I seem to recall a cat owner recently posting about frequent restarts during mild weather to avoid overheating the house. It's all a matter of heat loss. FWIW, I let the heat pump carry the house with outdoor temps in the 50s. It's cleaner and more efficient. In a normal winter our stove runs continuously also. No need for cold restarts when it's under 45º outside.

 

[joneo]

Thanks everyone for all the awesome feedback! To answer some questions, yes that Rainier would be at a discount since it's the only one they have left (floor model, unused) and they can't get them anymore. In response to cat stoves, I was hesitant about them because of what I had been told regarding parts wearing out and associated costs etc. However, I have since learned that the newer ones are much better designed, and the catalytic converters on those Blaze Kings that were mentioned now last a good 10 years before needing to be replaced. The BKs look REALLY NICE and I especially like the bigger view of the firebox, and ease of lighting is a big plus as well. However they are also $1,000 more expensive and we can't justify that cost right now.

Everyone I have talked with, even the dealers who don't sell Regencys, have said that the I2400 is a good stove. Nothing bad about them. The general consensus has been that a medium sized stove would be my best bet, and so my focus had quickly narrowed down to Regency I2400 vs. the Pacific Energy Super. I do agree that N/S loading would be a bit easier. But then I saw the Pacific Energy Neo 2.5 insert. Yay finally a flush design that isn't a small size firebox! I'm having an installer come out hopefully next week to let us know if it will fit or not. My preliminary measurements lead me to think it will. Here's the info on the Neo: http://www.pacificenergy.net/products/wood/contemporary-inserts/neo-25-insert/

Now, the one thing to consider with this model, is it too big???

 

[begreen]

and the catalytic converters on those Blaze Kings that were mentioned now last a good 10 years before needing to be replaced.

There is only one person that has reported this so far. Most users here that are burning 24/7 are seeing about 3yr. lifespan or 10,000 hrs.

 

[joneo]

Just found an older thread on this forum asking about the Neo 1.6 vs. 2.5 for a 1300 sq ft house. https://www.hearth.com/talk/threads/pacific-energy-neo-2-5-vs-neo-1-6-for-1300-sq-ft-house.155096/

 

[begreen]

One thing worth seriously thinking about is how the stove firebox is loaded. Some are rectangular and are best loaded E/W. Others are more square and can be loaded N/S or E/W. Having had both, I much prefer a squarer firebox. Sometimes this info can be hard to find. If you are researching a stove, download the manual and look at the firebrick layout to get a sense of the firebox proportions. The Neo 1.6 is definitely an E/W loader. The 2.5 is biased toward E/W but can be loaded N/S with shorter splits. The Super has a square firebox.

 

[joneo]

I took a look at a couple Neos today. If I go with the larger 2.5, I could load definitely load smaller pieces N/S. We like the flush look.

I guess if we put in a larger stove, we don't necessarily have to fully load the thing, eh? Say for instance, we only put in as much wood as a smaller 1.6 size would take. We could theoretically still burn hot enough to have an efficient fire, but by not fully loading the stove we wouldn't risk burning ourselves out of the house, correct? I'm starting to see that a larger firebox would give us the option to load more, if we felt the need, and would be easier to load as well. Would that be an accurate statement?

 

[Hogwildz]

Yes. You can only load the firebox with what room it allows. A larger box can be loaded with a smaller load, and larger load when the need arises. A smaller box can be filled to max, but if that don't cut it, then you are SOL.

 

[joneo]

Yes. You can only load the firebox with what room it allows. A larger box can be loaded with a smaller load, and larger load when the need arises. A smaller box can be filled to max, but if that don't cut it, then you are SOL.

That's what I was thinking, but just read from another post on this site that the Neo 2.5 burns best with a fully loaded firebox. Why would that be?
https://hearth.com/talk/threads/pacific-energy-neo-2-5-insert.172535/#post-2346608

 

[Hogwildz]

That's what I was thinking, but just read from another post on this site that the Neo 2.5 burns best with a fully loaded firebox. Why would that be?
https://hearth.com/talk/threads/pacific-energy-neo-2-5-insert.172535/#post-2346608

Is that a general consensuses or one observation/opinion?
I believe PE fireboxes are the same throughout the line across each size. That said, it should burn fine with small load, 1/2 load, or full load.

 

[Rhodie]

Our dealer noted that some people who wanted a Neo 2.5 did not have enough clearance at the top back end, some fireplaces slope more than others and if it fits width wise and the depth wise at the same level as the top of the unit then likely it’s going to be fine.

We don’t burn 24/7, burn mostly doug fir, and don’t need full loads to stay happy (not easy to heat far out parts of the house without running the house/furnace fan). Our chimney is not on the exterior (so we are ok without having a block off plate as the masonry going through the main floor releases the heat nicely for some time), insert is in the walk out basement level, house is ~2600sq ft, mild/little insulation avg for pac northwest 1950s house, flue is 25-30ft.

Our cats love it!

 

[begreen]

I believe PE fireboxes are the same throughout the line across each size. That said, it should burn fine with small load, 1/2 load, or full load.

The Neo fireboxes are a different shape from the Vista/Super/Summit line fireboxes.

 

[begreen]

That's what I was thinking, but just read from another post on this site that the Neo 2.5 burns best with a fully loaded firebox. Why would that be?
https://hearth.com/talk/threads/pacific-energy-neo-2-5-insert.172535/#post-2346608

Every house is different. It depends on how 'lossy' your house is. It also depend on the wood burned. If you are burning doug fir then 4-5 splits will provide a hot enough fire to keep the glass clean. During milder weather we often burn partial loads. That said, the Neo's have more of a rectangular firebox so a "full" firebox is not the same as a full load in a N/S loader. One has to be more careful in loading E/W so that splits don't tumble against the glass as the fire burns down.

 

[joneo]

Is that a general consensuses or one observation/opinion?
I believe PE fireboxes are the same throughout the line across each size. That said, it should burn fine with small load, 1/2 load, or full load.

I just got a reply on that thread, they said in their experience the glass can get increased soot at the edges but wipes off easily.

I've been going over everything again, re-comparing the Regency I2400 to the P.E. Super, Neo 2.5 and 1.6. While I would prefer the flush look of the Neo, the Regency can be loaded either N/S or E/W, it's viewing area is about the same size as the Neo 2.5, and the square footage rating is closer to our house. When I take all these factors into account, it seems that the Regency may just win out here after all. Which, like I previously stated, was the one that was originally suggested by the installer. Well at least I can say I'm making a truly informed decision now!


Side by side, their specs look like this:

Regency I2400

• View 160 sq in
• Firebox 2.3 cu ft
• Load N/S or E/W
• Max Log Size 18”
• Emissions 3.4 gm/hr
• Rated 1000-2000 sq ft
• Max Output 75,000 BTU/hr

Pacific Energy Neo 2.5

• View 166 sq in
• Firebox 2.5 cu ft
• Load E/W
• Max Log Size 19”
• Emissions 2.9 gm/hr
• Rated 1500-2300 sq ft
• Max Output 80,000 BTU/hr
  

Pacific Energy Super

• View 120 sq in
• Firebox 2.1 cu ft
• Load N/S
• Max Log Size 18”
• Emissions 3.4 gm/hr
• Rated 1000-2000 sq ft
• Max Output 72,000 BTU/hr

Pacific Energy Neo 1.6

• View 147 sq in
• Firebox 1.6 cu ft
• Load E/W
• Max Log Size 18”
• Emissions 3.9 gm/hr
• Rated 700-1500 sq ft
• Max Output 70,000 BTU/hr
  

 

[begreen]

My vote would be for the Super. It has no tubes. Gets a longer burn, loads N/S and E/W. Member Dix has this stove heating her place in NY state.

 

[Hogwildz]

I second BG's input.