Mrs. Yankee and I have spent a lot of time this Thanksgiving weekend looking at various inserts and I believe that we've narrowed it down to two at this point. The criteria we were working off of is as follows:
![[Hearth.com] Montlake 300 vs. Napoleon 1402-Also Install Questions? Feedback welcomed from owners of either unit](https://www.hearth.com/talk/attachments/1575209460983-webp.252488/ "[Hearth.com] Montlake 300 vs. Napoleon 1402-Also Install Questions? Feedback welcomed from owners of either unit")
This install is about what mine should look like-the Montlake 300 is 38 1/8" wide and my fireplace opening is 41 1/8" wide leaving me with only 1 1/2" on either side to cover. The flashing over the top would only need to be about 6". I like the plain all black styling and the understated design of the side vents. I would opt for the cast iron top. The glass area is nearly 200 square inches which is probably one of the largest out there. The 3.0 CF firebox is also about the biggest I've seen as well. I would like to be able to load in the morning before work (6:00 a.m.), in the afternoon when I get home (5:00 p.m) and just before bed (9-10:00 p.m.) as a general schedule. I'm not so concerned with not having the heat kick on at all (we have an old drafty house)-I have plenty of wood available on my own land which costs me nothing more than my labor so any degree to which I can offset oil usage with it is great. As long as I have a good bed of coals to start with each time I'll be happy.
Napoleon 1402:
![[Hearth.com] Montlake 300 vs. Napoleon 1402-Also Install Questions? Feedback welcomed from owners of either unit](https://www.hearth.com/talk/attachments/1575210495436-webp.252489/ "[Hearth.com] Montlake 300 vs. Napoleon 1402-Also Install Questions? Feedback welcomed from owners of either unit")
Ironically the Napoleon which has a smaller (2.25 CF) firebox and a smaller viewing area (170 square inches) than the Montlake 300 is wider set and would cover the sides of the fireplace on its own with no trim. Along the top it would need a bit more (about 10") as it sits lower. I'm also not crazy about the ornate design of the vents, but I like the overall styling. I do not believe there is an option for a cast iron top. That sums up the aesthetic concerns, so I 'd like to see if I can get some real world opinions on build quality, actual burn times with good hardwoods such as locust (I have a lot of it), parts availability and customer support, and blower noise levels.
Now for my specific install. What I like about both of these units is that they cover the width of the fireplace. One of the things I really don't like about a lot of inserts is the wide flashings that are often required to fill the gap between the fireplace opening and the insert itself, so at least in terms of width, that would be kept to a minimum (Montlake) or eliminated altogether (Napoleon) with these units. I had some ideas with regard to the top flashing however as I've never seen either done before. For each unit I would need to make up 6" (Montlake) or 10" (Napoleon) vertically. The first idea I had was to build up the floor of the firebox/hearth with brick in order to elevate the insert itself in order to make up the gap and face it off with stone from my property so that there would be no gap on top. The only problem I foresee with this is I don't know how I would access to the top of the unit in order to fasten the liner to the collar on the insert. I don't know enough about installing inserts to begin with to know if this is somehow surmountable or not. The second idea would be to substitute some kind of stone slab (either real or simulated) for the top flashing to create the illusion of a stone lintel. Again, however, I don't know enough about how it all goes together to know if it would be possible or not. There is also the issue of hearth protection. My current hearth of brick and stone extends about 18" out from the fireplace opening and is raised about 5" above the finished floor. With the protrusion of either insert I will lose about 9", so I assume that I will need to add another 9" of hearth protection. With regard to the chimney, I have 28' of Simpson Class A sitting in my basement. I took it off of our old house when we moved-it used to vent my Englander 28-3500 wood furnace and it's in very good shape. Could I use this inside my existing clay lined chimney, assuming it fits? Finally, as I type this, the ice storm currently hitting the Northeast has knocked out our power. Our line goes through about 400 yards of woods, so we lose power frequently in this kind of weather. We do have a generator, but when outages last into the night we tend to shut it off while we're sleeping. Even though it is 100' away in the barn its still fairly noisy. I'd like to be able to burn the insert whether the power is on or off, but I'm not sure if you're supposed to do so without the blower operating. I couldn't find a reference to anything like that in either manual.
Looking forward to recommendations and most of all hearing from those who own either of these inserts.
- Classic/Traditional styling (vs. contemporary, etc...)
- Plain black finish as opposed to any kind of gold or other shiny trim
- 2.0 CF+ firebox
- Face of insert large enough to fill our fireplace opening with the least amount of trim on the top and sides possible (I have an install question related to that)
- Large viewing window
- Insert protrudes into the room with a "shelf" of at least 8-9" for placing a kettle or a small dutch oven
This install is about what mine should look like-the Montlake 300 is 38 1/8" wide and my fireplace opening is 41 1/8" wide leaving me with only 1 1/2" on either side to cover. The flashing over the top would only need to be about 6". I like the plain all black styling and the understated design of the side vents. I would opt for the cast iron top. The glass area is nearly 200 square inches which is probably one of the largest out there. The 3.0 CF firebox is also about the biggest I've seen as well. I would like to be able to load in the morning before work (6:00 a.m.), in the afternoon when I get home (5:00 p.m) and just before bed (9-10:00 p.m.) as a general schedule. I'm not so concerned with not having the heat kick on at all (we have an old drafty house)-I have plenty of wood available on my own land which costs me nothing more than my labor so any degree to which I can offset oil usage with it is great. As long as I have a good bed of coals to start with each time I'll be happy.
Napoleon 1402:
Ironically the Napoleon which has a smaller (2.25 CF) firebox and a smaller viewing area (170 square inches) than the Montlake 300 is wider set and would cover the sides of the fireplace on its own with no trim. Along the top it would need a bit more (about 10") as it sits lower. I'm also not crazy about the ornate design of the vents, but I like the overall styling. I do not believe there is an option for a cast iron top. That sums up the aesthetic concerns, so I 'd like to see if I can get some real world opinions on build quality, actual burn times with good hardwoods such as locust (I have a lot of it), parts availability and customer support, and blower noise levels.
Now for my specific install. What I like about both of these units is that they cover the width of the fireplace. One of the things I really don't like about a lot of inserts is the wide flashings that are often required to fill the gap between the fireplace opening and the insert itself, so at least in terms of width, that would be kept to a minimum (Montlake) or eliminated altogether (Napoleon) with these units. I had some ideas with regard to the top flashing however as I've never seen either done before. For each unit I would need to make up 6" (Montlake) or 10" (Napoleon) vertically. The first idea I had was to build up the floor of the firebox/hearth with brick in order to elevate the insert itself in order to make up the gap and face it off with stone from my property so that there would be no gap on top. The only problem I foresee with this is I don't know how I would access to the top of the unit in order to fasten the liner to the collar on the insert. I don't know enough about installing inserts to begin with to know if this is somehow surmountable or not. The second idea would be to substitute some kind of stone slab (either real or simulated) for the top flashing to create the illusion of a stone lintel. Again, however, I don't know enough about how it all goes together to know if it would be possible or not. There is also the issue of hearth protection. My current hearth of brick and stone extends about 18" out from the fireplace opening and is raised about 5" above the finished floor. With the protrusion of either insert I will lose about 9", so I assume that I will need to add another 9" of hearth protection. With regard to the chimney, I have 28' of Simpson Class A sitting in my basement. I took it off of our old house when we moved-it used to vent my Englander 28-3500 wood furnace and it's in very good shape. Could I use this inside my existing clay lined chimney, assuming it fits? Finally, as I type this, the ice storm currently hitting the Northeast has knocked out our power. Our line goes through about 400 yards of woods, so we lose power frequently in this kind of weather. We do have a generator, but when outages last into the night we tend to shut it off while we're sleeping. Even though it is 100' away in the barn its still fairly noisy. I'd like to be able to burn the insert whether the power is on or off, but I'm not sure if you're supposed to do so without the blower operating. I couldn't find a reference to anything like that in either manual.
Looking forward to recommendations and most of all hearing from those who own either of these inserts.
