need opinions on BK chinook 20 vs PE neo

[bnt]

Hey all,
Ive spent a fair bit of time going cross eyed trying to find reviews on the chinook 20. lots of people have the 30. I know I am maybe comparing apples to oranges with baffles vs cat, but would appreciate all feedback to help me make a decision.
I am building a 1200 sq ft rancher home with heated slab on grade concrete as main heat source.
I am not sure how much the replacement cost is for the cat on the chinook and how difficult it is to use a cat stove vs non cat in general. overall the BK reviews seem great for the chinook 30. The pacific energy neo seems simpler to use but maybe less efficient? and perhaps more issues...?
also not sure if getting the ash box is worthwhile with the chinook as well...people say there is almost no ash so dont bother....
I like the simple lines and aesthetic look of both these stoves, and I can get the entire setup with liner and fan kit etcfor the chinook for under 4K cdn so that seems pretty decent.
any thoughts or advice would be greatly appreciated!

 

[Highbeam]

The pacific energy neo seems simpler to use but maybe less efficient?

Yes, simpler to use but much less efficient. Non-cats are all much less efficient than the BKs and their heat output is way less flexible, you can't turn them down very low at all. It's either hot or hotter. That's fine for an evening fire or weekend fire.

You're in "BC" so I assume you will be burning mostly doug fir like me. This wood makes very little ash so ash removal chores are greatly reduced but I still like an ash pan since it is so much cleaner to remove ashes when you must.

I would highly recommend you move up to the 30 series BK vs. the 20. Read the specs closely and you'll find that the 30 box can be burned very low and put out even less heat than the 30 but due to the large firebox can burn for 30 hours at that low rate. The 30 is also capable of much higher output since it's bigger. The 20 box is a really bad option in comparison.

The PE is a good brand. Non-cats make a nice fireview and can heat your house but it will be at the expense of short burntimes and low efficiency. They're usually cheaper to buy and have less stringent flue length requirements since all the heat being dumped into the chimney creates more draft.

 

[bcrtops]

Cat lovers throw around the word "efficiency" like a typical politician.
Look them up -- within 2% of each other!! So............2% is much less efficient?

The cats have the advantage of giving you long & slow burn times. They have the disadvantage of all the maintenance issues involved.
Keep in mind that given the same lb. of wood you will get the same btu's out of either, irregardless of the stove & despite the cat lover's political speech. PE makes some good stoves & as free of maintenance as any on the market -- easy to clean & easy to access the flue.

The BK's have a good reputation if you really want to go that direction. Around these parts the cat wood stove has a reputation that is beyond horrible, due to some of the older designs, which incorporated cast iron (leaky) boxes -- so the cat alone, was not the only issue. Do your research, & decide what you want -- just don't buy into all the hype from either the BK or PE direction. Good Luck.

(I like the design of these stoves with the somewhat elevated firebox. As you get older, the low to the floor stoves get to be more of a hassle. Quad makes a neat looking style similar -- Discovery 1,2 & 3)

 

[Highbeam]

Cat lovers throw around the word "efficiency" like a typical politician.
Look them up -- within 2% of each other!! So............2% is much less efficient?

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2013-08/documents/certifiedwood.pdf

I do agree that efficiency is not really that important compared to burn time which is directly related to the wide range of available output.

 

[bholler]

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2013-08/documents/certifiedwood.pdf

I do agree that efficiency is not really that important compared to burn time which is directly related to the wide range of available output.

And in a new 1200 squft house running low will probably be desired many times. I do agree the efficiency is not enough to make much of a difference. But if you have a low heat demand much of the season a cat is the way to co no question. And BKs are pretty much the best of the cats.

 

[bholler]

Oh and I may be moving to a smaller newer house so a BK may possibly be in my future. If we do move i will take the regency and run it a couple years to see how it goes but a cat would probably be a good fit.

 

[Highbeam]

This thread is dangerously close to a classic and common cat vs. non-cat debate. I own both types right now and there are plusses and minuses to both. PE and BK are good brands with good reputations.

1200 SF is pretty small and will be harder to heat with a non-cat because to get any reasonable length of burn you need a pretty big non-cat stove but a pretty big non-cat stove will make a lot of heat when it is burning.

 

[bholler]

This thread is dangerously close to a classic and common cat vs. non-cat debate. I own both types right now and there are plusses and minuses to both. PE and BK are good brands with good reputations.

1200 SF is pretty small and will be harder to heat with a non-cat because to get any reasonable length of burn you need a pretty big non-cat stove but a pretty big non-cat stove will make a lot of heat when it is burning.

Yes it is but the initial question was really asking that so it makes sense for once.

And in this case i think a cat fits well

 

[bcrtops]

Efficiency: from the manufacturers own spec sheets=

BK Chinook 20, 83% LHV & 77% HHV (1.8 cu.ft. firebox)
PE Neo 1.6, 80.9% LHV & 75% HHV (1.6 cu.ft. firebox)
Quad Discovery 2, 79.9% LHV (2.0 cu.ft. firebox)

They all have their advantages & disadvantages -- depends on your expectations (maintenance, clearances, burn times, cook-top, etc.)

 

[bnt]

the cat seems to be the way to go i think despite what seems like more maintenance but I am still unsure of the 20 vs 30...I did look closer at the specs and the 30 could work as it states 1100-2400 i think but people keep telling us to be careful that we get the right size stove so the 900-1500 spec seems to be more appropriate. With a 30 would we just be constantly overheating, esp with heated concrete floors...?

 

[lsucet]

the cat seems to be the way to go i think despite what seems like more maintenance but I am still unsure of the 20 vs 30...I did look closer at the specs and the 30 could work as it states 1100-2400 i think but people keep telling us to be careful that we get the right size stove so the 900-1500 spec seems to be more appropriate. With a 30 would we just be constantly overheating, esp with heated concrete floors...?

With the 30.1 you will have better emissions and more efficiency compare to the 20.1. also bigger box for longer burn times. You still can dial the 30.1 as low as the 20.1 series. See website specifications. It is all around a better deal unless is a real small house and easy to warm up.

 

[maple1]

Hey all,
Ive spent a fair bit of time going cross eyed trying to find reviews on the chinook 20. lots of people have the 30. I know I am maybe comparing apples to oranges with baffles vs cat, but would appreciate all feedback to help me make a decision.
I am building a 1200 sq ft rancher home with heated slab on grade concrete as main heat source.
I am not sure how much the replacement cost is for the cat on the chinook and how difficult it is to use a cat stove vs non cat in general. overall the BK reviews seem great for the chinook 30. The pacific energy neo seems simpler to use but maybe less efficient? and perhaps more issues...?
also not sure if getting the ash box is worthwhile with the chinook as well...people say there is almost no ash so dont bother....
I like the simple lines and aesthetic look of both these stoves, and I can get the entire setup with liner and fan kit etcfor the chinook for under 4K cdn so that seems pretty decent.
any thoughts or advice would be greatly appreciated!

A stove in 1200 sq.ft. with in-floor heat seems like a bit of an oddity to me. Either the stove will be heating which makes the in-floor kind of redundant, or the floor will be heating making the stove redundant? In-floor is the kind of thing that if used at all, it should be used constantly, not really off/on or up/down with it.

 

[Highbeam]

the cat seems to be the way to go i think despite what seems like more maintenance but I am still unsure of the 20 vs 30...I did look closer at the specs and the 30 could work as it states 1100-2400 i think but people keep telling us to be careful that we get the right size stove so the 900-1500 spec seems to be more appropriate. With a 30 would we just be constantly overheating, esp with heated concrete floors...?

Didn't you read the specs? The 30 can be run lower and make less heat than the 20. If you're afraid of too much heat then you should pick the 30!

 

[begreen]

A stove in 1200 sq.ft. with in-floor heat seems like a bit of an oddity to me. Either the stove will be heating which makes the in-floor kind of redundant, or the floor will be heating making the stove redundant? In-floor is the kind of thing that if used at all, it should be used constantly, not really off/on or up/down with it.

If the thermostat for the in-floor heat is within the heated area of the wood stove then it most likely will not come on while the stove is burning. The room ambient will be above the turn on temp. At that point the floor heat becomes supplemental, regardless of which stove is installed. More important to know is how well insulated the home envelope is. If it is super-insulated then even 10K btus may be too much in above freezing weather, but for average insulation the BK should do ok for the main area. The farther away bedrooms may be chilly though due to the rambling nature of a ranch house. If that is the case it may be a good idea to zone the bedrooms separately with their own thermostat. For sure insulate under the slab very well.

 

[maple1]

Yes, definitely should be zoned and well insulated underneath.

My thinking is that in slab heat is not very good for supplemental heating, given very long response times. Could take a day to just get the slab warmed to where it needs to be. So it should be main heat or always on. Which would maybe make the stove redundant. If it's a case of wanting extra heat in the area where the stove would be, or some ambiance, I guess that would be different.

 

[begreen]

Very good point, an uninsulated or poorly insulated slab can take a long time to heat. If it's very well insulated on the sides and underneath then about 4-8hrs. Zoning would help, but it all depends on the lifestyle. If the intent is to heat with wood 24/7 then the BK makes sense. If the desire is to have a chill chaser for nights and evenings with slab heat then I would consider the small Neo instead and leave the slab heat set at an acceptable ambient. FWIW I probably would not do a slab or slab heating. My preference would be to raise the house and do a crawlspace with good floor insulation and some electric baseboard in the bedrooms. Then the BK 30 would be a nice primary source of heat.