New wood stoves: square fireboxes

[MrMadness]

I’ve read that having a square firebox provides another means of controlling burn rate & heat output.
roughly a North-South log orientation leads to hotter & faster, while East-West orientation leads to longer slower burns.
Looking online I don’t see examples of these.
Does anyone have recommendations for new stoves with square fireboxes that can accommodate 16-inch logs?

 

[30WCF]

I’ve got one sitting in my carport right now. It’s the England’s 50-SHSSW01.

 

[begreen]

There are several. What size stove are you looking for and what budget range?

 

[stoveliker]

Exactly square rules out many possibilities that are nearly square.

E.g. BKs have an approximately square box - not trying to get into a debate about what approximately should still include. But for a 30.2 firebox, having 18" n/s and 20" e/w means I can put my 18" splits e/w with only 1" gap on each side.

As begreen will tell you, there are more brands and models that.can do something like that.

 

[Ashful]

I’ve read that having a square firebox provides another means of controlling burn rate & heat output.
roughly a North-South log orientation leads to hotter & faster, while East-West orientation leads to longer slower burns.

I think some clever marketing manager is taking a very secondary effect, and pretending it's actually something relevant to the operator. The direction you load the wood will have such a small effect on the burn rate, versus the impact of good air controls and good stove design (eg. how air is introduced to the firebox), as to be nearly completely irrelevant. It is true that all makers want to introduce a large fraction of the incoming air above the door, to keep the glass as clean as possible, and this does impose some limits on their air flow. However, this is not the reason you should be debating N-S vs. E-W loading.

Simply put, north-south loading allows one to more easily stuff the firebox full, without having logs roll out or up against the door glass. E/W loading gives a pretty traditional fire view, and allows for a shallower stove that doesn't stick out into the room as much. Some have come up with creative ways to achieve both, such as side-load or top-load doors, to avoid having to open the front door to load an E/W stove full. These factors are far more important than any miniscule difference in burn time due to N/S vs. E/W loading the same volume of wood.

 

[CentralVAWoodHeat]

Exactly square rules out many possibilities that are nearly square.

E.g. BKs have an approximately square box - not trying to get into a debate about what approximately should still include. But for a 30.2 firebox, having 18" n/s and 20" e/w means I can put my 18" splits e/w with only 1" gap on each side.

As begreen will tell you, there are more brands and models that.can do something like that.

As another example to support this, my Osburn 3500 will take a 22” log E/W and, I believe, about an 18” log N/S. Not perfectly square but really functional and gives you options.

 

[begreen]

The direction you load the wood will have such a small effect on the burn rate, versus the impact of good air controls and good stove design (eg. how air is introduced to the firebox),

That's not quite so. There is a marked difference in how a stove with a squarish firebox initially burns loaded E/W vs N/S. Yes, stove design can make a difference, but the user experience is notably different too. Look back on the several threads on starting an E/W loader for the difference that putting N/S sleepers under the wood made for easier startup.

The airwash air (and in many stoves the boost air) hits the wall of logs loaded E/W. That slows the air feed down and affects the burn order of the logs. In our E/W loading F400 it took loading the wood on a pair of small N/S sleepers set about 6" apart to permit the air to get under the wood for a faster start. In a N/S load, the airwash and boost air can easily travel the length of the wood on startup which contributes to a faster takeoff. The load burns initially faster for this same reason albeit with the potential for a shorter fire.

This may not make a lot of difference in a pure cat stove where the wood is smoldering. In a hybrid or tube stove it is notable.

 

[begreen]

Exactly square rules out many possibilities that are nearly square.

Absolutely right. If the depth permits a 16" or 18" split to be loaded N/S, the width is less important. Note the Jotul F118 or other box stoves which have a deep rectangular firebox.

More details after MrMadness tells us about the size of stove required and budget.

 

[stoveliker]

Apart from (low) burn modes, I think also a stove that regulates the air based on heat output would negate the effect of loading orientation. A stove with a fixed resistance to the pull of the chimney is likely more dependent on loading orientation due to in-firebox flow reasons.

 

[Ashful]

That's not quite so. There is a marked difference in how a stove with a squarish firebox initially burns loaded E/W vs N/S. Yes, stove design can make a difference, but the user experience is notably different too. Look back on the several threads on starting an E/W loader for the difference that putting N/S sleepers under the wood made for easier startup.

The airwash air (and in many stoves the boost air) hits the wall of logs loaded E/W. That slows the air feed down and affects the burn order of the logs. In our E/W loading F400 it took loading the wood on a pair of small N/S sleepers set about 6" apart to permit the air to get under the wood for a faster start. In a N/S load, the airwash and boost air can easily travel the length of the wood on startup which contributes to a faster takeoff. The load burns initially faster for this same reason albeit with the potential for a shorter fire.

This may not make a lot of difference in a pure cat stove where the wood is smoldering. In a hybrid or tube stove it is notable.

Good point, our minds always go to what we have the most experience with. In my mind, you want a longer burn, you just turn down the stove, orientation be damned. If your stove has an inability to turn down, then turning the wood E/W can be another way to slow down the burn rate.

But really, how many non-cats are that bad at turning down? I hear non-cat owners boasting 12 hour burn times on N/S loading stoves, which is impressive. So I can't believe they're really so terrible that many really need to resort to turning their wood E/W for the sake of controlling burn rate.

 

[MrMadness]

There are several. What size stove are you looking for and what budget range?

I guess I’m looking for a stove that would heat between 2,000 and 2,500 square feet. I don’t yet have budget. I just wanted a starting point for shopping. Are there brands that do this I can look at?

 

[MrMadness]

Exactly square rules out many possibilities that are nearly square.

E.g. BKs have an approximately square box - not trying to get into a debate about what approximately should still include. But for a 30.2 firebox, having 18" n/s and 20" e/w means I can put my 18" splits e/w with only 1" gap on each side.

As begreen will tell you, there are more brands and models that.can do something like that.

I really don’t mind nearly square fireboxes so long as they can accommodate 18” logs NS and EW

 

[MrMadness]

I think some clever marketing manager is taking a very secondary effect, and pretending it's actually something relevant to the operator. The direction you load the wood will have such a small effect on the burn rate, versus the impact of good air controls and good stove design (eg. how air is introduced to the firebox), as to be nearly completely irrelevant.

My source for this is at the address below:

A non-commercial service in support of responsible home heating with wood - Five Ways to Control Heat Output

The Wood Heat Organization was formed to support the public in the responsible use of wood energy in the home. We fulfill our mandate by providing reliable information, by conducting research into wood heating-related issues and by representing the public interest in discussions of policies that...

www.woodheat.org

They very well may be wrong, but it doesn’t appear that they are trying to sell me something.

 

[bholler]

My source for this is at the address below:

A non-commercial service in support of responsible home heating with wood - Five Ways to Control Heat Output

The Wood Heat Organization was formed to support the public in the responsible use of wood energy in the home. We fulfill our mandate by providing reliable information, by conducting research into wood heating-related issues and by representing the public interest in discussions of policies that...

www.woodheat.org

They very well may be wrong, but it doesn’t appear that they are trying to sell me something.

Yeah some of the info on that site is very questionable.

 

[begreen]

I guess I’m looking for a stove that would heat between 2,000 and 2,500 square feet. I don’t yet have budget. I just wanted a starting point for shopping. Are there brands that do this I can look at?

You have plenty of choices and will be looking for a 2.5 to 3.5 cu ft stove. In non-cat, check out the Lopi Liberty, Pacific Energy Summit or Alderlea T6, Osburn 3500 or Drolet HT3000, Ironstrike Montlake 300 or Country ST310, Englander 32-NC, and the Quadrafire 5700.
In cat stoves look at the Blaze King Princess or any of their 30.x models. In hybrids (cat and tube) look at the Regency 3500 and the Woodstock Ideal Steel.

 

[MrMadness]

You have plenty of choices and will be looking for a 2.5 to 3.5 cu ft stove. In non-cat, check out the Lopi Liberty, Pacific Energy Summit or Alderlea T6, Osburn 3500 or Drolet HT3000, Ironstrike Montlake 300 or Country ST310, Englander 32-NC, and the Quadrafire 5700.
In cat stoves look at the Blaze King Princess or any of their 30.x models. In hybrids (cat and tube) look at the Regency 3500 and the Woodstock Ideal Steel.

Thanks begreen

 

[ABMax24]

Personally I'd swap the Osburn 3500, Drolet HT3000 and Englander 32-NC out. They are all the SBI 3.5cuft firebox and are wider E/W than long N/S, and the firebox is quite short in height.

In comparison the 3.3 cuft firebox is more square, like perfect if you allow 2" from glass to wood, and it's firebox is an 1-1/4" taller. Which doesn't seem like much, but makes a noticeable difference. This firebox comes in the Osburn 3300, Drolet Austral III, Drolet Myriad III, and Drolet Legend III.

 

[begreen]

Yes, they are taller, but that doesn't make the others a poor choice. The Englander 32NC is still made by Englander even though it is now an SBI company. It has its own firebox config. Any of the stoves listed will do the job.

 

[ABMax24]

Yes, they are taller, but that doesn't make the others a poor choice. The Englander 32NC is still made by Englander even though it is now an SBI company. It has its own firebox config. Any of the stoves listed will do the job.

No they're not a poor choice, my post was merely my personal preference.

 

[Newbie78]

I really like the height in the Legend III too. It allows pretty big wood to be stacked without hitting the roof. Of course my pieces get bigger and bigger..until something won't fit, Lol.

 

[Easy Livin’ 3000]

I’ve read that having a square firebox provides another means of controlling burn rate & heat output.
roughly a North-South log orientation leads to hotter & faster, while East-West orientation leads to longer slower burns.
Looking online I don’t see examples of these.
Does anyone have recommendations for new stoves with square fireboxes that can accommodate 16-inch logs?

I wouldn't worry about being square, despite what huey lewis said.

Just look at the firebox specs. Mine will load 20" e-w, 16" n-s. I started cutting all my wood right to 20", with a plan to burn all e-w. Focus on the stove's n-s measurement, and forget about being square.

It didn't take me long to see the benefits of loading n-s. Most important to me is the ability to stack to the top, with no issues of rounds rolling out the front door, and flat out, more loading capacity. Of secondary importance, but still important to me, is the nature of the fire. E-w is a nice, casual, atmosphere fire. When you want a long burning heating machine, go n-s. It makes a significant difference, in my experience.

Now I cut all my wood to 15 1/2", for 100% n-s loading . That half inch (less than the stoves 16" spec) has saved me tons of stress, no fun finding the door won't close because my intended 16" cut was a little too long, and the door won't close, in the middle of a hot reload.

 

[Newbie78]

I concur with the E/W vs N/S loading wrt burn times and fire activity. It's nice to have a choice without going to very short pieces, Imo.

I like that I can load 18" either way.

gonna see -30C and probably colder over the next week (We're almost always several degrees colder here than the nearest town). Damn! The new, bigger stove will be nice for that.

 

[begreen]

Most of the time I load N/S, but for a test, I loaded the T6 east/west for the last 2 fires. I haven't done this for awhile and was curious. Holy Moly what a difference! The fire is definitely slower to take off. Normally, with a N/S loading I have the air all the way closed in about 15-20 minutes. With E/W loading this morning it took an hour and even now, I don't have the air fully closed. The secondary burn has extended with more wispy bursts of blue flame instead of the fairly continuous secondary burn with a N/S loading. It's like running a different stove.

Last night I did a hot coal reload before going to bed. Normally I have this timed down to being able to go to bed in about 30 minutes. I had to stay up an hour before the fire settled down and again, the air control was not fully closed. This information could be helpful for people that have a tall flue system and want more control. The caveat is that the stove will warm up slower. I am going to continue experimenting. This is the advantage of a squarish firebox, with more options for loading and burning.

 

[Hoytman]

As far as the Myriad II & III goes … I like the II because of the by-pass. Not sure, but I think the 3 doesn’t have the by-pass. Already forgot what other features separate those two stoves. Obviously the newer 3 is also cleaner burning, though likely not by much, but enough to pass the 2020 reg’s.

I too prefer the squarish fireboxes for the options to burn either direction without cutting two sizes of wood.

I’d trade my Liberty for an Endeavor in a heartbeat.

 

[begreen]

As far as the Myriad II & III goes … I like the II because of the by-pass. Not sure, but I think the 3 doesn’t have the by-pass. Already forgot what other features separate those two stoves. Obviously the newer 3 is also cleaner burning, though likely not by much, but enough to pass the 2020 reg’s.

I too prefer the squarish fireboxes for the options to burn either direction without cutting two sizes of wood.

I’d trade my Liberty for an Endeavor in a heartbeat.

No bypass now on that group of Drolets or the Osburn equiv. The primary differences are unshielded (Austral), pedestal and side shielding (Myriad), and legs + side shielding (Legend).

They extended the depth of the firebox in the new Liberty Nex-Gen a bit so that it loads 16" wood N/S now. So far the reports are very favorable for this stove.