Old Shallow Fireplace and the Stove Inside

[1869Farmhouse]

My old farmhouse has a fireplace that is about 32" across, just shy of 35" high, but only 17" deep at the bottom with the backside angling forward to make it only 11" deep at the top. There is an old stove pipe running up the masonry chimney, so there was obviously a stove in the fireplace at some point.

Is this type of fireplace common for the era and were folks generally putting stoves inside of them when the option became more commonly available? My town has a number of beautiful old stoves that would make a wonderful addition to the room, and this stove would only be used for occasional supplemental heat, but I've generally seen stoves out in the open, not tucked into a shallow fireplace, so looking for some input.

Thanks all

 

[begreen]

This sounds like a Rumford style fireplace. There are some modern good looking stoves that can fit in there, but the "stovepipe" in the chimney should be checked out. If it is a 6" stainless liner then it may be reusable if not damaged or in poor condition.

 

[1869Farmhouse]

This sounds like a Rumford style fireplace. There are some modern good looking stoves that can fit in there, but the "stovepipe" in the chimney should be checked out. If it is a 6" stainless liner then it may be reusable if not damaged or in poor condition.

Interesting, the Rumfords I'm seeing online are similar in depth. Biggest difference in mine is a little wider and squared on the sides with the angle at the top.

I had no plans to re-use the old liner. There's an extremely attractive old Fisher and another Jotul for sale very reasonably near me, so a new liner would be a given. My largest concern was placing the stove inside of the shallow fireplace. It's brick all the way around, but there is a wooden mantle above the fireplace - and I'd just never seen a stove placed into a fireplace in this fashion.

I appreciate the input!

 

[begreen]

If the fireplace is original then an insulated liner is imperative with a very thorough cleaning of the existing flue first. Sometimes they used wood supports inside the fireplace so a visual verification that there are none is a good idea too. In addition to venting the stove safely, clearances to combustibles in a fireplace install are very important. The mantel, side walls, cabinets, etc. need to be taken into account.

 

[1869Farmhouse]

Sounds great. I’ve narrowed my search down to a Vermont Vigilant, a Fisher Papa Bear, and a Jøtul 121. Would anyone have any input on the best of the three? I’m looking for longevity as much as anything - I know none of them will be efficient like a modern stove, but each is striking visually and inexpensive.

 

[Dann-0]

I love my vigilant. Not the most efficient stove, but sure looks great and throws out a lot of heat!
I was lucky and picked mine up for free. Bought another another one with a cracked back plate for 50 bucks that had short legs and the shelves. Swapped legs on both,removed the shelves and the sold the cracked one for 75 bucks.

 

[bholler]

Personally I would vote for none of the above I would be looking for a more modern stove. I have heated with old stoves and new and I can tell you once using a modern efficent stove I would never go back

 

[1869Farmhouse]

Personally I would vote for none of the above I would be looking for a more modern stove. I have heated with old stoves and new and I can tell you once using a modern efficent stove I would never go back

My primary heat is a Mitsubishi Hyper Heat Air Source Heat pump. This is just for fun, looks, and potentially backup. Each of these is available locally for between 200-400 dollars.

 

[bholler]

My primary heat is a Mitsubishi Hyper Heat Air Source Heat pump. This is just for fun, looks, and potentially backup. Each of these is available locally for between 200-400 dollars.

In that case I would go with the jotul or vc just because of aesthetics. you will probably need a heat shield for the mantle