Trying to decide between these three relatively comparable-seeming stoves (Pacific Energy Super 27, Regency Classic F2450, and Napoleon S25). Can't find much feedback from users of the Napoleon, and they all seem very similar. Does anyone have recommendations for or reasons to stay away from one over the others? Thank you very much in advance!
Pacific Energy Super 27 vs Regency Classic F2450 vs Napoleon S25?
- Thread starter RebeccainMaine
- Start date
-
Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.
We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.
We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil.
dafattkidd
Minister of Fire
Hello in Maine! I love that state. I was just there a couple of weeks ago in the Farmington area. Anyway to answer your question about the Napoleon, I cannot speak exactly to this unit, but I had a small Napoleon insert for a couple of years. It was a really great unit. I found it very easy to use, it put out sufficient heat for it’s size and it burned very cleanly.
That doesn’t exactly answer your question, but perhaps that is useful to you.
That doesn’t exactly answer your question, but perhaps that is useful to you.
The Regency and Napoleon are fairly similar in basic design. Both have 4 tube secondary racks and fiber baffles. The Regency may have a bit of an edge on small finishing details. The PE Super is a slightly smaller stove, with a different firebox in which there are no tubes or fragile baffle boards. Instead the baffle and secondary supply are combined in a stout stainless steel box. It also has a unique regulated secondary supply via the EBT which helps extend burn time.
I went through the exact same process on the same stoves 2 years ago. We ended up with the PE27, and we love it. It was a bit more expensive, and the Napoleon is made in our back yard. Biggest reason was the fibre insulation on the ceiling of the fire box, and it’s ease of damage. We are very happy with our choice, but I think you’d be happy with any of them.
The Pacific Energy Super would also be my choice, not that the other 2 stoves aren't effective, I personally believe the PE stainless baffle has both performance and reliability advantages over tube and baffle stoves.
I have a 2002 Napoleon 1401 with original fiber boards not a big deal occasionally if I stack wood to hi it will push up on it and I have to make sure they are seated in place with no gaps on the edges. That stove has a manifold that runs north and south. The tubes on the S25 would better protect the fiber boards. I just installed a PE 27 insert, I have not burned it yet but I tore the whole thing down to restore and paint it. I am very impressed with the construction and design of it. The PE is a 2003 the baffle has a slight warp should not affect the performance and the insulation blankets look like new.
Thank you so much! Super helpful. I definitely want the stove that will be the most damage-proof, since we tend to use whatever we have pretty hard. I had ruled the PE out b/c of the smaller fire box, but this has me rethinking it.
How large of an area will the stove be heating? How well insulated is the house? I am wondering if the Summit would work better?
Trevor Tahclep
Burning Hunk
Pacific Energy's one piece stainless baffle is so simple and trouble free, it is worth its weight in gold. The chimney sweep who has been coming here every year for the last 12 - 15 years, cleans the chimney, flue pipes, dismantles, cleans and inspects the stove interior every year, he claims that PE's have the most simple, trouble free and long lasting baffle system of all the manufacturers, he and his employee simply love Pacific Energy stove products. He works on all of them but he claims he recommends PE's.
