Please help me interpret install spec. I'm pretty sure I'm getting scammed

[matto]

It's a very simple question. What exactly is the meaning of 'B. Top Trim (1 1/2")' in the specification pictured below?

Does that row of clearances apply if

(a) the top trim sticks out *more* than 1&1/2 inches? or
(b) the top trim sticks out *less* than 1&1/2 inches?​

If your answer is (a), then what is the clearance requirement for flush trim? Is there no limit? Can my sheetrock go right up to the stove?

I'm asking because I believe my stove is installed unsafely. The installer insists it is fine. Vermont Castings will not help me iterpret this specification*, or state how close sheetrock can be to the stove. They say it is up to their dealer/installer network to answer all "technical support questions". However the dealer has no incentive to tell the truth and admit that they made a mistake.

How can a company refuse to interpret their own ambiguous specification?

* It's slightly more complicated and ugly than that. VC originally commented saying there "may be a problem" an in-home visit is required, and the dealer would contact me. The dealer would not return my emails for months, and when I finally go them on the phone said "Vermont Castings told us it's fine as is". I went back to VC and they said, "We can not provide you any more help on this issue." WTF

 

[kennyp2339]

That's a tough one, you would think that if it was 1 1/2" or greater then there would be a note that references it like they have for the side wall.
I would just measure and insist that there should be nothing combustible for a flush mount install less then 47 1/2" and 36 1/2" if the unit is "extended out"
Come to think of it, one would think that if the trim is greater then 1 1/2" it would be considered a mantle?

 

[sportbikerider78]

I would fire up the stove as hot as is safe for the stove to fire and then take a temperature reading on the mantel after an hr or so.

 

[Modenacart]

The OEM is responsible for installation parameters, so Vermont has to be the one that interpretes the spec.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[dBrad]

Yeah the OEM should better interpret that diagram for you - if they won't, blast them here so no one else buys their stuff.

 

[begreen]

I interpret it as top trim projecting no more than 1 1/2". That is fairly generous. Some inserts say 1" of less for the mantel trim. And no, a combustible can not go right up to the stove.

 

[bholler]

Gotta love that new and improved vc customer support

 

[matto]

Come to think of it, one would think that if the trim is greater then 1 1/2" it would be considered a mantle?

Exactly. That's what I said.

I would fire up the stove as hot as is safe for the stove to fire and then take a temperature reading on the mantel after an hr or so.

Yes. It gets very hot. The wood trim (which sticks out about 1/2") gets 200F+ if I burn it without the fan.

The OEM is responsible for installation parameters, so Vermont has to be the one that interpretes the spec.

I agree! But VC explicitly refuses to make a statement on the spec. What options do I have?

They told me to talk to the installer, who said (and I quote from an email)::

The clearance is to a top trim that is 1 ½” or more, not less. We have done many of these installs and we wouldn’t have left your job this way without letting you know you would have had to do something. Sheetrock could never go down to the fireplace opening, there is a clearance to each side and top which is usually about 6” needed.

They claim there is NO manufacturer spec for flat trim, so they use the "about 6" rule"

I followed up with Vermont Castings and told them that my wood trim gets 200+ without the fan so either a) their installer is lying to me, or b) their specs have a safety issue. VC told me "I'm sorry but we cannot help you further."

Can anyone think of another way to get an official interpretation of the spec? I'm assuming that the installer is lying, and VC is covering their ass to avoid admitting an ambiguous spec. Also, BTW, the installer is a subsidiary company of VC.

 

[begreen]

Yes. It gets very hot. The wood trim (which sticks out about 1/2") gets 200F+ if I burn it without the fan.

200º is too hot. How was this measured? Can you post a picture and include the distances from the stove to the mantel trim both side and top?

 

[matto]

200º is too hot. How was this measured? Can you post a picture and include the distances from the stove to the mantel trim both side and top?

I measured it with the Etekcity Infrared Thermometer. It was 201 with the fan off. At that point I shut down the fire because I was worried. I usually use the fan so it's not that hot, but it's still too warm. And since I can't run it without the fan it means I can't use it in a power outage.

A picture of the fireplace is attached. My hearth-to-top trim is 32.75" - that's 14.75 inches short of the VC spec... depending how you interpret it.

 

[begreen]

To avoid the risk of pyrolysis, nearby combustibles should not be more than about 165º. I interpret their clearance for the trim as up to 1.5" thick. Note that they provide a special case for the side trim if it exceeds 1.5" in thickness. For a flush mounted insert the top trim and mantel distance is the same 47.5" according to the documentation. It looks like if the insert has the extended 3" mount then the to trim clearance drops to 36". The extended mount appears to have a top cap on the 3" extension which must act like a heat shield.

 

[Ashful]

VC originally commented saying there "may be a problem" an in-home visit is required, and the dealer would contact me. The dealer would not return my emails for months, and when I finally go them on the phone said "Vermont Castings told us it's fine as is". I went back to VC and they said, "We can not provide you any more help on this issue." WTF

Gotta love that new and improved vc customer support

Exactly. And one of our mods indicated I might have been a little unfair, holding their past performance against them, in a recent thread. Looks like some things never change.

I’d return the stove, eat the lost install costs (much of which may be reused on another stove), and go deal with a company who hasn’t made screwing their customers a primary part of their profitability plan.

 

[matto]

Any ideas what we can do about VC refusing to interpret their own specs?

How would you guys proceed? Bend over and take it? Do the modifications myself to make it safe? I paid an arm and a leg for this install, so this will be the second time I'm bending over.

 

[Ashful]

Any ideas what we can do about VC refusing to interpret their own specs?

How would you guys proceed? Bend over and take it? Do the modifications myself to make it safe? I paid an arm and a leg for this install, so this will be the second time I'm bending over.

I guess there's no right or wrong answer here, and it might depend on how much money you're willing to burn to make yourself happy with the end result. I'd feel very good causing that original installer (and VC) a little pain, by returning the stove for a full refund on the product. It's probably not the cheapest route.

How far is the next closest VC dealer? It wouldn't cost you anything to call them, explain the situation, and ask their opinion on how to proceed. If nothing else, you're giving them good ammo against the competing installer who's refused to return your calls.

 

[barnaclebob]

I don't see how any top trim could be closer than the 36 1/2" spec for a 3" extended install. If yours is 32 1/4" then it is certainly not within specs.

I would interpret that you need 47 1/2" from the hearth to any combustible above the insert with a flush install.

I'm thinking that the trim is heated by convection coming off the front of the stove and if you want to cool off the top trim to stick a baffle/spoiler on top of the stove to cause some turbulence and mix the air up more. Of course your insurance company could probably still deny any claim if your stove isn't to spec...

 

[begreen]

Agreed. Bottom line is something has to change. The current mantel is just a picture frame. It should be pretty easy to replace it if there is a clean brick face up to 48" above the hearth. If not, at the least I would add a mantel shield.

 

[Ashful]

Agreed... at the least I would add a mantel shield.

Some folks run setups that they believe to be safe, and they may often be right on their assumption of safety. However if it's not manufacturer-prescribed, isn't it going to cause an insurance coverage issue, in any unfortunate event?

 

[matto]

Agreed. Bottom line is something has to change. The current mantel is just a picture frame. It should be pretty easy to replace it if there is a clean brick face up to 48" above the hearth. If not, at the least I would add a mantel shield.

There are no bricks beyond what you see.

I will try a mantle shield. Are they best added near the stove? Maybe just something sticking out from behind the stove surround?

Some folks run setups that they believe to be safe, and they may often be right on their assumption of safety. However if it's not manufacturer-prescribed, isn't it going to cause an insurance coverage issue, in any unfortunate event?

Well the installing dealer has told me that it is to spec, and VC will not say that they are wrong, so... It also passed inspection by the permit office.

 

[matto]

I just can't get past the following. It seems clear to me that one of the following HAS to be true.

1. The stove is not to spec, and someone is lying
or
2. The stove is to spec, and the spec is dangerous

I wrote this in an email to Vermont castings, and their response was "We cannot help you further". How can they not care that one of these is true?

I'm thinking of forcing this issue, because there is clearly a problem. I just don't know what my options are to force their hand to reply and make a statement.

 

[begreen]

I will try a mantle shield. Are they best added near the stove? Maybe just something sticking out from behind the stove surround?

Yes, the bottom edge tucked behind the surround will work. The shield should extend at least an 1" past the mantel trim.

 

[begreen]

Sorry you are going through this. Maybe sit down with the inspector and go over your concerns. Explain what you have learned and the temperature reading you are getting on the trim. By all appearances the spec seems unambiguous and the installer is not owning up to that fact. The responses from VC are unacceptable, they should at least answer your simple question unambiguously. If the inspector is convinced the installation was passed in error that would help your case. But don't bank on it. Some home inspectors know a lot about framing and little about stoves. Ultimately you must do what keeps your family safe.

 

[matto]

Yes, the bottom edge tucked behind the surround will work. The shield should extend at least an 1" past the mantel trim.

Any old sheet metal will do? I don't need some fancy heat-reflecting design?

Maybe sit down with the inspector and go over your concerns. Explain what you have learned and the temperature reading you are getting on the trim.

That's an interesting option. If the inspector fails me, I'm not sure VC would care though right?

I also like the idea of going to another dealer and asking. There's a major distributor for the north east about 1.5 hours away.

I also like the idea of returning the stove out of principle. Cost myself money but do it out of spite. Hahah. But I don't see that happening. Even if they admitted it's out of spec, they would just install some kind of sheet metal or something, right? I mean it will completely destroy the look of the fireplace, but they'd say it's a simple remediation therefore there's no basis to return the stove. I'd have to argue that I would never have bought it if it required such a shield.

I really appreciate everyone's help and advice. Thanks all.

 

[bholler]

Any old sheet metal will do? I don't need some fancy heat-reflecting design?


That's an interesting option. If the inspector fails me, I'm not sure VC would care though right?

I also like the idea of going to another dealer and asking. There's a major distributor for the north east about 1.5 hours away.

I also like the idea of returning the stove out of principle. Cost myself money but do it out of spite. Hahah. But I don't see that happening. Even if they admitted it's out of spec, they would just install some kind of sheet metal or something, right? I mean it will completely destroy the look of the fireplace, but they'd say it's a simple remediation therefore there's no basis to return the stove. I'd have to argue that I would never have bought it if it required such a shield.

I really appreciate everyone's help and advice. Thanks all.

If all else fails i would try calling hearth and home technologies. They are now vermont castings parent company. And while their customer service isnt the best in the industry it is generally far better than what you have gotten from vc.

 

[begreen]

Any old sheet metal will do? I don't need some fancy heat-reflecting design?

No, nothing fancy. It should be a decent gauge to hold its shape. I would use at least 22 ga. and paint it. But as a test a lighter gauge would work. If you paint it use a high temp paint. BBQ paint would work.

 

[Modenacart]

I agree! But VC explicitly refuses to make a statement on the spec. What options do I have?

Warranties are based on OEM specs and can be denied if they are violated. I recommend having a lawyer draft a letter and send it UPS with signature required. That would legally document the issue. Also, submit a claim with BBB.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk