rear Absolute Steel vs top vent Ideal Steel

[FeelTheBurn]

I'm replacing my old VC resolute acclaim with a Woodstock stove (either Ideal Steel or Absolute Steel) and am trying to figure out whether top or rear vent configuration will significantly affect the stove's performance. The thimble on my chimney is about 42.5" high (center height) and about 12" behind where the back of the stove will go. So I have a couple options:

1. If I get an Absolute Steel "High Style" and place it on a 1.5" thick hearth pad, its rear flue exit will line up horizontally with my thimble. Then I can connect a 12" section of pipe (or maybe a 6" section + a double male connector?) directly between them.
2. With an Ideal Steel, I think I can adjust the legs to a height where a 90-degree elbow directly on top of the stove can connect to the 12" horizontal section.

I understand that it's generally not great to bend 90 degrees before there's enough vertical rise to get the draft going (BK requires 2-3' vertical first, which is why I can't get one of those), but does a rear vent configuration effectively just move that bend even lower, right inside the stove? Given the very short horizontal and vertical distances here, is one option going to be significantly better than the other in terms of draft performance, or should I choose based on other characteristics of these stoves?

Assuming it's a wash on exhaust, any thoughts on the Absolute vs Ideal Steel in general?

Thanks!

 

[Devonian]

Woodstock has great customer service. Give them a call and see what they say.

 

[FeelTheBurn]

Woodstock has great customer service. Give them a call and see what they say.

I actually drove up to Lebanon and talked to them but didn't much info out of them. Basically just confirmation that longer vertical runs are better than shorter ones, and a short vertical run into a 90 degree elbow could be a problem but is compliant with their install requirements (unlike with BK, for example). Not much in the way of feedback with how a rear vent would operate in the same space.

So I was hoping to hear of some real world experience, good or bad, from folks on this forum.

 

[Devonian]

Wish I had something else for you.... how tall is your chimney? How many square feet are you looking to heat?
I have an ideal steel rear vented into 15’ of 6” liner. I don’t have anything to compare it against but it’s easy to use and throws a lot of heat.

 

[FeelTheBurn]

I'm looking to heat a 2200 sq foot house, displacing oil heat as much as possible. Chimney looks like it's about 18-20 feet tall. I had no problem getting a draft going in my old VC stove, though that had a couple feet of vertical rise from the top exit before turning 180 degrees into the wall.

 

[branchburner]

I have a rear-vented Ideal, but first beta-tested a rear-vented Absolute. I cannot speak to your venting considerations, but I actually have a preference for the smaller AS over the larger IS. This is primarily because I have a strong preference for the side-loading door over the front-loading door as regards to these two stoves (less ash spill, less smoke spill, easier loading to capacity).

I also feel like I was getting better/quicker light-off of the cat with partial loads in the smaller firebox, which is nice this time of year. But there is no denying that a bigger firebox is bigger, which seems like it has to be worth something in the deep of winter. Because my house is leaky and drafty, though, I really couldn't take advantage of potentially longer burn times on the coldest days, because I wasn't getting enough effective heat late in the burn cycle and would have to reload anyway.

So for me personally, having the larger firebox has not been as beneficial as I hoped. If there was no effort or expense involved, I think I would switch out the IS and go back to the AS. But both are great stoves!

 

[FeelTheBurn]

Branchburner, that's helpful to know. While I like the idea of the extra capacity in the IS for the coldest days, I probably don't need it either. The old VC would heat the first floor of my house up just fine on the coldest days, but it would take all morning from a cold start every morning and require multiple reloads throughout the day. If I can get 8-12 hour burns out of an AS and not have to cold start it every morning, I think it will be more than enough to keep the first floor toasty around the clock.

I'm not sure that more heat output beyond what the AS is capable of would help me heat the second floor any more effectively, at least without cooking us out of the first floor. So the only real benefit of that larger firebox would be to occasionally stretch out a longer burn if I'm going to be away. I think being able to run smaller fires more efficiently during shoulder season with the AS would be of more practical benefit, though.

 

[branchburner]

Yeah, I think that makes sense. The other consideration (which I completely failed to consider!) is ease of loading, in your own individual configuration of stove and wood supply. I have little room to the left of my stove for wood, so it has to mostly be stacked to the right of the stove. My prior stoves either top-loaded or side-loaded right, so that worked fine. But the IS front loads with the door opening left to right. That means prior to nearly every reload, I now have to first bring wood from the stack and put it on the floor on the other side of the stove, before opening the door, when I was always used to loading directly from my wood stack. Seems like a minor PITA, but it's still a PITA, especially when I find I can get a little smoke spill with the front-loader (whereas I had NONE with the other stoves).