stove design

  • 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.
  • Hope everyone has a wonderful and warm Thanksgiving!
  • Super Cedar firestarters 30% discount Use code Hearth2024 Click here
Status
Not open for further replies.

thinwirenail

New Member
Aug 12, 2013
7
Green Creek, NJ
Thanks again for the input on the creosote/stove size question - I will be following the "when in doubt, go larger" philosophy as a result, and so am now looking at the +/-2 cf size. Here's another question: why are some stoves (like the Super 27) so much more complicated in design (stainless steel baffle with blanket, insulation on either side, gasket that needs replacement whenever baffle removed, etc.) than the Regency F2400, for example, that seems so beautiful in it's simplicity (with just two firebricks on the re-burn tubes) - and, consequently, ease of upkeep - yet has substantially the same efficiency/emission numbers?
 
I always recommend going larger within reason. You can always use less wood and smaller pieces to build a quicker, hotter fire when you don't need as much heat. Each manufacturer comes up with a design to meet EPA regulations, and most do it with a combination of secondary air tubes under a brick baffle with a ceramic wool insulation blanket on top.This is a very common design.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PapaDave
Actually, the Super 27 is a less complicated design than a standard tube stove. They have combined the secondary manifold, secondary tubes, secondary tube fasteners, baffle, baffle insulation into one stainless steel box. The design is a lot less vulnerable yet gets the job of burning cleaner done. Not having the insulation blanket exposed is a big plus. PE could have done away with the baffle gasket and made the baffle a more permanent design, but the would have made it more complicated to clean. A gasket is a few bucks and replaces in a second. That seems like a reasonable design tradeoff. It would be nice for them to make a more stout one, but it is not a big deal. The linked secondary air control is slightly more complex, but it's tough and the resulting extended burn time is good.
 
That sounds like a good design. My LOPI Liberty has the secondary air tubes below the brick baffle but no messy ceramic blanket needed, which is nice. Those tubes usually need to be replaced after several years but I'm on the original set after 10 years and I heat a 2000 sq ft house only with wood. Not bad.
 
I like Lopi stoves. They are made locally and very well built. PE's design works well. Another benefit is that it eliminates a lot of welds in the secondary tube manifold system which is where we seem to hear about failures. Though most folks that burn at reasonable temps report good long life spans, even with the less expensive tube designs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.