The Blaze King Performance Thread

[rdust]

This stove still continues to impress me. Loaded it up with Poplar(lombardy?) this morning at 7am and it's still going strong at almost 9:30pm.(stove top @350*) Daytime temps "might" have touched 40* for a minute. It's about to get warm in here since I turned it up a little in order to make room for reloading tonight.

The last few days I've been burning a poplar/oak mix and getting 22-24 hours with ease.

 

[rdust]

Ended up reloading at 11:45 pm before turning in for the night, 16+ hours on poplar sounds pretty good to me. I never even burned it in the old stove(tried it of course) since it was a "waste" of time. Kinda bummed I gave away about a cord of the stuff a year ago before I burned the BK. I still hate the ash it leaves though.

 

[mdaniel]

I don't want to start a new BK thread, so I will add on to this one. I was dead set on getting a BKK this summer, but the wife looked at the picture of it and said no way in hell is that going in "my" house. So I showed her other BK's and she likes the look of the Chinook 30. I have a 2,200 sq. ft ranch that was built in 2010, do you think the Chinook 30 would be enough to heat the house? Looking at the BK website it states it can heat 1,200+ sq ft, I think I would be pushing it if I tried to use that as my main heat source. But I am not 100% sure as my house is very tight and is an Energy Star rated home. What are your thoughts on this? I want the burn time and ability to regulate the burn, especially if the weather is only marginally cold. Thanks for youer help!

 

[rdust]

Looking at the BK website it states it can heat 1,200+ sq ft, I think I would be pushing it if I tried to use that as my main heat source. But I am not 100% sure as my house is very tight and is an Energy Star rated home. What are your thoughts on this? I want the burn time and ability to regulate the burn, especially if the weather is only marginally cold. Thanks for youer help!

I think it would be up to the task since the house is tight, it's nearly a 3 cubic foot stove. I'm heating just under 2K(house built in 1981) with the Princess which is just a little bigger(advertised) than the 30. I think layout also plays a role in how well a stove will work, if it's an open layout it'll be even easier.

 

[weatherguy]

I don't want to start a new BK thread, so I will add on to this one. I was dead set on getting a BKK this summer, but the wife looked at the picture of it and said no way in hell is that going in "my" house. So I showed her other BK's and she likes the look of the Chinook 30. I have a 2,200 sq. ft ranch that was built in 2010, do you think the Chinook 30 would be enough to heat the house? Looking at the BK website it states it can heat 1,200+ sq ft, I think I would be pushing it if I tried to use that as my main heat source. But I am not 100% sure as my house is very tight and is an Energy Star rated home. What are your thoughts on this? I want the burn time and ability to regulate the burn, especially if the weather is only marginally cold. Thanks for youer help!

They're one of the companies that states a lower heating capacity than they're capable, I think it would be no problem for a house your size. Im using a princess for 2800 sf and Im doing 75-80% of the heating. I build my house in 94, I could get by just on the stove but I dont mind buying a tank of oil per year to always be comfortable.

 

[rdust]

24 hours and 15 minutes on that load with a 311* stove top, silly just silly. Had more in it but probably not enough to get through the night and I want to go to bed sometime in the near future.

 

[mdaniel]

I think it would be up to the task since the house is tight, it's nearly a 3 cubic foot stove. I'm heating just under 2K(house built in 1981) with the Princess which is just a little bigger(advertised) than the 30. I think layout also plays a role in how well a stove will work, if it's an open layout it'll be even easier.

Too bad there is not a Chinook 4.0 or something similar. I have an open floor plan so the heat can easily flow throughout the house, plus I can turn on the blower system for the furnace to circulate the air. I don't want to make a $3.5k mistake by buying too small.

 

[TX-L]

but the wife looked at the picture of it and said no way in hell is that going in "my" house

Interesting Points:

I heard my girlfriend say that the King was a "beautiful" stove. Yes, really, I heard it.

But that was after it had been burning for 2 months, so her perspective might have been based more in operational reality than aesthetics. Who woulda thunk it?

And now the ZERO gallons of propane usage this winter has really sparked her affection for the big ugly (aka - beautiful) thing! She even asked me this weekend if I would like her to help cut/haul/stack wood!!?!

Since this is the performance thread: Filled stove with maple last night at around 6 pm, set the stat on "2"; at 5:30 am the stovetop temperature was 500 . I will fill it again tonight around 7 or 8, or 9. This leaves me lots of time for steelhead fishing after work (maybe the girlfriend will cut a load of wood...? won't hold my breath).

Life is good >sigh<

 

[mdaniel]

I just got off the phone with BK in WA, they stated that pricing is changing in the next week or so. The reason I called them was to get their opinion on Chinook vs King and ability to adequately heat my house. The lady I spoke with seemed to think that the Chinook 30 would be ok, but the King would do it better. I would most likely have to run the Chinook at a higher setting in cold weather. That's fine with me as 1/2 to 3/4 of the burning season would only be moderately cold.
I hope the prices go down, but I doubt it. What about that east coast distributor that marks up the prices? Maybe that deal is over?

 

[weatherguy]

I just got off the phone with BK in WA, they stated that pricing is changing in the next week or so. The reason I called them was to get their opinion on Chinook vs King and ability to adequately heat my house. The lady I spoke with seemed to think that the Chinook 30 would be ok, but the King would do it better. I would most likely have to run the Chinook at a higher setting in cold weather. That's fine with me as 1/2 to 3/4 of the burning season would only be moderately cold.
I hope the prices go down, but I doubt it. What about that east coast distributor that marks up the prices? Maybe that deal is over?

That deal is up this year if I remember correctly, I think prices will go down east of the mighty mississip, I read it somewhere and I also talked to someone at BK not long ago about that issue. I know some dealers in new york state have the princess for a lower price than Ive ever seen so maybe its already up.

 

[mdaniel]

I have a stupid question. I am new to woodstoves so please be patient. Anyway I am looking at either a BK Chinook 30 or Woodstock Progress Hybrid. The BK states 2.75 cu/ft firebox while the Progress Hybrid is at 2.8 cu/ft, virtually the same right? So why does it appear that the Progress Hybrid is capable of heating a much larger space with higher BTU's? BTU's vary wildly between the 2 stoves, yet appear to be almost the same exact size. I know pretty much everyone on this forum states that BTU ratings don't mean that much, base it off of firebox size. At the end of the day do both of these stoves have about the same heating capability, or are there other factors involved? I need to heat about 2,200 sq/ft on a single level and it would appear only from reading the specs on each manufacturer website that the Progress Htbrid is superior in total heat output to the BK Chinook. Am I crazy?

 

[jeff_t]

I have a stupid question. I am new to woodstoves so please be patient. Anyway I am looking at either a BK Chinook 30 or Woodstock Progress Hybrid. The BK states 2.75 cu/ft firebox while the Progress Hybrid is at 2.8 cu/ft, virtually the same right? So why does it appear that the Progress Hybrid is capable of heating a much larger space with higher BTU's? BTU's vary wildly between the 2 stoves, yet appear to be almost the same exact size. I know pretty much everyone on this forum states that BTU ratings don't mean that much, base it off of firebox size. At the end of the day do both of these stoves have about the same heating capability, or are there other factors involved? I need to heat about 2,200 sq/ft on a single level and it would appear only from reading the specs on each manufacturer website that the Progress Htbrid is superior in total heat output to the BK Chinook. Am I crazy?

Yeah, yer crazy. There's only so many BTUs in a given amount of wood. They are both pretty efficient stoves, and there is no way one can get more heat from that given amount of wood than the other.
Numbers are just numbers. There is no standard that governs what manufacturers may print in their advertising propaganda.

 

[rdust]

Yeah, yer crazy. There's only so many BTUs in a given amount of wood. They are both pretty efficient stoves, and there is no way one can get more heat from that given amount of wood than the other.
Numbers are just numbers. There is no standard that governs what manufacturers may print in their advertising propaganda.

This is true but I do feel what matters is how those BTUs are extracted from the wood. I feel this is why the BK stoves are so impressive on a lower burn rate. My old Lopi had more raw heat coming off it on high burn but it couldn't hold a candle to the BK for overall burn ability. The new Wood stock stove is boasting the huge BTU number but that's on high burn I believe, not many of us ever run a stove wide open unless it's during start up.

 

[mdaniel]

This is true but I do feel what matters is how those BTUs are extracted from the wood. I feel this is why the BK stoves are so impressive on a lower burn rate. My old Lopi had more raw heat coming off it on high burn but it couldn't hold a candle to the BK for overall burn ability. The new Wood stock stove is boasting the huge BTU number but that's on high burn I believe, not many of us ever run a stove wide open unless it's during start up.

I guess my concern is that the Woodstock stove could heat a larger area than the BK stove of similar size. That is what you are lead to believe when comparing specs from each website. Both stoves are virtually the same size, should they both put out the same amount of heat at high burn? It seems that the BK's are exceptional at low burns, at least from everything I have read on here! My only concern from looking at the BK and Woodstock websites is that each stove is rated differently to heat max sq/ft. The woodstock states 1,300-2,200 sq ft, while the BK website states 1,200+ sq/ft. That is a big difference for almost the same size stove.

 

[jeff_t]

I think, once again, it is advertising. I also think you would be happy with either one, though you could be pushing it on the cold days. You are looking at two vastly different stoves, in terms of construction and styling. The PH is probably priced lower, though the rumor is that east coast pricing on BKs is supposed to come down.

 

[rdust]

I guess my concern is that the Woodstock stove could heat a larger area than the BK stove of similar size. That is what you are lead to believe when comparing specs from each website. Both stoves are virtually the same size, should they both put out the same amount of heat at high burn? It seems that the BK's are exceptional at low burns, at least from everything I have read on here! My only concern from looking at the BK and Woodstock websites is that each stove is rated differently to heat max sq/ft. The woodstock states 1,300-2,200 sq ft, while the BK website states 1,200+ sq/ft. That is a big difference for almost the same size stove.

Try not to get hung up on the sq ft rating. My Lopi Endeavor was rated at 2K and 70K BTU if I remember right, granted it was 2.2 vs 2.8 of the BK but the BK heats circles around the Endeavor. I was a little concerned about the lower BTU rating but followed everyone's advise and didn't get hung up on the number. Even the BKK only lists 47K for the BTU rating so I don't worry too much about those numbers.

Another thing that would interest me a little would be how fast the load of wood was consumed on high burn in the tests.

 

[jeff_t]

And in the original spirit of the thread, thirteen pages and 300 posts ago, I'm working on 24 hour cycles. I load 4-5 decent splits about this time in the evening. Get it good and charred, then start shutting it down. Wake up to 68-70 in the house, so I let it rip for a half hour or so to keep the females happy, then shut it down for the day. The cheapy Rutland thermometer has been sitting at 400-450 at bedtime, with the cat rockin', and 250-300 or so during the day. Night temps have been in the upper 20s to mid 30s, with daytime upper 40s to mid 50s, or low 60s with a 30mph wind. Been perfect in this weather. I'd be out if firestarters and kindling, and patience, if I was still messing with that furnace.

 

[Highbeam]

I have a stupid question. I am new to woodstoves so please be patient. Anyway I am looking at either a BK Chinook 30 or Woodstock Progress Hybrid. The BK states 2.75 cu/ft firebox while the Progress Hybrid is at 2.8 cu/ft, virtually the same right? So why does it appear that the Progress Hybrid is capable of heating a much larger space with higher BTU's? BTU's vary wildly between the 2 stoves, yet appear to be almost the same exact size. I know pretty much everyone on this forum states that BTU ratings don't mean that much, base it off of firebox size. At the end of the day do both of these stoves have about the same heating capability, or are there other factors involved? I need to heat about 2,200 sq/ft on a single level and it would appear only from reading the specs on each manufacturer website that the Progress Htbrid is superior in total heat output to the BK Chinook. Am I crazy?

That's an excellent question. We have lots of Woodstock flag wavers on this site that will jump all over you with subjective opinions but you have done your homework. The PH is not a large stove, same volume as the princess. The reason that the PH can make more heat is that it is a hybrid so when on a high burn it is in non-cat mode consuming wood quickly and releasing those btus quickly from oversized heat exchangers. You will pay for this by having to reload the stove more often but there is no denying a higher peak output with the hybrid on a high burn.

Who cares? Really, the high burn output is not where you will be burning the stove most of the time. More important is the medium to low burns that keep the house warm. In that area, the BK stoves are superior. Same firebox size, but a stat and more controllable low burn.

 

[jeff_t]

I'm not so sure about the higher peak output. I know my stove has no problem at 750-800°. I don't think the Chinook will be that much different when it's cranked. Not too many Chinooks here. The only two I know about on this forum aren't worked hard enough to know how they burn when pushed. Hass runs his on low all the time, and Franks' is in the showroom.

 

[Highbeam]

I'm not so sure about the higher peak output. I know my stove has no problem at 750-800°. I don't think the Chinook will be that much different when it's cranked. Not too many Chinooks here. The only two I know about on this forum aren't worked hard enough to know how they burn when pushed. Hass runs his on low all the time, and Franks' is in the showroom.

You have a good point that both stoves can be 800 degrees and both stoves have the same surface area. So why on earth would one stove be making more output? Perhaps the blowers are different, but I would have to say that the BK blowers are a very good design. Is the PH even available with a blower add-on?

 

[rdust]

I've never had to run my stove over "2" after burning a load in. We've had a mild winter but we had a handful of days of what I consider cold for my area and the stove cruised through without an issue. For my house a stove top in the 400* range will put heat back into the house when it's in the teens a little lower will maintain current temps rather well. No roller coaster rides with these stoves house temps are pretty steady for the full burn.

Right now is the type of weather why I bought an ugly Blaze King, low 30's high 20's at night and 40's-50's during the daytime. One load at night is good for 22-24 hours, I still find it rather amazing.

 

[SolarAndWood]

It seems I may be one of the few that ever runs the BK wide open. I have a relatively high heat load and no furnace. So, when it is below 0 or below 20 and blowing, it gets stuffed full with the good stuff and cranked. Days like today it gets stuffed with "junk" wood and burned relatively low with no fear of overheating the house. The clean reliable no fuss range of output of these stoves is amazing.

 

[eclecticcottage]

Any sirrico (sp) owners yet?

 

[jeff_t]

I've been loading every other day lately, finding enough coals to relight after 48 hours. That's been about right to get the house warmed up, shut it down some and go to bed. I'll open it back up a little in the morning if needed, shut it down for the day, then open it back up in the evening. That will get us thru until morning, then close it down for the day. Repeat.
The last couple of days have been decent, but with a stiff north wind. My long ranch house faces north, so that sucks out a lot of heat. With the extra pull on the chimney, I'm running the t-stat about the same, but the stove is burning hotter. That's keeping the inside temps comfy, even with the bright sun. But I'm loading every 24 hours