It was a cherry-picked slide out of many which we have not seen. Only one modern cat and one modern non-cat were mentioned out of 97 tested. There is no mention of particulate output in the slide, just efficiency and only during a low burn. And by that measure, the Fisher outdid the Harman P61 pellet stove regardless of how badly the wood was smoldering and how much smoke was coming out of the chimney.
Actually, if you look at the link the Fisher “outdid” a 2020 EPA Drolet stove, a pre-EPA Pacific Energy, as well as an EPA pellet stove (hardly cherry picking throwing in pellet stove) …and if you look at the numbers and by comparing those numbers my comment still stands…they’re not much more efficient. But what exactly is efficiency? What do they mean by it?
Many think efficiency means one thing, and I don’t agree. Efficiency of what? Heat transfer into the the room? Efficiency of clean burn? Efficiency of fuel use? Efficiency as in burn time? The picture is much larger in my mind.
Yeah…that link was supposedly a snippet of an overall larger (study) amount of stoves, but just look at the two brands listed (besides the BK) and we see they’re two stoves that come highly recommended on forums. I can’t see the unlisted stoves being anymore or less impressive. Those stoves are all in the sale class, hybrids in their class, and BK in its class…nearly alone.
I find it interesting that on different forums people that talk about the “high” efficiency of modern stoves compared to stoves of the past, yet these same people often make statements like: “heating from a basement the older comparable sized stove will put more heat into the room than the modern epa stove”…only to see a person provide pictures of removing a modern stove (pick a brand) and returning the old guard (stove) to its former duty. I’m describing one event, but I’ve seen many like it posted on forums and backed up with pictures. Sure, the new stoves burn cleaner at lower burns, but also fail to provide enough heat. One example is a guy on another forum removed an EPA stove (Big Drolet) and put an old Warner back on duty. I’ve seen the same scenario with other modern brands and Fishers put back on duty. Granted, the context of these examples were basement installs…and so it may not be fair to compare that type of install with one where the heater is upstairs in the house where a modern stove with more control shines…control as in not blasting the user out of the room.
Yeah…when
@BKVP provided that link, I don’t at all think it was to disparage other stoves, or even to put BK up on a “pedestal”, pun intended….LOL. I think it simply to let the numbers speak for themselves. If you read that thread agreed with me that the Fisher had impressive numbers all things considered.
There are two bottom lines in my mind:
1. Dry wood, dry wood, dry wood is where it’s at.
2. BK stove technology (catalyst combined with their bi-metal regulator) is in its own class with less than ideal dry wood.
