types of fire starters....

[JPapiPE]

OK, I bought the firestarer that was recommended, HEY $64/100 sticks WILL NOT KILL ANYONE....so why not take a chance ? They can only fool me once....
Now my silly kindling problems are over...,hopefully

 

[Elderthewelder]

All right from you gentlemans words i just ordered 100 sticks of Cedar starters

did the same a few weeks ago.. noticed the new ones are a bit lighter in color than the old ones and they now have a 4 way indent on them whereas last year it was a two way indent - i break them in 1/2 to start a fire and maybe i'll split a few splits (kindling) but most times i just toss the splits on top of the super cedar and away it goes

love them!

I break them into 1/4's and use dry / small kindling with it works great. I have also used a 1/2 section and a couple small splits and had good results, and even a few times when I ran out of wood late in year last season I put 2 full ones under a couple North Idaho logs and got them going real good, anyone used these North Idaho logs knows that unless you have a good coal bed they are a pain to get going, but the super cedars did it

 

[youngstr]

I've had pretty good luck with the lightning nuggets......

(broken link removed to http://www.lightningnuggets.com/Nuggets.htm)

 

[BrotherBart]

Large splits on the bottom, small splits on the top, little bit of small pine kindling with bow tied Washington Post pages on the top, a match and rock and roll.

Top down rules!

 

[webbie]

I thought every hearth.com forum member had to use Supercedars......

 

[fossil]

Don't get the Post anymore. :down: The Bend Bulletin burns nearly as good, though. %-P Rick

 

[fossil]

I thought every hearth.com forum member had to use Supercedars......

Yessir, Mr. Craig...I ordered another 100 today. I like to be at least 10 years ahead on my SuperCedars. Rick

 

[BrotherBart]

I thought every hearth.com forum member had to use Supercedars......

Whoops.

I had to choose between Tom or Vanessa. ;-)

 

[fossil]

I thought every hearth.com forum member had to use Supercedars......

Whoops.

I had to choose between Tom or Vanessa. ;-)

Oh, so that's why every time I call Vanessa all I ever get is her answering machine. And never a callback. Guess I'm stuck with Tom, then. :smirk: Rick

 

[jay3000]

I cut Duraflame logs (or equavalent) into chunks and light them with a propane torch. It's like a lighter on steroids.

 

[Oregon Fire]

The purest thing to do is to use alcohol gel with kindling. I have used this stuff and it was great :

http://www.wowpellets.com/p_firestarter.shtml

I went to bi-mart (a local co-op) looking for more gel and found lightnin nuggets in the bulk box...

http://lightningnuggets.com/

I was wondering how pellets would work with alcohol gel...

The nuggets do the trick every time - but I do worry about them leaving a bit of residue on the flue, etc.

jeff

 

[Apprentice_GM]

I use a fait bit of (very dry) kindling. Grows on trees . . . is free . . . and in abundance at my place. We have trees called paperbarks which have very fine twigs that keep falling off well seasoned Pick 'em up, chuck 'em on a pile or box near the stove, hey presto burns great and starts every time. If we want to show off we grab some green conifer and chuck them in, their sap is highly flammable (50 foot conifer tree burns out in 30 seconds), gotta be careful though.

I moved to (broken link removed to http://www.woodheat.org/tips/topdown.htm) this season and haven't looked back. Definitely superior IMNSHO. No smoke. Instant draft. No settling. Can fit more and larger logs in to start with so longer burn time before first refill.

I use propane torches for my creme brulee's (excuse the spelling).

Paperbark tree | Paperbark Kindling | Conifer

 

[Cluttermagnet]

I split a whole bunch of Red Oak in the past year. I save a lot of small pieces from that. It makes excellent tinder and kindling both. I have box after box of both sizes. I use just a little crumpled newspaper underneath. Sometimes I use very small pieces of either fatwood or that wax- soaked sawdust log stuff- but not much of it is ever needed. I could probably get things going every time with just the newspaper. Oak tinder is great.

 

[Jags]

Large splits on the bottom, small splits on the top, little bit of small pine kindling with bow tied Washington Post pages on the top, a match and rock and roll.

Top down rules!

OK BroB - you have finally convinced me. I WILL try a top down fire this year.

In the name of science, I am gonna time it to a specific stove top temp, compared to my normal method. I will post the results when we get back to fire season. I will try to make this as fair and even of a race as possible, using splits from the same log, making kindling from the same stick and measuring the amount of fire starter that I use. I am very interested in the results. Heck, I may have a new method when all is said and done.

 

[stanb999]

What I've been using for years is a Propane torch and Hmmm..... Dry wood. It starts in a jiffy and no ash build up like if you use paper or other small stuff. But of course I only start the fire without coals in the spring and fall. With coals I just pile new wood up and put the wood on top leaving the draft open. It lights quickly.

 

[BrotherBart]

OK BroB - you have finally convinced me. I WILL try a top down fire this year.

In the name of science, I am gonna time it to a specific stove top temp, compared to my normal method. I will post the results when we get back to fire season. I will try to make this as fair and even of a race as possible, using splits from the same log, making kindling from the same stick and measuring the amount of fire starter that I use. I am very interested in the results. Heck, I may have a new method when all is said and done.

The single biggest thing that converted me was the flues. Because of the weather here, where we will wake up to the 20's out and then be in the 50's by midday lots of times, there is a lot of firing up and letting the stove burn down that goes on with the 30 on the main level. The office stove in the basement pretty much burns all day but is shut down each night and restarted each morning. When I did the mid-season cleaning I had plenty of the soot in the pipes that goes with lots of start-ups. At that point I changed to top down. After burning two months longer than before the mid-season cleaning there was virtually nothing in either liner.

 

[Jags]

OK BroB - you have finally convinced me. I WILL try a top down fire this year.

In the name of science, I am gonna time it to a specific stove top temp, compared to my normal method. I will post the results when we get back to fire season. I will try to make this as fair and even of a race as possible, using splits from the same log, making kindling from the same stick and measuring the amount of fire starter that I use. I am very interested in the results. Heck, I may have a new method when all is said and done.

The single biggest thing that converted me was the flues. Because of the weather here, where we will wake up to the 20's out and then be in the 50's by midday lots of times, there is a lot of firing up and letting the stove burn down that goes on with the 30 on the main level. The office stove in the basement pretty much burns all day but is shut down each night and restarted each morning. When I did the mid-season cleaning I had plenty of the soot in the pipes that goes with lots of start-ups. At that point I changed to top down. After burning two months longer than before the mid-season cleaning there was virtually nothing in either liner.

Well, I do have to admit that I see one advantage in that the fire immediately starts to bounce off the re-burner (tubes). That alone may have advantages.

The only thing that has stopped me from trying this in past is my stubbornness. I can't get it through my head how a fire can travel downward as fast as it can travel upwards. In Jags-land, flame shooting up into the next split to be ignited should prevail over the cold(er) part of the flame (bottom) trying to creep its way downward. Science will prevail.

 

[fossil]

My wife and I do it either way as the mood strikes us. I'm talking about building fires, of course. Anything else is none of your business. :coolsmirk: Rick

 

[Jags]

My wife and I do it either way as the mood strikes us. I'm talking about building fires, of course. Anything else is none of your business. :coolsmirk: Rick

Hmmm....you wouldn't by chance have pictures or have timed it by chance (I'm talking about building fires, of course :lol: )

 

[Apprentice_GM]

It's definitely slower (a top down fire) compared to a conventional if the goal is a firebox full of flame. But it doesn't smoke whereas a conventional will, even if a little, even if built with super dry wood, at the beginning. As I said before, it generates a draft quicker, and there is no stack settling, longer first burn time as you can fit more large pieces in, and very consistent starting (reliable).

I have taken a video of building one but forgot to video the lighting of it (we only burn at nights through winter) but can do another video and upload it somewhere if you want . . .

 

[gibson]

I use The New York Times or The Boston Globe. So little substance in those that it burns like a dream. I can throw big splits right on top of it!

 

[JPapiPE]

Large splits on the bottom, small splits on the top, little bit of small pine kindling with bow tied Washington Post pages on the top, a match and rock and roll.

Top down rules!

OK BroB - you have finally convinced me. I WILL try a top down fire this year.

In the name of science, I am gonna time it to a specific stove top temp, compared to my normal method. I will post the results when we get back to fire season. I will try to make this as fair and even of a race as possible, using splits from the same log, making kindling from the same stick and measuring the amount of fire starter that I use. I am very interested in the results. Heck, I may have a new method when all is said and done.

This method sounds the opposite of my observations of fire spreading in the real world...Like forest fires and house fires,, etc. But I am no expert on the subject of wood stove start up fires and will try Barts method.

 

[CK-1]

I will give props to Super Cedars as being a great fire starter but I use these, with each of the "blocks" (24 per carton) broken into 3 or 4 pieces. They will fire up a cold stove in short order, and cheap to boot.

I buy them on sale (usually 6 or 7 bucks) and get just shy of 100 starts from a box (I break them into 4 pieces each).

The ones I bought are square lenghts that break into 4 triangular sticks (similar to pic below). I break these into six pieces each, so I get 24 starts instead of 4. The box states 48 starters, but I get 6X the number of starts (I've still got enough for this season!)

Looks like the one on the left is a fire log and the one on the right is a fire starter (brick). Both are almost the same. I get the fire starter bricks from homedepot as well..

 

[JPapiPE]

I did buy the Super Cedars 100 Super-pak for $64 including delivery to my door. Do you think I paid too much? The way I understand these fire starters...Is that they provide a consistant flame for a long enought period to catch fire to kindling, small splits and slightly larger splits. Where is the benefit? Does one use less kindling, less newpaper or fewer matches? And how are these fire starters used In Bart's Burn Method from the top method of starting a wood fire?
Thank you all

 

[gman1001]

Best and cheapest methods I use are to gather splitting scraps combine with newspaper...

I also gather tons of pine cones... These are the best! Sapier the better...