upgrading to a high-efficiency stove

[sebois]

I have a Fisher Mama Bear that I love, and that I've heated our 2300SF home with for 12 Maine winters. Prior to that, my father used it as one of three stoves to heat his house of 5000SF for nearly 30 years.

My wife has been "suggesting" a move to something with a glass front for the last several years, so I've been thinking of replacing the Fisher with something that has a higher efficiency rating and will be making the jump ("finally!" - my wife) this fall. I've been looking at the Jotul F400 - F600; it's a solid company and I am confident that I can find a used one in excellent condition. As an added bonus, my wife loves the look of the unit.

I understand how the modern units recirculate for efficiency, but my concern is that it will not heat as well as the MB. I have no experience with modern stoves to make this assumption other than "How can that pretty little stove heat as well as my tank... and use less wood at the same time?".

Any input from the forum is greatly appreciated. Also, in before Coaly

 

[jeff_t]

They don't 'recirculate', but bring in air at the top of the firebox to burn off gases that would be lost up the flue as wasted BTUs.

You may not feel that you are getting as much heat. It may not feel like the same radiant sear you are used too, but you'll get more BTUs spread out over a longer burn. You should also see lower flue temps, meaning more heat is staying in your home, instead of going up the pipe.

Lots of great stoves out there. Look for at least a 3ish cu ft firebox. The F600 would be a good fit. Maybe show her Woodstock's Progress Hybrid?

 

[begreen]

The F400 would probably not be enough stove. Look at the Jotul F600 and the F55 (made in Maine). Also look at the Quadrafire Isle Royale. Note that a modern stove is going to want fully seasoned wood and enough flue for sufficient draft.

 

[firefighterjake]

A lot depends on the insulation in the house . . . is this a 2,300 square foot 1800s vintage colonial or farmhouse . . . or a super-insulated 2,300 square foot modern home? Like others I would vote for a minimum of a F500 . . . better yet would be the F600.

For the record, I live in a 1970s vintage Cape . . . I'm guessing 1,800 square foot two-story . . . I've tightened things up some, but three of the four walls are still 2 x 4 construction. The F500 has worked out pretty well . . . in truth . . . every once in a while I find my eye a-wandering and looking at some other pretty looking stove, but the F500 has treated me pretty well with zero issues. You'll pay more for the Jotul name, but in return you get a very good looking and performing stove.

 

[stoveguy2esw]

look at it this way, the biggest difference between the Jotul (which is an awesome heater BTW) and the old fisher is easiest to think of this way;

think of "splits" as "pieces of heat" now say you burn 10 of these pieces (identical ones) in each stove in turn. the Fisher will consume 5 out of 10 pieces the rest is out the stack, the Jotul will consume 7 with 3 out the stack. now obviously the pieces which "go out the stack" do not give you heat, so in essence you will get the extra 2 "pieces" as heat.

see in a "reburn" stove you literally are incinerating a higher percentage of every split you toss in the stove , so with the added combustion , you realize more "heat per split" with less waste, AND reduced pollution into the atmosphere.

as for the sizing , i'll leave that to the Jotul owners to advise on the right model to get , but trust me, if you get a Jotul youre getting an awesome stove, they are among the class of the heating world. a wonderful line of stoves

 

[sebois]

A lot depends on the insulation in the house . . . is this a 2,300 square foot 1800s vintage colonial or farmhouse . . . or a super-insulated 2,300 square foot modern home? Like others I would vote for a minimum of a F500 . . . better yet would be the F600.

For the record, I live in a 1970s vintage Cape . . . I'm guessing 1,800 square foot two-story . . . I've tightened things up some, but three of the four walls are still 2 x 4 construction. The F500 has worked out pretty well . . . in truth . . . every once in a while I find my eye a-wandering and looking at some other pretty looking stove, but the F500 has treated me pretty well with zero issues. You'll pay more for the Jotul name, but in return you get a very good looking and performing stove.

Thanks for the input!

The F600 is probably my first choice, but I was worried about heating myself out of the house due to the BTU rating. I think the Fisher is rated around 55K, while the F600 has a rating of around 80K.

The house was built in 1975; 2x4 framing, new windows last year, extra insulation in the attic the year before. First floor is about 70% open. Floor plan is rectangular, appx 25x40, and the current stove location is close to one end.

 

[begreen]

There is a difference between maximum output and steady state output. You control the heat. Less fuel = less heat.

 

[BrotherBart]

The last thing I would use to describe the F600 is "little stove". That bad boy is big. By any year's measure.

It will kick that Fisher's ass for heating. The lower wood use will be the side benefit.

BB - Who loves big honkin steel stoves.

 

[firefighterjake]

Thanks for the input!

The F600 is probably my first choice, but I was worried about heating myself out of the house due to the BTU rating. I think the Fisher is rated around 55K, while the F600 has a rating of around 80K.

The house was built in 1975; 2x4 framing, new windows last year, extra insulation in the attic the year before. First floor is about 70% open. Floor plan is rectangular, appx 25x40, and the current stove location is close to one end.

Hmmm . . . remarkably similar to my house . . . built in the same time period (mid 1970s), 2 x 4 framing, you've put in extra insulation and have probably tightened things up as you've gone along and put in new windows as have we . . . difference being the size of the house.

I'm still thinking the F600 would serve you well . . . just realize that it is a whole other critter from the old stoves . . . for one thing . . . to get more heat you end up closing down the air control which almost seems counter intuitive . . . but that's when the magic happens and if the wood is good and dry and the temp is high enough you'll get the secondary burn. In any case, there is most definitely a learning curve when you go from the stove dragons to EPA stove . . . and folks often blame the stove . . . until they re-learn how they burn, realize the wood needs to be truly seasoned, etc. . . . and then they often fall in love with their stove.