Which One Is Better

[Maplehead]

We have a tiny fireplace that we wanted to put a small wood stove into. Our choices were limited because of the size. Wood stove will be mainly used for heating our living room, we do not have a open floor plan. I bought a Reginald 101 (similar to the Jotul) because of the size. Then i was given a Trailblazer 1700. The wife and kids cant stand the Reginald looks. My only issue is that the Trailblazer has some weird small crack on both sides where there is some tubes with tiny holes in them welded to the interior. The people it came from used it for years here and there. Would it still be safe to use?

Which would put out the better heat? Living room is 12X20.

Im completely new to Wood Stoves, thank
s.

 

[bholler]

the trailblazer is scrap with a crack in the side it should not be used and i think it is not worth trying to fix it the other one might be fine cant tell really

 

[Hogwildz]

Neither. Sorry, but I would not install either of those in my home.

 

[Maplehead]

The wood stove cement that is good to 2000 wouldnt work? I dont have a choice, 1 of them is going into my fireplace. I wont be using it everyday. It will be a mostly weekend and emergency situtation. We lost power 3 times last year and some of those days it was COLD. We are looking for something to keep us warm when we have no electricty.

 

[gzecc]

Do you own the structure this stove will be installed in?

 

[Maplehead]

yes.

 

[branchburner]

Welcome to the forums. The Reginald, if not cracked or otherwise damaged, should be ok to throw some heat. As you are new to stoves, consider also that a safe flue/chimney and hearth (with proper clearances) is just as important as a sound stove. You need to make sure you properly vent whatever stove you use into a safe chimney system, with no combustibles (including mantle) too close, and are using dry wood, or else you run the risk of a house fire, chimney fire, CO poisoning, etc. Just a reminder, more homework to do than getting an online opinion of those two stoves!

Edit: that includes checking with your insurance agent, if you want to be assured of coverage.

 

[Maplehead]

Thank you. We have 3 cords of wood that has been drying for 3 years underneath our porch. I use it to make maple syrup. This was really on a budget stove for an emergency situation. I wish i had thousands of dollars for a new stove, but with 4 months left in our present house i cant justify spending that kind of money. Our next house we will plan better to have something that will last a long time. Our chimney was re-built 3 years ago and we have used it maybe 10 times. I do plan to have a chimney person install the stove up to code and it will need to be inspected. Can a welder weld up a crack like that to get us by or would that be a real fire hazard as i have young kids. Like i said this would be primarly used as emergency daily and occasionaly on the weekends.

 

[Charles1981]

The cracked stove is a no go at all.

The other stove reginald if it was in good burning order with no cracks could potentially be used but there is so much more to this than throwing a stove in the fireplace and calling it good.

Picture of the fire place help. Knowing the condition and specs of the current chimney and flue you want to install the stove into will help.

You will probably want the chimney cleaned previous to installation.

You should also strongly consider having the chimney lined with a stainless steel liner rather than considering a "slammer" install where you just shove the stove into the chimney and allow it to vent through the current chimney.

 

[Ram 1500 with an axe...]

Keep looking.....

 

[branchburner]

You should also strongly consider having the chimney lined with a stainless steel liner rather than considering a "slammer" install where you just shove the stove into the chimney and allow it to vent through the current chimney.

You left out the in-between option, a direct-connect where a length of pipe goes up beyond the smoke shelf. For a 4-month install of a non-EPA stove for emergency use, that should suffice, so long as the wood is dry and is burned hot (not smoldered).

 

[bholler]

You left out the in-between option, a direct-connect where a length of pipe goes up beyond the smoke shelf. For a 4-month install of a non-EPA stove for emergency use, that should suffice, so long as the wood is dry and is burned hot (not smoldered).

I am sorry but that i dont see a direct connect as a good viable option at all yes i know it passes code but i dont see why it is a horrible way to install a stove only a little better than a slammer

 

[begreen]

If the fireplace is tiny you probably are going to need a tiny or at least narrow stove like the Reginald. What are the fireplace dimensions? Can you post a shot of it?

 

[NE WOOD BURNER]

IMHO if I where in your position I would buy a generator or keep one reserved at your local tool rental.

 

[Maplehead]

So then the trailblazer is out, i will scrap that. We checked the Reginald tonight and there are No light leaks. How much would a 6" liner be up a approx. 16ft chimney? The last thing i want is something un-safe, but our chimney looks great and they did a great job re-building it, if you did a direct-connect wouldnt the ash fall back?. Our fireplace is 34 wideX 28 deepX26 High. Wife will not be to happy about the way the reginald looks . How much can you get for a stove scrap?

 

[bholler]

that is a pretty standard size firebox. With a direct connect you need a blockoff plate so ash wont fall out but yes a bunch of crap will fall round the outside of the liner. You are supposed to seal the stainless liner inside the clay liner but i have no idea how that could actually be done well.

 

[begreen]

That is not a too small of a fireplace. You can put a decent sized insert in there. Maybe consider a Drolet Escape 1800i insert if you want more heat and longer burn times than the little Reginald will be capable of.

 

[Renjilj]

So then the trailblazer is out, i will scrap that. We checked the Reginald tonight and there are No light leaks. How much would a 6" liner be up a approx. 16ft chimney? The last thing i want is something un-safe, but our chimney looks great and they did a great job re-building it, if you did a direct-connect wouldnt the ash fall back?. Our fireplace is 34 wideX 28 deepX26 High. Wife will not be to happy about the way the reginald looks . How much can you get for a stove scrap?

I got $40 even for my old 500lb Gibraltar insert at the local scrap yard...

 

[branchburner]

i know it passes code but i dont see why it is a horrible way to install a stove only a little better than a slammer

It passes code for a reason... because even though it may be a horrible way to install a stove it's A LOT better than a slammer. A slammer poses an imminent threat of gasses entering the living space and of house fire, since creosote builds up right near the stove in the fireplace. But a DC poses only a potential threat of chimney fire, and then only if all the PITA steps of keeping things clean are not followed.

A direct-connect does not make any sense for a long-term 24/7 install, or for ANY install of an EPA stove where it would not provide sufficient draft.

For maybe a dozen fires over a few month period with a non-EPA stove, putting in a direct-connect (w/ block-off) does make sense, though, if the flue is already clean and not extremely over-sized, and the stove is burned clean and hot. You give the impression that a direct-connect is inherently dangerous in all scenarios. Is it really?

It IS potentially dangerous, and it IS a real PITA to properly maintain, and it IS ill-advised in general. Had one myself once, and hated it... but it's what I'd do if he were me, in this situation.

 

[bholler]

You give the impression that a direct-connect is inherently dangerous in all scenarios. Is it really?

it allows creosote down around the outside of the liner which can get down into the smoke chamber and possibly ignite causing a potential massive chimney fire. I dont care how short or infrequently someone claims to be going to use something it needs to be done right or not at all. Really how much more would it cost to run a cheap ss liner all the way up it is really no easier to do a direct connect To me the savings of a few hundred would not be worth the potential risk.

 

[branchburner]

It i it allows creosote down around the outside of the liner... and possibly ignite

Well, no, it doesn't in itself allow that... the person who fails to burn cleanly, and fails to monitor and maintain his setup, is what does that. Creosote that is removed, or not produced in the first place, cannot possibly create a massive chimney fire. That's my whole point... a DC is not inherently dangerous, only dangerous if allowed to be so by neglecting the PITA work required, by a lazy, ignorant or incompetent owner.

If I tried, I could create far worse conditions by burning green wood and shutting my bypass prematurely. So my EPA stove with fully insulated liner could easily be more of a creosote factory in the wrong hands than a non-EPA direct-connect in the right hands.

Doing something right does not simply rest in the one-time setup of the installer, it rests in the continued diligence of the operator.

 

[branchburner]

Really how much more would it cost to run a cheap ss liner all the way up it is really no easier to do a direct connect To me the savings of a few hundred would not be worth the potential risk.

I think you answered your question... a few hundred. Possibly better spent, if one had to choose, say, on a new set of snow tires? Weigh the odds, make your choice... I'll make mine. A direct-connect can be made a lot less risky than a car with any set of tires, since you get to choose who drives the stove!

 

[bholler]

Doing something right does not simply rest in the one-time setup of the installer, it rests in the continued diligence of the operator

i agree with that totally but if you burnt your setup badly created allot of creosote and a fire it would be contained in that insulted liner posing a much lesser risk of house fire. With a direct connect that fire is not contained in a nice sealed and insulated package. The old fireplace flue is also going to be over sized which will make it very hard to burn it without creating creosote and cleaning them is ridiculous. We charge almost double to clean direct connects because of that.

 

[bholler]

All i know is i would absolutely never install a direct connect for anyone regardless of what they say their intentions are. I have heard it many times that we will only burn it when the power goes out ect but that can change. When i do an install i need to make it a safe as possible and a direct connect is not as safe as possible i am sorry. It is far from the worst thing you could do but i will never recommend it to anyone. The small amount of money saved if you have your chimney cleaned by a pro will be lost in the added cost in a couple years and if you do it yourself the time and aggravation saved by properly installing it is well worth it

 

[smokedragon]

Can a welder weld up a crack like that to get us by or would that be a real fire hazard as i have young kids. Like i said this would be primarly used as emergency daily and occasionaly on the weekends.

A welder could absolutely repair those cracks. They might grind it down to look pretty, but a good bead of weld would seal that right up. I would get the cracked stove repaired since it seems much larger. Normally I would say to get away from both of these stoves, but since this is for emergency heat, either of these old stoves is better than nothing.

If you can find a local welder who will do it, that would be my choice.