Earth to Pallet Pete--Rangely Ash Door Problem

Need your advice Pete. The Rangely ash door often is a PITA to close. The ash is cleaned out inside, the ash pan pushed in to the end, but too many times the latch won't shut. All when cool.
Cleaned off creosote from the inner latch and the inside tab. Then graphite on the latch and tab which seems to help with some grease on the tab.
No schematic or maintenance tips in the manual for the latch.
Ideas ?

 

If you are looking to notify a member you can type the @ and then there name. A list should pop up you can click the one you want. They will get a notification when you post.


Pallet Pete

 

Thx Pete.
Ditto with the ash remnants clean out. I made a small rake for that in a local blacksmith class.
The ash pan design is klutzy compared to our Oslo and VC Encores. It's a blind fit unless you get on your knees to fit it back.
Other than that the Rangelys work fine. No top loading however...too tight and deep.

 

After a winter with the ash pan door on the Rangely(s) sometimes not closing or tough to close, a solution has been found.
There will be a consult fee payable by Jotul Norge.
We use the stoves hard for 24/7 heat.
About once a week I clean the latch and tab with a toothbrush ( not wife's ) all around the bolt, tab, and inside surface.
Then lightly spray with graphite all around the latch.
Now, no more latching problems.
Right, Jotul could have engineered the pan and latch better like the Oslo which we never had any problems with over ~ 12 years.

 

The new Jotul Oslo with the new cat looks promising. Twenty (20) year warranty on the cat, I see. Are they using that same cat system in some of their other stoves?

Looks promising, but I'm not sure I'd buy such a new stove until a few years down the road.

 

Jotul had a cat stove , Firelight, over a decade ago. Later stoves were all non cat.
Having used cat stoves for 20 + years ( VC ) before our non cats, the "new" Oslo V3 ( like a rocket ? ) may promise more than it can deliver. Lots of high warranty promises.
Time will tell.
BK and Woodstock seemed to have the cat engineering down well. It's that extra step burning ( "light off" ), and the replacement of cats that lead us to go with non cats.

 

I started fires in both a cat stove and a noncat this morning. The noncat is way easier and faster to start. Almost immediately clean chimney emissions too. No cats to buy! Trouble is slowing down the burn rate. The noncat needs to run hot to run clean. Maybe some tech will come along to help a noncat burn slow and clean.

 

Along with cleaner emissions isn’t that why they’re creating hybrids?

Edit:
Never mind. I imagine if a tube stove can burn clean enough to meet 2020 reg’s the addition of a cat may not be needed or required.

It would make sense though the by adding a cat to tube stoves that is how they can slow them down. I don’t know.

 

Yes, but isn’t this cat a different “breed” (type)?

 

Maybe my memory fails me, but I thought there were some tube stoves that burn really slow.

 

No. Not when compared to a good cat stove.

 

When you say no, do you mean low temperature wise, long low burn, or emissions wise?

Woodstock stoves...what is the markings on the lever for? Just a number for the setting in the lever or does it perform similar to a bi-metallic?

 

The noncats can have very low emissions. Very similar to cat stoves. Emissions don’t really favor either technology in real life and in gph. The noncats must burn relatively hot to do this so the noncats are unable to run at low output which means their burn times at lowest output are short. Also, efficiency is lower at all output settings fir noncats. So long, low, steady, efficient burns are best done by cat stoves. This style of output is great for a home properly matched to this low output level.

What the noncats do well is cheap, durable, low maintenance, make lots of heat, simple to run, clean glass. These are important things for many and if your furnace is also running or you’re okay with temperature swings then short burn times are okay.

I have one of each because they really are different tools. Long and steady in the home cat stove, short intense bursts of heat in the shop from a noncat. I could certainly stay warm with either stove but I prefer the right tool for the job.

 

I thought you were only eluding to low emissions. I realize the cats offer better emissions and longer burns. Trying to better understand how much longer and lower.
Given your explanation, which by the way makes sense, then hybrid stoves, or stoves using both technologies are giving the best of both worlds. There’s still a looming question I would like an answer to...and an answer may be available: Does any hybrid out there out perform (long low burns with better emissions) the standard or any standard ol’ cat stove (cat only)?

I am guessing with these new regulations the answer is yes. Maybe the water gets muddied some talking about emissions as well, but BK is still using the same technology, I presume, for these new refs as with their older stoves. To my knowledge they have not built a hybrid. Not saying a hybrid design is a must. Don’t want to give folks that impression. Some may have combined the tech in order to meet the numbers needed.

 

Bk actually built the first hybrid long ago but now all of their cat stoves are straight cat stoves. Most of the newest design cat stoves from other brands add some secondary air so are technically hybrids but I just don’t think it matters. All stoves can run hot, but only stoves with a catalyst can run low and slow.

Emissions are excellent across all stoves or they wouldn’t be 2020 legal. So you can completely ignore emissions and focus on important things like efficiency and wide range of outputs and firebox size and cost and aesthetics.

 

I agree with all that, accept I’m not so sure emissions can easily be separated from efficiency. I have to wonder how much they are related. I’m not so sure efficiency just means long burn time. Not saying I am right. They just seem interconnected than I think meets the eye, though I’m not sure how to relate them...at least properly. An efficient stove by nature would also seem to have better emissions...across all heating ranges, not just one or the other...high or low.

Side note:
How far are you from Paul Gauchi (Back to Eden Garden...YouTube) near Sequim? I’d love to go see that guys place and garden.

 

Emissions and efficiency are not related. It is easy to have good marks in one or the other but getting both takes a smart design.

Long burn times are directly related to the lowest available burn rate and fuel tank size, not efficiency among current stoves. The spread of efficiency ratings across all stoves available today is pretty small so I wouldn’t worry too much about this specification given that fuel cost is usually pretty low for firewood heaters.

im about 1.5 hours from sequim. It’s more of a retirement community now.

 

Deleted by me....company showed up and I don’t have time to finish my thoughts.