IS or PH dilemma

Oh.... horse hockey! The ash pan is the best thing that ever happened to wood burning stoves. Saves all the shoveling.

I told him, I did!

 

The real funny part? I don't even own a stove! (yet!) and I'm all arguing about ash pans!

 

I like the simplicity of not having an ash pan; one less place for air leaks (my old Hearthstone had this problem). As far as looks go, the height of the ash pan area being larger than either the soapstone panels above or below the glass draws my attention for some reason; I just prefer the stove without one. Also on the topic of looks, there seems to be two kinds of short stove legs - I like the narrow ones, but not the wider ones.

Images from WS Owner Photos section

 

Dennis

I agree it looks better without the ash pan. But you really don't notice the difference after while, and after owning a WS ash pan system, you will wonder why you ever did without it.

I was worried about the extra gaskets but took a leap of faith on WS Engineering. It's well designed, simple and looks bullet proof.

 

The only reason we picked the short legs was due to our lintel height. I think it looks cool with the short legs and we are used to no ash pan with our FV. One less gasket for me to worry about!

 

Well put your big-boy pants on and go get one!

Greg

 

Wish I could.

 

Thanks for your reply... I would love to have heard his two cents on it since he previously owned a FV and could give his opinion on the feel of the heat from the two stoves.

 

I faced the same dilemma last year. So I decided to get one of each!

I'll agree with those who say you can't go wrong with either stove. My wife likes the Progress because of the same reasons you mentioned, especially the side loading door and the classic look. We too have an old Victorian home, and the looks of the PH match the house. You'll be 100% satisfied.

Needless to say, there will be those who want to see pics...

 

Thanks Dennis. I can't add much to what has already been said. We had a Fireview, then the Beta IS and now the production IS. The soapstone is definitely a softer heat. The steel wrapped IS, even with its soapstone firebox, acts more like a steel stove IMO.

The Fireview with its 2.0 cu ft firebox gives off great heat. With the side loading, its runs cleaner too. The IS with its 3.2 cu ft firebox and hybrid system can give off a tremendous amount of heat in a shorter time. With that big front door, its a bit dirtier to run than the side loader in our experience.

On the other hand, if money had been no object, we would have a PH because the whole family liked the looks of soapstone a lot more. We have no regrets about the function of the IS. Its easy to use and fulfills its purpose flawlessly.

 

Great memories, thanks Dennis!

 

I'm curious, how do the soapstone stoves do as far as heat movement through a house? For example, I heat from my basement, to the upper level. The steel stoves I have get into a convective loop and pull the cold air down. Then the hot air replaces the cold. Does the radiant soapstone act similar?

 

Brian,
Thanks for taking the time to respond. We really like the soapstone heat from our current FV and the side loading too. We can't wait to get out new PH and the extra warmth it will bring. Thanks again for your two cents.

Tony

 

I insulated the basement first. That's the ticket.

 

Heat does rise... but in a basement, if it isn't insulated the concrete basement walls will suck up a lot of heat, making it a very inefficient place to put your primary heat source. But, for many it's only place so that makes it the best place.

I've got one in our basement/laundry/family room too, and it gets used when it gets really cold out. Extra btus never hurt anyone.