Tried another top down fire last night in the chiminea outside. It worked great once again. Burned three hours before I had to do anything. Very minimal smoke. Fire was very even. I will try some more but not tonight because it is hot.
Any time you want along burning fire, top down is the best. Uses way less kindling too. A full firebox with hardwood and a top down fire will go 8 hours easy. I don't think however that you get the most heat that way, but it is the easiest way to get a long consistent burn. Max heat for me is usually a few logs that are softer.. Make more smoke ... And sufficient room in Firebox to get the monster secondary flames rolling above the fire
I think thats a flawed analysis. X pounds of fuel produces the same amount of Btus ( given the sam MC). The top down just spreads it across a longer time. Same heat, just less intense for longer.
I disagree. The number of Btu's is not at issue here... Heat from the stove isn't the same as Btu's from the amount of wood loaded. The burn rate is a big factor in the amount of heat that the stove is putting out. The size of the splits is also a big factor as smaller chunks from the same weight of wood loaded will have a larger surface area and likely will have more active burning surfaces.
Then please explain how the BK and woodstock stoves are so well loved for their long burn times using low burn rates but can also roast you out of the house if needed.
This could hold weight if you are talking about an old smoke dragon but not with modern airtight stoves.
You are just consuming the wood at faster rate, turning those btu's into heat. I think it is awesome that you can get a stove that will burn at slow rate and maintain a clean burn, but every stove I have ever used has the ability to cook you out of the house - just depends on the ambient temperature.
No, it's the same...btu's have nothing to do with the stove. That's the amount of energy in the fuel.
When you consider how effective the top down is I am surprised that the form factor of free standing stoves hasn't changed to support taller loading
How so? Nearly every stove or insert is designed with a firebox shaped like an old TV. Would not taller, narrow and modestly deep firebox work better ?
I have used top down fires all week inside. I have to say that I am sold. They burn clean and long for me. They may not be for everyone but as for me and my house we will use this method.
Thanks Steve Burns Wood for this thread and to bobdog2o02 for the link. I just start top down this year with my new stove. I am not convinced that is the way yet. I would Stack 3 layers of splits, 1/4 of super cedar and then a handful of kindling. Took a long time to come up to temperature and smoke out the chimney. I have had about 4 fires started that way. Today I build a fire with a modified version of bobdog2o02 's tutorial. I layered 2 tiers of splits in the bottom and 2 short splits running the opposite direction on the top. I then lit 1/4 of a super cedar and placed it between the 2 short splits. Then I put a handful of kindling running the direction of the lower split. This worked great. Up to temp. in no time and very little smoke. Worked great tonight.
I tried to top down a few times I don't care for it . I do kind of a combination most of the time, Best of both worlds , 2 or 3 Pieces of small kindling on top One in the front bottom , I do this when I have coals to start the load with , And ,on a cold start add 2 safelight firestarters on the bottom . This way you get your fire going on the bottom and when the kindling on the top ignites It builds heat in your chimney and the top of your stove
I agree On a cold stove I can pack a good night's worth if wood in the box, kindling at the very top next to the secondary burn plate and as soon as the afterburner kick in I can shut it down without having to bother with loading more wood before hitting the sack
