EPA stove: still can't make up my mind

Great post!

I can see it being easier to refit tubes and refractive tiles into a cat stove than adding a cat to an older stove. The cat stove requires special cast cat fixtures and a bypass. Costly and likely difficult to find the space for it all. The tubes otoh are relatively simple.

Some of the European designs I like, but I do agree with you that many of them look pretty alien compared with what we are used to.

 

I lost my sense of humor in the same place you lost the ability to use emoticons.

 

Lol

 

Yeah it does. I was originally told, Since it would not be my main source of heat. I have a natural gas furnace and natural gas hot water / radiant in floor heat. That if installed properly "WETT" certified it would not raise my insurance at all. 1 year later I have researched / saved / got the building permits and bought the stove and pipe ETC. Talk to my insurance agent prior to putting the Heavy stove in the basement. Well here I sit over a month later waiting for a viable option in the winter with $3000 worth of wood stove sitting in a pile beside me. Not happy.

 

I would investigate different insurance companies, some absolutely hate wood anything and make sure you'll pay for it!
If your broker doesn't seem willing to check around, find a different broker.

It is extremely irritating when we live in one of the coldest countries on earth and make it such a hassle to burn wood for heat

 

It's extremely irritating when you're required to get insurance, then the insurance company bends you over every chance they get!

 

My buddies insurance company hired a "loss prevention specialist " to come inspect his shop and property, he refused to let him on the yard
Told his broker to switch companies, broker dragged his feet getting quotes, so my buddy switched brokers
Did business with them almost 20 years, means nothing!

 

State farm told me it was $40/year for the added wood stove. And she (nice young lady at the desk) would come inspect my installation....
I didn't have the young lady inspect my set-up...

 

No big deal here.. Which is surprising in the People's Republik of MA. Called my agent, let her know the plans, she asked if I was having a pro do the chimney, I told her "probably." She said whenever they need pictures next, I should just include one or two of the setup.

The town didn't care either - the chimney contractor pulled a permit which is supposed to include an inspection... In September... Nothing yet. I'm think they'd be chasing their tails all day here trying to keep track of everyone's rig. Town of 1600, probably half or more burn wood, and the town employees all have multiple jobs already.. For example, the dump guy is also the tree guy, and works on the road crew.

 

I like the way your buddy handles things.

 

I think they understood he wasn't happy, i walked in halfway into the conversation and i was a little scared!

 

Chit was gittin real, eh?

 

Oh yeah, sometimes nice doesn't translate well,

 

JOKE...I never made that comparison. I never wrote it either. How about giving me credit for what I actually wrote. The comparison of VC's and Elms having warming shelves...no more...no less...precisely. Not angry, or upset, rather, making a point. Don't assume I was making any other comparison other than the warming shelves.

Well aware of the awards and stoves competing for the green heat awards.

I fully understand what they are doing, I read the article. What I read, they were buying older stoves and trying a number of means (any and all...common or uncommon... retro-fit CAT's, tubes, etc.) to make certain designs more efficient and produce less emissions. Part of that...the unwritten part of the article... would include trying to figure which of the older stove designs were most efficient for their time period. They were all inefficient, yet still...there were more efficient designs than others. If that isn't the case, then why do the testing at all...that coupled with some being made entirely better...lots of factors and parameters to consider.

They were indeed interested in this at one time.

Here...directly from Woodstock...
..."We are testing older stoves made in the 1970s and 1980s. Stoves which were made with little technology to reduce emissions or improve efficiency...
...first goal is to establish a careful baseline profile for these older stoves in terms of heat output, emissions, and efficiency at low, medium, and high burn rates...
...Next, we want to see if we can design a retrofit catalyst and heat exchanger that will improve the performance metrics (heat output, emissions, and efficiency) enough to make them competitive with some of the stoves in today’s market."

Even though there was no mention of using tubes, or 2ndary air in some form, I highly doubt the consideration didn't cross their minds. Apparently the idea has crossed their mind, else they wouldn't have created a "hybrid" stove.

Though not in tube form... 2ndary air "IS" (pun intended) something Woodstock has and does give thought too. If they thought about it with their IS (no pun) hybrid stove, the why assume they wouldn't try to retrofit it into an older (as another forum member mentioned) "big black piece of chit"? The point being, don't assume...Woodstock hasn't assumed...in fact they used the technology.


Found here:
Woodstock Soapstone Co. Blog: Search results for old stove research ...the 2nd full sentence..near the end... tells exactly what they were doing...and precisely what I stated. I'm sure there were other "unmentioned" reasons for this research and testing also.

Old news.
I've done my research.
Read that article already too.

EDIT:
Experimenting and research may indeed be on hold. I never stated it was or wasn't on hold. I merely mentioned they were, or had been, doing research to improve older stoves. It appears, Tom indeed was interested in improving these old stoves at some point. I'd be willing to bet, if nothing else, he's interested in trying to preserve this part of our American heritage. I bet he loves all old antique stoves, too. Whether or not, he's still interested in making these old stoves burn better by retrofitting them...only time will tell.

Merry Christmas...everyone!

 

First off, welcome aboard Hoytman .
I'm gleaning from all your posts that you're afraid to pull the trigger on a modern stove for whole bunch of reasons that are based on info from reviews.
Here's a bit of info....the stove that was here when we bought the house was VERY difficult to control. It was built in 1985, and I'm sure a nice stove at the time. We discovered it had been overfired and busted a welded seam. I had that fixed and it STILL was VERY difficult to control. One small air hole which could be covered by a crude plate attached to a lever. There was a gap all around that bugger, so I fixed that with some gasket material, and guess what? Still VERY difficult to control, albeit better.
I finally was able to get my hands on a 30NC from Englander and even though it has similar burn characteristics, is MUCH more controllable, burns cleaner, and burns less wood to boot.
If you truly want a new wood stove, jump down off that fence you're teetering on, and buy one you like. Burn dry wood (pretty sure you've got that covered), and be happy in your choice.....I highly doubt that'll be an issue.
Our house is smaller than yours at about 1250 sq ft, and the 30 can be enough, too much, or just right depending on a variety of factors. If I could manage it, I'd get a BK in one of the 30 size boxes and have nice long, controllable heat.
Oh, and the propaganda.....uh, marketing material from manufacturers should be used only as a guideline. The 30NC firebox is not a usable 3.5 cu ft....it's closer to 2.75 once all the "innards" are added. It's still one of the largest boxes in the market (BK King is larger, and there's another that's about that size too, but I don't remember the brand).

 

drolett ht2000

 

Without doubt a proper stove

 

I do the same thing...and a I swear it runs better or at least comes up to temp quicker afterwards !

 

Thanks for the welcome.
Yeah...it may seem like I'm complaining about certain brands of stoves, CAT's -vs- Tubes, but the reality is the teetering you mentioned is just that...it's hard to make a decision. Even stoves that have lot's of con's...maybe more than others...also have some really strong positive features that sort of make up for some of the bad.

As far as "the propaganda.....uh, marketing material from manufacturers should be used only as a guideline" that's where having the EPA's current list of "actual efficiencies"...i.e., actual EPA test results...not just some number that a manufacturer mentioned in their marketing brochures...there's not regulations in place to make them report "actual" test results. I'm not for more gov't regulations...but that's what makes it so nice about the...I think it's 5...brands that volunteer to tell the truth and actually report their EPA "actual test efficiencies on their brochures. Think Woodstock...just 1 of the 5 companies, I think (?), that do their best to tell the truth.

Most of the EPA test results are likely skewed some as well, as in not "real world" testing because most of that testing is done with crib wood, or kiln dried, wood...not just cord wood left outside and covered...still being subject to outdoor humidity changes. There again, another plug for Woodstock ( a brand I don't yet own) for not only posting youtube videos of their stoves using crib wood...kiln dried...but they also video results from much "wetter" wood as well. I might just be talking myself into a Woodstock. LOL!

Bottom line for me is:
-I know seasoned wood...is likely at a minimum seasoned 3yrs...some will go with a 1yr...if you ever burn 3+yr old seasoned wood you'll finally get it.
-Knowing how good seasoned wood burns in a old stove...making for cleaner hotter burning and ease of use with the stove...
-I want the same ease of use with a modern stove...while burning less wood and much, much, cleaner.
-I don't mind regular monthly and yearly routine maintenance and cleaning, replacing gaskets, or replacing tubes and catalysts every 5-10 years, but I just don't want a brand prone to problems or those that have catalysts that won't last more than a couple years.

Some of y'all talking about discounting reviews...I wasn't referring to written reviews...though I do take some of them into consideration based on how well written they are, but most of the reviews I was referring to were youtube videos of problems issues going on with some of these brands of stoves. Some of the brands have some real issue's likely stemming from design flaws that hadn't been worked out enough in "real world" (home owner use) testing. Makes you wonder how much beta testing they did with certain designs.

For fear of beating a dead horse...where's that emoticon LOL...I'm sure I'll make an informed decision when I'm ready.