Wood stove advice needed

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Paulinok

Marksman
Special Hen
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
92
Reaction score
0
Location
Claremore
We are looking at buying a wood stove, but not sure which kind to buy....ie: catalytic, non-catalytic or go with old style ? I would like to hear from people that have a epa approved stove, as I hear and read they are so much more efficient. We have an all electric house and are looking for supplemental heat and emergency heat. The brand I'm looking at is a Harman, either the oakwood or the tl300. Thanks!
 

RidgeHunter

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Aug 7, 2008
Messages
9,674
Reaction score
723
Location
OK
Catalytic is the only way to go, man. They are so much more efficient than an old fashioned stove it's not even funny.

I heat my house with a Woodstock Soapstone Fireview. Yes, it was expensive, but considering I heat my house for the price of 2 ricks of wood ($140 a year) and it will burn 12+ hours on one load and retain heat and embers for days, it pays for itself pretty quick.

010%252520%2525282%252529.JPG


Whatever you get, get a catalytic.
 

twocan

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
1,775
Reaction score
198
Location
Perry
Catalytic is the only way to go, man. They are so much more efficient than an old fashioned stove it's not even funny.

I heat my house with a Woodstock Soapstone Fireview. Yes, it was expensive, but considering I heat my house for the price of 2 ricks of wood ($140 a year) and it will burn 12+ hours on one load and retain heat and embers for days, it pays for itself pretty quick.

010%252520%2525282%252529.JPG


Whatever you get, get a catalytic.
I like heat and alot of it, ill burn a rick in 4 days in cold weather. I dont think you can get that kind of heat from them fancy looking stoves, I may be wrong!
I keep my house 85 or higher. For heat ashley or that style is the only way to go. My opinion only.
 

Paulinok

Marksman
Special Hen
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
92
Reaction score
0
Location
Claremore
From what I've read, wood burning is much more efficient so much so that there is almost zero smoke. Im looking at a Harman tl300 which is epa approved, but has a special burn chamber instead of a catalyst. But I must say 2 ricks of wood for all winter seems near impossible if its your only heat source
 

mblaney

Marksman
Special Hen
Joined
Jan 30, 2011
Messages
36
Reaction score
0
Location
N/A
I would recommend a catalytic stove. I have an EPA approved CFM (Century) stove that I use for
back up heat and to supplement a propane furnace during extremely cold weather.

It is very efficient, using far less wood for the equivalent heat than my old non-cat stove.
In my experience it also burns cleaner meaning less trips onto the roof to clean the pipe.
 

RidgeHunter

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Aug 7, 2008
Messages
9,674
Reaction score
723
Location
OK
I like heat and alot of it, ill burn a rick in 4 days in cold weather. I dont think you can get that kind of heat from them fancy looking stoves, I may be wrong!
I keep my house 85 or higher. For heat ashley or that style is the only way to go. My opinion only.

LOL, you're welcome to come over sometime. My stove will flat out roast me out of the house; I often have windows open to keep it tolerable. I crank it at night and leave my bedroom shut off so it stays cold, because I can't sleep in a hot room. When I wake up the rest of the house is still warm.

If I was burning a rick in 4 days I'd cry. My parents have a masonry fireplace and they burn nearly that much when it's cold. And it actually makes their house colder by drafting all the air out the huge-ass chimney.

From what I've read, wood burning is much more efficient so much so that there is almost zero smoke.

You won't see smoke from my chimney; the catalyst burns the particles in the smoke. More of a white steam depending on weather conditions, though usually you can't see anything. Chimney sweep was out this week and said it would rarely need cleaning.

But I must say 2 ricks of wood for all winter seems near impossible if its your only heat source

I have central heat of course, and I use it on cool mornings like this to warm up the house a few degrees. I don't start using the stove until late November or December, because on a day where it gets out of the 50's for highs the stove will roast you out of the house. It's not worth lighting it to warm up the house on a day like today; by design they are meant to run nearly continuously.

Last year I burned 2 1/2 ricks, and that was a cold winter. When it gets to where we don't see high 50's, the stove is going 24/7. Usually December through early March it is running all the time. Even going 24/7 it just plain doesn't use much wood; it's not like an open fire you have to feed. You load it and forget it, like Ron Popeil. Nothing impossible about it.

The wood consumption is really that low. I will get it going good in the evening, go to bed, throw on a couple logs the next morning and go to work. Come home, open damper, throw on a couple more logs and it roars back up. Shut damper, engage converter when it gets up to temp. Repeat.

BTW, I burned 185 gallons of propane in from August 2010 to August 2011. Central heat, stove and hot water tank are on that. And I cook a lot.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom