Print

[Sprinter]

Just for an example, all those fancy high dollar modulating boilers that show an ASME efficiency rating in the 94-98% range. Can only do so if flue gasses are under 130 degrees and the maximum water supply temp is under 105 degrees. Anything above 86-88% comes from exhaust reclamation and very low supply temps. A perfect combustion alone can only account for 25-30% of the efficiency rating of a boiler for example. The big part is how much energy is transferred to the water and not lost up the chimney.

And just like gas fuel boilers or furnaces all of that efficiency can be wasted if the unit is not sized and or piped and installed properly.
In our area, a huge problem is standby losses and underground pipe issues.

[boilerman]

Wow, looks like over 1,900 views enjoyed and followed our little debate, lets go for 2,500.  So Slim, it took me a while to research some answers, since I’m not a regional company “Big Shot”  like you.  I had to do some research and once again I can discredit your wild assumptions, accusations and conspiracy theories. It seems CB produced a line of indoor gas fireplace models (Central Fireplace) from the late 1990’s to about 2008 and Omni Test Laboratories did all the testing and certifications on those fireplace models.  So, it appears that CB already had a 10+ year business working relationship with Omni. So if makes sense that CB would do their Eclassic testing with them too. So I seriously challenge your CB is “avoiding something” conspiracy accusation. If you think Omni is “fudging” on the test results from their accredited lab, maybe you should call them up on behalf of Portage and Main and throw your accusations that they are posting false numbers at them and see how that works out for you. You're the one hung up on the "efficiency" test results, I've never bothered to bring up efficiencies in our comparisons. I compared features and output capabilities. You ignored my point that EPA had those efficiencies posted on "their" site including a Heatmor model at 99% and a Woodmaster model at 99%. If you want me to post that chart along with your Portage & Main at 76% and prove myself yet once again I can do so. "All" manufacturers were asked not to advertise those efficiency numbers and EPA pulled them from their chart, as they realized there were issues in how the "efficiency test" portion was done. That error I agree with as I've already stated and don't buy into 90%+ numbers either. My point is don't go trying to single out 1 company as the bad guy. Now the 8 hour output rating of each model shows each furnaces ability to meet and hold a maximum btu output demand over an 8 hour burn period under constant draw. Now I find that valuable to know and to be able to compare models to each other in output capabilities. You can disagree with the test all you want, but right now it is the only "recognized" test for outdoor wood furnaces at  http://www.epa.gov/burnwise/owhhlist.html  I don't see that you've been able to persuade anyone to "pull that results column down as false". It is up to each individual to decide if they wish to value those nationally posted results and numbers and it seems to be up to you to discredit them. I'm guessing that one of the things you and I will agree on is that we will agree to disagree on this matter. Oh and before you accuse me, note: I am not an EPA advocate and certainly not in favor of the upcoming mandates they are ramming through in 2015. It also won't matter if you or I agree on whatever test method the EPA finalize on or emissions results they will require for that mandate once they implement it as law, as all manufactures will have to either meet it or they will be out of business, nor will they be there to warrant or back their traditional OWF's they've sold prior.

[slimjim]

Oh but I think that your guy was the one who started this whole thing, what was his name, oh I remember, Doctor Pinard and he did that by bashing P+M and it's simplicity, YOU are the guy that started with test results, AGAIN I will say, ANY test at this point in technology that boasts 97% efficiency and ANY company knowingly using those numbers to lie to potential customers is as flawed as the entire test!

[boilerman]

My reference to test results were only the 8 hour output rating for sizing and btu output comparisons between models. I'm not aware of any changes as to how the 8 hour btu output test is done or changes in those posted results.

[slimjim]

Please read above post, Note, when CB continues to boast 97% efficiency and you say P+M showed 76% you are as bad as they are, I just checked with the factory to get the numbers for sure as I don't promote on EPA numbers and did not remember  what they were, actually our 250 came in at 83% on high burn and 78% on low burn, where did the 2400 come in at on the low burn Boilerman, by the way what are you truly getting for a stack temp(I'll show you mine if you'll show me yours)!

[slimjim]

Boilerman I'd love to continue but it's been a long day and I've got an early wake up call. Continue tomorrow?

[boilerman]

Sure...Again I can care less about the efficiency numbers, but since you insist I did some googling and managed to find the following info: Portage & Main 250 70% high burn and 76% low burn........E2400 85.3% high burn and 92.6 low burn.......Heatmor 200SSRII  87.1% high burn and 99.9% low burn, which is the posting that really brought down the house and rightfully so...By the way, the low burn number is always higher that the low burn number.....I don't know about chimney temps, I've never seen any documentation or claims on CB's part and I don't have the equipment to check my own 2400.

[slimjim]

Oh thats easy, use a candy thermometer, I don't have a clue where you got those numbers, perhaps from the same CB dealer in Wisconsin that had the crude piece of plywood at the front gate hand painted with his statement  CB 97%   PM 84% AGAIN we did not start this and we do not tout on  the #'s CB and you still do, I think anybody in their right mind that has anything at all to do with heating already knows that ANY of those numbers are cooked and CB dealers continue today to use them in order to sell, I have never ever seen Heatmor advertise those numbers or anybody else for that matter, I have no doubt in my mind who to do business with, for others out there that think the important thing is checking the stove temp from an I Phone and believe impossible test results I ask them to please not buy our unit, For those who like simplicity, TRUE efficiency, and no lies, WELCOME aboard, there are several good stoves represented here on the forum, I'm not seeing any CB DEALERS who care enough to be here are you? Oh and by the way if you consider being the guy who services our customers in any way we can to help them burn wood as being a BIG SHOT then I will gladly accept your label, you started the labeling now let me ask you which are you, one of the LIERS that promote CB's propaganda or simply a sheeple?

[CountryBoyJohn]

Not to sound too fuddy-dudd, but the view count for this thread won't be going up any higher because of me.  I'm done.  I think you two, Mr. Slimjim and Mr. Boilerman, have strayed from productive discussion.  I know you two will shake hands when this is over, but I'm tired of the bickering.  Let's get back to helping people find the right boiler for them.   

[slimjim]

I don't think I slammed technology, If you like it , you can have it, your choice, Did you ever measure YOUR stack temp and do YOU think that an advertised 97% efficient stove with all the gadgets is really capable of those numbers, do me a favor would you for your own head space, purchase a candy thermometer and insert it into your stack at the breach of the boiler, I think you will be surprised, heck send me the receipt and I'll pay for it out of my own pocket, point is that with all those gadgets don't you think they would want to brag about their LOW stack temps by adding a 9 dollar temp probe, oh but wait, that would be a fact that you the customer could check in the field and not rely solely on propaganda.

[agriffinjd]

Not to sound too fuddy-dudd, but the view count for this thread won't be going up any higher because of me.  I'm done.  I think you two, Mr. Slimjim and Mr. Boilerman, have strayed from productive discussion.  I know you two will shake hands when this is over, but I'm tired of the bickering.  Let's get back to helping people find the right boiler for them.   

Can We All Just Get Along? For The Kids & Old People? RODNEY KING SPEAKS!

I agree.  Slimjim bends over backwards to help people, even those that aren't P&M customers.  I'm more familiar with him because I'm buying a P&M.  From what I've also seen, Boilerman also is very helpful with problems people are having.  Both class acts.  Good debates can be entertaining but we should call it a draw and move on.  Granted, I'm a newbie on the site so take my opinion with a grain of salt. 

[slimjim]

Thank you both for your opinion, Nobody's opinion is taken with a grain of salt, it has gone to far and I do agree that we should get back to helping folks without the bashing of others products, what say Boilerman, how about a hug!

[ffbare]

You guys   are crazy   

[victor6deep]

Its central boiler stoves that are all over YouTube for people pissed about smoke pollution. Wth?

[Scott7m]

If I only could collect all the hot air that's been wasted in this business with worthless anecdotal testing numbers I'd heat my home on it from now on that alone

I to used to spout numbers and get to caught up in it, upon being more involved in how those numbers are achieved and the effort that goes into maxing it out, do I realize that those aren't "real world" numbers and we just need to hush about it altogether.  For the most part, I feel we have here and that MOST companies have quit throwing them out there as the holy grail. 

Stack temps are where it's at in regard to efficency,  Slim is right, it's the best judge of how well its capturing heat and it's so simple anyone can do it and not have to believe a bunch of paperwork

Carry on