Woodburner advice, please

[Toadflax]

We're looking at woodburners, really just as a feature /general heat source in the living room, so would be a relatively small one, but have a few questions and wondered if anyone here could advise. We have been googling, but first hand accounts are always useful.

1. Wood burner or multi-fuel? Is the multi-fuel a poor compromise, and (I think to myself) if I keep a stock of wood available, woud I ever actually want to burn coal? But the backup of being able to keep a bag of coal in for emergency seems a good idea.
2. Can a wood burner burn peat? Or would I need a multi-fuel stove for peat?
3. Does the top of a typical wood burner get hot enough for simple cooking (e.g. boiling kettle or pans of stew)? I see there are a number of stoves that explicitly advertise a cooking top, which made me think that a standard one wouldn't be suitable.

Thanks for any help.


Geoff

 

[British Red]

Hi Geoff

Multifuel all the way. You should not use housecoal but rather smokeless or anthracite. Houescoal creosotes up your flue rather a lot. Multifuels burn wood happily, but, as you say, you can choose to use smokeless which burns a long time (12hrs+), gives more heat than wood and less ash.

Peat is somewhere between wood and coal so I would suggest go multifuel if you want that option

As for cooking, not all get hot enough to cook on, so do ask for it explicitly (generally the firebrick and thermal lining is thinner on the cook plate)

Hope that helps

Red

 

[Toadflax]

Thank you - that's very useful.


Geoff

 

[colly]

multifuel stoves are not as good at burning wood as a dedicated woodburner.
many woodburners have the ability to 'upgrade' to multifuel if you want to.
don't know much about peat except it would need a multifuel but really unless you are one of those with special permission using peat should be avoided.
a stove for cooking on would be advertised as such.
go for one with a 'clearview' 'clear glass' or some such statement or the glass will get very dirty and you won't be able to see the flames so it won't be a focal point.
you will have to get to learn how to use it. get a stove thermometer which will tell you how well it is burning and that will help keep the glass and flue cleaner.

hope this helps

 

[mr dazzler]

Usually when people think of getting a woodburning stove, they think of the stove (naturally), but tend to overlook the flue, which is just as important-if not more important-then the stove itself. In fact a potentially brilliant stove will be distinctly average if you try to run it up a cheap and nasty type of flue system. 99 times out of 100 draw problems are caused by bad flues. People get a stove that is smoky, or doesnt give high heat. Apart from the obvious damp wood or filthy flue, a bad arranged flue is very often the culprit. A good flue has to be well designed and correctly installed. You need to get a one piece continuous flue liner (stainless steel twin walled and insulated with vermiculite) A cheap system normally has lots of joined sections which inevitably break over time and leak, this affects your draw, which means less heat, more smoke, dirty flue more often, greater risk of flue fire....I have witnessed first hand the result of a flue fire, a cottage not 100 yards away was reduced to a smoking shell when the leaking flue ignited the thatch.... You want air to come only through the firebox (main air or secondary airwash), not in through gaps along the flue (or loose gappy doors, loose door glass etc). This will reduce efficiency if allowed. You want the maximum amount of heat possible from the logs seeing as it costs time and/or money to get them.
Believe me cheapest isnt always your best solution. I would rather spend on the flue and a good stove, and pay less on logs (process my own) In fact in october I am going to replace a clapped out 12kw villager (here when I moved in in May) with a high efficiency 6kw woodwarm fireview stove. Woodwarm are well worth a look. It will cost around £1700 stove+flue HETAS fitted all in, BUT I believe in buy once buy well, it will be around in 25 years time, and like for instance this year I paid only £100 for 4 or 5 tons of logs (tree trunks actually) that I have done myself. I would also advise get your own splitter, it will pay for itself in a couple of seasons. A lot of younger men like to brag about "splittin a cord in 23 minutes" etc etc, but when you get a bit advanced in years a machine is way more appealing. I built my own splitter (hycrack tapered screw type) for around £350 including a new 9hp villiers engine. It will (with care) handle logs up to 20" or more diameter. No hydraulics or electrics, and no need to bend my back so much..
Hope this helps, good luck with your stove project cheers Jonathan

 

[rik_uk3]

Multifuel without a doubt is the way to go. You will be surprised how much wood you use and with smokeless fuel your stove will spring to life in the morning.

 

[mr dazzler]

Just as a matter of interest, how much does one pay for a ton of smokeless fuel? For me personally a regular supply of cordwood logs to process has never been a problem and I never considered smokeless fuel as a viable option. I suspect its not cheap to buy, although compared to some of the "builders bag" log deals perhaps it compares favourably?
cheers Jonathan

 

[Toadflax]

Thanks for the suggestions so far. The consensus definitely appears to be multi-fuel (particularly if peat is to be burned). Location means that cutting and drying peat may be a viable option. Regarding flues, the stove will be on an ouside wall with the flue as a rear exit directly out through the wall.

However, none of the multi-fuel stoves I've found offer a cooking option. The (non-range) stoves that offer cooking all appear to be wood only.


Geoff

 

[British Red]

Just as a matter of interest, how much does one pay for a ton of smokeless fuel?

,
£400

However you don't burn much, one ton will keep my cooking range burning from November to March (without letting it go out). I use mostly wood - we have 36 cubic metres seasoning right now, but smokeless is very useful for "keeping it in" overnight. Takes up a hell of a lot less space too. My wood store is packed to the rafters (its an old garage) and I have ten cubic metres in the barn too

 

[Goatboy]

Yup smokeless for a heat bed and keeping it going and wood for a blast of heat when needed. One scuttle usually a day in winter with a wee bit of wood thrown in.

 

[didicoy]

Usually when people think of getting a woodburning stove, they think of the stove (naturally), but tend to overlook the flue, which is just as important-if not more important-then the stove itself. In fact a potentially brilliant stove will be distinctly average if you try to run it up a cheap and nasty type of flue system. 99 times out of 100 draw problems are caused by bad flues. People get a stove that is smoky, or doesnt give high heat. Apart from the obvious damp wood or filthy flue, a bad arranged flue is very often the culprit. A good flue has to be well designed and correctly installed. You need to get a one piece continuous flue liner (stainless steel twin walled and insulated with vermiculite) A cheap system normally has lots of joined sections which inevitably break over time and leak, this affects your draw, which means less heat, more smoke, dirty flue more often, greater risk of flue fire....

I think this is just over the top. Twinwall isn't required if its sealed within a chimney. Twill wall is designed to be free standing & cool to the touch, remains warmer than outside environment to assist draw A good length & diameter of flue is important. Go by stove manufactures guidelines and spec.