Page 3 of 6

Re: Worthwhile Alternative to Antique Baseburner Coal Stoves

Posted: Sun. Dec. 08, 2013 3:29 pm
by warminmn
Which is better? installing a double wall on my exterior wall like I did in less than a day, and I have good draft even in summer to burn bills, or cutting/maintaining a hole in my roof to save a couple pounds of coal? Easy answer for me.

I have a brick chimney in the center of my house too and the draft isnt much better then my outside one. It could just be that Im 2 miles from the highest point in my county? Or not.

Every house is different, every setup is different. No trees, lots of trees. On the prairie or in the woods. You cant lump them all together.

Im glad your setup works good for you.

Re: Worthwhile Alternative to Antique Baseburner Coal Stoves

Posted: Sun. Dec. 08, 2013 3:52 pm
by SuperBeetle
All I know is that if I ever have the opportunity to buy a Base burner at the right price, I'll snatch it right up and sell my Mark II. These old stoves are awesome and I'd be honored to own one. I'm finding that a lot of the time the old way is the right way.

Re: Worthwhile Alternative to Antique Baseburner Coal Stoves

Posted: Sun. Dec. 08, 2013 4:54 pm
by scalabro
I must say that I have had a long think on this topic.

I now feel that if I could find a BB cheap, get wifey to agree with the "look" and had the time to restore one, I would do it.

However, I'm pretty sure that if she did not care about the look of any contraption I was to build, I would heavily modify my MKII to suit.

I would include another, yet massive, air to air heat exchanger in the fire box with one or two more blower fans.

I would add a system to preheat the incoming charge air.

I would build a custom fire box made out of inconel or 625 nickel alloy, maybe even waspalloy, with a combustion chamber heated, secondary air jacket, to replace the fire brick.

I would then fabricate a finned exhaust stack that had the old school length.

Finally I would weld mild steel fins to completely cover the outside of the unit.

:eek2:

Re: Worthwhile Alternative to Antique Baseburner Coal Stoves

Posted: Sun. Dec. 08, 2013 5:24 pm
by waldo lemieux
^^^ and title it " mans inhumanity to himself" danger ,danger Will Robinson :shock:

Just kidding , most here will recognize the musings of an idol mind. :D

Re: Worthwhile Alternative to Antique Baseburner Coal Stoves

Posted: Sun. Dec. 08, 2013 6:03 pm
by nortcan
I have an interior chimney and with the Vigll and the Sunnyside Base Burner, the stove pipe at the outlet of the stove, at 2Ft H is always cool, possible to touch with hand most of the time. So the heat doen't go to the chimney.
I got the stove to keep the heat Inside of the house not in the chimney .
I got the chimney to get the gasses outside of the house, not the heat.
Anyway, now for me I love the look of my antiques stoves, plus they are performant, use no electricity and I can take the challenge with cc's stove anytime.

Re: Worthwhile Alternative to Antique Baseburner Coal Stoves

Posted: Sun. Dec. 08, 2013 6:06 pm
by wsherrick
Gekko wrote:I must say that I have had a long think on this topic.

I now feel that if I could find a BB cheap, get wifey to agree with the "look" and had the time to restore one, I would do it.

However, I'm pretty sure that if she did not care about the look of any contraption I was to build, I would heavily modify my MKII to suit.

I would include another, yet massive, air to air heat exchanger in the fire box with one or two more blower fans.

I would add a system to preheat the incoming charge air.

I would build a custom fire box made out of inconel or 625 nickel alloy, maybe even waspalloy, with a combustion chamber heated, secondary air jacket, to replace the fire brick.

I would then fabricate a finned exhaust stack that had the old school length.

Finally I would weld mild steel fins to completely cover the outside of the unit.

:eek2:
I have the perfect name for it. The Radiant Porcupine. All kidding aside, it might work well, but; you would have to get it past the female unit first.

Re: Worthwhile Alternative to Antique Baseburner Coal Stoves

Posted: Sun. Dec. 08, 2013 7:07 pm
by Wanna Bee
coalcracker wrote:Now, I'll say it one more time, a modern stove with an internal baffle and fan, with no flue damper of any type, burning coal, with a long vertical run of modern double wall insulated chimney pipe inside the home, will run rings around any antique baseburner, connected to an outside chimney.

No contest.
Dear Mr. Harmon,
Sometimes it is more about having CLASS. There is no modern stove that could get the type of attention that an antique base burner can.

This my friend is 100 year old artwork that can perform as well as your modern "iron box".

Image

Most antique base burner user's/admires don't care about using a few more pounds of coal a year. We are coal burning connoisseurs, we don't conform to normal rules. We drive old trucks, we respect the craftsman of the past. Most of us are blue collar craftsmen ourselves.

I don't know what flew up your ass, or why you continue to beat on your chest in regards to your stove and your installation being superior to our fine antiques. I smell a bit of jealousy on your end...maybe the wife won't allow it?

Like I said it's all about having class...

Re: Worthwhile Alternative to Antique Baseburner Coal Stoves

Posted: Sun. Dec. 08, 2013 7:18 pm
by Photog200
Wanna Bee wrote:
coalcracker wrote:Now, I'll say it one more time, a modern stove with an internal baffle and fan, with no flue damper of any type, burning coal, with a long vertical run of modern double wall insulated chimney pipe inside the home, will run rings around any antique baseburner, connected to an outside chimney.

No contest.
Dear Mr. Harmon,
Sometimes it is more about having CLASS. There is no modern stove that could get the type of attention that an antique base burner can.

This my friend is 100 year old artwork that can perform as well as your modern "iron box".

Image

Most antique base burner user's/admires don't care about using a few more pounds of coal a year. We are coal burning connoisseurs, we don't conform to normal rules. We drive old trucks, we respect the craftsman of the past. Most of us are blue collar craftsmen ourselves.

I don't know what flew up your ass, or why you continue to beat on your chest in regards to your stove and your installation being superior to our fine antiques. I smell a bit of jealousy on your end...maybe the wife won't allow it?

Like I said it's all about having class...
AMEN!

Re: Worthwhile Alternative to Antique Baseburner Coal Stoves

Posted: Sun. Dec. 08, 2013 7:22 pm
by VigIIPeaBurner
wsherrick wrote:
Gekko wrote:I must say that I have had a long think on this topic.

I now feel that if I could find a BB cheap, get wifey to agree with the "look" and had the time to restore one, I would do it.

However, I'm pretty sure that if she did not care about the look of any contraption I was to build, I would heavily modify my MKII to suit.

I would include another, yet massive, air to air heat exchanger in the fire box with one or two more blower fans.

I would add a system to preheat the incoming charge air.

I would build a custom fire box made out of inconel or 625 nickel alloy, maybe even waspalloy, with a combustion chamber heated, secondary air jacket, to replace the fire brick.

I would then fabricate a finned exhaust stack that had the old school length.

Finally I would weld mild steel fins to completely cover the outside of the unit.

:eek2:
I have the perfect name for it. The Radiant Porcupine. All kidding aside, it might work well, but; you would have to get it past the female unit first.
Cha-Cha-Cha-Chia stove :idea: :rofl:

Re: Worthwhile Alternative to Antique Baseburner Coal Stoves

Posted: Sun. Dec. 08, 2013 7:46 pm
by Bruce M
I've got a method that has worked great for me and the many years of coal burning I have under my belt, this will make the second year, that method is....Start a fire and be warm.

Re: Worthwhile Alternative to Antique Baseburner Coal Stoves

Posted: Sun. Dec. 08, 2013 7:49 pm
by buck24
I have a Buck Model 24 Coal Stove and I love it.... But that being said my stove does not compare to any baseburner. The baseburners were made to get the most heat out of the unit in different ways. All which proved to be successful in the past 100 years or so. To have the chimney inside the house any amount of feet and be able to place your hand on it how can this radiate any heat. Take a good look at the Harman and a Baseburner (cut away side view) and compare the two. The Baseburners are in a league of their own. Follow the exhaust path to the chimney. There is a big difference in Feet between the two types of stove. This takes place within the stove with the Baseburners. Longer exhaust path, more time in the stove would lead me to believe more area being heated and you would get more heat out of the baseburner. I consider the Baseburners a true work of art and true heating machines. Viva la baseburners.

Re: Worthwhile Alternative to Antique Baseburner Coal Stoves

Posted: Sat. Dec. 21, 2013 11:01 pm
by LsFarm
There is more to a baseburner's efficiency than just the length of the hot exhaust pathway. One of the amazing things is how long and how completely the coal burns. This is a product of the firepot design.
Most if not all baseburners have the firepot fully inside the stove body. The firepot is suspended inside the stove body, the outside of the firepot is surrounded by HOT gasses or radiant heat. This means that the firepot is much hotter than the firebricks on a modern box stove's firebox. The result is that even the coal resting right against the wall of the firepot in a baseburner is still plenty hot enough to fully burn, and not leave any BTU's in the ash. The coal is not losing it's heat to the firepot, instead the firepot is supporting the hot environment around the coal bed and this means the coal burns completely
Another feature of the baseburner is the round firepot. While not a rare design feature in many older stoves or in some modern stoves [like the Chubby], it is the most efficient shape for burning coal.
I believe that this is because coal likes to receive heat from all the coal and surfaces around it, and using this heat makes coal burn more completely. The hotter the coal bed, the better the coal burns
The round firepot also usually has a pretty good grate system that lets out the powdery ash that remains after complete combustion of coal.

Many modern square stoves have some issues with burning coal completely, with blocked air passageways, and clogged corners of the fire box. This results in difficulty in shaking down the partially burnt coal, sometimes resulting in jammed grates, or dumped fires.

I'm willing to bet that if a scientific study were done, with any of the modern box stoves, compared to a baseburner or an Oak stove with recirculating back pipe, that the older stoves will prove to be pretty good, probably significantly better in heat output per pound of coal, and completeness of combustion.

There are caveats, an older iron stove must be properly restored and properly sealed, and any and all miss-fitting doors or panels sealed.

So lets say we have a couple of box stoves, and a couple of baseburners and an Oak with double pass back pipe.
Run all the stoves so they have the same surface temperature say, just above the front door of the stove, or a similar location that is similar to all stoves..

Then when running the stove at this given temperature, accurately measure the heat in the flue pipe say, 12" after the stove's breach or exit. I have absolutely NO DOUBT that the flue gas temperature will be MUCH LOWER in the older stoves.

And to carry the experiment and 'contest' a bit further. Put in a measured amount of coal in each appliance, and see how many hours the stove can MAINTAIN the surface temperature in the stove.
Then, measure the weight of the ash from the same given amount of coal, and figure out which stove has the lightest ash, [ most completely burnt coal ] .

Now I'm not a huge advocate of old iron stoves.. personally I don't like iron for stove construction. But if properly designed, maintained, and burnt responsively, it makes a good stove.

I like welded steel for it's strength, sealed welded joints, ease of repair and maintenance. and in some homes, the appearance is better than an old stove. But that is subjective.

I have to say that the big, gaudy, plated monster-sized Art Garland Baseburner I have on display in my home gets positive comments all the time, where a modern box stove probably would be ignored. Liking or disliking the appearance of a stove is purely emotional or subjective. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Your double wall chimney will radiate virtually no heat into the room, the whole reason for the second wall is to create a radiant heat barrier to keep nearby combustibles safe from fire. Only a probe type thermometer into the flue pipe itself is an accurate measurement of flue temps.

Your understanding of the physics of heat transfer, surface radiation of heat, and complete combustion of coal are all lacking. I applaud your enthusiasm for your stove and it's instalation and it's performance for you in your home.. But it is not anywhere near as efficient a design for heat transfer, surface radiation or for low flue temps compared to a multiple-pass baseburner or Oak stove with a double pass back pipe.

Buy a probe thermometer that reads up to 600* or more, they can be purchased off ebay, or used to be. and use this to measure your true flue temps. Then ask a few folks to measure the same in their flue pipes. I think you will be surprised at the results

Greg L

Re: Worthwhile Alternative to Antique Baseburner Coal Stoves

Posted: Sun. Dec. 22, 2013 7:45 am
by EarthWindandFire
The motivation that drove the foundries in Taunton to design and produce more advanced and efficient coal stoves was driven by the intense competition from John D Rockefeller's Standard Oil and it's subsidiaries. The advent of cheap kerosene fuel and even cheaper kerosene heaters put the lid on the coffin for the iron foundries that produced the stoves. It was fuel oil run through pipes from Texas and Pennsylvania that put the final nails in the coffin for the coal heat industry, again thanks to men like Rockefeller.

My Grandfather, who was an Engineer on the New York Central Railroad, wanted nothing to do with coal. He worked on steam engines his whole life and shoveled probably a million tons of coal with his own hands. It was the introduction of diesel locomotives that drove him to retire early. The farm house in my avatar was heated with just portable kerosene heaters, they were too cheap to install a furnace or boiler, not even a bathroom was installed as they used an outhouse into the early 1970's.

Re: Worthwhile Alternative to Antique Baseburner Coal Stoves

Posted: Sun. Dec. 22, 2013 9:33 pm
by BPatrick
Greg you say it best. Cc in his narrow mindedness hates on the base burner to a fault of clouded judgement. The key isn't the 12 plus feet of exhaust gases that extract the heat. Its exactly where they are located and how the air travels around a suspended fire pot. They tried many different ways to run that pipe until they perfected it in the base heaters. Where do you get your rediculous numbers 8, 000 for a stove. The more I read from you the more I am convinced that your a blow hard. Please actually learn why the suspened fire pot is so important. Understand why the pipe travels where it does and it's relationship to complete burns. Your a wanna be know it all. You need to bring your A game...there some really smart people on here that know their stuff. I hope 1 day you really learn about and understand baseheaters because its obvious you havent a clue.

Re: Worthwhile Alternative to Antique Baseburner Coal Stoves

Posted: Sun. Dec. 22, 2013 9:46 pm
by McGiever
More of the same...

Cc says just run the stove pipe an extra ~12' and you got the same effect of the base burner.

Sorry, besides what was stated in post above, how would one switch the stove between the Direct and the Base Burner modes?
Might be a hard to light stove there. :roll: