Another Vermonster Question

The grates were fine, looked good no warping. There is no shaker system, you stab the coals from different direction with the 3 slots in the front. It seems like its making too much ash.

Vermonster wrote:The grates were fine, looked good no warping. There is no shaker system, you stab the coals from different direction with the 3 slots in the front. It seems like its making too much ash.

I would check the basics.

Will the stove idle way down when you close all the air to it? Did you try the dollar bill trick to test for leaks? Maybe it's making too much ash because you're burning too hot?

I am going to let this thing burn whats left in the hopper and vacuum it up and start from square one. Scobydog, now that I know you burn coal that makes 3 people I know that are burning coal in Windham county!

ONEDOLLAR wrote:Buying a stove (new or used) is a big decision and one wifey poo should be in on to some degree I would think! After all as well all know if the wifey ain't happy the couch feels extra lumpy.

If you pick up the Chubby you can always sell it later and you might even make some $$$$ on it. They are great stoves.

Try the baro and check and replace the gaskets. I don't know much about your current stove so I can't tell you what you should expect. But 3-4 hours doesn't seem right to me. You very well may find a baro and new gaskets solve your problem and I hope they do. No point in spending more than you need to I say!

Give me a call later anyway!

I will throw my two cents out their and im sure upset someone... if you have the Surdiac stove that looks like its one of those chalets in the swiss alps (several companies mimicked these)... they just aren't good coal stoves period (they never were!)... heat transfer sucks, coal bed sucks, grate sucks, etc.etc.etc... now I know some people will surely say how wonderful and quality built and perfect they are for European coal (well... we aint in Europe now are we) im only one mans opinion so take it for just that (one mans opinion)... I fired these along with chappee's, godins, and many others and im sorry but your not going to see the performance from this stove that you would from some other reputable coal stoves of that day (i don't care what you do to fix it up).... I hate being so blatant but this stove is horrible!

dcrane wrote:

ONEDOLLAR wrote:Buying a stove (new or used) is a big decision and one wifey poo should be in on to some degree I would think! After all as well all know if the wifey ain't happy the couch feels extra lumpy.

If you pick up the Chubby you can always sell it later and you might even make some $$$$ on it. They are great stoves.

Try the baro and check and replace the gaskets. I don't know much about your current stove so I can't tell you what you should expect. But 3-4 hours doesn't seem right to me. You very well may find a baro and new gaskets solve your problem and I hope they do. No point in spending more than you need to I say!

Give me a call later anyway!

I will throw my two cents out their and im sure upset someone... if you have the Surdiac stove that looks like its one of those chalets in the swiss alps (several companies mimicked these)... they just aren't good coal stoves period (they never were!)... heat transfer sucks, coal bed sucks, grate sucks, etc.etc.etc... now I know some people will surely say how wonderful and quality built and perfect they are for European coal (well... we aint in Europe now are we) im only one mans opinion so take it for just that (one mans opinion)... I fired these along with chappee's, godins, and many others and im sorry but your not going to see the performance from this stove that you would from some other reputable coal stoves of that day (i don't care what you do to fix it up).... I hate being so blatant but this stove is horrible!

dcrane, I'm not familiar with his stove, so I can not comment / help. But, I was thinking the same as you......a cheap knock- off. Made to look like the real deal, but not. The knock-off stoves had no "shaker" grates. They may, or may not have grates, but the grates did not shake. Lots were made in the 1970's - 80's, when people started burning wood as an alternative heat source.

Thanks dcrane,i do appreciate your informed opinion on the different brand & style stoves & while our search for our future coal burner goes on ,i am monitoring others issues with their stoves + what you & some other knowledgeable users have to say. Is their a thread on say--- Stoves : The good & the not so good ,if no such thread exits why not ????? Meanwhile I hope vermonster can get to the root of his problem & resolve it..either fix that poc or replace it with a good unit.Thanks,OP for your input as I have followed this thread closely as I had actually considered getting a stove like this,but was leary of the design.

Woke up this morning and could not see any hot coals. I checked the ash pan and none of the coals fell through the grates. I am headin out to try a different bag of coal. I appreciate any of the comments good or bad. I'm getting frustrated I tell you that! I got the fire going with some serious raking of the coals. The ash never falls through the grates unless I shake it myself.

Vermonster wrote:Woke up this morning and could not see any hot coals. I checked the ash pan and none of the coals fell through the grates. I am heading out to try a different bag of coal. I appreciate any of the comments good or bad. I'm getting frustrated I tell you that! I got the fire going with some serious raking of the coals. The ash never falls through the grates unless I shake it myself.

Its a very shallow bed in this unit, grate is flawed for coal burning, im not even sure it has any secondary air (not that its really needed for such a broad coal bed with so much exposure and little depth). holding heat in that type of coal bed and that type of shape and that type of liner/combustion chamber is all but impossible during its final stages of burn cycle (which is why its so hard to obtain fully burned coal/fine ash as well as long burns).

I will touch briefly on the previous posters question regarding "good coal burning stove attributes"... we all have differing opinions on many aspects of this so by no means is my opinion law, but here are some basics of where good coal burning design start... #1 cylindrical firebed #2 depth of coal bed in the firebox/liner (not including over fire banking or hoppers) should be a min. 6-8 inches deep. #3 secondary air needs to be provided for in some fashion #4 grate must provide for 100% of the coal bed bottom to shake as well as receive primary air (not 1-2" of dead space around the bottom of the coal bed, not dead corners in a coal bed, etc.) #5 you must have a liner in a coal stove (either cast or refractory brick) both have pluses and minuses to in depth to explain here but essentially you want to protect & radiate (cast iron will radiate, brick to lessor degree... this is why custom formed brick that is NOT thick 3 freeking inch square pavers that allow air through all the seams is better... custom formed to the stove 1.5 inches thick (the downside is you cant go to the local 5 & 10 to buy new big thick bricks every 10-20 years, you need to make it or order it from the stove company). #6 - #100 involve intricacies that get into debatable subject matter involving draft, baffling, dampers, etc... one of the best concepts ive ever seen include all the things ive mentioned above in a suspended firepot base burner design (the features, the methods, the concepts get pretty involved) so best to keep things to my simple #1 - #5 when it comes to basic good coal stove design.

Vermonster wrote:Woke up this morning and could not see any hot coals. I checked the ash pan and none of the coals fell through the grates. I am headin out to try a different bag of coal. I appreciate any of the comments good or bad. I'm getting frustrated I tell you that! I got the fire going with some serious raking of the coals. The ash never falls through the grates unless I shake it myself.

That's right, the ash won't fall thru the grates on its own.. It needs to be shaken down. How long did it go between tending?

windyhill4.2 wrote:Thanks dcrane,i do appreciate your informed opinion on the different brand & style stoves & while our search for our future coal burner goes on ,i am monitoring others issues with their stoves + what you & some other knowledgeable users have to say. Is their a thread on say--- Stoves : The good & the not so good ,if no such thread exits why not ????? Meanwhile I hope vermonster can get to the root of his problem & resolve it..either fix that poc or replace it with a good unit.Thanks,OP for your input as I have followed this thread closely as I had actually considered getting a stove like this,but was leary of the design.

My opinion:
You can have the best designed stove but if it's not putting out enough BTUs you're not going to be happy. dcrane offered suggestions on what he believes is the best design for a coal stove which I think are valid. Are there stoves in such a design that will put out over 75K BTU? I don't know, I didn't see one when I was looking.

I ended up choosing a model that puts out up to 100K. It's one of those football field sized coal bed units but I have a lot of sq ft to heat. My place is toasty warm and that's running the stove at half throttle. The walls around my stove are rarely ever hot. Will I have to open the windows in this spring? Probably that doesn't bother me.

I spent a lot of time thinking of ways I could make a smaller stove work but finally realized that I would need something bigger for my application. Stove design is a consideration but you should also think about the location of stove, sq ft to heat, house design, insulation, climate zone, etc.

These are the same considerations to think about when surprising central a/c units and/or any type of heating unit.

Gentlemen,Thank You ! This is how it all comes together for a lot of new members trying their hand at Anthracite Coal. Being able to develop preferences takes exposure,whether through reading about other's experiences,or hitting the hands-on trail and getting right into it,up to your eyeballs! My bad on not realizing this Surdiac has no Mechanically linked shaker grate system. Vermonster,you've made a stand and are firmly on the road. If you go after something beefier in the BTU Department,we'll concentrate on where you plan on operating the stove,your home's insulation,window and door sealing quality,and if you've got forced air ducts and abilities to get heat up and cold air to fall back to the stove. Is a Boiler in your future? We'll all find out working with you. Hammer your Surdiac down,and we'll go from there. I'll be sending that Leprechaun over with his Pot'O'Gold to finance it all !

Hitzer 50-93 & Alaska Kodiak are good stoves? just not the ideal design ? but still work very good ? hear quite a bit about that model Hitzer from one of the Fred's on here,have not heard much about the Kodiak tho.

Thanks for all the help. This I not working amazingly well, but it keeps my basement and first floor 70 degrees. It keeps my oil boiler not running and that makes me happy. It is a work in progress, maybe there is a different stove in my future, you never know.

Vermontster, There's a gent on this forum named franco, who I believe runs a Franco-Belge. A friend of mine had a Franco-Belge, and I think he used to rake the ash with a tool that came with the stove. His stove had a hopper that used 'pea' coal, but he would mix it with 'rice' coal. Maybe you need to rake more often, If your Surdiac is similar to the Franco Belge. I'd like to here Franco's take on this. As a final thought, if you can keep the basement at 70 degrees, maybe that's all the stove can do. Don't give up. Learning how to get the most out of coal is, like you said, is a 'work in progress'. The reward is 'PRICELESS'.

Good Luck

The Surdiac and the Franco Belge both can achieve higher efficiency than the usual design. They do this by running a shallower bed of burning coal which tends to run hotter and being shallow air penetrates the bed better for less formation of CO. Both use a hopper to feed coal which feeds hot coal at shake down time which speeds recovery and burning of initial volatiles. Any puff back would be very rare and non existent in the 3 sizes of Franco Belge I have run. Both use extended heat exchange for low stack temperature. The Franco uses both shaking and slicing of the coal bed to clear ash. The Surdiac uses only slicing. The method is very effective and better than any method I have used with the exception of the Glenwood triangular grates. Those are the good features along with excellent build quality.

The less good features are that the shallower fire pot just holds less burning coal than other stoves so burn time at equal output rates are going to be much shorter. 20 pounds of coal burns much faster than 40 pounds at equal outputs. The problem became much worse when the stoves were imported and the distributors were faced with the ludicrous ratings of American stoves like the Crane 404 being rated at 60,000 BTU. So they doubled or more than doubled what the makers of the stoves claimed. So now a stove with an output rating of 25,000 BTU by the maker and an 8 hour tending time suddenly can produce 50,000 BTU. Expecting those higher outputs and running that much hotter burn time goes way down and damage to the stove can result.

A stove intended to heat 3 or 4 rooms in the living space is now put in a basement and expected to heat the whole house. That's not going to happen with a grate area of 139 square inches and a 4 inch deep bed.

The stoves should have been built with bigger fire pots but were already pushing 400 pounds and for the usual European apartment were ideal.