One Time Deal for a Glenwood Magazine

Sunny Boy wrote:Dave,

Don't you have your Glenwood #6 set up with the firepot liner much higher than it would be originally? If so, then yeah, the mag wouldn't add much with your stove.

Going by my measurements using nut and stove coal, a #6 with the firepot liner at the original height would gain about 20 pounds of coal in the magazine. That's about a 40% increase in coal inside the stove.

Paul

Paul,

Not really, my liner (which I'm going to take out) is about where the top of the gas ring would sit. It might be slightly higher but not much if it is higher. What I used to do, before the magazine was in, when I wanted a particularly long burn, is the pile the coal up in a large pile on top of that location. Now the bottom of the magazine gets in the way of doing that. So given that the magazine is fairly narrow, the amount of coal it holds isn't much more than what that pile would be. Now if you could build a magazine that got a lot fatter going up to the top of the stove, now that would be a real benefit. My Vermont magazine is built that way.

I agree, you get about 20 pounds of coal in the magazine. So you are saying you get 50 pounds in the firepot - I get more than that. Mine holds more like 60 to 65 pounds in the firepot. Heaping it up I probably add another 15 pounds. So that doesn't seem to be right to me. At least not for my stove. Maybe my liner is thinner than yours... Also, that's why I'm taking my liner out this year.... I want more coal in the firepot for longer burn times and better heat transfer to the room. So currently I don't gain a lot of coal in the stove running the magazine. It does help even out the fire at reloading...

dj

Canaan coal man wrote:
OK thanks for the response, I'm just trying to get an Idea how my #6 will do this winter. I'm not sure if I will need a mag or not.
Like I said in other treads I'm going from automatic stoker to a antique base heater and I'm going to have one hell of a learning curb as well as I hope I made the right choice for my life style. I did all the homework I could have with wHillams vids and reading post about the #6. If I can get 12 hour tend times In polor vortex weather ill be happy. one thing that worries me is the recoverytime that you all speak about with a freash load of coal. Some time Im not at my best in the AM and I wont have 30mins to baby sit befor she goes into base burn mode.

12 hours is easy with the Glenwood. I'll often go 16 to 18 hours between fills... That's when recovery times begin to be affected. If you can maintain 12 hour fill shifts, you shouldn't have any problem. One thing I did learn with the magazine, when I fill the magazine, I spread the coal out to the edges of the firepot inside the stove. That will drop the coal inside the magazine a good 6 inches or more. Then I refill the magazine. That tended to give me good results.

dj

scalabro wrote:

Canaan coal man wrote:Is it possible with a mag to shake and reload while keeping to stove in bb mode?

Never have run an externally bypassed stove like a G6, but I would never do that on my Crawfords as it will load up the base passages with fly ash rather quickly.

Spot on.

I always shake with the stove out of baseburner mode so the fly ash does not fill up the passageways of the baseburner.

dj

dlj wrote:

Sunny Boy wrote:Dave,

Don't you have your Glenwood #6 set up with the firepot liner much higher than it would be originally? If so, then yeah, the mag wouldn't add much with your stove.

Going by my measurements using nut and stove coal, a #6 with the firepot liner at the original height would gain about 20 pounds of coal in the magazine. That's about a 40% increase in coal inside the stove.

Paul

Paul,

Not really, my liner (which I'm going to take out) is about where the top of the gas ring would sit. It might be slightly higher but not much if it is higher. What I used to do, before the magazine was in, when I wanted a particularly long burn, is the pile the coal up in a large pile on top of that location. Now the bottom of the magazine gets in the way of doing that. So given that the magazine is fairly narrow, the amount of coal it holds isn't much more than what that pile would be. Now if you could build a magazine that got a lot fatter going up to the top of the stove, now that would be a real benefit. My Vermont magazine is built that way.

I agree, you get about 20 pounds of coal in the magazine. So you are saying you get 50 pounds in the firepot - I get more than that. Mine holds more like 60 to 65 pounds in the firepot. Heaping it up I probably add another 15 pounds. So that doesn't seem to be right to me. At least not for my stove. Maybe my liner is thinner than yours... Also, that's why I'm taking my liner out this year.... I want more coal in the firepot for longer burn times and better heat transfer to the room. So currently I don't gain a lot of coal in the stove running the magazine. It does help even out the fire at reloading...

dj

So your going to run it with the firebed in direct contact with the firepot ?

I measured the 50 pounds of nut coal while it still had the original Glenwood fireclay bricks - all one inch thick, except at the radiused top edge. The 20 pounds that fit in the mag was measured with it outside the stove. Actually it holds 22 pounds of nut, but I don't count what would be displaced as the tip of the 50 pound pile cone that would be inside the base of the mag.

Paul

Sunny Boy wrote: So your going to run it with the firebed in direct contact with the firepot ?
Paul

Yes. Just like I did for the first 40 years of running my stove.... I've only had a ceramic liner in for the past few years. I don't think the stove puts out as much heat with it. I'm going to remove it and see if I still feel that way this coming winter. Also, I'll get more coal in the firepot without a liner so I should get longer burn times...

dj

I made a magazine for the Golden Bride a few yrs ago and tested it a few manners and can't find a very big advantage with the mag in. And if the fire goes out you have the mag in the way to re-start a new fire. A coal fire needs to be shaken after about 12 hrs, mag or not, so not much more longer burning time with a mag if you're out of the house.
The advantage??? with a mag is that the load in the mag. is warmer but my total coal qte burned did'n change and the heat output neither sooooooooo...
When I did restored the Sunny, I didn't put the original mag and the results are very good as said earlier in my past threads.
I repeat what I already said, if so many antique stoves don't still have their mags in is probably the answer to the mag debates ,in the past times they didn't get rid of usefull things
My personal opinions.

nortcan wrote:I made a magazine for the Golden Bride a few yrs ago and tested it a few manners and can't find a very big advantage with the mag in. And if the fire goes out you have the mag in the way to re-start a new fire. A coal fire needs to be shaken after about 12 hrs, mag or not, so not much more longer burning time with a mag if you're out of the house.
The advantage??? with a mag is that the load in the mag. is warmer but my total coal qte burned did'n change and the heat output neither sooooooooo...
When I did restored the Sunny, I didn't put the original mag and the results are very good as said earlier in my past threads.
I repeat what I already said, if so many antique stoves don't still have their mags in is probably the answer to the mag debates ,in the past times they didn't get rid of usefull things
My personal opinions.

Pierre, I use charcol to start fires so having the magazine in for that doesn't really matter. If one were using wood, that would be a pain. I completely agree with you about the usefulness of the magazine, certainly if using the original design. I think they could be improved with a change in design, but that wouldn't get you a lot as you point out - the stove needs to be shaken down anyway...

dj

I have seen a lot of 6,8 s, all sizes of Glenwood oaks. I have never seen a mag in any of them or even out of them.You have to wonder wy

Anybody have one they are not using and willing to part with? Please PM me.

wilsons woodstoves wrote:I have seen a lot of 6,8 s, all sizes of Glenwood oaks. I have never seen a mag in any of them or even out of them.You have to wonder wy

Wilson,

I honestly think that there is very little advantage in the Glenwood using the magazine. I've now run two years with a magazine and I'll continue to run with it in. I think I get a slightly better transition between fill-ups with the magazine in than without. So I'll keep it in. That is primarily due to there being a column of preheated cool typically left in the magazine when going through the shake-down and refill. That makes for less of a temperature swing.

But there is not a lot of difference. You clearly have to take it out to burn wood, so you with it in, you are running a stove that only burns coal. I'm not disappointed with the magazine in, but I am quite unimpressed with the difference in performance - almost none.

dj