Multi-fuel or wood stove for house?

[mross]

I'm moving to a stone built house that has chimneys but no fires. I'm planning to open them up and fit open fires or stoves, probably more inclined to go for stoves, to keep the ash dust and smoke down. Should I opt for a multi-fuel stove or a wood burner? Are wood burners really much better than multi-fuel stoves FOR BURNING WOOD? This would be for a dining room plus a living room. The room sizes - 18' x 12' and 12' x 9' with ceiling height about average.

 

I used a Burnley Debdale recently which is a wood burner and was impressed with the amount of control but is was quite easy to restrict the air too much and it would go out quickly. I also liked the look of a big Villager stove in the Red Lion pub in Burnsall!

 

The house already has storage heaters but no central heating. Hot water is by immersion.

 

Would an open fire with a canopy be practical? The chimney will be newly lined. It looks quite tall and there are no taller buildings nearby. The house is reasonably exposed, but not on a hilltop.

[peterboat]

Stick with the wood burner if burning just wood they are light years ahead of a multifuel stove, I would go for the burley fireball awesome stove very efficient looks good and the way the flame curl around is so good to watch

[Geo]

To me it depends on whether the area is a smoke free zone and how easily 4 or 5 cubic metres of good seasoned hard wood logs are to get.

 

I put in a Morso in my house because it was designed to burn both and I use it 24/7 in the winter. I burn both wood and anthracite Stovess. I use the anthracite for overnight and the wood during the day. On very very cold days I sometimes use all anthracite.

 

To an extent it depends on whether you are putting the stoves in for their heating capability or just the pleasure of wood burning etc.

Edited December 11, 2016 by Geo

[Guest]

I'm moving to a stone built house that has chimneys but no fires. I'm planning to open them up and fit open fires or stoves, probably more inclined to go for stoves, to keep the ash dust and smoke down. Should I opt for a multi-fuel stove or a wood burner? Are wood burners really much better than multi-fuel stoves FOR BURNING WOOD? This would be for a dining room plus a living room. The room sizes - 18' x 12' and 12' x 9' with ceiling height about average.

 

I used a Burnley Debdale recently which is a wood burner and was impressed with the amount of control but is was quite easy to restrict the air too much and it would go out quickly. I also liked the look of a big Villager stove in the Red Lion pub in Burnsall!

 

The house already has storage heaters but no central heating. Hot water is by immersion.

 

Would an open fire with a canopy be practical? The chimney will be newly lined. It looks quite tall and there are no taller buildings nearby. The house is reasonably exposed, but not on a hilltop.

 

If you are moving to a smoke control area you really should have one that is 'DEFRA' approved. The term 'Defra approved' is a bit of a misnomer as they dont actually approve them but rather the stove is designed to a spec. that means they can be used in a smoke control area.

 

The term however 'Defra approved' makes them easier to find on Google. Personally I would go the multi-fuel route to give you more flexibility and options.

[mross]

The fires will be for pleasure and heating. It's not a smoke control area, thanks for raising that. I think I will be able to get seasoned wood. I don't intend to leave the fire in 24/7 as house has thick stone walls and should retain heat well plus it has double glazing. There is a coal chute which goes down to the cellar but I suppose this could be used for wood. There is nowhere to season wood on the property but I could buy in bulk.

[Guest]

The fires will be for pleasure and heating. It's not a smoke control area, thanks for raising that. I think I will be able to get seasoned wood. I don't intend to leave the fire in 24/7 as house has thick stone walls and should retain heat well plus it has double glazing. There is a coal chute which goes down to the cellar but I suppose this could be used for wood. There is nowhere to season wood on the property but I could buy in bulk.

 

I would say it comes down to how much heat you require. Wood burning generally gives less heat but looks better, coal burning gives out more heat generally but doesn't always have an 'attractive' flame burning.

 

We used to burn both, a bed of coal with an occasional nice decent sized piece of wood thrown on top to give a nice flame.

[mross]

Can you lay a bed of coals on a wood burner? I guess not. Are they easy to light (wood burners). I have a Goblin but found it useless on my Little Wenlock.

[Geo]

The fires will be for pleasure and heating. It's not a smoke control area, thanks for raising that. I think I will be able to get seasoned wood. I don't intend to leave the fire in 24/7 as house has thick stone walls and should retain heat well plus it has double glazing. There is a coal chute which goes down to the cellar but I suppose this could be used for wood. There is nowhere to season wood on the property but I could buy in bulk.

 

My house is a well insulated building and loses its heat very slowly and the chimney is up the centre of the house. From my experience I find leaving the stove running overnight uses less fuel over all than letting it out. Overnight with it shut down and slow burning the stove allows the house to lose of the order of 1 or 2 degrees C of temperature. Without the stove overnight that is nearer 8 or 9 and the amount of fuel burn to get the house back up to temperature is more than that burnt overnight.

 

Oh one thing do get flue thermometers they do help to set the stove to its best burn and repeatably.

Can you lay a bed of coals on a wood burner? I guess not. Are they easy to light (wood burners). I have a Goblin but found it useless on my Little Wenlock.

 

I do not know the Goblin, I assume it was a wood burner.

 

Why did you find it was useless?

[MartinC]

Useful site http://www.soliftec.com/fuelcost.htm

[mross]

"Oh one thing do get flue thermometers they do help to set the stove to its best burn and repeatably."

 

The Burley manual says not to use flue thermometers! They claim their stoves are so efficient the low flue temps encourage over-firing! I saw typically 200F in a rental cottage that had one.

I've just been on the Burley website and you can fit a coal burning grate to their wood burners although you have to lift it out to remove the ash which is a bit daft. I've remembered that you don't have to remove ash very often from a wood burner, that's an advantage!

Edited December 11, 2016 by mross

[Geo]

"Oh one thing do get flue thermometers they do help to set the stove to its best burn and repeatably."

 

The Burley manual says not to use flue thermometers! They claim their stoves are so efficient the low flue temps encourage over-firing! I saw typically 200F in a rental cottage that had one.

 

I can see their point, it took a while here to ignore the black and red areas on the thermometer and use the temperature markings. At this time it is sitting at 250F which is about the max I let it go to and operates efficiently down to about 100F although by that time it needs a refueling. I think it depends on the flue and the freedom of the gases to travel up the flue, but I do not know for sure. All I do know is that if I want to keep replacing grates etc and not to be able to get within 3 feet of the stove because of the heat run it at 400F plus. Within the range 100F to 250F it keeps the house lovely and warm 24/7.

[mross]

http://burley.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/How-it-Works-The-science-behind-the-stove.pdf

 

This well-written article is quite persuasive!

[mross]

 

My house is a well insulated building and loses its heat very slowly and the chimney is up the centre of the house. From my experience I find leaving the stove running overnight uses less fuel over all than letting it out. Overnight with it shut down and slow burning the stove allows the house to lose of the order of 1 or 2 degrees C of temperature. Without the stove overnight that is nearer 8 or 9 and the amount of fuel burn to get the house back up to temperature is more than that burnt overnight.

 

Oh one thing do get flue thermometers they do help to set the stove to its best burn and repeatably.

 

I do not know the Goblin, I assume it was a wood burner.

 

Why did you find it was useless?

The Goblin is a hair-drier like device for igniting wood or coal but it takes ages and blows ash everywhere when used on a stove with ash in the bottom. It runs on mains electricity.

[Geo]

The Goblin is a hair-drier like device for igniting wood or coal but it takes ages and blows ash everywhere when used on a stove with ash in the bottom. It runs on mains electricity.

 

Ah I have seen something similar. On the odd occasion that I need to light the stove I use one firelighter, and a couple of small logs, plus any odd bits of bark that are laying around. When the wood is delivered I take all the odd bits, bark etc and store it in plastic boxes in the garage, idea for fire lighting.

 

 

http://burley.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/How-it-Works-The-science-behind-the-stove.pdf

 

This well-written article is quite persuasive!

 

Very persuasive. I do not know how I do it, but I get no tar deposits and not much ash from the wood, average moisture is 20%. It did take a couple of years to get the that stage though, learning how to balance the two air controls was that key. Of course that is one of the most important things keeping the wood dry after delivery. Mine is in a covered area so that the wood can breath but not sweat.

 

I understand what they are talking about room sealed. I am not sure I agree, I prefer the stove to pull air in from the house. It give the house a forced ventilation at the time when we tend to keep doors and windows shut to keep the heat in. I am not sure how much heat would be lost from ventaliting the house with a room sealed unit compared a normal unit. I have a suspicion it could be more.

[Guest]

Can you lay a bed of coals on a wood burner? I guess not. Are they easy to light (wood burners). I have a Goblin but found it useless on my Little Wenlock.

 

I would say no - if it's not multi-fuel ts not a good idea to use coal in it.

 

As for lighting it - we used to get some wood going then add the coal which would 'catch' and once that was alight and glowing just add more of each as required. Coal to keep the bed nice an hot and wood for the flames.

[Nightwatch]

Saw the thread title and immediately thought, "Seems like a bargain"!!!

[Athy]

Mross, go for a multi-fuel stove, iof only for the following reason: if you burn wood only, you will have to mend the fire much more frequently than if you use coal also. In our home stove ( a Clearview, very good) we start it off with wood and then, when we have established a thick wall-to-wall bed of red, we add a layer of coal. That lasts all evening, sometimes with a log added every so often, and although we don't plan to keep it in overnight, I can still feel the residual warmth when I come downstairs about 7 in the morning.

 

Have you used storage heaters before? BEWARE of them, and of the steep electricity bills which they engender. This house had them when we moved in and they are lovely and warm - but so was my language when we got our first bill a few months later! The firebricks inside make nice border edges or slim garden paths, we have since found.

[rasputin]

i would have a stove, definitely not an open fire.

[tree monkey]

Can you lay a bed of coals on a wood burner? I guess not. Are they easy to light (wood burners). I have a Goblin but found it useless on my Little Wenlock.

Not really no, a dedicated wood stove has no grate to allow bottom air, which coal needs

Multifuel stoves are a comprise but a good compromise if there is any doubt about fuel supply

Check local suppliers for prices and availability of timber, proper seasoned firewood ( kiln dried is a bit of a gimmick in my opinion but at least they should offer a guarantee of moisture content) is not all that cheap and isn't going to get any cheaper.

Villager stoves are good but at the bottom end of the market, higher end stoves tend to be better built with better control but again this is just my opinion

[rasputin]

Might also add that we love our Rayburn, but that is in the kitchen diner.

[peterboat]

If you can find a dealer in your area its worth seeing one in action the flame action is awesome and its amazing the lack of ash its supposed to be because they are so efficient and i can believe it. Whilst expensive its best to buy right and buy once I have two friends that have bought them and neither uses the central heating as they are so good and relatively cheap operate.

[Athy]

Might also add that we love our Rayburn, but that is in the kitchen diner.

So do we, but it's primarily a cooker and water-heater; it does drive the central heating, but does not push out a great deal of direct heat. Perhaps a solid-fuel one gives more heat - ours drinks oil.

[peterboat]

Might also add that we love our Rayburn, but that is in the kitchen diner.

I have a rayburn royal in the kitchen with backboiler and it really is the dogs doodahs

So do we, but it's primarily a cooker and water-heater; it does drive the central heating, but does not push out a great deal of direct heat. Perhaps a solid-fuel one gives more heat - ours drinks oil.

They give off a great deal of heat to say the least i have ended up in shorts whilst doing the cooking

[mross]

A Rayburn is too big for my needs!

If you can find a dealer in your area its worth seeing one in action the flame action is awesome and its amazing the lack of ash its supposed to be because they are so efficient and i can believe it. Whilst expensive its best to buy right and buy once I have two friends that have bought them and neither uses the central heating as they are so good and relatively cheap operate.

I've lived with a Burley for a week, so I know what it looks like.

[GUMPY]

As the custodian of 3 stoves and a free supply of seasoned hard wood (my daughter works for a company that produces windows, doors and staircases) I will offer the following:

To burn wood successfully/efficiently it needs a bed of its own ash, a grate doesn't work nearly as well.

Wood needs top draft only, solid fuel needs top and bottom draft.

In the livingroom we have a Charnwood Country 4 with no grate and we burn only wood on a thick bed of ash never bother to keep it in overnight.

In the kitchen\diner we have a Charnwood Country 6 with the optional solid fuel grate on which we burn Phurnicite and its often in 24/7

On the boat we have a Hobbit again with a grate and we burn Phurnicite and its always in 24/7.

Both the Hobbit and the 6 require little effort with Phurnicite to keep in 24/7, the 4 with only wood rarely stays in.

 

Guess what I am saying is get a multifuel stove and burn solid fuel and only use wood when you want it to be "pretty".