Central Boiler vs Heatmaster

Crhall · March 09, 2015, 05:39:37 PM

So I had another post about cb7260 classic vs eclassic. I've made a decision on a Classic. But now my dealer is saying I could get by with the 6048. It just may burn more wood in the lower temps we have a few days a year. To make things harder, Some local guys are telling me how much luck they are having with Heatmaster Brand. So I talked to dealer, said 10000E would be comparable to the 6048. I know the differences in the two, that's not the question. But what is the better over all boiler? Will the 409 ss metal hold up? I hear people say never use SS in a boiler? Well HM clams 409 is better than mild steel? Is the blower a better option on the HM? Or does it make it burn more wood? Does water capacity mean much? CB holds 100gal more? Does one burn more wood than other? Do I go with the tried and true CB? or try something different? Sure you hear problems with CB, but I'm sure there are more than 10 to 1 CB's to HM, so your going to hear more problems! I'm going crazy, This is worse than buying a new car!!

Dave Shepard · March 09, 2015, 05:49:52 PM

I really can't help you with the differences between the two. My experience with stainless is that it is more brittle than mild. That would worry me. I see a lot things that are SS in the truck world, such as dump bodies and sanders that are cracked on the welds. I think the more water storage the better, but that may not have a huge bearing on actual consumption. I've never heard of any trouble with a Classic around here. They are pretty bulletproof. The Classic doesn't use a fan, and I don't see where you need one with reasonably dry fuel.

martyinmi · March 09, 2015, 07:38:28 PM

The 10000e will definitely be the more efficient of the two.
CB may be a little better if warranty issues arise.
http://www.outdoorwoodfurnaceinfo.com/forum/
The site linked above ought to help you a bunch.

Crhall · March 10, 2015, 07:55:29 AM

I have been searching on that site like crazy, But can't find all the info im looking for. I tried to join, but cant get any activation emails back?!? I'm not a bit scared to try something new, The 100000e looks like a good choice, but with new laws, this is the only shot I have at buying a non epa burner. Makes it even harder to pick

martyinmi · March 10, 2015, 05:12:22 PM

If your brand of boiler choice is not yet "set in stone", and your mind is made up to purchase a conventional style unit, I'd like to recommend that you seriously take some time to look at the Portage and Main boilers.
Their BL (which stands for "brick lined") line of boilers is going to the most efficient line of all the conventional(non-gasifying) boilers on the market today.
The efficiency of the CB ought to be in the 30-35% range, the Heatmaster in the 40-45% range, and the P&M in the 45-55% range.
The owners of the BL boilers report that once the fire brick gets hot, the smoke is actually burned before it exits.
A conventional, old style boiler will burn in the 500-1000 degree range. The brick lined boilers are burning a good share of the smoke, so their combustion temperatures are much, much higher than the old style boilers. Smoke in a typical downdraft gasser can reach temperatures well in excess of 2000 degrees f. That should put in perspective how hot smoke (which is essentially gasses released that never got hot enough to burn) gets when it is burned. The BL line also has a multiple pass heat exchange,(as does the Heatmaster if I remember correctly), so much more heat is scavenged.
I have a sneaking suspicion that Heatmaster will be employing the very same technology as soon as next year.
If you pm me, I'll explain why in private. ;)

Crhall · March 10, 2015, 07:26:52 PM

Crazy, I was actually at the parts store today shootin the bs about wood burners. guy asked me if I looked into Portage & main? Said he was really looking into one of the gasifier units they offer. Said he really liked them compared to the other gasser units. As for conventional burners with brick lined, I really like the idea for sure. One main problem I have is my state is going to be phase ii in like a month. So I need to jump on a conventional pretty fast. He told me the dealer he was talking with on P&M only had one conventional left, that was 6 weeks ago. I may call to double check. Plus they are about an hour away. I'd love it if HM would do a BL conventional next year, but I wont be able to buy one then

WmFritz · March 11, 2015, 08:21:22 PM

Quote from: martyinmi on March 10, 2015, 05:12:22 PM
The efficiency of the CB ought to be in the 30-35% range, the Heatmaster in the 40-45% range, and the P&M in the 45-55% range.

Whoa! 65-70% of the heat goes up the stack on the CB conventials? I don't think that's a whole lot better then the fireplace in our living room.

Just thinking out loud... let's say that a CB Classic is rated for 200,000 btu's per hour ( just for round number's). Would that mean only about 60,000-70,000 btu's are actually being absorbed in the water jacket?

martyinmi · March 11, 2015, 10:05:45 PM

They are not efficient at all Bill.
A lot of manufacturers have copied CB's "ripple top" design over the years, so that design style has become very popular.
They are an awesome old workhorse that will burn almost anything at any moisture.
I'm not sure how many cubic feet of wood the 7260 holds, but I do know that the CB 6048 will hold 60 cu.ft. of wood(yep, that's almost a half of a FULL cord!).
To put that into perspective, my P&M 250 gasser holds 11 cu.ft. of wood.
My father in law has a CB 6048 and I just can't get over how much wood he goes through.
If I stuff mine full (maybe 9-10 cu.ft.)in the very coldest weather that ma nature throws at us, I can always get at least a 24 hour burn.
He loads his half full(25-30 cu.ft.) in the same weather and he'll get the same 24 hour burns.
His house is smaller than mine and more that 100 years newer(built in 2001).
He went through way more than double the wood that I used last year, and his heat load is measurably smaller. I used between 8 and 8 1/2 full cords, well seasoned.
I'll try to find a link that tells a story of a fellow who bought a 6048 and did his own efficiency tests on it. I believe he is an engineer. He found his system to be about 25% efficient (if I remember correctly)and he set out to make it better. He actually turned the big firebox of his 6048 into an updraft gasser and doubled his efficiency.

Found the article:

http://www.woodheat.org/report-bob-modify.html

WmFritz · March 11, 2015, 11:08:59 PM

Interesting experiment.

I have an old add-on stove in my shop that I put extra firebrick to the bottom of the box. I noticed the ashes turned into a very fine powder since I did that.

leonz · March 12, 2015, 10:27:27 AM

Quote from: Dave Shepard on March 09, 2015, 05:49:52 PM
I really can't help you with the differences between the two. My experience with stainless is that it is more brittle than mild. That would worry me. I see a lot things that are SS in the truck world, such as dump bodies and sanders that are cracked on the welds. I think the more water storage the better, but that may not have a huge bearing on actual consumption. I've never heard of any trouble with a Classic around here. They are pretty bulletproof. The Classic doesn't use a fan, and I don't see where you need one with reasonably dry fuel.

================================================================================

I have my locally made wood and coal boiler half filled with firebrick and it aids in
holding thermal mass and keeping the burn hot when burning coal and wood.

If you are intent on burning wood only you should look at the Switzer or Garn units
The Switzers are built a few miles from me and Gary has been building them since 1982.

The Switzers have the two pass conventional smoke path tube design as was
designed for locomotive boilers that burned wood and coal. The Switzer hybrid has
18 smoke tubes submerged in water and the system is pressurized rather than
using a non pressurized water system.

The Switzer hybrids require a chimney inducer and the Garn units use a boiler
mounted draft inducer and do not require a chimney connection due to the low
stack temperature and have a different combustion set up.

The Garn units have a cast firebrick combustion chamber and the switzer units do not.
Saying that there is no reason that you cannot line and cement the ash pit with full
firebrick and firebrick cement to achieve a higher burn temperature and to increase the
thermal mass where the firebrick would radiate heat back into the combustion chamber.

Gary does not use stainless steel in his boilers.

I have owned and used the same Switzer Boiler since 1982 and will be switching to a
coal stoker this year as the wood issue is becoming too much to deal with and too costly
as compared to coal.

www.switzerwoodburning.weebly.com

www. garn.com

hedgerow · March 12, 2015, 07:32:42 PM

Leonz
I have a Garn 2000 that Is finishing its six winter of heating. I run it year around to heat my hot water in the off season. I heat a 3,000 foot house and a 30 by 60 shop it takes 10 to 15 cord of wood a year to get the job done. Hedge and locust only. If I knew I was going to burn this much wood I wouldn't spend the $15,000 for the Garn and another $15,000 on the install and I did all the work except the spray foam on the bury pipe. If I was going to do over I would have made a homemade boiler for my floor heat in my shop and put geo thermal in the house. I don't have a lot of help to cut wood. Plenty of wood that needs to be cut.

martyinmi · March 12, 2015, 08:06:38 PM

I'm with ya on the Garn hedgerow.
$15k for a Garn, another $5k for a cheap, cemented Garn barn, plus all of the other related installation costs can really add up.
I was very close to going that route shortly before I bought my P&M, but instead chose to go with my OWB gasser.
I have about $12k into everything(did install myself), and before the end of this year(4th burn season with it) it will be paid for and start making me money.
I figured the break even point on the Garn would be 10 years.
It just didn't make sense financially to wait that long to make my investment back.

Crhall · March 14, 2015, 03:26:17 PM

So looks like i'm leaning toward the Heatmaster, The one main reason is the dealer is local, and a good guy to deal with that knows his stuff. He is actually a full time plumber that sells heat master boilers. The closest CB and p&m dealer is over an hour away. Here is my look on things, this is just my point of view on it. The conventional boilers work, period! Are they efficient? No. Not near as much as the gasser's. But from talking with local people, conventional are easier to maintain, operate, and are less "fussy" as the gasser's. My look on it is, By the time this boiler is toast and ready for replacement, technology will have brought the gasser type boiler to a new level! After research and talking with others, if I was to go with a gasser unit, P&M seem to be the ones that have it pretty close to figured out. Before I make a choice, I am going to call the dealer for the P&M and see what their say is on the gasser's.

doctorb · March 14, 2015, 05:03:24 PM

I prefer the gasser because it's more environmentally friendly, but I can not discount having a good responsive local dealer for your OWB. That's worth plenty. From your last post, I think your choice is very, very clear.