An open fireplace, even with good glass doors will normally result (I say without proof or a dimension of "normally") in a net heat loss. This is due in major part to warm air lost of the chimney when there is no fire, e.g., over night after having an enjoyable fire, one leaves the chimney damper open to let the smoldering fumes exit. Then too, most dampers loose heat all the time when closed, a Lock-top (one brand) cap damper being an exception to this condition.

Still, if you're trying to get an economic gain, not just a heat gain, do not forget the need to amortize the investments of $4,000, plus the cost of wood and chimney maintenance. If you have a fire only occasionally and if you have to pay a high price for wood and chimney sweeping you could save money just putting good glass doors on an putting a chimney top cap for the damper.

Well right now the home is heated with oil. And from what I have read regarding these wood stove inserts, you can essentially burn a log through the entire evening and generate heat in the home. I would like to use the insert to be the primary heat generator.

We don't use the fireplace at all now. In fact, I will enclose a photo of the chimney that I just took, looking up through the damper up to the cap. I've never even looked up a chimney before but I reckon this one is squeaky clean :)

But it seems here that anyone using an insert regularly have saved $$ over burning oil. Right?

Also, Let me know your thoughts on the photo.
thanks.

Anyone here with Osburn??

Here is a link that might be useful: {{gwi:1518662}}

also a question on installing an insert...

I was looking at the damper door. It's basically 2 long metal doors. How does that get removed? Is that where the torch comes in and they usually open up the opening to allow for the SS flue to be installed?

"And from what I have read regarding these wood stove inserts, you can essentially burn a log through the entire evening and generate heat in the home."

one log for entire evening and generate heat?...not a chance

You ask; "have saved $$ over burning oil. Right?" and I'd say no, but it depends on what you pay for wood and chimney maintenance and how much you value your time. P.S. if you heat with wood it'll take cords, plural, per year, the chimney will need cleaning at least once a year, say $200. Then if you pay $150 a cord, if you're lucky enough to get a full cord delivered, plus $50 per cord for cleaning, then you're paying about 1 cent per KBtu, and this assumes good hard wood with the best moisture content. Now if heating oil cost $2.00 you're paying 2 cents per KBtu and you can have a high efficiency oil burner that'll beat the efficiency of the stove. Now, if you harvest hard wood off your land, cut, split, stack and dry and you charge youself nothing for your work and write-off the cost of the splitting, sawing, and storing as recreation, then you'll save $$ over using oil. Otherwise, no. p.s. here I have to pay over $175 per cord, but I like a wood fire. I'm use a geothermal electric heat pump and it cost me about 1.5 cents per KBtu at 15 cents per KWH, high electric rates, and the HP is 100% efficient, it doesn't draw any cold air into the house to feed the wood fire. There may be a lot of outcries on this forum, bunch of happy fireplace/stove people, but if you're trying to save money, then think about what I say.

totally disagree...burned 4 cords last year(bought at $200) and saved a bunch of $$$ from year before just burning oil.

Price of 1 million BTU's for fuel oil at $2.49 per gallon:
1,000,000 btu / 139,000 btu per gallon x $2.49 / .8 efficiency = $22.39

Price of 1 million BTU's for cord wood at $175 per cord:
1,000,000 btu / 20,000,000 btu per cord x $175 / .75 efficiency = $11.67.

At the above prices and efficiencies, oil costs almost twice as much as wood per btu. Plug in your own prices and efficiencies for a more accurate calculation.

Note that the cost of a wood stove or insert is not included - it is just a comparison of btu's.

Given I can buy gasoline for about $2, why is fuel oil $2.49.

Also, add about $200 per season for chimney maintenance with wood, say 4 cords, that becomes $50 per cord, so we now have $15 per million Btu, and being fair, lets spend the $4K on the new insert on a new high efficiency furnace and get 85 to 90% efficiency.

Or don't buy a new oil furnace and depreciate the $4K for the insert over 20 years, and get another annual cost of $200 (time value of money taken as zero), or another $50 per cord in a 4 cord example. In any case the "number" come out close making any claim about saving big bucks questionable.

Again, if you do a lot yourself, like cleaning the chimney, and that can be easy if stainless steel and there is an access elbow at the point the vertical run starts. Still, it take time and some equipment, but could save close to $50 per cord in this example.

clean my own chimney..takes about 15 minutes

Mirrodie:

A comment for you to consider.

Creating heat from a fireplace insert is one thing. Distributing it evenly through the house is a whole other issue and depends on the layout of the house. A more open floor plan with the fireplace centrally located is better at distributing the heat more uniformly in the house than a floor plan that's closed off. My split-foyer home is a good example of a closed off floor plan. My fireplace insert is located in the corner of my below-grade family room. The stairway to the second floor is walled off so there is no easy way for the heat to circulate through the house. As a result, my insert heats the family room and provides only indirect heat to the rest of the house by heating the floor of the living room above the insert. I use my fireplace insert as supplimentary heat for my heat pump. If I had a new efficient insert, I would probably roast myself out of the family room but still need heat in the rooms away from the fireplace (bathrooms, bedrooms, etc.).

Just something to consider.

garyg, good point/advice.

I "love" a wood fire in the fireplace and even in the airtight stove (basement) which doesn't have a "window", there's something comforting about that kind of heat in my mind...may be in the genes. Then too, with a heat pump the heat out of the vents is only 20 to 30 degrees above room temperature (depending on the speed it is running), so there is no source of "hot air" other than the wood fire. I also like having a back up and the airtight would keep the house above freezing if we lost power. Never tested, but I'd guess it would keep the house above freezing with an outside temp of 0 degrees, very uncommon here, and happily never needed. Still it is a comfort to have the device and to have a stack of wood at the ready. I am not against wood (etc.) heat, I just think some have the wrong impression about how much money they are going to save over using oil or natural gas. With electric heat, even a air-to-air heat pump when it is below 20 degrees outside, there are some savings to be had. That's what got me on to the wood and coal capabilities I now have, but on converting to a geothermal heat pump about 15 years ago I use wood heat for for back up and for heating the basement when I'm there at my desk, we don't dump much air from the central heating into the basement.

First, let me thank you all for these considerations.

To view it from another angle, I have a bunch of wood, about a cord in the garage and another cord outside. And I do have some trees to add to that later.

But I grew up in a home without a fireplace, so this is all new to me. So I have yet to start a fire.

The way I have been reading, it almost made sense to get a fireplace insert and burn the wood (and get heat) as opposed to just getting fireplace doors and making the occasional fire and essentially wasting the wood.

Fuel oil is 2.19 here.

Now, considering layout, the home is a split but the coldest room is the one with the fireplace in it. The upstairs rooms are TOO hot at night. (For example, last night the heat was turned down to 64 degrees and we were baking! Normally it's no higher than 61 degrees at night but the wx outside has been freezing here in NY))

So I guess the wayI am trying ot justify the cost is that I have wood to burn and I can add heat to the home, so why not. (especially if just running a fire will create a heat loss which is exactly what we don't want.)

More thoughts or comments?

SO no one has heard of Osburn huh?

Mirrodie:

Try posting your Osburn question on Hearth.com, or searching for info on that site. A co-worker has a Quadrafire insert and likes it very much - clean-burning and no catalytic converter to worry about.

"The way I have been reading, it almost made sense to get a fireplace insert and burn the wood (and get heat) as opposed to just getting fireplace doors and making the occasional fire and essentially wasting the wood."
- You are indeed correct. Fireplace doors cost >$300 and do nothing for heat gain.

"...I have wood to burn and I can add heat to the home, so why not."
- What happens after you burn your 2 cords of wood plus any additional trees? Are you willing to buy wood? Are you going scavenge it? Are you OK with cutting, splitting, stacking? Purchasing a $2500 insert is a long term investment, so you need to think beyond the 2 cords that you already have available. If you are OK with the above, then by all means get yourself a good insert. I think that it is a good investment. You can suppliment your oil heat with a lower cost fuel, enjoy a fire in your family room (your coldest room), plus it can provide emergency heat in a power outage (provided that you can power the fan in the insert). Note the BTU output of the insert that you are looking at - you don't want to roast yourself out of the room.

I think you can save money with some of these individual heaters....wood stove, monitor heaters, etc.. The reason some people are saving is because they end up heating less area. The area around the heaters are nice and warm and the far areas of the house are cool. If you require or desire an even temp. throughout the house you need a cental heating system. And this central heating system will cost you more because you end up heating a greater area.
It's surprising to me that years ago banks would not finance a house without central heat and now I hear that the will finance with some of these portable heaters.

I may have been the first to "throw a wet blanket" on how much one can save using an insert and/or stove (airtight in both cases), and I have both. I enjoy a fire, I do gather and split some of my own wood, but buy more than I get for "free".

The way I figure it, with the type burning devices we've discussed, I one gets a significant heat gain into the house, I know it first hand having many times turned the central heat down and note it doesn't come on all evening while the fire is going. And even when I buy wood, usually get ripped of, never get a full cord, I figure it cost no more, maybe a little less than using the geoghermal heat pump.

My only reason for sounding a "negative" was I think it is mostly "sales talk" and "I always make the correct decision" thinking that leads people to think they're going to, or do, save big money burning wood. I think in most cases, some exceptions already noted, we break-even when we consider all the costs. And a cash outlay (or loan) doesn't help cash-flow either, so if you NEED to save to justify, then how long can you wait to earn back the outlay? To the Osburn, check that it meets EPA requirements and best if it has, or at lest claims, to have some form of an "air wash" for the front glass, part of the fun is seeing the fire and the glass on my 20 year old inset gets black and opaque in about 2 nighs of having a hard wood fire of about 8 hours each. I just scrape it off with a razor blade, but it would be better if that wasn't needed more than once a month, say.

Too, I draw comfort knowing I can heat my house (if I'm home) during a power failure, this could be a big payoff when contrasted with the cost of repairing damage due to frozen plumbing and the cost of a motel/hotel. Just one time could save enough to pay for the new insert. Enjoy, whatever you decide.

Mirrodie:

You posted a picture of the inside of the chimney - how about posting a picture of the hearth and mantle area?

Well, its been a while since I've been able to respond. My wife had a son and we've been nut since!!

So I was on energystar.gov and came across the following:

"-Consider installing a combination tube and glass door insert. The glass door seals the face of the fireplace, and the tube and blower mechanism makes more efficient use of the heat generated by the fire.

-If you use your fireplace a lot, consider adding a well-designed fireplace heater insert. These units come with blowers and thermostats. They are designed to significantly increase the heating efficiency of the fireplace while maintaining the classic fireplace atmosphere."

So now that I've read about the combination tube and glass door insert, I am more interested in finding out about this. As stated above, I might NOT be using that fireplace all the time, so perhaps its a more viable option. Can you please share some thoughts on what they mean by a combination tube and glass door?

They are talking about using a set of glass doors in combination with a "grate" heater or similar device. Grate heater is $500, doors may be priced similarly. At $1000 for this semi-insert, you are half way there for a good insert.

Just thought I'd chime in ....I have heated my home (4750 sq. ft/ two level)with two inserts now for years. With both units running, the inside temp goes from 57/62 to 70 degrees in about 40 minutes. I cut,split and stack my own wood (oak/madrone). I clean my chimneys myself. I normally burn 4 to 5 cords per year and always have at least 5 cords of prime wood ready to go. With each unit filled with wood they will burn and provide heat throughout the night.

The way I figure it, with the type burning devices we've discussed, I one gets a significant heat gain into the house, I know it first hand having many times turned the central heat down and note it doesn't come on all evening while the fire is going. And even when I buy wood, usually get ripped of, never get a full cord, I figure it cost no more, maybe a little less than using the geoghermal heat pump.

My only reason for sounding a "negative" was I think it is mostly "sales talk" and "I always make the correct decision" thinking that leads people to think they're going to, or do, save big money burning wood. I think in most cases, some exceptions already noted, we break-even when we consider all the costs. And a cash outlay (or loan) doesn't help cash-flow either, so if you NEED to save to justify, then how long can you wait to earn back the outlay? To the Osburn, check that it meets EPA requirements and best if it has, or at lest claims, to have some form of an "air wash" for the front glass, part of the fun is seeing the fire and the glass on my 20 year old inset gets black and opaque in about 2 nighs of having a hard wood fire of about 8 hours each. I just scrape it off with a razor blade, but it would be better if that wasn't needed more than once a month, say.

Too, I draw comfort knowing I can heat my house (if I'm home) during a power failure, this could be a big payoff when contrasted with the cost of repairing damage due to frozen plumbing and the cost of a motel/hotel. Just one time could save enough to pay for the new insert. Enjoy, whatever you decide.
>>

Best post in the thread, Jerry.

The original writer has no experience using wood for heat, and it shows. I recommend a lot more carful thought and investigation before buying.

Regarding the glass doors and pipe system---- that improves the efficiency of a conventional wood fireplace from around 10% to maybe 20% ---still a lousy way to heat a home.

A fireplace insert or airtight woodstove is the way to go if you want to heat the house with wood.

If you have a free source of wood and don't mind a lot of labor, dirt and mess, and heating only portions of most houses, then wood may be good for you.

But most people soon get tired of all the work and mess involved in burning wood. Think very carefully if a LOT OF WORK and A GOOD DEAL OF MESS are what you want in exchange for saving some money.

And for many homes, a woodstove does a lousy job of heating compared to a central heating system. I can get my living room, dining room and kitchen warm with my woodstove, but the rest of the house is usually quite cold. I've been comfortable sleeping on my living room couch since October because that's the room that stays warm the longest, but most people aren't going to be happy doing that.

And I usually wake up to a house with a temperature around 45 degrees ---or colder.

But I get my wood for free and I'm a firebug. Even so, I'll probably get bored with all the bother and go back to my gas heat in another few years.

Think carefully about what you are really going to be willing to do. Few people will stay with wood heat for long if they have alternatives.

Seattle Pioneer

Mirrodie,
First - congrats on the birth of your son.

I have an Osburn 1600 insert. I have been running it for 8 years now. It is a big improvement over the open fireplace.
I also have a wood cookstove down in the basement and between the two we go through 4 to 6 cords a year.

You have been given a lot of good insight from very pragmatic people. You should read all the posts carefully before making a decision.

Our fireplace is open on two sides. Due to this we did not install the decorative panels that seal up the fireplace opening. Even without those I need to run the units fan to extract heat out into the room and house. The wood stove downstairs radiates all of it's heat into the room. So even though an insert is efficient you still may loose heat up the chimmney. We live in a contemporary style house. All open space so the heat can be distributed. As others point out this is not going to happen in a conventional house.

My Osburn will hold an overnight burn. There is only one "control" - an air intake. You slide a single lever to control how much air is fed to the fire. Wide open means more air and thus a hot fire but a shorter burn time. Closing the damper means less air, colder fire and a longer burn time. We shut the air intake (bank the fire) each night. The house gets cold. The unit is not generating a lot of heat. But in the morning there are sufficient coals to start the fire right up. we light the woodstove in October and pretty much keep it going until April.

That leads to the last part. Heat with wood has become part of our lifestyle. A significant part. We spend much time obtaining fire wood. I live on 5 acres of woods but that can not sustain our 4 -6 cords a year. We scrounge for as much free wood as possible. If we must purchase we get log lenght loads (16 feet long)with an 8 cord minimum. The log lenght load costs about $500 or $62.5 per cord . Green cut and split is $200-240 and so called seasoned is up to $300 a cord here in SE NH.

But as I stated I spend a lot of time prepping firewood. If I fell a tree I need to get it out of the woods, buck it to lenght, split it haul it to a stack site and then stack it. I have all the required gear from chain saw to helmut, chaps, felling wedges and a maul for splitting. Sometimes I will rent a splitter for a weekend.

Even if you purchase you firewood you will still need to stack it. I stack mine in places to dry out. Every weekend we hual a weeks worth of wood to a giant wooden box on the porch. We use to do this with a garden cart and a hunters sled once the snow made the cart useless. Now we have a small tractor and haul wood in the bucket.

As I write this it seems like mostly negatives. But I do not mean it to be. I would not give up the wood stoves. There is just something about wood heat that warms and soothes in a way that nothing else can. I do not fear power outages. I get exercise, I get time spent with family and I get a sense of independence.

Hope you find some of that helpful.

Phil

One parting thought. Safety. I have 4 fire extinguishers in the house, 5 smoke detectors, 2 CO detectors and a few of the chimmney fire extinguishers that look like road flares. I hope to never use any of them. Also your homeowners insurance co. will want to know you use wood heat.

Just some more to consider.
Phil

While I imagine that the original Harmon vs. Regency decision is long made, I will weigh in with some Regency issues - what the brochures/salespeople don't say. The kinds of things you can't know about until it is too late (after purchase and installation)...

We had a Regency I3100 installed four months ago(the large insert model). I give the unit and company a C- overall. Some issues:

- First, the sheet metal surround was 5/8" taller than specified, so that my new tile grout lines didn't align as planned. Regency was EXTREMELY slow to respond or fix the problem (not to mention surly, unhelpful, and challenging).

While the company literature talks about service and quality, my experience was being ignored and dealing with a mis-sized unit. Their error was eventually fixed, after hours of correspondence (all inititiated on my end - about 50 emails, photos, and phone calls). It turns out that Regency just makes the surrrounds to a different size than the published specifications (tough luck for those of us who follow specifications for design purposes). The process took over a month.

- The unit "howls" intermittantly when the blower is turned on, which makes doing anything else in the room pretty challenging, unless you are deaf. Regency sort of shrugged their corporate shoulders on that one, too.

- Air seals around the door are crude, allowing some smoke to escape from time to time. Not great for health reasons...

- Overall fabrication quality is rough, at best. The gas-combustion tubes at the top of the unit require routine fiddling to keep them in place. The door hangs at an angle, with no adjustment possible. The hinges squeak pretty annoyingly when the door opens, every time. Graphite helps temporarily.

- While the unit does belt out some heat, the burn times are pretty wildly exaggerated. Fully loaded up with split cordwood, the unit will NOT maintain a fire for eight or even six hours. After that time you will have some embers, but that is all.

If I had to do it again, I would NOT buy Regency. The Osburn looks fine, but see if they can refer you to an actual owner (Regency would not or could not provide this service to me).

More significantly, check out the new Morsoe insert! It is all cast iron, rather than the cheaper sheet metal most inserts use (other than Vermont Castings, which has some engineering issues of its own).

seattlepioneer, Jerry, philnh5, and everyone prior, thank you so much for all the advice. I have really taken everything above that was said into consideration.

Phil nailed it when he inferred that I didn't understand what was involved.
We are in this home only 2 years and have yet to run a fire. We had the fireplace refaced and are now at the point of deciding whether to just get glass doors and call it a day OR go with an insert or go with the idea presented above about glass doors with a heat exchanger.

We have a few cords of wood here. Once that is gone, I'd be buying wood. And I doubt I'd be stacking it, splitting it, etc.

So after all has been said and after reviewing all your grteat advice and really taking the time to think about it, with the substantial amount of wood that we have available and ready to go, a fireplace that is newly refinished but still without doors, and still a moderate at best understanding of what we are getting ourseleves into, looks like glass doors with a heat exchanger might be the best option.

Any recommendations on how to proceed from there? Just ask installers for a pair of glass dorrs with heat exchanger?

I think that you may have a difficult time finding an installer that has those heat exchangers. When I was looking for them in early 2002, the hearth stores would not sell them. My belief is that if they worked as well as advertised, many homes would have them.

At $500 for a heat exchanger and about the same for glass doors, you are almost half-way to a good insert (same thing I said in my 2/22 post). I wouldn't waste my money on these two items but spending a little more on a good wood insert would be a smart investment.

My opinion.

Which inserts do those of you that have one recommend?
salbwil

A co-worker has a QuadraFire and he is very happy with it. Clean-burning with no catalytic converter. He says that he can actually see the gases from the firewood burning above the wood - Quadrafire uses a post-combustion technology.