[Closed] Stove-ists, woodburner vs multifuel

I have a multifiel yeoman cl3, never used coal in it.

Its a secondary heat source though so I’m not bothered about leaving it in overnight.

This will be a secondary heat source too, but in a cold draughty Victoria semi! In a room with a large, shaded north facing outside wall. We're gorgeous the room to become a useful room rather than just a thoroughfare!

Go for the multi fuel.  It is good to have the option of burning coal, even if you only use it occasionally.  It is usually only the grid which is different.

The grid and, I think, thicker fire bricks and a smaller grate. Our is a multi-fuel Dovre 250 and it works fine with all fuels and will stay in for a long time. My cycling buddy has a wood burner; the grate is huge and it looks gorgeous when burning wood but I think it would be too big for our lounge.

We have a multi fuel and do burn both. We find wood gives heat much quicker but also burns much quicker.

Coal takes far longer to get the room nice and warm but is a more economical burn.

If one of us is home in the afternoon we get a good coal fire going, if we don’t light up until later in the evening it’ll be wood.

Nice to have the choice.

I've been a stovist for years and would definitely recommend multi fuel, coal is great and good grate full of smokeless cobbles will tick over for 4 hours easily in mine, if you shut it down even longer.

Go with which ever you like the look of most.

That said, if the wood burner doesn't have an ash pan emptying ash is more awkward.

I used to fit stoves for a living and have used a lot of different makes and models, currently have a Town and Country Saltburn which is sold as a woodburner and is about 85% efficient, but because is has a grate and an air supply which can be opened up under the grate you could also burn smokeless coal.

This stove is British made and is quite expensive for a small 5kw stove, but you would not regret buying one as it is the mutts nuts.

I am in no way connected with T&C stoves.

If you're having a flu fitted you need the higher grade of stainless steel fitted, can't remember the grade now.

I did want that fitted in our chimney but the installer fitted 316 grade I think it is, which you're not supposed to burn multifuel even though he said 'it would be alright', I haven't risked it.

We have a Charnwood country 4 which is a great stove and worth a look

As above, I just bought the one I liked the look of, happened to be multifuel although I've no interest in coal.

I never use the ash pan, find it easier removing the front bar and shovel straight into an ash bucket/container

If you're having a liner and using it as a proper multifuel then make sure it's the highest grade liner (904:904??) EDIT : beaten to it

If you go multifuel, remember to not burn coal and logs together. The moisture from the logs reacts with the sulphur from the coal and will reduce the life of your liner considerably.

We had a multi fuel in our old house so we could burn coal if we wanted to. We didn’t once burn any coal. We have a wood burner now - simpler to use, lights more easily, more efficient. It also means there is more space for logs with no need for the grate / vents etc - especially useful if you are restricted on size.

Loading up and Locking your stove down to keep it burning = the most smokey poluting and inefficient way to use it

It's not 1922 anymore .

Fwiw mains gas if you can get it unless you have free or very cheap wood source is still cheapest heat source per kWh

We have an  oil boiler our primary heat is the stove(multifuel) with the oil for water heating and keeping the chill off. Costs too much to heat the house all the time with it. Can fair tear through the oil

I second trail rat.  Don't go thinking you'll use coal loads as it's cheaper than  gas Ch, it's not, unless the ch means heating a much much larger volume of the whole house when you'd be happy with just one room warm from the stove.

Coal is also the dirtiest and most carbon releasing fuel out there, burning it domestically in large quantities, if you have mains gas, is daft.

I'm just assuming you want the stove for ambience, which is fine, so I'll also add that I think logs burning is prettier than coal.  Find a decent local supplier for logs, or start collecting your own.

Loading up and Locking your stove down to keep it burning = the most smokey poluting and inefficient way to use it

+2

Very antisocial unless you live in the middle of absolutely BF nowhere.

I’d burn wood if you like the look of it. Use central heating otherwise.

If you’re interested in efficiency and want to burn cleaner then make sure you get a stove thermometer so you can burn at the correct temperature. Too hot means all your heat is going up the chimney. Too cold means you’re releasing a lot of pollution and also tarring up your chimney. Make sure you burn well-seasoned (dry) wood, and use enough kindling to get up to the proper temperature quickly when starting it.

We’re currently looking at stoves at the moment and chatted to a local supplier yesterday. He said that with the governments proposed clean air strategy he thinks that in the south at least, from 2020, it going to be increasingly difficult to get coal, even smokeless. He reckoned the market will die for anything other than seasoned wood or you’ll be paying a premium. I’ve personally got no idea but this is what the guy was saying.

I've got both. A wood only (flat bottom, no grate) charnwood in the lounge and a multifuel Hamlet in the conservatory. I installed the charnwood first so thought I'd definitely want multifuel on the second one in the conservatory. I burnt a few bags of smokeless in it to begin with but latterly have just stuck to wood.

Most my wood is free so I can't see the point in buying another fuel to burn?

Yes it will stay in longer but as ours are secondary heating we always tend to be in when it's going so it gets a constant supply of logs. If I was to do it again I'd definitely have a wood only charnwood again.

I'd echo what others say above that burning coal nowadays is madness.  Dirty, expensive and antisocial.

Slumbering smokeless is also a real liner killer.  Most of the destroyed liners I've swapped have been from smokeless burning.

If it's an option you really want to keep open, then as others have said, there are woodburners out there with optional drop in grates.

Burley, Charnwood, Parkray offer them, among plenty others.

FWIW, the Parkray Aspect 4 is my current favourite small woodburner.  Fantastic heated airwash makes it burn beautifully.

FWIW, the Parkray Aspect 4 is my current favourite small woodburner.  Fantastic heated airwash makes it burn beautifully

^^^ Which is the stove we have. I struggle *NOT* to light it first time every time - even with just a few bits of kindling and a single eco paper/wax firelighter (I hate the smell of traditional ones) it lights first time every time unless I am using particularly damp logs. My last stove was a Morso costing twice as much and half as useable.

Blitz, is you read the defra consultation papers it's clearly said they will ban coal (normal) nationwide and asking for views on putting a limit on sulphur content of smokeless.  Apparently a lot of cheap petroleum based smokeless imports are very very high in sulphur (no wonder it kills liners!).   They also wish to ban sale of wet wood (greater then 20%mc) in volumes less then 2m³.  The coal industry is expected to comply 100% but the government acknowledge enforcing the wet wood restrictions would be tough, but hope to educate users too.

We've just bought a Parkray Aspect 5 and we were considering the multi fuel addition, decided against it in the end. Can't wait to have it fitted and start getting in to the massive load of seasoned wood I've got stacked up for free!

Interesting to see the positive reviews of the Parkray Aspect. That was one we were looking at along with Charlton and Jenrick Fireline 5XW

Anyone got any experience of town and country stoves? Replacing the poorly fitted cracked one in our house and these seem to be well priced and seem to get good reviews.

Anybody struggling to light a wood fire have a google of the top down stoking method.

As a stove recommendation look at the Clock MF. Ours has been brilliant and is a nice midway between traditional and modern.

That's quite a boast Painey, unless you compete with mcmoonter!

It's only because since we moved into our house a few years ago I've had several trees chopped down and I asked to keep the wood. It's been drying out nicely so should burn a treat. Been told hornbeam gives a decent burn as well.

No matter. How big your pile is. If your not chopping down trees regularly and replenishing it then you'll get through it quickly.

hornbeam is an excellent wood yes,but as trail rat says, get a source.  I've had a couple of 80 ish year old oaks 20-22" dbh) down in the past soi know you can get a decent amount of wood, but use the stove seriously and you'll get through a tree surprisingly quickly!

If you want it for looks, just burn wood on your woodburner.

If you need 24/7 on low burn rate with coal or smokeless (we do, because it's a load-and-forget deal) then get a multifuel.

YMMV

I got a 5kw multi-fuel.  Only ever used wood so bought a conversion kit that removed the grate and ashpan, much better now as I've gained a load of space for loading large logs and they are burning on a bed of ash rather than a grid with loads of holes in it.  Also I can leave it a week or so before clearing the ash, with an ash pan I had to do it everyday before it overflowed.

So my vote would be a woodburner unless you intend to use coal 🙂

Large free supply of wood and using it for supplementary heat, wood will be all you need. Multi fuel is more advantageous if you are wanting to run back boiler or it is a range that you cook on.

Wood burner here, probably not as much stacked as McMoonter, but access to over 1000 hectares of woodlands.

Burley 5kW by the way, big firebox, less log faff. Also quite efficient, so doesn't actually need that much fuel.

I live in the south east where everyone in my town has had mains gas since the early 70s and can smell the houses with a wood burning stove. Judging from the truckloads of wood they seem to use it can’t be cost effective for most people.

i know very few people still using the old back boilers and fireplaces as decent central heating, windows and insulation work out cheaper.

wood burners have their place but it will only take a small group of pikeys stealing pallets and burning them for restrictions and bans to be put in place.

Restrictions are possibly overdue.

Anyway. To further add. If you're buying into a wood only deal, don't buy a tiny one. As said above you need a decent size firebox to avoid messing about with piddly size logs (and multifuel grates fight against this ideal).

Then, burn short, burn hot, and let it die right out.

Let the length of burn (ie amount of logs) control the heat - don't try and turn it down.

We burn a lot of anthracite (>2 ton a year) which is a very different ball game but works very well for a constant, always on, central heating type use - back boiler and whatnot - but we're off the gas grid, and the black stuff is one of the cheapest options out here.

We’ve had a multi fuel stove for 20 years (a Stanley). Trial and error revealed ovals to be the most controllable means of running it, but we do trend to keep it on “tick over” and only really turn it up when it’s very cold. It runs the central heating, hot water and you can cook on it.

It’s hard to see how we could run it more efficiently by running it hotter as most of the time it would simply make the house too hot; leaving it turned up overnight means re-lighting it every day - and the start-up procedure produces quite a bit of inneficient burn in itself.

We aren’t on mains gas. Some people on the street use oil (stinky). We’re thinking about installing electric radiators as we have been on a 100% renewables tarrif for donkey’s years.

Anyway. To further add. If you’re buying into a wood only deal, don’t buy a tiny one. As said above you need a decent size firebox to avoid messing about with piddly size logs (and multifuel grates fight against this ideal).

Then, burn short, burn hot, and let it die right out.

It needs to be appropriate for your room size and fireplace size. It needs to fit inside your fireplace recess, be to regs, have the gaps around it as recommended by the manufacturer and not look out of place (ie too big). secondly, If the ideal is that the stove is always operated at ramming speed, then again, it ought to be appropriate for your room size. I'd buy one that you like the look of, fits the room and fireplace. You can add firebricks to reduce the size of the firebox if needed, but small firebox stoves are perfectly workable if that's the space you have to work with or prefer a small stove. Obviously, buy one with a big glass screen.

"but small firebox stoves are perfectly workable if that’s the space you have to work with or prefer a small stove. "

while thats true there are a number of insets with tiny fireboxes that a standard cut log wont fit and you end up cutting all your own logs or special ordering and getting some fresh cut wet wood.

sorting your fitting so you can get a standard cut log in is well worth it long term.

Large free supply of wood and using it for supplementary heat, wood will be all you need. Multi fuel is more advantageous if you are wanting to run back boiler or it is a range that you cook on.

Wood burner here, probably not as much stacked as McMoonter, but access to over 1000 hectares of woodlands.

I was waiting for timber, timbur or mcm to pitch in.

That photo was taken yesterday, its about half my supply, laid most of that down since April (for next year and start of year after, obvs)

my gas consumption is under half what it was.  the convenience of thermostat and timer controlled heating in the mornings, the hot water and the cooking mean it won't go to zero.

2 stoves, both multi fuel.  Primarily because i got good deals on them, but i do find the ash pans super easy for emptying.

Buy the stove you like the look of, if it become a way of life then start to fret about functionality...but tbh, if i can feed 2 stoves, both multi fuel, cut serious amounts from my gas bill and still enjoy it then I think you are over thinking it if you are choosing a wood burner over a multifuel or vice versa as a novice.

Multifuel.

Coal burns hotter and longer in my experience...I can get the house ridiculously warm with it.

Wood for the aesthetic.

Deepest Darkest West Wales here so both coal and wood are readily and cheaply available...my combined energy bills are half that of what I used to pay in the South East for central heating alone.

what trail_rat said

a good wood firebox is nice and wide, but not that tall; the "long" dimension really needs to be horizontal so you can stuff a nice long dry log in there flat on your aesthetically pleasing, glowing bed of ash

a good coal box is narrow, shallow, and tall, so you can get a girt big tall stack of it going good and hot at the bottom of the stack

most multifuels seem to be a converted wood box and don't work quite so good with coal unless you stuff them full of firebricks (bodge)