I had a Russo with a catalytic combuster, prior to the coal stove. I owned it for 18 years but burned it only about 10. I felt it reduced creosote significantly, but certainly not 100 percent. For reasons I don't understand, there was significant buildup of creosote and soot in the stovepipe close to the stove, less in the chimney.
At a moderate burn rate, the probe thermometer just after the combuster would register 1400 to 1600 degrees. When pushed it could reach 2100 degrees or higher, but that's not good for the catalyst. I don't recall the stack temperatures being low -- they were in the low to middle portion of the "good" range imprinted on the thermometer.
As to 40 hour burn times (was that a misprint?) I don't know if that's possible. All I can say is, mine could not be set to burn low enough for warmer weather, and in cold weather it would seldom go through the night unless I got up and fed it at 3 am. The smoke was not especially clean -- it would stink up the area pretty bad in 40-degree weather when there was rain or fog that kept the smoke from dispersing.
From what I have been told about good non-cat stoves, I would say the catalyst is not worth the dollars and has little or no advantage. Having burned coal for several years now, I would never go back to wood, catalyst or no, even if you gave me the wood for nothing.