Vogelzang Potbelly

DOUG wrote:Yes, she sure can pump out the heat and it isn't glowing red to do it! I think that it must have something to do with the ribbed cast iron body. It radiates very well and pretty far. Put a pot of water on top and you're warm fast!

I don't know how to judge 200K BTU but when running on a full tank it definitely puts out *way* more than my 30-95. It got it up to some cherry red spots but Ive never had the whole thing glowing (yet). If you had a 100'x100' block warehouse you could put this little Chernobyl in the middle on a cement floor - crank it all out cherry red and be sweating buckets on a freezing cold day.

Too bad its so hard shake and control.

I got the vogelzang now three years. I first fired it up without any firebrick in the lower chamber. The fire was HOT! the walls glowed a cherry red. I use a manual damper just below the ninety degree elbow where the smokepipe goes into the chimney thimble. I kept on firing it and it lasted a whole five days, burning 24/7. this last year I put in firebrick into the lower section. I find its easier to shake down the ashes because with the firebrick in place, there's no ledge for the ashes to collect upon. Its pretty much a straight shot down to the grates. That, with the modified shaker I made, makes evacuating the burnt ash a breeze. the stock shaker is called a "dump shaker." open it wide it dumps whatever is in the firebox into the ashpan and you need to start all over firing it up. I'm in the process of making a prototype shaker that I'll present to a couple of seasoned NEPA members and see what they think.

Well guys, I've been trying to continuously fire this Vogelzang potbelly stove for quite a while now. I am impressed with the amount of high heat output this Vogelzang potbelly stove can produce, but I am very disappointed with the grate system. I've been trying to fire lump bituminous coal and it does burn it beautifully, but no matter how gentle or how I shake the grates, the entire grate ends up in the ash pan. The longest that I've got this stove to burn continuously is three days before the grate falls into the ash pan.

I just don't understand? Is it me? Or does this grate system SUCK this bad? I thought that I was a pretty good coal burner.

I have to say in defense of the Vogelzang potbelly stove that it fires wood and bituminous coal very, very, well! Putting a pot of water on top of the stove and firing it with bituminous coal, I'm able to get a good 6 to 8 hours of great heat. I've been able to heat my 3700 sq.ft. house in milder weather, 20 degrees and above, with just this stove and a pot of water.

Now if I could only get it to fire continuously, it would be great.

Anyone else having the same problem? Has anyone else modified this stove for better continuous coal firing? I'm actually considering, during the summer, making a wooden pattern to be cast with a different grate system. Any thoughts?

Thanks, DOUG

Doug, take a look at the drawing I made up in the vogelzang section. My stove is out at the moment. I'll pull out my modified grate and take exact dimensions of it and post it here. The basic grate is 1/2 inch steel plate.

Well I'm getting it, five days now and firing very well! I've been really loading her up with bit coal and firing her hot! I'm so impressed with the heat output of this stove. I'm getting the hang of the grate system.

I'm also starting to wonder if those old cast iron gravity furnace units aren't the best way to heat a house?

I've been comparing heat output and bit coal consumption rates of this Vogelzang Potbelly Stove, with a pot of water on it, and the Clayton furnace. I have noticed that I can fire the Vogelzang Potbelly stove hotter with less coal consumption, but more frequent loading and emptying ashes than the Clayton. The Clayton will hold more fuel, but it can't fire as hot without warping, so it has longer burn times. Other then that, I think that they are very close.

What I have done most recently is used the split refractory brick to line the bottom "ledge" in the pot belly. I have a tile saw so I cut a few in half lengthwise to fill in the gaps, above the bolts etc. It takes six tiles and four splits to line the lower part. I did not used fireclay between the smaller gaps. I fire it up with newspapers and thin kindling. Once a good roaring wood fire is going I load in just three scoops of smaller nut coal in the center. the manual damper on the pipe is wide open, the lower damper is wide open, the door damper is shut. When the coal starts, you can tell because the lit coal drops into the bottom as you can hear it go clink, clink etc. After about ten minutes of this clink, clink, I open the door a bit and look inside. Most of the wood has been consumed but the coal that's caught fire is glowing right in the center. I then add three more scoops of the smaller than nut coal. Close the door and leave everything the same [closed, open] Ten to fifteen minutes more and there is a bed of glowing coal. I then add five scoops of coal and wait - fifteen more minutes. Open the door and add coal almost up to the refractory brick top. Now close the bottom damper halfway and the pipe damper almost closed. Maybe a crack open. As the coal starts, [you'll notice the blue flames] the heat will radiate up into the upper chamber. Leave it run about three hours before you touch it! THEN add three more scoops of coal and shake the bottom grate quickly. A dome shape of glowing coal will form in the firebox. You'll need to open the shaker about halfway and poke up underneath with a bent poker all around the bottom grate openings to knock down this dome. The whole bottom should be glowing orange hot!

That's awesome! This Vogelzang potbelly stove is growing on me. I've yet to fire anthracite in it, but the bituminous lump coal burns so well and is readily available at fraction of the cost of eastern Pa anthracite here in western Pa, I'm having a difficult time actually breaking down and burning any anthracite coal in her. I've been so impressed with the bituminous coal burning characteristics and high heat output, it's hard to deviate from perfection.

If you look at the specs, the BTU output of Anthracite is way over Bituminous. There's less flyash going up the chimney is less. Bituminous has a high sulfide content and hydrogen sulfides are high. These sulfides, mixed with water produces sulfuric acid which will destroy your pipes and anything metal.

Crazy thing, Aubuchon hardware sells Blachzak anthracite at $7.49 per 40# bag. They also supply Bituminous at about a buck a bag more.

most eastern bituminous coal is from 500 to 1,000 btu's/lb MORE than anthracite, in the case of west virgina Poco coal or sewell coal it can exceed 15,000btu's/lb as recieved; additionally eastern KY coal, which is a HIGH volitile coal can commonly have in excess of 14,000 Btu's/lb. It is fairly common to find bituminous coals between 5-10% ash; most anthracite is higher. Anthracite averages around 12,500btus/lb, even lower if primarily from reclaimed coal; most western pa bituminous will have around 13,000btu/lb. It is a common misconception that bituminous has less heat than anthracite. Western subbituminous coal and much of the illinois basin coal is lower in btu/lb than anthracite, but that's not the case with the majority of eastern bituminous coals being mined. There was a post on this site recently where a member via Proximate Analysis compared superior anthracite to, I believe, western pa bituminous coal - the bit won in terms of heat output and ash. the increased sulfur of some bituminous coals makes little difference in terms of corrosion to stoves/stovepipe etc. my stoker furnace is a 1972 and it's doing just fine- no alarming corrosion after almost 40 years of use.

One problem with the BTU content of the coal, is that it is including the volitiles.. and most stoves won't burn the volitiles much if at all.. Only Berlin's homemade design does a good job burning the volitiles..

Now in a stoker furnace like a Combustioneer, or Stokermatic, the volitiles get burnt.. there is virtually no smoke from the bit coal..

Greg L

The big advantage of anthracite is ease of use, it burns like redhot marbles, doesn't smoke or stick together.
The big advantage of Bituminous is cost, cost, and cost. And closer to my location, which is still: cost..

But antracite wins for me., A 200Kbtu stoker boiler, that needs tending every couple of days. I don't think I can do that with Bit coal.

Greg L

As I've said before anthracite is a good coal to use, it has less variability, no visable smoke in a hand-fired appliance, and there exists a variety of appliances on the market designed specifically for its combustion. Having said all that, in many cases bituminous coal is an excellent choice. It has higher btu's, less ash, and with good coals can be easier to use in certain appliances.

Greg, while many stoves do not thoroughly combust the volitile matter, they usually manage to combust a large portion of it, at least partially. This, I believe, is enough to bring the usable btu's/lb to at least the level of anthracite's average, and, depending on the coal and appliance, probably higher. Don't forget that while dampering down anthracite you lose combustion efficiency in the form of large amounts of CO; when both bituminous and anthracite are operating at high burn, I believe the usable BTU's in bituminous will easily exceed that of anthracite, determined, obviously by the BTU's over anthracite in the bit coal. As far as finding a bituminous boiler that will not have to be tended for days at a time, you are right, there isn't much on the market. Any bituminous "clinkering" stoker will have to be tended at least once/day when demand is high, and at least every other day when demand is lower. There are some stokers now available that will allow multi-day and longer use without attention. These are the rotating ring stokers such as the coal-man etc. with bin feed and ash augers; those stokers will require a low coke button coal, less than 4. While the majority of eastern coals have coke-button's higher than 4, with relative ease coal can be found in every eastern state that will deliver a coke button of 4 or lower. As Interest in heating with coal continues to grow, I believe there will be more GOOD options for heating with bituminous coal.

Well guys, the snow storm has been tough on everyone here in southwest Pa. There is a lot of homes around me still without electricity, some going on four days now. I've have been fortunate not to have lost mine. Since most everything around me has been closed due to the weather, I decided since I have a couple of unplanned, unpaid, days off because my work is closed, to see how well this Vogelzang potbelly performs under no electricity conditions. I don't have my Claytons running, just the Vogelzang potbelly with a pot of water on the top simmering away.

I have been burning this Vogelzang potbelly hard for the past four days with bit coal and wood logs. To my surprise, this stove likes the high firing. I have not had any trouble with the grate system since I've been firing hot. I've been loading it up about every 4 to 6 hours and it looks like 8 hours is going to be the maximum I will be able to safely let it go without the fire extinguishing. So over all, I'm impressed and feel that if I was to lose electricity, the house will stay warm and comfortable.

My next project and experiment is going to be the Chubby Sr. I ordered from Larry. It is on a truck as we speak and on its way to its new home, my basement workshop. I picked up a ton of Reading Anthracite nut coal and I'm anxiously waiting to fire it in my new Chubby Sr. I'll keep you posted on the progress and results.

Here are a few pictures.

yep vogalzang potbellys are great stoves for the price mine has worked great this season. burning hard coal/soft coal/wood/it seems to like it all but I think a big coal chubby may be in order for next year

Yes, I think you maybe correct! I just removed my Vogelzang potbelly stove and put my new Coal Chubby in it's place. I'm getting ready to fire him up.

That second picture looks good enough to eat.