Brand Loyalty

While shaking down the stove this morning, I started thinking about the ash produced. That got me thinking about the type of coal I'm using and the numerous posts I've read about using this coal, or that coal. I'm using Reading nut by the way, but that's not important right now. My question is........... is there any REAL difference in the coal being bagged by the different companies? I am talking about anthracite vs. anthracite. I have heard claims about coal burning better, and others that have a lower ash output? I'm not looking to start a brand loyalty riot here, but are there any validity to these claims, or is it more of a Ford vs. Chevy situation? Is the coal treated by some and not others? I'm kinda thinking that if its mined and bagged in the same coal region, it would be the same, and the name on the bag wouldn't really matter. I would love to hear some input. By the way..... ford is better.

Yes there is a HUGE difference between different coal sources.. there are a lot of different veins of coal underground, Some are white ash, some red ash, some coal has a higher ash content than others, some has higher BTU content.

So Anthracite is not just Anthracite..

From my own personal experiences Reading coal was not very good, I bought 5 tons of stove and nut.. it had a lot of rock, high ash content and dirt..
I bought bulk and bagged. The bagged was very dirty and lots of fines/ wood splinters etc.

Blaschak is a much better product by the bag.

I used Superior coal while UAE was having problems producing enough to keep up with demand..

Now I use only UAE coal if I can get it. It has very low ash content. But UAE doesn't offer bagged coal..

Greg L

Reading sounds exactly like Kimmels bagged ....

SMITTY wrote:Reading sounds exactly like Kimmels bagged ....

We've had good luck with the Kimmel's, surprised to hear that.
Never found much junk in it.. and it burned well.
Just bought 3 ton of Blaschak to try, just for my own comparison, not because of
being dis satisfied with Kimmel... will have a better feel for it in a few months..
always heard good on both, actually.

Dan

I guess it varies quite a bit -- your not the first to say that.

I burned it for about 3 years (Kimmels bagged nut). We had mudballs the size of a grapefruit, chunks of wood, boulders ( like 10 lbs. at least! ), wire, metal & other assorted trash items. I never got any longer than a 12 hour burn before needing a shake down & reload. Ash pan was always overflowing after 12 hours. I didn't know what I was missing at the time because that was the only coal I had ever burned ..... then I got the Blaschak & it was night & day: less ash, longer burns, ZERO trash. Ash had more of a white super-fine powdery look to it, vs. the reddish brown clinker filled chunks, & balls of molten metal of the Kimmels. Just my experience.

I am burning Reading bagged.I don't have any problems with trash,some bags have
more fines than others but it does't affect my system.Everything is warm.I will shop
around when I need more.You have me thinking.

SMITTY wrote:I burned it for about 3 years (Kimmels bagged nut). We had mudballs the size of a grapefruit,
chunks of wood, boulders ( like 10 lbs. at least! ), wire, metal & other assorted trash items.

Wow! I guess we were lucky..
Nothing like that at all. At most, an occasional twig the size of half a pencil.
But I know what you mean about the redish ash..
You have made me anxious to try the Blaschak now!
Will probably start using the coal in a couple of weeks.
Right now, it just hasn't been cold enough, so if it gets a little raw, I just burn some wood..
I have 400# of Kimmels left over that I thought I'd burn first,
now I'm thinking I may just start out with the Blaschak

Dan

Don't know anything about the kimmels, burned reading last year and had I known what I know now burning Blaschak for the last month, I have longer burn times by a bunch and very little ash compared to reading when I was empting full to over full ash pans at 12 hrs. I'm sold at this point. The only coal here is reading or Blaschak that I know of.

There are differences in brands of anthracite. Like Greg stated, the variability comes from the field of origin (north, south or middle) and the various veins respective to each field.

The longevity of the coal company adds even more variability too. I've burned mostly Reading over the past seven years and have seen a wide range of product performance in the anthracite from my dealer's bulk piles. The previous two years' anthracite from his bulk has been very good. Other years and intra-year quality has been okay to 'meh'. Those in the know on this forum explain that change in consistency comes from an old company reworking old piles of coal that were deemed sub par for their contracts of that day but after years passed by, the same piles have been approved for residential use. Many mines have been worked and worked out. The next year he might have fresh mined coal from a new mine. IMO, people's experiences with their bagged product depends on what gets bagged at their (one?) bagging plant, when and where it gets moved to around the country. It's not a bad product but not nearly as good as the other anthracite I've been introduced to.

It really is analogous to getting into beer and comparing a micro brew company and a big nationally distributed foreign owned mass distributed brew. Ahh, two more sips to go

The ladies are up and dancing on the UAE. Can this be beat? Gnight...

From my small amount of experience, between me and what my friends burn, I'll say this: We will never use Reading again. It is certainly hit & miss. Sometimes you get OK stuff, others is just plain awful. Superior is superior in heat, but makes a heavy ash and a lot of it. Kimmels is good stuff. Blaschak, very good. That's all I know!
I'd like to try UAE someday.

Does anybody sell Blaschak in the southern NH region?

Superior nut has worked great for me. Consistent quality, no particular problems with impurities--mud, sticks, etc. Got some bagged Blaschak that I will try in a run in the middle of the season for comparison purposes. Good luck!

I burn Kimmels I do notice it seems to have a high ash content but, I have only been burning for a month and this is my only experience with coal and I have nothing to compare it to.

caesar10211 wrote:Does anybody sell Blaschak in the southern NH region?

How far south?
This guy is great to deal with, very fair.
http://mcmanusfuels.com

Dan

Most of the problem with anthracite coal is inconsistency.It all comes from small mines and breakers.Sometimes you hear that "coal x was good for me" but a day or two latter it may change.You may get great coal today and crap next week.

That's why you have to keep on top of it.

This year UAE seems to be about the best.Superior was great and consistent for years but that seems to have changed.

When you have been reading this site for a few years like I have you get to know what's coming from what mines and breakers.But it does take time to stay on top of things.

I'll give you my list this year for what it's worth.
#1 UAE great heat low ash(It's a 10 this year)always consistent so far.
#2 Blaschak good heat consistent year to year.
#3 Sherman good heat a little more ash than Blaschak fairly consistent
Hudson ? From what I've read over the years it's consistent and a lot like Sherman(I haven't burned it in 3 years)
Superior?
Reading what can I say one of the worst coals year to year

Just my .02 from burning coal
And yes there is a HUGE difference in coal even from year to year and day to day with most coals
DON