Anyone with an opinion on the Tri Burner?

Hello all,

Just curious if anyone has any first hand experience or words of wisdom relative to the Tri Burner stoves. I understand they have been renamed by Reading Stoves. Also, since Reading stoves are made locally to a lot of people on the list, just curious why we don't hear more about them?

I haven't used a reading stove but there are several reasons why I think people stay away from them.

#1. price they are low btu stove at 70,000 btu input but cost as much as the competitions 90,000 btu input stoves.

#2. The stove has a larger physocal footprint than that of most ofthe competition's 90,000 btu class stoves.

#3. They look moch more cheaply built than most of the competition as fit and finish seem to be lacking.

#4. The triburner is an old school combustion process that usually doesn't burn the coal as completely and offers lower efficency.

#5. They are the newest stove company in this area so people are inclined to go with the established company over the new kid.

I am not sure but I don't think Reading stoves use Tri-burner system any longer, you could contact them and ask.

I looked at them when I bought my Alaska Channing, they did not seem as well built to me, the door handles were cheaper, the stove body lighter and thinner.

But they had a larger ash pan, a ramp to help get it out.

You may be looking at an older or used stove, personally I would stay away from any Tri-burner system. Forum member Matthaus has had experience with them I think, and could give better advise than I can.

I just like the simplicity of the Alaska and Leisure Line stoves, tri burners are harder to adjust. I am married and have all the head aches I need.

BK

OOP'S, I was wrong,their website say's they DO use the Tri-burner system.

BK

The tri-burner system has been around for a long time. It has changed hands about 3 times, but the burner has remained the same. You will not find a more quiet burner out there, with very little fan noise. True, it is only a 70,000 BTU, but it does have some real good points. Being only a 70,000BTU stove with a one (1) motor system there are less moving parts to fail. The wheel that blows the air to the fire is plastic, with less drag than a steel wheel. With less drag comes less air noise, also less CFM's. This is why it's only 70,000. The plastic fan is only 31 CFM's. I don't know a whole lot about their stove, so I can't comment truthfully.
Jerry

I have a reading utility stove in my cellar and am quite happy with it, for the price it couldn't be beat. It has worked without a hitch for the last two years. I guess it depends on what you are looking for but they are very simple to operate and maintain. The utilty stove takes a regular ash tub to, square or round, like you would you use in a fullsize boiler so it goes a couple of days between emptying the ashes.

I too have a Reading, I have the twin stoker furnace I bought in October.It's highest output is 140,000 btu's.I am quite happy with mine..........Adam

I have a Tri Burner that came with the house. I'm about to list it as soon as it gets a good cleaning so I can take some pics.

I used it all last season, and for what it is it worked well. Just didn't throw enough heat for my house, and when the power went out so did the stove.

I think it would be great for a large room or finished basement. But for primary heat I needed more.

My dogs really liked it.

Quite a collection you have there, M.
Must be interesting at feeding time.