huntingteacher wrote:One guy who used to install the EFM's says that the keystoker boilers cost half as much as an EFM, and he thought they were a well built affordable unit. Keystoker makes the K-2 85,000 btu unit (which is likely too small) and the KA-6 144,000 btu unit (which is likely too big) A referbished EFM cost as much as a new other boiler and you can't be sure of the internal structure of a refab boiler. Many people rave about their Harman boiler and I like my Mag stoker, but...price of a new VF-3000? Forget the EFM and AA as new units. I might as well go with the gasification system if I was going to spend that much money.
huntingteacher wrote:So.....All this back ground to get to my question.....Can anyone tell me why the Leisure Line WL-110 is so much more affordable than other types of boilers? It is $2k less than a VF-3000 by Harman and it includes the dual fuel oil burner?
I am running a vf3000 in series with a wm-gold series oil burner. My home is a 2700 sqft(including basement) 2 story colonial. I heat my hot water with it also. I run all year round. Been running it now continuously for a year and half. Last winter was mild so I can't say if it will keep up with 10 degree days. I kept the temp at 68 last winter, wife said it too hot at 70. I think I will burn between 6 to 8 tons for a year. Three adults living in the house. We do a lots of wash every week.
I like the design because it is a bottom feeder like an EFM, no puff backs and little to no chance of the fire burning back into the bin. It is a compact, good looking unit. I am pleased with my purchase.
huntingteacher wrote:I do think I will keep the propane unit as a back up in case I go away for a week some year. I really thought the KA-6 was too big, but I have lots of space for it in the basement. Someday, I could build a great room addition onto my house if I ever got time to kill some trophies to put in it. What is the negative to being oversized? Just burning more coal than I need too?
huntingteacher wrote:What is the negative to being oversized? Just burning more coal than I need too? Anybody ever think about how much extra it actually cost?
Pacowy wrote:huntingteacher wrote:What is the negative to being oversized? Just burning more coal than I need too? Anybody ever think about how much extra it actually cost?
Even the idea that bigger boilers waste coal seems to have taken on a life of its own through repetition. So I will repeat my response, with apologies to forum members who have already heard it: A bigger boiler (with a bigger heat exchanger) running easy may use less coal to produce a given amount of usable heat than would a smaller boiler (with a smaller heat exchanger) running hard. And before anybody cites an ancient study from the development of the AA design, I'm not talking about a bigger heat exchange area created by increasing the diameter of heat exchange tubes to sub-optimal sizes.
Mike
NEPA Crossroads is a creation of Nepadigital.Com ©2009 • Contact Admin | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group