Blashak versus Kimmel - opinions on quality versus price?

Hi,

I'm new to coal and haven't burned either brand. I can get both in my area, but the Kimmel is about $20 a ton cheaper. Was wondering if the products were generally equal or if it was worth the few extra bucks for the Blashak?

Thanks for the input

The answer is not in how much you pay per ton, but how does your coal burning device like what you put in it. I am close to three coal yards within 15 minutes and two more within 45 minutes that vary in price for bulk ranging from 170 to 185 a ton. The cheapest with is the 170 a ton burns hotter and I burn less than the 185 a ton but it has a tendency to run into ash fusion problems if I don't watch it closely. When I burn their coal I cut down the air a bit and the ash flows off the grate just fine.

Don't judge the coal by the cost. Judge it by how it performs. It's kinda like whiskey. Some like Kentucky, some like Tennessee. Prices go all over the place and it comes down to what do you like.

Buy a sample couple of bags or if in bulk a few buckets full and try em out. Pick the one that burns the best for you and your appliance.

Rev. Larry

You'll find the Kimmel better for your type of stove.
It's a southern range coal with more volatiles. It will
be a little more flamey ( if there is such a word ) and
light easier.
If you can get it bagged, try one of each and see what works the best.

blrman07 wrote:The answer is not in how much you pay per ton, but how does your coal burning device like what you put in it. I am close to three coal yards within 15 minutes and two more within 45 minutes that vary in price for bulk ranging from 170 to 185 a ton. The cheapest with is the 170 a ton burns hotter and I burn less than the 185 a ton but it has a tendency to run into ash fusion problems if I don't watch it closely. When I burn their coal I cut down the air a bit and the ash flows off the grate just fine.

Don't judge the coal by the cost. Judge it by how it performs. It's kinda like whiskey. Some like Kentucky, some like Tennessee. Prices go all over the place and it comes down to what do you like.

Buy a sample couple of bags or if in bulk a few buckets full and try em out. Pick the one that burns the best for you and your appliance.

Rev. Larry

Thanks Larry. Wished I live in PA. Cheapest per ton in my area of Maine is 320...

tsb wrote:You'll find the Kimmel better for your type of stove.
It's a southern range coal with more volatiles. It will
be a little more flamey ( if there is such a word ) and
light easier.
If you can get it bagged, try one of each and see what works the best.

Thank you. I can get Kimmel by the individual bag to try, but not Blashak - it's by the pallet only.

By: glenwoodoak
Thank you. I can get Kimmel by the individual bag to try, but not Blashak - it's by the pallet only.

Add you general location to your profile and post a request to the forum for any member in your area to sell you a few bags from their pallet. Around here most dealers have a pallet they sell individual bags from. Of course they charge more per bag to do it.

Yep we have cheaper coal prices in NE Pa. but you have an advantage in the stove types. There are a few base burner type stoves that sip coal in this area but they are Cha Ching Cha Ching pricy for one you have to completely rebuild. The gold mine of stoves is where you are. It seems like the "Main'ers" area has the super efficient classy stoves at affordable prices. Around here in NE Pa. if we wanted to get one we pretty much have to drive to your neck of the woods.

I agree. Put you location in your description and someone close to you might be willing to share some coal for you to experiment with.

Rev. Larry

Larry, examples please. PA stoves, with some equals elsewhere, are the best for anthracite. Maine has many great things but not a lock on the best coal stoves. NY is best for,.... er hmmm, give me moment ... errr... I'll get back to you on that one.

Simon, for God's sake, think man---we got LAKES--Maine's just got a bunch of PONDS---

2 years ago, i burned Blashak because it was better quality than the Kimmel I was getting. It was also a lot more expensive. This year I am burning the Kimmel and it is outstanding!

Yeah it;s looking like Kimmel's is a winner this year from what I'm reading lately. I last burned it in '08, and it was TERRIBLE. Never saw so much trash in my life in the bags, not to mention LOTS of ash & hard to shake clinkers that limited my burns to 12 hours.

With the Blaschak I bought in summer '11, I've been getting grate-jamming rocks constantly. Figures I bought 14 pallets of it.

Another thing to consider - Blaschak has REAL plastic bags, 40 lbs. each. The real plastic holds up to direct sunlight MUCH better than the cheap, woven plastic strips of Kimmel's bags. They disintegrate in direct sunlight in a VERY short time. Kimmel's are 50 lb'ers.

any one have any likes or dislikes on blashack/reading coal here good and bad of both what to do /and any one know of pkcc haveint really heard alot of that type /company and quality any help thanx all !!!!

The only thing I can add is that in my purchase of several bags of pea Blashak coal recently I found that virtually every single piece of coal was exactly the same size. I've never seen this much consistancy in purchasing sized coal before. I'm impressed by the Blashak .

Kevin

I have burned roughly equal amounts of Kimmel and Blaschak over the last five years, and I'd say it's a toss-up as to which I prefer. Except as I get older I'm beginning to appreciate the 40-pound bags vs. the 50-pounders.

P.S. Where in Maine are you? The last couple years I have paid very little difference for the one brand vs. the other.