I think you are correct and don't see how it could be otherwise. These stoves were developed because it was desirable to raise efficiency while retaining a compact package. Once the heating unit was moved to the basement and central heat became popular, the need for compactness was no longer there. It was easy to add heat exchange above the fire.KingCoal wrote:this description of the "heat" dropping as it gets further from the fire pot is echoed by many members here in other threads as well. I have always thought that it represented the desired effect, that of the stove progressively giving off the heat in the exhaust path till by the time the gas enters the chimney thimble there is so little left that you can hold your hand on the stove pipe for as long as you want.
am I incorrect about this ?
Unfortunately the lessons learned in the best parlor stoves were forgotten and most furnaces and boilers were lacking in true air tightness making holding a small fire all but impossible. Lots of deaths in an effort to hold a small fire from check dampers built into the top of the stove. Fire pot design went straight downhill adding to the problem. Combustion chambers were air or even water cooled. Instead of keeping heat in for efficient combustion, heat was removed. Ash sifters became popular to save all the unburned coal. Kerosene heaters were used in the shoulder months to avoid the abortion in the basement. Oil heat went through its own trials until the lessons learned of proper air distribution and combustion chamber design common at the beginning of the century and before were relearned.