Who Has Switched From a Stoker to a Hand Fed???

blrman wrote:
Hold on there HB! Don't go counting out the EFM 520 thinking they draw all kinds of heavy juice. Truth be told, they only use a 1/8 HP motor that draws 1.7 amps. Or is it 2.4? Anyway, that's only about 200 watts give or take. Not enough to need a "Whole house generator and auto throwover switch" It would be nice though. Can't say watt the AA's draw.

Thinking about switching from hand-fed to stoker; not worried about power outage, I can hook up an inverter easy enough. Just for the easier operation.

I guess I am stating the obvious that I would never consider a stoker stove of any kind. The whole idea of, "alternative heating," is to be free of dependance on electricity, period.
The high probably of failure of these units due to their need for all of the expensive, complex, do daddery that makes them even able to function is a huge turn off.
The other is the grinding, clanking, blowing constant noise they make. It's like having a washing machine on constant spin cycle in your living room.
Of course some people get their jollies on the need to have something to tinker with or like playing with factory machinery right in their parlors. That is fine since that is what they like.
I'll skip all of that and have a base heater that always works no matter what. No gear oil needed.
Now another thing is the unabashed proselytizing the stoker people seem to feel compelled to do on the hand fed section anytime someone is leaning toward a hand fed is also a mystery to me.

Indeed William!

Well Put,as usual,William ! Need meeting Application seems to be The Master ! Sometimes there are Complex,yet Cut'N'Dried Simple Factors that can make The Decision ! I guess it comes down to what You actually need,vs what You want.......The True Beauty of a Hand-Fed is All You've Stated......Our Schedules,Demands And Lifestyles are The Mitigating Circumstances that can determine The Choice. I guess Our Age And Health are two other large kickers. Oh,I forgot about "Funds On Hand",too ! The fact that there's a Coal Burner Choice to suit One's Needs in this Day and Age is a Good Testimony to The Heating Method......I've always Enjoyed and Relied on the Passionate and Spirited Conversations We've had here.... In the End,do Your Homework,Make Your best Educated and Specific Needs Choice,and Stay Confidently Warm regardless ! Thanx for a Good Thread,Gang!

My stoves need to vent through the fireplace opening in my living room. I had a Harman Mark II hand fired for 3 years, but had to have a stoker. This past winter I got the Alaska Kast Console Hearth that I always wanted and have burned it all season. I have used 3.25 tons with the stoker. I burned about the same amount with the hand fired. The stoker is easy dump coal in, and take ash out. To me that is the only benefit. Stokers are noisy (its in my living room), the house stays warm but I do not feel it is the same warmth as a hand fired stove. I also do not feel the stoker is any cleaner. With the hand fired stove I got some ash dust from shaking it done, with the stoker I get black dust from dumping the coal in the hopper. Tending a stoker is about 5 mins, tending a hand fired maybe 15 mins. I am currently considering switching back to hand fired for next winter.

cowentz wrote:My stoves need to vent through the fireplace opening in my living room. I had a Harman Mark II hand fired for 3 years, but had to have a stoker. This past winter I got the Alaska Kast Console Hearth that I always wanted and have burned it all season. I have used 3.25 tons with the stoker. I burned about the same amount with the hand fired. The stoker is easy dump coal in, and take ash out. To me that is the only benefit. Stokers are noisy (its in my living room), the house stays warm but I do not feel it is the same warmth as a hand fired stove. I also do not feel the stoker is any cleaner. With the hand fired stove I got some ash dust from shaking it done, with the stoker I get black dust from dumping the coal in the hopper. Tending a stoker is about 5 mins, tending a hand fired maybe 15 mins. I am currently considering switching back to hand fired for next winter.

Those are good points. If I were to have a coal appliance up in my living area it would be a hand fed. No noise, better view of the fire, peaceful, tranquil radiant heat.

wsherrick wrote:I guess I am stating the obvious that I would never consider a stoker stove of any kind. The whole idea of, "alternative heating," is to be free of dependance on electricity, period.
The high probably of failure of these units due to their need for all of the expensive, complex, do daddery that makes them even able to function is a huge turn off.
The other is the grinding, clanking, blowing constant noise they make. It's like having a washing machine on constant spin cycle in your living room.
Of course some people get their jollies on the need to have something to tinker with or like playing with factory machinery right in their parlors. That is fine since that is what they like.
I'll skip all of that and have a base heater that always works no matter what. No gear oil needed.
Now another thing is the unabashed proselytizing the stoker people seem to feel compelled to do on the hand fed section anytime someone is leaning toward a hand fed is also a mystery to me.

I started out with handfiring and have a great deal of respect for William's opinions on vintage stoves, but when I got to the "proselytizing" part I felt the need to speak up. For me, dependence on electricity is not a significant factor, and ranks far behind issues like cost and comfort. Like anything mechanical, stokers periodically require maintenance and replacement of parts, but across an assortment of stoker types and manufacturers I've found most work on normal wear parts can be performed by the homeowner. Some of the ones built like "factory equipment" may tend to be more complex, but one of those in reasonable condition might run for decades in household use without requiring serious attention. Overall, I don't think it's necessary to condemn stokers in order for it to be reasonable for a person to choose hand-fired equipment, or vice versa.

Mike

My opinion.
Furnace= stoker
Stove in living space= hand fired.

Stoker6268 wrote:My opinion.
Furnace= stoker
Stove in living space= hand fired.

Where the devil does that leave me then Inquiring minds want to know

Canaan coal man wrote:

Stoker6268 wrote:Had a stoker years ago. Now have hand fired. I switched basically for the reasons you stated. The stove is in our living room and it is so nice not to have the noise of the motors. Power goes out occasionally and stove still runs. Not wasting electricity. Also the glass doesnt etch and pit as bad like the stokers do. 2nd year with mine and the glass is almost perfect.

Did you lower your coal consumption when switching. did you feel any difference in radiant heat vs the forced air from your stoker?

Even though the room temp might have been the same, the heat from the handfed seems hotter/more intense than the stoker. Coal consumption was about the same. Maybe a little more with handfed in spring and fall months.

Stoker6268 wrote:My opinion.
Furnace= stoker
Stove in living space= hand fired.

SWPaDon wrote:Inquiring minds want to know

I'm gonna guess and say that's what he would prefer since a hand fed or stoker could be in either place.

SWPaDon wrote:

Stoker6268 wrote:My opinion.
Furnace= stoker
Stove in living space= hand fired.

Where the devil does that leave me then

001.jpg

Inquiring minds want to know

Need to read & quote the whole thing. SWPaDon has a handfed stoker furnace.

windyhill4.2 wrote:Need to read & quote the whole thing.

Well I guess it leaves him with a mutant then, me as well..

Or is it only a handfed furnace? I think I goofed in my description

windyhill4.2 wrote:Or is it only a handfed furnace? I think I goofed in my description

Yes sir, ours are both hand fed furnaces..