When you hear AHS? (Please explain your choice)

PatrickAHS wrote:Technically not "taken". Same guys different name. Pretty Much

Poor choice of words on my part. I thought eshland was bought out by Jeff. Right?

PatrickAHS wrote:Wow, that about says it all.

We are just glad to be able to see folks educated about us and satisfied with their unit.

SORRY a little advertising would help i'm sure but inour area change is hard to come by oldtimers in my town have the Efm vs. Keystoker battle like Chevy vs. Ford maybe information pamphlets at coal breakers?? if your allowed to i think blashack coal has reading or alaska stoves on its site.


also i think i quoted the wrong post it was for an explanation i forgot to include

When I hear AHS I think good things. Early last year I decided to buy a coal boiler. I studied as best I could and almost bought an AHS. Because of my research one of my close friends did buy an AHS. I went with an Axeman Anderson instead though for two reasons. One, the Axeman is ASME certified, to get ASME certification with the AHS it was an extra couple of grand. My buddy didn't care as he installed it himself. In Maine a licensed installer would not be allowed to install an AHS without it having some sort of stamp of approval. Maine does not require ASME, but they do want some sort of approval stamp. The second reason I went with the Axeman was because I wanted auger feed. The Axeman comes with an auger for about the same price as the AHS without the auger.
The bottom line for myself and my friend, we are both very happy with our decisions. Both the AA and the AHS do what they are supposed to do and do it more efficiently than any other coal boiler that I know of.

Just found a Eshland 500, can't wait to rebuild that thing! Also own an Eshland 130 hopper fed unit. Can't seem to part with it, probably will have to some day.

From what I have seen of AHS they offer a quality and diverse product line. Hope to become a dealer some day, will compliment the AA product line since AHS offers wood gasification and waste oil technology.

I think good things, cool machine, but it took a while to figure that out. Initially, I was turned off.
I checked them out. Big money and the guy tried to sell me a certified boiler for an extra 2 or 3 K. My state does not require
a certified boiler in a residential application under 250000 BTU.The sales guy should have known that. Another thing that turned me away from them is the options.
Really, the unit should come with what ever it needs to run at its best. So extra for better fan drive, thermo grate thingy,
just turned me off as a consumer. The biggest thing that caught my attention was the puff backs some have experienced.
It alarmed me that some who have been using the boiler for a few years, still had BOOM issues. Not everyone had them,
but on initial investigation, no one could say why it happened. Draft issue? Just the deal with pea coal? During my research
the boom thing sealed the no deal. The way I figured it at the time, for the money spent, and the work involved, I did not
want to risk having the problem. Again, you have to remember, I was a non coal guy doing research. Knowing what I know
now, I would not be afraid of it. Most of new customers will be "non coal guys" So the potential boom thing is HUGE.
So , after doing home work looking for a boiler, they were a contender, but I decided against them.
People that have them are happy, once the BOOM thing is straightened out. The small flue size, the efficiency, fly ash containment , are all very attractive.

AHS does have a better web presence than the other manufactures. When doing research, I stumbled on you guys from
a couple of different sites. From those sites, I found this one. So, marketing wise, you are on the right track. Would I buy
one today? Knowing what I know now, yes.

Matthaus wrote:Just found a Eshland 500, can't wait to rebuild that thing! Also own an Eshland 130 hopper fed unit. Can't seem to part with it, probably will have to some day.

From what I have seen of AHS they offer a quality and diverse product line. Hope to become a dealer some day, will compliment the AA product line since AHS offers wood gasification and waste oil technology.

Hello Matthaus,

I may have a customer for that AHS 500. I was at my local greenhouse nursery and the owner was complaining about his heating bills, $3K a month. It's a very old nursery and at one time, before the current owner, they heated their greenhouse with coal. I asked to see the boiler and he showed me a hand fed modern Harmon. It's not the boiler I remember from 10+ years ago. He said it does not work well. It's obviously way undersized. It also appears to burn oil. He was busy with spring seasonal sales and I'll go back and talk to him in less busy times. I think we could engineer him a good system with a AHS 500.

John

I think the AHS is a fine boiler, but was too expensive compared to some other alternatives on the market. Between the AA and AHS, I like the design of the AHS more with the ashing mechanism seperated from the blower drive, simpler being better in this case. For the price that these units fetch I think that they should all come with painted sheetmetal covers as does the AHS, not the AA.

When I was making my boiler decision about two years ago, I seriously considered all the boilers, and collected as much information as I could on each. I looked at the AA, AHS, EFM, Keystoker and Harman.

I liked the AHS design, but with the belt driven fan, and the thermoash monitor, it was way more then what I would pay for a Harman or Keystoker. AHS did respond to my email with a brochure and pricing information, but no one ever called or followed up after that.

I have to agree with Paulie, that the belt drive fan and thermoash monitor should be part of the standard trim, not extra cost options.

I chose the second option, while the customers seem very happy with them, you don't make any bituminous burning stoker boilers

Having bought, refurbuished and sold one, I can say that the AHS units are very well made and very heavy duty units, however it will be quite a while before I'd be able to justify the cost of a new unit vs just burning heating oil. $7500 + $2000 to install..... 9500 bucks to save $1500/yr... not for me, not yet....

tom69z wrote:Having bought, refurbuished and sold one, I can say that the AHS units are very well made and very heavy duty units, however it will be quite a while before I'd be able to justify the cost of a new unit vs just burning heating oil. $7500 + $2000 to install..... 9500 bucks to save $1500/yr... not for me, not yet....

There is no doubt that the AHS is probably more expensive than most coal boilers. I had mine installed new, with auger for about $8500. I cannot judge whether initial price is warranted or not because I am not an authority by any means on coal burning and all the other boilers out there in the marketplace. I had used coal in a stoker (Alaska 90000 BTU unit) about 20 years ago and never really learned to max the output or make it worth the effort. So I stopped burning coal after a couple of years and just stayed with oil. Now, with the internet, and forums like this one, I have learned some of the "art" of burning antracite correctly and that has made all the difference.

When oil prices peaked at $4.00 plus a few of years back I decided that something needed to be done to heat my rather large home without wasting money. I researched alternatives and stumbled on AHS and decided to go with the 130 model.

It is routed through my oil boiler and services four zones in the house. My average saving has surpassed 5K per year (@ $3.00 per gallon) and the entire house has been heated to between 70-72F vs the 64-66F I kept it at with oil (and I closed off 1,100 ft2 of living space when running oil). Only when the temperature dips down towards 0-10F do I supplement coal with oil. Last winter I used only about 40 gallons of oil as a supplement.

In just two years the system has more than paid for itself and the quality of life with a completely warmed and comfy home goes beyond what anything oil had ever done for me and my family in the preceeding 20 years.

Interestingly, I run the system all year long and have had no problems with it going out even during the scorching summer we just experienced in PA this summer. For me it is an outstanding performer and a really fantastic money saver. I often wish I had known about this sleek looking machine years ago. I would have saved a fortune on my fuel bills and not felt the misery of all those long and cold winters.

Cheers,
Stephen

Well Stephen, I keep the house at 70 degrees in the winter and we only use 1000 gallons of oil all year long, hot water included to heat 2400 sqft. Maybe its because the house is only 5yrs old and has 2x8 exterior walls with R19 in them.... but I could not justify 10 grand to save $1500/yr. I'd much rather work a few more hours of overtime, much easier.

tom69z wrote: 2x8 exterior walls

tom69z wrote: I could not justify 10 grand to save $1500/yr. I'd much rather work a few more hours of overtime, much easier.

If I could buy oil at $0.85/gallon,then it would be a wash. A year of $4.00 oil and you might think differently

Everyone's situation and break-even point is different. Obviously those of us with large, old homes have the quickest return on investment. For those that burn 1000 gallons or less of fuel per year, the price of a refurbished unit (as opposed to new) will make the math look a lot better.

tom69z wrote:Well Stephen, I keep the house at 70 degrees in the winter and we only use 1000 gallons of oil all year long, hot water included to heat 2400 sqft. Maybe its because the house is only 5yrs old and has 2x8 exterior walls with R19 in them.... but I could not justify 10 grand to save $1500/yr. I'd much rather work a few more hours of overtime, much easier.

Unfortunately, I don't have 2x8 or R19. Obviously, that would make a substantial difference in fuel consumption. My house was built 20 years ago with 2x4 and R11 or13 (? I assume) and it is Tyvek wrapped. It exceeds 4000 ft2. I have added more insulation over the past year to the attic. Perhaps my heat loss is greater than some as I have several panoramic picture windows that exceed 10' in length and several skylights. While closing off the 1100 feet, I did keep it heated to around 60F.

Considereing the fact that the house is nearly twice as large and I averaged about 1800 gallons per year to keep it at ~ 66F on average, our fuel consumption per ft2 isn't really too different.

That said, extrapolating costs to move the house from 66F to 70F, and heating all of the house to that temp, means that I clearly would burn in excess of 2200 gallons of oil. At $3 per gallon that is $6600 per annum. Even if I used 9 tons of coal ($175 ton delivered) my savings are, more or less, 5K per year.

Who knows where oil prices will end up? At $4.00 the savings climbs to $7200 per year. That's real money. Would I prefer to use oil? Sure. But as I near retirment, the more money I bag in my account vs my oil company's account will make my life that much better down the line.

Coal certainly requires some physical participation, but it provides great heat, little maintenance, and provides a modality of savings in energy costs that oil unfortunately does not at this time.

The reality here is that the sytem paid for itself in a year and a half. My wallet and accountant tell me that. The quality of life that a warm house provides is priceless. For me the AHS system has, so far, been an efficient an easy to operate system.

Stephen

AA130FIREMAN wrote:

tom69z wrote: 2x8 exterior walls

tom69z wrote: I could not justify 10 grand to save $1500/yr. I'd much rather work a few more hours of overtime, much easier.

If I could buy oil at $0.85/gallon,then it would be a wash. A year of $4.00 oil and you might think differently

$4 oil is still a 3yr payback for this home-owner. Thats 3 years of hauling coal and empying ashes (where do you go with caustic ashes?) before being ahead. Oil will not ever be $4 for very long periods of time, especially not in this economy, the govt knows it and don't think for a second they are not connected with big oil to keep the costs down. If oil gets to $4, I'll switch to natural gas, theres more than enough of that here in PA and NY as well.

IF I had the time, it might be different, but with the busy lives we lead today and 3 kids, theres just no way. Not now. Maybe as a hobby when I am older. who knows.

Merry Christmas everyone !