Looked at a Keystoker 90K BTU Stoker and Chimney Question

Post Reply
 
ad356
Member
Posts: 189
Joined: Sat. Sep. 21, 2013 7:07 am
Location: north java, ny

Post by ad356 » Thu. Aug. 27, 2015 10:30 pm

i called on a leisure line stove today. the guy said he has two stoves for sale, the leisure line pioneer and a keystoker 90K BTU stove. I told him I was going to come over and take a look. I got to his house and he had the keystoker fired up for me. he wheeled it out into the driveway, he put a couple pieces of black pipe on the stove to produce some draft. it was a nice running stove, very quiet and produced some nice heat, I am impressed with it. it also had what appeared to be a newer blower motor. I think the only thing this stove needs is some paint. he is a former stove dealer and he refurbs them and resells them. he said he was going to repaint the keystoker right now he will sell it to me as is for $800 but after he repaints he said the price is going up to $1200. I think I might call him back tomorrow and tell him I will buy it as is, I can handle painting that's cheap and simple enough. it wasnt really badly rusted either just some surface rust and paint. I think at least I would be buying something that I know runs well.

he also said that coal stoves only have a warm flue temp, you are only venting gases its not like a wood stove. I have discovered that is very true. I was able to put my hands right on the black pipe and it was nowhere near hot, heck you can even put your hand inside the top of the black pipe without getting burned. I was really impressed. he told me that if the previous owners were burning wood with the old chimney that it would be fine for a coal stove with absolutely no risk of a chimney fire none-what-so-ever. that is why I originally abandoned that chimney in the 1st place. I was told there was not enough brick between the wall and the thimble. he said that's not a concern with coal. so should I attempt to reuse the existing chimney without worry of a fire? when I bough the house I had a chimney sweep come in and they wouldnt touch it, told me not to use it for wood but I think coal might be different story. I was also told there is no creosote with coal either. so what do you guys think? he also told me I could use a powervent but he doesnt recommend it. he said they are expensive, require more maintence, and must be cleaned regularly. he only suggests them in a situation where its no other option

 
User avatar
2001Sierra
Member
Posts: 2211
Joined: Wed. May. 20, 2009 8:09 am
Location: Wynantskill NY, 10 miles from Albany
Hot Air Coal Stoker Stove: Keystoker 90 Chimney vent
Coal Size/Type: Rice
Other Heating: Buderus Oil Boiler 3115-34

Post by 2001Sierra » Thu. Aug. 27, 2015 11:11 pm

My Keystoker 90 runs just warm chimney temps, with a max around 275 degrees using an immersion thermometer. You can almost always touch the stove pipe without burning your hands easily, the surface temp is a fair amount cooler than the temp measured by the immersion thermometer. I am concerned about your thimble connection. Can you give us any photos or measurements to combustibles?

 
ad356
Member
Posts: 189
Joined: Sat. Sep. 21, 2013 7:07 am
Location: north java, ny

Post by ad356 » Fri. Aug. 28, 2015 3:15 am

that black pipe was no where near 275. 275 is hotter then boiling water, of course he was only running the stove with about 6 feet of black pipe for draft, I know if a 16' masonry chimney would produce much more draft, the stove would produce more heat and maybe that pipe gets hotter. he did tell me that when he used to do fair demos he would put a peice of scotch tape on the pipe and it would never melt. he used to do that to demonstrate the safety of coal vs. cord wood. a cord wood stove will get that pipe in the 450 range no problem. I heat my barn with a wood-stove so I am well aware of how much more heat is contained in the exhaust. I really was very impressed with the apparent safety of the coal exhaust. here is the problem with producing a picture. I would gladly take a picture the problem is that the thimble is covered in drywall. we cut the thimble back and re-dry-walled that wall because we had not intended on using that chimney ever again. the wife constantly complained that she could see the thimble and wanted it covered. the chimney is otherwise 100% intact. the best I could do right now is exterior pictures. when I was quoted to repair the chimney it was several thousand dollars for a liner which I thought was kind of absurd so I never used it. I went pellets and after burning pellets for the last 4-5 years and dealing with constant pellet price increases and with pellets being almost the same price as coal its no longer a logical solution for me. if coal and pellets are the same price, well then it makes more sense to pursue coal, much hotter heat. I now realize that pellets really aren't enough heat anyways considering the age of the home.

i believe the issue was that there was only 4" of brick around the thimble and not the required 6" but I cannot remember. I do know that the thimble was not in direct contact with the wood but the amount of brickwork was not equate. the original contractor that I had look at the chimney is actually out of business so looking back I don't know how much I should have trusted his opinion. he probably tells every single person burning wood on a masonry chimney the same exact thing. he wants to sell a liner costing several thousand dollars that's his only goal.

 
ad356
Member
Posts: 189
Joined: Sat. Sep. 21, 2013 7:07 am
Location: north java, ny

Post by ad356 » Fri. Aug. 28, 2015 3:28 am

i also know that another big issue that this stretchy contractor had was the multiple chimney fires that the previous owners had in this chimney. I guess it was so bad that according to my neighbors they called the fire dept once on them. when the fire dept got to the house the previous owner told the fire dept not to worry and that he was just cleaning it out. I believe they put the chimney fire out anyways because it was unsafe, apparently the next day he was using it again. the previous owner was not very intelligent and very stubborn from my understanding. if you look at the chimney and roof their is evidence of a chimney fire and he is probably lucky he never caught the house on fire. either way I was told that should try to re-use the chimney for coal only, if they got away with it for wood then it would be much safer with coal. I was told that coal stoves only vent flue gases and that there really is no heat there, not even enough to ignite old creosote. I will take some pictures of the chimney exterior tomorrow.

i was told I could use a powervent if I wanted to but I would be much, much better off with a chimney and since I already have a chimney that I should try to utilize it. he told me that power vent is constant maintenance and that its something else that costs money and will wear out, its not a matter of if it will wear out but when it will.


 
User avatar
blrman07
Member
Posts: 2383
Joined: Mon. Sep. 27, 2010 3:39 pm
Location: Tupelo Mississippi

Post by blrman07 » Fri. Aug. 28, 2015 7:12 am

Get a different sweep in and have your chimney inspected. Coal does not create creosote but it will cause it to dry out and flake off the inside walls of the chimney. There have been instances of enough falling out to block the flue pipe. You just need to make sure that you check it on a regular basis to ensure that creosote hasn't fallen and blocked the chimney.

Correct: Flue pipes run much cooler with coal than wood.
In addition to the stove and pipe you want to get a manometer to hook up to the stove and the flue pipe. This will measure the draft and let you know if your starting to experience any draft problems.

Happy burning!!! :D

 
User avatar
SWPaDon
Member
Posts: 9857
Joined: Sun. Nov. 24, 2013 12:05 pm
Location: Southwest Pa.
Hand Fed Coal Furnace: Clayton 1600M
Coal Size/Type: Bituminous
Other Heating: Oil furnace

Post by SWPaDon » Fri. Aug. 28, 2015 8:19 am

I agree, get the chimney checked out. If you can use it, that opens up a whole new world of stoves for you to use. You could go hand fed, with or without a hopper, and have no motors to worry about (or listen to ). Not to mention that hand fed stoves are great during power outages.........they keep on burning.

 
titleist1
Member
Posts: 5226
Joined: Wed. Nov. 14, 2007 4:06 pm

Post by titleist1 » Fri. Aug. 28, 2015 8:32 am

Given the chimney fire history I would inspect the chimney for damage from those fires. If you are able, you could drop a cell phone in video mode down the chimney on a rope and see what it looks like. If you can't get access to do that then get a chimney sweep in that can do that for you.

You may be correct that the previous sweep's only interest was selling a big $$ liner, but the chimney fires would have me looking at it closely.

The 4" of brick wouldn't concern me. It may not be to code for a wood stove, but coal exhaust should be cool enough that it isn't a problem.

In addition to the manometer to measure draft a probe thermometer ($10 barbeque type) that you can thread into the flue pipe and a magnetic gauge to put on the stove is useful to have.

$800 for a working stoker that has had its gaskets replaced and has working motors / blowers sounds pretty good. I am not one to worry too much about the looks as long as it has function, but with yours going in the LR paint may be needed to keep the decorating committee happy! :)

 
ad356
Member
Posts: 189
Joined: Sat. Sep. 21, 2013 7:07 am
Location: north java, ny

Post by ad356 » Fri. Aug. 28, 2015 8:40 am

a little time with a DA sander and a can of stove paint, don't care about a little time and a few bucks im sure stove paint is fairly cheap. make it look good again. what's the lifespan of these stoves, looks like they are made like a brick outhouse and it might last 30-40 years. as far as noise, I heard the thing run and couldnt believe how quiet it was, way less noise then my harman. problem with a chimney sweep company, would they treat the situation as it is, only burning coal and NO WOOD? or would they inspect with the assumption that I was going to burn wood, personally I would never burn wood in that chimney know its history. I will take some pics of the exterior


 
Den034071
Member
Posts: 907
Joined: Sat. Jun. 25, 2011 4:30 pm
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Hitzer, 3095

Post by Den034071 » Fri. Aug. 28, 2015 8:57 am

Sir mason here 40 plus years .The thimble area 8 inches of briv brick around thimble is better .You can do it does not to be pretty just 8 inches .Chimney try an have at least 2 masons look at chimney a previous fire would really concern me .Fire company called me to a chimney fire it was still burning when I got there .Flames an sparks shot out of the chimney .Not to scare you just have a qualified person look at chimney not a sweep .jack good luck

 
User avatar
Doby
Member
Posts: 477
Joined: Tue. Dec. 02, 2014 9:57 pm
Location: Elysburg PA
Hot Air Coal Stoker Stove: Alaska Kast console and Alaska Channing III
Coal Size/Type: Rice
Other Heating: oil but not much

Post by Doby » Fri. Aug. 28, 2015 9:34 pm

ad356 wrote:a little time with a DA sander and a can of stove paint, don't care about a little time and a few bucks im sure stove paint is fairly cheap. make it look good again. what's the lifespan of these stoves, looks like they are made like a brick outhouse and it might last 30-40 years. as far as noise, I heard the thing run and couldnt believe how quiet it was, way less noise then my harman. problem with a chimney sweep company, would they treat the situation as it is, only burning coal and NO WOOD? or would they inspect with the assumption that I was going to burn wood, personally I would never burn wood in that chimney know its history. I will take some pics of the exterior
As titleist said $800 bucks for that stove sounds very good they will last many years, parts are readily available and not that expensive. Noise from these stoves is minimal I don't understand what all thats about, way quieter then a air conditioned in summer I compare mine to a refrigerator or humidifer on low, tending time is a couple minutes a day, they idle down real low with no fuss in warm spells so you get a extended burn season

 
Pacowy
Member
Posts: 3555
Joined: Tue. Sep. 04, 2007 10:14 pm
Location: Dalton, MA
Stoker Coal Boiler: H.B. Smith 350 Mills boiler/EFM 85R stoker
Coal Size/Type: Buckwheat/anthracite

Post by Pacowy » Sat. Aug. 29, 2015 12:17 pm

There have been a few comments here comparing the temp of the smoke pipe for wood vs. coal and I'm wondering if everyone is on the same page regarding the cause(s) of the difference. Obviously a chimney fire can get the flue pipe extremely hot, and you don't get that with coal. Beyond that, it would seem like the temp of the flue gases would reflect the BTU's released in combustion and the heat exchange efficiency of the appliance. Is wood exhaust hotter because it's hard to idle the fire as low as a coal fire can go? Are coal appliances somehow more efficient at heat exchange? Is anybody drawing conclusions from the temp of the flue pipe beyond a barometric damper?

Avoiding chimney fires is an important benefit. Beyond that, knowing the causes of any differences seems like it could be useful to people considering/comparing different heating methods.

Mike

 
User avatar
2001Sierra
Member
Posts: 2211
Joined: Wed. May. 20, 2009 8:09 am
Location: Wynantskill NY, 10 miles from Albany
Hot Air Coal Stoker Stove: Keystoker 90 Chimney vent
Coal Size/Type: Rice
Other Heating: Buderus Oil Boiler 3115-34

Post by 2001Sierra » Sat. Aug. 29, 2015 1:37 pm

Wood vs coal flue temps. The appliance burning it is what really determines efficiency. My friend has a HSTARM wood gasification wood boiler, you do not see smoke from his chimney and his flue temps are about 100 degrees hotter than my Keystoker measured on the stove pipe surface, I always measure mine before the baro, and stove pipe surface temps run almost 100 degrees below flue gas temperature.

 
Pacowy
Member
Posts: 3555
Joined: Tue. Sep. 04, 2007 10:14 pm
Location: Dalton, MA
Stoker Coal Boiler: H.B. Smith 350 Mills boiler/EFM 85R stoker
Coal Size/Type: Buckwheat/anthracite

Post by Pacowy » Sat. Aug. 29, 2015 2:04 pm

So is he producing more btu/hr? For hand-fired units , the #'s I've seen say you can burn 20 lb wood per sf per hour, but only 8 lb of coal. I think this means any unit will tend to run hotter on wood than on coal because (as long as you are willing to keep feeding it) the wood is in a bigger hurry to give up BTU's than is the coal. I think it also means that a coal stoker running hard will tend to close the gap with wood.

Mike

Post Reply

Return to “Stoker Coal Furnaces & Stoves Using Anthracite (Hot Air)”