Anybody got a 'Stoker' stove from Mulberry Stoves

P

pbyrne

Registered User
Messages
103
Hi,

We are looking into getting a stove and I found this product/company:

[broken link removed]

Looks like it would do the job nicely but am wondering if anybody has one already and whether they have any experiences to share.

How would this compare to an Oisin stove from Stanley, I see the efficiency of the Stoker is 76% efficient, the Stanley is ~78% so not much of a difference there. The maximum output on both is the same.

The big benefit in our situation is that the Stoker goes into an existing chimney and does not require a special flue lining on the chimney (looks like there could be significant cost in getting the flue lining / installation for the oisin).

Any information greatly appreciated.
 
When Mulberry can prove the Stoker or any of their stoves are manufactured in Ireland (as they claim on the brochure for the Stoker product) then they may gain some credibility. As to efficiency claimed by Mulberry and Stanley it would be nice if they disclosed the test methods used.
 
Hi Peter C,

Would you have an opinion on their claim that the stoker fits into a normal chimney (without requiring any special flue). I have been tying myself up in knot reading about stoves and most of the conventional wisdom indicates that a flue is a requirement (especially in older houses?).

Thanks,

pbyrne.
 
Not sure if any help as i can only offer our experience of mulberry yeats. Originally had an open fire place with wooden surround and hearth that just ate solid fuel and did little to heat the largish sitting room.

After Christmas last year just removed the overhanging metal archy bit of fireplace and built up the front with blocks and left a circular hole to fit pipe that came with the stove. However turns out no need for the pipe as it connected directly into blockwork. The stove sits on the original hearth. The excellent thing about this stove (unknown to me at the time) is it had a high grate and so never have any falling ashes/turf. The heat generated is fantastic, we burn the "spruss"" that is left on the bottom of the shed floor from the main turf the full time. Our house is four years old.
 
pbyrne said:
Hi Peter C,

Would you have an opinion on their claim that the stoker fits into a normal chimney (without requiring any special flue). I have been tying myself up in knot reading about stoves and most of the conventional wisdom indicates that a flue is a requirement (especially in older houses?).

Thanks,

pbyrne.
Click to expand...

I have no doubt that it will fit into an existing fireplace without needing a flue as it is not the only such product on the market , however the competitor is open about the product being made in China and claims at best 60% efficiency.
Re-packing or opening the door to shove in a manual does not qualify as manufactured in Ireland IMO, I prefer to work with honesty usually a good start.
 
Hi all, I have a Mullberry Stoker that I installed about 3 months ago. I was fortunate enough to discover that the chimney was already lined with a flu which I was able to connect the Stoker into (I did need to buy an additional adapter). The Stove has been excellent in terms of heating and fuel use (it seems like the sitting room is twice as hot and we are using half the amount of Logs). It's vents can be completely closed down and the fire will last overnight, though the glass will tend to get blackened in reduced oxygen. (Vinegar and lots of elbow grease needed to clean though there might be an easier way I have yet to discover) One thing worth noting is that the maximum logs length is around 22cm. All in all I have to say it been well worth the effort and I figure it should pay for itself in terms of fuel savings over the course of 2 or 3 winters.
F
 
Glad I found this thread as we have been considering getting a multi-fuel stove for some time.
We have a very large, quite old, very cold (the kids call it the fridge!) house that is not feasible to heat throughout. We have gas heating which we may in time convert to solid fuel with a proper multi-fuel or pellet boiler, but this would be part of a much bigger project to include replacement/insulation of Victorian bays etc. We thought a cheap interim solution would be to install a small multi-fuel stove, without boiler.
The main obstacle now is the advice that I have seen online that one cannot simply put in a stove -- we would also have to install a flue (at €50 per metre for materials alone) and that not to do so could seriously damage the chimney, with no insurance comeback.
So I'm wondering if anyone has the definitive answer: in an older house, does one absolutely need a flue with all such stoves, or are there classes of stoves -- perhaps lower output -- that can do without? And what is so different about Mulberry stoves that lets them make their no-flue claim (which, incidentally, I don't see on their website)?
 
I understood that Mulberry Stoves are Guaranteed Irish which means they have to do 80% of the work on the stoves in Ireland. Surely that is proof that they are mostly made in Ireland?? Should we be knocking Guaranteed Irish and Irish owned companies in times like these? I don't think Stanley are Guaranteed Irish. On the issue of the test methods - to have CE approval, they all have to be independently tested by a third party to particular standards. I'm sure you could get documentation on this if you wanted. I got a Mulberry Stoker myself earlier in the winter and it's working really well. It's a big improvement on an open fire.
 
Reply to Fergal - I was told to clean the glass with grade 00 (that's zero-zero) steel wool. You can get a handful of it in any hardware store for a few euro and it doesn't scratch the glass. It's been working a treat for me!
 
Mulberry stoker or insert stoves that use a fireback don't need a flue connection as they can be easily removed for proper cleaning. Other similar models include esse 300 and 301 and Tr4.

Fergal for the glass get a damp cloth and dip in the wood ash from your stove should make the galss easier to clean use plenty of the ash.
 
fmc said:
Mulberry stoker or insert stoves that use a fireback don't need a flue connection as they can be easily removed for proper cleaning. Other similar models include esse 300 and 301 and Tr4.

Fergal for the glass get a damp cloth and dip in the wood ash from your stove should make the galss easier to clean use plenty of the ash.
Click to expand...

Hi FMC,

I have read some of the previous threads around this and was tying myself up in knots around the question of whether I needed a special flue lining or whether my standard chimney would suffice.

Am I correct in saying that an 'inset stove' is designed to be slotted into an existing fireplace without any requirement for a flue lining. So the normal chimney is sufficient. Some of the posts here and on boards.ie indicate that there is additional heat generated up the chimney by the stove that requires the lining.

If you were buying which one would you go for (or what would you look for when buying)?

Finally - fair to say that these inset stoves are DIY job (even for a novice)?

Many thanks for any advice.
 
Hi pbyrne there are two basic types oif insets 1. like the stoker, esse 300, Esee 301 and Tr4 taht go in againest the fireback and do not require a liner. The larger output inset stoves like esse 350, riva 40, boru fiachra need the fireback removed, the space left filled and a connection to the flue to ensure proper cleaning. I have had plenty of discussions here and on board re the lining of flues for stoves like these and imho its on an individual basis depending on flue location age etc.
The ones that leave the fireback in could be diy in most circumstanses. In some cases like where a gas fire is being replaced by the stove then I'd get an expert as the flue and or fireplace may not suit solid fuel.
 
I have four stoves one of which is a Mulberry. The performance is poor my advice is to be very caerful before parting with your money.
 
hi, can anyone suggest a good stove. I don't want anything that you are going to carry fuel to constantly. The room is quite large and it will be required to heat bout 12 rads at any time. People are suggesting stanley erin to me can anyone who has one comment or suggest something elso
 
I am thinking of inserting a stoker stove. can anyone recommend it to me. i am told you can buy them in enamel by mulberry. is this true? is the box very small on them
 
Both Stanley and Mulberry are made in China, changing the packing does not mean the stove is made in Ireland.
Enamel looks great when the stove is new, they tend to get chipped by the owner when being refuelled and then look terrible because the damage is on the front where you have to see it.
Standard cast has the advantage that if you scratch or mark it a coat of stove paint makes it look new again.
Possibly the most honest insert is the TR4, easy to fit and take out again, price is realistic, doesn't claim to be anything it's not.
 
Just wondering if you still had your mulberry stoker? And hows it performing for you?
 
FergalMohan said:
(Vinegar and lots of elbow grease needed to clean though there might be an easier way I have yet to discover)
F
Click to expand...
I use a spray of oven cleaner on a sheet or two of kitchen paper, a quick wipe and its spick and span! try it...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top