PDA

View Full Version : Difference Between Air Tight Front and Inferno Arches



backyardsugarer
12-08-2009, 06:24 PM
Getting a new rig but want to do it right. Are air tight fronts worth the $1500 or the "inferno arches" that you only have to reload every 45 minutes. What is the difference between the two?

Seems like an add on I may want to get if the increase efficiency as much as they say.

Chris

brookledge
12-08-2009, 07:12 PM
Inferno is a term used by Leader. Intenso fire and force 5 are others.
There are some arches that you can buy new fronts for them which will give you some air over and insulated doors.
I belive that only force 5 advertises 45 min. between feeding the fire. And I think the smallest size available is 3X12. If you are looking to buy a new arch I would definately spend the extra to get a air tight front.
Keith

sapman
12-08-2009, 09:22 PM
I put an air-tight front on my 2.5X8 several years ago. I was very happy with it. But obviously the Inferno, or Intens-O- Fire, would already come with that, so that's the route I'd go. Not sure how the money part compares, but it was kind of a pain changing the front on mine.

Tim

Steve O'Farrell
12-09-2009, 08:17 AM
Inferno is a term used by Leader. Intenso fire and force 5 are others.
There are some arches that you can buy new fronts for them which will give you some air over and insulated doors.
I belive that only force 5 advertises 45 min. between feeding the fire. And I think the smallest size available is 3X12. If you are looking to buy a new arch I would definately spend the extra to get a air tight front.
Keith

Hi, just a bit of information about the Force 5.
I know this equipment well, since i was part of the design team.
This arch is very different compare to all other high performance arches on the market. It consumes less wood, easy to control, and safe due to the lack of sparks coming out of the stack. We designed it to allow evaporation of high brix sap if desired by it's operator. One customer as stretched the wood reload up to 1.5 hour. this is partly due to the optimal combustion control.

Force 5 fronts are not available for sale. FORCE 5 is a unique package, nothing to compare with!

Best regards.

backyardsugarer
12-09-2009, 09:08 AM
ok so there are differences between a simple air tight insulated front door and the "inferno" or "hurricane" arches. I can get an inferno arch for 3700 and a regular arch for 1900. Does the leaders style inferno arch cut down on wood consumption? How about the air tight fronts? Do air tight fronts increae evaporation rate or not?

I believe you on the hurricane but I am only in the market for a 2 by 6 or a 2 by 8. if they made the arch for that I would buy it.

Chris

sapman
12-09-2009, 11:54 PM
The air tight front only increase evaporation because they allow you to crank the blower to full. I started with a blower on a standard front, ran it hard and cracked the front all up, then got the air tight next season, making it almost an inferno once I plugged most leaks in the arch. You fire it more often than a standard arch, but boil increases, so you save wood. I also had/have a Steamaway, saving a LOT more wood. But I burn oil now.
Tim

backyardsugarer
12-10-2009, 08:08 AM
So i can make an air tight arch with good gasket material around the doors if I seal up the space between the doors. Well, pretty close to air tight if I use my head.

Chris

Dave Y
12-10-2009, 08:23 AM
Yes ,you can buy an air tight front and install it on you evaporator. It will use more wood but boil faster. Be sure to put you blower at the back of the fire box, and besure to size it properly. If you over size it you could be putting more heat up the stack than is desirable.

802maple
12-10-2009, 01:10 PM
There hardly any difference between a airtight front and a Inferno as the Inferno doesn't have the back air and very little front air.

The Intens-O-fire and the regular hurricane are very similar. They both have much more air added to the top of the fire then the Inferno making them more efficient. The Force 5 is step beyond both of these and for now seems more efficient.