Victorian Cast Iron Fireplace or Firebasket? You choose!!

[Edz]

I have a dilema. In our lounge we were going to fit a Cast Iron Victorian frieplace with some nice tiles down each side. Now, when I took out the old 1950's fireplace and stripped all of the plaster on the walls I found a brick arch about 4' high with an iron strap under it.

It would appear that the original set up was for a range and I have since discovered that it was bricked in to accomodate a conventional fire about 50 years ago.

I thought that perhaps I would remove all of the made up brickwork, build up the hearth to a height of say 2' ish and put a firebasket and nice dogs in rather than the cast iron job.

What do you lot reckon? BTW .. it's a farmworkers mid Victorian semi.

Cheers

 

[Penners]

Victorian chimnies often have a firehole rather larger than the fireplace, and the brick arch was probably intended to be structural rather than decorative.

First and foremost, I think you should do what you will most like. But if it were me, I would fit a cast iron fireplace as you originally planned.

 

[middi]

You can certainly install an open crate/log burning arrangement in the fireplace, I personally would install a double skinned S/steel liner in the chimney and fit a log or multi-fuel burner, this is easier to manage and safer to leave unattended.

A bit more costly though.

 

[middi]

THere you go, two answers, different choises.

It goes to prove as, Penners says, it,s your baby and you have got to live with it.

 

[Edz]

You are dead right there!

Here's a question: Should I have any worries about removing all this old made up brickwork. I can see what is made up and what is original but I'm a bit worried about stuff falling in that shouldn't!?

 

[Penners]

If the brickwork is simply reducing the size of the firehole underneath the brick arch without and where it butts up to the older brickwork is simply a straight vertical mortar line, then provided the arch looks in good condition, you shouldn't have any problems.

Comment given without prejudice! Only you can make the final decision!

 

[middi]

If the outline of the original fireplace is intact, you should have no worries about removing the " add ons". The extra additions are purely cosmetic.

 

[Mark]

log burning stove!

 

[geoff]

I had a big opening like that in my previous (Edwardian) house (exposed by previous owner) and I used a cast iron fireback and dog grate in the brick opening for a couple of years. I found it was very drafty, muckier and less heat efficient than a normal fireplace. I also thought it was cosmetically a bit naff - unless the house is very rustic, a cast iron fireplace does look nicer. I fitted a simple cast iron Victorian fireplace with tiled inserts and it was much better - more heat, less muck and a lot better to look at. I have a log burner stove in my current place and that's best of all.

 

[Jill]

We took a small bedroom fireplace out of our lounge, and like you started to take off the plaster to discover a 4" bricked up fireplace opening. We took the plunge and took all the bricks out. We've now got a lovely opening that will eventually take a wood burning stove. (A real tree looked effective in it at Xmas) Its still up to you though! I must admit i like the victorian tiled fireplaces and am undecided whether to have one put in the other room, but am unsure if it will go with the style of the house. (Early 1700 stone cottage)

 

[middi]

Jill, if by next Xmas you are still undecided use the tree to start a log fire with, it will look better than a victorian tiled fireplace.

 

[ajbaker]

I'm rather surprised to see this thread - Edz dilemma is identical to my own. Having just torn the front off a 60/70s fireplace I was initially considering a firebasket. Having read the internet though, I am facing the same decision.

One question that I hope someone will be able to answer, and I hope this will help Edz also... In order to create an efficient flue, I am aware most flues have a 'tongue' to constrict the flue diameter to create an area of low pressure - thus increase the draw. I'm doubting anything like this will exist when all the infill bricks are removed. Is it necessary or just an advantage? Would such a thing have existed in a late 1700s house? Is it possible to create?

 

[ajbaker]

Oh, and Edz, what were you thinking of doing with the chimney, hearth and fireplace recess? Plaster or bare brick? As has been said the brick arch would have been plastered - and in my case at least, I don't think it will clean well enough to look good exposed.

 

[Penners]

In order to create an efficient flue, I am aware most flues have a 'tongue' to constrict the flue diameter to create an area of low pressure - thus increase the draw. I'm doubting anything like this will exist when all the infill bricks are removed. Is it necessary or just an advantage? Would such a thing have existed in a late 1700s house? Is it possible to create?

Fires and flues are a black art. People will tell you that this feature is essential.... it won't work properly without that fitting... and so on.

In truth, every one is different, and each individual chimney will behave differently under different conditions. For example, if a house has been empty for a while, and/or the chimney has been unused, it can sometimes take up to a week or two of fires before it will start to draw properly.

All you can do is try it. And if it doesn't work well in the first few minutes, don't lose heart - persevere. After a few hours or days of warmth, it might be perfect.

Or it might not!

 

[Jill]

Middi - don't worry about what we should do with the Xmas tree, its already been burnt on the open fire that we already have. We haven't done anything with the opening as we're letting the hearth and all the brick work dry out - No chimney cowl, so years worth of rain have just come straight down the chimney and caused lots of damp. Thats our reason for not doing anything with it yet.

 

[Flyfisher]

In truth, every one is different, and each individual chimney will behave differently under different conditions. For example, if a house has been empty for a while, and/or the chimney has been unused, it can sometimes take up to a week or two of fires before it will start to draw properly.

The trick I use when lighting our open fires after a period of non-use is to poke a couple of loosely bundled sheets of newspaper up the chimney and light that first. This 'blows away' the plug of cold air in the chimney/flue so that when I then immediately light the fire I get a decent draw. If I don't use this trick and just light the fire as normal, then the smoke 'hits' the plug of cold air in the flue and spills out of the fireplace into the room.

But this trick is only necessary with a cold chimney. If I light a new fire the next day it will draw perfectly well because the chimney is still warm from the previous day.

But as penners rightly says, fires and flues are definitely a black art so I can only guarantee that this trick works on our chimneys :?

 

[skier-hughes]

In truth, every one is different, and each individual chimney will behave differently under different conditions. For example, if a house has been empty for a while, and/or the chimney has been unused, it can sometimes take up to a week or two of fires before it will start to draw properly.

All you can do is try it. And if it doesn't work well in the first few minutes, don't lose heart - persevere. After a few hours or days of warmth, it might be perfect.

Or it might not!

Our new wood burner gave off lots of smoke (everywhere) on it's first few times of being lit, so much so that I thought we'd have to rebuild the rebuilt chimney. We thought we'd matched it up, but as it'd been taken down some 40 or so yerars ago we only had old photos and the old owner to guide us.

Then after about 5 fires it all started working properly and hey presto has done ever since.

 

[Penners]

The trick I use when lighting our open fires after a period of non-use is to poke a couple of loosely bundled sheets of newspaper up the chimney and light that first. But this trick is only necessary with a cold chimney.

And only advisable if you're confident that your chimney is thoroughly clear of soot!

 

[Flyfisher]

. . . or crow's nests (yep , been there, done that, called the fire brigade!)

 

[Edz]

ajbaker, a good point re: plaster or not plaster. At the moment the arch and brickwork do not look very inspiring but my plan is to view it at each stage before plastering i.e:

1) Build the hearth 2 foot or so off floor level and install fire basket, stand back and have a look
2) brush down the chimney breast, PVA then have another look
3) Re-point breast in lime mortar, have a last look.

If I still ain't happy then I'll plaster over it. BTW .. I intend to plaster the walls either side of the chimney breast, no point in being "over rustic!"