The efficiency statement was actually on a sticker inside the new Atwood
heater I examined and dissected for comparison purposes.

I'm not sure that less run time equals better heat, it seems to me that
the hot-cold extremes would be larger.

The Propex is quickly becoming mainstream. We now have four retailers
and soon  to be a few more selling the product in North America.

In regards to the flare fittings, the Propex is CE certified everywhere
in the world that it is sold. Propex has been using compression fittings
from the very beginning without failure, and sees no worthwhile reason
to change. Recently, a custom camper builder in the US contacted RVIA in
regards to the heaters and the were found to meet their standards. That
said, I am stocking flare fittings for those that want them. In my view,
stretching tubing into a flare makes the end more brittle as well as
thinner and could lead to failure more easily than a compression fitting.

Karl
www.propexusa.com

Dennis Haynes wrote:
> Where did that 75% efficiency rating come from? Although it is probably
> close. Looking at the btu input/output specs on the Propex site you get ~93%
> which is really good for any furnace. At these high efficiencies you get
> some water vapor condensation in the exhaust. Larger furnaces that work this
> way are often known as condensing furnaces.
>
> Consider that with the US style furnaces you get a lot more heat which means
> run time will be a lot less.
>
> For the Vanagon I like the Propex due to the small size and quiet operation.
>
>
> The compression fitting should be replaced with a flare. It would be nice if
> someone could get these UL or FM listed and make them main stream here in
> the US.