Hi,

I am thinking buying a house. But it has a back boiler.
So can anyone tell the the con of back boilder. Like how much more does
it cost to run, and how much it cost to change from back boilder to
combi boiler.

Any rough figure is ok.

Thanks

zy

wrote:
Hi,

I am thinking buying a house. But it has a back boiler.
So can anyone tell the the con of back boilder. Like how much more does
it cost to run, and how much it cost to change from back boilder to
combi boiler.

Any rough figure is ok.

Thanks

zy

I have had quotes from £1800 - £3000 to change my back boiler into a combi.

Paul

In article . com,
wrote:
I am thinking buying a house. But it has a back boiler.
So can anyone tell the the con of back boilder. Like how much more does
it cost to run, and how much it cost to change from back boilder to
combi boiler.

Back boilers are about the most inefficient around. So changing to a
condensing type will give more savings than most - probably about 30% off
the actual bill, assuming like for like temperatures in the rest of the
house. Trouble is replacing one needs much more in the way of pipework
alterations, so may well cost more than the average.

--
*Is it true that cannibals don't eat clowns because they taste funny?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article . com,
wrote:
I am thinking buying a house. But it has a back boiler.
So can anyone tell the the con of back boilder. Like how much more does
it cost to run, and how much it cost to change from back boilder to
combi boiler.

Back boilers are about the most inefficient around. So changing to a
condensing type will give more savings than most - probably about 30% off
the actual bill, assuming like for like temperatures in the rest of the
house. Trouble is replacing one needs much more in the way of pipework
alterations, so may well cost more than the average.

In my last house (3 bed mid terraced) the gas for conventional backboiler
was about £200 a year. Had it replaced (non condensing) equivalent + nice
fire front, for £2k and consumption dropped to about £180/year. Problem was
a condensing setup was over £3k due to pipework and replastering etc
required and also not intending to stay for ever in the house so would not
recoup any savings.

In article ,
Ian_m wrote:
Back boilers are about the most inefficient around. So changing to a
condensing type will give more savings than most - probably about 30%
off the actual bill, assuming like for like temperatures in the rest
of the house. Trouble is replacing one needs much more in the way of
pipework alterations, so may well cost more than the average.

In my last house (3 bed mid terraced) the gas for conventional
backboiler was about £200 a year. Had it replaced (non condensing)
equivalent + nice fire front, for £2k and consumption dropped to about
£180/year.

Could it be you use the gas fire to in the main to heat the living area?

Problem was a condensing setup was over £3k due to pipework
and replastering etc required and also not intending to stay for ever
in the house so would not recoup any savings.

Was the new boiler a back boiler too, then? If so you did well to save 10%
on your bills.

--
*Why does the sun lighten our hair, but darken our skin?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Ian_m wrote:
Back boilers are about the most inefficient around. So changing to a
condensing type will give more savings than most - probably about 30%
off the actual bill, assuming like for like temperatures in the rest
of the house. Trouble is replacing one needs much more in the way of
pipework alterations, so may well cost more than the average.

In my last house (3 bed mid terraced) the gas for conventional
backboiler was about £200 a year. Had it replaced (non condensing)
equivalent + nice fire front, for £2k and consumption dropped to about
£180/year.

Could it be you use the gas fire to in the main to heat the living area?

Problem was a condensing setup was over £3k due to pipework
and replastering etc required and also not intending to stay for ever
in the house so would not recoup any savings.

Was the new boiler a back boiler too, then? If so you did well to save 10%
on your bills.
The old boiler was installed in 1971 and certainly had "flow issues" with
the heat exchanger, ie full of crud.