On Feb 2, 9:16*pm, wrote:
On Wed, 2 Feb 2011 08:21:47 -0800 (PST), wrote:

You REALLY CAN"T READ, can you???

Of course I can read. *You're the one that's having difficulty here
as evidenced by your inability to remember what you posted
two posts back. *You claimed that your 80% furnacewas running
at 85%, then you backtracked and claimed that it's just running
at 80%+

No Idiot.
I NEVER said I had an 80% efficient furnace.
YOU say I have an 80% efficient furnace.

The furnace is an 80+% efficient furnace (which for all you know could
be a 98% efficient furnace if I had not specified it is
non-condensing.)

Show us any furnace that is sold as an 80%+ furnace that reaches
98% efficiency. Or 95%, or 93%, or 90% in a data sheet spec.
Or a data sheet showing that an 80% furnace reaches 85%.
Whatever that 80% furnace is reaching, it's still pretty close to 80%
and nowhere near the efficiency of a 95% furnace that costs $200
more.

Furnaces of various types, including 80% are marketed
as 80%+ because some models within that product line are capable
of SLIGHTLY higher output when tested according to DOE
procedures. So what? You apparently think that because you
bought an 80%+ furnace, that "+" somehow makes it unique among
furnaces, a marvel of science that defies physics and gets some
significantly greater efficiency than 80%. Let's say it gets 82.6%/
Use 82.6% instead of 95% and it doesn't materially change the
comparison.



So you cannot read, or you cannot comprehend what you are reading, or
both.

I can do both. But you can't even keep straight what you posted:

"And the 80+% efficient furnace is supposedly
running about 85% as installed - "

"He didn't say that, and nor did I. I said it is an 80+ % efficient
furnace, which he stated is likely running closer to 85% than 80% "

So is it 85% or just 82.6%, or just some mumble jumble
crap spouted by some numb nuts guy trying to sell a furnace.



You also apparrently do not know what you are talking about, as
evidenced by your statement that the difference between an 80% and a
90% efficient furnace included the presence vs absence of a draft
inducer motor.

You're incapable of realizing that this point, which you keep bringing
up, just makes your case worse. With a draft inducer in the 80%
furnace, the only difference left between the 80% and the 95%
is the second heat exchanger and $200 in cost.

Two choices:

A - 80%, two stage, ECM blower

B - 95%, two stage, ECM blower, $200 more

I stand by my earlier statement that only a moron would go out and
buy choice A. That's purely from a dollar and sense standpoint.
I'd also consider that with the concern about CO2 emissions, it's
always a good thing today to go with the choice that's going to
emit less CO2, where it's possible and doesn't have a significant
downside.

And I quickly corrected my error on the draft inducer point.
Unlike you, who frequently puts out total
nonsense and then won't even correct it. Want an example? In
another thread here, a couple days ago, you questioned when the
last time anyone saw a car battery with removable vent caps,
implying they don't exist anymore. I have two of them sitting in
my cars in the garage. Another poster responded similarly. Did
you admit you were wrong? Of course not.

Or how about when you claimed modern cars don't have dozens
of microprocessors, because when those microprocessors are
programmed to one or a few functions, function, eg radio control,
or air bag control, they magically are no longer microprocessors?

I'll leave it for others to judge who the village idiot is here.