On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 01:11:54 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 12/22/2013 12:07 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 21 Dec 2013 23:01:40 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 12/21/2013 1:37 PM, micky wrote:
On Sat, 21 Dec 2013 14:02:50 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 21 Dec 2013 11:28:48 -0500, micky
wrote:

On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 23:37:46 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 22:32:10 -0500, micky
wrote:

On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 22:22:00 -0500, Ed Pawlowski
wrote:

On 12/19/2013 2:17 AM, gregz wrote:
Today's furnace specify btu. Is that input or output
?

Greg


Input. Figure the output by multiplying by the
efficienct rating.

Is that true for oil furnace, too?

Yes.

Or maybe the question is, Was that true for oil furnaces
35 years ago, too?

Yes. It was stated as such, on mine. As others have
stated, it can't be anything else. There are too many
variables to state the heat output.

Well, my furnace is a Carrier model 58HV085

And in the owners manual, it says Ratings, Input (1000 Btuh)
106 Output (1000Btuh) 85

So it not only rates the output, it named the model of
furnace after the output.

I went shopping for a new oil furnace, but the brochures
they gave me didn't show if they rate them by input or output
or both now, of if the model number reflects either number.

(HV means it's an upflow furnace, and 58 is the series, a
group of furnaces including downflow, upflow, loboy, etc of
variious sizes, a total of 18 models, all of which are named
after their rated output)

Plus the blueprints for the house, which I got fromt he
architect, have 85,000 (or maybe 85,000 btu) hand-written
in big numbers at an agle on them.

It was installed 34 years and a few months ago, and when
shopping for a new furnace, I have to be careful NOT to buy
one with 85,000 input, which won't give as much output as I
have now.

Here's the spec sheet for all of them. The info starts at
page 3.
http://www.xpedio.carrier.com/idc/gr...it/58h-5si.pdf





Even Carrier can't repeal the laws of physics. The only thing they
have control over is the input (and that, only to the degree
that specifications are followed). The output (efficiency) is
left to age and those maintaining the system.

True, but nonetheless, that's how this 34 year old oil furnace
was rated, and named. I guess they changed but I don't know
when.

Hmmm. Have they changed that much? I see that currently Carrier
names its gas furnaces by the maximum effficiency they can
deliver, Comfort 80, Comfort 92, and Comfort 95, model names for
80, 92, 95% efficiency. and it's probably no coincidence that
model 59SC5, ending in 5, iis the one that they say is up to 95%
efficient. And 59SC2, ending in 2, is the one they say is up to
92%.

Not all of them are exaclly like that. Performance 90 (not 92)
goes up to 92.1% they say, but its model number is 59SP2, ending
in 2. to represent 92%. .
http://www.carrier.com/homecomfort/e...ling/furnaces/






And in oil furnaces, Performance 80 ranges they say gp from 85.7 to
86.6% eff. but they are all called Perf. *80*. The model
numbers have no numbers, only letters.

I havent' found the btu ratings, but I wouldn't be surprised if
they have a rating for output, despite its dependance on age and
maintenance. They'll say they're just rating it when it's new.


Oil heat for a home is a foreign concept for us down South because
NG or LP are the most common fuels burned for heating homes. Of
course there are heat pumps with a backup that can either be
electric resistant heat or a fuel burning furnace, then there are
wood or other solid fuel burning sources of heat.

Nat gas isn't available in much of the NE and LP is exceedingly
expensive. Oil is there, now, too. We had oil-fired hot-water heat
in our NY and VT houses. The latter we converted to Nat Gas as soon
as we could (the gas company gave us a deal we couldn't refuse).

Many very old homes have coal burning furnaces that have been
converted to NG but they're not as efficient as more modern forced
air systems. We call the old coal burners, "Octopus" heaters
because there is no blower, the furnace in the basement has large
ducts coming out looking like a tree or octopus and the heated air
flows by convection. The old homes have a coal chute from outside
to the basement and when I've serviced some of the old coal
furnaces converted to natural gas, there is often still coal in the
coal chute. ^_^

Sure, though not that not all "octopi" were coal-fired. There were
also gas and oil-fired gravity fed hot-air systems. Their
efficiency sucked so went away some time back (at least by the end of
the '50s).


All the old octopus furnaces I've ever seen were former coal burners
converted to natural gas. Here in Alabamastan, coal has always been
plentiful. The city of Birmingham is young compared to other cities
but it's been around since the mid 19th century when everything ran on
coal plus, Birmingham was "The Steel City" with a lot of steel mills.
During that era, coal was everywhere and the infrastructure for coal
distribution was well established. If I remember right, folks even had
coal fired stoves for cooking. ^_^

When I lived in NY, several of my coworkers were *installing* coal
furnaces. Oil was going "sky high" ($1/gal) and they were looking for
a cheap heat. NO THANKS! What a mess.

In VT, several had outdoor wood boilers. They were out in the boonies
(Vermont *is* the boonies, so the boonies is *really* rural) because
neighbors would have lynched them otherwise. ;-)