On Thursday, June 14, 2018 at 9:00:38 AM UTC-4, ItsJoanNotJoann wrote:
On Thursday, June 14, 2018 at 7:02:40 AM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 6/13/2018 11:19 PM, ItsJoanNotJoann wrote:

I opted for another
regular hot water heater last year.


It is not an option on our new house in spite of other energy saving
options. Gas with regular tank. OK by me.


I was raised in a house with gas heat, kitchen range, and water heater.
This house is also gas powered and I love that IF I should run out of
hot water the recovery is so fast!

Yep. I see tankless fitting special applications, like where you really
need unlimited hot water in large quantity, frequently. Like maybe a
big shore rental property, where 8 people could be coming back from
the beach at the same time. But for a typical home, there is little
advantage and a lot of downside. The only advantage I'd see is eliminating
standy losses. But, as I've said before, the whole gas bill here in
summer is ~$17, which includes hot water and some gas grilling outside.
That hot water includes usage and standby loses at the tank. So, how
big could the standby losses be? Clearly they aren't significant and
that's with a basic tank, with pilot. The next step up would be a higher
efficiency tank type that would reduce standby losses more. So, I've
never seen the math.

I'm feeling a little bad for the OP. No one can give him advice on
which unit to buy, problem is I don't recall seeing anyone on here
who has one. He's in a little different situation, he's already got
one so no issues with running gas lines sufficient to support it,
etc, all the usual stuff. But from what I've seen, the tankless unit
itself costs ~$700 more than a tank type. I don't see the math
adding up.