"Set Square" wrote in message
...
In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
Adrian C wrote:


If it actually comes to *needing* replacement, then we will have to.
If it seems the 40% saving on gas will neatly pay for the seem to be
required breakdown cover and future ongoing repair/replacement costs
of the new fangled wotsit, then frankly i'd much rather stick with
the cast iron lump.

Even Drivel didn't say you'd get a 40% saving on gas - he said *up to*
40% -
which is a bit different - and grossly optimistic at that unless you've
got
a literally 'stone age' boiler.

Nope. 33% is the least you should expect.

As long as the 'iron lump' can be restored
to reliable operation, stick with it

You are totally mad. You don't know much about this game do you?

- by the time a new boiler has paid for
itself in fuel savings, *that* will need replacing.

3 to 5 years?