I was getting really tired of our old Honeywell analog thermostat and
how inaccurate it had become over the years. It was very difficult to
consistently set the temperature.

So I replaced it with a Hunter "Just Right" (model 42999B) digital
electronic thermostat that cost $27. I didn't bother getting the
programmable version of the thermostat because of our unpredictable
schedule.

I took pictures of the install process and wrote up a quick guide.

Here's the guide - http://www.paulstravelpictures.com/H...-Install-Guide

I don't know if we have saved much on our power bill, but I can
definitely feel the difference in how consistent the air temperature
inside the home remains.

Cheers,
Paul Michaels
Ft. Lauderdale, FL

In article , Paul Michaels wrote:
I was getting really tired of our old Honeywell analog thermostat and
how inaccurate it had become over the years. It was very difficult to
consistently set the temperature.

So I replaced it with a Hunter "Just Right" (model 42999B) digital
electronic thermostat that cost $27. I didn't bother getting the
programmable version of the thermostat because of our unpredictable
schedule.

I took pictures of the install process and wrote up a quick guide.

Here's the guide -
http://www.paulstravelpictures.com/H...rmostat-Instal
l-Guide

I don't know if we have saved much on our power bill, but I can
definitely feel the difference in how consistent the air temperature
inside the home remains.

Cheers,
Paul Michaels
Ft. Lauderdale, FL

Thanks for the info.

I don't think I saw any Hunter thermostats at The Home Depot.
I have been trying to tell my relativse to get rid of that stupid mechanical
thermostat. A lot of digital thermostats give the option of temperature
sensing, like +- .5 drgree or 1 degree, up to 2 degrees.

I used to use a programmable thermostat. It is NOT needed in a home thats
quick to heat or cool. I can set it as I like when i'm there.
I actually bought a cheap Honneywell programmable unit for $25.
I have not tried the programming. I also consider it unique
as the sensor is attached right to the case, an I can get a cold
shot from the cooling if I rest my hand there.

My first digital thermostat was a Hunter, and that was a monster
to program. That was a $100 unit way back then. It was also a two way power
with battery backup.

I think the mechanical actually actually saves heating costs because
it does not cycle as much buy the fine tune digital will feel a lot
more comfortable and you may not have to set the temperature
as high or low.

I would still have the installed thermostat installed (White Rodgers)
but the display and the controller became unrealiable.
My Ritetemp touch screen thermostat also became unreliable.
In a sense, the mechanical thermostat IS more reliable.

Therre are various levels of temperature control. The best use
adaptive PID, but the cheap systems don't go anywhere near that.

greg

In article , (GregS) wrote:
In article ,
Paul Michaels wrote:
I was getting really tired of our old Honeywell analog thermostat and
how inaccurate it had become over the years. It was very difficult to
consistently set the temperature.

So I replaced it with a Hunter "Just Right" (model 42999B) digital
electronic thermostat that cost $27. I didn't bother getting the
programmable version of the thermostat because of our unpredictable
schedule.

I took pictures of the install process and wrote up a quick guide.

Here's the guide -

http://www.paulstravelpictures.com/H...rmostat-Instal
l-Guide

I don't know if we have saved much on our power bill, but I can
definitely feel the difference in how consistent the air temperature
inside the home remains.

Cheers,
Paul Michaels
Ft. Lauderdale, FL

Thanks for the info.

I don't think I saw any Hunter thermostats at The Home Depot.
I have been trying to tell my relativse to get rid of that stupid mechanical
thermostat. A lot of digital thermostats give the option of temperature
sensing, like +- .5 drgree or 1 degree, up to 2 degrees.

I used to use a programmable thermostat. It is NOT needed in a home thats
quick to heat or cool. I can set it as I like when i'm there.
I actually bought a cheap Honneywell programmable unit for $25.
I have not tried the programming. I also consider it unique
as the sensor is attached right to the case, an I can get a cold
shot from the cooling if I rest my hand there.

My first digital thermostat was a Hunter, and that was a monster
to program. That was a $100 unit way back then. It was also a two way power
with battery backup.

I think the mechanical actually actually saves heating costs because
it does not cycle as much buy the fine tune digital will feel a lot
more comfortable and you may not have to set the temperature
as high or low.

I would still have the installed thermostat installed (White Rodgers)
but the display and the controller became unrealiable.
My Ritetemp touch screen thermostat also became unreliable.
In a sense, the mechanical thermostat IS more reliable.

Therre are various levels of temperature control. The best use
adaptive PID, but the cheap systems don't go anywhere near that.

My White Rodgers only started failing after I was hammer drilling in the same wall !
Do not subject your digital thermostat to severer vibration OR drop it !

I also think I might be able to fix it, as I think its the crystal for
the circuitry is unstable.

greg

On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 19:43:46 GMT, (GregS)
wrote:

I think the mechanical actually actually saves heating costs because
it does not cycle as much buy the fine tune digital will feel a lot
more comfortable and you may not have to set the temperature
as high or low.

Many (most?) digital thermostats attempt to control cycle rates also,
either by a temperature spread setting (mimicking the hysteresis of a
mechanical thermostat), or a predictive cycle count (i.e. let the temp
spread a bit more to get N cycles per hour. That's a setting on
ours)

And some thermostats "lie" to you -- the new Honeywell thermostats
installed with our AC upgrade seem to round the "current" temperature
more generously when it's close to the setpoint (e.g. if setting=73,
anything from say 72.1 to 74.5 is shown as 73, but if I change the
setting to 71, all of a sudden it's really 74 in the room :-) I think
it cuts down on complaints, and truthfully the whole AC system works
so much better than our old one well that I don't care (and I'm
usually very sensitive to small temp diffs).

Josh

In article , Josh wrote:
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 19:43:46 GMT, (GregS)
wrote:

I think the mechanical actually actually saves heating costs because
it does not cycle as much buy the fine tune digital will feel a lot
more comfortable and you may not have to set the temperature
as high or low.

Many (most?) digital thermostats attempt to control cycle rates also,
either by a temperature spread setting (mimicking the hysteresis of a
mechanical thermostat), or a predictive cycle count (i.e. let the temp
spread a bit more to get N cycles per hour. That's a setting on
ours)

And some thermostats "lie" to you -- the new Honeywell thermostats
installed with our AC upgrade seem to round the "current" temperature
more generously when it's close to the setpoint (e.g. if setting=73,
anything from say 72.1 to 74.5 is shown as 73, but if I change the
setting to 71, all of a sudden it's really 74 in the room :-) I think
it cuts down on complaints, and truthfully the whole AC system works
so much better than our old one well that I don't care (and I'm
usually very sensitive to small temp diffs).

Thanks for the info.

The only thing missed was a time ON reading. I used to like
it when I had oil heat, and I could compute comsumption at
3/4 gallon per hour.

I was wondering about my air conditioner. Its a 2.5 ton unit.
Seems a bit slower than after installation 3 years ago.
I measured the current draw of only about 6 amps
at 240 vac. Not counting the furnace fan. Its got to
be low, but it works. The air conditioner man said it
should work OK but I'm only putting 1500 watts into it.
Figure at least 2 KW with the furnace fan. So if it runs longer its
not drawing much electricity.
I was surprised at the tag to be used with 20 amp breaker.

My old window unit draw was 23 amps at 240 vac,
and it was just a 2 ton.

greg

On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 14:01:35 GMT, (GregS)
wrote:

In article , Josh wrote:
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 19:43:46 GMT, (GregS)
wrote:

I think the mechanical actually actually saves heating costs because
it does not cycle as much buy the fine tune digital will feel a lot
more comfortable and you may not have to set the temperature
as high or low.

Many (most?) digital thermostats attempt to control cycle rates also,
either by a temperature spread setting (mimicking the hysteresis of a
mechanical thermostat), or a predictive cycle count (i.e. let the temp
spread a bit more to get N cycles per hour. That's a setting on
ours)

And some thermostats "lie" to you -- the new Honeywell thermostats
installed with our AC upgrade seem to round the "current" temperature
more generously when it's close to the setpoint (e.g. if setting=73,
anything from say 72.1 to 74.5 is shown as 73, but if I change the
setting to 71, all of a sudden it's really 74 in the room :-) I think
it cuts down on complaints, and truthfully the whole AC system works
so much better than our old one well that I don't care (and I'm
usually very sensitive to small temp diffs).

Thanks for the info.

The only thing missed was a time ON reading. I used to like
it when I had oil heat, and I could compute comsumption at
3/4 gallon per hour.

I was wondering about my air conditioner. Its a 2.5 ton unit.
Seems a bit slower than after installation 3 years ago.
I measured the current draw of only about 6 amps
at 240 vac. Not counting the furnace fan. Its got to
be low, but it works. The air conditioner man said it
should work OK but I'm only putting 1500 watts into it.
Figure at least 2 KW with the furnace fan. So if it runs longer its
not drawing much electricity.

I think something's wrong with your measurements. That would be a
SEER of at least 20 (assumes PF=1). Kinda high, I would think.

I was surprised at the tag to be used with 20 amp breaker.

Assume you're off by a factor of two (the real SEER of 10ish) and a
20A circuit is quite reasonable. That's what I would expect.

My old window unit draw was 23 amps at 240 vac,
and it was just a 2 ton.

That's a SEER of 5.4. Assume a PF of, say .9, and that works out to a
SEER of 6, which isn't unbelievably bad for an old AC unit.