Which one is better more efficient and what are the pros and cons.
Matt

Matthew Martin wrote:
Which one is better more efficient and what are the pros and cons.
Matt

Tankless take up less space and have unlimited capacity. Tankless also
don't use any fuel if you don't use them (unlike tank heaters which
keep the water hot if you don't turn them off when you go on vacation).

Tank heaters don't have better efficiency unless they are the heat pump
type.

Tankless Ng have an Energy Factor of between 82-90+ Sears best Ng tank
is in the 60s. Ng tankless have bottom efficiencies of 82% and Takagi
TH1 is 94%. Few tanks match this. Tankless have no tank to rust out and
can last 30+ years, Tankless Ng have no standby loss. Downside is your
gas supply must be measured with competing apliances on and factor gas
pressure variances in pipe sizing or you may never get 100%., or be sure
your gas is adequate before you purchase one and that you know how much
your pipe instal is. Tankless do not turn on at low flow maybe 1/2 gal
so you may have cold comming out. But the savings I get from a Bosch
117000 btu give me a 4-5 yr payback so it is worth it. If you have kids
the unlimited HW might just cost you more. Im sure a reapair could be
expensive on tankless.

Sorry tankless are a looser costing over a $1000.00 bucks with a 10
or 12 year warranty the savings on gas if they occur at all will
probably never cover the extra cost of the heater. Since you can buy a
12 year warrantied 50 gallon gas water heater today for $330.00 from
Sears


beyond which unlimited hot water can lead to much longer showers
costing even more. teenagers espically....

Plus theres another issue temperature control may lead to temp
bounces while showering. others have reported that here, and you may
have to upgrade to larger gas pipes to support the large amount of gas
needed.

You need to size the heater to the MAX flow needed, like showering, and
running a washer. you have to consider the temp increase needed. in
cold climates thats more of a issue and varys depending on season.

to sum up the initial cost of tankless is so great the gas saved by no
standby looses is less than the addedcost of the tankless.

you can best save $ by buying a really good standard tank, adding a
extra insulating blanket, and insulating the hot water lines....

beyond which if you live in a cold climate the standby heat lost in a
regular tank isnt wasted as it helps keep your home warm


sad to say tankless sounds nifty but is a lose lose purchase

There was a fairly lengthy thread on this very subject titled "My new
Bosch is a joke...!!!" that began on 2/16., started by someone called
SanDiegoGuy. See if you can find it and read all the responces. Very
interesting, mainly about the problems with flow vs. temp, as a previous
poster mentioned. I do not know anything about Usenet on a computer, but
WebTV stores 1500 postings on this group and these particular ones are
very near the end, and about to be dropped off as more new posts come
in. Larry

Google keeps all the Group posts, you can google for the Topic...

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.h...e0cc33494c815/

I've heard Bosch is a Joke, though that is just the Bosch Line of Tankless.
From my research, the Takagi is the unit you want for the DIY Guy. If you
are going to have someone else install the unit, go with the Rinnai.

There are some issues With the incoming Water Temp and Max temp rise for the
flow you need. With The Higher end units you can get a remote panel to help
smooth out the temp flux.

You need to look at how many potential things you will use that want hot
water all at the same time. 2 showers and a laundry cycle is pretty tough
without spending atleast $1600.

I'm going with two 4gpm @ 70 degree Temp Rise units. One for the 2
Bathrooms, the other for the rest of the house.

Scott-


"lp13-30" wrote in message
...
There was a fairly lengthy thread on this very subject titled "My new
Bosch is a joke...!!!" that began on 2/16., started by someone called
SanDiegoGuy. See if you can find it and read all the responces. Very
interesting, mainly about the problems with flow vs. temp, as a previous
poster mentioned. I do not know anything about Usenet on a computer, but
WebTV stores 1500 postings on this group and these particular ones are
very near the end, and about to be dropped off as more new posts come
in. Larry

Matthew Martin wrote:
Which one is better more efficient and what are the pros and cons.
Matt

Neither is better, it is apples and oranges.

Tankless is less well understood and usually involves more original cost
yet lower operating cost unless they have maintenance problems.

Tankless can deliver hot water all day long while tank types will run
out. However tankless can't provide large volumes of hot water, if you try
to use too much too fast (maybe a shower the washing machine and the dish
washer all at the same time, and you did not size the tankless to handle all
three (especially this time of year when the incoming water supply is likely
to be very cold) you will not be able to maintain the high temperature, but
the tank type would, at least until it emptied the tank.

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit

wrote:

Tankless take up less space and have unlimited capacity.

Really :-) So 100 gpm at 120 F is no problem? :-)

Tankless also don't use any fuel if you don't use them...

I''ve heard that some tankless heaters keep a small part of themselves
warm all the time.

Tank heaters don't have better efficiency unless they are the heat pump type.

That's true for electric heaters, but a well-insulated tank with a small gas
burner can be more efficient than a tankless with a larger burner
for the same capacity, measured in gallons per day.

Nick

If the original poster wanted a better supply of hot water rather than
saving energy.

you can but a regular hot water tank with larger capoacity like 75
gallons and a bigger BTU burner. regular burners are around 40,000 BTU,
high recovery like 75,000 BTU. these tanks while costing more are still
less than a tankless, while supplying a much better supply f nice hot
water.

thats what I did, in 2000, it cost a 200 more than a regular tank but
we have been very happy wih it.

On 2006-02-21, wrote:

. . . a well-insulated tank with a small gas burner can be more
efficient than a tankless with a larger burner for the same
capacity, measured in gallons per day.

Why do you say this Nick? Is the thermal effiency of a small gas
burner greater than the thermal efficiency of a large burner? If not,
I don't see anything wrong with the usual argument that a tankless
unit has greater overall efficiency because it has no standby losses.

Thanks, Wayne

Wayne Whitney wrote:

. . . a well-insulated tank with a small gas burner can be more
efficient than a tankless with a larger burner for the same
capacity, measured in gallons per day.

Why do you say this Nick? Is the thermal effiency of a small gas
burner greater than the thermal efficiency of a large burner?

Maybe not. A 100K Btu/h tankless with 90% efficiency would waste 10X more heat
(10K Btu/h) than a tank with a 10K Btu/h burner with 90% efficiency, but it
might only run 10% of the time. Given the same size heat exchangers, the tank
heat exchanger with the lower firing rate would be more efficient.

I don't see anything wrong with the usual argument that a tankless
unit has greater overall efficiency because it has no standby losses.

IIRC, some tankless units have standby losses.

Nick

Nick you old ignorant fart, look at published, verified,"Energy Factor"
ratings on tank vs tankless and explain it. Go back to your "lightbulb
sauna", in your "flooded basement for humidity" you ignorant moron.

"m Ransley" wrote in message
...
[snip]
If incoming gpm
match temp rise needed it does not matter how many faucets are open.

[snip]
It all boils down to ignorance.

Big "If"!

I had to use tankless heaters for 10 years in many different residences --
mine and friends'. They're still, IMHO, overpriced low end appliances that
higher quality residences avoid and/or replace with tank units.

As I've said before, and the answers to this OP indicate, a tankless unit
will be responsible for the 2 happiest days of your life -- (1) the day you
first install the thing and calculate all the money you're going to save,
and (2) the day you finally replace the %&*#@! thing.

In article .com,
says...
A couple more things: Tanks have hot water ready to go, whereas a
tankless has to heat up the pipe first, and so all things being equal,
you'd have to wait slightly longer for a tankless located in a central
location.

On the flip side, this points to physical limitation on a
high-intensity tankless. The moment you shut off the hot water, the
intense heat in a tankless has to go somewhere. The options are

1.) Into the now stationary pipe water, where, if the leftover heat is
intense enough, it can heat the water to dangerously hot levels.

2.) Into the air.

3.) Both.

Obviously for safety reasons & material reasons, there's going to be a
heat intensity or heat transfer rate limitation for the
instant-of-water-shutoff condition.

At least on my Takagi, which can run the shower, dishwasher, and laundry
at the same time comfortably, the moment the water stops flowing, a
blower in the unit cools the heat exchanger and clears exhaust from the
flue. Maximum heat output is rated at 185,000 BTU.

As with any modern water heater, the system also has a
temperature/pressure relief valve, so if the blower fails to run and
there's a dangerous heat buildup, the system vents rather than
exploding.

One other convenient thing, noticed during a recent power failure. The
unit needs 120v 0.8A, only while running, which means that during a
power failure it can easily be powered with the inverter I keep in my
car for my laptop. Might not have heat or lights after the storm, but I
can have a hot shower!

--
is Joshua Putnam
http://www.phred.org/~josh/
Braze your own bicycle frames. See
http://www.phred.org/~josh/build/build.html

Matthew Martin wrote:
Which one is better more efficient and what are the pros and cons.
Matt
I'll try to be more specific. I am currently in the process of buying a
house. Right now it has a 40 gal electric water heater. It happens to
be in the kitchen. Further down the line I wanna upgrade possibly to a
larger one and move it my plan is to either move it to a closet in the
hallway or to the garage. Energy cost wise I was trying to figure out
would be the better choice.

Electricity for most of the U.S. is still 50% or so more expensive than
N gas. My 25$ a month savings is junking a great electric tank and going
Ng tankless, whick now costs 4-6$ a month.

People who post of no payback with Ng tankless have no idea of the
facts.

Either way junk the electric unless you pay .06 kwh., but true
efficiency is the "Energy Factor" rating, not just burner efficiency %.
Shop with that figure, Energy Factor, and Ng tankless are the highest by
18-25 +%

I'll try to be more specific. I am currently in the process of buying
a
house. Right now it has a 40 gal electric water heater. It happens to

be in the kitchen. Further down the line I wanna upgrade possibly to a

larger one and move it my plan is to either move it to a closet in the
hallway or to the garage. Energy cost wise I was trying to figure out
would be the better choice.

If you have gas available its a MUCH better choice. lower operating
cost, way faster recovery.

electric resistance is the most expensive way to heat water