Do you think replacing a 1991 AC would be a wise move? It's a Rheem can't
read the label to well but I'll bet it wasn't top of the line.

On Jun 11, 9:27 pm, "Sacramento Dave" wrote:
Do you think replacing a 1991 AC would be a wise move? It's a Rheem can't
read the label to well but I'll bet it wasn't top of the line.

If it works fine and you have no problems, why would you want to
change it? Wait till it dies, then get a new high efficiency model. I
have a Carrier unit made in 1986. It still works well, cools the house
with no problems.

Sacramento Dave wrote:
Do you think replacing a 1991 AC would be a wise move? It's a Rheem can't
read the label to well but I'll bet it wasn't top of the line.

A 16 year old AC probably has a relatively low EER by today's
standards. If you find a replacement unit rated at 14 or so, I'd go
for it, considering how much energy costs are rising. This is a good
time to shop for a better AC before the summer frenzy commences and
stocks are still good in the stores. HTH

Joe

On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 18:40:31 -0700, Mikepier
graced this newsgroup with:

On Jun 11, 9:27 pm, "Sacramento Dave" wrote:
Do you think replacing a 1991 AC would be a wise move? It's a Rheem can't
read the label to well but I'll bet it wasn't top of the line.

If it works fine and you have no problems, why would you want to
change it? Wait till it dies, then get a new high efficiency model. I
have a Carrier unit made in 1986. It still works well, cools the house
with no problems.


It's very expensive to change it out and it'll take time to realize
any savings from the more efficient a/c. We *had* to replace our
because it died on us and the cost to replace the (mid-70's) parts
nearly cost as much as just getting a more efficient system outright.

Having said that, if the seer rating is very low then it's something
to consider.

"Joe" wrote in message
ups.com...

Sacramento Dave wrote:
Do you think replacing a 1991 AC would be a wise move? It's a Rheem can't
read the label to well but I'll bet it wasn't top of the line.

A 16 year old AC probably has a relatively low EER by today's
standards. If you find a replacement unit rated at 14 or so, I'd go
for it, considering how much energy costs are rising. This is a good
time to shop for a better AC before the summer frenzy commences and
stocks are still good in the stores. HTH

Joe

A big factor is my wife works a major manufacturer witch gets us an
incredible discount. The unite seems to be pretty wimpy, about 2 years the
compressor died we had a home warranty cost us $150 to replace the biggest
annoyance is it's so loud when it kicks in. I did remove the cover cleaned
all the coils some were pretty bad look like dog hair, but it still seem
very inefficient

IF you have the means ( having a major discount helps too) then I would
replace while you have the means. I worked part time at a Sears and replaced
all my vehicles tires and fridge, then quit! With the emp discount + emp
night + sale + coupons = 40% discount!

Why wait till it dies and its 100+ out and your paying full retail!
That's not FUN


Searcher

Joe writes:

A 16 year old AC probably has a relatively low EER by today's
standards.

Bunk. Efficiency became an issue in the 1970s after the energy crisis
and monetary inflation. Efficiency improvments were mostly in place
during the 1980s. Improvements in true efficiency since the 1990s have
been minimal.

Thermodynamics is a dismal science, and the law of diminishing returns
applies to efficiency improvements. The low fruit has been picked for
decades.

Now, the AC salesman will tell you that anything you *have* is woefully
out of date and inefficient and you will just *make money* by spending
$$$$'s on his new system. But he won't actually write down any promise
of savings, he will only puff.

Ask the salesman of the "more efficient" system for an actual efficiency
promise in terms of dollars, amperage, temp differential, air flow, or
other quantitative performance measure. Not some cooked-up government
SEER number that is literallyl *impossible* to verify in the field, but
actual measurable numbers. Tell him you're ready to buy but you won't
pay until the system is installed and the measured performance meets the
promise. See how his puffery is deflated.

"Sacramento Dave" wrote in message
t...

"Joe" wrote in message
ups.com...

Sacramento Dave wrote:
Do you think replacing a 1991 AC would be a wise move? It's a Rheem
can't
read the label to well but I'll bet it wasn't top of the line.

A 16 year old AC probably has a relatively low EER by today's
standards. If you find a replacement unit rated at 14 or so, I'd go
for it, considering how much energy costs are rising. This is a good
time to shop for a better AC before the summer frenzy commences and
stocks are still good in the stores. HTH

Joe

A big factor is my wife works a major manufacturer witch gets us an
incredible discount. The unite seems to be pretty wimpy, about 2 years
the compressor died we had a home warranty cost us $150 to replace the
biggest annoyance is it's so loud when it kicks in. I did remove the cover
cleaned all the coils some were pretty bad look like dog hair, but it
still seem very inefficient


Take into consideration that this may be the last year of any Fed tax
rebates and SMUD is offering up to 500.

If it's still running, a professional cleaning would help save
energy. The tech should take the cover off the outside unit and
spray it with cleaning chemicals. Wait several minutes, and rinse
with a water hose. Might take two or three washings.

--

Christopher A. Young
You can't shout down a troll.
You have to starve them.
..

"Sacramento Dave" wrote in message
et...
: Do you think replacing a 1991 AC would be a wise move? It's a
Rheem can't
: read the label to well but I'll bet it wasn't top of the line.
:
:

Richard J Kinch wrote:

Joe writes:


A 16 year old AC probably has a relatively low EER by today's
standards.


Bunk. Efficiency became an issue in the 1970s after the energy crisis
and monetary inflation. Efficiency improvments were mostly in place
during the 1980s. Improvements in true efficiency since the 1990s have
been minimal.

Thermodynamics is a dismal science, and the law of diminishing returns
applies to efficiency improvements. The low fruit has been picked for
decades.

Now, the AC salesman will tell you that anything you *have* is woefully
out of date and inefficient and you will just *make money* by spending
$$$$'s on his new system. But he won't actually write down any promise
of savings, he will only puff.

Ask the salesman of the "more efficient" system for an actual efficiency
promise in terms of dollars, amperage, temp differential, air flow, or
other quantitative performance measure. Not some cooked-up government
SEER number that is literallyl *impossible* to verify in the field, but
actual measurable numbers. Tell him you're ready to buy but you won't
pay until the system is installed and the measured performance meets the
promise. See how his puffery is deflated.


Richard Kinch, you hit the nail on the head. What is his location and
runtime per season?
Southern Florida 2200-hours, upper states 400 to 600-hours of runtime
per AC season.
In upper states, do what will save money in Particular on Heating costs.

There are numerous things that can be done to reduce AC & heating energy
use costs other than going to a higher SEER.
I want AC Contractors & consumers' to think about all the cost effective
possibilities and list them.
SEER is only one factor among dozens of factors when considering
reducing AC operating costs!
http://www.udarrell.com/proper_cfm_b...syste ms.html

Then Click the Anchor named below, then the click the PDF Link allow
plenty of time for it to load -
"Basic AC Overview - Specifications VS. Reality
#Below_is_an_outstanding_PDF" #Below_is_an_outstanding_PDF
- udarrell

--
WISDOM PRINCIPLE DIRECTED EMPOWERMENT COMMUNICATIONS -
THE REAL POLITICAL ISSUES and WISDOM BASED PEOPLE EMPOWERMENT

http://www.udarrell.com/

http://www.udarrell.com/my_pages2.htm

http://www.udarrell.com/recognizing_real_enemies.html ***

http://jesuschristsavior.net/Beatitudes.html

http://www.antiwar.com/ ***

Reality Is Not An Easy Thing To Be Confronted With, or to Accept!

I've seen EERs or SEERs in the 20s, like the very expensive Mitsubishi
mini-splits, w/ inverter technology--essentially variable speed compressors.
Bull?

How would someone actually measure and EER in the field? An amprobe and a
thermometer? And then mass-flow, no?
Not so easy.
--
------
Mr. P.V.'d (formerly Droll Troll), Yonkers, NY

Stop Corruption in Congress & Send the Ultimate Message:
Absolutely Vote, but NOT for a Democrat or a Republican.
Ending Corruption in Congress is the *Single Best Way*
to Materially Improve Your Family's Life.
The Solution is so simple--and inexpensive!

entropic3.14decay at optonline2.718 dot net; remove pi and e to reply--ie,
all d'numbuhs

"Richard J Kinch" wrote in message
. ..
Joe writes:

A 16 year old AC probably has a relatively low EER by today's
standards.

Bunk. Efficiency became an issue in the 1970s after the energy crisis
and monetary inflation. Efficiency improvments were mostly in place
during the 1980s. Improvements in true efficiency since the 1990s have
been minimal.

Thermodynamics is a dismal science, and the law of diminishing returns
applies to efficiency improvements. The low fruit has been picked for
decades.

Now, the AC salesman will tell you that anything you *have* is woefully
out of date and inefficient and you will just *make money* by spending
$$$$'s on his new system. But he won't actually write down any promise
of savings, he will only puff.

Ask the salesman of the "more efficient" system for an actual efficiency
promise in terms of dollars, amperage, temp differential, air flow, or
other quantitative performance measure. Not some cooked-up government
SEER number that is literallyl *impossible* to verify in the field, but
actual measurable numbers. Tell him you're ready to buy but you won't
pay until the system is installed and the measured performance meets the
promise. See how his puffery is deflated.

On Jun 12, 8:51 am, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:
If it's still running, a professional cleaning would help save
energy. The tech should take the cover off the outside unit and
spray it with cleaning chemicals. Wait several minutes, and rinse
with a water hose. Might take two or three washings.

--

Christopher A. Young
You can't shout down a troll.
You have to starve them.
.

"Sacramento Dave" wrote in message

et...
: Do you think replacing a 1991 AC would be a wise move? It's a
Rheem can't
: read the label to well but I'll bet it wasn't top of the line.
:
:

I have a 1984 unit here in NJ that's still running and I have no plans
to replace it. Does that answer your question? A lot depends on
your situation. At one extreme, you live in Phoenix, have an elderly
parent that can't stand the heat, and work out of a home office. At
another, you live alone in Sacramento and can easily make it through
most of a season without air, should you not get a good price if it
blows.

"Sacramento Dave" wrote in message
et...
Do you think replacing a 1991 AC would be a wise move? It's a Rheem can't
read the label to well but I'll bet it wasn't top of the line.


Some other factors Will get the unite at cost and I mean cost, Will pay one
of the installers to install it ( cash) I have cleaned the coils that seems
to have helped a little. I will wait until after summer. also one of the AC
guys is going to come out and evaluate are AC seeing how my wife works there
I guess he'll be pretty honest. I'm really don't want to spend the money but
the system now seems weak ( it has a new compressor) So if the house will
cool down better and will save on my energy cost ( PG&E pay on a average
just about $600 a month) then it's worth it.

How would someone actually measure and EER in the field?

Measure temperature and humidity of air in vs out, and air flow. Calculate
actual heat pumped per hour from consequent latent and sensible heats.
Meter power at panel to get actual energy used per hour. Divide to get
heat per energy, which is efficiency.

Or estimate refrigerant mass flow from compressor pressure differential,
displacement, and volumetric efficiency, to get heat pumped per hour, given
no gas out or liquid in.

You really think you're going to get a unit "at cost"? Does that
mean stolen, and then sold for cash?

You're going to get a backdoor deal from a hack who works for
cash while probably screwing his boss out of truck time and
labor? Why am I not all warm and fuzzy?

Is it just me, or do many "pretty honest" people go behind the
boss's back to do cash jobs? I've never met one.

Damn, boy, I think you're so cheap you're setting yourself up for
a major fall.

--

Christopher A. Young
You can't shout down a troll.
You have to starve them.
..

"Sacramento Dave" wrote in message
. ..
:
: "Sacramento Dave" wrote in message
: et...
: Do you think replacing a 1991 AC would be a wise move? It's a
Rheem can't
: read the label to well but I'll bet it wasn't top of the
line.
:
:
: Some other factors Will get the unite at cost and I mean cost,
Will pay one
: of the installers to install it ( cash) I have cleaned the
coils that seems
: to have helped a little. I will wait until after summer. also
one of the AC
: guys is going to come out and evaluate are AC seeing how my
wife works there
: I guess he'll be pretty honest. I'm really don't want to spend
the money but
: the system now seems weak ( it has a new compressor) So if the
house will
: cool down better and will save on my energy cost ( PG&E pay on
a average
: just about $600 a month) then it's worth it.
:
: