In article ,
Set Square wrote:
I know enough to know that your 3-5 year payback period is totally false.

A realistic fuel saving is nearer 20%

This is near enough exactly what my brother got when changing from 'an
ancient cast iron lump' to a condenser. And his gas bills are over 1000
quid a year.

--
*Too many clicks spoil the browse *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Doctor Drivel" wrote:

"Adrian C" wrote in message
...

I'm am he. OK diMM, so what are the elements of work involved in a
typical gas boiler service? What should I as a punch blind seeker of gas
service in the yellow pages be asking of shady characters coming to see
my Boiler? What should I see taking place for my £90/hour wallet tease?

What are you on about, idiot?

That's a bit harsh on the original poster, he's on about a boiler
service, time for you to show us "amateurs" how an expert like you
would do it.

Any gas fired boiler, simple annual service, talk us through it.

Pick one you are familiar with, maybe the Alpha CD50, this isn't a
trick question, no CORGI man will call, Transco have restored your gas
supply, the Health and Safety Inspectorate won't be breathing down
your neck again and there are a dozen junior hacksaws in a box ready
for abuse ;-) Go on its not difficult.




--

"Matt" wrote in message
...
"Doctor Drivel" wrote:

"Adrian C" wrote in message
...

I'm am he. OK diMM, so what are the elements of work involved in a
typical gas boiler service? What should I as a punch blind seeker of
gas
service in the yellow pages be asking of shady characters coming to see
my Boiler? What should I see taking place for my £90/hour wallet tease?

What are you on about, idiot?

That's a bit

snip babbling lunacy

In article s.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
Well, the boiler is unlikely to use that much gas when sooted up - if
you continue to try and use it - and it does fire up - it will
probably explode. ;-)

It is clear you know this from experience. Took down a few houses in
the street.

No - my house is massive and detached and stands in 7 acres of landscaped
gardens.

But the boiler is situated in a nuclear bomb proof shelter. Just in case
some wally like you was sent to service it. The padlock on the door is
hacksaw proof.

--
*The most common name in the world is Mohammed *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article s.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
Well, the boiler is unlikely to use that much gas when sooted up - if
you continue to try and use it - and it does fire up - it will
probably explode. ;-)

It is clear you know this from experience. Took down a few houses in
the street.

No - my house is massive and detached

It was. It was blown up and now you are in a sink estate; most of the time
at the clinic.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Set Square wrote:
I know enough to know that your 3-5 year payback period is totally
false.

A realistic fuel saving is nearer 20%

This is near enough exactly what my brother got when changing from 'an
ancient cast iron lump' to a condenser. And his gas bills are over 1000
quid a year.

You are making things up.

"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message
...

Greater than 84% efficient and 24 years old? Make and model please? More
like 55% if that.


Thorn Apollo IIRC.
It is a nice low water content job.
I think most modern boilers use similar designs these days.

"dennis@home" wrote in message
. uk...

"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message
...

Greater than 84% efficient and 24 years old? Make and model please?
More
like 55% if that.

Thorn Apollo IIRC.
It is a nice low water content job.

Copper tube boiler of about 70-75% efficent when new. When old lower.

I think most modern boilers use similar designs these days.

Nope. Copper tube heat exchangers are rare. Now it is stainless steel or
silicon aluminium.

In article ws.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
Copper tube boiler of about 70-75% efficent when new. When old lower.

Care to explain?

--
*The hardness of the butter is proportional to the softness of the bread *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ws.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:

Copper tube boiler of about 70-75% efficent when new. When old lower.

Care to explain?

Just read again. You can move your lips when reading, I don't mind.

In article s.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
Copper tube boiler of about 70-75% efficent when new. When old
lower.

Care to explain?

Just read again. You can move your lips when reading, I don't mind.

So yet again you make a statement with no substance to back it up. Or
obviously the knowledge to even guess.

What a ******.

--
*Virtual reality is its own reward *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article s.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
Copper tube boiler of about 70-75% efficent when new. When old
lower.

Care to explain?

Just read again. You can move your lips when reading, I don't mind.

So yet again you ...

...can't understand

snip babble

He just doesn't stop does he. The must be about to lock him up for night.

"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message
eenews.net...

"dennis@home" wrote in message
. uk...

"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message
...

Greater than 84% efficient and 24 years old? Make and model please?
More
like 55% if that.

Thorn Apollo IIRC.
It is a nice low water content job.

Copper tube boiler of about 70-75% efficent when new.

82% according to the manual.

When old lower.

What is the mecanism for the reduction in efficency?

I think most modern boilers use similar designs these days.

Nope. Copper tube heat exchangers are rare. Now it is stainless steel or
silicon aluminium.


So they use poorer conductors, how's that significantly different?

"dennis@home" wrote:


"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message
reenews.net...

"dennis@home" wrote in message
. uk...

"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message
...

Greater than 84% efficient and 24 years old? Make and model please?
More
like 55% if that.

Thorn Apollo IIRC.
It is a nice low water content job.

Copper tube boiler of about 70-75% efficent when new.

82% according to the manual.

You forgot that Dribble doesn't need the figures from manual, and even
if you quote undeniable facts to him he will disagree.

But, compared to letting his type roam the streets with a box of
hacksaws, creating mayhem wherever he goes, it's infinitely more
preferable to keep feeding him in here.


--

"dennis@home" wrote in message
. uk...

"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message
eenews.net...

"dennis@home" wrote in message
. uk...

"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message
...

Greater than 84% efficient and 24 years old? Make and model please?
More
like 55% if that.

Thorn Apollo IIRC.
It is a nice low water content job.

Copper tube boiler of about 70-75% efficent when new.

82% according to the manual.

That will be peak. The sebuk seasonal efficiencies will put this way low.

When old lower.

What is the mecanism for the reduction in efficency?

Burner fading. Fins corroding

I think most modern boilers use similar designs these days.

Nope. Copper tube heat exchangers are rare. Now it is stainless steel
or
silicon aluminium.

So they use poorer conductors,
how's that significantly different?

It is more hard wearing and corrosion resistant in the condensing
conditions.

"Matt" wrote in message
...
"dennis@home" wrote:


"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message
reenews.net...

"dennis@home" wrote in message
. uk...

"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message
...

Greater than 84% efficient and 24 years old? Make and model please?
More
like 55% if that.

Thorn Apollo IIRC.
It is a nice low water content job.

Copper tube boiler of about 70-75% efficent when new.

82% according to the manual.

You forgot

snip drivel from a lunatic

In article ,
Dennis@home wrote:
82% according to the manual.

Figures quoted by manufacturers in past times tended to be the
efficiency you could get tested under ideal conditions. The SEDBUK
approach tries to replicate real life conditions, in particular
assuming 30% load for 50% of the time (IIRC). Big CF CI floor standing
boilers like the one we had in our church could get 75% on the bench
but the in-use efficiency is reckoned to be more like 55%

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk
Free SEDBUK boiler database browser http://www.sda.co.uk/qsedbuk.htm
[Latest version QSEDBUK 1.10 released 4 April 2005]

In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
Copper tube boiler of about 70-75% efficent when new.

82% according to the manual.

When old lower.

What is the mecanism for the reduction in efficency?

Drivel just plucks figures from the air if he can't find a suitable advert
to back his claims.

And can never give any 'scientific' proof off his own back because he
doesn't understand the meaning of the word.

Best to ignore him. Others here will give good advice. And back it up with
facts if challenged.

--
*I used to have an open mind but my brains kept falling out *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ws.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
What is the mecanism for the reduction in efficency?

Burner fading. Fins corroding

Then service it.

But then you don't know how to do this, do you?

--
*I wished the buck stopped here, as I could use a few.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
dennis@home wrote:

Copper tube boiler of about 70-75% efficent when new.

82% according to the manual.

When old lower.

What is the mecanism for the reduction in efficency?

snip total drivel

His boiler exploded.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ws.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
What is the mecanism for the reduction in efficency?

Burner fading. Fins corroding

Then service it.

Every like you do, and then have an explosion.

"Tony Bryer" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Dennis@home wrote:
82% according to the manual.

Figures quoted by manufacturers in past times tended to be the
efficiency you could get tested under ideal conditions. The SEDBUK
approach tries to replicate real life conditions, in particular
assuming 30% load for 50% of the time (IIRC).

That should be OK then as it doesn't modulate in anyway.
I run it using zone valves so its always running at maximum efficiency.

In article ,
Tony Bryer wrote:
Where the floor standing CI boilers really lose it is
that when they cut out there is a huge amount of heat stored in the heat
exchanger which disappears out of the flue

A pump over-run can help reduce this effect. But yes, it makes them a
great deal less efficient during part load conditions.

--
*If you try to fail, and succeed, which have you done?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article , Dennis@home
wrote:
Figures quoted by manufacturers in past times tended to be the
efficiency you could get tested under ideal conditions. The SEDBUK
approach tries to replicate real life conditions, in particular
assuming 30% load for 50% of the time (IIRC).

That should be OK then as it doesn't modulate in anyway.
I run it using zone valves so its always running at maximum efficiency.

If it doesn't modulate then for much of the year it will be running in
stop start mode. Where the floor standing CI boilers really lose it is
that when they cut out there is a huge amount of heat stored in the heat
exchanger which disappears out of the flue. Thus you may get a quoted
efficiency of 75% but in use it's more like 55%. This phenomenon lessens
if the boiler has a low water content heat exchanger or fan flue.

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk
Free SEDBUK boiler database browser http://www.sda.co.uk/qsedbuk.htm
[Latest version QSEDBUK 1.10 released 4 April 2005]