I just had my central heating boiler serviced
by the gas company here,
for the first time in 14 years.

The service engineer said the boiler (Potterton "Profile Prima")
as in good nick, which surprised me.
But he mentioned that there are now "condensing boilers"
which save a bit of heat, as they extract heat from the fumes
which are expelled outside the house in older models.

Is it worth going over to such a model?

--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail (80k only): tim /at/ birdsnest.maths.tcd.ie
tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland

On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:45:47 +0100, Timothy Murphy
wrote:

I just had my central heating boiler serviced
by the gas company here,
for the first time in 14 years.

The service engineer said the boiler (Potterton "Profile Prima")
as in good nick, which surprised me.
But he mentioned that there are now "condensing boilers"
which save a bit of heat, as they extract heat from the fumes
which are expelled outside the house in older models.

Is it worth going over to such a model?


it isnt worth upgrading your existing boiler unless you need to
becuase its in a bad way or your upgrading your kitchen and you want a
change etc etc. If your existing boiler is working fine then keep it
as you wont recoup the cost of the change in energy savings.

If you want to improve things,invest in insulation and other forms of
energy conservation (gas and electric!). You will only spend once on
insulation but you will spend all the time on heating a house which
leaks out heat like a colander.

joe



Remove antispam and add 670 after bra to email

Be a good Global citizen-CONSUMECONFORMOBEY

Circumcision- A crime and an abuse.
http://www.sexuallymutilatedchild.org/

The service engineer said the boiler (Potterton "Profile Prima")
as in good nick, which surprised me.
But he mentioned that there are now "condensing boilers"
which save a bit of heat, as they extract heat from the fumes
which are expelled outside the house in older models.

Generally speaking, it is neither economic nor environmentally friendly to
replace working models, unless they are particularly inefficient. The costs
(money and energy) of building a boiler are quite high and will take a long
time to offset against decreased fuel usage.

When the boiler does need replacing, you should replace with a condensing
model. Generally speaking, you are required to do so, but there are
exceptions, which you should not be tempted to use unless you really have
to.

Christian.

On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:45:47 +0100, Timothy Murphy
wrote:

I just had my central heating boiler serviced
by the gas company here,
for the first time in 14 years.

The service engineer said the boiler (Potterton "Profile Prima")
as in good nick, which surprised me.
But he mentioned that there are now "condensing boilers"
which save a bit of heat, as they extract heat from the fumes
which are expelled outside the house in older models.

Is it worth going over to such a model?


it isnt worth upgrading your existing boiler unless you need to
becuase its in a bad way or your upgrading your kitchen and you want a
change etc etc. If your existing boiler is working fine then keep it
as you wont recoup the cost of the change in energy savings.

If you want to improve things,invest in insulation and other forms of
energy conservation (gas and electric!). You will only spend once on
insulation but you will spend all the time on heating a house which
leaks out heat like a colander.

joe



Remove antispam and add 670 after bra to email

Be a good Global citizen-CONSUMECONFORMOBEY

Circumcision- A crime and an abuse.
http://www.sexuallymutilatedchild.org/

"Timothy Murphy" wrote in message
...
I just had my central heating boiler serviced
by the gas company here,
for the first time in 14 years.

The service engineer said the boiler (Potterton "Profile Prima")
as in good nick, which surprised me.
But he mentioned that there are now "condensing boilers"
which save a bit of heat, as they extract heat from the fumes
which are expelled outside the house in older models.

Is it worth going over to such a model?


Yes it is worth going for such a model - if you have the money I would.

In fact I did a few months ago and am well pleased with the fuel savings,
quiet operation, quicker warm times and just generally pleased all round.
Oh, and I got a few eco warrior brownie points too.

Can't see what all the fuss is about. A nice new boiler for around £1500+. I
wish I'd done it ages ago.

In article ,
RedOnRed wrote:
In fact I did a few months ago and am well pleased with the fuel
savings, quiet operation, quicker warm times and just generally pleased
all round.

There's no way a condensing boiler in principle will be quieter or have
faster warm up times than a non condenser.

--
*With her marriage she got a new name and a dress.*

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

"Dave Plowman (News)" through a haz of senile
flatulence wrote in message ...
In article ,
RedOnRed wrote:
In fact I did a few months ago and am well pleased with the fuel
savings, quiet operation, quicker warm times and just generally pleased
all round.

There's no way a condensing boiler in principle will be quieter or have
faster warm up times than a non condenser.

...more incoherrent babble based on no experience whatsoever. Culiflower
cheese today at the home is it?

"tarquinlinbin" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:45:47 +0100, Timothy Murphy
wrote:

I just had my central heating boiler serviced
by the gas company here,
for the first time in 14 years.

The service engineer said the boiler (Potterton "Profile Prima")
as in good nick, which surprised me.
But he mentioned that there are now "condensing boilers"
which save a bit of heat, as they extract heat from the fumes
which are expelled outside the house in older models.

Is it worth going over to such a model?


it isnt worth upgrading your existing boiler unless you need to
becuase its in a bad way or your upgrading your kitchen and you want a
change etc etc. If your existing boiler is working fine then keep it
as you wont recoup the cost of the change in energy savings.

Wrong. A condensing boiler can be had for under £500. That will save
around £100 per year (gas has just gone up 13%) So, 5 years "max" to
recoup the cost, lees if gas gone up again, and then massive saving over the
old boiler after the recoup period. Do some sums and stop arm waving.

http://www.uselessenergy.org.uk/boilers_prices.asp

If you want to improve things,invest in insulation and other forms of
energy conservation (gas and electric!). You will only spend once on
insulation but you will spend all the time on heating a house which
leaks out heat like a colander.

Good advice.

In article ws.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
In fact I did a few months ago and am well pleased with the fuel
savings, quiet operation, quicker warm times and just generally
pleased all round.

There's no way a condensing boiler in principle will be quieter or have
faster warm up times than a non condenser.

..more incoherrent babble based on no experience whatsoever.

Please explain just how a condensing boiler is inherently quieter than a
non condenser. Similarly why it will warm up quicker. If you can manage to
before your lunchtime nap, or if still sober.

--
*Never miss a good chance to shut up *

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

Please explain just how a condensing boiler is inherently quieter than a
non condenser. Similarly why it will warm up quicker. If you can manage to
before your lunchtime nap, or if still sober.


I didn't say that a condensing boiler is technically quieter then a
non-condensing. My last boiler was 28 years old and suffered from bad,
noisey kettling. In that respect a new boiler is quieter.

My new boiler warms up quicker presumably due to it firing up on all
cylinders in its modulating mode, which a lot of old boilers may not have.
Additionally, due to our system being modified with the new boiler
installation, our boiler warms up the house quicker.

"Dave Plowman (News)" through a haze of senile
flatulence wrote in message ...
In article ws.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
In fact I did a few months ago and am well pleased with the fuel
savings, quiet operation, quicker warm times and just generally
pleased all round.

There's no way a condensing boiler in principle will be quieter or
have
faster warm up times than a non condenser.

..more incoherrent babble based on no experience whatsoever.

Please explain

It is not worth explaining to an old codger who can't understand. How was
the cauliflower cheese at the home?

(sorry if this gets posted twice - newsfeed playing up)

Timothy Murphy wrote:

But he mentioned that there are now "condensing boilers"
which save a bit of heat, as they extract heat from the fumes
which are expelled outside the house in older models.

Is it worth going over to such a model?

Depends on the circumstances. When you need to replace it for other
reasons then yes certainly, go for the best efficiency you can get all
other things being equal. Whether it is worthwhile scrapping a working
system requires some careful analysis. There is no point taking the
simplistic view of just comparing the raw cost of the boiler to the gas
savings, you need to look at the fuller picture.

Firstly how much are you spending on gas for your current boiler? The
model you list probably has an efficiency around about the 75% mark. So
going to a modern 90% model could reduce your gas bills by up to 15%.

What would it cost to have it changed - even a straight swap would
probably require some additional work for plumbing the condensate drain
etc. You may also need to spend some on upgrading controls to modern
build regs standards. Chances are even with a basic boiler you are
looking at £1500 unless you are up to doing the work yourself.

Modern high tech boilers are less likely to be happy going 14 years
without a service, so you need to factor in extra maintenance costs as
well.

To balance the costs you can also look at other factors: the modern
boiler will modulate over a decent range which combined with better
controls (TRVs on most of the rads etc) may give better temperature
regulation and comfort in your house. It may also take up less space and
be quieter / less ugly etc.

Environmentally the picture is less clear, since no manufactured product
is "environmentally friendly". These environmental costs of making your
new boiler and disposing of your old one are obviously hard to quantify
- but they are certainly not zero.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

In article ,
RedOnRed wrote:
Please explain just how a condensing boiler is inherently quieter than
a non condenser. Similarly why it will warm up quicker. If you can
manage to before your lunchtime nap, or if still sober.


I didn't say that a condensing boiler is technically quieter then a
non-condensing. My last boiler was 28 years old and suffered from bad,
noisey kettling. In that respect a new boiler is quieter.

Oh - I'm not disputing that. However, kettling isn't inherent in a non
condensing boiler - it's a fault.

My new boiler warms up quicker presumably due to it firing up on all
cylinders in its modulating mode, which a lot of old boilers may not
have.

Modulating means *reducing* the heat output from maximum.

Additionally, due to our system being modified with the new
boiler installation, our boiler warms up the house quicker.

Well yes. But this has nothing to do with condensing or non condensing
boilers, that's all.

--
*Growing old is inevitable, growing up is optional *

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

On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:45:47 +0100, Timothy Murphy
wrote:

| I just had my central heating boiler serviced
| by the gas company here,
| for the first time in 14 years.
|
| The service engineer said the boiler (Potterton "Profile Prima")
| as in good nick, which surprised me.
| But he mentioned that there are now "condensing boilers"
| which save a bit of heat, as they extract heat from the fumes
| which are expelled outside the house in older models.
|
| Is it worth going over to such a model?

It is well worth doing the sums to see how much you would save.
On our *very* well insulated extended semi, we spent only GBP 370 in 2004
on heating plus Domestic Hot Water, of which about GBP 150.

So if efficiency of a 25 year old boiler was about 70%, a high efficiency
one 80% (sedbuk) and a condensing boiler 90% (sedbuk) we could only save
GBP 37 per year going to a High Efficiency one and GBP 75 for a condensing
one. These give payback times of 5 to 20 years depending on how much one
allows for installation costs. In pure economic terms I would expect a
payback of more than 10 years, and preferably over 20 years, the expected
life of a boiler.

In our case, the change would not be cost effective. However, because the
boiler was clapped out and as part of a remodeling of the kitchen it will
go ahead, probably a condensing one, because it would be greener.

I would strongly suggest that you do some cost and savings estimates with
your own figures, allowing a reasonable inflation factor for gas costs,
before replacing a boiler which is in "good nick".

--
Dave Fawthrop dave hyphenologist co uk
The London suicide bombers killed innocent commuters.
Animal rights terrorists and activists kill innocent patients.

In article ws.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
There's no way a condensing boiler in principle will be quieter or
have faster warm up times than a non condenser.

..more incoherrent babble based on no experience whatsoever.

Please explain

It is not worth explaining to an old codger who can't understand.

But then others might be interested in your explanation since this is a
newsgroup.

But of course the reason is simple. You don't know.

--
*Work like you don't need the money. Love like you've never been hurt.

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

"John Rumm" wrote in message
...
(sorry if this gets posted twice - newsfeed playing up)

Timothy Murphy wrote:

But he mentioned that there are now "condensing boilers"
which save a bit of heat, as they extract heat from the fumes
which are expelled outside the house in older models.

Is it worth going over to such a model?

Depends on the circumstances. When you need to replace it for other
reasons then yes certainly, go for the best efficiency you can get all
other things being equal. Whether it is worthwhile scrapping a working
system requires some careful analysis. There is no point taking the
simplistic view of just comparing the raw cost of the boiler to the gas
savings, you need to look at the fuller picture.

Firstly how much are you spending on gas for your current boiler? The
model you list probably has an efficiency around about the 75% mark. So
going to a modern 90% model could reduce your gas bills by up to 15%.

What would it cost to have it changed - even a straight swap would
probably require some additional work for plumbing the condensate drain
etc. You may also need to spend some on upgrading controls to modern
build regs standards. Chances are even with a basic boiler you are
looking at £1500 unless you are up to doing the work yourself.

Modern high tech boilers are less likely to be happy going 14 years
without a service, so you need to factor in extra maintenance costs as
well.

My God! Nothing worse than amateur misadvise. All boiler have to be
serviced once a year. A one piece heat exchanger condensing boiler clean its
own heat exchanger.

"Dave Plowman (News)" through a haze of senile
flatulence wrote in message ...
In article ,
RedOnRed wrote:

Please explain just how a condensing boiler is inherently quieter than
a non condenser. Similarly why it will warm up quicker. If you can
manage to before your lunchtime nap, or if still sober.


I didn't say that a condensing boiler is technically quieter then a
non-condensing. My last boiler was 28 years old and suffered from bad,
noisey kettling. In that respect a new boiler is quieter.

Oh - I'm not disputing that. However, kettling isn't inherent in a non
condensing boiler - it's a fault.

More likely in cast iron boilers

My new boiler warms up quicker presumably due to it firing up on all
cylinders in its modulating mode, which a lot of old boilers may not
have.

Modulating means *reducing* the heat output from maximum.

Additionally, due to our system being modified with the new
boiler installation, our boiler warms up the house quicker.

Well yes. But this has nothing to do with condensing or non condensing
boilers, that's all.

It is because it's not cast iron heats up faster.

"Dave Fawthrop" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:45:47 +0100, Timothy Murphy
wrote:

| I just had my central heating boiler serviced
| by the gas company here,
| for the first time in 14 years.
|
| The service engineer said the boiler (Potterton "Profile Prima")
| as in good nick, which surprised me.
| But he mentioned that there are now "condensing boilers"
| which save a bit of heat, as they extract heat from the fumes
| which are expelled outside the house in older models.
|
| Is it worth going over to such a model?

It is well worth doing the sums to see how much you would save.
On our *very* well insulated extended semi, we spent only GBP 370 in 2004
on heating plus Domestic Hot Water, of which about GBP 150.

So if efficiency of a 25 year old boiler was about 70%,

More like 55%.

"Dave Plowman (News)" through a haze of senile
flatulence wrote in message ...
In article ws.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
There's no way a condensing boiler in principle will be quieter or
have faster warm up times than a non condenser.

..more incoherrent babble based on no experience whatsoever.

Please explain

It is not worth explaining to an old codger who can't understand.

But then ......

....it is not worth explaining to a senile old codger who can't understand.
Do you shovel coal into your boiler?

In article s.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
I didn't say that a condensing boiler is technically quieter then a
non-condensing. My last boiler was 28 years old and suffered from
bad, noisey kettling. In that respect a new boiler is quieter.

Oh - I'm not disputing that. However, kettling isn't inherent in a non
condensing boiler - it's a fault.

More likely in cast iron boilers

'Kettling' is the water in the heat exchanger boiling. It's a fault
condition and nothing to do with the type of heat exchanger material. Most
likely when the water circulation is cut off before or at the same time as
the burners. In other words, poor design of the system with no pump
over-run. Exactly the same would happen with any other construction of
heat exchanger.

My new boiler warms up quicker presumably due to it firing up on all
cylinders in its modulating mode, which a lot of old boilers may not
have.

Modulating means *reducing* the heat output from maximum.

Additionally, due to our system being modified with the new boiler
installation, our boiler warms up the house quicker.

Well yes. But this has nothing to do with condensing or non condensing
boilers, that's all.

It is because it's not cast iron heats up faster.

So all non condensing boilers use cast iron heat exchangers? And no
condensing ones do?

Back to the catalogues, pet, and do some more reading.

--
* I like you. You remind me of when I was young and stupid

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

In article s.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
So if efficiency of a 25 year old boiler was about 70%,

More like 55%.

More numbers plucked out of the air.

If it were 55% and your modern boiler was 108% or whatever it would near
half the gas consumption. And not even the wildest of advertising claims
that.

--
*I'm really easy to get along with once people learn to worship me

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

In article s.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
Do you shovel coal into your boiler?

If I did, it would need servicing at least once a year. Is this how you
fuel yours and why you insist on yearly servicing?

And is this were you get your figures for '55%' efficiency?

--
*I got a sweater for Christmas. I really wanted a screamer or a moaner*

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

"Dave Plowman (News)" through a haze of senile
flatulence wrote in message ...
In article s.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
Do you shovel coal into your boiler?

If I did,

snip drivel

"Dave Plowman (News)" througha haze of senile
flatulence wrote in message ...
In article s.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
So if efficiency of a 25 year old boiler was about 70%,

More like 55%.

More numbers

Yes 55 is a number.

snip senile drivel

"Dave Plowman (News)" through a haze of senile
flatulence wrote in message ...
In article s.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
I didn't say that a condensing boiler is technically quieter then a
non-condensing. My last boiler was 28 years old and suffered from
bad, noisey kettling. In that respect a new boiler is quieter.

Oh - I'm not disputing that. However, kettling isn't inherent in a non
condensing boiler - it's a fault.

More likely in cast iron boilers

'Kettling' is the water in the heat exchanger boiling.

It is clear you know sweet nothing about boilers.

snip drivel

So if efficiency of a 25 year old boiler was about 70%, a high efficiency

Before you embark on a load of misleading figures. The efficiency of a 25
year old boiler is likely to be around 55% efficient. Like the one I just
got shot of.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
RedOnRed wrote:
Please explain just how a condensing boiler is inherently quieter than
a non condenser. Similarly why it will warm up quicker. If you can
manage to before your lunchtime nap, or if still sober.


I didn't say that a condensing boiler is technically quieter then a
non-condensing. My last boiler was 28 years old and suffered from bad,
noisey kettling. In that respect a new boiler is quieter.

Oh - I'm not disputing that. However, kettling isn't inherent in a non
condensing boiler - it's a fault.

I thought kettling was more to do with the age of the boiler, in so much
that they all fur up eventually and are then prone to kettling?

My new boiler warms up quicker presumably due to it firing up on all
cylinders in its modulating mode, which a lot of old boilers may not
have.

Modulating means *reducing* the heat output from maximum.

I'm sure it does mean that. But doesn't it regulate the power too? If an old
boiler fires up only in 1st gear, a modulating boiler can use several
gears...thus increasing the heat output? Just an analogy.


Additionally, due to our system being modified with the new
boiler installation, our boiler warms up the house quicker.

Well yes. But this has nothing to do with condensing or non condensing
boilers, that's all.

--
*Growing old is inevitable, growing up is optional *

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

In article ,
RedOnRed wrote:
Before you embark on a load of misleading figures. The efficiency of a
25 year old boiler is likely to be around 55% efficient. Like the one I
just got shot of.

It really depends on the type of 25 year old boiler. In 1980 there were
plenty that bettered that and by quite some margin.

--
*I'm pretty sure that sex is better than logic, but I can't prove it.

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

In article ,
RedOnRed wrote:
Oh - I'm not disputing that. However, kettling isn't inherent in a non
condensing boiler - it's a fault.

I thought kettling was more to do with the age of the boiler, in so much
that they all fur up eventually and are then prone to kettling?

Assuming it's not a combi, there's no reason why it should fur up if
properly maintained.

My new boiler warms up quicker presumably due to it firing up on all
cylinders in its modulating mode, which a lot of old boilers may not
have.

Modulating means *reducing* the heat output from maximum.

I'm sure it does mean that. But doesn't it regulate the power too? If an
old boiler fires up only in 1st gear, a modulating boiler can use
several gears...thus increasing the heat output? Just an analogy.

Older boilers fired up on maximum burner rate. They controlled the water
temperature by switching on and off. A modulating boiler can reducing the
flame size. So assuming the output and heat exchanger are the same, there
will be no difference in heat up time.


Additionally, due to our system being modified with the new
boiler installation, our boiler warms up the house quicker.

Well yes. But this has nothing to do with condensing or non condensing
boilers, that's all.

--
*Ah, I see the f**k-up fairy has visited us again

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

Older boilers fired up on maximum burner rate. They controlled the water
temperature by switching on and off. A modulating boiler can reducing the
flame size. So assuming the output and heat exchanger are the same, there
will be no difference in heat up time.

So what's the point of the modulating large and small flame?

Isn't it to control the rate of heat?

My old boiler wouldn't modulate and would heat on fixed flame which would be
lesser then a full on modulating one in my new boiler, which would surely
heat faster on full modulation?

A bigger flame means quicker heat doesn't it? Or is my sense of logic not
modulating right?

"Doctor Drivel" wrote

My God! Nothing worse than amateur misadvise. All boiler have to be
serviced once a year.

They might have to be but most aren't

I had my one serviced for the first time when it broke down after 14 years.

On Sat, 1 Oct 2005 23:22:17 +0100, "RedOnRed" wrote:

Older boilers fired up on maximum burner rate. They controlled the water
temperature by switching on and off. A modulating boiler can reducing the
flame size. So assuming the output and heat exchanger are the same, there
will be no difference in heat up time.

So what's the point of the modulating large and small flame?

Isn't it to control the rate of heat?

My old boiler wouldn't modulate and would heat on fixed flame which would be
lesser then a full on modulating one in my new boiler, which would surely
heat faster on full modulation?

A bigger flame means quicker heat doesn't it? Or is my sense of logic not
modulating right?


The only reason that a newer boiler, be it condensing or not would
heat faster than an older generation one would be that the newer one
would typically have a stainless steel or aluminium heat exchanger and
the older one perhaps cast iron.

The point about modulating is three-fold:

- The boiler can run continuously rather than on/off for more of the
time. Cycling, especially with a cast iron model is less efficient,
especially with an old conventional or non-fan-assisted model where
excess heat at the end of the cycle ends up outside.

- A modulating boiler can begin to turn down the heat close to the
desired temperature for the house and reduce temperature overshoot.

- On a condensing boiler, operating at a lower temperature results in
more efficient operation.


--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

"informer" wrote in message
...

"Doctor Drivel" wrote

My God! Nothing worse than amateur misadvise. All boiler have to be
serviced once a year.

They might have to be but most aren't

I had my one serviced for the first time when it broke down after 14
years.

You are totally irresponsible and should be prosecuted. The house is in
danger.

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

"informer" wrote in message
...

"Doctor Drivel" wrote

My God! Nothing worse than amateur misadvise. All boiler have to be
serviced once a year.

They might have to be but most aren't

I had my one serviced for the first time when it broke down after 14
years.

You are totally irresponsible and should be prosecuted. The house is in
danger.


Time to get your fluffy handcuffs out you keep next to your bed for a
citizens arrest. But don't forget to take your gimp boy outfit off prior to
apprehension of this hardened recidivist.

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 1 Oct 2005 23:22:17 +0100, "RedOnRed" wrote:

Older boilers fired up on maximum burner rate. They controlled the water
temperature by switching on and off. A modulating boiler can reducing
the
flame size. So assuming the output and heat exchanger are the same,
there
will be no difference in heat up time.

So what's the point of the modulating large and small flame?

Isn't it to control the rate of heat?

My old boiler wouldn't modulate and would heat on fixed flame which would
be
lesser then a full on modulating one in my new boiler, which would surely
heat faster on full modulation?

A bigger flame means quicker heat doesn't it? Or is my sense of logic not
modulating right?


The only reason that a newer boiler, be it condensing or not would
heat faster than an older generation one would be that the newer one
would typically have a stainless steel or aluminium heat exchanger and
the older one perhaps cast iron.

The point about modulating is three-fold:

- The boiler can run continuously rather than on/off for more of the
time. Cycling, especially with a cast iron model is less efficient,
especially with an old conventional or non-fan-assisted model where
excess heat at the end of the cycle ends up outside.

- A modulating boiler can begin to turn down the heat close to the
desired temperature for the house and reduce temperature overshoot.

- On a condensing boiler, operating at a lower temperature results in
more efficient operation.


No-one seems to have picked up on the rating of a replacement boiler. If the
old boiler was 60,000BTU/hr and ther new one is also 60,000BTU/hr then it
will modulate "down" from there and never up past it. Thus the rate of heat
up at maximum will only be the same as before. (Give or take a little bit
for a cleanbrand new heat exchanger)

No-one seems to have picked up on the rating of a replacement boiler. If
the old boiler was 60,000BTU/hr and ther new one is also 60,000BTU/hr then
it will modulate "down" from there and never up past it. Thus the rate of
heat up at maximum will only be the same as before. (Give or take a little
bit for a cleanbrand new heat exchanger)


In the mist of a shed load of confusing remarks on this debate, someone at
last makes sense.

In message , RedOnRed
writes

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

"informer" wrote in message
...

"Doctor Drivel" wrote

My God! Nothing worse than amateur misadvise. All boiler have to be
serviced once a year.

They might have to be but most aren't

I had my one serviced for the first time when it broke down after 14
years.

You are totally irresponsible and should be prosecuted. The house is in
danger.


Time to get your fluffy handcuffs out you keep next to your bed for a
citizens arrest. But don't forget to take your gimp boy outfit off prior to
apprehension of this hardened recidivist.

Look - dIMM's a waste of space and just a source of noise in uk.d-i-y

You know you're never going to get a sensible reply from him

Just don't reply to him

--
geoff

"raden" wrote in message
...
In message , RedOnRed
writes

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

"informer" wrote in message
...

"Doctor Drivel" wrote

My God! Nothing worse than amateur misadvise. All boiler have to
be
serviced once a year.

They might have to be but most aren't

I had my one serviced for the first time when it broke down after 14
years.

You are totally irresponsible and should be prosecuted. The house is
in
danger.

Time to get your fluffy handcuffs out you keep next to your bed for a
citizens arrest. But don't forget to take your gimp boy outfit off prior
to
apprehension of this hardened recidivist.

Look - dIMM's

Maxie!!! Are you about to jilt Dim Lin, the Oriental enchantress, the love
of your life? My, oh, my!

RedOnRed wrote:
Before you embark on a load of misleading figures. The efficiency of a 25
year old boiler is likely to be around 55% efficient. Like the one I just
got shot of.


1973, Ideal Standard efficiency, 76%

Regards
Capitol

Capitol wrote:

Before you embark on a load of misleading figures. The efficiency of a
25 year old boiler is likely to be around 55% efficient. Like the one
I just got shot of.


1973, Ideal Standard efficiency, 76%

If you wander through the SEDBUK database, there are very few that are
as low as 55% (39 models out of over 3,300 listed - mostly poxytons).

There are a few hundred at 65%, but the vast bulk are 70% or better.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/