The c/h boiler in our house is at least35 yrs old, the pipes and
radiators must be a similar age.
The boiler is serviced each year, it works fine. Basic , simple
controls, just water temp and timer for ch and hw. I am a great
believer in 'if it aint broke then don't fix it !' I know that it is
not efficient but it keeps us warm and causes no problems. I asked the
service engineer about replacing and he told me that a new boiler would
have problens with the mucky water in our old but sound pipes and lots
of double panel rads. Big water flow through lots of big pipes then
going into a new boiler that would not like any contaminated water at
all. New boiler I can cope with but not a complete c/h system in an old
property that is our home ! His opinion of modern boilers was not high
, he is ex British Gas. Poor quality metals used, regular parts failure
after only 3/4 yrs etc.

Any opinions on this would be helpful.

Thanks

Brian

On 4 Sep 2006 11:02:02 -0700, wrote:

The c/h boiler in our house is at least35 yrs old, the pipes and
radiators must be a similar age.
The boiler is serviced each year, it works fine. Basic , simple
controls, just water temp and timer for ch and hw. I am a great
believer in 'if it aint broke then don't fix it !' I know that it is
not efficient but it keeps us warm and causes no problems. I asked the
service engineer about replacing and he told me that a new boiler would
have problens with the mucky water in our old but sound pipes and lots
of double panel rads. Big water flow through lots of big pipes then
going into a new boiler that would not like any contaminated water at
all. New boiler I can cope with but not a complete c/h system in an old
property that is our home ! His opinion of modern boilers was not high
, he is ex British Gas. Poor quality metals used, regular parts failure
after only 3/4 yrs etc.

Any opinions on this would be helpful.

The question would seem to be "Why do you want to replace it?".

Thirty-five years ago boilers were built to last, whereas modern (at
least "consumer" types (such as combi)) boilers are designed as
"throw-away after a year or two". Probably radiators and piping etc of
the same vintage were expected to last more than a fortnight or so!

It would seem that the only reasoning for constant replacement of
heating systems is to attempt to conform to pressure from
governmental-type bodies who like to control every little thing you
want to do.

btw I have no objection to combi boilers where they are appropriate -
I use one myself!

--
Frank Erskine

Frank Erskine wrote:
On 4 Sep 2006 11:02:02 -0700, wrote:

The c/h boiler in our house is at least35 yrs old, the pipes and
radiators must be a similar age.

//snip//

The question would seem to be "Why do you want to replace it?".

Thirty-five years ago boilers were built to last, whereas modern (at
least "consumer" types (such as combi)) boilers are designed as
"throw-away after a year or two". Probably radiators and piping etc of
the same vintage were expected to last more than a fortnight or so!

It would seem that the only reasoning for constant replacement of
heating systems is to attempt to conform to pressure from
governmental-type bodies who like to control every little thing you
want to do.

would endorse that.

It is certainly true that semi-clogged up old rads won't be a joy to a
new boiler, but don't let anyone persuade you that clogged up rads will
have a major effect on your fuel costs.

A new boiler might - just might- give a fuel efficiency in the upper
80s% whilst an elderly one might be nearer 80%. However the cost of
new boiler might take you many years to recover from lower fuel bills.

Impression I've formed from lots of half heard conversations is that
new boilers have a life of only 15 years.

wrote in message
oups.com...
The c/h boiler in our house is at least35 yrs old, the pipes and
radiators must be a similar age.
The boiler is serviced each year, it works fine. Basic , simple
controls, just water temp and timer for ch and hw. I am a great
believer in 'if it aint broke then don't fix it !' I know that it is
not efficient but it keeps us warm and causes no problems. I asked the
service engineer about replacing and he told me that a new boiler would
have problens with the mucky water in our old but sound pipes and lots
of double panel rads. Big water flow through lots of big pipes then
going into a new boiler that would not like any contaminated water at
all. New boiler I can cope with but not a complete c/h system in an old
property that is our home ! His opinion of modern boilers was not high
, he is ex British Gas. Poor quality metals used, regular parts failure
after only 3/4 yrs etc.

Any opinions on this would be helpful.

Thanks

Brian

If you reduced your bills by 20% per year, how long would it take to pay
back replacing the boiler? If it's more than 5 years then I'd not bother.
You might well have to replace the boiler within this time or at least have
it repaired. The radiators will be fine. Replace a leaky one when it
leaks. Do you have thermostatic valves on your radiators? If not then if
it was me I'd fit some - but again you might to check the sort of saving vs
reduction of gas and possibly increased comfort.

wrote:

The c/h boiler in our house is at least35 yrs old, the pipes and
radiators must be a similar age.
The boiler is serviced each year, it works fine. Basic , simple
controls, just water temp and timer for ch and hw. I am a great
believer in 'if it aint broke then don't fix it !' I know that it is
not efficient but it keeps us warm and causes no problems. I asked the
service engineer about replacing and he told me that a new boiler would
have problens with the mucky water in our old but sound pipes and lots
of double panel rads. Big water flow through lots of big pipes then
going into a new boiler that would not like any contaminated water at
all. New boiler I can cope with but not a complete c/h system in an old
property that is our home ! His opinion of modern boilers was not high
, he is ex British Gas. Poor quality metals used, regular parts failure
after only 3/4 yrs etc.

Any opinions on this would be helpful.

Thanks

Brian

As long as its not a 55% efficient one I'd keep it. Consider yourself
lucky.

If you did fit a new one, could the old one be left in situ so it can
be used again after the new ones dead and buriable? Just curious.


NT

Thanks for those comments, all very helpful. Just one point that
perhaps can be answered, how do you come to a figure that indicates the
efficiency of a boiler ?

Thanks

Brian
wrote:
wrote:

The c/h boiler in our house is at least35 yrs old, the pipes and
radiators must be a similar age.
The boiler is serviced each year, it works fine. Basic , simple
controls, just water temp and timer for ch and hw. I am a great
believer in 'if it aint broke then don't fix it !' I know that it is
not efficient but it keeps us warm and causes no problems. I asked the
service engineer about replacing and he told me that a new boiler would
have problens with the mucky water in our old but sound pipes and lots
of double panel rads. Big water flow through lots of big pipes then
going into a new boiler that would not like any contaminated water at
all. New boiler I can cope with but not a complete c/h system in an old
property that is our home ! His opinion of modern boilers was not high
, he is ex British Gas. Poor quality metals used, regular parts failure
after only 3/4 yrs etc.

Any opinions on this would be helpful.

Thanks

Brian

As long as its not a 55% efficient one I'd keep it. Consider yourself
lucky.

If you did fit a new one, could the old one be left in situ so it can
be used again after the new ones dead and buriable? Just curious.


NT

The message .com
from contains these words:

Thanks for those comments, all very helpful. Just one point that
perhaps can be answered, how do you come to a figure that indicates the
efficiency of a boiler ?

See http://www.sedbuk.com/

The table on the first page gives a general indication of the savings to
be had and to my mind suggests that on cost grounds it is probably never
financially advantageous for most people to replace a working gas fired
boiler as the undoubted savings in gas costs will not exceed the capital
cost of the replacement (and its probably higher maintenance costs)
before the new boiler with its built in obsolescence reaches the end of
its economic life.

The best condensing boilers (as can be seen on the next sedbuk page) are
marginally better than the table suggests and as your boiler is so old
it could well be 55% efficient (or even less) so yours could be one of
the few cases where new will produce a saving. However the chances are
that as condensing boilers need larger radiators to allow them to
operate at their most efficient you would need to factor in the cost of
the whole of a new heating system or accept that your savings will not
be as great as sedbuk predicts.

No doubt if Dribble is around (I have him killfiled) he will have
claimed you are financially inept (or worse) for not having spent
£2-3000 on a newer boiler long ago, but economics is one of the many
subjects that Dribble just can't understand.

--
Roger Chapman

On 4 Sep 2006 16:57:48 -0700 someone who may be
wrote this:-

If you did fit a new one, could the old one be left in situ so it can
be used again after the new ones dead and buriable? Just curious.

I almost did the same when I replaced a mechanical programmer with
an electronic one at least a decade ago. The electronic one failed
after about five years, at which point I took the mechanical one out
of my "might be useful sometime" box and put it back on the wall.
The mechanical one is still working.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

wrote:
Thanks for those comments, all very helpful. Just one point that
perhaps can be answered, how do you come to a figure that indicates the
efficiency of a boiler ?


A meter tells your this via a probe put in the exhaust gas.

The meters need relatively expensive regular calibration which is why
you may find a direct answer is avoided.

Standard equipment for servicing - ask what the % is next time you have
the boiler serviced.

Surely the mucky water can be replaced with clean water by simply
flushing?
I do my 23 year old solid fuel system every two years. Turn all
radiators OFF except one, turn pump on high speed and continually drain
the system. Do this sequentually around the house starting upstairs. It
takes a week or more for the water to become de-aireated again but
generally that only effects the upstairs radiators.

Chris.

Roger wrote:

the few cases where new will produce a saving. However the chances are
that as condensing boilers need larger radiators to allow them to
operate at their most efficient you would need to factor in the cost of
the whole of a new heating system or accept that your savings will not
be as great as sedbuk predicts.

I am not convinced that is going to be true most of the time. You need
to consider that modern boilers are modulating and will adjust their
flow temperature so as to achive good efficency regardless of radiator
sizing. The only time this will not be true is when the outside
temperature is so cold that you need to run a higher flow temperature in
order to get the house warm enough.

However, that does not change the sums much, so you still need to do
them to work out if there is any advantage to a premature replacement.

--
Cheers,

John.

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