The house I recently acquired has a Thorn M54 boiler which I want to move
to a more out-of-the-way location in the same room. It's a floor-standing
boiler and I'll have to butcher my kitchen units in order to reloacate the
boiler. I realise this would be the perfect opportunity to buy a modern
wall mounted boiler, but frankly, I don't have the spare cash. So my
question, really, is: how many more years of life will I be likely to get
out of this Thorn M54 boiler? I gather spares are getting more difficult to
obtain as it's about 30 years old...

Thank you,

Al

AL_n wrote:
The house I recently acquired has a Thorn M54 boiler which I want to move
to a more out-of-the-way location in the same room. It's a floor-standing
boiler and I'll have to butcher my kitchen units in order to reloacate the
boiler. I realise this would be the perfect opportunity to buy a modern
wall mounted boiler, but frankly, I don't have the spare cash. So my
question, really, is: how many more years of life will I be likely to get
out of this Thorn M54 boiler? I gather spares are getting more difficult to
obtain as it's about 30 years old...

Thank you,

Al
When I bought my house in 1982, it had a M54 that had been converted
from town gas to natural gas as the town gas parts were stacked up
beside the gas meter. I don't know how that old makes it but it is still
going strong 28 years later. Our gas bill is still not excessive so I
can't see me replacing for some time to come.

I've taken the casing off and built it into a kitchen based unit with a
suitable thermal lining and ventilation.

I've had no problem with spares but it has hardly needed any.
Universal thermocouples fit it and I made an electronic igniter out of a
motorbike coil for it when the naff piezo pilot lighter failed 25 odd
years back. The pilot jet clogs up now and then but soaking it it in
acid soon clears it and I have a spare one that I keep clean ready.
To be honest it is so simple that it would easy to repair with
improvised parts.
I service it each year but if I were to get BG or similar in they would
possibly find some reason to condemn it.

Bob

"AL_n" wrote in message
...

The house I recently acquired has a Thorn M54 boiler which I want to move
to a more out-of-the-way location in the same room. It's a floor-standing
boiler and I'll have to butcher my kitchen units in order to reloacate the
boiler. I realise this would be the perfect opportunity to buy a modern
wall mounted boiler, but frankly, I don't have the spare cash. So my
question, really, is: how many more years of life will I be likely to get
out of this Thorn M54 boiler? I gather spares are getting more difficult
to
obtain as it's about 30 years old...

Thank you,

Al

How long is a piece of string?
I would go with Bob - it's a good, well made boiler.
Move it and see how it goes.
Little to lose except time and some inconvenience in the worst of cases.
Nick.

"AL_n" wrote in message
...

The house I recently acquired has a Thorn M54 boiler which I want to move
to a more out-of-the-way location in the same room. It's a floor-standing
boiler and I'll have to butcher my kitchen units in order to reloacate the
boiler. I realise this would be the perfect opportunity to buy a modern
wall mounted boiler, but frankly, I don't have the spare cash. So my
question, really, is: how many more years of life will I be likely to get
out of this Thorn M54 boiler? I gather spares are getting more difficult
to
obtain as it's about 30 years old...


It has got a seasonal efficiency of 55%. A modern replacement could be more
that 91% efficient.



--
Michael Chare

Bob Minchin wrote in
:

AL_n wrote:
The house I recently acquired has a Thorn M54 boiler which I want to
move to a more out-of-the-way location in the same room. It's a
floor-standing boiler and I'll have to butcher my kitchen units in
order to reloacate the boiler. I realise this would be the perfect
opportunity to buy a modern wall mounted boiler, but frankly, I don't
have the spare cash. So my question, really, is: how many more years
of life will I be likely to get out of this Thorn M54 boiler? I
gather spares are getting more difficult to obtain as it's about 30
years old...

Thank you,

Al
When I bought my house in 1982, it had a M54 that had been converted
from town gas to natural gas as the town gas parts were stacked up
beside the gas meter. I don't know how that old makes it but it is
still going strong 28 years later. Our gas bill is still not excessive
so I can't see me replacing for some time to come.

I've taken the casing off and built it into a kitchen based unit with
a suitable thermal lining and ventilation.

I've had no problem with spares but it has hardly needed any.
Universal thermocouples fit it and I made an electronic igniter out of
a motorbike coil for it when the naff piezo pilot lighter failed 25
odd years back. The pilot jet clogs up now and then but soaking it it
in acid soon clears it and I have a spare one that I keep clean ready.
To be honest it is so simple that it would easy to repair with
improvised parts.
I service it each year but if I were to get BG or similar in they
would possibly find some reason to condemn it.

Bob

Thanks for the input on that. Looks like I should keep the boiler,
although the efficiency rating that John Rumm kindly mentioned concerns
me a bit.

Al

"Michael Chare" wrote in
o.uk:

It has got a seasonal efficiency of 55%. A modern replacement could
be more that 91% efficient.

Hi Michael,

That sounds poor. Does that 55% mean it will cost almost twice as much to
run as a modern boiler?

Al

"AL_n" wrote in news:Xns9E0344DA46BD6zzzzzz@
130.133.4.11:

Thanks for the input on that. Looks like I should keep the boiler,
although the efficiency rating that John Rumm kindly mentioned concerns
me a bit.


Sorry, my mistake; it was Michael C who mentioned the seasonal efficiency
rating.

Al

"Michael Chare" wrote in message
o.uk...
"AL_n" wrote in message
...

The house I recently acquired has a Thorn M54 boiler which I want to move
to a more out-of-the-way location in the same room. It's a floor-standing
boiler and I'll have to butcher my kitchen units in order to reloacate
the
boiler. I realise this would be the perfect opportunity to buy a modern
wall mounted boiler, but frankly, I don't have the spare cash. So my
question, really, is: how many more years of life will I be likely to get
out of this Thorn M54 boiler? I gather spares are getting more difficult
to
obtain as it's about 30 years old...


It has got a seasonal efficiency of 55%. A modern replacement could be
more that 91% efficient.

where do yuo get the seasonal efficiency figures?

I would like to check the figures my old and much loved Vaillant Combi
vcw-sine 18 T3 w

regards



--
Michael Chare

AL_n wrote:

"Michael Chare" wrote in
o.uk:

It has got a seasonal efficiency of 55%. A modern replacement could
be more that 91% efficient.

That sounds poor. Does that 55% mean it will cost almost twice as much to
run as a modern boiler?

Sort of, but it's easy to be blinded by such exaggerations. "Twice as much"
would be 100% more, but in fact 91 is only 65% more than 55. So it should
reduce your annual fuel bill by only about 40% (as opposed to 50%) if you
switched to a modern boiler. Against that you have to set the cost of
acquiring and installing the new boiler.

Let's pluck some figures out of the air. If your gas bill is £1200 a year,
the modern boiler would save you some £475 a year in fuel. If the boiler
costs £2000 to put in, that means it would take more than 4 years to pay
for itself.

These modern things are more complicated than the nice simple old ones which
"last forever", and this means three things: (1) More goes wrong with them,
(2) You can't fix'em yourself when they go wrong, (3) They're not designed
to last very long.

(1) and (2) probably mean you'd have to budget for a maintenance/service
contract where you needn't have bothered before. That might set you back
£250 per year, which brings your annual savings down to £225 a year, and
increases your break even time to nearly 9 years.

(3) might mean the damn thing's expected life is only 10 years.

So until your existing one starts showing signs of giving up the ghost,
don't even think of replacing it.

SNIP EFFICIENCY DISCUSSION
It has got a seasonal efficiency of 55%. *A modern replacement could be
more that 91% efficient.

where do yuo get the seasonal efficiency figures?

I would like to check the figures my old and much loved Vaillant Combi
vcw-sine 18 T3 w


Try this:

http://www.homeheatingguide.co.uk/ef...p?model=000773

65% it reckons!

Luke

"TMC" wrote in message
...

"Michael Chare" wrote in message
o.uk...
"AL_n" wrote in message
...

The house I recently acquired has a Thorn M54 boiler which I want to
move
to a more out-of-the-way location in the same room. It's a
floor-standing
boiler and I'll have to butcher my kitchen units in order to reloacate
the
boiler. I realise this would be the perfect opportunity to buy a modern
wall mounted boiler, but frankly, I don't have the spare cash. So my
question, really, is: how many more years of life will I be likely to
get
out of this Thorn M54 boiler? I gather spares are getting more difficult
to
obtain as it's about 30 years old...


It has got a seasonal efficiency of 55%. A modern replacement could be
more that 91% efficient.

where do yuo get the seasonal efficiency figures?

I would like to check the figures my old and much loved Vaillant Combi
vcw-sine 18 T3 w

The trouble with the official list is that if the boiler hasn't been tested
they assign it a value of 55%. It doesn't necessarily mean it is 55%.
The manufacturers data for mine states 82% but the official figure is 55%
because its too old to have been tested.

What it means is i could potentially save about 10% of my gas bill, That
would be about £40 a year and it would take an awful long time to repay the
cost of an expensive, probably unreliable condensing boiler. Even if it
saved the full amount its would still take years. It just isn't worth
replacing it with a potentially unreliable boiler, and they are far more
complex and do fail more often. I have had one fault in about 30 years with
the Thorn one I have.

AL_n wrote:
wrote in news:Xns9E0344DA46BD6zzzzzz@
130.133.4.11:

Thanks for the input on that. Looks like I should keep the boiler,
although the efficiency rating that John Rumm kindly mentioned concerns
me a bit.


Sorry, my mistake; it was Michael C who mentioned the seasonal efficiency
rating.

Al
I agree the official efficiency figure is not brilliant by modern
standards but even knocking 40% off by gas bill is unlikely to make it
worthwhile changing until it is impossible to repair it.
Given the typical life and high maintenance/ cost of spares of modern
boilers. I suggest you hang on to it.

Bob

Ronald Raygun wrote in
:

That sounds poor. Does that 55% mean it will cost almost twice as
much to run as a modern boiler?

Sort of, but it's easy to be blinded by such exaggerations. "Twice as
much" would be 100% more, but in fact 91 is only 65% more than 55. So
it should reduce your annual fuel bill by only about 40% (as opposed
to 50%) if you switched to a modern boiler. Against that you have to
set the cost of acquiring and installing the new boiler.

Let's pluck some figures out of the air. If your gas bill is œ1200 a
year, the modern boiler would save you some œ475 a year in fuel. If
the boiler costs œ2000 to put in, that means it would take more than 4
years to pay for itself.

These modern things are more complicated than the nice simple old ones
which "last forever", and this means three things: (1) More goes
wrong with them, (2) You can't fix'em yourself when they go wrong, (3)
They're not designed to last very long.

(1) and (2) probably mean you'd have to budget for a
maintenance/service contract where you needn't have bothered before.
That might set you back œ250 per year, which brings your annual
savings down to œ225 a year, and increases your break even time to
nearly 9 years.

(3) might mean the damn thing's expected life is only 10 years.

So until your existing one starts showing signs of giving up the
ghost, don't even think of replacing it.


That's very helpful - thank you. Thanks in particular, for elucidating
the real implications of that percentage figure. I have to say, this was
the advice I was hoping to hear. I installed a combi boiler in my last
house and it was constantly giving problems requiring expensive
maintenance. Meanwhile, the old 1970s system boiler in my parents' house
kept purring away, decade after decade, never needing the slightest
attention. They had a contract with British Gas to send an engineer
around once a year to check the system. Needless to say, he always tried
his utmost to get them to scrap that excellent boiler and buy a new one!

Al

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...


"TMC" wrote in message
...

"Michael Chare" wrote in message
o.uk...
"AL_n" wrote in message
...

The house I recently acquired has a Thorn M54 boiler which I want to
move
to a more out-of-the-way location in the same room. It's a
floor-standing
boiler and I'll have to butcher my kitchen units in order to reloacate
the
boiler. I realise this would be the perfect opportunity to buy a modern
wall mounted boiler, but frankly, I don't have the spare cash. So my
question, really, is: how many more years of life will I be likely to
get
out of this Thorn M54 boiler? I gather spares are getting more
difficult to
obtain as it's about 30 years old...


It has got a seasonal efficiency of 55%. A modern replacement could be
more that 91% efficient.

where do yuo get the seasonal efficiency figures?

I would like to check the figures my old and much loved Vaillant Combi
vcw-sine 18 T3 w

The trouble with the official list is that if the boiler hasn't been
tested they assign it a value of 55%. It doesn't necessarily mean it is
55%.
The manufacturers data for mine states 82% but the official figure is 55%
because its too old to have been tested.

What it means is i could potentially save about 10% of my gas bill, That
would be about £40 a year and it would take an awful long time to repay
the cost of an expensive, probably unreliable condensing boiler. Even if
it saved the full amount its would still take years. It just isn't worth
replacing it with a potentially unreliable boiler, and they are far more
complex and do fail more often. I have had one fault in about 30 years
with the Thorn one I have.


I was just coming to the same conclusion when I read your post

The 65% figure refers to old light weight boilers where mine was a top of
the range new fangled combi one at the time so likely more efficient

If I divide the nominal heating capacity by the nominal heating input I get
a figure of 75% but not sure if this is a valid way to get an efficiency
figure

Against my current gas usage it would take many years to recover the cost of
a new boiler, I estimate around 15 years and as modern boilers appear to
have only a 10 year life then I would be even less like to recover the cost

I bought the boiler in 1986. I think it cost around £400 to buy and I fitted
it myself with a qualified central heating engineer to check my work so it
really owes me nothing

All that I have had to since is replace the automatic air bleed which cost
£19.00 and pump up the expansion vessel and that only last week

Regards

"TMC" wrote in message
...

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...


"TMC" wrote in message
...

"Michael Chare" wrote in message
o.uk...
"AL_n" wrote in message
...

The house I recently acquired has a Thorn M54 boiler which I want to
move
to a more out-of-the-way location in the same room. It's a
floor-standing
boiler and I'll have to butcher my kitchen units in order to reloacate
the
boiler. I realise this would be the perfect opportunity to buy a
modern
wall mounted boiler, but frankly, I don't have the spare cash. So my
question, really, is: how many more years of life will I be likely to
get
out of this Thorn M54 boiler? I gather spares are getting more
difficult to
obtain as it's about 30 years old...


It has got a seasonal efficiency of 55%. A modern replacement could be
more that 91% efficient.

where do yuo get the seasonal efficiency figures?

I would like to check the figures my old and much loved Vaillant Combi
vcw-sine 18 T3 w

The trouble with the official list is that if the boiler hasn't been
tested they assign it a value of 55%. It doesn't necessarily mean it is
55%.
The manufacturers data for mine states 82% but the official figure is 55%
because its too old to have been tested.

What it means is i could potentially save about 10% of my gas bill, That
would be about £40 a year and it would take an awful long time to repay
the cost of an expensive, probably unreliable condensing boiler. Even if
it saved the full amount its would still take years. It just isn't worth
replacing it with a potentially unreliable boiler, and they are far more
complex and do fail more often. I have had one fault in about 30 years
with the Thorn one I have.


I was just coming to the same conclusion when I read your post

The 65% figure refers to old light weight boilers where mine was a top of
the range new fangled combi one at the time so likely more efficient

If I divide the nominal heating capacity by the nominal heating input I
get a figure of 75% but not sure if this is a valid way to get an
efficiency figure

Against my current gas usage it would take many years to recover the cost
of a new boiler, I estimate around 15 years and as modern boilers appear
to have only a 10 year life then I would be even less like to recover the
cost

I bought the boiler in 1986. I think it cost around £400 to buy and I
fitted it myself with a qualified central heating engineer to check my
work so it really owes me nothing

All that I have had to since is replace the automatic air bleed which cost
£19.00 and pump up the expansion vessel and that only last week

Almost anyone would save more cash by adding insulation before a new boiler
(especially as it subsidised).
I cut my heating bill to about £25 pm so there is no way I would ever get
the cash back on a modern boiler replacement.
I am thinking about ASHP as a replacement as I can cool in the summer then.
The odd few days a year where it below freezing outside i can get around
with a hosepipe as I don't have a water meter. ;-)

Of course adding insulation is the best option as it covers global warming
and global cooling and staying the same. You can't really lose by it at
current prices. Shame it wasn't so cheap when I did mine 30 years ago,
however it has paid for itself many times and is still earning now.

AL_n wrote:

"Michael Chare" wrote in
news:meWdnetfQsvZTD7RnZ2dnUVZ8rGdnZ2d@brightview. co.uk:

It has got a seasonal efficiency of 55%. A modern replacement could
be more that 91% efficient.

Hi Michael,

That sounds poor. Does that 55% mean it will cost almost twice as much to
run as a modern boiler?

Al

I used to have a Glowworm Galaxie back boiler and gas fire, installed
in 1979 and only recently left behind in a house move. About 10 years
after installation the BG tales of woe started: 'can't get spares',
then 'flue has no plate', then 'the ventilation is insufficient'. I
ignored it all. Apart from cleaning out the jockey tank once a year
and adding new inhibitor, it never went wrong. It kept our modest semi
warm even without the gas fire on - we could get the open-plan lounge
to 23 degC while it was -5 outside. The last 12 months running costs
(including the coldest winter since the boiler was installed) for CH
and DWH were just £500. One of the chaps who came to service it said
his dad had one and it was 43 years old and had never gone wrong.

Much is claimed for the efficiency of modern boilers, and I'm sure
that the boiler part is very efficient. However, boilers are used in
systems, and the real question is the efficiency of the system.

My airing cupboard was warm, from the lagged tank, CH piping, and
chimney breast. All the 'wasted' heat was going somewhere useful, and
when snow covered the roofs, there wasn't a large clear patch round
the chimney.

My view on your question is to keep your old boiler, find out what
spare parts are available for it, and in the fullness of time decide
what you want to do about it. You might be surprised by overall
running costs being pleasantly low, and the possibility of servicing
it yourself.

TF

"TMC" wrote in message
...

"Michael Chare" wrote in message
o.uk...
"AL_n" wrote in message
...

The house I recently acquired has a Thorn M54 boiler which I want to
move
to a more out-of-the-way location in the same room. It's a
floor-standing
boiler and I'll have to butcher my kitchen units in order to reloacate
the
boiler. I realise this would be the perfect opportunity to buy a modern
wall mounted boiler, but frankly, I don't have the spare cash. So my
question, really, is: how many more years of life will I be likely to
get
out of this Thorn M54 boiler? I gather spares are getting more difficult
to
obtain as it's about 30 years old...


It has got a seasonal efficiency of 55%. A modern replacement could be
more that 91% efficient.

where do yuo get the seasonal efficiency figures?


See http://www.sedbuk.com/


--
Michael Chare

On 29/09/2010 21:45, AL_n wrote:
The house I recently acquired has a Thorn M54 boiler which I want to move
to a more out-of-the-way location in the same room. It's a floor-standing
boiler and I'll have to butcher my kitchen units in order to reloacate the
boiler. I realise this would be the perfect opportunity to buy a modern
wall mounted boiler, but frankly, I don't have the spare cash. So my
question, really, is: how many more years of life will I be likely to get
out of this Thorn M54 boiler? I gather spares are getting more difficult to
obtain as it's about 30 years old...

Get rid and try and find a modern, more efficient boiler.

Dave

Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Ronald Raygun" wrote in message
...

These modern things are more complicated than the nice simple old ones
which
"last forever", and this means three things: (1) More goes wrong with
them,

Which is tripe when buying a quality model. Look at an ATAG or ATmos.

All models are "quality". It's just than some qualities are higher than
others.

(3) They're not designed
to last very long.

Total bollox!

Of course it isn't. If they were built to last, then once everyone has
one, the manufacturers would go out of business because then nobody would
need to buy any more of them!

(3) might mean the damn thing's expected life is only 10 years.

Total bollox!

You wish.

In article ,
"dennis@home" writes:

Almost anyone would save more cash by adding insulation before a new boiler
(especially as it subsidised).
I cut my heating bill to about £25 pm so there is no way I would ever get
the cash back on a modern boiler replacement.
I am thinking about ASHP as a replacement as I can cool in the summer then.

I fitted one 4 years ago, and I'm very pleased with it.
It gets used for heating and cooling when I'm working at
home and just need to heat the one room where I'm working
(probably 95% heating, 5% cooling).

It's on a power meter which has been running for 3/4 of
a year now. It's used 103kWh in that period.

The odd few days a year where it below freezing outside i can get around
with a hosepipe as I don't have a water meter. ;-)

Actually, it works fine below freezing. It's when it's
between 0 and about 6 outside that it struggles, because
thats where ice forms on it, and it has to run defrost
cycles, and it's probably no better than an electric
heater when doing that. (Good fun for generating big
clouds in the garden though.)

You really need to DIY it though. The cost of a
professional install will more than wipe out any savings
you'll ever make, just as with most green initiatives.

Of course adding insulation is the best option as it covers global warming
and global cooling and staying the same. You can't really lose by it at
current prices. Shame it wasn't so cheap when I did mine 30 years ago,
however it has paid for itself many times and is still earning now.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

On 03/10/2010 23:59, Doctor Drivel wrote:

"AL_n" wrote in message
...
"Michael Chare" wrote in
o.uk:

It has got a seasonal efficiency of 55%. A modern replacement could
be more that 91% efficient.

Hi Michael,

That sounds poor. Does that 55% mean it will cost almost twice as much to
run as a modern boiler?

YES!!!!

I see Dribble is still clueless about figures and, it seems, the meaning
of common words such as 'almost'.

On 03/10/2010 23:44, Andrew Gabriel wrote:
I am thinking about ASHP as a replacement as I can cool in the summer then.
I fitted one 4 years ago, and I'm very pleased with it.
It gets used for heating and cooling when I'm working at
home and just need to heat the one room where I'm working
(probably 95% heating, 5% cooling).

It's on a power meter which has been running for 3/4 of
a year now. It's used 103kWh in that period.

The odd few days a year where it below freezing outside i can get around
with a hosepipe as I don't have a water meter.;-)
Actually, it works fine below freezing. It's when it's
between 0 and about 6 outside that it struggles, because
thats where ice forms on it, and it has to run defrost
cycles, and it's probably no better than an electric
heater when doing that. (Good fun for generating big
clouds in the garden though.)

You really need to DIY it though. The cost of a
professional install will more than wipe out any savings
you'll ever make, just as with most green initiatives.


How does ASHP compare with GSHP? (Which I presume would be a much harder
DIY install).

On 04/10/2010 12:29, Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Roger Chapman" wrote in message
news
On 03/10/2010 23:59, Doctor Drivel wrote:

"AL_n" wrote in message
...
"Michael Chare" wrote in
o.uk:

It has got a seasonal efficiency of 55%. A modern replacement could
be more that 91% efficient.

Hi Michael,

That sounds poor. Does that 55% mean it will cost almost twice as
much to
run as a modern boiler?

YES!!!!

I see Dribble is still clueless about figures and, it seems, the meaning of common words such as 'almost'.

(SILENT SNIP reinstated)

This f***ing idiot again.

You are indeed a ****ing idiot.

"almost - ... little short of being; very nearly" (Collins)

"almost - ... all but; very nearly." (Concise Oxford)

Since when has marginally less than two thirds (65.45%)been 'almost' to
anyone of normal intelligence?

On 30/09/2010 11:44, Bob Minchin wrote:
AL_n wrote:
wrote in news:Xns9E0344DA46BD6zzzzzz@
130.133.4.11:

Thanks for the input on that. Looks like I should keep the boiler,
although the efficiency rating that John Rumm kindly mentioned concerns
me a bit.


Sorry, my mistake; it was Michael C who mentioned the seasonal efficiency
rating.

Al
I agree the official efficiency figure is not brilliant by modern
standards but even knocking 40% off by gas bill is unlikely to make it
worthwhile changing until it is impossible to repair it.
Given the typical life and high maintenance/ cost of spares of modern
boilers. I suggest you hang on to it.

We got rid of ours just before we would have been forced to install a
condensing type. It's main failing was having to renew the rubber seals
between the access panel to the heat exchanger. If the rear one had
gone, it became a major job to stop it leaking. The front one drips onto
the pilot light and puts it out. The timer was a problem as well, I
wired ours up for a Set5 digital timer made by Danfoss Randall. I also
ended up changing the gas control valve, thanks to some friendly
plumbers at the merchants telling what to ask for.

As you don't have the cash for a new one, I would keep an eye on it and
start saving for a replacement. I was glad to see the back of ours. It
was installed about 1977 or 1978 and like you say the spares are
becoming a bit scarce.

Moving the M54 might/will give you problems with the flue.

Dave

On 04/10/2010 23:28, Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Roger Chapman" wrote in message
...

This f***ing idiot again.

I didn't write that at all. I just reminded the world at large (not that
they really needed any reminder) that the ****ing idiot in this case was
yourself:

" You are indeed a ****ing idiot."

In message , Doctor Drivel
writes

"Bob Minchin" wrote in message
...

I agree the official efficiency figure is not brilliant by modern
standards but even knocking 40% off by gas bill is unlikely to make it
worthwhile changing until it is impossible to repair it.
Given the typical life and high maintenance/ cost of spares of modern
boilers. I suggest you hang on to it.


Bollox!! Modern quality boilers will go wrong and go wrong again.


--
geoff

In message , Ronald Raygun
writes
AL_n wrote:

"Michael Chare" wrote in
o.uk:

It has got a seasonal efficiency of 55%. A modern replacement could
be more that 91% efficient.

That sounds poor. Does that 55% mean it will cost almost twice as much to
run as a modern boiler?

Sort of, but it's easy to be blinded by such exaggerations. "Twice as much"
would be 100% more, but in fact 91 is only 65% more than 55. So it should
reduce your annual fuel bill by only about 40% (as opposed to 50%) if you
switched to a modern boiler. Against that you have to set the cost of
acquiring and installing the new boiler.

Let's pluck some figures out of the air. If your gas bill is £1200 a year,
the modern boiler would save you some £475 a year in fuel. If the boiler
costs £2000 to put in, that means it would take more than 4 years to pay
for itself.

These modern things are more complicated than the nice simple old ones which
"last forever", and this means three things: (1) More goes wrong with them,
(2) You can't fix'em yourself when they go wrong, (3) They're not designed
to last very long.

(1) and (2) probably mean you'd have to budget for a maintenance/service
contract where you needn't have bothered before. That might set you back
£250 per year, which brings your annual savings down to £225 a year, and
increases your break even time to nearly 9 years.

(3) might mean the damn thing's expected life is only 10 years.

Life expectancy of a current boiler is quoted at being between 5 and 7
years


So until your existing one starts showing signs of giving up the ghost,
don't even think of replacing it.


Wise words grasshopper

--
geoff

In message , Doctor Drivel
writes

"AL_n" wrote in message
...
Ronald Raygun wrote in
:

That sounds poor. Does that 55% mean it will cost almost twice as
much to run as a modern boiler?

Sort of, but it's easy to be blinded by such exaggerations. "Twice as
much" would be 100% more, but in fact 91 is only 65% more than 55. So
it should reduce your annual fuel bill by only about 40% (as opposed
to 50%) if you switched to a modern boiler. Against that you have to
set the cost of acquiring and installing the new boiler.

Let's pluck some figures out of the air. If your gas bill is o1200 a
year, the modern boiler would save you some o475 a year in fuel. If
the boiler costs o2000 to put in, that means it would take more than 4
years to pay for itself.

These modern things are more complicated than the nice simple old ones
which "last forever", and this means three things: (1) More goes
wrong with them, (2) You can't fix'em yourself when they go wrong, (3)
They're not designed to last very long.

(1) and (2) probably mean you'd have to budget for a
maintenance/service contract where you needn't have bothered before.
That might set you back o250 per year, which brings your annual
savings down to o225 a year, and increases your break even time to
nearly 9 years.

(3) might mean the damn thing's expected life is only 10 years.

So until your existing one starts showing signs of giving up the
ghost, don't even think of replacing it.


That's very helpful - thank you.

It isn't it is bollox.

NURSE

He's been hiding his medication under his tongue again



--
geoff

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember geoff saying
something like:

He's been hiding his medication under his tongue again

He just likes the taste of used suppositories.