In message
2859757.1168.1335380264153.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbez18, kent
writes
This is probably a daft idea, but I'd be interesting to see if there is
any mileage in it! Combi boilers tend to work best in smaller
properties, so for a larger property would it be possible (or make any
sense) to have 2 combi boilers serving different parts of the house?
By "larger" I don't mean a mansion I mean a 4 bedroomed house with 3 showers!
Thanks for any thoughts on this.


Look in the mirror and say "Drivel" three times


--
geoff

On 26/04/2012 21:12, kent wrote:
On Thursday, 26 April 2012 20:25:40 UTC+1, YAPH wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 12:51:19 -0700, kent wrote:

Oh dear, I didn't mean to stir the s*** ! Does this mean I am unlikely
to get any rational answers?!

No, it just means you are likely to get some irrational ones ;-)

Multiple boilers in larger properties is quite a sane idea. Generally,
however, they are ganged together so that either boiler can run quite
efficiently at the lower output required for heating in spring and autumn-
ish weather, with both coming on together for winter loads. This also
gives a degree of fault tolerance as a fault in one boiler doesn't leave
you entirely without heating, and may not even be noticed in milder
weather. However the controls required (including a mechanism for
detecting that just one boiler has failed, before the other one goes as
well and you really don't have any heating!) is more complicated and/or
expensive.

Combi boilers aren't generally ganged though: in the larger properties in
which ganged boilers would be called for the hot water demand (e.g.
multiple bathrooms etc) is likely to be greater than even 2 combis
working together can supply.

However a 4 bedroom house isn't large enough to likely require more power
for heating than a single domestic boiler can supply (and if it does
you'd be better advised reducing the heat losses than adding boilers!)
Given that the hot water requirement is the critical factor then some
form of stored water system ('Megaflo'-type unvented, or thermal store/
heat bank) or just a storage combi (e.g. Worcester's Highflows) would be
more appropriate. If you are seriously concerned about backup for when
the boiler goes down a stored water system with immersion heater and a
few cheap convector heaters stored in the attic should do the trick.

--
John Stumbles -- http://yaph.co.uk

The astronomer married a star

Well John it certainly has made for some interesting reading and encouraged me to look a few technical points up on the internet. The conclusion I have come to is that for our four bedroom house I just need a condenser boiler to replace our old regular one (making sure that the condensing pipe is not in a location where it might freeze up) and install an electric shower if we really do want three people showering at the same time! Any idea how much just replacing the boiler might cost (with labour, not diy)?
The idea of having combi's really came from my wife who wants the airing cupboard space!
Anyway, thanks to all for your comments and suggestions.

I use Thunderbird and I can't see how to fathom out word wrap issues either!

I recall a friend who's combi boiler went u/s before Christmas. The old
one was classed as non-repairable, or should we just say that a couple
of plumbers couldn't repair it as it's must easier and remunerative to
install a new one.

A simple boiler change 5 days before Christmas cost £1,600 on a boiler I
could have got for £500. So the idea of immersion backup and some
electric heating sounds eminently sensible.

Perhaps Adam will be here shortly to advise on power diversity rules
regarding 3 showers?

The thing is, combis don't cost much more than a conventional boiler,
and I would be tempted, if the plumbing was straightforward to have one
shower running of the combi + hot water for the kitchen tap. That call
is dependent on proximity and nuisance of time for hot water to run hot.

On 26/04/2012 21:28, Stephen H wrote:
On 26/04/2012 21:12, kent wrote:
On Thursday, 26 April 2012 20:25:40 UTC+1, YAPH wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 12:51:19 -0700, kent wrote:

Oh dear, I didn't mean to stir the s*** ! Does this mean I am unlikely
to get any rational answers?!

No, it just means you are likely to get some irrational ones ;-)

Multiple boilers in larger properties is quite a sane idea. Generally,
however, they are ganged together so that either boiler can run quite
efficiently at the lower output required for heating in spring and
autumn-
ish weather, with both coming on together for winter loads. This also
gives a degree of fault tolerance as a fault in one boiler doesn't leave
you entirely without heating, and may not even be noticed in milder
weather. However the controls required (including a mechanism for
detecting that just one boiler has failed, before the other one goes as
well and you really don't have any heating!) is more complicated and/or
expensive.

Combi boilers aren't generally ganged though: in the larger
properties in
which ganged boilers would be called for the hot water demand (e.g.
multiple bathrooms etc) is likely to be greater than even 2 combis
working together can supply.

However a 4 bedroom house isn't large enough to likely require more
power
for heating than a single domestic boiler can supply (and if it does
you'd be better advised reducing the heat losses than adding boilers!)
Given that the hot water requirement is the critical factor then some
form of stored water system ('Megaflo'-type unvented, or thermal store/
heat bank) or just a storage combi (e.g. Worcester's Highflows) would be
more appropriate. If you are seriously concerned about backup for when
the boiler goes down a stored water system with immersion heater and a
few cheap convector heaters stored in the attic should do the trick.

--
John Stumbles -- http://yaph.co.uk

The astronomer married a star

Well John it certainly has made for some interesting reading and
encouraged me to look a few technical points up on the internet. The
conclusion I have come to is that for our four bedroom house I just
need a condenser boiler to replace our old regular one (making sure
that the condensing pipe is not in a location where it might freeze
up) and install an electric shower if we really do want three people
showering at the same time! Any idea how much just replacing the
boiler might cost (with labour, not diy)?
The idea of having combi's really came from my wife who wants the
airing cupboard space!
Anyway, thanks to all for your comments and suggestions.


Having two combi boilers also allows you to have two zone heating as well.

You can have two zones with a single boiler, or two even if put in parallel.

This could help you to use gas more efficiently if you use a pair of
programmable room thermostats. These PRTs allow you to have different
temps during the course of the day, so during the night , you'd heat
upstairs only, keep downstairs at 5°C. During the day, you'd heta
downstairs only, and keep upstairs at a lower temp.

You'd have a downstairs boiler doing the downstairs rads and the
downstairs hot water taps.

You'd have an upstairs boiler doing the upstairs rads and the upstairs
hot water taps.

One of teh boilers could go where your existing boiler is, the other 2nd
boiler could go where your hot water cylinder is.

YOu may need to revise your heating pipework to get the two heating
zones created though.

Its a trivial matter to put in some 2 port zone valves on both the hot
water and the heating loops and a special switching arrangement so that
if one boiler fails, the other working boiler can then take on the whole
house..


Then why not have both boiler in parallel in the first place??

In the past I have had two boiler, each having a non-return valve and
its own pump, such that you have the choice of one running, or both
depending on the need for heat.

Fredxx wrote:

I use Thunderbird and I can't see how to fathom out word wrap issues
either!

If you mean when replying to people using GG where their entire
paragraph appears as single line, you can select the block and type
ctrl-R to reformat.

On 28/04/2012 17:44, Andy Burns wrote:
Fredxx wrote:

I use Thunderbird and I can't see how to fathom out word wrap issues
either!

If you mean when replying to people using GG where their entire
paragraph appears as single line, you can select the block and type
ctrl-R to reformat.


Cheer for that!!

Fredxx wrote:
On 26/04/2012 21:12, kent wrote:
On Thursday, 26 April 2012 20:25:40 UTC+1, YAPH wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 12:51:19 -0700, kent wrote:

Oh dear, I didn't mean to stir the s*** ! Does this mean I am
unlikely to get any rational answers?!

No, it just means you are likely to get some irrational ones ;-)

Multiple boilers in larger properties is quite a sane idea.
Generally, however, they are ganged together so that either
boiler can run quite efficiently at the lower output required for
heating in spring and autumn- ish weather, with both coming on
together for winter loads. This also gives a degree of fault
tolerance as a fault in one boiler doesn't leave you entirely
without heating, and may not even be noticed in milder weather.
However the controls required (including a mechanism for
detecting that just one boiler has failed, before the other one
goes as well and you really don't have any heating!) is more
complicated and/or expensive. Combi boilers aren't generally ganged
though: in the larger
properties in which ganged boilers would be called for the hot
water demand (e.g. multiple bathrooms etc) is likely to be
greater than even 2 combis working together can supply.

However a 4 bedroom house isn't large enough to likely require
more power for heating than a single domestic boiler can supply
(and if it does you'd be better advised reducing the heat losses
than adding boilers!) Given that the hot water requirement is the
critical factor then some form of stored water system
('Megaflo'-type unvented, or thermal store/ heat bank) or just a
storage combi (e.g. Worcester's Highflows) would be more
appropriate. If you are seriously concerned about backup for when
the boiler goes down a stored water system with immersion heater
and a few cheap convector heaters stored in the attic should do
the trick. --
John Stumbles -- http://yaph.co.uk

The astronomer married a star

Well John it certainly has made for some interesting reading and
encouraged me to look a few technical points up on the internet. The
conclusion I have come to is that for our four bedroom house I
just need a condenser boiler to replace our old regular one (making
sure that the condensing pipe is not in a location where it might
freeze up) and install an electric shower if we really do want
three people showering at the same time! Any idea how much just
replacing the boiler might cost (with labour, not diy)? The idea of
having combi's really came from my wife who wants the airing
cupboard space! Anyway, thanks to all for your comments and
suggestions.

I use Thunderbird and I can't see how to fathom out word wrap issues
either!
I recall a friend who's combi boiler went u/s before Christmas. The
old one was classed as non-repairable, or should we just say that a
couple of plumbers couldn't repair it as it's must easier and remunerative
to
install a new one.

A simple boiler change 5 days before Christmas cost £1,600 on a
boiler I could have got for £500. So the idea of immersion backup
and some electric heating sounds eminently sensible.

Perhaps Adam will be here shortly to advise on power diversity rules
regarding 3 showers?


I would suggest sharing a shower with 2 friends. It saves on all the
diversity calculations.

--
Adam

On 28/04/2012 12:09, BartC wrote:


"kent" wrote in message
news:2859757.1168.1335380264153.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbez18...
This is probably a daft idea, but I'd be interesting to see if there is
any mileage in it! Combi boilers tend to work best in smaller properties,
so for a larger property would it be possible (or make any sense) to have
2 combi boilers serving different parts of the house?
By "larger" I don't mean a mansion I mean a 4 bedroomed house with 3
showers!
Thanks for any thoughts on this.

Do they still do hot-water-only gas boilers?

You mean a "heating only" (i.e. old school boiler with no pump or any
other system components in the box?), then yes, they are called "heating
only" boilers.

I had a house a few years ago with an ancient combi downstairs, and an
equally ancient separate hot water boiler in the upstairs bathroom
(which was supremely reliable; no electrics, just gas and water, and no
secondary heat exchangers and 3-way valves to clog up. Just the
occasional transatlantic call explaining how to ignite the pilot..).

Ah that sounds more like a multipoint instantaneous water heater. Also
still available, but less common than they were.

So each floor had it's own hot water source. And it came in extremely
useful
when the combi started playing up. (In fact I eventually plumbed it so the
upstairs boiler supplied all the hot water.) Unfortunately when the combi
was replaced, the upstairs heater was taken out too; big mistake as I
continued having boiler problems for years.

I would go with a 2-boiler solution, although it would be wasteful if
one is
only used for hot water (and will it even work if the CH flow just comes
straight back without going through radiators?).



--
Cheers,

John.

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

On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 23:30:14 +0100, ARWadsworth wrote:

David Paste wrote:
On Wednesday, April 25, 2012 7:57:44 PM UTC+1, kent wrote:
This is probably a daft idea, but I'd be interesting to see if
there is any mileage in it! Combi boilers tend to work best in
smaller properties, so for a larger property would it be possible
(or make any sense) to have 2 combi boilers serving different parts
of the house? By "larger" I don't mean a mansion I mean a 4
bedroomed house with 3 showers!
Thanks for any thoughts on this.

The guy who services my gas boiler has two in his house.

He would not be the first person to have to sevice two boilers at the same
time.

Mine (not a combi) has run without servicing for 14 years.

--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

Lysdexia: a peech imspediment we live to learn with...

On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 20:07:33 +0100, kent wrote:

On Wednesday, 25 April 2012 20:05:20 UTC+1, Jim K wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 19:57:44 +0100, kent wrote:

This is probably a daft idea, but I'd be interesting to see if there is
any mileage in it! Combi boilers tend to work best in smaller
properties, so for a larger property would it be possible (or make any
sense) to have 2 combi boilers serving different parts of the house?
By "larger" I don't mean a mansion I mean a 4 bedroomed house with 3
showers!
Thanks for any thoughts on this.


ah the old ones are always the best....







nope! Thought of it all by myself! Is it that stupid then?

Only as stupid as having two engines in your car.

--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

I think car alarms should be set of explode after two minutes.
That way, we either take out a car thief, or deprive a noise-polluting jerk of his wheels.

On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 01:26:56 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

kent wrote:
On Wednesday, 25 April 2012 20:42:01 UTC+1, wrote:
kent wrote:
On Wednesday, 25 April 2012 20:05:20 UTC+1, Jim K wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 19:57:44 +0100, kent wrote:



ah the old ones are always the best....

nope! Thought of it all by myself! Is it that stupid then?
You have just made a new friend. He wll be along shortly to back you to the
hilt and claim you are a genius, second only to himself and Einsein.

--
Adam

Oh dear, I didn't mean to stir the s*** ! Does this mean I am unlikely to get any rational answers?!
more or less yes.

Ill give you one:

a sealed mains pressure tank and a system boiler is cheaper than two
combis and wont suffer from lack of hot water when two people take a
bath/shower

Have a cold shower you wimp.


--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

Maybe . . .
Flying saucers are real and the Air Force doesn't exist.

On 28/04/2012 20:30, Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 20:07:33 +0100, kent wrote:

On Wednesday, 25 April 2012 20:05:20 UTC+1, Jim K wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 19:57:44 +0100, kent wrote:

This is probably a daft idea, but I'd be interesting to see if
there is
any mileage in it! Combi boilers tend to work best in smaller
properties, so for a larger property would it be possible (or make any
sense) to have 2 combi boilers serving different parts of the house?
By "larger" I don't mean a mansion I mean a 4 bedroomed house with 3
showers!
Thanks for any thoughts on this.


ah the old ones are always the best....







nope! Thought of it all by myself! Is it that stupid then?

Only as stupid as having two engines in your car.


What if it was cheaper, and possibly more efficient, to couple two
smaller engines together?

On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 21:32:18 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

On 28/04/2012 20:30, Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 20:07:33 +0100, kent wrote:

On Wednesday, 25 April 2012 20:05:20 UTC+1, Jim K wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 19:57:44 +0100, kent wrote:

This is probably a daft idea, but I'd be interesting to see if
there is
any mileage in it! Combi boilers tend to work best in smaller
properties, so for a larger property would it be possible (or make any
sense) to have 2 combi boilers serving different parts of the house?
By "larger" I don't mean a mansion I mean a 4 bedroomed house with 3
showers!
Thanks for any thoughts on this.


ah the old ones are always the best....







nope! Thought of it all by myself! Is it that stupid then?

Only as stupid as having two engines in your car.


What if it was cheaper, and possibly more efficient, to couple two
smaller engines together?

That did happen in a few cars, I think it was more for performance though.

And I don't believe it could be cheaper and possibly more efficient to couple two boilers.

--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

The average person over 50 will have spent 5 years waiting in lines.

Lieutenant Scott wrote
kent wrote
Jim K wrote
kent wrote

This is probably a daft idea, but I'd be interesting to see if there is
any mileage in it! Combi boilers tend to work best in smaller
properties, so for a larger property would it be possible (or make any
sense) to have 2 combi boilers serving different parts of the house?
By "larger" I don't mean a mansion I mean a 4 bedroomed house with 3
showers!

Thanks for any thoughts on this.

ah the old ones are always the best....

nope! Thought of it all by myself! Is it that stupid then?

Only as stupid as having two engines in your car.

Nope, there are a few situaitions where it can make sense.

On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 22:47:30 +0100, Rod Speed wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote
kent wrote
Jim K wrote
kent wrote

This is probably a daft idea, but I'd be interesting to see if there is
any mileage in it! Combi boilers tend to work best in smaller
properties, so for a larger property would it be possible (or make any
sense) to have 2 combi boilers serving different parts of the house?
By "larger" I don't mean a mansion I mean a 4 bedroomed house with 3
showers!

Thanks for any thoughts on this.

ah the old ones are always the best....

nope! Thought of it all by myself! Is it that stupid then?

Only as stupid as having two engines in your car.

Nope, there are a few situaitions where it can make sense.

A 20 bedroomed house?

--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

I loathe people who keep dogs. They are cowards who haven't got the guts to bite people themselves.

On 28/04/2012 22:03, Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 21:32:18 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

On 28/04/2012 20:30, Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 20:07:33 +0100, kent wrote:

On Wednesday, 25 April 2012 20:05:20 UTC+1, Jim K wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 19:57:44 +0100, kent wrote:

This is probably a daft idea, but I'd be interesting to see if
there is
any mileage in it! Combi boilers tend to work best in smaller
properties, so for a larger property would it be possible (or
make any
sense) to have 2 combi boilers serving different parts of the house?
By "larger" I don't mean a mansion I mean a 4 bedroomed house with 3
showers!
Thanks for any thoughts on this.


ah the old ones are always the best....







nope! Thought of it all by myself! Is it that stupid then?

Only as stupid as having two engines in your car.


What if it was cheaper, and possibly more efficient, to couple two
smaller engines together?

That did happen in a few cars, I think it was more for performance though.

And I don't believe it could be cheaper and possibly more efficient to
couple two boilers.


The reason I felt obliged to post was from my own experience a number of
years ago, before condensing boilers became essentially compulsory.

I was putting a heating system in an old Victorian house. The size of
boiler required put it in the commercial floor standing category. I can
assure you, that in this instance, 2 condensing boilers were somewhat
cheaper than a single large boiler.

It also meant I could go for condensing boilers as I wasn't looking
forward to the gas bill. If required I could run just the one boiler,
and on the 2 occasions I had a fault I still had gas heated hot water,
and maintained background heat.

I suspect the goal posts have changed since, but the principles still
hold, especially in these days when boiler reliability is at an all time
low.

On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 23:00:14 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

On 28/04/2012 22:03, Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 21:32:18 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

On 28/04/2012 20:30, Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 20:07:33 +0100, kent wrote:

On Wednesday, 25 April 2012 20:05:20 UTC+1, Jim K wrote:








nope! Thought of it all by myself! Is it that stupid then?

Only as stupid as having two engines in your car.


What if it was cheaper, and possibly more efficient, to couple two
smaller engines together?

That did happen in a few cars, I think it was more for performance though.

And I don't believe it could be cheaper and possibly more efficient to
couple two boilers.


The reason I felt obliged to post was from my own experience a number of
years ago, before condensing boilers became essentially compulsory.

They aren't in Scotland, and who checks anyway?

I was putting a heating system in an old Victorian house. The size of
boiler required put it in the commercial floor standing category. I can
assure you, that in this instance, 2 condensing boilers were somewhat
cheaper than a single large boiler.

Are you sure it was required? People seem to fit boilers that are capable of far more than they are given to do. For example mine is only lit half the time when powering all the radiators and the hot water tank.

It also meant I could go for condensing boilers as I wasn't looking
forward to the gas bill. If required I could run just the one boiler,
and on the 2 occasions I had a fault I still had gas heated hot water,
and maintained background heat.

I suspect the goal posts have changed since, but the principles still
hold, especially in these days when boiler reliability is at an all time
low.

Mine has run unserviced for 14 years. Buy a Baxi.

--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

A blonde is walking down a creek. While she's looking around she notices Judi walking along the other side of the creek. She yells to the other blonde. "Hey, how do I get to the other side?"
Judi replies, "You are on the other side!"

In message op.wdhx0ltzytk5n5@i7-940, Lieutenant Scott
writes
On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 23:00:14 +0100, Fredxx wrote:
It also meant I could go for condensing boilers as I wasn't looking
forward to the gas bill. If required I could run just the one boiler,
and on the 2 occasions I had a fault I still had gas heated hot water,
and maintained background heat.

I suspect the goal posts have changed since, but the principles still
hold, especially in these days when boiler reliability is at an all time
low.

Mine has run unserviced for 14 years. Buy a Baxi.

So, you're comparing a boiler built 15 years ago with one built today
....

You make Harry sound sensible


--
geoff

"Fredxx" wrote in message
...
On 28/04/2012 20:30, Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 20:07:33 +0100, kent wrote:

On Wednesday, 25 April 2012 20:05:20 UTC+1, Jim K wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 19:57:44 +0100, kent wrote:

This is probably a daft idea, but I'd be interesting to see if
there is
any mileage in it! Combi boilers tend to work best in smaller
properties, so for a larger property would it be possible (or make
any
sense) to have 2 combi boilers serving different parts of the house?
By "larger" I don't mean a mansion I mean a 4 bedroomed house with 3
showers!
Thanks for any thoughts on this.


ah the old ones are always the best....







nope! Thought of it all by myself! Is it that stupid then?

Only as stupid as having two engines in your car.


What if it was cheaper, and possibly more efficient, to couple two smaller
engines together?

It never is with a car.

It can be with boilers and even when it's a similar price,
there can be significant advantages with two as well.

"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wdht36rwytk5n5@i7-940...
On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 21:32:18 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

On 28/04/2012 20:30, Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 20:07:33 +0100, kent wrote:

On Wednesday, 25 April 2012 20:05:20 UTC+1, Jim K wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 19:57:44 +0100, kent wrote:

This is probably a daft idea, but I'd be interesting to see if
there is
any mileage in it! Combi boilers tend to work best in smaller
properties, so for a larger property would it be possible (or make
any
sense) to have 2 combi boilers serving different parts of the house?
By "larger" I don't mean a mansion I mean a 4 bedroomed house with 3
showers!
Thanks for any thoughts on this.


ah the old ones are always the best....







nope! Thought of it all by myself! Is it that stupid then?

Only as stupid as having two engines in your car.


What if it was cheaper, and possibly more efficient, to couple two
smaller engines together?

That did happen in a few cars, I think it was more for performance though.

And I don't believe it could be cheaper and possibly more efficient to
couple two boilers.

It can be more efficient anyway, particular with as he said
originally, each serving a different part of the house.

"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wdht36rwytk5n5@i7-940...
On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 21:32:18 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

On 28/04/2012 20:30, Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 20:07:33 +0100, kent wrote:

On Wednesday, 25 April 2012 20:05:20 UTC+1, Jim K wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 19:57:44 +0100, kent wrote:

This is probably a daft idea, but I'd be interesting to see if
there is
any mileage in it! Combi boilers tend to work best in smaller
properties, so for a larger property would it be possible (or make
any
sense) to have 2 combi boilers serving different parts of the house?
By "larger" I don't mean a mansion I mean a 4 bedroomed house with 3
showers!
Thanks for any thoughts on this.


ah the old ones are always the best....







nope! Thought of it all by myself! Is it that stupid then?

Only as stupid as having two engines in your car.


What if it was cheaper, and possibly more efficient, to couple two
smaller engines together?

That did happen in a few cars, I think it was more for performance though.

And I don't believe it could be cheaper and possibly more efficient to
couple two boilers.

--

The average person over 50 will have spent 5 years waiting in lines.

Don't believe that even in that soggy little island.

On 29/04/2012 00:02, Rod Speed wrote:


"Fredxx" wrote in message
...
On 28/04/2012 20:30, Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 20:07:33 +0100, kent wrote:

On Wednesday, 25 April 2012 20:05:20 UTC+1, Jim K wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 19:57:44 +0100, kent wrote:

This is probably a daft idea, but I'd be interesting to see if
there is
any mileage in it! Combi boilers tend to work best in smaller
properties, so for a larger property would it be possible (or
make any
sense) to have 2 combi boilers serving different parts of the house?
By "larger" I don't mean a mansion I mean a 4 bedroomed house with 3
showers!
Thanks for any thoughts on this.


ah the old ones are always the best....







nope! Thought of it all by myself! Is it that stupid then?

Only as stupid as having two engines in your car.


What if it was cheaper, and possibly more efficient, to couple two
smaller engines together?

It never is with a car.


Cobblers - Take a look at http://www.fullonfabrications.co.uk/


--
Engage brain before putting fingers in gear

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 00:11:42 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

On 29/04/2012 00:02, Rod Speed wrote:


"Fredxx" wrote in message
...
On 28/04/2012 20:30, Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 20:07:33 +0100, kent wrote:

On Wednesday, 25 April 2012 20:05:20 UTC+1, Jim K wrote:








nope! Thought of it all by myself! Is it that stupid then?

Only as stupid as having two engines in your car.


What if it was cheaper, and possibly more efficient, to couple two
smaller engines together?

It never is with a car.


Cobblers - Take a look at http://www.fullonfabrications.co.uk/

I don't think that's cheaper or more efficient, but I want one!

Engage brain before putting fingers in gear

I like that one. Although I was imagining fingers getting caught in some industrial gearing.

--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

It is easier to get forgiveness than permission.

"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wdhwpfilytk5n5@i7-940...
On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 22:47:30 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote
kent wrote
Jim K wrote
kent wrote

This is probably a daft idea, but I'd be interesting to see if there
is
any mileage in it! Combi boilers tend to work best in smaller
properties, so for a larger property would it be possible (or make
any
sense) to have 2 combi boilers serving different parts of the house?
By "larger" I don't mean a mansion I mean a 4 bedroomed house with 3
showers!

Thanks for any thoughts on this.

ah the old ones are always the best....

nope! Thought of it all by myself! Is it that stupid then?

Only as stupid as having two engines in your car.

Nope, there are a few situaitions where it can make sense.

A 20 bedroomed house?

Don't need anything like 20, just quite a few showers and
the occupants likely to want to use them simultaneously etc.

Whats the point of more than a couple of showers
if you cant use them whenever you like etc ?

Not everyone 'lives' alone in a single shower tiny little hovel.

geoff wrote:
In message op.wdhx0ltzytk5n5@i7-940, Lieutenant Scott writes
On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 23:00:14 +0100, Fredxx wrote:
It also meant I could go for condensing boilers as I wasn't looking
forward to the gas bill. If required I could run just the one boiler,
and on the 2 occasions I had a fault I still had gas heated hot water,
and maintained background heat.

I suspect the goal posts have changed since, but the principles still
hold, especially in these days when boiler reliability is at an all time
low.

Mine has run unserviced for 14 years. Buy a Baxi.

So, you're comparing a boiler built 15 years ago with one built today ...

You make Harry sound sensible

PHucker makes Mad Gerald The Insane sound sensible. In other groups he is
boasting that he saved a fiver on having dumpy bags of gravel delivered by
loading 1.5 tonnes of gravel into the back of a Golf.

In message

g, Steve Firth writes
geoff wrote:
In message op.wdhx0ltzytk5n5@i7-940, Lieutenant Scott writes
On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 23:00:14 +0100, Fredxx wrote:
It also meant I could go for condensing boilers as I wasn't looking
forward to the gas bill. If required I could run just the one boiler,
and on the 2 occasions I had a fault I still had gas heated hot water,
and maintained background heat.

I suspect the goal posts have changed since, but the principles still
hold, especially in these days when boiler reliability is at an all time
low.

Mine has run unserviced for 14 years. Buy a Baxi.

So, you're comparing a boiler built 15 years ago with one built today ...

You make Harry sound sensible

PHucker makes Mad Gerald The Insane sound sensible. In other groups he is
boasting that he saved a fiver on having dumpy bags of gravel delivered by
loading 1.5 tonnes of gravel into the back of a Golf.

Interesting, I though that it was Skodas that were traditionally used as
skips


--
geoff

"Fredxx" wrote in message
...
On 29/04/2012 00:02, Rod Speed wrote:


"Fredxx" wrote in message
...
On 28/04/2012 20:30, Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 20:07:33 +0100, kent wrote:

On Wednesday, 25 April 2012 20:05:20 UTC+1, Jim K wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 19:57:44 +0100, kent wrote:

This is probably a daft idea, but I'd be interesting to see if
there is
any mileage in it! Combi boilers tend to work best in smaller
properties, so for a larger property would it be possible (or
make any
sense) to have 2 combi boilers serving different parts of the
house?
By "larger" I don't mean a mansion I mean a 4 bedroomed house with
3
showers!
Thanks for any thoughts on this.


ah the old ones are always the best....







nope! Thought of it all by myself! Is it that stupid then?

Only as stupid as having two engines in your car.


What if it was cheaper, and possibly more efficient, to couple two
smaller engines together?

It never is with a car.


Cobblers -

We'll see...

Take a look at http://www.fullonfabrications.co.uk/

That's not cheaper or more efficient.

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 00:52:28 +0100, geoff wrote:

In message

g, Steve Firth writes
geoff wrote:
In message op.wdhx0ltzytk5n5@i7-940, Lieutenant Scott writes
On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 23:00:14 +0100, Fredxx wrote:
It also meant I could go for condensing boilers as I wasn't looking
forward to the gas bill. If required I could run just the one boiler,
and on the 2 occasions I had a fault I still had gas heated hot water,
and maintained background heat.

I suspect the goal posts have changed since, but the principles still
hold, especially in these days when boiler reliability is at an all time
low.

Mine has run unserviced for 14 years. Buy a Baxi.

So, you're comparing a boiler built 15 years ago with one built today ...

You make Harry sound sensible

PHucker makes Mad Gerald The Insane sound sensible. In other groups he is
boasting that he saved a fiver on having dumpy bags of gravel delivered by
loading 1.5 tonnes of gravel into the back of a Golf.

Interesting, I though that it was Skodas that were traditionally used as
skips

A VW becomes a Skoda with old age.

--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

What's soft and warm when you go to bed, but hard and stiff when you wake up?
Vomit.

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 00:40:28 +0100, Steve Firth wrote:

geoff wrote:
In message op.wdhx0ltzytk5n5@i7-940, Lieutenant Scott writes
On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 23:00:14 +0100, Fredxx wrote:
It also meant I could go for condensing boilers as I wasn't looking
forward to the gas bill. If required I could run just the one boiler,
and on the 2 occasions I had a fault I still had gas heated hot water,
and maintained background heat.

I suspect the goal posts have changed since, but the principles still
hold, especially in these days when boiler reliability is at an all time
low.

Mine has run unserviced for 14 years. Buy a Baxi.

So, you're comparing a boiler built 15 years ago with one built today ...

You make Harry sound sensible

PHucker makes Mad Gerald The Insane sound sensible. In other groups he is
boasting that he saved a fiver on having dumpy bags of gravel delivered by
loading 1.5 tonnes of gravel into the back of a Golf.

Since I got them for free, I very much doubt the guy wanted to deliver them.

So, what was silly about paying absolutely nothing (except maybe £2 of diesel) to get 1.5 tonnes of gravel? How much would your local DIY shop sell and deliver that for?

--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

What's soft and warm when you go to bed, but hard and stiff when you wake up?
Vomit.

On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 23:50:26 +0100, geoff wrote:

In message op.wdhx0ltzytk5n5@i7-940, Lieutenant Scott
writes
On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 23:00:14 +0100, Fredxx wrote:
It also meant I could go for condensing boilers as I wasn't looking
forward to the gas bill. If required I could run just the one boiler,
and on the 2 occasions I had a fault I still had gas heated hot water,
and maintained background heat.

I suspect the goal posts have changed since, but the principles still
hold, especially in these days when boiler reliability is at an all time
low.

Mine has run unserviced for 14 years. Buy a Baxi.

So, you're comparing a boiler built 15 years ago with one built today
...

You make Harry sound sensible

I can't believe Baxi boilers have changed to something less reliable.

--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

Love is complicated machinery.
But sometimes all you need is a good screw to fix it.

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 00:08:04 +0100, Rod Speed wrote:



"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wdht36rwytk5n5@i7-940...
On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 21:32:18 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

On 28/04/2012 20:30, Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 20:07:33 +0100, kent wrote:

On Wednesday, 25 April 2012 20:05:20 UTC+1, Jim K wrote:








nope! Thought of it all by myself! Is it that stupid then?

Only as stupid as having two engines in your car.


What if it was cheaper, and possibly more efficient, to couple two
smaller engines together?

That did happen in a few cars, I think it was more for performance though.

And I don't believe it could be cheaper and possibly more efficient to
couple two boilers.

It can be more efficient anyway, particular with as he said
originally, each serving a different part of the house.

It's the servicing (which apparently a lot of fools pay for every year) that would cost a lot. Most likely a lot more than you'd save on gas.

--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

The gene pool could use a little chlorine.

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 00:08:57 +0100, Rod Speed wrote:



"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wdht36rwytk5n5@i7-940...
On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 21:32:18 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

On 28/04/2012 20:30, Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 20:07:33 +0100, kent wrote:

On Wednesday, 25 April 2012 20:05:20 UTC+1, Jim K wrote:








nope! Thought of it all by myself! Is it that stupid then?

Only as stupid as having two engines in your car.


What if it was cheaper, and possibly more efficient, to couple two
smaller engines together?

That did happen in a few cars, I think it was more for performance though.

And I don't believe it could be cheaper and possibly more efficient to
couple two boilers.

--

The average person over 50 will have spent 5 years waiting in lines.

Don't believe that even in that soggy little island.

I do. Queueing is a British tradition. People seem to accept it, I do not.

--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

Exersize: the act of removing excess baggage

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 00:21:43 +0100, Rod Speed wrote:



"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wdhwpfilytk5n5@i7-940...
On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 22:47:30 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote
kent wrote
Jim K wrote








nope! Thought of it all by myself! Is it that stupid then?

Only as stupid as having two engines in your car.

Nope, there are a few situaitions where it can make sense.

A 20 bedroomed house?

Don't need anything like 20, just quite a few showers and
the occupants likely to want to use them simultaneously etc.

Whats the point of more than a couple of showers
if you cant use them whenever you like etc ?

Not everyone 'lives' alone in a single shower tiny little hovel.

Either stop insisting on piping hot showers, or have a proper hot water tank so you have unlimited hot water.

--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

Exersize: the act of removing excess baggage

In message op.wdjie8sxytk5n5@i7-940, Lieutenant Scott
writes
On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 23:50:26 +0100, geoff wrote:

In message op.wdhx0ltzytk5n5@i7-940, Lieutenant Scott
writes
On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 23:00:14 +0100, Fredxx wrote:
It also meant I could go for condensing boilers as I wasn't looking
forward to the gas bill. If required I could run just the one boiler,
and on the 2 occasions I had a fault I still had gas heated hot water,
and maintained background heat.

I suspect the goal posts have changed since, but the principles still
hold, especially in these days when boiler reliability is at an all time
low.

Mine has run unserviced for 14 years. Buy a Baxi.

So, you're comparing a boiler built 15 years ago with one built today
...

You make Harry sound sensible

I can't believe Baxi boilers have changed to something less reliable.

Baxi-Potterton have a very poor reputation nowadays


--
geoff

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 20:26:04 +0100, geoff wrote:

In message op.wdjie8sxytk5n5@i7-940, Lieutenant Scott
writes
On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 23:50:26 +0100, geoff wrote:

In message op.wdhx0ltzytk5n5@i7-940, Lieutenant Scott
writes
On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 23:00:14 +0100, Fredxx wrote:
It also meant I could go for condensing boilers as I wasn't looking
forward to the gas bill. If required I could run just the one boiler,
and on the 2 occasions I had a fault I still had gas heated hot water,
and maintained background heat.

I suspect the goal posts have changed since, but the principles still
hold, especially in these days when boiler reliability is at an all time
low.

Mine has run unserviced for 14 years. Buy a Baxi.

So, you're comparing a boiler built 15 years ago with one built today
...

You make Harry sound sensible

I can't believe Baxi boilers have changed to something less reliable.

Baxi-Potterton have a very poor reputation nowadays

What has a good reputation should mine ever explode?

--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

A sign at the golf course detailing the dress code:
Guys: No Shirts, No Golf
Girls: No Shirts, No Green Fees

In message op.wdjl8ryzytk5n5@i7-940, Lieutenant Scott
writes
On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 20:26:04 +0100, geoff wrote:

In message op.wdjie8sxytk5n5@i7-940, Lieutenant Scott
writes
On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 23:50:26 +0100, geoff wrote:

In message op.wdhx0ltzytk5n5@i7-940, Lieutenant Scott
writes
On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 23:00:14 +0100, Fredxx wrote:
It also meant I could go for condensing boilers as I wasn't looking
forward to the gas bill. If required I could run just the one boiler,
and on the 2 occasions I had a fault I still had gas heated hot water,
and maintained background heat.

I suspect the goal posts have changed since, but the principles still
hold, especially in these days when boiler reliability is at an all time
low.

Mine has run unserviced for 14 years. Buy a Baxi.

So, you're comparing a boiler built 15 years ago with one built today
...

You make Harry sound sensible

I can't believe Baxi boilers have changed to something less reliable.

Baxi-Potterton have a very poor reputation nowadays

What has a good reputation should mine ever explode?

Vaillant atm

or just look for whoever is giving the longest warranty


--
geoff

Lieutenant Scott wrote
geoff wrote
Steve Firth wrote
geoff wrote
Lieutenant Scott wrote
Fredxx wrote

It also meant I could go for condensing boilers as I wasn't looking
forward to the gas bill. If required I could run just the one
boiler,
and on the 2 occasions I had a fault I still had gas heated hot
water,
and maintained background heat.

I suspect the goal posts have changed since, but the principles still
hold, especially in these days when boiler reliability is at an all
time low.

Mine has run unserviced for 14 years. Buy a Baxi.

So, you're comparing a boiler built 15 years ago with one built today
...

You make Harry sound sensible

PHucker makes Mad Gerald The Insane sound sensible. In other groups he
is boasting that he saved a fiver on having dumpy bags of gravel
delivered by loading 1.5 tonnes of gravel into the back of a Golf.

Interesting, I though that it was Skodas that were traditionally used as
skips

A VW becomes a Skoda with old age.

Mine didn't.

Lieutenant Scott wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Lieutenant Scott wrote
Fredxx wrote
Lieutenant Scott wrote
kent wrote
Jim K wrote

nope! Thought of it all by myself! Is it that stupid then?

Only as stupid as having two engines in your car.

What if it was cheaper, and possibly more efficient, to couple two
smaller engines together?

That did happen in a few cars, I think it was more for performance
though.

And I don't believe it could be cheaper and possibly more efficient to
couple two boilers.

It can be more efficient anyway, particular with as he said
originally, each serving a different part of the house.

It's the servicing (which apparently a lot of fools pay for every year)
that would cost a lot.

The obvious fix for that is to not be that stupid.

This is diy after all.

Most likely a lot more than you'd save on gas.

Not if you arent that stupid it wont be.

Lieutenant Scott wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Lieutenant Scott wrote

The average person over 50 will have spent 5 years waiting in lines.

Don't believe that even in that soggy little island.

I do.

I don't.

Queueing is a British tradition.

English, actually. The rest of the barbarians
never were much into that sort of thing.

And I don't believe that even the english actually
spend anything like 10% of their 'lives' queuing.

People seem to accept it, I do not.

That's coz you aint english, stupid.

Lieutenant Scott wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Lieutenant Scott wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Lieutenant Scott wrote
kent wrote
Jim K wrote

nope! Thought of it all by myself! Is it that stupid then?

Only as stupid as having two engines in your car.

Nope, there are a few situaitions where it can make sense.

A 20 bedroomed house?

Don't need anything like 20, just quite a few showers and
the occupants likely to want to use them simultaneously etc.

Whats the point of more than a couple of showers
if you cant use them whenever you like etc ?

Not everyone 'lives' alone in a single shower tiny little hovel.

Either stop insisting on piping hot showers,

I don't in summer. I do in winter.

or have a proper hot water tank so you have unlimited hot water.

No tank is ever unlimited, stupid.

On 28/04/2012 20:30, Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 20:07:33 +0100, kent wrote:

On Wednesday, 25 April 2012 20:05:20 UTC+1, Jim K wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 19:57:44 +0100, kent wrote:

This is probably a daft idea, but I'd be interesting to see if
there is
any mileage in it! Combi boilers tend to work best in smaller
properties, so for a larger property would it be possible (or make any
sense) to have 2 combi boilers serving different parts of the house?
By "larger" I don't mean a mansion I mean a 4 bedroomed house with 3
showers!
Thanks for any thoughts on this.


ah the old ones are always the best....







nope! Thought of it all by myself! Is it that stupid then?

Only as stupid as having two engines in your car.



This is not without precedent.... the Intercity 125 train has two engine
coaches, one at the front to pull and one at the back to push.... the
two engines are sychronised....

Also the ThamesLink trains are usually coupled in 2's, or 3's or 4's.
Often at peak hours, they will couple two or three of these "complete
trains up to produce between 6 to 12 coaches. Sometimes they will
split/merge part way through journey....