Announcement Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The "Once and For ALL" Tankless Thread! Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: The "Once and For ALL" Tankless Thread!

    I would start a trhead but even after spending the better part of a day going over them I can only repeat what I saw and have zero real world experiance with the unit. On the face of it, it looks to be pretty good, but only time will tell. I have a very hard time pushing any of this technology though as a standard tank type heater is far and away a better value for the dollar, hands down. BTW, I feel the same about most mod con boilers. Though the preformance appears spectacular, the actual savings over a 15 or 20 year period are only slightly better than a std. high efficiency unit and will never make up the added cost. Unfortunatly, there are all too many products on the market that due to the high cost of the equipment and installation, are just not as economically feasable as a slightly lower efficiency unit at much less the cost. Keep this in mind. If the equipment was truley all that good, then the Government and the gas companies would not have to offer rebates and such, the public would be beating your door down.
    sigpic

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: The "Once and For ALL" Tankless Thread!

      Originally posted by NHMaster3015 View Post
      I would start a trhead but even after spending the better part of a day going over them I can only repeat what I saw and have zero real world experiance with the unit. On the face of it, it looks to be pretty good, but only time will tell. I have a very hard time pushing any of this technology though as a standard tank type heater is far and away a better value for the dollar, hands down. BTW, I feel the same about most mod con boilers. Though the preformance appears spectacular, the actual savings over a 15 or 20 year period are only slightly better than a std. high efficiency unit and will never make up the added cost. Unfortunatly, there are all too many products on the market that due to the high cost of the equipment and installation, are just not as economically feasable as a slightly lower efficiency unit at much less the cost. Keep this in mind. If the equipment was truley all that good, then the Government and the gas companies would not have to offer rebates and such, the public would be beating your door down.
      Consumer reports agrees with you. They don't recommend it as an investment the unit will need to be replaced before you recoup the cost in energy savings. Conceptually it is a good idea... Needs work though.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: The "Once and For ALL" Tankless Thread!

        Originally posted by EasyEman View Post
        Consumer reports agrees with you. They don't recommend it as an investment the unit will need to be replaced before you recoup the cost in energy savings. Conceptually it is a good idea... Needs work though.
        I wish CR who have been a little bit more honest in their testing....

        Our tests simulated daily use of 76 to 78 gallons of hot water. That's the equivalent of taking three showers, washing one laun­dry load, running the dishwasher once (six cycles), and turning on the faucet nine times, for a total of 19 draws. While that's considered heavy use compared with the standard Department of Energy test, we think it more accurately represents an average family's habits. We also ran more than 45,000 gallons of very hard water through a tanked model and a Rinnai tankless model to simulate about 11 years of regular use.
        (1) Never did they express (in this article at least) the calculation of stand by loss.

        Thus, negating the biggest savings of the system.

        (2) they ran 45k gal. through a tank type heater? Oh really? They let it heat up to temp then purged it over and over again.

        What was the incoming water temp? heating a tank up to 130 degrees then purging it over and over again with 35 degree water to simulate 11 years of usage is hard on a tank type.... don't believe me? then why are commercial warranties only 3 years?

        Not to mention all the calcium build up in the bottom of the tank due to the expansion and contraction.... I wonder how efficient it was after the 3rd year of simulation?

        Did they mention that manufacturers of standard tanks recommend purging the sytem to remove the sludge and calcium chips from the bottom?

        I just don't think that was a head to head test. Could be wrong though.

        I would have liked to seen more technical data regarding this test.....does anybody have it?

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: The "Once and For ALL" Tankless Thread!

          http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/a...heaters-ov.htm

          This all I could find... without subscribing.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: The "Once and For ALL" Tankless Thread!

            If the customer's goal is saving energy, I agree with you. If it's lots of hot water immediately, as in the case of 90% of my customers, then I disagree.

            Originally posted by EasyEman
            Not really the point of tankless systems.
            For many of my clients who build starter castles, using tankless to achieve "lots of hot water immediately" is, along with space savings, exactly the point.


            Comment


            • #36
              Re: The "Once and For ALL" Tankless Thread!

              I have had these customers... one lady had a water heater for each bath group. They were all 50 gallon tanks. The one in the laundry was only 30 gallons.




              The point of tankless is to not heat water all the time... if you want immediate hot water you ought to be keeping it hot and circulate it.

              If they won't do that then they have a trade off. Money savings is not the number 1 priority.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: The "Once and For ALL" Tankless Thread!

                Give me back that filet o'fish,
                give me that fish
                Give me back that filet o'fish,
                give me that fish
                What if it were you,
                hanging up on this wall,
                If it were you in that sandwich,
                you wouldn't be laughing at aaaaaaaaaalllll!
                Northern Kentucky Plumbers Twitter Feed | Plumbing Videos

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: The "Once and For ALL" Tankless Thread!

                  I believe as a whole we have outlined many of the "empty promises" made by the tankless manufacturers, as a tech, salesman, installer, whatever the he// you are, why should we as plumbers sell our customers whom we will hopefully deal with for many years sell a product to them that we dont feel comfortable about. What are the real advantages? Honestly the efficiency thing is a line of BS, it will take foreveer for them to pay for themselves. Saves S.F. comeon how much room does a traditional tank take up, last time I checked a tankless required a front clearance of 30" to work right? so really how much room are we saving!!!

                  Save your Snake oil for someone else!! I for one am not buying until i see concrete evidence of how this is good for a client!
                  Last edited by wrench spinner; 03-09-2009, 02:14 PM. Reason: freudian slip

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: The "Once and For ALL" Tankless Thread!

                    onceandforall, i suggest that you read the countless post that we have had on tankless for the last 4 years.

                    it seems that the real pros here don't like all the smoke and mirrors that the tankless originally promised.

                    i personally spent well over $1000. for a tankless on my own home to prove a point. nothing wrong with my 20 year old 40 gallon heater.

                    sure i saved a whopping $5.00 worth of gas last month. but show me a tankless that can deliver hot water for 20 years untouched/ unserviced.

                    show me a tankless that delivers instant hot water without waiting 10 seconds. show me one that delivers more than 7 gpm's. my jazuzzi tub is a joke to fill now. the 3/4'' valve for my spa is a waste as the volume coming from the hot is nothing compared to the cold. and yes my 40 had no problem filling the tub to the proper temperature.

                    even the tankless manufacturers have gone back on their over exzadurated promises.

                    the best quote i have from a tankless rep was "tankless are for tree huggers" his words not mine.

                    remember that there are plenty of us here that have 10-35 years of real plumbing experience. we know better than all of the tankless b.s they feed the public.

                    rick.
                    Last edited by PLUMBER RICK; 03-10-2009, 02:48 AM.
                    phoebe it is

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: The "Once and For ALL" Tankless Thread!

                      Ah... but the burgers don't look too bad.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X