I'm thinking or replacing some fairly elderly (20+ years I believe) hardwood double glazing including a large set if hinged patio doors.
I'm thinking about good quality triple glazed units in both cases. Am I likely to see much of an improvement given the extra layer and the passage of time?
The patio doors in particular are draughty anyway so I'd expect to see improvement there. Also are any of the modern alternatives to hardwood any good?
It's generally reckoned that upgrading from single to double glazing has a very long payback time (very many years) so I would expect that changing from double to triple would be far less cost-effective than that.
Draughtiness is a different issue altogether and not down to the number of layers of glass... can't you fix the draughts with methods other than replacing the windows?
uPVC windows etc are usually very effective at sealing the place up though there are other considerations, eg aesthetics; also compared to timber frames they are pretty hard to adjust if ever you do need to, in that eg you can't plane them, plug old screw holes with filler etc
David
triple glazing has its uses, but not many. The gain over dg isnt a lot. But your problems are evidently elsewhere. Draughts can often be fixed with a bit of silicone, apply to the frame, place clingfilm on the opener and shut the window/door. The silicone is then moulded to the frame. And there are other ways. Generally you can forget about retrofit dg or tg ever paying its cost back, only fit it if its genuinely needed.
NT
You could consider just changing the glazing for Pilkington K glass which is more efficient thermally than what you have and which will cost less than what you have.
Don't forget to give the cling film a coat of cooking oil to act as a release agent first though. It might also be a good idea to give the window/door a thin coat, in case of creep of silicone.
Dave
May or may not be worth it. Back in the UK my local glazier was charging a £50/m2 premium for low-E argon units over regular DG, probably reducing the U-value from about 2.8 to 2.0. I used to reckon that reducing the U-value by 1 saved £1/m2 on the average house, possibly £2 now, so that would give a 3.2% return, but that's cancelled out if you assume a 25-year life for sealed units. If you can get the low-E glass for a much lower price or energy prices increase significantly then the economics would be better.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.