Replacement Heating System (System 2000 vs others)

T. Downie

Does anyone have any experience with the high efficiency Viessmann systems? I have heard they are comparable. Are there any dealers in the CT/RI area? I have seen their building going through Warwick, RI

T. Downie

Heating system replacement (System 2000 vs others)

I need to replace my Burnham/Becket heating system due to a crack in the cast iron water jacket. I have the option the replace the water jacket for a cost of $1,500 or to upgrade to a System 2000 for $7,500. Having trouble justifying the $6,000 cost delta, however there is a possible $600/yr fuel bill savings if an efficient improvement of 30% is truely achieved. Looking for a recommendation based on experience and field history as to whether the System 2000 is worth the money in the long rund. I have also heard the Viessmann make a similar system and wanted to know if this product was worth looking into as well.

Will_5

Burnham

I'm pretty sure Burnham will also give you a rebate towards an upgrade to their MPO three pass boiler. I've put in a couple and they are very nice and efficient package. You could certainly add a enrgy management system to it to go a step further. The rebate from the manufacturer would sure bring down the cost of a new system.

Just a thought.

[Deleted User]

System 2000

My experiences with the system 2000 have been all good,never had one complaint after the sale and most did not need cleaned 5 years later with only nozzle and oil filter annually

Bob Forand

Tall order

Am I correct in assuming that the tech that quoted you actually told you that you may see a $600 savings in fuel cost? If I were you I would ask a couple of questions of that tech. 1) Will you put that in writing ? 2) Will you guarantee that in writing ? 3) How is the system that you are proposing going to achieve those outstanding fuel savings ? I am doubting the accuracy off his statements. If you are swapping boiler for boiler and not changing the system components, that is one tall order. I would really question those statements before you make the change. There are other options out there that could potentially SAVE you thousands, not cost you thousands. Such as swap the boiler for another Burnham and the look at the SYSTEM itself. Such things, as adding outdoor reset controls, insulation to the piping, indirect DHW if you don't already have a tank, etc. There are many ways to increase your SYSTEM efficiency without spending that kind of money on a system 2000. I would also urge you to get more estimates. Good luck...

Norm Harvey

Bob,

The system 2000 incorporates as standard many of the things you suggest.

As EK Dealer I would have no problems putting in writing that you will save $600 yearly opposed to a burnham with an L8124. (I would convert the dollar amount to a gallon amount were a customer to ask me to put something in writing though.)

I do agree with you that the $6,000 may be better spent, I would say on things like insulation and weather stripping.

System 2000 is a great boiler for a fin tube baseboard heating system.

To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"

Bob Forand

Norm

Thanks for your response, I can't say that I know alot about the system 2000 boiler. I do know a bit about their heat manager system, and the increase in efficiency. However, that still seems to me to be a tall order. At what point could this homeowner see a savings of $600 per year ? Would this efficiency savings last for the entire 10 years ? Please don't take this as challenging because that is not the intent. If you could shed more light I certainly would look forward to learning more. Let's just say he has 100 feet of b/b, and his system was originally designed around that footage on a high temp system, how would he save $600 per year in fuel costs?

T. Downie

Additional info on Burnham and application

To clarify things a bit I have a house with 2x6 construction. The heating system is a hydroair with one coil in the basement next to the furnace and the other in a third floor attic. Fuel savings I based on the 30% efficiency improvement times the amount I spent on oil last season. At present my 12 yr old Burnham boiler (model # V-74-T)has a crack and is leaking (a known problem) and I am looking for a more efficient replacement.

Dave_4

System change

Well, I'll bet he sees better than $600 savings myself. It would be a huge difference.

Robert O'Brien

In

my experience would expect about a 35% drop in gallonage consumption with a EK.

To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"

Norm Harvey

The main bennefit comes from not maintaining any low limit,its low mass design, and somewhat from the circulator evacuating the remaining heat from the boiler after a sone is satisfied.

You could argue that any boiler can be equipped with a l8148 control and not maintain a low limit if it has an indirect HW tank, but the low mass system 2000 can heat its 2.5 gallons to 140 degrees in approximately 90 seconds. Think of the energy and fuel it would take to heat up a boiler with say 12 gallons, and multiply that savings over each and every cycle.


You could very well equip any other burnham, WM, smith, etc boiler with controls to do all the same things, but still not have the low mass feature. The system 2000 is all that with a very simple control. Should the system 2000 have any problems with its proprietary control, no problem, it begins to operate on its high limit like a "dumb" boiler. theres never a no heat condition to the customer that cant be remedied even if you dont have the parts.

Speaking of parts, there are only two that are special to the system 2000. One is the digital manager, and the other the return temp sensor. should you have a problem with eiter,... simply remove the return temp sensor and the boiler will operate off its high limit as mentioned.

As far as combustion efficiency,.. believe it or not it gets better with age. The only way I can explain it, and I dont know if this is the actual reason, but it makes sense,... the surface of the steel after the initial installation and combustion test becomes "roughed up" slowing the velocity of the flue gas and allowing more time to exchange its heat to the water inside.

Typicly, on the day of install I see 84-85% and a year or two later 85-87% due to lower flue gas temperature.

Add to all that that the boiler come pre-piped in a pumping away setup, and the package price includes everything you will possibly need save for an expansion tank and the copper to plumb the existing zones to the new zone valves,.. its a winner for me.


Older system 2000's were a pain when the insulation boards started to go, they had holes through them where the supply and return piping would go so you couldnt replace the front insulation board without some serious work. Now, you can replace boththe fron and back insulation boards with ease, in such a time frame that you could do it durning an annual maintenance.


I am a huge fan of the system 2000 but I know its limitations. Although you could probably do radiant with it if you incorporated a buffer tank, I fould rather choose a different boiler.

Ive also installed system 2000 to replace a large gravity water boiler (that had already been converted to forced hot water) by using primary-secondary and that works well, though I dont have any real hard numbers to make a case for that yet.

I know I went off on a tangent there,.. I just hope I made any sense.

- Norm

To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"