Replace burner, replace boiler, or minimal change?

MichaelR

Hello,

I have a Grant 50/90 boiler with a Minor 1 burner. The combination is in for about 20 years, but the previous owners did not use it very much. A very good plumber across the road services the boiler and helps with issues.

The pipes from the boiler house into the house are apparently not well insulated - when there was frost, a line over them thawed. The plumber says that he can dig them out, insulate them, and dig them in deeper in the summer.

The boiler has failed today, with the orange light on the burner coming on. After a reset it failed again within less than two hours. The plumber will try and get a control box for the burner. If he can't get one or if it does not help, he says we need a new burner, but the boiler can last another 30 years.

So my question is - should we instead try to replace the boiler? It is a massive outlay (around 3 grand or so, I think, while the burner control box and the ppe work are only a few hundred). We are spending around 2000 liters of kerosene a year to heat the house (3 bed semi, most of it well insulated but the converted garage not so well) now, which translates to about 1200 Euro at current prices. I would not expect a saving of more than 100 Euro/year, right? Seems like a not-so-great idea to replace the boiler?

Or perhaps we should just replace the burner, not control box? That's not that expensive, but I don't know if the burner model affects efficiency at all.

EDIT: one more option seems to be getting an LPG gas boiler instead. The boilers seem to be cheaper and one can get a "combi" to have instant hot water around the house. But there is also the price of a new cylinder, and also, if we do it right away, the loss of existing kerosene. And the fuel price seems to be higher?

Wearb

If it runs for a couple of hours after a reset, then it is unlikely to be the control box. While your plumber seems like a very nice guy, not all of them are good on oil boiler diagnostics. You might be better off getting someone who works with oil boilers all the time to sort out your burner problem. Same guy should be able to advise on the economics of a complete boiler change, but certainly those pipes need lagging and sealing (no point in wet lagging).

While natural gas is fine, I never see a deal with LPG that doesn't eventually have a large payback. There may be guys on here that will disagree with that, but its an open forum and subject to lots of different opinions.

MichaelR

And suddenly, natural gas is available!

Tom44

Wearb wrote: »

If it runs for a couple of hours after a reset, then it is unlikely to be the control box. While your plumber seems like a very nice guy, not all of them are good on oil boiler diagnostics. You might be better off getting someone who works with oil boilers all the time to sort out your burner problem. Same guy should be able to advise on the economics of a complete boiler change, but certainly those pipes need lagging and sealing (no point in wet lagging).

While natural gas is fine, I never see a deal with LPG that doesn't eventually have a large payback. There may be guys on here that will disagree with that, but its an open forum and subject to lots of different opinions.

Agree too.


Michael
If your boiler is a EUROFLAME then that's a good standard efficent design.
SLIMLINE are a more inefficient model.
EASYCLEAN are worse.

Personal experience is seeing my customers saving 1/3 on fuel with new grant condensing boilers.

Your problem is not the control box.
Capacitor, coil, transformer or drive coupling more common.
Or broken airband.
Or a lot of other things.

MichaelR

Thanks!

The Grant boiler is a Euroflame 50~90. So I should expect to save perhaps 1/4 of the oil if I get a new boiler,especially if I perhaps put it closer to the house so I get less outdoor pipes?

And *if* I replace the boiler, the new question is - oil or natural gas?

Sadly, when we were doing up the house a couple of years ago, we did not know natural gas was available in the estate. Only a couple of people have chosen it, and these were not the people we talked to much. The others knew but never told us because we never asked and they don't think much of it.

So if I go for the natural gas it's extra spending for breaking up some of those new tiles in front of the house and putting down new ones, etc. Also, in that case the new hot water tank we have put in 2 years ago turns out useless.

But, the gas boiler is inside the house, so no heat loss to pipes outside. And instant hot water at any time. And possibly a SEAI grant, though I am not sure their "control system" requirements are worth it.

I would appreciate ideas on new oil vs natural gas.

Also - one more idea I am considering is getting a used Riello burner, not doing up the pipes, just using things as they are for another 3-4 years, then doing up the new gas boiler together with other works that we are looking at in the same timeframe. This works specifically for gas because of the invasive nature of the works. Or is this too risky?

K.Flyer

You only need to get rid of the hot water cylinder if you are going for a Combi Gas Boiler. Then, most likely, you are going to have the cost of a pump taking the water from the tank to create equalised pressure at taps and showers.
Unless you are hankering for the combi boiler set up, stick with the normal "system" boiler.

MichaelR

And if we take the combi boiler out of the picture, is there a significant reason to go with gas and not oil?

It looks like an oil installation might cost me about 1000 Euro less than gas (give or take), even though the "system" boiler itself is cheaper. There is too much work involved in digging up the front of the house and bringing the gas pipe through the house itself to the utility room. I can place a freestanding oil boiler closer to the house to minimize pipe loss, or use the existing boiler house and insulate the pipes well. (An oil boiler inside the house is probably too much hassle, especially w/o Combi).

JamesM

Ifyou do not want to spend too much at the moment, I would buy the Riello burner - if it is compatible, and if the run of pipes to the house is more than a couple of metres, I would replace and insulate those - especially if they are gunbarrell - also if you intend leaving the boiler where it is in the future. With a minor 1, it is probably the transformer that has a weak spark.
Jim

MichaelR

Well the thing is, if I replace the burner with a Riello and also dig up and insulate the pipes I'm down at least 700 Euro. A new freestanding outdoors condensing boiler of 90k BTU is listed at 1400 Euro, so i guess it will be under 2000 installed, and I can put it much closer to the house and also insulate the new short pipes. The difference is just over 1000 and I have a new boiler, not an old boiler with a new burner - might be more efficient?

Tom44

For the time being, I'd just fit burner.
Till you decided what to permanently do.
More than likely your pipes are insulated, but not terribly well. And not deep enough.
Unless the ground is actually warm / hot, the heat loss might actually be minimal, and the cost mightn't justify the savings.
2°c would stop the ground freezing where the pipes are.

MichaelR

If we look at "for the time being", might it make sense to get a used burner?

Tom44

One breakdown with a "used" burner will be more expensive than a new reliable burner.

MichaelR

You mean the burner, when breaking down, can take the boiler with it?

Tom44

Unless you have a very understanding wife, fit a new burner.:)