2.4 M sliding door

km79

Just about to start new build hopefully !

Have started to get prices for windows and doors in the West.
[snip] are the most competitive and would be my preferred supplier for a few other reasons.
There is one issue however.
The sliding door . The opening is planned to be 2.4 meters.
They only have a choice of two sliders which are basically budget and premium . Other companies seem to have a mid range option .
The rep has told me I have basically two choices as 2.4 M triple glazed would make the budget option too heavy.
Option 1- make the opening smaller . 2m . Would prefer not to do that.
Option 2 - make the opening bigger . 3m. He said to justify the price of the premium lift and slide we would need to this and it would cost the same as 2.4 m . It’s tight to do this but I think we can just about fit it in. It’s 3 grand more though .........

Kind of caught in the middle . Literally . The door will be used quite a bit so I do not want a crappy budget slider that breaks down or is hard to move. 3 grand is a lot more though ..........

Any advice appreciated . Particularly around that kind of material , railing i should be looking at for the 2.4m. Or indeed if I should just make it bigger .
It’s a w/sw aspect at side of rural house with neighbours on that side . There may be a small paved patio area but main patio will be to rear of house

dubrov

Why not just go double glazed? If it's south facing you won't need the extra glazing

greasepalm

Have a look at these guys as seen in the RDS many times at shows and quality is brilliant.

snip

km79

dubrov wrote: »

Why not just go double glazed? If it's south facing you won't need the extra glazing

Going for A rating . BER species triple glazing. It’s quite a windy site too so want maximum noise reduction

com1

So the options are a 2m slider or, for 3k extra, a 3m lift and slide? I would definitely go for the 3m lift and slide.

I had option 1 in previous house... it was only OK. Renovated current house put lift and slide into extension... delighted with it. Night and day... well worth the extra cost

Much more secure too.

km79

com1 wrote: »

So the options are a 2m slider or, for 3k extra, a 3m lift and slide? I would definitely go for the 3m lift and slide.

I had option 1 in previous house... it was only OK. Renovated current house put lift and slide into extension... delighted with it. Night and day... well worth the extra cost

Much more secure too.

Yeah that’s the way we are leaning too . Would like to see them in person but it’s not possible at the moment . Hard make costly decisions based on phone calls and internet photos

I should say I am waiting for another local company to get back to me . They have a mid range option.
They were due to have quote back to me by Monday. I called Thursday . He said he was on site and too busy but would call me at 3pm Friday. He never called. He won’t be getting another phone call.

com1

km79 wrote: »

Yeah that’s the way we are leaning too . Would like to see them in person but it’s not possible at the moment . Hard make costly decisions based on phone calls and internet photos

Pity you cannot physically compare... are there no glazing showrooms open... I see a lot of builders merchants still open. The lift and slide tech is impressive and while you know you are moving substantial weight, it is quite easy to get moving and once going takes little effort to manage.

km79

com1 wrote: »

Pity you cannot physically compare... are there no glazing showrooms open... I see a lot of builders merchants still open. The lift and slide tech is impressive and while you know you are moving substantial weight, it is quite easy to get moving and once going takes little effort to manage.

Maybe if restrictions ease a little .....

BryanF

dubrov wrote: »

Why not just go double glazed? If it's south facing you won't need the extra glazing

Dubrov, prove this ascertain?

It been debunked many time before here.

listermint

Don't use a slider ? If that's the full width of your opening then you only get half of that width opening.

I'd go with French doors. You then get full opening.

listermint

BryanF wrote: »

Dubrov, prove this ascertain?

It been debunked many time before here.

I'm sure it's been debunked cut the difference is quite negligible tbf. Is it worth the cost and weight unless you are trying to keep noise at bay ? Personally id say no is not. But its up to the individual.

If I was south facing and no noise concerns I wouldn't bother my arse.

km79

listermint wrote: »

Don't use a slider ? If that's the full width of your opening then you only get half of that width opening.

I'd go with French doors. You then get full opening.

It’s too windy
We are renting house two doors down
French doors can’t be opened whenever there is a puff of wind
Glass has smashed on a few occasions before we moved in
There is now a big ugly bit of wavin pipe wrapped in insulation drilled into steps outside

I think we are going to go for the lift and slide now anyways . Prob make it 3m

BryanF

listermint wrote: »

I'm sure it's been debunked cut the difference is quite negligible tbf. Is it worth the cost and weight unless you are trying to keep noise at bay ? Personally id say no is not. But its up to the individual.

If I was south facing and no noise concerns I wouldn't bother my arse.

Ah come on

double glazing is max 1w/m2k
Triple glazing is at say .6w/m2k

Frames are the weak link but a double glazed overall unit will ~1.4w/m2k at best
Triple glazing will can be down at 0.8 (passive standard or typically about 1w/m2k

What ever way you look at it, that’s a 1/3 improvement

When you consider our wall u-values are down at 0.2 :

0.2 v 1.4 or 0.2 v 1 is a massive difference ie 1/3 better

As for this south facing BS, glazing where ever it is always has 10time more heat loss than usable heat gain

As for ‘triple v double with light transmittance, triple can be as little as 10% less light transmittance (that’s 70 v 60%), again in the context it’s negligible and not relevant to the heat gain discussion unless we are taking overheating.

South facing has FA to do with it, triple is the only glazing that should be considered in a new build, any salesman that tells you differently is selling you an inferior product.

Biker1

BryanF wrote: »

Ah come on

double glazing is max 1w/m2k
Triple glazing is at say .6w/m2k

Frames are the weak link but a double glazed overall unit will ~1.4w/m2k at best
Triple glazing will can be down at 0.8 (passive standard or typically about 1w/m2k

What ever way you look at it, that’s a 1/3 improvement

When you consider our wall u-values are down at 0.2 :

0.2 v 1.4 or 0.2 v 1 is a massive difference ie 1/3 better

As for this south facing BS, glazing where ever it is always has 10time more heat loss than usable heat gain

As for ‘triple v double with light transmittance, triple can be as little as 10% less light transmittance (that’s 70 v 60%), again in the context it’s negligible and not relevant to the heat gain discussion unless we are taking overheating.

South facing has FA to do with it, triple is the only glazing that should be considered in a new build, any salesman that tells you differently is selling you an inferior product.

Well said Bryan. Have this issue a lot lately with self builders getting their info from Facebook.

Gumbo

km79 wrote: »

Going for A rating . BER species triple glazing. It’s quite a windy site too so want maximum noise reduction

Every new build in the country is A rated. They all don’t have triple glazing.
Could you compromise on this unit alone?

km79

Gumbo wrote: »

Every new build in the country is A rated. They all don’t have triple glazing.
Could you compromise on this unit alone?

I am fairly sure I am just going to spend the cash and go slightly bigger
Thanks for the advice all the same

dubrov

BryanF wrote:

Dubrov, prove this ascertain?

BryanF wrote:

It been debunked many time before here.

I assume you mean assertion.

I never said triple glazing wasn't better. Just that the impact would be minimal on the overall BER if only the sliding doors were changed to double glazing. Double glazing means lighter doors which makes more options available.

I did an A2 new build myself and have two large double glazed sliding doors. The rest of the house is triple glazed. I certainly have no regrets at all in that area.

listermint

BryanF wrote: »

Ah come on

double glazing is max 1w/m2k
Triple glazing is at say .6w/m2k

Frames are the weak link but a double glazed overall unit will ~1.4w/m2k at best
Triple glazing will can be down at 0.8 (passive standard or typically about 1w/m2k

What ever way you look at it, that’s a 1/3 improvement

When you consider our wall u-values are down at 0.2 :

0.2 v 1.4 or 0.2 v 1 is a massive difference ie 1/3 better

As for this south facing BS, glazing where ever it is always has 10time more heat loss than usable heat gain

As for ‘triple v double with light transmittance, triple can be as little as 10% less light transmittance (that’s 70 v 60%), again in the context it’s negligible and not relevant to the heat gain discussion unless we are taking overheating.

South facing has FA to do with it, triple is the only glazing that should be considered in a new build, any salesman that tells you differently is selling you an inferior product.

Salesman ? I'm not listening to salesmen thanks. Picking figures out of the air about window pain u values is a nonsense without discussing the overall envelope and of course solar gain is part of a discussion.

Cherry picking is what it is.

BryanF

listermint wrote: »

Salesman ? I'm not listening to salesmen thanks. Picking figures out of the air about window pain u values is a nonsense without discussing the overall envelope and of course solar gain is part of a discussion.

Cherry picking is what it is.

The overall u-value doesn’t need a discussion, the weakest link by far is double glazing. I

Lantus

Get the air tightness rating of the door. A lot of those sliding doors are poor and your windy site will expose an issue instantly. Needs to be passive house standard I'd say.

Triple glazed but draughty is no good.

BryanF

dubrov wrote: »

I assume you mean assertion.

I did thanks

I never said triple glazing wasn't better. Just that the impact would be minimal on the overall BER if only the sliding doors were changed to double glazing. Double glazing means lighter doors which makes more options available..

you didn’t really say that:

dubrov wrote: »

Why not just go double glazed? If it's south facing you won't need the extra glazing

fundamentally disagree with this statement, it suggest that somehow south facing has some relevance when considering to install inferior glazing. whether there was a minimal impact to a specific houses BER is not the point. As also discussed here many times before, the BER system is not exactly flawless..

I did an A2 new build myself and have two large double glazed sliding doors. The rest of the house is triple glazed. I certainly have no regrets at all in that area.

Part L changed since your build.

BryanF

listermint wrote: »

Salesman ? I'm not listening to salesmen thanks. Picking figures out of the air about window pain u values is a nonsense without discussing the overall envelope and of course solar gain is part of a discussion.

Cherry picking is what it is.

A bit surprised by this post? Cherry picking? If that’s whats called using relative values to debunk a myth?

Re overall envelope: Let’s pick some more u-values out of the air shall we? The overall envelope for example with 50mm polystyrene insulation (@say 0.5w/m2k, so that caters for most thermal junctions in a new build) will be better than most triple glazing units. So glazing and particularly doors are generally the ‘weakest link’ thermally.

As for solar gain, I’ve already explained that I’m my previous post. In any calculations I’ve ever seen or done using normal triple v double glass types, the light/solar gain affect of triple v double is not worth talking about.

dubrov

BryanF wrote:

Part L changed since your build.

When did the regulations change and what was in the changes that is relevant?

I checked the uw values in the windows I bought and the values were a lot closer between double and triple glazing than your estimates.

Anyway, my point is that the OP will not notice the difference in potentially the warmest room in the house

Gumbo

dubrov wrote: »

When did the regulations change and what was in the changes that is relevant?

I checked the uw values in the windows I bought and the values were a lot closer between double and triple glazing than your estimates.

Anyway, my point is that the OP will not notice the difference in potentially the warmest room in the house

2019.

In general, this document applies to works, or dwellings in which a material alteration or change of use or major renovation commences or takes place, as the case may be, on or after 1st November 2019. I

dubrov

Gumbo wrote:

2019.

Thanks I was just before that.

Have the regulations got so tight that they can't be met without triple glazing everything now?

Gumbo

dubrov wrote: »

Thanks I was just before that.

Have the regulations got so tight that they can't be met without triple glazing everything now?

It’s not that you need TG, but obviously it’s hose specific and the design may require TG over DG.

But the air tightness, space heating, fabric insulation and renewables have definitely got tighter. The A2 is the minimum rating now I believe.