Hi folks... This is a continuation of the question I asked under "New Construction vs. Retrofit." True-blue, Xsleeper, Guy, and AnotherWindowGuy, you gave me such good answers, I hope you will take a look at this and comment. Until yesterday, I thought that there were 2 kinds of installation: new construction (nail-on) and retrofit. As I now understand things, there are 3 kinds of installation:
(1) Nail-on, where the old window, including the fin, is taken out, which breaks the moisture barrier. The new window is nailed on to the frame (jamb?) by its fin, the moisture barrier is replaced, etc.
(2) What I'll call "semi-retrofit." The old window frame is taken out, but the old fin is left. The new window, which has no fin, is put into the old opening and is held in place by nailing it to the sides of the jamb. Then caulking is put around between the window and the jamb. The building's moisture barrier is never broken.
(3) Retrofit: The old window's sashes and glass are removed, but not the window frame. The new window is put inside the old window frame.
I realize I may not have written this exactly correctly, but does the gist seem right?
What I understand your answers to "new construction vs. retrofit" to say is that #3 is superior to both #1 and #2. Is that correct? If #2 were done well, would it be likely to cause more problems than #1? (Is using these numbers helpful or a pain in the butt??)
Also you mention differences in cost when buildings are brick (and I assume stucco also), but what about in a wood building?
I thought that seeing a picture of a window in my building might help, and I have a good one, but I can't figure out how to post it. If someone can tell me how, I'll post it.
Thank you again for your help.javascript:emoticon(':D')
javascript:emoticon(':D')
Now I get it--there are 3 kinds of installation, not 2.
Your in the ballpark but need some clarification.
#1 or "Total Replacement" (or New Construction as it's sometimes called). Is when you remove the old window down to the studs. The exterior side gets the brickmould or nail fin removed along with it. If an existing nail fin is present we remove any siding to access the fin. If the house is wrapped with Tyvek or any other house wrap. We cut along the outside of the nail fin so we don't damage any of the wrap around the window. Ounce we remove the old window we tape new wrap in place to re-seal the barrier. The new window is installed and nailed in place. The bottom and sides are then taped. The top is taped down under the barrier first and then the top flap of house wrap is taped down over that. We are now back to the safe zone in protection. This is the best way to do any replacement if possible.
#2 or Insert Replacement (Retrofit) you have down well.
#3 is the same as number one but cheating. I'm always very concerned when this is done. Any mistake in caulking or can foaming can result in a major leaking problem. The only time we do it this way is when it's in a protected area from rain or the house has a siding we can't remove. But it's always a scary thing to deal with in my opinion.
#1 or "Total Replacement" (or New Construction as it's sometimes called). Is when you remove the old window down to the studs. The exterior side gets the brickmould or nail fin removed along with it. If an existing nail fin is present we remove any siding to access the fin. If the house is wrapped with Tyvek or any other house wrap. We cut along the outside of the nail fin so we don't damage any of the wrap around the window. Ounce we remove the old window we tape new wrap in place to re-seal the barrier. The new window is installed and nailed in place. The bottom and sides are then taped. The top is taped down under the barrier first and then the top flap of house wrap is taped down over that. We are now back to the safe zone in protection. This is the best way to do any replacement if possible.
#2 or Insert Replacement (Retrofit) you have down well.
#3 is the same as number one but cheating. I'm always very concerned when this is done. Any mistake in caulking or can foaming can result in a major leaking problem. The only time we do it this way is when it's in a protected area from rain or the house has a siding we can't remove. But it's always a scary thing to deal with in my opinion.
Thanks Guy! I think that this information will be helpful to a lot of people.
Now my question is whether I was correct about the fact that #1 is the better option than #2 (although more expensive). Again, my building is wood, so from what I understand, the job is much easier than if it were brick or stucco.
Also, if someone will tell me how to post a picture, I'd like to post one.
You folks are the best! Have a great day everyone!
Now my question is whether I was correct about the fact that #1 is the better option than #2 (although more expensive). Again, my building is wood, so from what I understand, the job is much easier than if it were brick or stucco.
Also, if someone will tell me how to post a picture, I'd like to post one.
You folks are the best! Have a great day everyone!
1,2,3
PVW I think you may have confused your own numbers. Here's some previous statements and my thoughts:
"What I understand your answers to "new construction vs. retrofit" to say is that #3 is superior to both #1 and #2. Is that correct?" NO, that is not correct! I was saying that #1 (new construction install) is potentially superior to #3 (retrofit), not the other way around. The advantage of #3 is that is is less costly for both labor and materials. The advantages of #1 are the same as stated previously.
"(2) What I'll call "semi-retrofit." The old window frame is taken out, but the old fin is left. The new window, which has no fin, is put into the old opening and is held in place by nailing it to the sides of the jamb. Then caulking is put around between the window and the jamb. The building's moisture barrier is never broken." The building's moisture barrier IS broken. The key barrier that married the window frame to the building (i.e., the fin) is severed from the frame. Also, caulking IS NOT ENOUGH in this situation. In addition to caulk, you need backer rod behind it. In fact many manufacturers will not warranty their products if used in a non-fin new construction installation without backer rod. The backer rod (a foam rope, basically) is inserted into the opening between the frame and the rough opening from the outside, and the caulk goes on top of that. Foam insulation then can be used on the inside to create an additional barrier to air and water infiltration.
"If #2 were done well, would it be likely to cause more problems than #1?" If #2 (new construction semi-retrofit cutting the fin) is done correctly, it should be a "tie." But it better be a pretty damn perfect job. As Guy said: "I'm always very concerned when this is done. Any mistake in caulking or can foaming can result in a major leaking problem. The only time we do it this way is when it's in a protected area from rain or the house has a siding we can't remove. But it's always a scary thing to deal with in my opinion." I share Guy's concern. I have seen numerous jobs where this wasn't done correctly, and water did enter the building cavity. It's not as much of a threat on a small home with small window openings, but on a $650,000+ lake home with 50MPH driving rains year after year with a 4-wide window with a 4-wide transom (for example), there would be more movement and deflection and it had better be a perfect job.
"Also you mention differences in cost when buildings are brick (and I assume stucco also), but what about in a wood building? " Doesn't matter, the work is about the same. It might be trimmed a bit differently by some installers, but it's pretty much the same. Install the window. Seal the window into the sash opening or rough opening to prevent water & air infiltration. Cap the wood parts if any on the exterior.
"Now my question is whether I was correct about the fact that #1 is the better option than #2 (although more expensive). Again, my building is wood, so from what I understand, the job is much easier than if it were brick or stucco." Yes #1 (Total replacement) is better than #2 (Semi-retrofit, or cutting the fins). However, #1 is normally CHEAPER than #2 also, in contrast with your inquiry (unless MAYBE you're taking off the fins burried by the siding). Less work, less worries. To me it doesn't matter if it's brick or wood siding, it's about the same amount of work (unless I'm removing the old fins).
"Also, if someone will tell me how to post a picture, I'd like to post one." I hesitate to say how to post a picture because some people may post inappropriately large pictures or a large quantity. When pictures are posted at this site, those with dialup or lower-end DSL have to wait a LONG time for the web page to load if the pictures are large. I would suggest that people shrink the pictures down to less than 1 megapixel (800 x 600 max) before posting. Just a suggestion. I have a cable connection so it loads fast; I'm just thinking of those that don't. Having said that, here's how: When posting a message, there are several formatting boxes above the text box (bold, italics, underline, etc.). One of those boxes says "Img" (meaning "image"). Click on the "Img box" then paste the URL of the location of the picture, then click the "Img" box again to close it. This means of course that you have to have the picture stored online so that you have a URL to point to. The URL has to end with a JPG. So, for example, if you had pictures at your own personal website, or Snapfish Photos, or Yahoo Photos, or Smugmug Photos (my choice), you would right-click on that picture and select "Properties," then copy/ paste the address into this website. I hope that makes sense. One thing I have noticed is that pictures always seem to work at this site's sister website (replacement-windows.com), but only work sometimes (about 20% of the time?)at this site.
"What I understand your answers to "new construction vs. retrofit" to say is that #3 is superior to both #1 and #2. Is that correct?" NO, that is not correct! I was saying that #1 (new construction install) is potentially superior to #3 (retrofit), not the other way around. The advantage of #3 is that is is less costly for both labor and materials. The advantages of #1 are the same as stated previously.
"(2) What I'll call "semi-retrofit." The old window frame is taken out, but the old fin is left. The new window, which has no fin, is put into the old opening and is held in place by nailing it to the sides of the jamb. Then caulking is put around between the window and the jamb. The building's moisture barrier is never broken." The building's moisture barrier IS broken. The key barrier that married the window frame to the building (i.e., the fin) is severed from the frame. Also, caulking IS NOT ENOUGH in this situation. In addition to caulk, you need backer rod behind it. In fact many manufacturers will not warranty their products if used in a non-fin new construction installation without backer rod. The backer rod (a foam rope, basically) is inserted into the opening between the frame and the rough opening from the outside, and the caulk goes on top of that. Foam insulation then can be used on the inside to create an additional barrier to air and water infiltration.
"If #2 were done well, would it be likely to cause more problems than #1?" If #2 (new construction semi-retrofit cutting the fin) is done correctly, it should be a "tie." But it better be a pretty damn perfect job. As Guy said: "I'm always very concerned when this is done. Any mistake in caulking or can foaming can result in a major leaking problem. The only time we do it this way is when it's in a protected area from rain or the house has a siding we can't remove. But it's always a scary thing to deal with in my opinion." I share Guy's concern. I have seen numerous jobs where this wasn't done correctly, and water did enter the building cavity. It's not as much of a threat on a small home with small window openings, but on a $650,000+ lake home with 50MPH driving rains year after year with a 4-wide window with a 4-wide transom (for example), there would be more movement and deflection and it had better be a perfect job.
"Also you mention differences in cost when buildings are brick (and I assume stucco also), but what about in a wood building? " Doesn't matter, the work is about the same. It might be trimmed a bit differently by some installers, but it's pretty much the same. Install the window. Seal the window into the sash opening or rough opening to prevent water & air infiltration. Cap the wood parts if any on the exterior.
"Now my question is whether I was correct about the fact that #1 is the better option than #2 (although more expensive). Again, my building is wood, so from what I understand, the job is much easier than if it were brick or stucco." Yes #1 (Total replacement) is better than #2 (Semi-retrofit, or cutting the fins). However, #1 is normally CHEAPER than #2 also, in contrast with your inquiry (unless MAYBE you're taking off the fins burried by the siding). Less work, less worries. To me it doesn't matter if it's brick or wood siding, it's about the same amount of work (unless I'm removing the old fins).
"Also, if someone will tell me how to post a picture, I'd like to post one." I hesitate to say how to post a picture because some people may post inappropriately large pictures or a large quantity. When pictures are posted at this site, those with dialup or lower-end DSL have to wait a LONG time for the web page to load if the pictures are large. I would suggest that people shrink the pictures down to less than 1 megapixel (800 x 600 max) before posting. Just a suggestion. I have a cable connection so it loads fast; I'm just thinking of those that don't. Having said that, here's how: When posting a message, there are several formatting boxes above the text box (bold, italics, underline, etc.). One of those boxes says "Img" (meaning "image"). Click on the "Img box" then paste the URL of the location of the picture, then click the "Img" box again to close it. This means of course that you have to have the picture stored online so that you have a URL to point to. The URL has to end with a JPG. So, for example, if you had pictures at your own personal website, or Snapfish Photos, or Yahoo Photos, or Smugmug Photos (my choice), you would right-click on that picture and select "Properties," then copy/ paste the address into this website. I hope that makes sense. One thing I have noticed is that pictures always seem to work at this site's sister website (replacement-windows.com), but only work sometimes (about 20% of the time?)at this site.
Tru_blue, you were so right: I did mix up my numbers in one of my questions javascript:emoticon(':oops:')
javascript:emoticon(':oops:'). What I meant was "Is nail-on superior to semi-retrofit?" This is what I get for trying to do this late at night! Anyway, I think your answer is clear--go with new construction (nail-on) unless cost prohibits it. Your reply has so much good information that I want to print it out and read it carefully to make sure I understand it fully--like maybe in the daytime when I'm a little fresher.
So thank you so much for the advice about the windows, and also about posting the pictures. Right now, my pictures are not on any URL--just on my own computer. I'll check to see if I can get them on a URL and upload them to this site. Although I think I'm decided at this point, who knows--maybe they will bring up some issue that will be helpful to me and, even more important at this point, to others... and that's the point, isn't it?
Again, thank you.
javascript:emoticon(':oops:'). What I meant was "Is nail-on superior to semi-retrofit?" This is what I get for trying to do this late at night! Anyway, I think your answer is clear--go with new construction (nail-on) unless cost prohibits it. Your reply has so much good information that I want to print it out and read it carefully to make sure I understand it fully--like maybe in the daytime when I'm a little fresher.
So thank you so much for the advice about the windows, and also about posting the pictures. Right now, my pictures are not on any URL--just on my own computer. I'll check to see if I can get them on a URL and upload them to this site. Although I think I'm decided at this point, who knows--maybe they will bring up some issue that will be helpful to me and, even more important at this point, to others... and that's the point, isn't it?
Again, thank you.
800-399-4623