Majestic vs Okna 600

For all those Replacement Window decisions - just read, review or post a question. You will be helped!
Message
Author
toddinmn
Posts: 565
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 7:11 am

Re: Majestic vs Okna 600

#16 Post by toddinmn » Sat Aug 10, 2019 2:00 pm

On a side note , what extrusion is the Majestic window based on? They do have some pretty good permanent numbers.

masterext
Posts: 777
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 9:14 pm
Location: New Jersey Window Pro- Northern NJ and Central NJ

Re: Majestic vs Okna 600

#17 Post by masterext » Sun Aug 11, 2019 9:12 am

I forget what extrusion the Ideal “ Majestic” uses. However, its very strong and has a very nice looking sash design.

User avatar
HomeSealed
Posts: 2506
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 6:14 pm
Location: Milwaukee, Madison areas
Contact:

Re: Majestic vs Okna 600

#18 Post by HomeSealed » Mon Aug 12, 2019 10:52 am

toddinmn wrote:
Sat Aug 10, 2019 1:59 pm
Homesealed, I agree with what your saying but my point was it is typically not the manufacturer promoting this.
Going from what original poster said 366 and similar glass packs may be what he is looking for. I have many jobs in my northern climate where I recommend 366 type glass packages. I have not seen an credible data where a 272 package with a lower U value and higher solar outperforms a 366 package with lower solar except on some passive houses. I typically do use a 272 type glass on surface 3 and like using 366 type glass on sunrooms or with walls with a lot of glass. Neither of these are “standard or default options through my manufacturer. I would say in southern climates the choice is more clear cut and much easier to figure out when it comes to money saved on energy expenses and comfort.
I don't disagree at all with most of that Todd. You are properly applying a specific glass package based on the details, and that is the best thing that a homeowner can ask for. I also agree that the choices are more clear in hot climates, as they simply want to block heat, where here we benefit from some of that, but not too much either. There is definitely data to support the U value/shgc trade-off in a cold climate, I believe that you reference that often when the .27 Northern region u value is discussed, citing that an alternative (albeit uncommon) method to qualify is the higher shgc tier where the u value and shgc both are allowed/required to be higher.

My initial comments may have OVER generalized to some degree, however I see far more dealers (and a few manufacturers) that recommend 366 across the board here in the north, and for the only reason that it benefits them in selling more windows due to the appearance of better performance, as opposed to what may actually be the appropriate prescription and what would be in the best interest of the homeowner.... You could be correct that the OP homeowner is looking for such a package --OR-- they could simply be looking for the improvement that a 272 type package would offer and are simply unaware of the matter on a deeper level, and the discussion here could be enlightening in that regard... Either way I believe we agree that 1) more information for homeowners is better, and 2) 366 type glass (or even 366 WITH a surface 4 coating as one poplar manufacturer promotes) are not the ideal default glass choice for a northern climate.

On a related note, do you have anyone in your area pushing high solar gain glass as a default? Say something like that .30U / >.41 SHGC that would still qualify for Energy Star?... Not super common, but they seem to be popping up here and there. What are your thoughts on that?

toddinmn
Posts: 565
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 7:11 am

Re: Majestic vs Okna 600

#19 Post by toddinmn » Tue Aug 13, 2019 11:35 am

The only place I see anyone pushing a high solar heat gain is Menards. They stick windows on shelf with a 0.30 U and 0.51 solar. If you were to special order you would have to select the glass pack.
For me the data is not that clear cut since there are to many variables from house to house, I find it like the black art of tuning a 2-stroke .

ottoguy
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:18 pm

Re: Majestic vs Okna 600

#20 Post by ottoguy » Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:05 pm

I appreciate all of the responses. I understood there was different glass, but I didn't realize it was fairly standardized across the industry.

When looking at 272 vs 366 glass would a user be able to see a visible difference? Heating my house usually isn't a problem it's the cooling that struggles. That's why I was exploring the lower E glass. I understand that I'm in a middle climate where some heat from the windows may be helpful in the winter though.

User avatar
HomeSealed
Posts: 2506
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 6:14 pm
Location: Milwaukee, Madison areas
Contact:

Re: Majestic vs Okna 600

#21 Post by HomeSealed » Thu Aug 15, 2019 10:38 am

toddinmn wrote:
Tue Aug 13, 2019 11:35 am
The only place I see anyone pushing a high solar heat gain is Menards. They stick windows on shelf with a 0.30 U and 0.51 solar. If you were to special order you would have to select the glass pack.
For me the data is not that clear cut since there are to many variables from house to house, I find it like the black art of tuning a 2-stroke .
I never noticed that Menards carried that profile... Which line? Jeldwen? Hayfield?

As far as the data, I think that is mostly clear, but I agree that the application of that data gets a bit muddier up north here, I think that's what you may be saying as well. The degree of benefit to be gained by fine tuning your average home that was placed and designed with zero regard to solar heating through the windows is definitely debatable, and I think most of us that contribute here realize that and recommend more generalized climate based packages as opposed to fine tuning based on the home (something like 366 on the north facing windows, high solar gain on south and west, etc). The size of those windows, landscaping or lack thereof, all play into that... even then though, I agree that it can be a fine art art without guaranteed results on an average home.... In my opinion, for a climate like ours, a low U value and average to above average shgc (numerically) is the porridge that is just right. The heavy low E of the 366 variants (with a marginally better u value) is too cold, and the high solar gain (with compromised u value) stuff is too hot. Each has they place when properly applied, however that correct application is not as a "blanket" offering. When sold that way, I perceive it as a disingenuous, potentially harmful sales gimmick.

@Otto, I understand where you are coming from. What type of glass do you currently have in your home? I haven't looked up your climate data, but despite what you may feel, I believe that more of your energy costs are spent heating your home as opposed to cooling it in DE. Even though you feel the sting of that heat through what I'd presume is clear glass in the warmer months, the furnace is probably putting in more work on a yearly basis. If both of those presumptions are true (about your climate and that you currently have clear glass), then I believe a standard surface 2 or 3 low e glass package will get you the result that you want (energy savings and take the edge off of that heat in the summer), and do so without overcompensating or making your home too dark. I believe Delaware Mike said that SunSeal glass (a variant of low solar gain glass like 366) accounts for only 5-10% of his business in that region. Maybe in your case you have a couple egregiously hot openings where it would be advisable, but probably not in the entire home.... Better yet, if you haven't already had him out, I'm sure that DM could assess that first hand if you do.

toddinmn
Posts: 565
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 7:11 am

Re: Majestic vs Okna 600

#22 Post by toddinmn » Thu Aug 15, 2019 4:14 pm

Jeld-Wens. Pretty sure they do this since it is cheaper than upgraded spacers and foam filled .
In general, I would disagree on West and North facing windows. West windows get the highest amount of sun and I would consider 366 there. I seem many home get over heated on the west, especially if there is no shading.
High solar glass would be best on North due to the lack of sun. I do not think there is any easy portage but 272 is a safe way but perhaps not the best way. There are lot factors that will determine what works best like shading, orientation, glass to wall ratio, thermal mass and then we got personel preferences such as sensitivity to heat or cold , are you going to the difference in natural light that a 272 lets in over 366? Any glass package with Low-E is going to be an improvement over clear glass with the exception of natural lighting , which is best just depends.

User avatar
HomeSealed
Posts: 2506
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 6:14 pm
Location: Milwaukee, Madison areas
Contact:

Re: Majestic vs Okna 600

#23 Post by HomeSealed » Fri Aug 16, 2019 12:49 pm

toddinmn wrote:
Thu Aug 15, 2019 4:14 pm
Jeld-Wens. Pretty sure they do this since it is cheaper than upgraded spacers and foam filled .
In general, I would disagree on West and North facing windows. West windows get the highest amount of sun and I would consider 366 there. I seem many home get over heated on the west, especially if there is no shading.
High solar glass would be best on North due to the lack of sun. I do not think there is any easy portage but 272 is a safe way but perhaps not the best way. There are lot factors that will determine what works best like shading, orientation, glass to wall ratio, thermal mass and then we got personel preferences such as sensitivity to heat or cold , are you going to the difference in natural light that a 272 lets in over 366? Any glass package with Low-E is going to be an improvement over clear glass with the exception of natural lighting , which is best just depends.
Depends if the goal is comfort or efficiency. The idea of passive solar is to take advantage of the solar gain on that West face, not to block it. You'd hope to then shade that area in the summer. Then on the north, you'd want the superior U value as opposed to the higher solar gain, which is like trying to squeeze water from a rock. You aren't gaining much from that little sunlight, so the superior insulating properties would be better... at least in theory of course.... I wouldn't crucify someone for selling 366 in the west facing dinette to the guy that just wants to cut the heat on his back at 3 in the afternoon, but for efficiency purposes its not ideal.

Ricknez
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 8:24 am

Re: Majestic vs Okna 600

#24 Post by Ricknez » Sun Aug 18, 2019 2:09 pm

The Ideal “Majestic” is a good looking window and designed very well. Its very air tight. You would be happy with either window.
I also agree with the over emphasis on shgc. The air infiltration rating is the most important in conjunction with a low Ufactor. I can see raising the shgc if someone lives in a very cold( northern climate).

toddinmn
Posts: 565
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 7:11 am

Re: Majestic vs Okna 600

#25 Post by toddinmn » Mon Aug 19, 2019 7:06 am

I feel I am now dumber after reading the last post.

TheWindowNerd
Posts: 1740
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 5:52 pm
Location: SE PA & NJ; CT
Contact:

Re: Majestic vs Okna 600

#26 Post by TheWindowNerd » Thu Aug 22, 2019 4:43 pm

WE tried the Majestic for a couple of jobs last year.
My very fussy lead mechanic absolutely prefers the Okna.
I will leave it at that as I do not want to upset anyone nor burn bridges.
theWindowNerd.com

toddinmn
Posts: 565
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 7:11 am

Re: Majestic vs Okna 600

#27 Post by toddinmn » Thu Aug 22, 2019 5:33 pm

Where you been Nerd? I always look forward to your post.
Let’s burn a few bridges I say.

Ricknez
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 8:24 am

Re: Majestic vs Okna 600

#28 Post by Ricknez » Mon Sep 16, 2019 3:34 pm

our technicians really embrace the Majestic. my lead installer is a 30 year veteran in the industry and they dont get more picky than him when it comes to a window being strong and solid; he installed just about every top brand there is. he absolutely loves the Majestic. the feedback from customers have been fantastic especially during the cold winter months. its also one of the nicest looking vinyl windows i have seen.
think about this, The Majestic has a .02 air leakage rating without using “cheat pads”, has reinforcement in both meeting rails, and .080 walls. i would say that entitles it to be compared to other top tier windows.

toddinmn
Posts: 565
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 7:11 am

Re: Majestic vs Okna 600

#29 Post by toddinmn » Mon Sep 16, 2019 6:36 pm

I think we would have to put it a step down from Okna 800 and Soft-Lite Element and Andersen Woodwright inserts since it leaks a 100% more air.

toddinmn
Posts: 565
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 7:11 am

Re: Majestic vs Okna 600

#30 Post by toddinmn » Mon Sep 16, 2019 6:37 pm

I do like the ground welds and finger pulls on the screens.

Post Reply