Replies

1. GBA Editor
   Martin Holladay | Aug 24, 2018 05:06am | #1

   Alan,
   I don't think it is "bizarre" that a specialist in restoring historic homes believes that it makes more sense to preserve and repair historic windows than to replace the windows in a historic house with new vinyl windows. Most historic preservationists agree.

   For more information on this issue, see "What Should I Do With My Old Windows?"

1. 
   AlanB4 | Aug 24, 2018 06:27pm | #3

   I agree but the arguments against vinyl siding for example are interesting. He may actually have a point but i'm not sure whether to take that at face value

2. 
   Deleted | Aug 24, 2018 06:27pm | #2

   Deleted

3. 
   Robert Opaluch | Aug 25, 2018 01:00pm | #4

   There are some people who like to work on cars and have decades old cars still operating, and love them. Personally I'd rather replace my car every ten years than do or pay for lots of repairs on a old car.

   If you like to paint windows every five years or whatever your climate requires, you could repair old windows and keep painting them over and over, like the good old days. The author seems to enjoy the renovation projects he describes, and maybe you would also. Its your house, and if you want to keep it historically accurate, good for you. The historic house article author would agree with you.

   If you prefer to update to low maintenance, energy-efficient alternatives, good for you. Those old windows would be poorly insulated and leaky despite repairs and adding weatherstripping, and more comfortable and energy-efficient windows are available and would last longer than the author claims. The author's claim that vinyl siding doesn't "breathe" is BS (its not an air or vapor barrier). The author claims old wood floors and plaster walls last for centuries (if protected and maintained). He enjoys renovating, but the labor required for renovating or maintenance is not a popular or inexpensive choice. His claims that you can insulate the walls to today's standards yet preserve siding and plaster on walls by just removing some siding boards is bogus. It wouldn't provide enough space for a highly energy-efficient wall. Plaster does increase the thermal mass of walls, but provides minimal extra insulation as he claims. Likely he is correct that there are some people who are willing to pay more to buy your historically preserved home, but most people wouldn't pay more, and it may not be a good investment overall to preserve rather than update.

   Most people would agrees with the author that it is a mistake to replace historic items with cheap junk that looks terrible and won't last long. The author assumes this is all that you can do besides his historically accurate preservation suggestions. Nonsense. You can update your house with attractive, better products than products available decades or centuries earlier, to have a more comfortable, energy efficient and less maintenance intensive home.

   Possibly the author also might suggest we avoid those newfangled medical treatments and die at age 40 with no teeth, like the good old days? :-) Sorry, couldn't resist.