Jt Some questions please. What is your location? What size home living area? What size furnace and eff are you replacing? What size AC are you replacing? I would like to know the exact mdl number evap coil for each quote. What thermostat is proposed for the Carrier quote? That is a big difference between the 96% eff Carrier furnace and the 80% eff Trane furnace-both 60 K input. That would be about 56 KBTUs output on the Carrier and about 48 KBTUs on the Trane. Not insignificant. I don't care for some shortcuts that homeowners make particularly on reusing linesets and using existing thermostats that shortchange a nice furnace's operational capability. Post back with the info requested. IMO

I agree 100% with your expectations Brook and to answer your question. " I really just want feedback if its the norm for them to completely miss this or they have been negligent in their inspection and maintenance." Unfortunatly it's the norm for outfits selling maintenance contracts to be negligent. Some reasons why contractors like selling contracts is (A) Being paid to come out and see if there's anything they can sell customers. (B) It's done in spare time of their choosing when they don't have other calls. (C) 99% of maintenance labor is done by the inexperienced techs on staff. Adding insult to injury is that maintenance should have already been preformed before summer is half over. Not to twist the knife but I've serviced and repaired thousands of units over a period of decades and the amount of gunk on those coils was rarely found unless it had been a few years since they were cleaned. The exceptions are when unit sit's near Cottonwood trees,a patch of Dandelions or whoever mows lawn blow's mower discharge onto coils. Ok,now to leave you with something you didn't already know and can use in the future. To do a good job cleaning coils,turn electric power off at disconnect or breaker before you start. I can't tell if top is off in pics but it need's to be so you can get hose inside to blow trash out in opposite direction from which it entered coil. Use a garden sprayer,empty dishwashing detergent bottle or such to squirt a solution of 5% dish soap,5% liquid laundry detergent and 90% water into coils on both sides. Let it soak a few minutes then hose out coils. Most hose end spray nozzles have threads onto which a leaf sweeper nozzle can be screwed. Using the jet from leaf sweeper is better but not necessary. By far the easiest but most important thing homeowner can do is change filter before it's so dirty it restrict's airflow. Notice I said"before it's so dirty",not every xx weeks. Filter change intervals can range from twice monthly where occupants work in dirty environment,have 3 pre-teen boys,2 cats, 3 large dogs and old carpet that shed's to once every 4 months for a single bank teller with no pets. To do it's job,the filter must fit slot,otherwise dirt laden air by-passes the route of least resistance and stick's to indoor coil where efficiency drop's dramaticly. I highly recommend merv 8 pleated paper filters. $2 fiberglass filters are better than no filter but not much better. At this point the super handy can do more but that's for another day. Best of luck.

I'm disappointed that what had at first seemed a very balanced comment was followed by what seems to be misinformation and misdirection. People buy ground source heat pump equipment because they want to and can afford it. Or decide they need to in their locations. They're hugely more expensive than alternatives, which is why they're still not very common. "When’s the payback on a Tesla? People still choose to buy them for reasons other than the ‘bottom line’." Not a comparable. A false analogy. "I would not choose natural gas or propane for reasons relating to the environment, safety, IAQ & paying for yet another utility hookup for an energy source that might not even be used for months on end during the year." What effect having a gas furnace has on indoor air quality. Another hookup? Most people prefer gas cooking appliances and besides, the OP is talking about an existing home, he either has gas service or he doesn't. "Rather than spending perhaps tens of thousands of dollars on a Solar Array, I would sooner invest that same money, hopefully less, in a ground loop for a Geothermal system." Sure you would, that's the business you're in. The ground source heat pump market is not growing as expected by those in the industry, which suggests that your opinion isn't widely held or easily sellable. In many parts of the country, solar panels can have a quick payback. Not so ground source heat pumps. "I often hear about Solar Panels when geothermal is mentioned, as an alternative way to save money by creating energy." In a place like Texas, where electricity is cheap (other than during cold weather crises as they just experienced) there's likely no payback from a solar panel installation. People do it as a personal statement, call it for environmental or other personal reasons. Like buying the Tesla, not a financial decision. An HVAC system blows warm air when it's cold, cool air when it's hot. It's one of those things people don't care about - either it works or it doesn't work. Spending extra money for an exotic system doesn't equate to extra payback when the home is sold. Neither owners, nor visitors, nor people passing by, nor anyone else, concern themselves with what's doing the work. It's equipment that doesn't produce an experience for someone in the house if it's working. In the US, there are vast areas where electricity is cheap. It will remain so for some time. People don't spend money today to potentially save money 10 years out when market conditions may or may be different. I suspect you could build a house with mahogany or teak framing. Or you could paint the framing bright colors. Why bother, you can spend less money and effort and get something else that will do the same job. "We almost never use setbacks at our home - even when going on vacation for weeks on end with no one home, our geothermal just runs." You're combining two different things to produce confusion. Thermostats that have a setback feature ALL are set up to provide lower overnight temperatures to have more comfortable sleeping conditions and then a recovery in the morning before wakeup time. As sleep specialists recommend. That in demand comfort features isn't possible with ground source heat pumps because the warm up period from a setback is too slow to be convenient to use, absent triggering a secondary heating source (like a furnace) to help. THAT'S why you don't "believe" in setbacks with a heat pump - they don't work. Turning down a thermostat during heating season when the home will be unoccupied is not a "setback" as that word is most commonly used. It's done to save money, why heat a vacant house? No setback thermostat is needed, even a dumb 50 year old analog thermostat can be turned down.

I love that I can count on some good discussion points and varying viewpoints here on Houzz. I am sticking with thinking of a house as a depreciating asset, but you guys made me think about it and try to understand your logic and why you feel it is different than a car. Drive the car off the lot and you lose money. Live in a house for a year and see if it appraises at the same amount that an identical home that is new construction appraises for. Don't sink money into maintaining the house and it will go to pot and the building will be a tear down in 30 years. If I have two homes that have similar floorplans, square footage and finishes on similar lots in the same neighborhood and one is brand new and one is 30 years old the price tag of the brand new home is going to be higher than the price tag of the used home. It may be more than what it originally cost, but if I deduct all the expenses used to maintain the home, the taxes and the cost to insure the home and adjusted for inflation would have I realized a gain? Would I be better off if I had just purchased the land and let it sit for 30 years? What if I put a tiny house on the land and spent far less on maintenance, taxes, insurance? If I minimize the size of the house and maximize the investment into the land (best location I can afford) or get a larger house in a less desirable location? Based on my thinking if the house is appreciating as well as the land I would come out even regardless of location, but I think the smaller house in the more desirable neighborhood will yield a much higher profit. If I don't continue to invest in the house (maintenance) it will yield a loss, not a profit, but the land will still appreciate in value. I just don't see where the building is appreciating faster than inflation less expense. That means it is a depreciating asset. I don't have the data to validate my conclusion, but I do believe that the three most important consideration for a real estate investment are location, location, location.