The wood those windows are made from is simply not available anymore. It is likely virgin growth wood with very tight growth rings, one of the reasons it has made it this long. If there are any soft spots they can be hardened with epoxy (or wood hardener) and then filled in and restored (Minwax High Performance Wood Filler). Under primer and two coats of paint you will not be able to tell a repair has been done. I still prefer the Minwax filler over epoxy fillers. The epoxy ones always seem to end up harder than the wood and tend to cause dishing of the wood around them when sanding. The Minwax matches closer to wood hardness (and better than Bondo also). You can feather it out for undetectable repairs. If you need to match details you can use wood chisels when the material is partly set to carve it to approximate shape, then finish up after it hardens completely (I give it 24 hours). You can even make a reverse sanding form by pressing sandpaper against the surface and then backing it up with Bondo. Allow it to set. Adding a thin\n wooden strip saves on the amount of Bondo required and provides something less likely to break in use. Slide your sanding form along the wood and repair for a perfect match. This post was edited by brickeyee on Sun, May 12, 13 at 15:02

Hi, why not "adjust" the miter cuts 'til they fit properly? Most margins will allow shaving a degree or two; (past which they will be too short.) I did this last weekend on my kitchen/din rm door I moved over 2 feet. Now the tightest joints in the whole joint. Casey

We have the same dilemma, and if it makes you feel better, the Bay Area estimates for rebuilding the sashes were $1500 *per window*!! Needless to say we are living with our leaky windows for right now, but still struggling with what to do. Here's what we've gleaned from friends who've already made the plunge: vinyl and aluminum look awful in old houses, even if they are nice, high quality windows. They stick out like sore thumbs, so I would not go that direction unless it's a temporary stop gap measure. We found two options that do look pretty decent: replacing the window inside its original frame (as someone above mentioned), which effectively builds a new frame that hugs the original frame and is then adapted and insulated so that there will be no gaps. That's the cheaper of the options, but will still clearly not be original. Our friends did their whole house that way, though, and it still looks quite lovely. There are also some variations on this that mix wood and vinyl components. Second option is to have someone build new wooden sashes and place them within the original frame. This is much more expensive primarily because it involves much more work and is a custom job, especially for houses where the window frames are no longer square. However, it will look exactly like the original window. We're hoping to do the latter on our fixed front windows someday when we win the lottery (ha) and in the meantime are using less high-tech ways of insulating them. However, we also live in a very moderate climate (pretty much never below 40 or above 80) so it's a much easier thing to do here. Moisture/dry rot is the biggest concern here. I'd say if you're getting tangible immediate benefits as far as heating and cooling bills, go with the cheaper option and get it done, though. Good luck! Diana

@HomeSealed Exteriors, LLC: “The link seems to be broken. If it lists $6400 as an average price for a whole-house window replacement I suspect that its grossly outdated...however I'd agree with the intended premise of the above post which is that it will take an awful long time(if ever) for windows to pay for themselves in energy savings.” Thanks for letting me know about the broken link; it *should* be working now. Regarding the price of a whole-house window replacement: While $6,400 seems so low that it must be an outdated figure (Lord knows I spent a hell of a lot more than that back in February of this year replacing just the windows on the BACK of my house…and only in my DREAMS is my monthly power bill $117.46!), we’re talking in AVERAGES here. The numbers make more sense when you see — which you can do now since the link is working ;) — what they’re considering ”average.” But, hey: At least you were able to see what my larger point was!