Hi themcnabs,

I propose that the intangible of comfort and "livability" far outweigh whether you can ever recoup cost of the windows. It is the difference between a heavily curtained, dark and gloomy home versus a bright, airy, and clear view to the outside living space. YOu may also want to check local building code. Some local code requires certain insulation rating for windows and doors.

We are in Northern CA on a South facing hillside. Summer temp ave 105-F and peaks at 138-F. When we had clear (no Low-E) double pane, our windows had Solar Shade covering the outside with triple-cell blinds inside. Interior temperature rose rapidly to 95-F by 2PM and reached 98-F by sundown. This is with insulation in the walls, blinds down and shade down resulting in a gloomy interior. When we ran the A/C at full blast, it could barely keep the inside at around 88-F.

With Low-E II, Argon filled and DP-40 dbl-pane windows, we no longer use any blinds! The solar shade comes down only when the sun is low and blinding us inside. Interior temperature rises very slowly to reach 85-F by sun down on the hottest day. It normally reaches only 80-F by sundown on average summer days. This is without A/C usage at all and occassional use of fan. If we turn on the A/C, it can easily maintain a comfy 72-F all day!

The key for us is sunlit interior year round with minimal use of A/C and heat. The views and comfort level are worth every extra penny we spent.

The temperature I gave (105-138) is measured right in front of our house where stucco wall and cement ground work with direct sun to cook everything in sight.

Normal air temperature as measured by NWS range only around 90's to low 100's. Unfortunately, this is not useful for our home site.

This is a no-brainer - definitely go with low-e.

With the calculations I get it will take over 100 years to regain the costs in electric and gas bills. My builder also told me since we have trees surrounding our house and do not have alot of direct sunlight that the low-e would not help much.

Can you guys be more specific why you are so sure that they are worth the money?

In the end, it is what you consider important and practical. If your measure is strictly Return-on-Investment, then you have answered your own question regarding whether to use low-E at all.

I will suggest looking at Winter months heat usage given that your house is surrounded by tall trees. What is the lowest temperature at your home site? Does it snow a bit? Stormy? Cold? If not, then you have the best of both worlds, cool shaded summer and warm mild winter.

Low-E can be switched to keep in heat during cold winter months if your site needs heating.

It is worth the money because the addition of a LowE coating can save upwards of 35% or better in a hot climate and upwards of 18% or better in a cold climate - all else being equal. Whoever said 6% in your climate is wrong.

It is better because it will raise the interior temperature of the glass in your windows in the winter making the room more comfortable at lower actual temperatures thus enabling you to keep your thermostat lower in winter. And it will reduce or eliminate the potential for interior condensation on your windows as well during the winter...although this isn't really a major consideration in your climate.

The differences between the 200 and 400 series are a lot more than just LowE coating. The LowE coating is an option on the 200's as well. To get a true comparison price the 200's with coating and use the difference between those and the 200 without to compute the price of the coating.

The LowE2 coating will block both long wave and short wave IR energy from entering your home. This is significant in your climate. Short wave IR is primarily direct solar gain. Long wave IR is primarily the reflection of direct sunlight from the ground, walls, whatever else - and into your home.

The 400 series also comes standard with a titanium dioxide coating on the exterior glass - which reacts with UV light to oxidize organic contaminants on the surface of the glass - making the windows much easier to clean (in fact, some companies call windows with this coating "self-cleaning") and with a factory-applied poly-film on the glass to protect it from scratches and contaminants during installation.

And speaking of UV - the LowE2 coating blocks a significant portion of UV from passing thru your windows and fading and damaging your furnishings.

LowE is a no-brainer. Never buy windows without it.'

Thanks for the response, you actually gave me some info not just sales hype. I understand that low-e can save money but even at 30% it will take 25 years to pay the price difference. I am having a real hard time making the decision. I was aware of the "self cleaning" feature of the 400 series and my wife does not seem to think it is worth while. The sales people told me that the 200 series windows did not have the low-e option. They really want ot sell me the 400 series so go figure. I think I will ask for a price for the them.

I am under the impression that there is no difference in apperance between the 200 and 400 series. Is that true?

As you can see from the detail below (with water flow shown dotted), Andersen casements, awnings and some double-hungs rely only on a bead of sealant below the sill to keep water from returning below the sill and entering behind the siding, not that this detail is unique to Andersen. It is a terribly foolish detail and I have seen it cause a lot of serious damage and result in one major lawsuit. Why they continue to offer such a poor design is a mystery to me.

I strongly recommend adding a sub-sill that overhngs the siding.

With regards to the Andersen window design, the bead of sealant is to keep water from getting behind the siding. If you follow the cladding on the window, it goes behind the siding, it doesn't end at the siding. Also, the nail flange/flashing is one piece, not a separate piece added to the frame. No seams anywhere on the exterior frame. Really, a brilliant design, unique to Andersen.

Just to clarify one major point. Andersen only makes one casement/awning, unless you want to consider the Architectural Series, which is very expensive.
The only difference between the 400 Series and 200 Series casements and awnings is the glass. Same frame, same sash, same hardware, same assembly line. If you add lowE to the 200 Series casements, they become 400 Series.
But I do agree that the lowE is important. Not just from a energy savings stand point, but from a comfort stand point. Lower heat gain will make your home more comfortable inside, which will be worth it's weight in gold.
As for the sill detail, the vacuum formed cladding leaves no seams or welds for water to leak in. As long as the installer understands basic flashing techniques, you'll have no problems.
Good luck.

We just installed 20 Andersen 400 windows in our new house, mostly casements, a couple of gliders and fixed panes, and a patio slider. The E4 window glass is something else. The clarity is unreal. I am intrigued by the stay clean glass and sure hope it works that way.

We are impressed with the quality of the windows, they seem solid and the mechanisms work very smoothly.

I realize this doesn't answer your energy efficiency question, but thought I'd chime in about the aesthetics. The energy efficiency was an important part of our decision, as we are building an ICF home in MN and needed good windows.

Jill

Jill, which Anderson 400 did you use...Tilt Wash or Woodright?

This is such a big decision..we are considering the WW, but like to hear what others have chosen.
Helen

Helen,

The majority of our windows are single casements (crank outs), two large glider/slider windows (out to a covered porch & didn't want windows opening into that space), one patio door and three fixed pane windows. They are all the 400 series with E4 glass. We did between the glass grills in a short fractional pattern. (Andersen was the only company that had this as a standard grill, the others would have been custom to get that design and I had my heart set on that detail.)

We shopped around quite a bit. Seems like a lot of people like Marvin, but there have been some problems in houses built here, bad seals and mold. In their defense, Marvin replaced them.

We know several people who put in Andersen and like them very much. In our previous house, there were 30+ year old Andersen which were still great windows, unlike the ones that were put in an addition that after 10 years were junk.

We ordered from a local lumberyard (who matched HD prices). You get the same window, but I wasn't too confident about HD's customer service. We did end up with one bad window, a large archtop that the grills had separated from (probably from rough handling in shipment). But they were very prompt in coming out and we should have the new glass insert next week.

Jill

We have had a terrible experience with Andersen double hung 200 series with low e glass. The low e glass may be OK, but the windows leak air, and mulch like a sieve. So without the ability to keep cold air out, the low e is worthless. Neither the builder nor Andersen have stood behind the windows. Instead they blame me for where I built the house, how the house is shaped, the direction of the prevailing winds, the intensity of the winds, my tolerance for cold, etc, etc.... yes I've heard it all. So it's my fault that these miserable things allow air and particulates to pass through the window... between the sashes and the jamb liner. But wait Mr. Builder and Mr. Andersen... you knew exactly where I was building, the shape of my house, the orientation... and yes your subdivision is in a cow pasture so there aren't any wind breaks. And you did encourage me to buy these windows. This wasn't really my choice. I just followed your recommendation. My greatest fault was to trust you.

But nothing galls me more than the fact that Andersen's regional rep stood in my house and said, "these windows meet Andersen specs" although I have to wipe mulch from my flower beds off the top of the lower sash and sill everytime we have a windy day... very frequent here in the winter time. And yes the windows are closed and "tightly" latched. I have photographic and videographic evidence to back these assertions up. I am thorougly disgusted with Andersen's failure to stand behind their windows. If it is poor installation they should have the integrity to tell me. It seems to me that the builder and Andersen have a cozy relationship... maybe collusion is the proper term. The bottom line is that you cannot trust a brand name, history, number of units sold ect. to assure a quality product or customer service.

Don