First off, Andersen for a Gothic top type window would be in the Vinyl Clad wood line and would not be considered a "vinyl window".Andersen does own Silverline which would fall into the term "vinyl window" but i will not get into there lousy reviews. Second Marvin does not nor has ever made a "vinyl window". They make a all wood window, an all wood window with an extruded aluminum cladding and they make there Integrity line which is either all Ultrex(fiberglass) or Ultrex exterior/Wood interior.

From an 2010 thread on warranty here is some excellent input from @xoldtimecarpenter and jives with the biz law course that I audited years ago on contract law. If there is forum member with legal background it'd be nice to get their opinion on this. After my prior post I read about "stress cracks" caused by thermal differences and realize these can happen fairly easily especially on larger windows and so a warranty that is skimpy here as Kolbe seems to be is not positive. His/her post also made me laugh: "Window warranties aggravate me about as much as faucet warranties, which are only slightly less annoying than setting my hair on fire with kerosene and putting it out with a brick. I don't know of a single window manufacturer that really stands behind its product. Almost all claim to have life-time warranties, but if you read the warranty, they actually promise very little. At most they will, eventually, send you a replacement part, but actually getting the window fixed is up to you. Not to be impolite, but this is crap. The window fogged up because it was not manufactured properly. There is no other explanation for fogging of an unbroken window. The homeowner did nothing to cause the problem. It is entirely on the manufacturer, who, if he was actually standing behind his product would also pay for the labor to install the window. I am not at all impressed with the fact that a window company makes a video showing the homeowner how to install replacement glass. Why should the homeowner have to install it? He didn't cause the problem. If we install windows for a customer, and they have manufacturing problems, we take care of the problem. We deal with the manufacturer, we install the replacement parts. And we keep track of our time and costs and bill the manufacture for them. If they have not paid in 90 days, we sue. Most people are not ware that the manufacturer's written warranty is not the only warranty a homeowner has. By law the manufacturer warrants the windows to be merchantable, workmanlike, and fit for the purpose for which intended. If the manufacturer violates these warranties by, for example, providing a dual-glazed window with seals that leak so the window fogs up (not merchantable, not workmanlike), he has to pay for the parts AND the labor to install the parts. That is the law, and has been the law for over 100 years. Manufacturers' warranties are not written for the purpose of protecting the customer, they are written to avoid, as much as possible, their duties under these common law warranties. The effort is only effective if the customer lets the manufacturer get away with it. We never do, and we never lose. My suggestion for homeowner is not to deal with warranty issues themselves. Get the company who installed the windows to deal with it. You may have to pay them to take care of manufacturing problems (but not installation problems -- that's on them). That way you avoid the finger-pointing that is common in window warranty claims. The manufacture says its an installation problem, the installer says its a manufacturing problem and no one does anything. Take pictures, get invoices, keep close track of your costs. Add them up and bill the manufacture. The company will probably deny their liability since labor is not covered by their written warranty. Don't spend any time trying to explain your rights under common law warranty -- just sue in small claims court. The judge will provide all the explanations necessary. At $15-45 to file a small claim, it is one of the best judicial bargains around. Keep in mind also that most window companies are members of the Better Business Bureau and as members have to submit to binding arbitration if your ask for it. Ask for it. Let the BBB collect for you. Stop taking crap from manufacturers over warranty issues. Regards,"

A-Series has a fibrex frame and a fiberglass clad sash. This is from Andersen's brochure on the A-Series for professionals. There is no reason why fibrex should fail any sooner than fiberglass. It is completely immune to water, just as is fiberglass. The advantage of A-series is that it is available in a number of deep colors, Marvin Integrity has a much more restricted palette of exterior colors. We are probably going to go with the A-series because of color choice. Otherwise, I would definitely go with the Marvin Integrity. That said, I see no reason to fear fibrex as a material, it has been in use for quite some time. Here is a link that might be useful: Link to downloadable brochures

I was just talking to someone in Austin as a matter of fact. They were comparing the Marvin Integrity and the Andersen E-Series in this case. I think it is as much a function of what "look" you are going for. Seems to be that the "modern" look is catching on these days to be honest. In that case, the sleeker profiled unit is probably the better look. Does you builder/GC have a window that he/she runs with? In Texas, even in the hill country, you can get away with Thermally Broken aluminum as well where you can't in most of the other parts of the country.