You have to start with the stone and the roof before you even pick up a single paint chip. They will both inform all of your color choices going forward. White windows will make it more challenging to pull off the look you're going for. Sometimes there simply isn't enough budget for a color other than white. If, however, you have any wiggle room at all, the windows would be a worthwhile investment = value now, and at resale.

Hello Jbrig - Great question. The finish choice may be influenced by your location. Coastal applications usually require the 2605 finish but people throughout the U.S. may request the upgrade if they want to be assured of extended longevity of the finish. Seeing that you are in upstate South Carolina, but not knowing exactly where, the 2605 finish may be a wise choice. You may have already seen this, but for reference, I am providing a link to our clad colors brochure PDF, There is a table on the back page with additional information on coastal weathering and the differences between the two specifications: AAMA 2604 and 2605 Information In addition, here are a few more details about the paint system that I hope will help with your decision: Windsor factory applied heat-cured painted finishes are durable and very colorfast. The Super Durable Polyester TGIC and Fluoroset® resin-based paints block damaging ultraviolet rays of the sun and repel general air pollution. They will not whiten or pit when exposed to dew, fog, rain or acid rain and will retain their color and gloss level for many years, based respectively on meeting AAMA 2604 or 2605 specifications. However, to assure that they retain their original beauty, even these highly durable finishes should be cleaned occasionally. When selecting a cleaning solution, use mild soap solutions and avoid using strong acid or alkali cleaners as they may damage the finish. If I can be of further assistance, please don't hesitate to reach out.

So, your double pane U-Factor appears to be a 0.27. Good, but what about that "will add thermal performance that far exceeds the vinyl options". I am quoting you directly from above about 6 posts ago. There are more than a handful of vinyl windows that will best that thermal performance in the case of double pane and more than a handful that equal or best the thermal performance numbers that you show in triple pane. To be certain, 0.15 is a good U-Factor, but it is only equivalent in this case to just the handful of vinyl windows that I know of personally not to mention the more exotics that are designed solely around performance. I do love nice wood windows, but to claim they are more efficient because of the wood is sketchy science to put it mildly.

@John Hrivnak, ArCH, AIA, MBA, NCARB, LEED AP - This is a problem with anecdotal evidence. You are not going to architect your way out of a bad builder. When we look at the advantages and disadvantages of design/build firms in aggregate it is pretty easy figure the trade-offs inherent in the model. This is not rocket surgery, it is a simple backward or forward vertical integration business combination and they have been happening a long time now. Somewhere deep in the past a wine maker said. "I think we would be more profitable if we grow the grapes." THE GOOD Every combination requires synergy, so the two parts being better together than they would be apart. In the case of the winery owning the grapes it is a change in the decisions around growing and harvesting grapes. Essentially you can tailor your wine to your grapes and your grapes to your wine. In design/build firms plans will be tailored to take advantage of builder proficiencies and enhanced communications. The designer will be able to anticipate areas where the builder may struggle and will design away from that when possible and communicate more clearly when not. Plans are more likely to hit cost targets as the design process is automatically designing to efficiency. There will also be more communication between the builder and designer during the design phase when they are in the same office. THE BAD Every combination has a sacrifice because of the exclusive nature of the combination. In the case of a winery, if you own the fields and have a grape harvest that is not particularly fantastic while a competing grower has a fantastic harvest, you are still required to use your grapes. If you sell your grapes and buy the others you have destroyed all of the value in the combination. In design/build firms that tailoring of plans to building efficiency will limit creativity. An architect for a design build firm is not going to design towards something the builder is not good at doing. They are going to design to strengths and away from weaknesses. Those strengths and weaknesses might not be shared by every builder. This is a tangible weakness and should be given serious consideration (e.g. If a builder has a preferred window supplier the designer is likely to find a way to incorporate those windows in the design even if a different window would be better). --- This entire thing assumes that quality is equal across the board, which it is not. I can assure you that the answer above is correct, yet it is also meaningless in your decision. Your decision is going to be based on your needs and your market. In your market you may well have several architect driven design/build firms (forward vertical integration), or you might have cost conscience builders providing design services (backward vertical integration). Do your due diligence and then pick the arrangement that you are most comfortable with. I would advise that you take pricing quotes with a grain of salt, the best value is not likely to depend on a quoted upfront price. Also I personally would not look at portability of plans from a design/build firm. This seems like the worst of all worlds... You limit design to strengths of one firm and then don't use that firm. Just my 2 cents... Good luck.