My first comment is the furnace seems over sized. I assume your old furnace was rated in the 75-80% range. The 59TP5 has a 96.5% AFUE rating. It makes to no sense to increase the size of the furnace. I would not go bigger than 80K BTU. You should have the contractor do a load calculation to verify the sizes.

The price you got is meaningless without the model number of the AC and coil. You don't have a valid quote until you have all model numbers.

I was wondering the same thing, regarding an over sized furnace. The other model numbers I received are:

25HCC542A003
CNPHP4321ATA
59TP5A100E21-16

I supplement my heat with a wood stove. The dealers are anxious to install, thinking I have no heat at all. It is 46 degrees out today and 71 in my house.

Do those model numbers help? And yes, the next dealer that comes I am going to ask for a load calculation.
Thanks!

load cal:

3.24 ton
55,700 btu

load cal:

3.24 ton
55,700 btu

Recommendation:
Trane XR 13 4TWR3042B1000A
Trane XR 95 TUH1B080A9421A
Trane 42k btu 17.5 inches aluminum coil TCONT802AS32DA
STD motor
$8,284.17

or

Trane XV95 2 stage variable speed upflow 4 ton
TUH2C100A9V4VA
Trane 60k btu 21 inches coil
4TXCC008CC3HCB
Trane XR15
4TWR5042E1000A
$9,813.21

Both prices include the permits, various replacement of pad, duct work/return, Thermostat. 2 yr labor warranty, 10 yr parts, lfetime warranty on the coil and heat exchanger.

Thoughts?
Thanks...

This post was edited by touchthewindrider on Fri, Nov 29, 13 at 14:53

"Trane XR 95 TUH1B080A9421A"

80k btu furnace.

"Trane XV95 2 stage variable speed upflow 4 ton
TUH2C100A9V4VA"

100k btu furnace.

I would start with this discrepancy. With your heat loss figure, both furnaces are technically oversized. Trane does make an 80k XV95 with a 4 ton blower. Don't see why they wouldn't instead propose this model. It doesn't make sense to oversize a 2-stage furnace, rendering it essentially an expensive single-stage furnace that never leaves low fire.

Also, in a dual fuel application with a 2-stage variable speed furnace, you definitely want the Honeywell VisionPRO IAQ thermostat -- properly configured to control both stages of the back-up heat source (in this case the furnace). If they are proposing the TCONT802 in the second configuration, the XV95 will go to high-stage, if needed, based on a timer. Not the best way to get maximum comfort from a 2-stage furnace.

On the Carrier bid, besides the furnace being oversized, the other comment I'll make is you should ask for the all-aluminum evaporator coil (has an "ALA" suffix as opposed to "ATA"). The ATA style is the older tin-plated copper coil, not as reliable as the newer all-aluminum model. Still Trane all-aluminum coils are the best in the industry as far as reliability goes (in my opinion at least).

Best of luck.

This post was edited by ryanhughes on Fri, Nov 29, 13 at 15:50

Interesting. I've asked the Carrier dealer why the 100k btu furnace and not an 80k. He didn't believe the load calculation of 55,700. Also, he states because Carrier invented the coolant used in most systems today, the all-aluminum coil is not necessary. In fact, Carrier, he claims, does not make all-aluminum coils any longer. Because of my question he is willing to up the labor warranty from 5 to 10 years!

And, Trane states that by going to the XV95 the seer rating drops under 15 and we lose the Energy company's rebate of $450.

This is amazing. Heck, by the time I finished researching and asking questions and comparing..it'll be summer and I won't need heat.

Thanks, Ryan.

I'll try to address each specific claim individually.

"He didn't believe the load calculation of 55,700."

-- Many probably wouldn't although it is likely close to correct (don't know how accurate a load calculation was performed -- block load calc vs. room-by-room Manual J. Did you receive a print-out of the results with a software letterhead, or otherwise have any other details as to the accuracy of the load calc procedure?). That is why many oversized systems get installed daily, leaving the consumer with higher utility costs, a decreased level of comfort, and generally less reliable equipment (longevity).

"Also, he states because Carrier invented the coolant used in most systems today, the all-aluminum coil is not necessary."

Well, that is bogus. Google "formicary corrosion" -- it is an industry-wide problem that has plagued all manufacturers (Carrier included). That is why Carrier went to tin-plated copper coils as "standard" in the sense that they were just about all the supply houses provided anymore, due to the warranty claims on the non-coated coils. The tin-plating helped somewhat, but still left portions of the coil that were very much susceptible to corrosion; as a side benefit, they did include a 10-year warranty.

"In fact, Carrier, he claims, does not make all-aluminum coils any longer."

They sure do. Link below, which you may wish to forward to this dealer/salesman for their information. It is their responsibility to know the product line they are selling.

"Because of my question he is willing to up the labor warranty from 5 to 10 years!"

A salesman sensing you are somewhat informed and wanting to close the sale ASAP (i.e., before you catch on to any misinformation). Not at all surprising. Just my impression, not trying to pass judgment on a situation and/or person(s) whom I have not encountered.

"And, Trane states that by going to the XV95 the seer rating drops under 15 and we lose the Energy company's rebate of $450."

Possibly true that going to the 100k model gives slightly higher "ratings" in the AHRI database. However I am very against oversizing equipment for sole purposes of receiving rebates. You save a bit up front but pay the added costs (comfort and efficiency) down the road.

Here is a link that might be useful: http://www.docs.hvacpartners.com/idc/groups/public/documents/techlit/cnpv-08pd.pdf

This post was edited by ryanhughes on Fri, Nov 29, 13 at 22:30

"The ATA style is the older tin-plated copper coil, not as reliable as the newer all-aluminum model."

Have you encountered any failures of the Carrier ATA coil so far?

Hey Mike,

No, I have not personally encountered any to have failed, knock on wood. I do understand there have been some failures (albeit presumably far less than the ACA type) just based on pictures and accounts from homeowners about their unfortunate experiences (on the web). I also know that while the ATA coils were definitely an improvement and a good idea at the time, they were and still are susceptible to formicary corrosion like the ACA coils because the front tube sheet (a very common place for corrosion and subsequent refrigerant leaks to develop) is NOT coated. Carrier has certainly never been alone in this problem, and like other manufacturers they have been taking steps to avoid it.

So I still feel that the all-aluminum coil from Carrier is the way to go, although it may cost the dealer a bit more money upfront. I think in due time Carrier will provide them as standard like other brands have begun to do.

This post was edited by ryanhughes on Sat, Nov 30, 13 at 10:35

I look at furnace sizing a bit differently. Your heat loss figure is based on "design temperature", the coldest temp of the year. You are at that number less than 1% of the total heating season. Going with an 80 or large means that you are oversized by design ( because you are at design condition for 1% of the heating season) and then you are oversized by selection. This is SOP in the industry. I would go with a 50kbtu two stage and let it do it's thing. You have good insulation and windows and you supplement with wood. If you go on vacation and the outside temp drops low the house won't be 70, it may be 60 for a short time. You will have better run times with a smaller unit and overall, I think better comfort and efficiency.

A heating contractor cannot pitch this type sizing because he has to make sure you, and he, are covered.