So how much are wooden windows Manks? You must have costed them up surely? In order that you could count your beans?
I know exactly what equivalent wooden windows cost, and the initial outlay is at least double the cost for softwood. Hardwood is a deal more. In the case of the former they definitely need painting and maintaining, in the case of the latter they probably do. Buyers are not prepared to pay a premium for budget property simply to have the privilege of painting windows every five years.
Incidentally, my having a go at you has nothing to do with our dialogue about MDF. It is entirely due to your attitude and persistence that black is white when you aren't in possession of the facts.
When one's own tastes revolve around period property, traditional materials and similarly historic construction methods it is quite possible to become convinced that it is the ONLY way to do things. However, my day job involves a great deal of messing with low-end housing stock where the end price (and I am not necessarily talking about new build) is a major consideration.
If I were building new quality houses I would almost certainly consider wooden windows. If I were refurbishing a period property I would fit nothing but wood. But if I am refurbishing a knackered terraced house - which once would have had nice wooden windows - I will use plastic. These houses have usually been stripped of most of their (limited) finery anyway and they are little more than red brick shells. The buyers of them want to pay as little for them as possible usually, in order that they can afford a car, a (big) TV and an Ipod.
You can go on arguing the toss about this for as long as you want, but if I am going to bother replying you'd better come up with some facts. By this I mean proof that there is a viable alternative to UPVC windows in low-end housing stock.
Manks
I know exactly what equivalent wooden windows cost, and the initial outlay is at least double the cost for softwood. Hardwood is a deal more. In the case of the former they definitely need painting and maintaining, in the case of the latter they probably do. Buyers are not prepared to pay a premium for budget property simply to have the privilege of painting windows every five years.
Incidentally, my having a go at you has nothing to do with our dialogue about MDF. It is entirely due to your attitude and persistence that black is white when you aren't in possession of the facts.
When one's own tastes revolve around period property, traditional materials and similarly historic construction methods it is quite possible to become convinced that it is the ONLY way to do things. However, my day job involves a great deal of messing with low-end housing stock where the end price (and I am not necessarily talking about new build) is a major consideration.
If I were building new quality houses I would almost certainly consider wooden windows. If I were refurbishing a period property I would fit nothing but wood. But if I am refurbishing a knackered terraced house - which once would have had nice wooden windows - I will use plastic. These houses have usually been stripped of most of their (limited) finery anyway and they are little more than red brick shells. The buyers of them want to pay as little for them as possible usually, in order that they can afford a car, a (big) TV and an Ipod.
You can go on arguing the toss about this for as long as you want, but if I am going to bother replying you'd better come up with some facts. By this I mean proof that there is a viable alternative to UPVC windows in low-end housing stock.
Manks