Historic single pane windows

[Gone Fishing]

Just got back from visiting an historic neighborhood in the mid Atlantic region in an area with cold, but not frigid or long winters.  Many of the houses are in the 2000-3000 sqft range and are pushing 100 years old.  Over the years, a few owners have replaced the single pane windows with more energy efficient double panes, but most opted for storm windows to help improve energy efficiency.  Not a perfect solution, but a significant improvement, none the less.  Sadly, many owners are now removing the storm windows as they dislike the look of them. This undoubtably leads to a significant increase in energy consumption. 

[iris lily]

I have sat through more than one presentation by historic preservation experts who urge retention of original windows. They advocate rebuilding, reglazing, recaulking and say the finished product will be nearly as good as new windows.

I dunno, sigh.

We just sold our 1880’s house which has new windows when we bought it. Our current 1941 cottage has new windows when we bought it.

My 1927 condo has old, original windows and I was all excited due to these preservation expert talks to have them rebuilt at great expense. But then I stayed there during a cold snap and yowza, the cold is pretty extreme. But damn I love those old windows with counter weights.

I dunno, such a dilemma.

[Sanitary Stache]

I have not repaired my single pane 95 year old windows.  Many of them have no glazing at all and sometimes ice dams form at the bottom of the windows where the air seeps through.  I do have storm windows, though these could use some replacement and I tend to put up the window plastic when the ice dams start to form.

I am convinced that my uninsulated walls are a bigger heat loss than the windows.  There is just so much more wall. Ice forms on the wall as well in the real cold.

[iris lily]

The insulating value of double pane was brought home to me this year during this recent terrible cold snap. Our two old original doors with glass panes on top completely frosted  over.

[StarBright]

The insulating value of double pane was brought home to me this year during this recent terrible cold snap. Our two old original doors with glass panes on top completely frosted  over.

Same here. Most of the windows had been replaced in our house when we purchased it (ours is an 1860 Greek Revival that has very few original bits left) but our front door still has wavy single panes in the sidelights and transom. There is always at least a week in the winter where they frost over and I feel like I'm in a Dickens novel.

Winter makes me glad we chose our current house over another, larger historical home that still had many original windows.

Our bigger problem, as someone mentioned above, is insulation. Like many old houses, our second floor is really more of a half story with angled ceilings from the gabled roof. The thin space between gable and ceiling leads us to either being too cold from not enough insulation, or dealing with damp and mold when we stuff too much insulation into the space. We think we finally got it right this winter, but it is still colder than I would like.

[nereo]

Oof. Historical homes

Retrofitting older homes for modern efficiency standards takes a lot of time, money and effort. Doing so while maintaining the “historical integrity” of the building (itself a fluid target) can be a a nightmare. O

[sonofsven]

I have extensive experience restoring old sash. Can you restore them to excellent working condition? Absolutely. But in no way, shape, or form are they as energy efficient as a properly installed modern window. With storms added you can get close. But as has been mentioned, old windows are just part of the inferiority of an old home vs new. They are the low hanging fruit, though. It's easier to replace windows than it is to insulate and air seal an older home. And old windows and storms need maintenance that modern windows don't.
Will a modern window last 100 years? No, probably not, but they don't have to. They can be replaced.
As much as I like historic buildings and protecting them, I do dislike being boxed in by historic districts that don't allow a building to grow and change (and yes, improve) with the times.

[Telecaster]

I am convinced that my uninsulated walls are a bigger heat loss than the windows.  There is just so much more wall. Ice forms on the wall as well in the real cold.

The math says you are right.  Typically, doors and windows are about 20% of the wall area.  An uninsulated wall has an R value of about 3.  If you blow in insulation, you can bump that R-10 or so. 

A typical single-pane window has an R-value of about 1.  A modern double pane window has a R-value of about 2.   So by replacing windows you are spending a lot of money to increase the total insulation value by not very much. 

[nereo]

I am convinced that my uninsulated walls are a bigger heat loss than the windows.  There is just so much more wall. Ice forms on the wall as well in the real cold.

The math says you are right.  Typically, doors and windows are about 20% of the wall area.  An uninsulated wall has an R value of about 3.  If you blow in insulation, you can bump that R-10 or so. 

A typical single-pane window has an R-value of about 1.  A modern double pane window has a R-value of about 2.   So by replacing windows you are spending a lot of money to increase the total insulation value by not very much.

Your figures are roughly correct and I don’t disagree with what you’ve said, but we’ve overlooked air penetration. Any air gaps have an R=0, and operable (or formerly operable) period windows with counterweight pockets are notoriously huge air leakers. If the wind blasts through every window seal it doesn’t matter if you take your walls up to R10 or even R30 - you are going to have a drafty, cold house with issues. That’s why storm windows are so popular for historical buildings. If you can’t stop the drafts, insulation had minimal impact (hence the “hierarchy of weather sealing”)

[ChpBstrd]

The people removing storm windows to achieve a certain look are ignorant. That "look" might cost them $100 per month in utility bills, a miserable draftiness during cold spells, and the need to replace the HVAC system every 8-10 years or so. Historical preservationists recommend storm windows because they don't alter the existing structure and because they keep the structure economically viable. Both elements are necessary for the continued existence of old buildings. Somebody is going to have to replace those storm windows someday at a very high cost.

I am convinced that my uninsulated walls are a bigger heat loss than the windows.  There is just so much more wall. Ice forms on the wall as well in the real cold.

The math says you are right.  Typically, doors and windows are about 20% of the wall area.  An uninsulated wall has an R value of about 3.  If you blow in insulation, you can bump that R-10 or so. 

A typical single-pane window has an R-value of about 1.  A modern double pane window has a R-value of about 2.   So by replacing windows you are spending a lot of money to increase the total insulation value by not very much.

Going from an R1 single pane window to an R2 double pane represents a 100% increase in window energy efficiency. That's a huge reduction in the speed of heat leakage. It's the difference between a drafty house that never feels warm enough in the winter and a normal house. A house with single pane windows will prematurely wear out its HVAC system and consume lots more energy to heat and cool.

R value represents the speed of energy leakage on a scale that is exponential-like. Thus the difference between R1 and R2 is a lot bigger than the difference between R20 and R21. 



In this way you can visualize heat pouring out of or into the house through different surfaces at different speeds. If your attic is insulated to R30 or so, that surface is leaking energy very slowly. Uninsulated R3 walls are leaking energy a lot faster. But those R1 windows - that's like a waterfall of wasted energy pouring out of the house. Even if the windows represent only 20% or so of the building envelope, they might be losing more energy than the entire attic surface and probably more than the walls.

This means it makes sense to attack the least-efficient surfaces of a building first.

[iris lily]

Oof. Historical homes

Retrofitting older homes for modern efficiency standards takes a lot of time, money and effort. Doing so while maintaining the “historical integrity” of the building (itself a fluid target) can be a a nightmare. O

Our house was in a district that required wood windows on the front of the house. Fortunatekyn our windows were very few and not fancy. No fancy shapes. And to confess when we bought the house it had new windows that had been installed prior to that historic standards of wood windows so our windows were vinal but eventually they would have to be replaced.

Edited to make sense

[nereo]

Oof. Historical homes

Retrofitting older homes for modern efficiency standards takes a lot of time, money and effort. Doing so while maintaining the “historical integrity” of the building (itself a fluid target) can be a a nightmare. O

Our house was in a district that required wood windows on the front of the house. Unfortunately our windows were very few and not fancy. No fancy shapes. And to confess when we bought the house it had new windows that had been installed prior to that historic standards of wood windows so our windows were final but eventually they would have to be replaced.

Why do you say “unfortunately” that your windows were not fancy or has no fancy shapes. Non-rectangles are absurdly expensive, and curves are the worst (particularly with wood frames).

[Telecaster]

In this way you can visualize heat pouring out of or into the house through different surfaces at different speeds. If your attic is insulated to R30 or so, that surface is leaking energy very slowly. Uninsulated R3 walls are leaking energy a lot faster. But those R1 windows - that's like a waterfall of wasted energy pouring out of the house. Even if the windows represent only 20% or so of the building envelope, they might be losing more energy than the entire attic surface and probably more than the walls.

This means it makes sense to attack the least-efficient surfaces of a building first.

I'm a BPI certified commercial and residential energy auditor--by training, not profession it should be said.  But I know a bit of this topic.   Every house is different of course, but a reasonable rule of thumb is that a typical house loses about 15-20% of its energy through the windows themselves (I'll talk about leakage in a bit).   Lowering your energy usage by 7-10% by replacing windows is not nothing to be sure, but it isn't a lot either.

Problem is, windows are expensive and those R-4 EnergyStar windows are really expensive.   If you mentally add up how many windows you have in your house, you might be surprised at how many you have.   Window replacement costs a lot.   Again, all projects are different, but it is not unusual for the projected window replacement payback time to be longer than the design life of the window itself.   The numbers seldom pencil out. 

That said, as @nereo points out, the calculations change a lot of if the window is leaking.   Good old fashioned air leakage is how most homes lose the most energy.   Gaps around doors, windows, etc. are all major loss points.  Ducts leaking condition air into unconditioned spaces (like an attic or crawlspace) can be a biggie as well.  Good news is those things are cheap to fix and the bang for the buck is off the charts.   Similarly, attic insulation, if needed,  is usually cheap to add and provides good return.    But if you are looking to improve the energy efficiency of your house, replacing windows is almost always one of the least cost effective things you can do. 

One artefact of windows in cold weather is that as warm interior air meets the cold glass it will sink, creating a convention current.   Many people think this means the window is leaking because they can feel moving air, but that's not the case.  I believe that if being near a window feels uncomfortable, it is uncomfortable and it might be time to consider replacing that window with a better insulated unit.   Something to consider before replacing windows is installing window quilts or cellular shades, which can really improve the insulation factor of a window, improve comfort, and are cheap in comparison.

[Sibley]

LOL, I can't escape this argument.

Ok look, yes, poorly maintained single pane wood windows are TERRIBLE. Just, terrible. But, you rehab them, make sure they're properly painted, glazed, caulked AND HAVE GOOD CONDITION storm windows, and they're not terrible. They can be close to modern vinyl windows in terms of efficiency in fact. It gets you within the range of the windows are no longer the problem.

Here's what all the people who say to replace wood windows don't like to think about:
Wood windows, properly maintained, will last 100+ years. Vinyl windows won't. You can fix wood windows. You can't fix vinyl windows. So, from a long term environmental standpoint, wood windows will win because they are repairable and don't have to be replaced every 10-20 years.

Oh, and if vinyl windows are so wonderfully air tight, why am I putting plastic up on 2 of mine? Because they're warped and I can't actually close and latch the stupid things, that's why. I wouldn't have that problem if they were wood windows, because I would have been able to rehab and repair wood windows.

The people taking the storms off are incredibly stupid and they deserve their utility bills. They get no sympathy from me.

[nereo]

To be fair @Sibley - there are replacement options beyond cheap vinyl which will need replacement every 10-20 years. I do agree that rehabbing older window -when possible - is preferable to the cheapest stock vinyl option.

[bill1827]

Here's what all the people who say to replace wood windows don't like to think about:
Wood windows, properly maintained, will last 100+ years. Vinyl windows won't. You can fix wood windows. You can't fix vinyl windows.

Yes you can repair wooden windows. Our previous house had wood windows, with character; they were probably about 70 years old at the time. They looked terrible, flaking paint, missing putty, leading rotting, most people would have replaced them. Being stuid and impoverished, I repaired them all, dismantled them, repaired the gaping joints, and rebuilt them and painted them properly, with effective draught stripping. They've lasted getting on for 30 years since with no significant work.

However, you need the ability to do it or you need very deep pockets to pay someone to do it for you. It doesn't generally make sense to renovate old wood windows.

Although the heat loss with the repaired windows wasn't huge you still have the issue of feeling cold next to the window and condensation with the accompanying mould growth to contend with.

Vinyl windows can be repairable. The glazing can be replaced as can the hinges and latches, the seals can be replaced, they can usually be adjusted and re-squared if the openers have dropped. But, again, you have to make a bit of an effort to do that and most people won't bother.

[Sibley]

Here's what all the people who say to replace wood windows don't like to think about:
Wood windows, properly maintained, will last 100+ years. Vinyl windows won't. You can fix wood windows. You can't fix vinyl windows.

Yes you can repair wooden windows. Our previous house had wood windows, with character; they were probably about 70 years old at the time. They looked terrible, flaking paint, missing putty, leading rotting, most people would have replaced them. Being stuid and impoverished, I repaired them all, dismantled them, repaired the gaping joints, and rebuilt them and painted them properly, with effective draught stripping. They've lasted getting on for 30 years since with no significant work.

However, you need the ability to do it or you need very deep pockets to pay someone to do it for you. It doesn't generally make sense to renovate old wood windows.

Although the heat loss with the repaired windows wasn't huge you still have the issue of feeling cold next to the window and condensation with the accompanying mould growth to contend with.

Vinyl windows can be repairable. The glazing can be replaced as can the hinges and latches, the seals can be replaced, they can usually be adjusted and re-squared if the openers have dropped. But, again, you have to make a bit of an effort to do that and most people won't bother.

Houses require maintenance. That requires skill, materials, time, or money to throw at the problem. Your criticism in that respect of wood windows equally applies to vinyl windows.

If you have a guide that will walk me through fixing my crappy vinyl windows, please share. I'm not aware of one.

However, NO WINDOW is going to be perfect. There are pros and cons to different materials - wood, metal, vinyl, fiberglass, whatever. Do not say that one is all bad, because its not. Some will do better in certain situations than others. But all require maintenance.

And yes, higher quality will last longer. That's a given. Doesn't mean they'll last 100+ years. I don't think they've been around for that long, so time will tell.

[iris lily]

Oof. Historical homes

Retrofitting older homes for modern efficiency standards takes a lot of time, money and effort. Doing so while maintaining the “historical integrity” of the building (itself a fluid target) can be a a nightmare. O

Our house was in a district that required wood windows on the front of the house. Unfortunately our windows were very few and not fancy. No fancy shapes. And to confess when we bought the house it had new windows that had been installed prior to that historic standards of wood windows so our windows were final but eventually they would have to be replaced.

Why do you say “unfortunately” that your windows were not fancy or has no fancy shapes. Non-rectangles are absurdly expensive, and curves are the worst (particularly with wood frames).

Stupid typo. You are right. Fixed it.

[iris lily]

Here's what all the people who say to replace wood windows don't like to think about:
Wood windows, properly maintained, will last 100+ years. Vinyl windows won't. You can fix wood windows. You can't fix vinyl windows.

Yes you can repair wooden windows. Our previous house had wood windows, with character; they were probably about 70 years old at the time. They looked terrible, flaking paint, missing putty, leading rotting, most people would have replaced them. Being stuid and impoverished, I repaired them all, dismantled them, repaired the gaping joints, and rebuilt them and painted them properly, with effective draught stripping. They've lasted getting on for 30 years since with no significant work.

However, you need the ability to do it or you need very deep pockets to pay someone to do it for you. It doesn't generally make sense to renovate old wood windows.

Although the heat loss with the repaired windows wasn't huge you still have the issue of feeling cold next to the window and condensation with the accompanying mould growth to contend with.

Vinyl windows can be repairable. The glazing can be replaced as can the hinges and latches, the seals can be replaced, they can usually be adjusted and re-squared if the openers have dropped. But, again, you have to make a bit of an effort to do that and most people won't bother.

ohhhh, can you hear me moan? I DO have very deep pockets. Perhaps I SHOULD pay someone to completely repair my 97 year old windows. I do love them.

DH who can fix anything is buried in work completing renovation of our house. Our condo, the one with old windows, doesn't come up for his attention for 3-4 years.


I wonder just how much it would be to pay someone to rebuild these old windows.
Believe it or not that was my original,plan, then I got sidetracked with thoughts of new windows yet I dislike or even outright hate the new windows I have in other properties…what a dilemma.

[Sibley]

Here's what all the people who say to replace wood windows don't like to think about:
Wood windows, properly maintained, will last 100+ years. Vinyl windows won't. You can fix wood windows. You can't fix vinyl windows.

Yes you can repair wooden windows. Our previous house had wood windows, with character; they were probably about 70 years old at the time. They looked terrible, flaking paint, missing putty, leading rotting, most people would have replaced them. Being stuid and impoverished, I repaired them all, dismantled them, repaired the gaping joints, and rebuilt them and painted them properly, with effective draught stripping. They've lasted getting on for 30 years since with no significant work.

However, you need the ability to do it or you need very deep pockets to pay someone to do it for you. It doesn't generally make sense to renovate old wood windows.

Although the heat loss with the repaired windows wasn't huge you still have the issue of feeling cold next to the window and condensation with the accompanying mould growth to contend with.

Vinyl windows can be repairable. The glazing can be replaced as can the hinges and latches, the seals can be replaced, they can usually be adjusted and re-squared if the openers have dropped. But, again, you have to make a bit of an effort to do that and most people won't bother.

ohhhh, can you hear me moan? I DO have very deep pockets. Perhaps I SHOULD pay someone to completely repair my 97 year old windows. I do love them.

DH who can fix anything is buried in work completing renovation of our house. Our condo, the one with old windows, doesn't come up for his attention for 3-4 years.


I wonder just how much it would be to pay someone to rebuild these old windows.
Believe it or not that was my original,plan, then I got sidetracked with thoughts of new windows yet I dislike or even outright hate the new windows I have in other properties…what a dilemma.

The hardest thing would be finding someone who can do the work. Go to your local non-chain hardware store and ask them if they know someone. I would imagine that they'll know the local skill. Or you can try posting on the local facebook or next door page. Basically, you need to find the "in", then get directed to the right place. Or, ask your husband if he or his buddies know someone if you think that's a possibility.

Costs vary widely based on location. Doesn't hurt to get a quote.

[NaN]

Going from an R1 single pane window to an R2 double pane represents a 100% increase in window energy efficiency.

Just a friendly reminder, heat loss (not from air leaks) is proportional to the inverse of the R value, given temperature differences and surface area are constant. If the R value goes from R1 to R2 then you have HALVED the heat loss (or 50% less heat loss - the true measure of window efficiency). Similarly, if you go from R16 to R32, you have HALVED the heat loss. It is the same relative change in heat loss. So if windows go from R1 to R2 then that can be a big deal if you have a lot of windows.

Near me there are a lot of historic homes made of thick adobe (at least 1 ft or more!) but still have single pane windows. Terrible single pane windows are a lot less of a discomfort with a thermal mass that help keeps the temperature fairly consistent. What do I mean by discomfort? Well, the heat loss is still the same out the window, but the heat held in by the thermal mass radiate into that space and heat it back up. A lot of old homes might have large thermal masses (around fire places, etc.). In building construction, we have generally went away from this approach (cheaper materials). In my home made in 1960, we have R11 mineral wool insulation in a 2x4 wall - so super thin and at the start of the 'efficient' housing boom. We do have stucco and plaster, but those aren't great for insulation. The old aluminum single pane windows that took up significant area were a huge discomfort. I really did not have many options in my home, barring full reconstruction of my walls, and when we changed to double pane wood interior it made a significant difference in comfort, as well as efficiency. So it also depends on how the single pane windows are situated and the make of the rest of the house.

[MayDay]

If you have single pane glass doors, get a storm door! We put on one pur single one door, cost about 300$, and install wa super easy. No more frost on the inside of the door. Seriously don't know why we waited so long.

I'm generally pro save your old windows, but only if you are willing to DIY or spend $$ to fix and buy storms.  They are miserable without those two things. But I was quite thrilled when my children broke a window that it was an old wood single pane, because it cost 4$ in glass to re-glaze.

Pro tip: if you buy windows from a major manufacturer who has been around a long time, odds are you can get replacement parts decades later, so your new windows will have a lifespan closer to the 100 year old ones. I know Pella and Andersen do, I'm sure there are others as well. My neighborhood of 50's houses are mostly (all?) original Andersen windows and we can still get replacement parts. My SIL has 1970's Pella windows and was able to order a new sash for a broken window. No the warranty isn't 50 years but it is awful nice to buy a 10$ part or 100$ sash vs. replacement.

[StashingAway]

All new windows aren't equal. And survivorship bias means that all the old ones we see seem to be a better option. In 100 years, we will be looking back at good windows from 2025 reminiscing at their reparability and durability. Those windows exist new today, just get lost in the sea of marketing.

Window styles change performance and longevity of the window. Sliders are cheap and ubiquitous in the US unfortunately. Go one step up and get casement windows or another step up and some European tilt & turn for something that won't wear out and will keep weather out better. You can replace the seals on these types of windows. Like 95% of the new drop in windows I see are sliders, then of course they're going to represent poorly what a new window can do. There are various claddings and UV additives that eliminate any possibility of warping that you see with the cheap vinyl ones. I was just in a house in the Rockies with double pane casement windows that are 45 years old and performing admirably.

Historic sash windows do work well with storms, but you can certainly buy the modern quality equivalent if you spend the $$ (that will last another 100 years).

[nereo]

All new windows aren't equal. And survivorship bias means that all the old ones we see seem to be a better option. In 100 years, we will be looking back at good windows from 2025 reminiscing at their reparability and durability. Those windows exist new today, just get lost in the sea of marketing.

Agreed.  I’d also add that I’ve never encountered a window that lasted the previous 100 years without being rebuild/overhauled at least once and resealed at least a few times. The same is true for top-end, modern wood windows - expect to refurbish them ever 30 years ago, and recaulking at least once a decade.  You might get slightly better if the unit doesn’t get a lot of direct rain or direct sunlight (for example, under an overhang on the northern side in the northern hemisphere). 

[bacchi]

We bought plexi/acrylic inserts for the old, single pane, bedroom windows in our rental. There is a noticeable noise difference between those rooms and the non-insert rooms.

[chemistk]

In the area I live (Mid Atlantic, although I doubt OP visited my town), many of the towns were established between the late 1600's and mid 1700's. There are a few dozen, approaching the 100's of original structures in my town, many dating back to the 1700's-1800's. There is a clause in the local code which ambiguously states:

Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property should be preserved.

There are other supporting codes to this one, but generally speaking, the municipality leverages this code to require that homes (and businesses) which would have been built with single pane windows should have single pane, or 'restomod' single pane windows. Most of these homes have either internal or external storm shutters, and at times some of the homes (especially those which aren't directly facing the touristy areas of downtown) are allowed to have appropriately designed modern windows that have a better R-value. But generally speaking, you won't find many, if any, homes' windows in the 'historic district' which aren't single pane or at least appear to be single pane.

It's definitely a choice to live in these homes, and at this point (thanks to the local popularity of this town), most people who do live in these homes 1) pay a premium to do so  and 2) are eager to restore them in alignment with the local codes.

Obviously, from an energy efficiency, cost saving, and environmental perspective, this is a dumb rule - but, it also is one of the only means the town has to prevent someone from getting Home Depot vinyl windows installed on a structure from 1763.

[partgypsy]

My house was built in the 1920s, had the original wood windows, in poor shape. Our original idea was to repair them, but honestly (after seeing how much time it took to fix one, and having like 20 windows) it wasn't feasible (this was not the hill we were going to die on). Once we replaced them with double pane (non wood, but good quality replacement) windows, was amazed at the difference in lack of drafts and also how much quieter the house is. When people say there is not much difference between single and double pane windows, well, I disagree. There is still no insulation whatsoever in the walls, and only the fiberglass batts we ourselves put in the joists up in the attic, so def room for improvement. I hear you. Wood windows are attractive. They are esthetically more pleasing. But single pane windows without storm windows, can physically uncomfortable to live with.

[StashingAway]

My house was built in the 1920s, had the original wood windows, in poor shape. Our original idea was to repair them, but honestly (after seeing how much time it took to fix one, and having like 20 windows) it wasn't feasible (this was not the hill we were going to die on). Once we replaced them with double pane (non wood, but good quality replacement) windows, was amazed at the difference in lack of drafts and also how much quieter the house is. When people say there is not much difference between single and double pane windows, well, I disagree. There is still no insulation whatsoever in the walls, and only the fiberglass batts we ourselves put in the joists up in the attic, so def room for improvement. I hear you. Wood windows are attractive. They are esthetically more pleasing. But single pane windows without storm windows, can physically uncomfortable to live with.

The historic district thing, too, seems a bit like missing the point to me. I understand preserving a house or two as a museum piece, but in general the idea that we have to freeze our architecture in time for some sort of reminiscing of times gone past doesn't pay proper tribute to those old houses. Dwellings should change with the times and fit people as culture adapts. We're not preserving all of the old coal power plants for nostalgia's sake; we use them until they're not feasibly useful any more in their current state. If you have ever had the privilege of visiting Europe, they have much older building stock and manage to co-mingle it with modern amenities and buildings in ways that honors the history of the place. Then they preserve a cathedral to it's original condition rather than the entirety of a neighborhood where people are living.

Being in a four story masonry apartment building retrofitted with a modern radiant heat panels and triple pane tilt and turn windows feels incredibly secure and comfortable- something the people 1700's would have embraced with open arms if they had the opportunity. Plus, it will actually make the place last longer if you fit it with proper weatherproof building envelope pieces. I think sliding windows with storms is a wonderful option, especially as it can be done on more of a budget if the existing windows are in decent shape. Replacing with modern vinyl sliders would be a downgrade (in part because it is difficult to air seal a sliding window, a problem that storm windows solve). But replacing with modern fiberglass or metal cased casement windows, not so much.

Note that from an insulation perspective, storms with single pane windows are no match for even basic double pane. Part of the issue is that if the gap between panes is two large, it allows an internal convection current to develop, reducing the insulation value. Plus any medium or high quality double/triple pane window will have better thermal bridge reduction.

[iris lily]

My house was built in the 1920s, had the original wood windows, in poor shape. Our original idea was to repair them, but honestly (after seeing how much time it took to fix one, and having like 20 windows) it wasn't feasible (this was not the hill we were going to die on). Once we replaced them with double pane (non wood, but good quality replacement) windows, was amazed at the difference in lack of drafts and also how much quieter the house is. When people say there is not much difference between single and double pane windows, well, I disagree. There is still no insulation whatsoever in the walls, and only the fiberglass batts we ourselves put in the joists up in the attic, so def room for improvement. I hear you. Wood windows are attractive. They are esthetically more pleasing. But single pane windows without storm windows, can physically uncomfortable to live with.

The historic district thing, too, seems a bit like missing the point to me. I understand preserving a house or two as a museum piece, but in general the idea that we have to freeze our architecture in time for some sort of reminiscing of times gone past doesn't pay proper tribute to those old houses. Dwellings should change with the times and fit people as culture adapts. We're not preserving all of the old coal power plants for nostalgia's sake; we use them until they're not feasibly useful any more in their current state. If you have ever had the privilege of visiting Europe, they have much older building stock and manage to co-mingle it with modern amenities and buildings in ways that honors the history of the place. Then they preserve a cathedral to it's original condition rather than the entirety of a neighborhood where people are living.

Being in a four story masonry apartment building retrofitted with a modern radiant heat panels and triple pane tilt and turn windows feels incredibly secure and comfortable- something the people 1700's would have embraced with open arms if they had the opportunity. Plus, it will actually make the place last longer if you fit it with proper weatherproof building envelope pieces. I think sliding windows with storms is a wonderful option, especially as it can be done on more of a budget if the existing windows are in decent shape. Replacing with modern vinyl sliders would be a downgrade (in part because it is difficult to air seal a sliding window, a problem that storm windows solve). But replacing with modern fiberglass or metal cased casement windows, not so much.

Note that from an insulation perspective, storms with single pane windows are no match for even basic double pane. Part of the issue is that if the gap between panes is two large, it allows an internal convection current to develop, reducing the insulation value. Plus any medium or high quality double/triple pane window will have better thermal bridge reduction.

I won’t talk about windows here, but I will push back on your idea that only one or two houses need preservation in a group.

What makes my former neighborhood spectacular is the entire fabric of the neighborhood. My own house was modest, less than 2000 ft.². But its facade, its siting,  its relation to its neighbors, those all make it special. The places that preserve entire blocks are magical.

[GuitarStv]

We bought plexi/acrylic inserts for the old, single pane, bedroom windows in our rental. There is a noticeable noise difference between those rooms and the non-insert rooms.

When we replaced our old single pane wooden framed house windows with newer energy efficient vinyl ones this is was the most immediate and welcome change.  The lack of air leaking also radically cut down on noise from outside.

[StashingAway]

I won’t talk about windows here, but I will push back on your idea that only one or two houses need preservation in a group.

What makes my former neighborhood spectacular is the entire fabric of the neighborhood. My own house was modest, less than 2000 ft.². But its facade, its siting,  its relation to its neighbors, those all make it special. The places that preserve entire blocks are magical.

Sure, and I'm saying that can totally be done while allowing modernization. I'm not pushing against maintaining a certain presence; I totally understand that and wouldn't want it to be hap-hazard in terms of upgrades. I've seen it done in entire European neighborhoods where it was unrealistic to hold it to historic standards.

I think that it can be taken too far though, and at that level can be considered an exercise in vanity. Like driving around a 1955 vehicle but refusing to use modern quality tires. In a museum, sure! But on the road, in some ways you are insulting the original engineering by not using the best quality on offer. It's just a personal opinion, I don't want to definitively say other opinions are wrong. I do get that something is lost when retiring older items, but that doesn't mean that something better isn't gained. And if this is embraced and done intentionally (rather than just slapped on with no concern for context), it can be beautiful and better for the long term as well.

[ChpBstrd]

We bought plexi/acrylic inserts for the old, single pane, bedroom windows in our rental. There is a noticeable noise difference between those rooms and the non-insert rooms.

Can you describe these more? Did you custom-build them?

[partgypsy]

I live in a historic district. My house is a contributing member of the neighborhood. At the same time walking around, up to 1/4 of the houses have been torn down and replaced with completely modern houses. If the code for upgrading historic structures is too strict, regarding remodeling, insulation, etc (which my opinion it is, based on the way the house was originally built, making it prohibitively expensive), may actually encourage people to tear down and build completely new. Which is what is happening, and prob not the intention of those who created these historic districts.

[StarBright]

I live in a historic district. My house is a contributing member of the neighborhood. At the same time walking around, up to 1/4 of the houses have been torn down and replaced with completely modern houses. If the code for upgrading historic structures is too strict, regarding remodeling, insulation, etc (which my opinion it is, based on the way the house was originally built, making it prohibitively expensive), may actually encourage people to tear down and build completely new. Which is what is happening, and prob not the intention of those who created these historic districts.

I totally agree! One of the reasons we picked the house we did (other than the mostly updated interior) was that the other house was in a strict zone of the historic district and we would have to commit to wood shingle roofs and repairing old windows and foundations.  The previous owners had to hire a company from several hours away when they had to repair the roof.

Our street enters the historic district next year. Once it does you won't be able to make big changes without going through the historic commission. We had several houses on our block that sold in 2020-2022 that were bought as teardowns to get in before the historic designation kicks in. Some of the new builds have been nice and some are totally out of character with the neighborhood. There is a new build, all black "farmhouse" at the end of the block that makes me cringe every time I look at it. It is 2.5 stories tall and takes up as much of the lot as they could manage and it is BLACK and it sits in between a 1900's gingerbread cottage and a pastel yellow 1930s bungalow house.

We also had someone who bought a historic mansion in the heart of our downtown, and then found out how much the repairs/upkeep would be.  Then they let it rot until it reached actual teardown status and built a mcmansion in it's place. I always wondered if a happy medium could have been found.

[nereo]

I take it you don’t like black homes @StarBright?  THey’re fairly common where I live, and I also encountered a bunch while traveling through some parts of Scandinavia. Most are over a century old. Seems black was used ‘back in the day’ because you could char the wood instead of painting it t for water perfection, and because black absorbed the most heat (useful in cold winters).  I rather like the look, though our home is currently a boring beige that’s all the rage around now.

[StarBright]

I take it you don’t like black homes @StarBright?  THey’re fairly common where I live, and I also encountered a bunch while traveling through some parts of Scandinavia. Most are over a century old. Seems black was used ‘back in the day’ because you could char the wood instead of painting it t for water perfection, and because black absorbed the most heat (useful in cold winters).  I rather like the look, though our home is currently a boring beige that’s all the rage around now.

I don't hate black all together - but this house makes me grimace :) It is probably a combination of the style, size, and color within the context of our neighborhood. The block is shades of light blue, yellow, light green, white, gray, etc and most houses are small (900- 1700 sq ft).

The new house is huge and tall and sits right in-between two very small and pastel colored houses so it sort of stands there like a monolith and towers over these cute little, happy houses.

I probably wouldn't mind it at all if I saw it back in a field or in a contemporary neighborhood.

There is a different so dark-brown-it-is-almost-black house on another historic street and it doesn't bother me at all. It just reminds me of House of the Seven Gables or Orchard House (both historic New England Homes), and is built in an old colonial style and it fits within it's lot.

In any case- the new house never have been approved next year when the street gets looped into the historic district. But maybe if the historic district didn't have such strict rules (especially about additions) someone would have waited and saved the neat old stick house that was there.

[iris lily]

I live in a historic district. My house is a contributing member of the neighborhood. At the same time walking around, up to 1/4 of the houses have been torn down and replaced with completely modern houses. If the code for upgrading historic structures is too strict, regarding remodeling, insulation, etc (which my opinion it is, based on the way the house was originally built, making it prohibitively expensive), may actually encourage people to tear down and build completely new. Which is what is happening, and prob not the intention of those who created these historic districts.

How can your historic district allow tear downs? Mine does not.

It is a poorly written historic preservation ordinance that allows it.

[nereo]

I live in a historic district. My house is a contributing member of the neighborhood. At the same time walking around, up to 1/4 of the houses have been torn down and replaced with completely modern houses. If the code for upgrading historic structures is too strict, regarding remodeling, insulation, etc (which my opinion it is, based on the way the house was originally built, making it prohibitively expensive), may actually encourage people to tear down and build completely new. Which is what is happening, and prob not the intention of those who created these historic districts.

How can your historic district allow tear downs? Mine does not.

It is a poorly written historic preservation ordinance that allows it.

I disagree - certain structures are beyond practical rehabilitation, and many structures do not have significant historical value. Any good historical preservation ordinance has guidelines for determining which structures should be maintained and which can be torn down. Otherwise what ultimately happens is a growing collection of condemned structures that no one can either remove nor rebuild.

[iris lily]

I live in a historic district. My house is a contributing member of the neighborhood. At the same time walking around, up to 1/4 of the houses have been torn down and replaced with completely modern houses. If the code for upgrading historic structures is too strict, regarding remodeling, insulation, etc (which my opinion it is, based on the way the house was originally built, making it prohibitively expensive), may actually encourage people to tear down and build completely new. Which is what is happening, and prob not the intention of those who created these historic districts.

How can your historic district allow tear downs? Mine does not.

It is a poorly written historic preservation ordinance that allows it.

I disagree - certain structures are beyond practical rehabilitation, and many structures do not have significant historical value. Any good historical preservation ordinance has guidelines for determining which structures should be maintained and which can be torn down. Otherwise what ultimately happens is a growing collection of condemned structures that no one can either remove nor rebuild.

The devil is in the details and “ practical” renovation varies but certainly historic structures are more expensive to renovate than to build new. That’s why federal and state funds exist to shore up these projects, if one has the patience to work with those fund grantors. We did not. We played with several  circa 1880’s structures, using our own labor and money to stabilize, if not complexly renovate, several tiny houses. We lost money on them, but I have no regrets.

As for your “ many structures do not have significant historical value” I will refer you to my post above about my own house, and the term “ contributing structure” which is the actual phrase used in setting up an historic district. It isn’t one specific house that is important in a district, it is the entire fabric that makes it special and worth preservation.

The historic code governing my own house was not as onerous as in some cities in restrictions. It governed exteriors, but one could do anything one liked to the interior. They could, and did. And funny, the interiors that preserved special features of these old houses did better in market value over the decades, generally speaking. By that I mean the house completely modernized by 1979 standards did not fare well in the 2020 market, while the gentle renovation of 1979 looked better in 2020.

[MayDay]

All new windows aren't equal. And survivorship bias means that all the old ones we see seem to be a better option. In 100 years, we will be looking back at good windows from 2025 reminiscing at their reparability and durability. Those windows exist new today, just get lost in the sea of marketing.

Window styles change performance and longevity of the window. Sliders are cheap and ubiquitous in the US unfortunately. Go one step up and get casement windows or another step up and some European tilt & turn for something that won't wear out and will keep weather out better. You can replace the seals on these types of windows. Like 95% of the new drop in windows I see are sliders, then of course they're going to represent poorly what a new window can do. There are various claddings and UV additives that eliminate any possibility of warping that you see with the cheap vinyl ones. I was just in a house in the Rockies with double pane casement windows that are 45 years old and performing admirably.

Historic sash windows do work well with storms, but you can certainly buy the modern quality equivalent if you spend the $$ (that will last another 100 years).

Tell me more. What do you consider sliders? Single/double hung or what I call gliders?

Curious why you mentioned many windows but not hung windows? Or is that what you mean by historic sash windows?

 Seals on all windows can now be replaced. Entry doors have fairly standardized weatherstrip, you can find something pretty close at HD. This is now making me curious about if you can find exact matching weatherstripping for windows, which is much more window-specific.

Agree that UV resistant exterior finishes are completely different than they used to be. Top finishes can last decades. Meanwhile those with their original wood windows in my neighborhood are on an annual painting rotation (not the whole house annually, but some touching up). But, the old wood is much better.

[StashingAway]

All new windows aren't equal. And survivorship bias means that all the old ones we see seem to be a better option. In 100 years, we will be looking back at good windows from 2025 reminiscing at their reparability and durability. Those windows exist new today, just get lost in the sea of marketing.

Window styles change performance and longevity of the window. Sliders are cheap and ubiquitous in the US unfortunately. Go one step up and get casement windows or another step up and some European tilt & turn for something that won't wear out and will keep weather out better. You can replace the seals on these types of windows. Like 95% of the new drop in windows I see are sliders, then of course they're going to represent poorly what a new window can do. There are various claddings and UV additives that eliminate any possibility of warping that you see with the cheap vinyl ones. I was just in a house in the Rockies with double pane casement windows that are 45 years old and performing admirably.

Historic sash windows do work well with storms, but you can certainly buy the modern quality equivalent if you spend the $$ (that will last another 100 years).

Tell me more. What do you consider sliders? Single/double hung or what I call gliders?

Curious why you mentioned many windows but not hung windows? Or is that what you mean by historic sash windows?

 Seals on all windows can now be replaced. Entry doors have fairly standardized weatherstrip, you can find something pretty close at HD. This is now making me curious about if you can find exact matching weatherstripping for windows, which is much more window-specific.

Agree that UV resistant exterior finishes are completely different than they used to be. Top finishes can last decades. Meanwhile those with their original wood windows in my neighborhood are on an annual painting rotation (not the whole house annually, but some touching up). But, the old wood is much better.

I mean all three when I say sliders; hung, gliders and sliders. The reason none of these windows will be as airtight is that their "seal" must accommodate the sliding/gliding action of the window. Any pressure differential from wind or temperature can blow past this seal as it is only lightly resting against the moving piece of the window. The seal is usually a thin strip of rubber or brushes, as anything thicker and with more interference would make the sliding action difficult. This is the reason storm windows help so much with older windows; because storm windows have no moving parts to accommodate and they are pretty easily installed to seal around the entire edge. You can achieve almost the same level of comfort as a storm window with a plastic shrink kit, although these usually have to be re-bought seasonally (https://www.homedepot.com/p/Frost-King-Indoor-Window-Insulation-Kit-3-per-Pack-V73-3H/100135637). Good for renters though.

Casement windows and tilt & turn use compression seals for their weatherization. When the window is closed and locked, it is physically pressed against a substantial seal so that pressure from inside or outside the house cannot break it easily. The most expensive glider/slider windows have a difficult time beating the air tightness of cheap builder grade casement windows just through the physics of the system. And as you spend more on windows with compression seals, you get some pretty impressive air tightness numbers. There are other build issues to consider; low-e, number of panes, materials, brand reputation, etc. But if we're looking at air tightness (which is a pretty big deal for comfort and energy efficiency), it's pretty hard to overcome the limitations of windows that use a sliding mechanism to open.

[bacchi]

We bought plexi/acrylic inserts for the old, single pane, bedroom windows in our rental. There is a noticeable noise difference between those rooms and the non-insert rooms.

Can you describe these more? Did you custom-build them?

The ones that work well were ordered from Indow Windows. They send a measuring kit and you take about 8 measurements per window.

I also built some of my own but they don't fit as well. There was a lot of cutting, fitting, cutting again, sanding, fitting, and sanding. I'm happy to let a machine do the work.

[partgypsy]

I live in a historic district. My house is a contributing member of the neighborhood. At the same time walking around, up to 1/4 of the houses have been torn down and replaced with completely modern houses. If the code for upgrading historic structures is too strict, regarding remodeling, insulation, etc (which my opinion it is, based on the way the house was originally built, making it prohibitively expensive), may actually encourage people to tear down and build completely new. Which is what is happening, and prob not the intention of those who created these historic districts.

How can your historic district allow tear downs? Mine does not.

It is a poorly written historic preservation ordinance that allows it.

. The historic neighborhood is in a "u" shape. The vast majority of new buildings are in the inside of that u shape bc they are not technically in the historic neighborhood. There are also brand new buildings in the historic neighborhood, usually from people buying it saying they are going to keep structure, and either intentionally or not saying the structure cannot be salvaged, then tearing down and putting up a completely modern structure. In at least a couple of incidents, appears the buyers never intended to keep the house and were deceptive of their intentions when purchasing. Yes this has caused some uproar the neighborhood Listserve and has also been covered in our local free paper. I have come to the conclusion if you have enough money, pretty much can do what you want despite historic designations. Otoh I have a neighbor at their own cost  and time and effort relocated a tiny shed like building that I believe was a type of corner store to their backyard and saved it rather than allow the new buyer to tear down. 

[Just Joe]

Pro tip: if you buy windows from a major manufacturer who has been around a long time, odds are you can get replacement parts decades later, so your new windows will have a lifespan closer to the 100 year old ones. I know Pella and Andersen do, I'm sure there are others as well. My neighborhood of 50's houses are mostly (all?) original Andersen windows and we can still get replacement parts. My SIL has 1970's Pella windows and was able to order a new sash for a broken window. No the warranty isn't 50 years but it is awful nice to buy a 10$ part or 100$ sash vs. replacement.

I'll second this anecdote.

DW and I are looking to replace the upstairs windows. Previous owner of our house made questionable choices during their ownership. I think they may have just been cheap. ;) House has 4-5 different brands/models of windows on it. Upstairs several of the windows are replacement windows. I watched one installed as a contingency of purchase. Window company came in, removed the sashes and then screwed new tracks in over the old tracks and snapped in the new panes. ~15 minute job. While they don't leak rain, they look terrible, don't match the house and have awful gaps at the trim around the windows inside and out. All this on an (now) expensive house. We saw them as at best a temporary solution from the start.

So we're shopping Andersen. We visited HD and asked for an estimate on one window. Naturally they just had to send a salesman the next week. He took a couple of measurements, gave us a sales spiel, gave us a price and tried to get us to quickly sign the order. Ah, no - still have more homework to do. Thanks. Price was about $10K for 5 windows installed.

Figured out from Andersen's own website that the MSRP for the same mid-quality window we want is ~$750. So, we'll purchase the windows somewhere and then find someone to install them. I think there will need to be some vinyl siding work done at the same time. I'm half inclined to install them myself. I've only done two windows but understand the process.

Also on the horizon - insulation. Went into the attic and noticed that there is zero insulation over part of our bedroom. A fascia board might be falling off. I can do the fascia board. Will hire the insulation out. 

As for the historic windows - if I lived in a harsh winter environment, I would likely choose a house not regulated by a historical commission so I could make improvements as I saw fit. I'd seek out the period look but I'd buy modern double pane windows. Efficiency first, appearance second. That might be an unpopular attitude but I'm not picking a fight. ;)

[Louise]

So we're shopping Andersen. We visited HD and asked for an estimate on one window. Naturally they just had to send a salesman the next week. He took a couple of measurements, gave us a sales spiel, gave us a price and tried to get us to quickly sign the order. Ah, no - still have more homework to do. Thanks. Price was about $10K for 5 windows installed.

Figured out from Andersen's own website that the MSRP for the same mid-quality window we want is ~$750. So, we'll purchase the windows somewhere and then find someone to install them. I think there will need to be some vinyl siding work done at the same time. I'm half inclined to install them myself. I've only done two windows but understand the process.

Interesting. We also have five old windows upstairs that we would like to replace. I wondered how much it would be. My spouse can install windows. It seems like it might be worth the trouble. As to the OP, we still have all of our original windows with storms in our 110 yo house. I'm OK with replacing the upstairs windows because they were originally painted pine and they aren't that special. Our downstairs windows have a lot of oak piano style windows including ones that are part of our built in buffet. They are hard to match and if it's possible, I'm sure it's very expensive. Our house isn't that big though. I'm assuming it's pretty efficient because our bills are reasonable, even though we live in a very cold climate. We have a stucco house with blown in insulation though. It makes a huge difference.

[Valley of Plenty]

I have an old house with many old single pane glass windows, so this is all very useful information! I had never even heard of storm windows prior to reading this thread.