I just saw your post 16 years after your question. I too have an old furnace with a simple BASO switch Mod 850. My furnace is has simple controls, is 64 years old, well built with heavy burner and heat exchanger. Only trouble is recent with intermittent thermocouple/ switch issues, but it still works well year to year. Yes, its efficiency is around 50% but it has sufficient capacity to keep the house comfortable in frigid Great Lakes winters. Hang on to that dinosaur; they were built to match the lifespan of the house.

--
For full context, visit https://www.homeownershub.com/maintenance/trouble-with-baso-pilot-safety-switch-63141-.htm

On 12/5/2021 10:01 AM, Geoffrey Stuk wrote:
> I just saw your post 16 years after your question.  I too have an old
> furnace with a simple BASO switch Mod 850.  My furnace is has simple
> controls, is 64 years old, well built with heavy burner and heat
> exchanger. Only trouble is recent with intermittent thermocouple/ switch
> issues, but it still works well year to year.  Yes, its efficiency is
> around 50% but it has sufficient capacity to keep the house comfortable
> in frigid Great Lakes winters.  Hang on to that dinosaur; they were
> built to match the lifespan of the house.
>

Yes, hold on to it and piss away money every day it runs. Why not get a
new one that pays for itself in a few years? New one have efficiency in
the high 90s.

On Sunday, December 5, 2021 at 10:41:32 AM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 12/5/2021 10:01 AM, Geoffrey Stuk wrote:
> > I just saw your post 16 years after your question. I too have an old
> > furnace with a simple BASO switch Mod 850. My furnace is has simple
> > controls, is 64 years old, well built with heavy burner and heat
> > exchanger. Only trouble is recent with intermittent thermocouple/ switch
> > issues, but it still works well year to year. Yes, its efficiency is
> > around 50% but it has sufficient capacity to keep the house comfortable
> > in frigid Great Lakes winters. Hang on to that dinosaur; they were
> > built to match the lifespan of the house.
> >
> Yes, hold on to it and piss away money every day it runs. Why not get a
> new one that pays for itself in a few years? New one have efficiency in
> the high 90s.

Install a cold weather heat pump and you can probably beat high 90’s
on an annual basis. Well, not if measured in terms of efficiency, but
rather in terms of Coefficient of Performance. A COP of greater than
1 is often achieved.

Granted, equipment and installation costs will extend the payback period
and testing standards for very low temps are still be developed, but it's
pretty neat stuff. I wish I could justify it but I don’t think the numbers would
work out for me based on my age, real estate prices in my area, my current
equipment, etc.

A friend recently bought a house with a heat pump and back up furnace. It’s
weird to see the “AC condenser” fan running when it’s 35°F outside. ;-)

On Sunday, December 5, 2021 at 10:41:32 AM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 12/5/2021 10:01 AM, Geoffrey Stuk wrote:
> > I just saw your post 16 years after your question. I too have an old
> > furnace with a simple BASO switch Mod 850. My furnace is has simple
> > controls, is 64 years old, well built with heavy burner and heat
> > exchanger. Only trouble is recent with intermittent thermocouple/ switch
> > issues, but it still works well year to year. Yes, its efficiency is
> > around 50% but it has sufficient capacity to keep the house comfortable
> > in frigid Great Lakes winters. Hang on to that dinosaur; they were
> > built to match the lifespan of the house.
> >
> Yes, hold on to it and piss away money every day it runs. Why not get a
> new one that pays for itself in a few years? New one have efficiency in
> the high 90s.

Especially if it's oil, which the older they are the more likely. How does
he know it's 50% efficient? Could be even less. In the Great Lakes region?
I note there is no mention of the fuel costs.

On 12/5/2021 1:54 PM, trader_4 wrote:
> On Sunday, December 5, 2021 at 10:41:32 AM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> On 12/5/2021 10:01 AM, Geoffrey Stuk wrote:
>>> I just saw your post 16 years after your question. I too have an old
>>> furnace with a simple BASO switch Mod 850. My furnace is has simple
>>> controls, is 64 years old, well built with heavy burner and heat
>>> exchanger. Only trouble is recent with intermittent thermocouple/ switch
>>> issues, but it still works well year to year. Yes, its efficiency is
>>> around 50% but it has sufficient capacity to keep the house comfortable
>>> in frigid Great Lakes winters. Hang on to that dinosaur; they were
>>> built to match the lifespan of the house.
>>>
>> Yes, hold on to it and piss away money every day it runs. Why not get a
>> new one that pays for itself in a few years? New one have efficiency in
>> the high 90s.
>
> Especially if it's oil, which the older they are the more likely. How does
> he know it's 50% efficient? Could be even less. In the Great Lakes region?
> I note there is no mention of the fuel costs.
>
I replaced by 1978 oil burner about 2013 and it paid for itself in just
over five years. The one I bought I heard about in this newgroup,
System 2000 by Energy Kinetics. Cut my oil use by 38%.

On Sunday, December 5, 2021 at 2:55:12 PM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 12/5/2021 1:54 PM, trader_4 wrote:
> > On Sunday, December 5, 2021 at 10:41:32 AM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> >> On 12/5/2021 10:01 AM, Geoffrey Stuk wrote:
> >>> I just saw your post 16 years after your question. I too have an old
> >>> furnace with a simple BASO switch Mod 850. My furnace is has simple
> >>> controls, is 64 years old, well built with heavy burner and heat
> >>> exchanger. Only trouble is recent with intermittent thermocouple/ switch
> >>> issues, but it still works well year to year. Yes, its efficiency is
> >>> around 50% but it has sufficient capacity to keep the house comfortable
> >>> in frigid Great Lakes winters. Hang on to that dinosaur; they were
> >>> built to match the lifespan of the house.
> >>>
> >> Yes, hold on to it and piss away money every day it runs. Why not get a
> >> new one that pays for itself in a few years? New one have efficiency in
> >> the high 90s.
> >
> > Especially if it's oil, which the older they are the more likely. How does
> > he know it's 50% efficient? Could be even less. In the Great Lakes region?
> > I note there is no mention of the fuel costs.
> >
> I replaced by 1978 oil burner about 2013 and it paid for itself in just
> over five years. The one I bought I heard about in this newgroup,
> System 2000 by Energy Kinetics. Cut my oil use by 38%.

Similar here with nat gas. I replaced a 1984 furnace with a 94% in 2010
and saw bills cut by a similar amount. That was when they had the tax
credits going and that helped pay for $1500 or so of the cost. Between
that and the reduced electric costs for running the furnace and AC,
it's more than paid for itself by now. And I have a quieter, reliable,
two stage furnace. At the last minute I also wised up and figured out
that it would be stupid to put the new AC condenser in the location of
the existing one, which is right outside the den. It was loud and buzzing
away while watching TV. I figured out that by moving it around the
corner of the house, it would be outside a bathroom and the run distance
was about the same. Between relocating it and the new one being much
quieter, it went from making a terrible racket, to barely noticeable.
It's also interesting that while I had three companies give quotes,
I was the only one that figured this out.