Home  Product and Services Guide  Stories, articles, and how-to's  Old-House-Friends Forums
"Aluminum and Vinyl Siding on Historic Buildings" an Historic Preservation Brief December 1, 2008


How to clean rain lamp...
Member Sign In|Company Sign In





Aluminum and Vinyl Siding on Historic Buildings
The Appropriateness of Substitute Materials for Resurfacing Historic Wood Frame Buildings

John H. Myers, revised by Gary L. Hume
Aluminum and Vinyl Siding on Historic Buildings

What's in this article



more detail


Introduction

Historic Character of Buildings and Districts

The Products and Their Installation

Use of Aluminum or Vinyl Siding on Historic Buildings

Summary

Reading List

Acknowledgements


Return to the Knowledge Base

 << Previous Page 
Viewing Page 5 of 7
Next Page >> 

Durability and Cost

The questions of durability and relative costs of aluminum or vinyl siding compared to the maintenance cost of historic materials are complex. It is important to consider these questions carefully because both types of siding are marketed as long lasting, low maintenance materials. Assuming that the substitute sidings are not damaged, and that they will weather and age normally, there will be inevitable changes in color and gloss as time passes. A normal application of aluminum or vinyl siding is likely to cost from two to three times as much as a good paint job on wood siding. A sensitive application, retaining existing trim, will cost more. Therefore, to break even on expense, the new siding should last as long as two or three paintings before requiring maintenance. On wood two coats of good quality paint on a properly prepared surface can last from 8 to 10 years, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. If a conservative life of seven years is assumed for paint on wood, then aluminum and vinyl siding should last 15 to 21 years before requiring additional maintenance, to break even with the maintenance cost for painting wood siding. Once painted, the aluminum and vinyl siding will require repainting with the same frequency as wood.

While aluminum siding can dent upon impact and the impact resistance of vinyl siding decreases in low temperatures and, therefore, is susceptible to cracking from sharp impact, these materials are generally not more vulnerable than wood siding and shingles. All siding materials are subject to damage from storm, fire, and vandalism; however, there is a major difference in the repairability of wood siding versus substitute materials such as aluminum and vinyl. Although they can all be repaired, it is much easier to repair wood siding and the repair, after painting, is generally imperceptible. In addition, a major problem in the repairability of aluminum and vinyl siding, as mentioned above, is matching color since the factory finishes change with time. Matching the paint for wood siding has a greater likelihood of success.

Energy

Because of high fuel costs, there is a concern for energy conservation in historic materials as well as in substitute materials. Because aluminum and vinyl siding can be produced with an insulating backing, these products are sometimes marketed as improving the thermal envelope of a historic building. The aluminum and vinyl material themselves are not good insulators, and the thickness of any insulating backing would, of necessity, be too small to add to the energy efficiency of a historic building. What energy savings did accrue as a result of a siding application would probably be as much the result of the creation of an air space between the old and new siding as the addition of insulating material. If the historic wood siding were removed in the course of installing the aluminum or vinyl siding (even with an insulating backing), the net result would likely be a loss in overall thermal efficiency for the exterior sheathing.

Preservation Briefs Number 3, "Conserving Energy in Historic Buildings," notes that the primary sources of energy loss in small frame buildings are the doors, windows and roof. It is, therefore, more cost-effective to apply storm windows, weatherstripping and attic insulation than to treat the sidewalls of these structures. There are numerous publications on energy retrofitting which explain techniques of determining cost-effectiveness based on utility costs, R-factors or materials and initial cost of the treatment. Persons interested in this approach may wish to read "Retrofitting Existing Houses for Energy Conservation: An Economic Analysis" published by the National Bureau of Standards, or the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development booklet "In the Bank or Up the Chimney." One such study in Providence, Rhode Island, determined that for a two-story house, twenty-five feet square, the payback period for twenty-three storm windows, two storm doors and six inches of attic insulation (R-20) was 4.4 years while the payback period of aluminum siding with an R-factor of 2.5 was 29.96 years. Most of the information which is available supports the position that aluminum or vinyl siding will not have a reasonable payback on an energy-saving basis alone.


 << Previous Page 
Viewing Page 5 of 7
Next Page >> 



  Ads by Google

  Members:  Sign In  |  Register  |  Benefits  |  Feedback  |  Tell-a-Friend  |  Help
  Companies:  Sign In  |  Account Manager  |  Promote Your Company  |  Register  |  Help Advertise

Copyright ©2008 by Renovators, a TB Systems company. All rights reserved. Privacy policy.