Browse Forums Heating, Cooling & Insulation 1 Jun 29, 2010 1:12 pm Hey Guys Ive been googling which is more efficient - Reverse Cycle or Evap. Half the websites say evap and half say reverse cycle so now Im confused! Im wondering if anyone has either of these and is able to tell me which costs less to run? I know reverse cycle is a lot more expensive to start with but if its more energy efficient then we wouldnt mind paying more. Land Settled: 29 March 2010 Pre contract & Deposit paid - 17 May 2010 Pre Start & Contracts Signed - 16 June 2010 Council Approval Received - 30 June 2010 Slab Down 30 July 2010 Plate High - Late August Lock Up - TBA Re: Which is more efficient? 2Jun 29, 2010 1:29 pm Evapourative air conditioning is a good choice for dry climates, such as Adelaide. Doesn't really work well in the Sydney, Melbourne, etc. Also, with evapourative air conditioning you need to keep the house ventilated to outside. So a well insulated house (or better still, one with high thermal mass on the inside) is going to be wasted if you open up the windows. I would go for reverse cycle air conditoning. Also a few split systems make more sense than a fully ducted air conditoning. Demolition August 2009, Construction Started September 2009, Completed December 2010 Re: Which is more efficient? 3Jun 29, 2010 4:46 pm Evaporative AC is much cheaper to run. The motor is rated between 0.5 to 1.5 kW depending on the size of the unit. It works so as long it isn't too humid. We had it here in Adelaide and Canberra and it works most days. It is no problem in a home with thermal mass. Houses with high mass and insulation needs to be have the heat flushed out during summer anyway. Re: Which is more efficient? 5Jun 29, 2010 11:17 pm Separate splits or multi-splits are more efficient to run but cost more to install. Ducted AC suffer duct losses at around 10%. They generally have a limited number of return air ducts thus resulting in a greater area being conditioned than required. Nevertheless, if you house is well designed for energy efficiency, the absolute benefit may not be that great to justify the additional capital cost. Re: Which is more efficient? 7Jun 29, 2010 11:53 pm IceMan Casa2 ...Also a few split systems make more sense than a fully ducted air conditoning. Why...? Cheaper to install You only need to run 1 at a time More efficent If you are going to cool an entire house constantly then consider ducted. Zoned ducted will still use more power than a single split for nightime Re: Which is more efficient? 8Jun 30, 2010 5:33 am dadandsue IceMan Casa2 ...Also a few split systems make more sense than a fully ducted air conditoning. Why...? Cheaper to install You only need to run 1 at a time More efficent If you are going to cool an entire house constantly then consider ducted. Zoned ducted will still use more power than a single split for nightime Depends how many rooms you have that you want to get conditioned air to... as soon as you get up to 4+ the costs are going to be similar or greater... with splits you have a condenser farm outside your house... and ugly things hanging off your walls... and an inability to reach internal walls most of the time without internal trunking... This forum is the only place I've ever seen where some people would rather have splits than ducted throughout the house... and we put in hundreds of systems a year... Re: Which is more efficient? 9Jun 30, 2010 3:08 pm IceMan Depends how many rooms you have that you want to get conditioned air to... as soon as you get up to 4+ the costs are going to be similar or greater... with splits you have a condenser farm outside your house... and ugly things hanging off your walls... and an inability to reach internal walls most of the time without internal trunking... This forum is the only place I've ever seen where some people would rather have splits than ducted throughout the house... and we put in hundreds of systems a year... Well said. Ugliest things I've ever seen. I'd hate to be trying to decorate around those wall units. And the condensers outside... Back to the OP's dilemma though: where are you located??? That's the crucial point. No good installing evap if you live in the tropics, or the sub-tropics. It won't do a thing. But it's perfect in the right climate. This is interesting: http://www.coolmax.com.au/evaporative-cooling/evaporative-cooling-areas.htm Re: Which is more efficient? 10Jun 30, 2010 3:47 pm Multi-splits is one big condenser but multiple thin refrigerant tubes to each wall unit. No condenser farm. There must be some way of controlling refrigerant flows independently. Re: Which is more efficient? 11Jun 30, 2010 3:57 pm dymonite69 Multi-splits is one big condenser but multiple thin refrigerant tubes to each wall unit. No condenser farm. There must be some way of controlling refrigerant flows independently. Yes, but as soon as you want more than 4 fancoils you're into Super Multi Plus's or VRV's which will scare most people rigid at the standard end of the market... Black on light wood does look good. Not sure if it will be as long lasting as a steel finish? 6 6357 brokers will also be in a position to get you a better rate than the advertised rate most times. 6 7589 Thank you. Do I use timber floorboards for stairs or do people use timber treads? Or is both the same? 6 7310 |