Considering indirect hot water heating
We're doing a remodel of an old house (1914) and I was told by my brother (a plumber) to go with an indirect hot water heater. The boiler will be a direct vent boiler and I'd like to get your opinion on them (indirect HW heaters)as opposed to the gas fired hot water heater (40 gal) that she now uses. We'd need to be upgrading to a bigger hot water heater in any case because I'll be moving in with her. Any help would be appreciated.
Re: Considering indirect hot water heating
Don't even THINK of putting in a separate gas heater---it'll cost you much more to run & there's no need for it.
The indirect HW heater is one of the best things invented, tailor-made for HW boilers since they are connected by piping to the boiler & run off the boiler's hot water; widely considered one of the most efficient ways to make DhW.
Thus there's no need for a separate flue & they don't burn any fuel on their own.
They do cost ~$700, but they're well worth it IMHO; they come in 30, 40 or 50 gal. sizes & you'll get all the domestic hot tap water you'll ever need.
I've had an Amtrol Boilermate for the past 10 years without a speck of trouble; they last lots longer than a fuel-fired separate HW heater because they don't burn out.
They just sit there in their heavily insulated shell, occasionally calling for heat from the boiler.
Better indirects are made by Triangle
Tube, HTP Superstore, & Weil-McLaine has its name tag on a Triangle Tube unit that is also recommended; Buderus, Burnham; Crown makes a good one; most of these have a stainless steel inner tank instead of simply a copper coil, as does the Boiler Mate.
But there's nothing wrong with Boiler Mate, & they usually cost less than the others.
I would recommend a Triangle Tube if they're not substantially more costly than the Boiler Mate in your area.