condensing vs "traditional" boilers

[KR]

i am in the process of upgrading my boiler for CH and hot water. The two heating engineers I have spoken to have conflicting opinions on whether to go with a condensing boiler or a traditional one. As I understand it, the complaints on the condensing boiler are: too complicated so repairs are always significant; requires a lot more ongoing maintenance to keep it running correctly; the condencing boilers are prone to rusting; and finally that the condensing boilers do not actually save you money in the long run.

I understand that condensing boilers will soon become mandatory, but, apparently we can still install the more traditional style.

Apologies for rambling on, but, I would appreciate your comments.

 

[ollski]

At this point in time condensing units do not have the reliability that conventional boilers do, but they are getting better and they will save you money.

 

[oilman]

How long they will take to save money is another matter. Combi boilers are supposed to save money. Not given the amount of maintenance they need.

 

[KR]

Thanks for your comments-- it mirrors what the engineers have said.

My bias is to go with the most efficient method with the idea that a new boiler should last 15 yrs or so and so over time it will pay for itself. I understand that condensing boilers have been used in europe for around 20 years- are there any models that you are aware of that are more reliable/require less maintenance?