Jumping in to mention something about Renewal by Andersen (since a lot of people wonder about them). I'm in Sarasota and we got a quote from RbA when shopping around. They use Fibrex (that composite material) which is indeed very nice – strong frames, and our friends up north love their Andersen windows. But wow, the cost... The quote for 15 windows was nearly double what some vinyl options cost.
We ended up not going with RbA due to budget. Instead, we chose a high-quality vinyl (Simonton) installed by a local dealer. No regrets at all. The efficiency of our vinyl windows is on par with what the Fibrex would have given us (both had Low-E and argon). Maybe the Andersen might last longer in terms of frame durability (hard to say), but the vinyl ones we got have a lifetime warranty anyway.
The look: Andersen's Fibrex frames were a bit thinner and could be painted, which was appealing, but we decided those benefits weren't worth the steep price in our case.
So, just a note: if anyone out there is considering the big names like Andersen or Pella, definitely compare with local vinyl/fiberglass options. You might find the performance is similar and the cost difference is huge. Andersen and Pella make great products, but in Florida's climate, some of the local brands are just as effective for efficiency at a fraction of the price.
Now that a lot of the technical stuff has been covered, I'll throw in something about aesthetics and functionality. Consider if you want things like grids, window styles, tint, or special screens as part of your project.
I live in a 1960s ranch in Tampa, and when we replaced windows, we changed a few horizontal sliders to single-hung windows for a different look (and better rain resistance when partially open). We also decided to add a slight gray tint on our big living room picture window (in addition to Low-E) just to cut down glare a bit more. That window gets blasted by sun. The tint makes it a little darker from outside, but inside it's still very bright – just not blinding.
If you do want any tint beyond what Low-E provides, make sure it's within code (there are some limits for egress windows, etc., but usually not an issue for homes). Most people find the Low-E alone is enough, though.
And think about screens too – almost all new windows come with screens. If you hate the look of full screens, some companies offer half-screens (only covering the part that opens), which give a slightly clearer view. We did half-screens on our double-hung windows and full screens on the single-hungs.
Minor details, but since you're investing a lot, it's worth getting those little things the way you want them.
A quick tip on the Low-E glass appearance: if you have doubts, try to see a sample of the glass in person. Some window companies have showrooms or can show you a demo unit. I was also worried about how the Low-E tint would look. When I saw a sample of the actual glass with the coatings, I realized it was pretty much a non-issue. It helped me feel confident choosing the glass with the extra Low-E layers.
Sometimes it's hard to imagine the look until you see it, so ask your installer or supplier if viewing a sample is possible. It put my mind at ease.
This thread is super helpful. Quick question about incentives: has anyone taken advantage of any energy efficiency rebates or tax credits for these window upgrades? I heard there’s a federal tax credit for Energy Star windows (like 30% of the cost up to $600). Also, do local utilities (TECO or Duke Energy) offer any rebates for window replacement? Trying to factor that into my budget.
@tylerclark995 Yes, definitely look into the incentives! As of this year, there is a federal tax credit for energy-efficient home improvements, including windows. It’s part of the Energy Efficient Home Improvement Credit. You can get back 30% of the cost of the windows as a tax credit, up to $600. The windows need to meet Energy Star (specifically the Energy Star Most Efficient criteria) to qualify – most good Low-E/argon windows do, but double-check the labels or manufacturer specs.
In Florida, there's no state-level tax credit for windows that I know of. However, some utilities do offer rebates:
Tampa Electric (TECO) had a rebate around $0.75 per square foot of window glass replaced, if the new windows meet certain efficiency criteria (SHGC ≤ 0.35 and U-factor ≤ 0.60, which Low-E double-panes usually do). It might amount to something like $50-$150 back for an average house – not huge, but it's a nice bonus.
Duke Energy (in our area) had a window rebate up to $400, but you needed to have a home energy audit done first and the windows had to meet their specs. Not sure if that program is still active, so you'll want to check their latest offerings.
Also, the Inflation Reduction Act extended those federal credits for several years. So if you can't do all your windows in one year, you could do some this year and some next year and potentially claim up to $600 each year (since the cap is annual).
Definitely take advantage of the federal credit. And ask your installer or utility about any local rebates. I got about $80 back from TECO after my installation – it was just a form to fill out with the window ratings and a copy of the invoice.
My house is pretty shaded by trees, especially on the east and south sides. For folks like me who don't get a ton of direct sun, is the Low-E glass still worth it for energy savings? I'm mostly concerned with heat and humidity, but if direct solar gain is less due to shade, maybe the windows matter a bit less? I'm definitely replacing the old windows regardless (they're in bad shape), but I'm trying to decide if I should go all-in on the highest SHGC reduction or if a standard Low-E is enough since we have shade.
@rockysinger Even in a shaded house, energy-efficient windows are still absolutely worth it. Direct sun is a big source of heat, but it's not the only source. Our Florida air is hot, and anything not well insulated (like old single-pane windows) will let heat seep in just from the temperature difference. New double-pane windows with Low-E and argon will greatly reduce that heat transfer, even in shade.
Shade does help reduce solar gain, so you're right that the impact of a super low SHGC glass might be a bit less crucial on those shaded sides. But I'd still go with a good Low-E coating regardless. First, not all shade is constant – when the sun’s angle changes or if a tree loses branches in a storm, etc., you might get more sun. Second, Low-E also helps with insulating in general (it reflects heat back), so when it's cooler inside than outside (which is most of the time with AC on), Low-E keeps the exterior heat out better.
Also, Low-E coatings block UV light, which is present even in shade (diffuse daylight still has UV). That helps prevent fading of your furniture and floors.
In my opinion, the cost difference between a "standard Low-E" and the highest performance Low-E is usually not huge, so you might as well get the better one on west/south windows at least. If you wanted to save a bit, you could possibly use a slightly lower spec on fully shaded north/east windows, but often it's simpler (and best) to have the same glass throughout.
We have a couple of big oak trees shading our house, and we still noticed a big difference in indoor temperature consistency after replacing our windows. Even in the shaded rooms, the new windows made it less stuffy. So yes, you'll still benefit a lot.
Late to the party, but I wanted to share our experience since it involves one of the companies you mentioned. We recently replaced all the windows in our home in Brandon and went with ProTech Windoors as the installer. They weren't the cheapest, but we chose them for their strong reputation and we’re glad we did.
The crew from ProTech Windoors was very professional – they arrived on time, put down drop cloths everywhere, and used spray foam around the window gaps for insulation. We had 14 windows done, using CWS vinyl impact windows (we decided to do impact glass for the whole house). It took them 3 days total. The attention to detail in the install was great (nice clean caulking lines, etc.). They even fixed one of our out-of-square openings so the new window fit perfectly.
It's been 4 months since then, and we're really happy. The house feels cooler and our electric bill dropped about 12% compared to last year. Also, a shout-out to ProTech's customer service: one window had a minor issue (a small scratch in the glass, likely a manufacturing thing). They handled the warranty and got the sash replaced in a few weeks, no hassle.
So, if anyone is considering ProTech Windoors, my experience with them has been excellent. Sometimes paying a bit more for a quality installer pays off, because you get a smooth installation and good support after the sale.
I have a bit of a different scenario: my house (in Seminole) already has double-pane windows that were installed around 2002. They are tinted but I don't think they have any Low-E coating (or if they do, it was early tech). They've been okay, but I wonder if upgrading to newer windows would make a significant difference in energy efficiency. Has anyone replaced relatively newer (say 20-year-old) double-pane windows with the latest Low-E windows? Was it worth it? Or should I wait longer?
I don't have any issues like fogging or leaks with them, it's just that they're not the newest tech. Trying to decide if the energy savings and comfort would justify the expense to replace windows that aren't that old.
@marks96 I was in a similar situation. My previous house had double-pane windows from the late '90s, no Low-E coating (just a slight gray tint). Our current house had early 2000s double-panes, and we decided to upgrade them last year as part of a remodel. Here's what I found:
If your existing double-panes are in good shape (no seal failures, etc.), the difference in energy efficiency between those and brand new Low-E windows will be noticeable, but not as dramatic as going from single-pane to double-pane. The newer Low-E glass will certainly reduce more solar heat. A 2002-era window might have an SHGC of like 0.5 (with tint) and a U-factor around 0.5. A modern Low-E window can have SHGC ~0.25 and U-factor ~0.30. That's a significant improvement. In our case, we did notice the west-facing rooms stayed cooler than before, and our HVAC runtime went down a bit. But the savings might be on the order of 5-15% off the energy bill, not 30%.
One big difference was comfort and even condensation. The old windows would still feel a bit warm to the touch on a hot day and cool on a cold winter morning (we do get some 40s°F nights in winter). The new ones feel more neutral – not hot or cold – on the inside pane. Also, our old double-panes would occasionally get condensation on the inside in winter (probably because the frames weren't great). The new ones have had no interior condensation at all so far.
Another factor: new windows will seal better. Windows from the early 2000s might not have the best weatherstripping after 20 years. Our old ones had noticeable air leaks; you could feel drafts. The new ones are super tight. So even aside from glass efficiency, the reduction in air infiltration made a difference in comfort.
That said, replacing windows is expensive, and if your current ones aren't failing, the payback purely on energy savings will take a long time. We mostly did it because we were remodeling anyway and we wanted the improved comfort, noise reduction, and to update the look (the old tint made the house look a bit dark).
So, if you have the budget and plan to stay in the house, upgrading 20-year-old windows with new efficient ones will improve things (just maybe not as dramatically as older homes). If your current windows are okay and you have other priorities, it's also reasonable to wait. Maybe check if there's an NFRC sticker or etched code on the glass to see if they had Low-E. If not, they're basically just tinted glass, so a Low-E upgrade would help.