Window Dilemma

I just bought a single family home in Baltimore, MD built in 1919 with 35 beautifully placed but awful condition alum single pane replacement windows. 50% of them are completely broken, won't shut, and the outside world is only a storm window a way. It also has heat pumps (but I am putting in two wood stoves) so I am burning dollars by the hour with these drafts.

I need to do a huge replacement job and have a great company, well recommended by friends, and reasonable price to do alot of the windows but they are a double pane double hung window WITHOUT Low e and Argon. I also found windows a little more expensive from companies less recommended and reliable and some great windows that are really expensive. The difference is these have low e and argon or krypton.

SO, what would you do. Replace 5 of the 35 windows with more expensive but better efficiency windows and let the gale force winds continue through the rest. Or would you get the best fix possible on as many as possible and then update to low e, or whatever the new thing will be, 5 years from now. If the former is the best choice, would it be better to buy the cheapest window possible and do them all right now?

 

If it were I with my low budget, I'd cover the inside of the windows with plastic after replacing broken glass and caulking. Then, I'd decide whether I wanted to replace the worst or those in the most prominent location, such as on the front of the house. I would go with the windows with low e and argon. I have known many folks who replaced windows as budget allowed over a period of time.

 

I'd buy the better windows and replace as many as you can at a time - seems like a better long term solution and lower marginal cost (installation).

 

Keep in mind that some window manufacturers go out of business or change the design of their window over time. This could be a problem if you replace the windows a few at a time.