Is it more cost effective to have radiator temp set to max on boiler?

Moneybus

I have a thermostatically controlled boiler whereby it has a sensor which senses the temperature and if it falls below a certain temperature the boiler switches on the radiators. Once the temperature increases and reaches the desired temperature the boiler turns the radiators off.

On the boiler there is a min / max control for the radiators and I'm wondering if its more cost effective to set the radiators to maximum in this cold weather. My thinking behind is that if the radiators are on max they will get hotter and give out more heat and the heat the room quicker and the temperature rises quicker and the boiler then switches off. If the radiators are on medium on the boiler they will give out less heat and take longer to heat the room and hence take longer to reach the desired the temperature and therefore the boiler is on for longer and therefore using more gas.

Am I correct?

HappyMJ

Do you have a condensing boiler? Set it to medium in winter. If you have a non condensing older boiler then set it to maximum. The difference in running costs are quite small anyway so set it the most comfortable for you. If it's on maximum you'll feel the room getting hot then cold then hot more often than if it's on medium. The biggest savings are made when you turn the boiler off for as long a period as possible.

rogerblack

It varies.
If the pipework is within the heated portion of the building, then having the boiler running longer, and being more efficient due to the lower loop temperature is a win.
However - a lower loop temperature will never use more gas.
If it fails to heat the rooms adequately fast, then there is a saving for every minute that it's not up to temperature, compared to it being at temperature.

The differences are going to be small - in the 5% realm - if the property ends up heated to the same temperature.