Do you ever replace something before it fails?

Question

Always operated on "if it ain't broke, don't fix it," which mostly served me fine. Started wondering recently if that's actually the wrong call for certain systems, the ones where waiting for failure means a tenant with no hot water for two days versus a planned swap on a random Tuesday with nobody home.

Tried it once with a water heater that was getting up there in age but hadn't failed yet. Replaced it proactively on my schedule instead of its schedule. Cost the same either way, but the experience for the tenant and for me was completely different, no emergency call, no scrambling for same-day service.

Curious if anyone else does this deliberately for certain systems, or if "wait until it breaks" is just the default for everyone and I got lucky once.

Bill B. · Answer

When my tenants moved in a little over 10 years ago they thought the water heater “looked old, like it’s about to fail…”. I said I have a system and it would be replaced within hours of failing or even starting to leak.

Long story short that water heater “looks the same” today. I can almost guarantee if I had replaced it 10 years ago the replacement would have failed by now.

Ps. Their central ac system is 40 years old. It too could have been replaced 20 years ago when it was “at the end of its life”. And then replaced again this year. It has seriously given me zero issues the 11 years I’ve owned it.

I don’t buy in to the idea that everything used to be made better. But many things were. Either because they relatively more expensive, made in lower quantities, or they hadn’t figured how cheaply they could make something and still have it outlast the warranty period.  Anyway. To each their own.

Drew Sygit · Answer

the problem - no one knows when something will fail!

Why replace it based only on how old it is - when it may last another 3 years?

No "guaranteed" answer, to go with what works for you:)

Theresa Harris · Answer

A roof is the first thing that comes to mind.  I wouldn't wait for it to leak.

Aaron Zimmerman · Answer

I would actually argue it does Not cost the same. For instance, a furnace in the winter and a furnace in the summer may be different prices for labor due to demand.

Patrick O'Sullivan · Answer

The middle ground is planning for it without relying on age alone. Once something's older, budget for it, watch it more closely, and be ready to move when the warning signs show up. If a failure could mean real damage or a tenant losing an essential service, that's when proactive starts making more sense than waiting.

Mike Fisher · Answer

Giuseppe, you didn't get lucky, that's a real operating principle and worth being deliberate about. I have invested in Chicago-area rentals since 1991 and manage in the south and southwest suburbs, so here is how I actually make the call.

I don't replace on age alone (Drew is right that a 12-year-old heater might have three good years left). I replace early only when two other things line up with the age:

1. The failure MODE is what matters, not just the odds of failure. A water heater sitting on a finished basement floor under living space is a very different risk than the same-age unit in a garage next to a floor drain. Same age, same chance of going, wildly different bill when it does. Ask what does it ruin when it lets go, not just how old is it. I pull the first one much sooner than the second.

2. There is a captive moment. The least disruptive proactive replacement is the one you do while the unit is already vacant at turnover. Full access, nobody to schedule around, no after-hours premium. If a system is aging and I have the unit empty anyway, that is when it comes out, not on a random occupied Tuesday.

Two Chicagoland notes since our winters force the issue:

Furnaces get replaced on my calendar in the fall, not on the tenant's calendar in January. A no-heat call here mid-winter is not just an unhappy tenant, it is a habitability problem and a frozen-pipe risk that can dwarf the furnace itself. Shoulder season is planned; February is an emergency.

For the aging water heater you are not ready to pull yet, an inexpensive leak sensor plus a drain pan changes the whole equation. It turns a catastrophic overnight flood into a phone alert, which is exactly what lets you safely squeeze the remaining life out of the asset the way Drew is pointing at. You get both predictability and full useful life.

So for me it is not proactive versus wait-until-it-breaks. It is age plus cost-of-failure plus a captive moment, with low-cost monitoring on the stuff in between.

I run MF CashFlow Property Management (M Property Group LLC) out of New Lenox, IL, and this is the kind of call we work through weekly.

Jim Johnson · Answer

I do, but not across the board. If something is getting older, I look at its condition, repair history, and what happens if it fails unexpectedly. Sometimes getting another year out of a system isn't worth much if that year ends with an emergency call and a tenant without heat or hot water.

Water heaters are one where I'm more willing to be proactive, especially because a failure can mean more than just an inconvenience if it starts leaking. HVAC can fall into that category too depending on the time of year. If I can replace something on my schedule instead of waiting for it to choose the worst possible day, sometimes that's money well spent.

Traci McKinley · Answer

Definitely replace items before they fail when it could create a bigger expense, tenant inconvenience, or vacancy. Preventive replacement of aging HVAC systems, water heaters, appliances, or other high-risk items can be far less costly and less headache than dealing with an emergency failure at the worst possible time.

Kyle Mccaw · Answer

@Giuseppe Cavucci

Yes, I do this on my personal rentals. Certain systems are worth replacing proactively, especially water heaters.

It shows the tenant you care about their experience, and I’d much rather replace a water heater on a planned Tuesday than deal with an emergency call, potential water damage, after-hours labor, and an unhappy tenant.

There’s a difference between squeezing every last year out of an asset and maximizing the economics of the property. Sometimes replacing an aging system before failure is simply good property management.

You’re buying predictability, not just a new water heater.

Mohammed Rahman · Answer

Hey Guiseppe,

I think there’s definitely a difference between “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” and “if it’s nearing the end of its useful life, plan for it.”

For rentals especially, I’d rather proactively replace something when the cost of failure is high. A water heater is a good example. The replacement itself may not cost much more whether you plan it or deal with an emergency, but the tenant experience, potential water damage, and emergency labor can make the latter much more expensive.

I’d probably use the age and condition of the system as a trigger to start budgeting for replacement rather than automatically replacing everything early. You’re essentially trading an unpredictable expense for a planned capital expense.

Definitely something I’m becoming more conscious of as an investor. Always happy to connect and help any way I can - my DMs are always open!

Do you ever replace something before it fails?

Most Popular Reply