Weathershield patio door rollers

A handy person from Beesleys Point, NJ says:
August 17, 2012
I have a Weathershield 8' patio door installed before 2000. The roller looks like and matches the dimensions of your 81-087 except for the rollers which are 1 1/4. The left most hook fits into a slot and the right most is just in the void on the side channel of the door. Being that the hooks are recessed, it seems that your 81-158 would fit the only difference being the steel rollers instead of nylon. Attached are pics of the roller and the slot in the door for the roller.
A customer submitted image of a window roller.
Profile picture of Dave Sr.
Dave Sr. from SWISCO responded:
August 21, 2012
Thanks for contacting us! The 81-087 appears to be the only roller housing I can find that has those hooks on top of the housing. I cannot find a closer replacement.

However, I think it still may be a good match. The only problem I see is determining if you will have clearance for the larger rollers. Check to see if you can clear the bottom track. The 81-087 should only be about 1/8" to 1/4" taller than your own roller. Could it still work for you?
A quick learner from Beesleys Point, NJ says:
August 21, 2012
I don't know if I have enough clearance, I ordered the 81-158 as I don't think the hooks on the top are necessary. I will get a better idea of what clearance I have when I install the 81-158. The doors are heavy and if I have clearance the larger rollers would probably improve opening/closing. I will let you know after I install the 81-158.

Thanks

Jack P.
Profile picture of Dave Sr.
Dave Sr. from SWISCO responded:
August 21, 2012
Thank you! Let us know how it goes.
A handy person from Beesleys Point, NJ says:
August 24, 2012
I installed the 81-158 and it is working fine. The clearance on this door is really tight, If the 81-087 is 1/8 larger it would probably fit but If it is 1/4 larger I dont think it would clear the lip of the door frame.
Profile picture of Tom
Tom from SWISCO responded:
August 27, 2012
I'm glad to hear that the 81-158 was an applicable substitute! That's great to know. I appreciate you trying it out. I'm sure this information will help other customers in the future.
Reply to Thread
Use this form to ask a follow-up question or to share your experience regarding this subject.
(your email address will be kept private and is only used to inform you when a response has been made)