Two materials that age very differently
Wood was the default window material in India for generations, and it remains the right choice in particular situations. uPVC has taken over most new residential work for reasons that are mainly about maintenance and moisture rather than performance alone. The honest comparison is less about which is better and more about which failure modes you would rather manage.
Maintenance
This is the clearest practical difference. Timber needs periodic attention: repainting or revarnishing on a cycle that depends on exposure, and prompt repair of any coating breach before water reaches the wood underneath. Neglected timber deteriorates from the outside in.
uPVC needs washing and occasional attention to hardware and seals, but no protective coating cycle. For an owner who does not want a recurring maintenance task tied to the weather, that difference is the main argument.
Humidity, rain and insects
Timber absorbs and releases moisture, which makes it swell and shrink with the seasons. In humid and coastal conditions that movement causes sticking sashes, gaps that open and close through the year, and eventually rot where water sits. Timber is also vulnerable to termites and borers, which is a serious consideration in much of India.
uPVC does not absorb water, rot, or attract insects. In a humid climate or near the coast, this is the strongest point in its favour.
Thermal behaviour
Both materials insulate far better than metal. Solid timber is a genuinely good insulator. Multi chambered uPVC is comparable, with the trapped air in the chambers doing the work that the density of the timber does.
In practice the glass specification will influence a room's comfort more than the choice between these two frame materials.
Appearance and repairability
Timber has a depth and character that foils and laminates approximate rather than match. For a heritage property, a restoration, or an interior where the joinery is part of the design, that matters and is a legitimate reason to choose wood.
Timber is also repairable in a way uPVC is not. A damaged section can be filled, sanded and recoated by a carpenter. Damage to a uPVC profile usually means replacing the section, because the colour runs through the surface layer rather than being applied on top.
Strength and spans
Good hardwood is structurally strong and can carry large openings in relatively slim sections. uPVC relies on internal steel reinforcement to achieve comparable rigidity, which is why uPVC frames look chunkier at larger sizes.
Where each one fits
uPVC tends to suit
- Humid, coastal or heavy monsoon locations
- Owners who want to avoid a recurring maintenance cycle
- Properties where termites are a known local problem
- Standard residential openings in new construction
Timber tends to suit
- Heritage buildings and restorations where appearance must match
- Dry climates where moisture movement is limited
- Interiors where visible joinery is a deliberate design choice
- Owners who prefer a material that can be repaired rather than replaced
The realistic summary
If the deciding factors are maintenance effort and resistance to moisture and insects, uPVC is the straightforward answer. If appearance, repairability or matching existing joinery carries more weight, and you accept the upkeep, timber remains a sound choice. Both are capable materials, and neither is a compromise when chosen for the right reasons.