ᐅ What is the most cost-effective type of shell construction?

Hello,

I want to start building this year. However, I can’t find any website that compares the costs of different types of structural work. But isn’t this actually a fundamental aspect?

Of course, I am aware that certain construction methods lead to higher follow-up costs (such as greater insulation effort, more work for the electrician, etc.) than others. Therefore, a general statement is probably hardly possible.

Nevertheless, I am considering having a solid prefabricated house built (walls made of Liapor, cast in place). The question now is simply: how much more expensive or cheaper is this method compared to conventional masonry construction with Liapor, brick, or Ytong block? How does it compare to a prefabricated house? Which is more cost-effective?

Perhaps someone knows of a website that compares these construction methods. Unfortunately, I haven’t found one yet.

Thanks in advance for your help.

Neubauherr

Hello,

Neubauherr schrieb:
Still, I am considering having a solid prefabricated house built (walls made of Liapor, cast on site). The question now is simply how much more expensive or cheaper this method is compared to "conventional" construction, building stone by stone with Liapor, brick, or aerated concrete (Ytong). How does it compare to a traditional prefab house? Which is more cost-effective?

It is difficult to find verifiable statements on this because it would require homeowners to have built at least twice—once with prefabricated panels and once conventionally.

I personally worked for several years with prefabricated panels like Liapor®. When properly assembled, there is no objection to this construction method. The key factors are the composition of the material and the surface of the walls—whether the form results in a relatively smooth wall or one that is rather coarse-textured. This is especially important regarding the finishing stage—are the walls delivered ready for painting, or who is responsible for sealing ceiling joints, connections, control joints, and plastering the walls?

The construction schedule is comparable to that of a typical prefab house manufacturer—once planning is secure, the walls are produced and erected within a few days. Meanwhile, conventional builders are already working on the masonry at this stage, so there is no significant time saving. During the interior finishing, both methods proceed at roughly the same pace.

If you want reasonable quality, you will find that all variations of house construction fall within a similar price range. It is in your best interest to avoid outliers, especially those significantly below or above the average price.

Best regards

Hello Ralf,

Neubauherr schrieb:
..I was also thinking more about developers or architects who already have more experience with the different construction methods.

You don’t seem to want to read properly ... or want to?

There is no significant price difference or time advantage. If you think about developers – they have to purchase the system you prefer, the architect expects to be paid according to HOAI (even the creator of the system wants to recoup their investment) – all legitimate variations, each inherently carrying a markup.

If you want to save money, the only option is to lay stone by stone by stone yourself (regardless of the type). Every “middleman” must be paid for their service, otherwise the legal process becomes shorter than what you and other builders would like.

Best regards

It also heavily depends on your location, as prices vary significantly across the country. We live up here on the coast.

Here, H&H or Ytong aerated concrete blocks are mostly used because some of them are produced nearby.

Next are Liaplan in the Brandenburg area and, far behind, Schlagmann or Wienerberger.

Transport costs can then add up so much that you might end up paying twice as much for a comparable brick.

Bauexperte schrieb:

Reading and looking things up is educational

Kind regards

First, you say there is no significant difference. Yet immediately after, you recommend building with traditional masonry because it can save costs.
Who is supposed to understand that statement?

Hello,

Interessent schrieb:
First you say there is no significant difference. Yet in the same breath, you recommend brick-on-brick construction because it saves money. How is anyone supposed to make sense of this statement?

Quote: "If you want to save money, the only option is to lay brick upon brick upon brick (no matter which type) yourself." Is that clearer now?

Kind regards