ᐅ Solid wood house / partial self-construction, wall structure / differences
Created on: 13 Oct 2013 09:46
R
Ralf-Bux
Good morning,
I am new here... and also new to the topic of “building a house.”
My wife and I have already read quite a bit, but we are not professionals.
We want to build a healthy single-family wooden house for our family of four.
The choice between wood and stone is no longer a question for us. It will clearly be wood.
Until now, we thought it would be a solid wood house. At first, a modern log house, but after further research, we have now settled on Holz 100 or rather “Only Wood” by Rombach.
After several discussions with general contractors, carpenters, etc., we finally consulted an architect (it would then be KfW 40 standard) who told us that we would be better off with a wood frame construction.
We are generally aware of the differences, but we are not really sure and would be very grateful for your opinions.
Especially the technical pros and cons regarding energy efficiency, building ecology, wall construction...
We are planning a 130sqm (1400 sq ft) single-family house with 4 bedrooms plus a spare room... and of course kitchen and other rooms. No basement. The plot is already owned. Heating should be provided only by a masonry heater. Hot water with an on-demand water heater + photovoltaics. (If necessary, infrared heating).
The budget is clearly set at 210,000 EUR for everything. That will be challenging, of course, but we have several craftsmen in the family and plan to do quite a bit of the work ourselves.
Thank you very much...
Ralf
I am new here... and also new to the topic of “building a house.”
My wife and I have already read quite a bit, but we are not professionals.
We want to build a healthy single-family wooden house for our family of four.
The choice between wood and stone is no longer a question for us. It will clearly be wood.
Until now, we thought it would be a solid wood house. At first, a modern log house, but after further research, we have now settled on Holz 100 or rather “Only Wood” by Rombach.
After several discussions with general contractors, carpenters, etc., we finally consulted an architect (it would then be KfW 40 standard) who told us that we would be better off with a wood frame construction.
We are generally aware of the differences, but we are not really sure and would be very grateful for your opinions.
Especially the technical pros and cons regarding energy efficiency, building ecology, wall construction...
We are planning a 130sqm (1400 sq ft) single-family house with 4 bedrooms plus a spare room... and of course kitchen and other rooms. No basement. The plot is already owned. Heating should be provided only by a masonry heater. Hot water with an on-demand water heater + photovoltaics. (If necessary, infrared heating).
The budget is clearly set at 210,000 EUR for everything. That will be challenging, of course, but we have several craftsmen in the family and plan to do quite a bit of the work ourselves.
Thank you very much...
Ralf
O
ohneWissen18 Nov 2013 21:06We had already decided on Rombach Wood because we liked the carpenter and his partners as down-to-earth and reliable craftsmen. Our budget, after deducting connection work (sewer/electricity/telecom), solar panels, fees for authorities, fastening, and a small terrace, is about 245,000 EUR. And for that, if we want to build everything ecologically, we can afford a maximum of 110 sqm (1,184 sq ft). That is why everything has come to a standstill. Firstly, our desired house is not feasible because it would be too complex, and secondly, the space is somehow too tight. We do not have a basement, and our two boys should also be able to stay longer at some point.
Therefore, I have started looking again to see if another provider with log construction or expanded clay might be more realistic. But we are both laypersons, and in the three years, I have not managed to understand which building method is truly better. In the end, I thought the wooden panel construction without glue and metal was great. I still think so, but our budget does not quite add up. I also can’t find the pure wood price for our desired house. Therefore, a price comparison is not possible from my point of view. Everyone has different prices. One does not include crane and scaffolding; another leaves out the base slab and interior finishes. According to our carpenter, he could deliver the house move-in ready for the 245,000 EUR stated. For that, we would need to give him flexibility in the choice of heating and interior walls. There would be no fixed price.
Today, I spoke with a Honka sales representative. Apparently, a solid wood house from the top edge of the slab with 130 sqm (1,399 sq ft), including high-quality windows, doors, and roof, costs about 220,000 EUR. But what about heating, roofing (sheet metal work), plumbing, electrical work, and flooring? For parquet flooring, which we like, I am calculating 80 EUR/sqm (7.4 USD/sq ft) including installation, totaling 10,400 EUR. I don’t know if that is unrealistic. The base slab for the bungalow is 20,000 EUR, plumbing 15,000 EUR, electrical work 6,000 EUR, and a simple wall-mounted fireplace 2,900 EUR. All that together is already over our budget. And the gutter is still missing.
At the very beginning, I had a fixed offer from a builder in Allgäu for Holz 100. Back then, the bungalow on stilts was supposed to cost 279,000 EUR turnkey. That would have been acceptable if the distance for planning was not so far. It seems harder here in the Nuremberg area to calculate prices without planning costs and to build a healthy house affordably. I’m slowly starting to believe that healthy, beautiful houses are only for people with a lot of money or for those skilled in craftsmanship who can do lots of things themselves, but not for ordinary people. We have actually already commissioned the planning contract, but nothing is progressing.
Actually, it is not about building as cheaply as possible for me but about building a dream house in good workmanship, completely PUR-glue-free, and with natural or no insulation. I do not want mineral wool or Styrofoam. That seems to be difficult.
I would be interested to know if anyone is familiar with the pure wood price from Rombach or knows what is better or cheaper: log construction (Honka/Polarlife) or Rombach Pure Wood, especially when you have a limited budget and still want to build a nice house.
Therefore, I have started looking again to see if another provider with log construction or expanded clay might be more realistic. But we are both laypersons, and in the three years, I have not managed to understand which building method is truly better. In the end, I thought the wooden panel construction without glue and metal was great. I still think so, but our budget does not quite add up. I also can’t find the pure wood price for our desired house. Therefore, a price comparison is not possible from my point of view. Everyone has different prices. One does not include crane and scaffolding; another leaves out the base slab and interior finishes. According to our carpenter, he could deliver the house move-in ready for the 245,000 EUR stated. For that, we would need to give him flexibility in the choice of heating and interior walls. There would be no fixed price.
Today, I spoke with a Honka sales representative. Apparently, a solid wood house from the top edge of the slab with 130 sqm (1,399 sq ft), including high-quality windows, doors, and roof, costs about 220,000 EUR. But what about heating, roofing (sheet metal work), plumbing, electrical work, and flooring? For parquet flooring, which we like, I am calculating 80 EUR/sqm (7.4 USD/sq ft) including installation, totaling 10,400 EUR. I don’t know if that is unrealistic. The base slab for the bungalow is 20,000 EUR, plumbing 15,000 EUR, electrical work 6,000 EUR, and a simple wall-mounted fireplace 2,900 EUR. All that together is already over our budget. And the gutter is still missing.
At the very beginning, I had a fixed offer from a builder in Allgäu for Holz 100. Back then, the bungalow on stilts was supposed to cost 279,000 EUR turnkey. That would have been acceptable if the distance for planning was not so far. It seems harder here in the Nuremberg area to calculate prices without planning costs and to build a healthy house affordably. I’m slowly starting to believe that healthy, beautiful houses are only for people with a lot of money or for those skilled in craftsmanship who can do lots of things themselves, but not for ordinary people. We have actually already commissioned the planning contract, but nothing is progressing.
Actually, it is not about building as cheaply as possible for me but about building a dream house in good workmanship, completely PUR-glue-free, and with natural or no insulation. I do not want mineral wool or Styrofoam. That seems to be difficult.
I would be interested to know if anyone is familiar with the pure wood price from Rombach or knows what is better or cheaper: log construction (Honka/Polarlife) or Rombach Pure Wood, especially when you have a limited budget and still want to build a nice house.
O
ohneWissen18 Nov 2013 21:20I have also lived for ages in an old building where there are drafts everywhere. However, the structural fabric is still better than all the OSB houses, and an old building absorbs more guest heat than a new build. I believe you also have to consider the future and environmental protection. Therefore, I would prefer an ecological house, if I can afford it.
blockhauspower19 Nov 2013 06:58Hello. We live in a solid wood house, and I can share from experience that the quality of life and added value of living are significantly higher than in apartments and houses made from panel materials. I won’t list the advantages of solid wood construction here, as those can be found online, but I will share my personal experiences.
I did a lot of the work myself, which is quite manageable due to the construction method. The house was assembled with a master carpenter on site, interior walls built with a stud frame construction. From the very beginning, the construction site was dry, so there was no need to dry the house afterwards. Only the screed had some moisture, but it was absorbed by the wood and slowly released again.
We would choose to build with our supplier again, as they are very customer-oriented, always available for constructive questions, and so on. I can provide the company name via private message. For us, a solid wood house was the right choice. It also helps reduce CO2 emissions.
Best regards
Derimholzhauswohnt
I did a lot of the work myself, which is quite manageable due to the construction method. The house was assembled with a master carpenter on site, interior walls built with a stud frame construction. From the very beginning, the construction site was dry, so there was no need to dry the house afterwards. Only the screed had some moisture, but it was absorbed by the wood and slowly released again.
We would choose to build with our supplier again, as they are very customer-oriented, always available for constructive questions, and so on. I can provide the company name via private message. For us, a solid wood house was the right choice. It also helps reduce CO2 emissions.
Best regards
Derimholzhauswohnt
F
friedrich2719 Nov 2013 08:44Hello, what kind of advice are you actually looking for? What benefit do you get from knowing only the raw wood price for JUST the wood? The more you deal with these so-called specialists (in reality, they are mostly just salespeople trying to sell their product), the more confused you will become. You say you don’t want insulation made of polystyrene or mineral wool, but there are plenty of other ecologically sensible insulation materials available. What is so bad about glued laminated timber constructions? Building ecologically doesn’t mean going back to the Stone Age; it always involves weighing compromises. Considering all factors, glued laminated products actually perform quite well. Why not clearly describe your exact issue, supported by your design, and specify the services you want? It’s always interesting how prospective homeowners try to avoid the very first step, which is sitting down with a suitable neutral expert (building biologist, architect, structural engineer) to sketch and clearly define the project. Once you have that, you can get offers from appropriate companies and then see if you can afford it.
Best regards, Friedrich.
Best regards, Friedrich.
O
ohneWissen19 Nov 2013 23:25Maybe that was my real problem. I thoroughly researched biological building at the traveling exhibition and spoke with two committed building biologists. They definitely advised me against using PUR adhesives and polystyrene, even in the floor slab. I also obtained the technical datasheet for PUR adhesives and saw that they are carcinogenic.
I find it incredibly difficult to make a decision with so many conflicting pieces of information. I have nothing against white glue and I’m not picky when it comes to natural insulation materials. It could be hemp, lava, wood, or something else. But I don’t know whether to choose log construction, timber frame, or lightweight expanded clay aggregate. Above all, I want to know what kind of house we can afford within our budget, that is reasonably environmentally friendly, built by workers who are fairly paid, and that we like.
When I read the article about sand that a colleague sent me, I feel like I shouldn’t build a concrete house since it involves resource depletion. Maybe I shouldn’t build at all, then I can’t do anything wrong.
I find it incredibly difficult to make a decision with so many conflicting pieces of information. I have nothing against white glue and I’m not picky when it comes to natural insulation materials. It could be hemp, lava, wood, or something else. But I don’t know whether to choose log construction, timber frame, or lightweight expanded clay aggregate. Above all, I want to know what kind of house we can afford within our budget, that is reasonably environmentally friendly, built by workers who are fairly paid, and that we like.
When I read the article about sand that a colleague sent me, I feel like I shouldn’t build a concrete house since it involves resource depletion. Maybe I shouldn’t build at all, then I can’t do anything wrong.
A
AallRounder20 Nov 2013 07:40Good morning,
My old brick house was built over 120 years ago using handmade bricks, lime, sand, and wood from the surrounding area. Honestly, I don’t worry much about the energy balance of the old brick kiln ring ovens from back then.
I have been renovating it for years using lime, gravel, untreated wood, clay infill for insulating between floors, iron slag in the flooring, ring oven bricks, and lots of original materials—without OSB, V100 vapor barriers, polystyrene, mineral wool, or similar products. In my opinion, renovating offers a better ecological balance since ideally the entire structural shell can be preserved instead of having to build everything anew. With the many individual steps involved, you can deliberately avoid petrochemical-based products by choosing alternatives that often fit the existing fabric better anyway. Because my house is listed, I even have official approval for this approach: despite new energy-saving regulations introduced each year, I’m never allowed to cover the façade with insulation because I have to preserve the stucco and original appearance. For the stucco repairs, I’m even going to remove the cornice and window sill metal flashing and replace it with stucco plaster because the metal flashing is considered too “modern.” I clean my bricks by hand with water and a root brush, repoint with homemade lime mortar, and consciously avoid any impregnation. Inside, I’m not allowed to cover anything up either, which aligns perfectly with my own views. Instead, I was able to plaster everything by hand using lime and lime-cement plaster.
When renovating, you can carefully consider and weigh your options step by step and avoid poor workmanship. That’s been my experience, at least. I should add that since I am working alone, it takes a long time and I can’t manage fast-paced actions like in a new build. As a result, the house and apartment remain in use side-by-side for years, which only became financially inconvenient after installing the heating system. This allowed me to leave damp walls standing for a few winters after removing moldy plaster, without needing construction dryers, etc. The same applied to re-plastering and sometimes laying a new screed on the ground floor, where the floorboards could no longer be saved: by traditional methods, everything remained unheated through the winter.
I’m thinking of flat roof construction. Or has the adhesive industry, especially regarding chipboard production and similar, since changed for the better?
Best regards
ohneWissen schrieb:Hmm, that’s a consistent approach. What do you think about this in relation to an existing house?
I probably am not allowed to build at all, so I’m not doing anything wrong.
My old brick house was built over 120 years ago using handmade bricks, lime, sand, and wood from the surrounding area. Honestly, I don’t worry much about the energy balance of the old brick kiln ring ovens from back then.
I have been renovating it for years using lime, gravel, untreated wood, clay infill for insulating between floors, iron slag in the flooring, ring oven bricks, and lots of original materials—without OSB, V100 vapor barriers, polystyrene, mineral wool, or similar products. In my opinion, renovating offers a better ecological balance since ideally the entire structural shell can be preserved instead of having to build everything anew. With the many individual steps involved, you can deliberately avoid petrochemical-based products by choosing alternatives that often fit the existing fabric better anyway. Because my house is listed, I even have official approval for this approach: despite new energy-saving regulations introduced each year, I’m never allowed to cover the façade with insulation because I have to preserve the stucco and original appearance. For the stucco repairs, I’m even going to remove the cornice and window sill metal flashing and replace it with stucco plaster because the metal flashing is considered too “modern.” I clean my bricks by hand with water and a root brush, repoint with homemade lime mortar, and consciously avoid any impregnation. Inside, I’m not allowed to cover anything up either, which aligns perfectly with my own views. Instead, I was able to plaster everything by hand using lime and lime-cement plaster.
When renovating, you can carefully consider and weigh your options step by step and avoid poor workmanship. That’s been my experience, at least. I should add that since I am working alone, it takes a long time and I can’t manage fast-paced actions like in a new build. As a result, the house and apartment remain in use side-by-side for years, which only became financially inconvenient after installing the heating system. This allowed me to leave damp walls standing for a few winters after removing moldy plaster, without needing construction dryers, etc. The same applied to re-plastering and sometimes laying a new screed on the ground floor, where the floorboards could no longer be saved: by traditional methods, everything remained unheated through the winter.
friedrich27 schrieb:
What’s so bad about glued constructions?
I’m thinking of flat roof construction. Or has the adhesive industry, especially regarding chipboard production and similar, since changed for the better?
Best regards
Similar topics