ᐅ Comparison of Solid (Masonry) Houses and Prefabricated Houses
Created on: 29 Aug 2012 13:32
V
VanTide
Hello everyone,
we are currently planning a 140 m² (1,507 ft²) house on a 500 m² (5,382 ft²) plot of land.
There are only two providers left in the running: one prefab house supplier and one traditional masonry builder.
We want to build with an air-to-water heat pump and underfloor heating, including a 4 kW photovoltaic system to balance out electricity costs in the long term.
The prefab house provider builds to the KfW 55 standard and estimates monthly operating costs for the heat pump at 35 euros.
The masonry builder uses conventional bricks and advises against insulation according to the KfW 70 standard, which would cost 12,000 euros more. Their argument is that heat pump costs would be around 65 euros per month, and with KfW 70 insulation, only about 6 euros per month could be saved. To recover the 12,000 euro investment, it would take 200 months, so it is not worthwhile.
What is your opinion on this topic? Do you have any experience, and how do you assess my approach? Would you plan the house differently?
Thank you very much and good luck,
Andre
we are currently planning a 140 m² (1,507 ft²) house on a 500 m² (5,382 ft²) plot of land.
There are only two providers left in the running: one prefab house supplier and one traditional masonry builder.
We want to build with an air-to-water heat pump and underfloor heating, including a 4 kW photovoltaic system to balance out electricity costs in the long term.
The prefab house provider builds to the KfW 55 standard and estimates monthly operating costs for the heat pump at 35 euros.
The masonry builder uses conventional bricks and advises against insulation according to the KfW 70 standard, which would cost 12,000 euros more. Their argument is that heat pump costs would be around 65 euros per month, and with KfW 70 insulation, only about 6 euros per month could be saved. To recover the 12,000 euro investment, it would take 200 months, so it is not worthwhile.
What is your opinion on this topic? Do you have any experience, and how do you assess my approach? Would you plan the house differently?
Thank you very much and good luck,
Andre
Claus schrieb:
Are you really unable to understand that the 207,000 euros for the wooden house do not include the foundation or the garage, or do I need to explain it even more clearly? And to reach the remaining amount of about 360,000 euros, you simply have to add the land, electricity, heating, water, kitchen, and so on... Alright, listen up, my good man:
First of all, it’s not acceptable for you to be insulting here. A little sarcasm is fine... 🙄
I already understood that 207,000 euros is not the turnkey price, but 360,000 euros is. You say the solid construction house is then a third cheaper. And that’s exactly what sounds very unlikely.
Therefore, it would be really helpful if you could provide a detailed scope of work.
Otherwise, how are we supposed to compare prices or make any statements about whether the price is realistic or not?
Good grief......
Sarcasm is one thing, but when all we get from you and Baufie is just "blah blah...blubber blubber...I don’t believe that the price is one-third less for the same performance...blah blah," it eventually becomes annoying, especially since there haven’t been many other comments from you. Apparently, you are the ultimate experts who have built nearly 100 houses—50 with solid construction and 50 timber-framed—so you supposedly know exactly what you’re talking about. As for me, I only wrote here that, based on my quotes, solid construction is about one-third cheaper than a prefabricated house, and that I’m not very convinced by full thermal insulation.
Claus schrieb:
Apparently, you are the absolute experts who have built nearly 100 houses, about 50 of them with solid construction and 50 using timber frame methods, so you know exactly what you are doing. That's correct!
schubert7923 Dec 2012 16:59I'll just say nothing about that....
Well, I understand Claus. 😉
It’s quite simple:
2 pears are one-third cheaper than 1 pound of apples.
Of course, this only applies to the special offer when you buy the pears in a pack of 10 and add 1 kilogram (2.2 pounds) of tomatoes to the apples.
That should be easy to understand.
It’s quite simple:
2 pears are one-third cheaper than 1 pound of apples.
Of course, this only applies to the special offer when you buy the pears in a pack of 10 and add 1 kilogram (2.2 pounds) of tomatoes to the apples.
That should be easy to understand.