Certainly, this discussion has probably come up once or twice before – but now, in 2015, how does the technology really stand?
I want to exclude soundproofing from this discussion, since we are building in a very quiet residential area, as are most such areas. The special case of building a house near a flight path, on a main road, or similar, I don’t want to discuss here, especially since a double or triple-layered wall also provides some sound insulation (actually quite good).
I have always had concerns about mold, but on the other hand, where would the moisture come from? In the case of a pipe leak and significant moisture damage, sources suggest that solid/concrete houses have worse problems than timber structures. The procedure here is to remove drywall, dispose of insulation in the affected area, allow it to dry for a week (using controlled mechanical ventilation with professional equipment), then install new insulation, close it up, and it’s done.
Normally, without a pipe break, moisture shouldn’t actually penetrate, right? Just like with solid construction, only the first few millimeters of the wall serve as a moisture buffer. It is well known that there is no “breathing wall.”
Regarding summer heat protection, I have experienced that even shaded solid model homes can become quite warm over the weekend. The two types of houses don’t differ much in this respect. I have even read that the heat cannot be released from the masonry at night, whereas in a timber house with low thermal mass, you can ventilate and thus lower the temperature, or use a brine-earth heat exchanger with the controlled mechanical ventilation system to achieve comfortable temperatures.
How does durability compare? Why is it said that timber houses don’t last as long, and what would be a realistic lifespan?
What are the real disadvantages of modern timber frame prefabricated houses from established manufacturers (Bien-Zenker, Weberhaus)? I am not referring to those from Poland or the Hunsrück region.
I want to exclude soundproofing from this discussion, since we are building in a very quiet residential area, as are most such areas. The special case of building a house near a flight path, on a main road, or similar, I don’t want to discuss here, especially since a double or triple-layered wall also provides some sound insulation (actually quite good).
I have always had concerns about mold, but on the other hand, where would the moisture come from? In the case of a pipe leak and significant moisture damage, sources suggest that solid/concrete houses have worse problems than timber structures. The procedure here is to remove drywall, dispose of insulation in the affected area, allow it to dry for a week (using controlled mechanical ventilation with professional equipment), then install new insulation, close it up, and it’s done.
Normally, without a pipe break, moisture shouldn’t actually penetrate, right? Just like with solid construction, only the first few millimeters of the wall serve as a moisture buffer. It is well known that there is no “breathing wall.”
Regarding summer heat protection, I have experienced that even shaded solid model homes can become quite warm over the weekend. The two types of houses don’t differ much in this respect. I have even read that the heat cannot be released from the masonry at night, whereas in a timber house with low thermal mass, you can ventilate and thus lower the temperature, or use a brine-earth heat exchanger with the controlled mechanical ventilation system to achieve comfortable temperatures.
How does durability compare? Why is it said that timber houses don’t last as long, and what would be a realistic lifespan?
What are the real disadvantages of modern timber frame prefabricated houses from established manufacturers (Bien-Zenker, Weberhaus)? I am not referring to those from Poland or the Hunsrück region.
So, my wife’s grandfather is over 80 years old, lives on the second floor in his own house, and still does all the gardening by himself. It can turn out differently, of course, but I don’t plan on being unable to climb stairs or having to move into a care home at 70. On the contrary, a solid financial plan usually assumes a life expectancy of 90 to 100 years, so you don’t run out of money. If I plan conservatively from age 30 to 80, the house should last at least 50 years. Ideally, I would prefer a design lifespan of 70 years. It’s clear that during that time you’ll need to redo plaster several times or renovate the bathroom, flooring, wall paint, etc. completely gutting the building down to the shell and then redoing electrical and plumbing installations would be quite drastic.
You, me, and we belong to a completely different generation than your wife’s grandfather. I don’t think you can compare our desire for comfort and lifestyle to that of an 80-year-old today. Fifty years ago and throughout his life, your grandfather certainly didn’t have the wish or determination to have an open-plan kitchen, living, and dining area.
Besides, he probably got more physical activity without any home exercise equipment in one year than you have had in your entire young life. Your desk-bound body will eventually set your limits, but not in a way that you get carried out of your house feet first at 80.
I hope everyone experiences a good life like that, but it’s best to look at it all with a clear and sober perspective… as you so aptly put it.
Besides, he probably got more physical activity without any home exercise equipment in one year than you have had in your entire young life. Your desk-bound body will eventually set your limits, but not in a way that you get carried out of your house feet first at 80.
I hope everyone experiences a good life like that, but it’s best to look at it all with a clear and sober perspective… as you so aptly put it.
B
Bauabenteurer24 Jul 2015 17:59This is now off-topic as well – we have two immediate neighbors who are retired and have recently built their houses (both bungalows). I think it’s a good idea and, health and income permitting, I would certainly do the same.
Similar topics