11 ms·

The quality of framing wood you choose does not factor into home longevity at all. If you follow standard stick framing practices (16" or 24" OC) use the corre

The quality of framing wood you choose does not factor into home longevity at all. If you follow standard stick framing practices (16" or 24" OC) use the correct sheathing and fasteners, there will be no difference. What really determines how long a house will last is water/moisture management.

version_five 3y ago
I think the point (accurate or not) was that building codes are what they are to accommodate crappy modern lumber. Although actually afaik older buildings are often overbuilt because there was no engineering to figure out the least you could safely get away with. I agree with you that houses are more likely to rot than to break from under building and fall down, although events like decks collapsing during party or roofs collapsing in heavy snow do happen.
- dpe82 3y ago
  There's a ton of survivorship bias here too. Older houses that we're familiar with were well built, which is why there's still here. Plenty of poorly built ones are no longer around.
  - HPsquared 3y ago
    Well built, and also well maintained.
peteradio 3y ago
True, but on the margins of a leaky roof you'll rather have the old growth.
- dymk 3y ago
  That's a matter of kiln drying and milling quality, not old growth, when you're choosing your studs
  - rcme 3y ago
    I’m not an expert but I have a hard time believing density doesn’t matter.
    - civilitty 3y ago
      I'm having a hard time believing anyone uses old growth lumber for stick houses nowadays. That shit's expensive and much rarer than it once was.
      - thghtihadanacct 3y ago
        NO DOUBT, I am lucky to live in central coast and my house is made of it. I think the post a couple up was talking about moisture and rot resistance tho. Edit: just says old growth ... i thought i saw redwood
      - defrost 3y ago
        Myself and friends are using 200-400 year old growth jarrah in our building today - it was sourced from treefall in the 1980's, slabbed and stacked in sheds on farms for retirement. Jarrah looks like: https://youtu.be/jdBHtUN5gAE?t=217 https://youtu.be/jdBHtUN5gAE?t=217 and sounds like: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGFqvOEL5bw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGFqvOEL5bw https://youtu.be/uKxAkfI2pNo?t=39 https://youtu.be/uKxAkfI2pNo?t=39 Jarrah was used to pave high traffic thoroughfares in London at the turn of last century. Once our state stopped the wholesale clear felling of jarrah by europeans, we turned to harvesting regrowth: Jarrah is a sustainable, exclusively sourced from regrowth forests in Western Australia. Strict regulations are in place to ensure jarrah sustainability is managed in a way that balances ecological, economical socio-cultural factors. The guidelines and policies outlined in the The Forest Management Plan and the WA Regional Forest Agreement are regularly reviewed to ensure world-class standards are upheld. All native forests that are harvested in Western Australia are regenerated or replanted every year. Jarrah can be recycled and repurposed for other uses. Even though Jarrah is very sustainable timber, the West Australian Government has made the decision to ban logging any native timbers by the end of 2023. So .. still being used, but not for much longer.
AmVess 3y ago
Incorrect. I've some across many new boards that wouldn't hold a nail or a screw securely.
- thghtihadanacct 3y ago
  You werent using OSB on walls were you? Which goes back to the moisture thing...
- eropple 3y ago
  Boards that will not hold a screw? OK, I'll bite. What kind of wood? What fastener? What direction into the wood? How was the wood stored prior to use? Forgive my skepticism, but for wood boards (and not engineered materials being used incorrectly), ones not stored in deeply failure-causing conditions to the point where you wouldn't want to touch them because they'd be gross, this just does not happen.
  - sacrosancty 3y ago
    [dead]
- ikekkdcjkfke 3y ago
  And I've come across screws that won't hold a board securely. The screws just cracked.. It was only a table and a gate. From now on I test the screws i use for how much it takes to brake in half, and if it bends or just snaps
  - rudedogg 3y ago
    I’ve started to only use GRK screws for things I care about. They’re like twice the price, but it’s not like you go through many screws to do most DIY projects, and how easily they screw into stuff makes it worth it. Check them out, they’re nice.
  - hasmanean 3y ago
    Pre drill your screw holes.
mc32 3y ago
Were any of the Sears kits timber frames? It would make a diff if they were stick/platform vs timber.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
DropInIn 3y ago
Where the same methods are used a higher quality products does make a significant difference. Denser growth means it's harder for pests to damage and water to penetrate. My mom's place is build with high grade fir for every stud and beam and there's clear differences in how it's holding up to contemporaries built using pine from the same era (old growth too). Materials make a difference.
- eropple 3y ago
  Most firs and pines tend to be around the same density (around 25-28 lb/ft^3). Wood isn't magic and no common softwood is particularly moisture resistant. It's more likely that the envelope of the house was built better than anything to do with the framing materials.
  - DropInIn 3y ago
    This wood breaks screws and bends nails.... I really question if you comprehend the type of wood I'm talking about. The contemporary pine is like butter by comparison...
    - eropple 3y ago
      What species, what country? Because absolutely no softwood in North America does this. You can run Deckmates into the oldest pine you want all day. (And hardness has little to do with the strength or survivability of a constructed building.)
      - DropInIn 3y ago
        North Central coast BC, looks and smells like fir And it absolutely 100% does, as I've had it happen to me many times. It also gives circ saws a hell of a time. Don't know how to prove this given that's an 18 hour drive from me and she's not currently doing renos....
        ChoGGi 3y ago
dimitrios1 3y ago
> The quality of framing wood you choose does not factor into home longevity at all. This is just absolutely false. Older growth wood is more stable and more likely to resist moisture. We have zero examples of homes built with fast growth SPF (etc) lasting 100 years or more. Hell even 75. On the contrary, we have a plethora of examples of old growth pine lasting centuries. Just look at the cold, wet, and snowy northeast. Plenty of moisture there, yet the historic homes still stand. No contractor I've spoken to thinks the homes being built today will last half a century or longer. edit: I will stand by my comment. Lets see how many 70's and 80s era houses last until 2040.
- conjecTech 3y ago
  I've worked on plenty of hastily built houses from the 70s that are still standing half a century later and in relatively good condition. They may run up slightly higher maintenance bills, but I'd be surprised if they don't last to see 100 years. Houses today are undoubtedly better constructed. The quality of materials in the old days compensated well for the stress from poor environmental and thermal design, but you can probably get the same longevity by designing the house to not have that stress in the first place.
- eropple 3y ago
  > No contractor I've spoken to thinks the homes being built today will last half a century or longer. Contractors adhere to code largely as far as they can be forced to and work on a "we've always done it that way" basis. On the other hand, architects and engineers are pretty sanguine about modern softwood, and for good reason. You start seeing "modern" SPF in broad use starting in the mid-seventies and construction from that era is by-and-large fine. Remember that the houses that sucked--and there were a lot of them in the 1900s and earlier--simply no longer exist. Survivorship bias is real.
- JamisonM 3y ago
  You can't assert this is absolutely false, you have not even in your comment established the criteria to say so. If "older growth wood is more stable and more likely to resist moisture" it still stands that any wood can perform well in the absence of excess moisture. I certainly agree that my 120+ year old house made of fir would last much longer with a leaky roof than a house from the 1960's or 1990's with a leaky roof.. but all of those houses would be unfit for occupancy while they deteriorate. 75 years ago is 1957 by my reckoning, you have some example of 75 year old houses deteriorating because of the quality of wood in the absence of moisture penetration? There is no point in having a structure that is uninhabitable due to moisture penetration that still stands except for the purposes of salvaging it.. which I guess has some value.. My personal opinion is that building built to code today will stand for 100+ years no problem, buildings built in the 70's, 80's and 90's to code in many places will also do so if moisture (Rh) mitigations are reasonably executed (lots of mould & vapour barrier issues in that era). Older houses don't face the moisture issues because they are not as well sealed and as with all structures - keep a good roof on them and they are fine. Framing wood quality doesn't matter, how fast that wood rots is a question of every other material used in the construction of the envelope.
jacquesm 3y ago
> What really determines how long a house will last is water/moisture management. What really matters is the foundation.

version_five 3y ago

I think the point (accurate or not) was that building codes are what they are to accommodate crappy modern lumber. Although actually afaik older buildings are often overbuilt because there was no engineering to figure out the least you could safely get away with. I agree with you that houses are more likely to rot than to break from under building and fall down, although events like decks collapsing during party or roofs collapsing in heavy snow do happen.

dpe82 3y ago
There's a ton of survivorship bias here too. Older houses that we're familiar with were well built, which is why there's still here. Plenty of poorly built ones are no longer around.
- HPsquared 3y ago
  Well built, and also well maintained.

peteradio 3y ago

True, but on the margins of a leaky roof you'll rather have the old growth.

dymk 3y ago
That's a matter of kiln drying and milling quality, not old growth, when you're choosing your studs
- rcme 3y ago
  I’m not an expert but I have a hard time believing density doesn’t matter.
  - civilitty 3y ago
    I'm having a hard time believing anyone uses old growth lumber for stick houses nowadays. That shit's expensive and much rarer than it once was.
    - thghtihadanacct 3y ago
      NO DOUBT, I am lucky to live in central coast and my house is made of it. I think the post a couple up was talking about moisture and rot resistance tho. Edit: just says old growth ... i thought i saw redwood
    - defrost 3y ago
      Myself and friends are using 200-400 year old growth jarrah in our building today - it was sourced from treefall in the 1980's, slabbed and stacked in sheds on farms for retirement. Jarrah looks like: https://youtu.be/jdBHtUN5gAE?t=217 https://youtu.be/jdBHtUN5gAE?t=217 and sounds like: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGFqvOEL5bw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGFqvOEL5bw https://youtu.be/uKxAkfI2pNo?t=39 https://youtu.be/uKxAkfI2pNo?t=39 Jarrah was used to pave high traffic thoroughfares in London at the turn of last century. Once our state stopped the wholesale clear felling of jarrah by europeans, we turned to harvesting regrowth: Jarrah is a sustainable, exclusively sourced from regrowth forests in Western Australia. Strict regulations are in place to ensure jarrah sustainability is managed in a way that balances ecological, economical socio-cultural factors. The guidelines and policies outlined in the The Forest Management Plan and the WA Regional Forest Agreement are regularly reviewed to ensure world-class standards are upheld. All native forests that are harvested in Western Australia are regenerated or replanted every year. Jarrah can be recycled and repurposed for other uses. Even though Jarrah is very sustainable timber, the West Australian Government has made the decision to ban logging any native timbers by the end of 2023. So .. still being used, but not for much longer.

AmVess 3y ago

Incorrect. I've some across many new boards that wouldn't hold a nail or a screw securely.

thghtihadanacct 3y ago
You werent using OSB on walls were you? Which goes back to the moisture thing...
eropple 3y ago
Boards that will not hold a screw? OK, I'll bite. What kind of wood? What fastener? What direction into the wood? How was the wood stored prior to use? Forgive my skepticism, but for wood boards (and not engineered materials being used incorrectly), ones not stored in deeply failure-causing conditions to the point where you wouldn't want to touch them because they'd be gross, this just does not happen.
- sacrosancty 3y ago
  [dead]
ikekkdcjkfke 3y ago
And I've come across screws that won't hold a board securely. The screws just cracked.. It was only a table and a gate. From now on I test the screws i use for how much it takes to brake in half, and if it bends or just snaps
- rudedogg 3y ago
  I’ve started to only use GRK screws for things I care about. They’re like twice the price, but it’s not like you go through many screws to do most DIY projects, and how easily they screw into stuff makes it worth it. Check them out, they’re nice.
- hasmanean 3y ago
  Pre drill your screw holes.

mc32 3y ago

Were any of the Sears kits timber frames? It would make a diff if they were stick/platform vs timber.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

DropInIn 3y ago

Where the same methods are used a higher quality products does make a significant difference. Denser growth means it's harder for pests to damage and water to penetrate. My mom's place is build with high grade fir for every stud and beam and there's clear differences in how it's holding up to contemporaries built using pine from the same era (old growth too). Materials make a difference.

eropple 3y ago
Most firs and pines tend to be around the same density (around 25-28 lb/ft^3). Wood isn't magic and no common softwood is particularly moisture resistant. It's more likely that the envelope of the house was built better than anything to do with the framing materials.
- DropInIn 3y ago
  This wood breaks screws and bends nails.... I really question if you comprehend the type of wood I'm talking about. The contemporary pine is like butter by comparison...
  - eropple 3y ago
    What species, what country? Because absolutely no softwood in North America does this. You can run Deckmates into the oldest pine you want all day. (And hardness has little to do with the strength or survivability of a constructed building.)
    - DropInIn 3y ago
      North Central coast BC, looks and smells like fir And it absolutely 100% does, as I've had it happen to me many times. It also gives circ saws a hell of a time. Don't know how to prove this given that's an 18 hour drive from me and she's not currently doing renos....
      - ChoGGi 3y ago

dimitrios1 3y ago

> The quality of framing wood you choose does not factor into home longevity at all. This is just absolutely false. Older growth wood is more stable and more likely to resist moisture. We have zero examples of homes built with fast growth SPF (etc) lasting 100 years or more. Hell even 75. On the contrary, we have a plethora of examples of old growth pine lasting centuries. Just look at the cold, wet, and snowy northeast. Plenty of moisture there, yet the historic homes still stand. No contractor I've spoken to thinks the homes being built today will last half a century or longer. edit: I will stand by my comment. Lets see how many 70's and 80s era houses last until 2040.

conjecTech 3y ago
I've worked on plenty of hastily built houses from the 70s that are still standing half a century later and in relatively good condition. They may run up slightly higher maintenance bills, but I'd be surprised if they don't last to see 100 years. Houses today are undoubtedly better constructed. The quality of materials in the old days compensated well for the stress from poor environmental and thermal design, but you can probably get the same longevity by designing the house to not have that stress in the first place.
eropple 3y ago
> No contractor I've spoken to thinks the homes being built today will last half a century or longer. Contractors adhere to code largely as far as they can be forced to and work on a "we've always done it that way" basis. On the other hand, architects and engineers are pretty sanguine about modern softwood, and for good reason. You start seeing "modern" SPF in broad use starting in the mid-seventies and construction from that era is by-and-large fine. Remember that the houses that sucked--and there were a lot of them in the 1900s and earlier--simply no longer exist. Survivorship bias is real.
JamisonM 3y ago
You can't assert this is absolutely false, you have not even in your comment established the criteria to say so. If "older growth wood is more stable and more likely to resist moisture" it still stands that any wood can perform well in the absence of excess moisture. I certainly agree that my 120+ year old house made of fir would last much longer with a leaky roof than a house from the 1960's or 1990's with a leaky roof.. but all of those houses would be unfit for occupancy while they deteriorate. 75 years ago is 1957 by my reckoning, you have some example of 75 year old houses deteriorating because of the quality of wood in the absence of moisture penetration? There is no point in having a structure that is uninhabitable due to moisture penetration that still stands except for the purposes of salvaging it.. which I guess has some value.. My personal opinion is that building built to code today will stand for 100+ years no problem, buildings built in the 70's, 80's and 90's to code in many places will also do so if moisture (Rh) mitigations are reasonably executed (lots of mould & vapour barrier issues in that era). Older houses don't face the moisture issues because they are not as well sealed and as with all structures - keep a good roof on them and they are fine. Framing wood quality doesn't matter, how fast that wood rots is a question of every other material used in the construction of the envelope.

jacquesm 3y ago

> What really determines how long a house will last is water/moisture management. What really matters is the foundation.