Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Around here 60's and 80's homes were built well. Homes built in the 70's were crap.
They were cutting a lot of corners back then.... aluminum wiring, all electric, bad foundations, little insulation.
Interesting. I grew up in a 70's house. Homes built in the 60's and 70's were built for baby boomers. Demand exceeded supply and they needed to build quickly. I do think the quality is fine overall, but every lace will have their quirks. My parents house was built in the early 70's and their ceilings are noticeably lower - 7.5 feet instead of the standard 8. It was more efficient to heat, which was a selling point because of the oil crisis.
Until morons stop accepting this mediocre wooden construction then you're doomed to complain. A quality structure should be built out of condo / commercial quality glass, concrete, and where necessary steel. That's the only way to guarantee no bugs, no noise, and almost no energy loss. Keep slapping together 2x4s, keep getting crap.
Watch out for the assumption that all houses were built of the same quality in any particular decade. They weren't. In any particular year there were builders who took pride in their work and others who just wanted to sell a house and would cut corners to do so. Older houses may have had lead paint, asbestos, and dangerous wiring or boxes. Google "Federal Pacific" if you don't believe me.
No matter whether you purchase a house that's newly built or one that's a historic home, you should have a licensed inspector go over it with a fine tooth comb during your option period.
Watch out for the assumption that all houses were built of the same quality in any particular decade. They weren't. In any particular year there were builders who took pride in their work and others who just wanted to sell a house and would cut corners to do so. Older houses may have had lead paint, asbestos, and dangerous wiring or boxes. Google "Federal Pacific" if you don't believe me.
No matter whether you purchase a house that's newly built or one that's a historic home, you should have a licensed inspector go over it with a fine tooth comb during your option period.
Yes, yes, yes. I have family members who live in old houses and they are not fine houses. Sometimes the floors are spongy. Sometimes the wiring has been bad and had to be replaced. Sometimes the bath fixtures were put in odd places, or the kitchens were badly designed. I could go on and on.
There are so many variables. I know of housing built during the WWII years that was shoddily built. The house my family built in the 1950s was solid as a rock. The house I lived in that was built in 1979 had out of square walls and a spongy area in the floor; the house I live in now which was built in 2012 is much more solid, with firm floors and straight walls. In newer houses you get more electric outlets and better plumbing too.
Sweeping generalizations are almost never accurate. Consider each house individually because it is as much an individual as a person is.
Yes, yes, yes. I have family members who live in old houses and they are not fine houses. Sometimes the floors are spongy. Sometimes the wiring has been bad and had to be replaced. Sometimes the bath fixtures were put in odd places, or the kitchens were badly designed. I could go on and on.
There are so many variables. I know of housing built during the WWII years that was shoddily built. The house my family built in the 1950s was solid as a rock. The house I lived in that was built in 1979 had out of square walls and a spongy area in the floor; the house I live in now which was built in 2012 is much more solid, with firm floors and straight walls. In newer houses you get more electric outlets and better plumbing too.
Sweeping generalizations are almost never accurate. Consider each house individually because it is as much an individual as a person is.
How about tract homes built by the same developer and having the exact same floor plan across from the 1950s and on?
How about tract homes built by the same developer and having the exact same floor plan across from the 1950s and on?
How about them? As an adult, I've lived in three of these myself. The first was built in 1959; the second one I lived in was built in 1969; this present house was built in 2002. The last is much the best. Another house was built originally on spec, so it wasn't a tract house. I believe it was built better than the house we lived in that had been built in 1969, which I think was the worst of the ones I've lived in. The house built in the late 1950s was pretty good, if memory serves.
I have never lived in a Levittown situation though, where all the homes were identical.
I am not sure what you are asking. If you don't want to live in a subdivision in tract housing, you don't have to.
Until morons stop accepting this mediocre wooden construction then you're doomed to complain. A quality structure should be built out of condo / commercial quality glass, concrete, and where necessary steel. That's the only way to guarantee no bugs, no noise, and almost no energy loss. Keep slapping together 2x4s, keep getting crap.
I don't know what you have against wood houses. They are easily built, easily modified, and last 100 years even in terrible climates like Chicago's. If you're building with a 500 year time horizon you might consider brick or stone.
Also, wood grows on trees. It is the original renewable resource.
I used to have a much older house (older than 60's or 70's) and I think it was better constructed than my current 1998 house. Plaster walls instead of drywall, real wood doors instead of some hollow crap, real wood trim and moldings as opposed to particle board, real hardwood floors instead of some engineered crap, just to name a few things.
Having lived in a variety of different homes since I was a kid, I have to agree with most of the benefits of that type of construction, except the plaster walls. Those were terrible. I remember watching my parents doing a simple thing like hanging a new picture on the wall, and seeing it turn into a disaster. They would pound the nail in, hang the picture, and watch it drop on the floor and take a chunk of plaster out with it.
Some of my best memories were of the 1950s houses we lived in. Those were really nice. They were new enough to have the nice modern smooth drywall. But old enough to still have real craftsmanship. The thick exterior brick walls, custom wood framed windows and doors, and features like custom built in wooden bookcases, that I don’t think you can find in new homes.
If I had the money, my dream would be to buy an old historic home, and remodel it. I would replace all the plaster with nice smooth drywall, but I would keep all the original woodwork.
In defense of new construction - [1] it is up to the buyer. [2] Everyone wants cheap. [3] So builders comply.
Heifer dung! (pardon my barnyard metaphor)
. . .
[1] The buyer of pre-made tract housing has ZERO input.
If he's not involved in the construction, he's at the mercy of building codes, mindless bureaucracy, and banking interests. More often than not, buyers settle for the least annoying affordable house, not their 'dream house.' Gawd hep you if you want something "not on the menu" - like a superinsulated disaster resistant autonomous house.
[2] People don't want to be ripped off - which is the situation under current housing construction. IIRC - the old rule of thumb was that the price of a typical house was 1/3 materials, 1/3 labor, and 1/3 profit. I'd augment that with some of the crap materials and undocumented labor, it's more like 1/4 materials, 1/4 labor, and 1/2 profit. (Which fails to account for 44% tax bite taken by aggregate government) Then there's the 'cut' taken by the usurers / bankers...
And though we have mass production for many other necessities, housing isn't one. Worse, "custom made" housing emphasizes style over function... especially when it comes to placating the "little woman."
[3] Builders comply with building codes that define the lowest common denominator, freeze innovation, and then slap on marketing gee-whiz items that the buyer is forced to accept.
Pet peeves: Windows as 'emergency exits' for bedrooms. What a stupid requirement. Forces windows to be made convenient for burglars, as well as in the wrong place for privacy. Why not put in compact "emergency exits" near the floor - safest place during a fire?
Another pita - heat registers under windows - to ameliorate the unpleasant chill from cold glazing - which is like trying to fill a bathtub with the drain open. Why not add insulated (partial) shutters?
Then there's the issue of ventilation via operable windows. A vent in the middle of the wall is the least effective. You need a high vent for hot air, and a low vent for cold air, for maximum efficiency. So we're stuck with code enforced windows that are ridiculous compromises.
Next is the electrical code. Electrical outlets placed exactly where small children can reach, and placed at the midpoint in the wall, instead of near corners, where most people have electrically powered items, lamps, and appliances. And why use only duplex outlets when a quad would be so much better? Obey the CODE, mindlessly. And let's not forget the absence of an airlock foyer, to reduce losses when entering / exiting. Some cold climate houses have "mud rooms" on their informal entries, but rarely do formal entries include an airlock foyer.
They don't build 'em with any common sense, either.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
