Mobile Homes vs Traditional (claim, expensive, value, builders)

[sholomar]

Things I don't like is laundry and water heater on main level, so if there's a leak that particle board flooring will turn to mush.

Plus the washing machines can shake the entire home. However they are inexpensive to maintain and on their own land will hold up well for resale value. I wouldn't buy one new.. but used ones on their own land with 2 stall garages I can see the appeal to some people. Not me though I want stick built with a full basement (no concrete slab or crawl space)

[old_cold]

A few errors in this thread.
One... manufactured homes (with wheels and axles) commonly still called trailers, are not motor vehicle registered in every state. Most these days are doublewides.
The one we have in Fl is and has titles (one for each half!) In NYS it is treated like any other house.

Modulars, those built in a factory without are very often better built than stick, depending on the manufacturer, due to the factory methods used. These must be moved on a flat bed. If set on a full basement, you'd be probably not be able to tell the difference by looking at it.

Old 'trailers', like cars, may be well built or poorly built and generally aren't still on their wheels . If it is, maybe that's why the washing machine shakes it but it's certainly not the norm.

Stockwiz....we have one on a full basement, that's just a matter of choice (and money

[LOL_Whut]

Originally Posted by Sky-Blue

Having a brand-new MFH is tempting now, but think two decades into the future:

Some trailer parks make rules that MFH built before a certain year will no longer be allowed on their lot. Anyone with an older model will need to find another trailer park that will accept it, and then have it transported.

Look online at some of the prices of 20+ year old MFH's. They are practically giving them away compared to what was paid. Others say the MFH is all yours if you have it moved. Not good return when the MFH is expected to depreciate all the way down to zip.

We used to have this old lady come into the bank about every 6 months to argue about her double wide. She wanted a large home equity loan. She bought her double wide for $120,000 about 18 years prior and insisted that it should have retained it's value...but it was worth less than $17,000 max.

She'd actually cry when we told her, then she'd be back a few months later saying the same thing again. It was sad.

[Hemlock140]

Once they reach about 30 years of age, they cannot be financed, the value is 0.
When you sell at that age, the buyer can only get a loan on the land, so they must have a much larger down payment. Depending on the brand and location they can be very well insulated with 6" stud walls, and the interiors are now done so well that one can't tell from just looking. That double-wide joint running the length of the home has become completely hidden with modern methods. In rural areas they tend to be as acceptable as any other house, in some cities they are not allowed at all.

[old_cold]

Originally Posted by Sky-Blue

Having a brand-new MFH is tempting now, but think two decades into the future:

Some trailer parks make rules that MFH built before a certain year will no longer be allowed on their lot. Anyone with an older model will need to find another trailer park that will accept it, and then have it transported.

Look online at some of the prices of 20+ year old MFH's. They are practically giving them away compared to what was paid. Others say the MFH is all yours if you have it moved. Not good return when the MFH is expected to depreciate all the way down to zip.

Ooops...another one.
I doubt you'll find any park that makes you move your home, regardless of it's age.
Most parks will not allow any homes to be brought into them unless they are new or within a specific age limit.
Homes on their own land are not susceptible to the same type of depreciation as one "on it's own" so to speak....on a rented lot.
If on a rented lot in a DMV subject state, it's better to compare with the cost of long term renting.

If on owned land the structure itself may depreciate substantially if never improved or kept up but a stick built house may also depreciate in that circumstance, too.
But, when combined with the land and improvements, water, sewer, additional buildings, etc, they may hold value acceptably.
The stigma remains...even I keep referring to our two as "trailers" in sort of a derogatory manner but it all depends on what one is trying to achieve.

[augiedogie]

IMHO, a mobile home is a very viable option. From what I've seen and heard of modern home construction, I don't think the site built home is much better quality than a mobile. In fact, the mobile might have better quality, being built under supervision in a factory rather than by a contractor trying to cut every corner he possibly can. We had some friends that owned one, and once you were inside, you couldn't tell the difference between it and a conventional built home. Plus it was spacious.

[Ted Bear]

Originally Posted by old_cold

Modulars, those built in a factory without are very often better built than stick, depending on the manufacturer, due to the factory methods used. These must be moved on a flat bed. If set on a full basement, you'd be probably not be able to tell the difference by looking at it.

I looked into modular construction versus stick built on site. It is hard to overcome the stigma associated with mobile homes ('trailers'), but the reality is that modular construction using the same/similar materials is much better than on-site built. Workers working indoors, not subject to the elements (mud/rain/snow/hot/cold), well lit, level/even floors on which to work, modern tools, and a clean unobstructed job site just leads to a higher quality product. On top of that, all the trades work in tandem for the manufacturer, so you are not hop-skipping the plumber, the electrician, the HVAC guys, etc.

It is hard to overcome the stigma, but modular usually produces a higher quality product at the same or lower cost, and is starting to catch on in the US. Around the world it is way more popular as a method to get a house built.

As for mobile homes, I think they deteriorate quickly, and after 20 years have virtually no residual value. Way different that 'modular'.

[old_cold]

Originally Posted by Ted Bear

I looked into modular construction versus stick built on site. It is hard to overcome the stigma associated with mobile homes ('trailers'), but the reality is that modular construction using the same/similar materials is much better than on-site built. Workers working indoors, not subject to the elements (mud/rain/snow/hot/cold), well lit, level/even floors on which to work, modern tools, and a clean unobstructed job site just leads to a higher quality product. On top of that, all the trades work in tandem for the manufacturer, so you are not hop-skipping the plumber, the electrician, the HVAC guys, etc.

It is hard to overcome the stigma, but modular usually produces a higher quality product at the same or lower cost, and is starting to catch on in the US. Around the world it is way more popular as a method to get a house built.

As for mobile homes, I think they deteriorate quickly, and after 20 years have virtually no residual value. Way different that 'modular'.

I agree on the mods but do have to say, as an owner that 'traded' one stick built for two old doublewides...a 1977 and a 1978..neither have 'deteriorated' to any appreciable extent anymore than many similar ranch houses built at the same time.
In fact, I was just appreciating the easy functionality of the very solid aluminum sliding glass door on the one I am sitting in right now. ..especially after having had to replace 3 extremely expensive sliders on our last house after 20 years.

[volosong]

Not a realtor, but someone considering something like this for my retirement home, (a couple more years out).

Originally Posted by MPRetired

I'd be interested in hearing some realtor opinions on mobile homes.

For quite some time I've viewed mobiles (trailer homes) with a sort of negative stigma, having driven through the areas with some really nasty trailer parks. On the other hand, looking at the websites of the newer mobile home manufacturers, some of the newer models look really nice! I realize that different areas of the country are probably better suited to mobiles, but I had some concerns:

1. Do potential buyers tend to skip over newer mobile homes without even wanting to view them in your experience?

The new ones I've seen are magnificent. Some of the double-wides and especially the triple-wides. As mentioned, once inside, one would be hard pressed to tell the difference between it and a stick-built house. I'm impressed! Long gone are the fake wood paneling and short ceilings.

2. Do mobiles tend to have higher utilities costs (heating, cooling) vs traditional homes of similar size?

After my dad's death, my mom sold the house and purchased an older double-wide in a park. I think the answer to this question can only be answered by knowing the age of the house and the mobile. My mom never complained about utility costs, but then she moved to an area with pretty beguine weather. As people become more energy conscious, they are demanding energy efficiency in both their homes and mobiles. My guess is that of a comparable age, both will have similar utility costs.

3. Is there any trend that appears to be changing the public's perception of mobile homes, or is there still a stigma or sorts for the foreseeable future?

Mobiles have a rep. It will take decades, if not generations, to change.

4. Are there any particular reasons that you would either encourage or dissuade someone from seriously considering a mobile home, assuming they aren't looking to buy in a tornado hazard zone?

I would dissuade someone from purchasing in a ratty park. They are just down right ugly. I can't imagine ever living in such a place, so would counsel others to not do so. My mom was in an ugly park. Yuck!

There is a mobile home park in the harbor where I used to berth my sailboat. Man, I would seriously consider staying in California if I could live in that park. It's absolutely gorgeous. It's a senior park with controlled space rents. Even the older mobiles look pretty nice, but I've seen that the older units are being purchased, hauled away, and new units put into the spots.

The only thing I don't like about mobile home parks is that most of them have units that sit almost on top of each other, and that most of them don't have enclosed garages, (workshops, etc.). Not sure if I want to put a unit on a rural lot. I'm thinking that I'd like to have neighbors close by. Not on top of me like in a park, but close enough that I could holler for help if needed. Maybe the distance between two suburban homes that have RV parking spaces between the houses.

One attraction for me is that they seem to be lower in cost than stick built houses. But I realize that I am still too ignorant on that aspect and that by the time one includes lot grading, set-up; water, sewer, electrical hookups; landscaping; building a garage; and cement driveway/walkway work; the total costs might not be much of a savings.

The last thing that "bugs" me is the pitch of the roofs. Mobiles have this certain pitch and just screams "trailer". If that could be "solved", then a lot of the newer mobiles will look just like stick built units.

[Bebeloves]

My experience from living in a relatively nice, well-maintained manufactured home community for 10 years (mobile home was bought brand new in 2001):

1) The cost for electric was much higher due to how incredibly HOT they get, and therefore, how much our air conditioner had to work. The AC unit was top of the line and purchased when we bought the home (no, it did not come with one).

2) The stigma of living in a manufactured home aka trailer is hard to shake. Unless you do not care at all what others think, prepare to feel like you have to hide where you live from others.

3) Living so close to others is a bit stifling and made me feel clausterphobic at times.

4) Whenever there was bad weather, I was a little unnerved. Also, was a bit fearful of a fire and how quickly the place might go up in flames. Never happened of course...

5) There was a general feeling of depression or malaise amongst people I got to know there. They felt stuck because...:

6) Our home was purchased for 27k and we got 8k back 10 years later...we were lucky though as many could not get the front office to buy back their homes for one reason or another. We kept ours up nicely and had nice appliances, some updates etc. which I suppose helped us sell back. But what happens if you cannot sell back? You are stuck paying the lot rent (ours was $460/mo) and then what? You can't just move it either unless you're prepared to spend upwards of 10k to do so...


Okay. I'm sure there are more negative things I could share, but I'd rather not go back there in my mind as I've moved on - finally. Here are a few positive things though that I'll make note of here:


1) Once we came out of our financial troubles and were making a pretty good income, we had a ton of disposable income each month and paid off the majority of our debt (student loans, paid off the 27k, cars etc.) $460/mo. for a cute 3 bedroom home anywhere else would NEVER happen around here.

2) The neighborhood usually felt peaceful and was always well maintained with pretty flowers/landscaping, water was nice to look at etc. The pool was a really nice amenity as well and we used it often. We also rented the nice clubhouse out for events a couple of times.

3) People there didn't seem as driven to just go to work to make $$$ and instead, they seemed more focused on just living life and spending time with their families (unlike where we live now...) I had some deeper relationships with some of the people there.

4) I liked my little home. It felt homey, was easy to clean and I actually kind of miss it.


I feel like I could go on and on but I won't. Just some perspective from someone who has been there.