How do you determine the build quality of a home? (countertop, cheapest)
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.
I'm a first time buyer, looking for a decent home. There are a lot of new homes here, I checked the names of the builders, most of them seem to use the cheapest material and labor. Great price but poor quality.
Being in a moderate size city with no kids, all I want is a quality home in a safe neighborhood, nothing fancy.
For one thing, quality construction isn't cheap. If you are looking at new houses, none of the low priced ones are going to be high quality.
Upgraded finishes, not luxury finishes just nicer ones, can add $50,000 to the cost of a house. Or even more than that.
If you are buying new construction, go by and visibly inspect the quality of the wood being used.
If the house is already built, look to see if the house is plumb and the corners are actually square. Does the interior trim have neat joints? Is carpet flat and tight up against all the walls?
It might depend upon what state you are located in, but generally, a new house has to be built to code, which means it will be safe enough and sturdy enough to last.
Some of the really cheap stuff might have to be replaced after a few years, like the faucets and the carpet, although even the cheap stuff will generally keep working if you take good care of it. A really cheap new house won't have the best paint, so you would have to repaint the exterior in a few years. Although, even good paint doesn't last like it used to.
A cheap roof (10 year roof) might have to be redone at 12-15 years, where an expensive house might have a 50 year roof. You aren't getting a 50 year roof unless you are paying premium prices for your house.
There are very few new homes of smaller size that are built with any quality. Of course many larger ones are very cheaply built too.
If your idea of quality is nice wood doors, floors, and an overall quality 'feel'. Then the obvious answer may be an older home. 1960s and 1950s for example, often can provide a balance between not too old to deal with really old building methods and great expense to maintain and old enough to be built very solidly.
For one thing, quality construction isn't cheap. If you are looking at new houses, none of the low priced ones are going to be high quality.
Upgraded finishes, not luxury finishes just nicer ones, can add $50,000 to the cost of a house. Or even more than that.
If you are buying new construction, go by and visibly inspect the quality of the wood being used.
If the house is already built, look to see if the house is plumb and the corners are actually square. Does the interior trim have neat joints? Is carpet flat and tight up against all the walls?
Definitely.
The new homes in my area seem to be too cheap to be true, that's why I checked these builders and none of them has good reputation.
The problem is, I can't find good ones. The market is dominated by lemons.
If you want quality, you need to go with an older home, preferably built before the 1970s. Even expensive homes in a lower-priced market (say, a $700,000 home in the Raleigh, NC area) are cheaply built. Our home was built in 1915 (we deliberately looked to buy an older v. newer house) and I'm so used to the quality of materials used (super-thick plaster walls, hardwood floors from old-growth trees, etc.) that whenever I'm visiting someone in a newer home, I'm shocked by the flimsiness of the materials. The paper-thin walls, the fake molding and trim made to look like the house has "character," the fact that the house literally shakes if the front door is slammed shut; etc. No way. Better to buy old and invest in upgrades, in my opinion. Or, build custom.
I'm a first time buyer, looking for a decent home. There are a lot of new homes here, I checked the names of the builders, most of them seem to use the cheapest material and labor. Great price but poor quality.
Being in a moderate size city with no kids, all I want is a quality home in a safe neighborhood, nothing fancy.
Any idea?
Great price but poor quality. Well, that doesn't really sound like such a great price.
I like the quote attributed to Benjamin Franklin: "The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low price is forgotten."
I do NOT believe that paying more will assure you of better design and execution. "You get what you pay for" is a common whopper that fools consumers.
I DO believe that "You don't get what you don't pay for." You don't get champagne when you only pay for beer...
I like the approach that "Quality is achieved when the standards are met." As you are the buyer, you determine what standards are acceptable when you sign the contract with the builder. If 24" O. C. truss joists at maximum span are acceptable to you, and the builder's subs frame conscientiously, with full attention to the specs, and the tradesmen don't chainsaw the framing to oblivion running plumbing and ductwork, you have achieved "quality." Even though your dishes rattle in the cabinets because the floor bounces like a trampoline. That is the design you chose.
You also may have set the bar too low for your long term satisfaction.
Shopping by price can be setting a trap for yourself. In my market, too many buyers go for flash at the lowest $$$/SF, and end up with a lipsticked piggy.
Finishes are just skin-deep in the search for quality. But, too many buyers consider glitz and flash to indicate quality.
I would rather have formica countertops with drop-in sinks and sheet vinyl flooring in a house with framing members and methods that exceed code requirements significantly than granite and faux hardwoods in a house with 24" O. C. floor joists at maximum calculated spans.
I want durability. The structure will be more durable in the first, assuming equivalent workmanship. And over-framing will be more forgiving of minor errors than minimal framing with the same errors. Durability from good framing means that there will be less nuisance cracking in sheetrock, fewer doors that bind, better operation of windows, all due to less racking and movement of the house.
Walking through a pimped out finished model only scratches the surface in a quest for quality building.
When I have a client tell me they would like to consider Mega-National-Publicly-Traded-Production-LoveShack-Builders in Mildew Downs or Local-Quality-Custom-Builders in Cadillac Heights, I try to walk through several homes under construction in various phases.
I want to see the foundation, how they frame, how many gigs the production supers mark up in framing, how many times the city inspectors fail them on framing inspections.
I have seen good custom builders with only a handful of markups, and with city inspectors passing them on the first go round.
If you don't know much about construction, you may want to engage a buyer's agent with "dirty shoes" new construction experience. Take a couple for a test drive onsite and see what they can tell you.
I sold a listing a while back, and the buyer's agent, and I am not making this up, did not know what a "2x4" was. I don't know how she could be licenses, let alone guiding buyers.
Last edited by MikeJaquish; 01-12-2018 at 05:30 AM..
If you want quality, you need to go with an older home, preferably built before the 1970s. Even expensive homes in a lower-priced market (say, a $700,000 home in the Raleigh, NC area) are cheaply built. Our home was built in 1915 (we deliberately looked to buy an older v. newer house) and I'm so used to the quality of materials used (super-thick plaster walls, hardwood floors from old-growth trees, etc.) that whenever I'm visiting someone in a newer home, I'm shocked by the flimsiness of the materials. The paper-thin walls, the fake molding and trim made to look like the house has "character," the fact that the house literally shakes if the front door is slammed shut; etc. No way. Better to buy old and invest in upgrades, in my opinion. Or, build custom.
I guess homes are not really the same as cars, but don't older homes require more maintenance?
The quality of a older home can be so much better. My mid priced newer home has plywood floors under the carpet and kitchen flooring. In contrast my parents home built in late 50's has two steel beam that support the one story home, has full basement (mine has engineered beam that doesn't run the whole length of home) the floors are 2x6 planks, rather than plywood. Even the roof is 2x6 planks rather than plywood. All the bedrooms and living room and hall have solid oak flooring under the carpet, not engineered veneered flooring. Kitchen cabinets needed some upgrades with new doors and drawer fronts and boxes, stripped and restrained, but otherwise well built. Insulation was lacking but had new stuff blown in attic and walls. They replaced windows 17 years ago with double panels ones. This was a basic house when built, real middle class 3bed,1bath, am sure there are poorly built ones, you just need to look past the ugly vinyl floor and weird paint colors.
Anyway, their house is quieter and doesn't shake the whole house when the front door is slammed.
Last edited by Izzie1213; 01-12-2018 at 06:13 PM..
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.
