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'd say 50/50 here. Houses built today are very similar to those built 10 years ago. Granite's granite. Except for used houses just plum done wrong, what's the difference? Price maybe, but that's for you to determine. Happy house hunting.
The first advantage I can think of to buying new is that if the roof is well made it should last 25 years. If it's a 25 year roof and you buy the home that is 15 years old you may have to replace it in 10 years or less.
The advantage of buying a home that is 10 years old or more is that you can see if the finishes held up well or not, with a new home you may not know for several things if things start to settle and while everything looks new and good it can start to look old fast if the quality is lacking.
Anyway to me any home that is 25 years or less old is new.
We are expecting kid #2 in July and are house hunting right now. While it’s not a requirement to move before baby, it is a preference.
The area we are looking in has great schools, abundance of dining & retail, low crime, and reasonable 30 min commutes to our jobs. The only issue is that my wife prefers new construction, and the limited new construction here is about $100k higher than our budget. The bulk of the housing stock in the area was built in the 90’s and 00’s.
She prefers new because she likes things like upstairs media room, huge closets, and mud rooms (all common in new houses these days). She also likes the finishes we’ve seen in new construction developments.
I also like new construction, but I’m open to a 10-15 year old house, especially if it will save us money and still get us in this desirable area (I prefer location over newness). My wife still wants something updated or new, because with a new baby around, she says we won’t have any time to renovate anything. Also, she says she hears nightmare stories from co-workers about dealing with repairs in an older home (neither of us have any handyman skills, so we would have to outsource everything).
Does anyone have any insight on this topic? Thanks.
10-15 yrs old is not an old home.
New constructions minuses: Every time a house changes owners, improvements are made (usually), for which the owner does not recover 100%. You won't get any of those improvements with new construction. I looked at a couple, and they didn't come with landscaping, grass, gutters, and other things. If the builder does those things, you'll pay a pretty penny for them.
Also, it can take 10 to 20 years for foundation problems to appear. You never know with new construction if the house is sound, until you've lived there a while.
Also, you don't know just what a neighborhood will end up being like, the feel of it, the look of it, who lives there. Or even if the subdivision will be completed. I've seen isolated houses in "new" subdivisions that were never completed.
Also, it's more likely there will be vacant land near new construction. Vacant land is always a concern. You don't know for sure what will be built there until it's built. You can't go by zoning, since zoning changes.
Existing homes: You get more bang for the buck. Prior owners have made any builder corrections and added improvements (gutters, lawn, maybe landscaping). Of course, you may not like those improvements.
Also, the subdivision is likely to be complete, so you know what you'd be moving into.
Also, existing homes are usually in better locations. New construction is usually by necessity built further out from the hub of things.
You know how sometimes houses are advertised as "one-owner" homes? I dislike one-owner homes, for the reasons mentioned above. They make initial improvements, and though they may maintain the homes, tthey don't usually update it or upgrade it, as time passes, like a NEW owner will usually do. So one-owner homes are often fixer uppers, even if they're in good working order. They need updated colors, counters, backspashes, maybe appliances, etc.
New construction is very enticing. I love the look of them. But quality of build, locations, the lack of finishing touches, and the lack of getting bang for the buck, all made me concentrate on existing homes.
I owned two new homes and now live in one built in 1980's but complete reno in 2000. I prefer our current "older" home. It's old enough that all the "new house" issues have been resolved but still has alot of the modern upgrades of newer homes and is well built. Our new homes were cookie cutter homes in cookie cutter subdivisions, poor workmanship, cheap insulation, houses 10 feet from each other and the biggest issue is we didn't know how the neighborhood would turn out since we were one of the 1st to buy-things went south during the recent recession.
We sold as soon as the market recovered but was stuck there for 8 years. Our requirement for our current home was no new homes or subdivisions. We found our lovely 30+yr old in a subdivision where every home is different(no cookie cutter) on land where I can't stretch my arms and not touch the next house in a great neighborhood.
Don't just throw out the idea of an older home, check them out and the neighborhood, even better if it's cheaper.
I bought new construction 2 years ago. I love that everything in my house is what I picked - I am sure that I'll never experience that again. And I love how energy efficient it is - I just got my Nest thermostat report for December, and I got 31 Nest leaves and was in the top 15% of energy usage for my area.
However, I did not pay a 100K premium for it. More like 50K, and that was because I put in a fair amount of upgrades and some of what I spent for those, I would have also ended up paying to upgrade in a pre-owned house. And I was still comfortably within my budget at that point.
Unless your original budget was deliberately very conservative and you can actually afford 100K more, then I don't even know what the question is. If you can't afford it, it doesn't really matter if new construction is the greatest thing ever with no arguments against it (it's not but that's besides the point). If you can't afford it, you can't afford it. Not worth being that house poor esp. when your expenses will go up with a second child - twice as much in daycare costs are going to take a big bite every month!
I agree that you should buy what best fits your budget, especially with another baby coming along.
IF you buy an older home, try to find one in which the HVAC systems and appliances are not original but either are new or have been installed within the last 2 years because in the age range you are talking about, you will be replacing all of those soon after you move in.
My wife and I are currently house hunting. We have looked at some brand new homes, and yes they are all new and shiny, but the yards were terrible, the appliances were cheap, as were the doors and windows. We have also seen some very run down homes that are only 10 to 15 years old. We are about to place an offer on a home that has the best of both worlds, and this is what I am going to recommend to you. We just looked at a home that was built in 1925, but it was professionally remodeled 5 years ago. The couple that owns it redid the entire house when they retired. Due to health they are selling. New furnace and central AC, new floors, new bathrooms and kitchen, new roof, on a large lot. From the outside, the house looks like any other home in the neighborhood.
I would look at every home in your preferred area, and within your budget and try to find a gem. I know you would think that everyone would do that, but some people care more about the floor plan, then they do about the condition of the home. You really have to do some digging and not just rely on the pictures from the internet.
I can tell you there is little difference between a new home and one that is 15 years old as far as materials and workmanship. Very little has changed in the past 15 years.
Just because it is new does not mean it was thrown up quickly, or poorly constructed. Same goes for a house built 15 years ago. About the only thing of note that has changed over the past 15 years is the energy efficiency of the HVAC units and water heaters.
In my area a 20 year shingle will last about 16. A 30 year shingle will last about 25. Life of shingles can vary a lot depending on the area.
HVAC units are pretty much gone after 15 years. In my area a heat pump will last 12 - 14 years and a gas furnace will last 16 - 18. Water heaters last 10 - 12 years.
Kitchen appliances will also be about worn out in 15 years.
If the 15 year old house has a new HVAC system, water heater, and appliances then you are good to go. Depending on the age of the roof, you might be in for a large expense in a few years.
Keeping in mind the potential costs for appliances, HVAC, and roof, if the price is right, then go with the 15 year old house. But it really all comes down to $$$$$ and what is the best deal.
Last edited by K'ledgeBldr; 01-12-2017 at 07:22 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.
