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.
Location: Stuck on the East Coast, hoping to head West
4,640 posts, read 11,940,392 times
Reputation: 9887
Advertisements
All houses are money pits, each in their own individual way. I care far more about the condition of the house, vs the age of the house. There are also certain things I'll never buy into again: slab foundation, vinyl siding, and heat pumps to name a few.
HGTV is introducing a new series, I think it's called cheap old houses, should be interesting.
There is a great deal of misinformation i this thread.
Not all old houses are moeny pits. It depends on how they have been maintained and whether they have any billy bob renovations.
Many new houses are money pits too. Modern construction techniques are mass production with poor quality. Many modern houses are designed to last 20 to 30 years, not 100 or 200. Modern materials, especially lumber are terrible in comparison.
Much of what people do to old houses is really just destroying them. Often "modernizing" really just eliminates the charm of an older home and replaces superior materials with inferior materials. A modern subdivision house kitchen in a 150 year old house looks terrible and is considered "dated" in only a few years. It also remove much of the charm and historic integrity of an older home. Replacing 100 year old wooden windows with plastic is just foolish.
Not all knob and tube wiring is dangerous or needs to be replaced. Much of it is fine. Viability of wiring old or new is more dependent on proper installation than the age or time it was installed. People get hung up on grounding without understanding what it actually does or why it is needed. It is easy enough to add, but generally overrated. Look at your cords. IF an appliance does not have three prongs on the cords, then your grounding is doing nothing. Grounded or not, installing GFCI breakers or outlets will do more to protect you in real world situations.
Yes, houses do need insulation. Most have it. In some climates (warm places like California) it is not all that necessary, but old materials do not replace insulation at least in the attic.Thick plaster walls are not a substitute for insulation. In fact when those thick walls get heated up on a hot day, they radiate massive amounts of heat all night. It is like having a furnace on. There is a reason people slept outside on sleeping porches during the summer.
Properly maintained wooden single pane windows with an interior or exterior storm window have insulating qualities so close to modern double or triple pane windows that it makes almost no difference. Replacing all the windows is a bad investment. Maintaining them is a good investment.
Old framing is a trade off. Balloon framing is stronger and holds up better to super high winds, and in some ways to seismic events (better than platform framing in one regard and worse in another). Balloon framed houses are much less susceptible to collapse than platform framing. Some of the (not all) does not have fire stops between floors is it is prudent to add them of use fire resistant insulation.
Steel plumbing is bad. It will need replacing after a time. There is not much steel left. Copper plumbing also goes bad over time, but a longer time. No one knows how long PEX will last, maybe forever.
Modern materials tend to use a lot more plastics. Smoke from burning plastics is lot more toxic and drywall provides less fire protection than plaster. Still the smoke from any fire can kill you, so any house old or new should have smoke detectors. Fewer plastics may give you a few extra seconds to get out before you succumb, but it makes little difference. Both old and new houses have equal chances of catching on fire. You can die just as fast in either one.
New houses are cleaner - at least for a week or two. All homes have crannies that cannot be cleaned. However most newer homes are made with bland unfeatured interiors to make them easier to clean. That does not mean they are cleaner, it just means they are easier for lazy people to make/keep them clean. It is a question of whether you spend 20 minutes or an hour cleaning a room. If you spend only 20 minutes, then yes and older home will not end up as clean. All those features (ornate moldings, five panel doors, etc) collect dust and grime and require more effort to clean than the flat unadorned surfaces prevalent in newer homes.
I prefer concrete, as in structural concrete insulated panels (SCIP). That's a relatively new material, so I have no urge to buy "used" houses, no matter what vintage.
Best to buy a piece of dirt, and build a sturdy concrete house that will be fire resistant, wind resistant, water resistant, immune to flying debris, unsuitable for vermin and pests, and super insulated.
Concrete makes a great building material. It can be made to look nice too if you can afford it. If properly done, it will hold up better to everything except ground settlement and some types of forces caused by earthquakes. However if you use SCIP it depends on what they are affixed to. everything nee structural support.
All houses are money pits, each in their own individual way. I care far more about the condition of the house, vs the age of the house.
Also, caring less about aesthetics could save buyers lots of dough. Old houses without updates sell for much less. Bringing in your HGTV visions is expensive, while the house could be perfectly functional as is.
It depends on how high one's standards are and how much dated stuff can be lived with.
Count me as another who has an old house that isn't updated, and won't be.
I like my 1940s kitchen. It's so cheery and homey feeling, especially when it's filled with sun in the morning. The linoleum counter tops with the stainless steel edge have a 50/50 success rate. Some of it is still like new, but the area by the stove was heavily damaged (probably from putting hot pans on it) and had to be repaired. The vinyl asbestos tile floor is also in good shape, and it contributes to the vintage feel, so I won't be replacing that, either. The kitchen is not a perfect fit for a house built in 1902, but it's better than a new kitchen, IMO.
There are several more "supposed to do" items in my house that I don't plan to address unless I have to.
Count me as another who has an old house that isn't updated, and won't be.
I like my 1940s kitchen. It's so cheery and homey feeling, especially when it's filled with sun in the morning. The linoleum counter tops with the stainless steel edge have a 50/50 success rate. Some of it is still like new, but the area by the stove was heavily damaged (probably from putting hot pans on it) and had to be repaired. The vinyl asbestos tile floor is also in good shape, and it contributes to the vintage feel, so I won't be replacing that, either. The kitchen is not a perfect fit for a house built in 1902, but it's better than a new kitchen, IMO.
There are several more "supposed to do" items in my house that I don't plan to address unless I have to.
You got any pictures? I don't know if I've ever seen a 1940's kitchen.
Gorgeous sink! I saved one of those from a tear-down, but then had to leave it behind when I moved.
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.
