[frankthetank]

What does a house built today (2x6-2x4 walls/fiberglass insulation/drywall/poured basement/OSB sheathing/vinyl siding/fake hardwood/etc) going to look like in a 100 years?

I figure once the shit goes down, upkeep will become trivial (food/heat /ac will be most important). Shingles laid today will probably not be replaced in 30-50 years/vinyl will fade and disintegrate??? and water will start penetrating. If the OSB is still there it'll start absorbing water/mold will form. I figure if you can keep moisture out, everything should be OK??????????

I just watch a history channel special on Machu Picchu. They built using no mortar and they didn't even have the wheel. They (Incas) also built 1000's of miles of "roads".

Even a log building (the slap on log siding stuff) retail complex just built around here used vinyl on the less visible parts to save a buck.

[WisJim]

A lot of the "McMansions" will start showing the shoddy materials used in 15 to 20 years--some are in need of repairs adn renovation already, some that I've seen need help in 5 to 10 years. Just throw them up, make them look good from the street, and who cares how they are built and what quality of materials are used.

[Baldwin]

Compare the houses built today, those built in the 1930's, and before.

When I drive to my grandparent's, I've seen 4 McMansions (approx $1-$2 million cost) go up. Everything is prefabricated. The wood looks like pressed plywood. It's a bit light for oakwood. Then the building is wrapped in Tyvec or whatever the brand name is of insulation. Then a veneer of that junky looking siding or in the case of one spanish style house, stucco is put on. The Spanish-style house has wht looks like Terra Cotta roofing. If it is real Terra-Cotta, it will last 150 years. If it is that "not terra cotta but an incredible simulation", then it will need to be replaced in 20 years.

My house went up in the 1930's. It is built solidly of oak and cherry. It has a brick front.

My grandparent's house was built in the 1890's. Her neighbors' homes who were also built at the turn of the century are no match for the McMansion's built after the year 2000. The square footage is smaller, but they have more property and far better construction. The house has regular roofing, but under it is a layer of copper sheet metal and timber. Leaks are unheard of. The house itself is covered in cedar shingles. There are some cedar closets. The house itself has wood floors (it looks like dark stained maple wood). The front and back doors are double the thickness of modern doors and made of maple. They would make the house good as an anti-zombie horde safe house. In the basement, the house is supported by basically young cedar trunks. They are unhewn, so they pretty much are the tree minuus roots and brances and leaves.

[mmasters]

I bet most of them wont last the length of the mortgages currently on them. Once they pay it off they will own a POS and if they don't the bank will own them.

[dukey]

house i live in is at least 350 years old
fucking low cielings
people that long ago were far too short

[Madpaddy]

90% of houses in Irlenad are built with 2 layers of dense concrete block with an insulation filled cavity in the middle. There is a gap between the insulation and the outside wall to prevent moisture bridging the cavity. This type of house does not deteriorate once you keep the roof on and the windows intact.

[frankthetank]

I've watched (noticed) the building of some twin homes and its utterly amazing how fast they go up. It is almost like manufactured housing. I always take the time to notice things like brick (where they skimp), concrete (blacktop is crap) and siding/roofing choices. MY house is sided with vinyl and it already looks like crap on two sides (faded big time). I think it was put on in the early 90's. Everything else seems solid.

Sometimes i hear people say how good (easy) poured basements are (vs stacking) and i wonder...100 years ago, there were no poured basements? 40 years ago there were no poured basements? How can you be so confident on something that hasn't been tested the only real test (time)? The same can be said for vinyl siding and for OSB (chip board). Vinyl windows too. Only thing i see thats "good" about new homes is insulation and that they stopped using linoleum (thank god!). Although now they put that fake wood floors down and use drywall everywhere.

[Twilight]

In the UK most homes are brick. Thick, solid brick, 2-3 layers thick. A lot of 3-4 floor late Victorian stuff is still standing because it's thick as hell with massive load-bearing columns and beams which make interior decorating a nightmare. You can't change layout, you're stuck with what you've got. There was a big building boom 1920-1940s, that stock is awesome too, built to a fairly standard layout and averaging a quarter million these days. There was more housing built in the 1980s to replace the post-war crap that got put up in a hurry; where it copied early 20th century methods, it was built well, where an architect flew off on an experimental whim, you have problems.

What really sucks though, are the apartment buildings and massive suburban developments of the 1990s onwards. They're cheap, they're thrown up in months, they're built up like a kit.

If you're lucky, it's one layer of breeze block, 1-2 layer brick exterior, cavity wall insulation and pre-fabricated roof members thrown on top. Interior walls are basically a non-load-bearing honeycomb plasterboard sandwich. Maybe the attraction is you can redesign room layout however you like, but you can also punch a hole in those walls just by toppling over a tall piece of furniture.

If you're unlucky, instead of a brick exterior you get some sort of insulated aluminium panels which are bolted onto the breeze block, sandwiching a plastic-sheeted insulating layer. Or worse, wooden panels which are supposed to look charming, but in the British climate, last even less time. I started noticing that sort of thing in the late 1990s, some of it is showing signs of age, peeling and erosion, after only 5 years. The irony is, because it's brand new, it was bought during the bubble. No-one bought it for a fair price over the decades and got use out of it, it's basically bubble-housing from inception. That sucks. Everyone living in those places is being ripped off. Millions of people by now.

[Laughs_Last]

This is a topic close to my heart. I used to work, grudgingly, for a major national home builder. I saw houses starting to fall apart in as little as 2-years after being built. The standard for quality was that it has to make it to 11 or 12 years to get past the 11 year limit on liability. This is the sort of house that the consumer demands. They want a big shiny house to impress people, to impress themselves, and don't give a crap about how it is built just so long as it looks nice and big. The moral justification that I heard was that these would be the fixer-uppers of tomorrow, and that this was a good thing.

Today we have the best materials, tools, knowledge, capability ever known to man. We collectively choose either to build cheap crap, or to build expensive follies. I don't understand why people put a 25-year roof on a house with a 30-year mortgage when for 00.2% more they could have gotten 40 or 50-year shingles.

I think that this trend is much more prevalent in peoples houses and businesses. Most churches, schools, and other institutions are still willing to pay for some quality. It's the same people.

If I ever get together the money to build my own house, I'm sure I can make one that will last a thousand* years with minimal maintenance. Even without having the dense old wood to work with. (*barring it being buried by deep ash, or covered by a glacier, or directly hit by a bomb, or by a cannon.)

[lawnchair]

A certain part of me shrugs at longevity. I'm from Kansas, so the 1-in-100 chance that a tornado will level your house this year compounds the possibility that fire will destroy it.

But yes, the peeling-sagging-failing five year old construction is awful and getting worse. There's a reason every brand new development needs a Home Depot. Small-scale commercial building is just the same. On the larger scale (taller office buildings, university construction, etc), at least nothing is cheaper than reinforced concrete, so while it's ugly, it's at least durable. And there's nothing intended to be long-term about the modern Zeppelin-hangar style construction of a Wal-Mart Supercenter.

As to why someone will choose the 25-year tiles? Simple. No one expects to live somewhere for 30 years, even if they get a 30 year mortgage. Most people have been convinced they are rock stars. They're quite sure they'll be moving up, or at least moving out, some time before then. Will the 40 year tiles substantially increase the sale price or refiATM value of the home in 5-8 years? Not really, so why bother? Mind you, I again live in a state where you have a 1-in-15 chance of a hailstorm totalling your roof any given year.

[frankthetank]

Laughs-

Funny you should mention churches. I have watched the progess (its done now) of a church and early on you could tell, by material used, they weren't cheaping out. I guess they can afford it!

Never knew about the 11 year liability.

In theory, i could build an ice shanty that should last longer then some houses.

[WisJim]

At the recent Energy Fair in central Wisconsin, one of the workshops that I attended was about new developments relating to PVs (photovoltaics or solar electricity). The presenter mentioned that, in personal discussions, engineers for companies manufacturing PVs have told him that they expect PV panels to last at least 50 years so they give them a 25 year warranty. However, there is a company making roofing slates with integrated PVs that replace the roof covering and the roof decking, just like real roofing slates, and should work as PVs for 150 years (and perhaps 200 to 500 years as roofing), but they cost twice what other current quality crystalline PVs sell for. But they would be a good choice for a house designed and built the way houses were often built a hundred years ago or more. I'm thinking about them, if I ever build the smaller house that I would like to retire to, just up the hill from where I live now. (don't want to lose out on all the effort we have put in our orchard and garden)