Another thread that mentioned simpson ties got me thinking about my current home renovation.
We live in a hurricane zone, the house is 61 yo and has seen multiple hurricanes and TS.
I have just finished all the demo work that I will be doing and found this:
All the corners were a solid 4 x 6. all the walls had x-bracing (interior as well as exterior) all the trusses were common 2 x 6, all decking was 1 x 6, all the headers were 2 x 4, 16d nails were used throughout (you wanna talk about a biatch demoing), there was only 6″ of roof overhang (which was a crown finish), no osb/cdx on the walls, and plaster with wood lathe.
And no simpson ties.
There just has to be something to their building standards back then?? And yet todays standards seem to have altered from the old ways and we’re having to build “better” homes.
But are they really?
—————————————————————————–
WWPD
Replies
I submit that the old building standards were based on tradition and experience, with a heavy measure of craftsmanship, rather than speed and profit. Our whole society turned a corner some time ago where the bottom line became most important.
Regarding your house, I suspect the quality of the material was far superior to what we presently use. I know here in Victoria BC the older home (ie pre 60's) were all built with old growth, tight grain fir. Very little of it is kiln dried. Stuff we just don't have anymore. They relied less on caulking and more on good flashing technique. I realize that there is now way we could continue to use the high quality wood forever.
That said, the old houses were sorely deficient in the foundations. A combonation of poor concrete mixes, little or none re-bar, not deep enough and walls resting on the ground, with out footings. It is a common sight around here to see old character houses up on blocks with a new foundation going under. The combonation of the two will outlast any of the new OSB and metal framing anchor monsters that are spreading over the hillsides.
IMHO, there have always been well built homes and there is always some cr@p mixed in. Your home sounds very well built, and most of mine (1915 vintage) is too. The exception is the addition/remodel done in 1937, when they decided to forgo the expense of headers where they cut new doorways into load bearing walls, and decided that a foundation should go about 8 inches into the ground, no footing necessary. No subfloor either, but the floorboards are beautiful fir.
The same thing happens today- look at the house that Mike Smith is building- high quality materials, meticulous attention to detail, good planning for a long life. Compare this to all the horror stories of walls framed inches out of plumb, windows installed with no flashing whatsoever, etc.
The people who want to build a shoddy home and take off with the money always seem to find a way to do it, codes or no codes.
zak
This is all great stuff.
I just want to clarify, by no means was I demeaning or putting down todays builders.
I was referring to the city/county/state codes that were developed to build a home better. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
WWPD
“16d nails were used throughout.”
I’m guessing this had a lot to do with it. Hand drives have more holding power than the gun nails that are commonly used today. If the house is 61 years old, it would’ve been built before the advent of sinkers. The commons they used back then also had more holding power than the slick vinyl coated sinkers that have been invented since.
I think a lot of it has to do with an effort to make improvements in efficiency, and then forgetting to also make improvements in quality somewhere along the way. Often only minimum requirements are met in order to reach the greatest speed possible. However, I think the technology is there to keep the speed we have today, and at the same time bring back the quality of yesterday.
I remember an article in FHB not long ago that mentioned a study of hurricane damage, and the significance fasteners played. I believe it also mentioned new gun nails on the market that are designed for greater holding power than the ones we use at present.
-T
and its about Luck too,
I went to Biloxi last week and there are hundred of old 1900 houses blown off there foundation, alot cannot be found just twigs of wood. i know no house can with stand a wave of water, but I thibk luck has a lot to do with it.
.
BOB thinks I,m an idiot
We have done lots of building on the Third Coast. There are some places where frame lumber in the right configuration can offset the uplift and / or shear strength supplied by all of the differing Simpson or equal metal parts. Our windstorm engineer (70 years old) would rather see the frame substitutes.
For example, a simple outdoor covered deck roof that is treated exposed lumber on 4 x 4 post.
The builder can set the post, use a Simpson uplift fastner / connection from post to 2 x 8 (or other) DBL beam and hurricane ties on each rafter.
Alternative: set 4 x 4 post / bolt 2 x 8 to each side of the post / flush 2 x 4 to bottom of beam between the beams (filing 3 1/2" space created by bolting the 2 x 8s to the sides of the post) and running them to the top of the rafter @ each rafter / fasten the 2 x 4 to the rafter. The uplift requirements are met, and it looks a lot better when all is exposed. We did this prior to ZMax and the windstorm engineer said that we also prevented premature deteoriation of the clips by eliminating the clips.
This can also be done when building a rasied foundation on post at the beam to floor joist connection.