I live in a 40+ year old house. It’s time to replace the entry doors. The opening is 60″ wide with two doors. The door that is normally fixed in place measures 30-1/2″ while the door that normally opens measures 29-1/2″.
Questions:
1. Why the difference in widths?
2. Do I need to find exact replacement sizes, or can I go with two 30″ doors?
Thanks for your help.
Daniel
Replies
Daniel... one of the doors ( the normally fixed one ) has an astragal on it so the normally opening one has something to seal against.
A lot of these doors were installed when it wa in vogue.. frankly , i hate them
sometimes they were installed so you can get large furniture in and out.. but they are not convenient for anything else..
you have a 60" opening.. you could replace it a fixed panel and a regular door
the regular size entry door is 36".. more convenient than a 30" door...
you could have a 36" door and two flanking sidelights of 10" each ... or a 36" door and a 20" sidelight....
see a good lumber yard to find the combination you like..
you might try a ThermaTru dealer
Go to any lumber yard and they will at least have a catalog or two (if not samples) of a variety of door arrangements (double door, door with side lites, etc). These will be "prehung" entry doors, including frame and threshold. Usually you can custom-order the units to fit your specific rough opening size.
I personally hate double doors, not because they eventually always seem to leak, but because I just hate the look. I much prefer a 3-0 flanked by equal width sidelights. Looks much classier. The only place where double doors might be acceptable (to me) is in a huge house (mansion) with a very formal and large entry.
My .02. Pick it up or leave it, your choice.
Perhaps this style of door may be architecturally correct for your home.
That would cause you to disregard all previous post especially those referring to Therma Tru.
Perhaps the doors are salvageable with some good creative carpentry work and some weatherstripping.
This is your entry. Do not take lightly any decision you make to alter it's appearance as it may or will alter the appearance of your home as a whole.
There is no reason why a properly constucted and installed double door will not function correctly AND seal out the elements.
If you wish to replicate what you have after determining that the existing doors are no longer usefull, then search out a wood worker in your area who is capable and comfortable to make and install a new set of doors for you.
EricI Love A Hand That Meets My Own,
With A Hold That Causes Some Sensation.
eric .. can you picture this house ?
1960 ?....
Mike Smith Rhode Island : Design / Build / Repair / Restore
1960, double door -- it's probably a pseudo-modern style home? The door was originally painted orange?
Would that be "moderne"?
"I will never surrender or retreat. " Col. Wm. B. Travis, The Alamo, Feb. 1835
If the archy is saying it, probably.
well he said +
so I missed that.
Bite me Mike!
I know that house........that's like early Therm tru..yyyeeeccchhhh!
Did I say bite me?
EricI Love A Hand That Meets My Own,
With A Hold That Causes Some Sensation.
Thanks for the input. I should have mentioned that the doors also have 23" sidelights, for a total entrance of 106". There is nothing special about the doors, just simple, flat panels. I would like to go with something in the Craftsman style, but before I do I wanted to know if there was a specific reason the doors are different widths.
Thanks again,Daniel
No telling why the doors aren't exactly the same width. Of course, the stationary piece generally has a slightly different latch edge profile, but that shouldn't make any difference (unless you were measuring the extension lip on the inside edge, which I assume was not the case). It may be that they judge that the appearance is a little more "balanced" with them slightly different, or it may simply correspond to the available stock widths.
By the way, what color are they (or were they originally)?? :)
The doors are now "cream" colored. No way of knowing the original color.Daniel
We have a lot of picture junkies here if you want to post a picture, you can probably get more focused advice.
Or maybe a couple pics. One showing the front of the house from a distance and one with a close up on the doors/side-lites.
jt8
>> I much prefer a 3-0 flanked by equal width sidelights.I agree. Or even a 3-6 or 4-0 if there's any doubt about a 3-0 being wide enough for carrying stuff in and out.
I'm with you but prefer a 3'-0" door with a single lite on the side and no fancy shmancy coloured glass with that cheap looking stained glass effect.
Not sure if you are interested but it is pretty standard to have a min 3' wide front door.
Yeah, you need a 32" door, minimum, to clear a wheelchair, and at least that large to allow normal furniture to get into the house. (Of course, with a double door, getting furniture in isn't a big problem.)
Daniel, another opinion, for what it's worth.
I don't know what kind of house you have (Rancher etc), but a pal of mine has just built a house;
His door (entry) is 42" with one side lite of undetermined size (It's not the point of my post). He got one like that so that he can get in easily with a wheelchair, since he may need one soon.
With the kind of space you have, and if accessability in mind, you could probably get a really nice custom door and side lites for full accessability.
As I say, just another opinion.
Quality repairs for your home.
Aaron the Handyman
Vancouver, Canada
It's apalling how many builders, HOs doing remodeling, and future HOs planning a new house fail to take accessibility into account. If you're in your 20s or maybe early 30s then you probably don't need to worry about it (with many notable exceptions), but anyone in their 40s or later should plan/buy/remodel a home with future accessibility in mind, if they're planning to stay there longer than 5 years or so.In many cases it only takes a few simple modifications (bathroom door width, etc) to make an unworkable plan workable, with some of the details (grab bars, etc) deferred until the actual need arises.
>> It's apalling how many builders, HOs doing remodeling, and future HOs planning a new house fail to take accessibility into account. <<
Generally speaking it's a little more complicated than that... Look at almost any small to medium sized house plan (or house) and you will see that there is not room for fully accessible interior doors (2-10), showers, bathrooms, etc. It comes down to adding more square footage to allow for these things, which can easily get into the thousands or 10s of thousands of dollars. When building a home for my wife and I, I was able to work in 3-0 entry doors and 2-10 bedroom doors into the plan, but the master toilet room has a 2-4 door. And I looked into accessible showers, but now we are talking an additional $1,000 or so each. It all comes down to dollars, and nothing is easier than writing checks out of other people's check books. Unfortunately, life doesn't work like that. :-) Matt
I've seen a number of cases where it would not have added any SF to enlarge the bathroom doors (or, in one case, to slightly straighten the "cute" zig-zag hallway so that W/C access was possible).And many of the homes I've looked at are those McMansions that have rooms the size of basketball courts. (But still they have narrow bathroom doors, etc.)A lot of these homes are targeted at 50-something (or older) couples. (The only people who have the money for them.)
Note that I said small to medium houses... you are right though about >> McMansions that have rooms the size of basketball courts << What a waste... and they usually they have a postage stamp lot. Problem is that the average home buyer wouldn't know accessability or an accessable door if it hit them in the face. So, builders install 2-6 bedroom doors and 2-4 bath doors in these big houses, and the HO says "just look at the value I got!!!!" and (almost) everyone is happy. Value in many peoples mind = cheap square footage... A builder has to build what people want or else he goes out of business. Matt
a few simple modifications (bathroom door width, etc)
Don't forget hallway width (39" or 42" finish to finish is minimal, 45" is ideal), and "approach" zones. You need 14" (and 18" is better) on the strike side of the door on the side it swings "out" into. And that's every door. It's also a good idea to have a "strikable" surface that's about 14" high next to, and on the doors.
And "walk in" closets need slightly different dimensions, too.
Been though this before--it's a challenge.Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
But keep in mind that we're not talking about building an "accessible" home here, in the "legal" sense of the term, but simply making a standard home more adaptable. You don't need to have 5-foot turning circles everywhere, just the ability to, say, get into a bathroom and then, if necessary, back out. You don't need to have fully accessible closets, just the potential to have an accessible area in one.
in the "legal" sense of the term, but simply making a standard home more adaptable.
Well, the "legal" requirements are incredibly more stringent.
I was speaking from experience having adapted/remodeled a few "standard" homes into accessible/barrier-free. If you are "clean sheet" thinking about it, a little bit more consideration makes for a better end result--just offering some hard-earned advice is all.
Hallways can be a real pain, those turning circles go into effect for every room, for the self-sufficent wheelchair-bound (it's their house, they often want to vaccum the thing).
You are also correct, there are "grades" of accessible/barrier-free; persons in assisted living situations need less resculpting of a particular house. Which means every new space that is accessible is more freedom. Which can be worth the effort.
BTDT, was embarassed to get a t-shirt . . . Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
Great idea. I hadn't considered replacing the double doors with a single. I think that would significantly improve the curb appeal, not to mention the accessibility issue.Daniel