My home has EIFS, and I’m thinking of having someone replace it. The fellow I’m talking to uses a “Sonneborn System” for applying stucco in place of the EIFS. Is anyone familiar with this system? Is this a good idea? Are there better ways of doing this?
Discussion Forum
Discussion Forum
Up Next
Video Shorts
Featured Story
Fine Homebuilding's editorial director has some fun news to share.
Featured Video
Highlights
"I have learned so much thanks to the searchable articles on the FHB website. I can confidently say that I expect to be a life-long subscriber." - M.K.
Replies
There are two types of "stucco" : the original true stucco, which is (usually) three layers of cement totalling about 7/8" thick, and the synthetic stucco, also known as EIFS or exterior insulated f.. system (forgot what the F is...maybe foam?). Anyway, eifs is usually applied as a very thin coating (1/16 to 1/8") over a fiberglass mesh and 1" of rigid foam, and the EIFS is the stuccfo that has been getting bad press due to rot and mold. You can tell eifs from stucco because it's slighly flexible (you can get a little deflection by pushing it with your thumb) and it is easily damaged by a kid with a baseball, etc, which you have probably already discovered. There is also a variation of eifs that is applied without the foam insulation, and it is sometimes called deifs I think. It is usefull for applying over concrete block walls.
I am not familiar with the Sonneborn system, although they do market some quality products. Of course eifs itself is of reasonable quality, it was the design and installation that caused most of the moisture problems. MY opinion...if you are going from existing eifs to Sonneborn eifs, you're probably just making the contractor wealthy.
Do it right, or do it twice.
Don't know what your contractor is using but Sonneborn eifs is what I almost used, until I went an entirely different direction. If you want traditional stucco, I'm not aware of any Sonneborn product you need. Nothing wrong with their products that I know about.
My current client is a previous eifs owner. Had problems like so many others and now wouldn't touch the stuff with a stick. He was looking at around $80k to redo his substantial house. Sold it instead. New owners are patching the loose spots. A basement finish showed up serious structural wood decay. My guy's now very happily completing copper installation on his new digs.
Good luck.
PAHS Designer/Builder- Bury it!
The main question is "Where do you Live?" After years and years of doing something, why change? Replace EIFS with what others used for years and years. Locals in Toronto, Phoenix and Seattle use whats best for their weather.
My question to you would be...."Why do you feel it's necessary to replace the EIFs on your house?" Is your house currently suffering any noticeable problems? or are you just concerned because of things you've read or seen on TV?
I'm not trying to downplay possible shortcomings that may result from EIFs...but a lot of past troubles were due to improper installation...more directly associated with improper flashing techniques.
If you have "suspicions" about your current home, but no real proof that anything is underlyingly wrong, then I would first hire a reputable home inspector or contractor who is familiar with the use of moisture meter detectors.
This is simply an instrument that normally has 2 thin probes attached. The probes are inserted into the "skin" of the building and a moisture reading is obtained. Based on this detection, a qualified person can easily deduce whether you have a moisture problem, and how bad it may or may not be. Best place to probe is at the sill area and header area of doors and windows, as well as intersecting wall/roof junctures that normally must be flashed.
If the inspection reveals favorable results, then I would hesitate going to all the expense of replacement. EIFs can be painted ( if it is a color scheme/fading problem that you currently dislike).
If the results are not in your favor and you decide to tear off and install new, then please be aware that real cementitous stucco does "breathe" and would help wick out moisture from the building envelope. If you elect to go back with another EIF product, then make certain that the new installation process involves the installation of an air barrier between the wall sheathing and the foam installation. In other words, the sheathing should be covered with a mesh type membrane ( that will not collapse) before the insulation board is installed, and such insul should be mechanically fastened ( ie..screws or nails) rather than glued directly to the sheathing. Also, just like in brick veneer , a weep hole system must be incorporated so that any moisture that somehow finds its way in between the insul board and wall sheathing, will have the opportunity to migrate downward and exit out via the weep hole design.
I am not familiar with Sonneborn Method.
If the Sonneborn method incorporates these mentioned details, then OK...if they do not, don't waste your money...period.
The air barrier/weep hole method that I mention here, stems from an upgraded system that Dryvit made mandatory a few years ago after first encountering all those lawsuits in the Carolinas. They do not advocate glueing of insul board to wood substructures anymore...only permissable for brick/block substructures. Dyrvit reps "preach" flashing, flashing, flashing....and advocates and sells air barrier type systems that allow for moisture drainage.
Just my 2 cents.
Just so you know, I'm not really an EIFs installer; although I've seen a good bit go up, and I've dabbled in it for my own personal use....but I did learn a thing or two after completing an introductory course sponsored by the Dryvit Company; concerning installation details.....90% of the course work delt exclusively with proper flashing methods.
Davo
Edited 7/19/2003 3:15:07 AM ET by Davo
Thank you for your thoughtful analysis. I now have some questions to pose to my contractor. He advocates a 7/8" (I think) thick real stucco arrangement with an elastomeric coating over the outside of it so that the inevitable stucco cracks won't show or matter. However, it sounds like I better see if it will allow any water to permeate outwardly. I've suggested that insulation board be added between the moisture barrier and the stucco so as to make up for the noise and thermal insulation lost be removing the EIFS, but I'm now wondering if this might not cause problems also. However, the insulation board would be OUTSIDE the moistue barrier. What do you (or anyone else) think of that idea?
If he is proposing real stucco (good move) leave out the elastomeric coating.
Do it right, or do it twice.
Just looked at your post... Do not think you want to add foam under "real" cement stucco... The cement stucco is held onto the substrate with the wire mesh... The foam does not add enough insulation or sound barrier to try to make it work... Another site is Portland Cement.
Ken in Savannah
There are more than 2 types of stucco. I stongly recommend going to http://www.grailcoat.com and reading the site through thoroughly. You might like what you see.
Formerly BEMW at The High Desert Group LLC