*
A friend and I have been having an on-going discussion (argument) about the pros and cons of 2×6 vs. 2×4 exterior stud walls.
I say that the extra expense for 2×6 studs is justified because along with the additional insulation and energy savings, you also get a much stiffer house.
He says that a “properly” framed home with 2×4 studs will be just as strong and the pay back in energy savings is too long to worry about. He stated that 22 years was the pay-back period.
NOTE: We both frame our houses using 7/16″ exterior wall sheathing and house wrap.
I would like some opinions and hard facts to support either case. If you can, give me some supporting documents or web sites to visit.
Thanks, John Doe
Replies
*
John
Assuming that your energy code requires R19 for exterior walls, I believe that the 2x4 wall will require a more expensive insulation that will offset some of the cost difference.
*2x4 vs 2x6.....an old debate even before energy became a factor. I am a retired contractor/framing contractor in California having done everything from cheap tracts (God forgive me) to apartment complexes to commercial and industrial. I am now finishing a complete rebuild to my own house, 2000 sq ft enlarged to 6800 sq ft. A framer's holiday? Regarding your question, you did not mention where the alleged projects were located. In today's market I feel that energy savings would only be a selling point if you lived in an area that was buried in snow for a significant amount of the winter. Not many people care about energy savings any more unless they are buying fuel oil for heating in Vermont.I think, more importantly, the key issue is the quality of the finished job. Lumber quality (or lack of quality) available today is pitiful. 2x4 is bad enough, but 92-1/4 studs in 2x6 are the dregs of society. Barked on one or two edges (allowed by grading), BIG knots (allowed by grading) and so wet they weep unashamedly on the deck while they are waiting and spit water at you as you sink that 16d one more time. 2x6 studs out of DF #2 and better will bow and twist to give you nightmares in straightening the walls before drywall. That extra width seems to give them more power for evil rather than good.In closing, if you are bound and determined to use 2x6 for studs, pay the premium for composite material like paralam or LVL studs which are just coming on the market. This will give you the best of both worlds. Good luckKen th
*I was at a trade show talking to a rep from a steel framing manufacturer about the conductivity of steel and if it was any good for use in Canada. He said that whether you frame with wood or steel the wall should be 2x4 with extra insulation on the exterior because of the dew point. With a 2x6 wall the dew point is at the middle of the wall whereas with 2x4 and insulation it would be much closer to the outside of the wall cavity. We require R20 in walls in this area. I'm not a framer nor was I aware of a dew point but am still interested in this topic. I'd be interested in other comments.
*
... a topic often discussed here -- search the archives for articles with 2x4 and 2x6 in them -- and actually being discussed right now in another thread... in construction? best not to duplicate the effort. For an older one, see: http://www.taunton.com:8090/WebX?14@@.ee7f813
2x6 appears to be becoming passé, though there's nothing terribly wrong with it aside from expense. Strength is not a selling point, in fact at the usual 24" o.c. is makes siding and sheathing a bit less secure. 2x4 16" o.c. actually exceeds code and necessity in many cases.
"John Doe"? Say it ain't so. Real names or at least clever monikers are encouraged here.
*John Doe. In 1984 Peter Lund said, "Watch the wood content of your walls.Cut back on it whenever possible, and instead use foam[rigid foam board insulation]insulation to build to the desired depth. Unless you do, totsal wall performance mayufall far short of what you expected."See the article, "Calculating The Whole Wall R-Values On the Net." on page 22, of the Nov/Dec, 1999 issue of _Home_Energy_ Magazine. GeneL.
*John:As Andrew said yours is a FAQ. Search the archives.Also, read this for some additional background info.All: do we need a FAQ folder?
*Maybe FAQ folder with links to archives? I suppose that would leave many with a feeling of "That's not exactly what I want to ask" but might still be helpful. Seems as if some of the old regulars who had a LOT to offer on some of these subjects found something better to occupy their time. Working maybe? But the answers to a lot of these questions are still to be found hidden in the archives. Wellllll, maybe not answers, but information for sure. Joe H
*Dont start this tastes great less filling argument up again.
*Matt G. Tim Carter's article is goood, but it is not current. He mentions nothing about the research at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) on the true value of different wall configurations. Briefly ORNL researchers foud that the difference in R-values between the 2x6 R-19 wall and the 2x4 R-11 wall is 3.8. This is too small a difference to justify the added costs--as Tim notes-of 2x6s et all. If a 6-inch depth is needed, a better way to get it is by using staggered 2x3 studs on rough sawn full-width 1x6 plates. A poster told me that on a 2000 sq. ft. spec house in Wisconsin, by switching from 2x6s to the staggered 2x3 stud wall he saved $1200.00. By the bye. In this wall there are NO 2x6s except for the top and bottom plates which are, of course rough sawn full-width 1x6s.GeneL.
*Gene:Not meaning to be adversarial, but, I take anything I read with a grain of salt - especially on the internet. I form opinions from first hand experience combined with an aggregate of things that I read. That was why I said "for some additional background info". This goes for any URL I reference on any of my posts. I like referencing Tim Carter as he has a lot of topical information and opinions.By the way, I agree with you re 2x4 vs. 2x6 walls, especially for the relatively mild (mixed) climate in which I live. I like your method of the staggered studs, problem is, that it is hard to find framers that are willing to use new framing techniques - especially in this building boom market. We will have to see if Y2K remedies that situation. Being a longtime Breaktimer, what do you think of the FAQ folder?
*I've proposed it many times; problem is, who administers it? Maybe just put threads with 100 or more posts in it, those were the odyssey threads.
*Andrew:"Homebuilding FAQ" folder, here is how it could work:Like any other Folder anyone can post a new message: The new message would simply contain, a list of links to other messages, articles and pertinent info, and perhaps some base information. The topic would need to be finite, to some degree.Some possible FAQ topics might be:2x4 vs. 2x6 wallsCellulose Vs Fiberglass InsulationCutting and Installing Crown moldingWindow brands and typesCrawlspace Moisture ProblemsCutting Roof RaftersLaying out and building StairsFinishing Wood FloorsWood "look alike" floorsOSB and related productsCeramic tile underlaymentCost per square footRoof VentilationFloor framing bridgingHandling and use of Pressure Treated LumberPouring Concrete, Curing, Cracking etcInsulating Concrete floorsRoof SheathingFloor SheathingPneumatic NailersCircular Saws Air CompressorsThen other Breaktimers could post replies with additional information and links or a directly related question. Probably most of the regulars or folks who consider themselves a topic expert would add a FAQ thread to their "new messages", so new, related questions would get timely responses.Only pitfall I can see is people's reluctance to using subfolders - which I can only think comes from people's fear that subfolders are not read - when in fact I am guessing that subfolders are where the regulars and topic experts hang out. Either that, or perhaps some PC users are not so "seasoned" and probably keep all 12 of their documents in "my documents"! By the way, I'm referencing this post in a thread in the "About Breaktime: Help Using, Ideas for Improving" subfolder.Not sure the idea "threads with 100 or more posts in it", if I understand you correctly, would necessarily be the ticket. Seems like this would more than likely target threads like "Blue's virtual get together" and the dreaded "Mr. Smith Incident". Perhaps topics that have come up, say 4 or 5 times in the past your would be candidates. I think that rather than relying technology and/or plain hard work to identify FAQ, the creator of a FAQ, would by definition, be a individual who has read a lot of Breaktime and recognizes a topic as a come-back.Just some ideas... Anyone else?
*Only problem is, I GUARANTEE people would just start arguing there! I'd suggest collections of thread links ONLY, no editorial commentary whatsoever. In other words, a quick index of what a good search of the archives on the topic would turn up, kind of like retrospective magazine indexes. Ideally a Taunton person would do this so that the internecine warfare of certain posters just wouldn't enter into it.Now that new folks are showing up in greater numbers, more redundant questions are appearing. This is a quick way to drive away all those experienced old-timers, it gets REALLY boring to log on. I.e., "What kind of windows should I buy?"The only problem I can think of is that the FAQ might forestall new info from coming in, stuff that the newcomers have to offer unless they religiously read the archives and took it upon themselves to start a new topic with their comments (unlikely)... The topic would then become stagnant.
*Matt G. Tim seems reasonably knowledgeable on a wide variety of construction subjects. I've challenged him on a number of topics. He was apparently pleased with some of my concepts to have me on his radio show. He and I obviously? disagree on atic ventilation.I've dealt with builder resistance to new ideas about framing. I handle it by taking the lead framer to dinner and away from telephones. My approach is to show him or them what is in it for them. If necessary I also have the electrician, sheetrockers and plumbers to dinner. I loan a video of some of my framing techniques to the lead framer.I like the idea of a FAQ if done properly and updated as needed. If it would be easier than searching the archives Id be all for it. I note, not surprisingly, that the "same old"questions keep popping up. Some subjects require lots of space to explain. Be nice to refer a questioner to a readily easily accessed file or folder.GeneL
*John Doe:Did you find the info on 2x4 vs 2x6 walls you were looking for?
*I think the FAQ idea is a good one. While most other discussion sites cannot begin to comare with Taunton's sites for the sophistication of their web server, many of them do have additional aids such as FAQs. Some search engine sites utilize either paid or volunteer "experts" to organize information into "guides" that can be quite useful- sometimes with summaries and others with only a listing of applicable URLs. AOL and miningco.com are two sites that come to mind which do this (I vaguely remember that AOL a while back had a bit of a rumble over whether these people were "employees" or not, however). It would be nice if Taunton could supply the mind power to do this (so long as it doesn't increase the already astronomical price of their magazines...), but, if not I would guess some of us would volunteer to try to organize specific areas. This would only require Taunton to provide the structure within their site to allow this to function.One problem is how the new user is made aware of these features. Many other sites utilize a side bar which cuts down on the text display area - sometimes markedly. Just incomporating these FAQs or "guides" into the current structure of the Fine Homebuilding home page means that most people would not even notice them until they posted something and a regular told them to check the FAQs. Even now, I would guess that there are features on the home page that most of us have not checked out. Despite having visited Breaktime for a while now, only when thinking about the possibility of adding FAQs did I really check the home page and notice that under "sites to see" listed on the sidebar they had links to sites for software and timber framing, both of which were topics on Breaktime in the recent past and I don't recall anyone saying to check the "sites to see" area for these.There are some design consideration for what would go into the FAQ - individual posts might be a bit tedious to list while many threads (such as this one) tend to get hijacked and cover many topics. On one hand, you wouldn't want to include the "lunatic fringe" (should any appear on our beloved Breaktime) but at the same time you wouldn't want to alienate people by leaving them out if you included everything else. Would entries be chronological or would there be an attempt to list the best first, which would raise those usual political considerations that comes from dealing with, and being, human...One other consideration is that it seems like that no matter how many times a topic has been covered, when it comes up again, usually a lot of people are willing to jump in - sometimes covering old ground, but often expanding the previous discussions.I would be willing to put in some time to help out, unfortunately, my time allotments can be somewhat sporatic - lots of time a couple of weeks ago but almost none since then... (including no time to research the Senco thing, sorry Andrew...)BTW, Andrew, what is the best window to buy???
*Around here framers are very willing to try something new..........as long as their great-grandfathers tried it first.
*How do I get one of these free dinners?
*Ah, the pitfalls of the Information Age!Marvin.
*Atta boy!
*Absolutely, Marvin is great for job security, you get to come back and replace the different components every couple years, just as soon as the warranty lapses.Now, Andersen, on the other hand..........So, John, anyways, EVERYONE knows that the best wall for 6000 degree-day areas is a 2x4 @16" oc, with 1" foam EXTERIOR, let-in metal corner brace, 1/2" CDX ply sheathing/ nailbase, Fiber -cement clapboards, GP PrimeTrim trim, backprime everything, and either highdensity glass batts with seperate poly vapor barrier interior or blow cellulose thru the blueboard before skim-coat. Details include energy corners and headers, eliminate any framing member you can without sacrificing nailers for interior trim.now, lets see, can I get that down to 25 words or less....?IMHO
*Mike. You've got a bit of unnecessary overkill in your wall.The 1/2-inch CDX makes let-in corner bracing unnecessary. Furthermore, metal or wood let-in corner bracing does not work. Search the archives on this. Ive written quite a bit on this. See also my article "To Brace Or Not TO Brace" in the July 1999 issue of Building & Remodeling News. GeneL. .
*Lucy ! you got some 'splaining to do !I was told that because the 1/2" cdx is NOT in contact with the stud wall, but rather 1" away due to the thickness of the foam, that the racking resistance was derated. So, BY CODE, the let-in TEE braces comply with code for corner racking resistance. I started including it because I could save time and energy instead of arguing with Building Inspectors, I would agree with YOU, that the let-in is superfluous, but I can't put a stamp on my prints. Have you ever seen the racking strength calculation for 1/2" CDX nailed 1" away with solid blocking on the corners ?I'd be curious to know.OK,Gene: can I get your book from the web ?
*Mike:I did one house with "energy efficient" framed corners. Was unhappy with the lack of framing for nailing siding to in the corners. I'm not comfortable with siding that is just nailed to the sheathing. Havn't used these corners since.Below is a link to a drawing of the corner I used. Do you have a better method?
*Matt: when I click on your attachment, all I get is a netscape msg, saying I need to add a feature in order to read your attachment.I don't have any problem reading those pictures of the 3 views of the fence, so I don't know why I can't read yours......Any how...the detailing I use always puts 1" blocking in strategic locations, like the nailing fins for the windows, at corners, etc. But I DO rely on the 1/2" CDX as my nailbase for the siding.
*That drawing I posted was in the Jpeg (common) format.Here try one in gif:
*My present home has no wood nailers for drywall...the rockers nailed scrap in back instead of framer's wood and time....no cracks...and no one can tell the difference....Tops energy corners and budgets and schedules...In the no "nailers of wood" home by the stream,aj
*What did your rockers do? Not getting a mental picture nhere...
*Andrew,they nailed up a scrap of rock where you would normally nail a scrap of wood...That's it in a nutshell I guess as I'm not yet up to speed in posting pic's....If you look at the energy corner that is posted here just assume the rock nailer is rock....And no you don't nail the rock to the rock nailer...rock on that wall is placed first and held in place by the rock on the other wall that is nailed to the stud of wood that is there for it....Starting to get the picture??near the stream,aj
*Well, now I can't read your format. I believe that DXF is a common Autocad format. I do not have Autocad. That's OK, it's not a big thing either way.In order to read jpeg (.jpg) you need a plug in loaded on your PC. The plug in is free share ware, but not sure where you get it. Kinda the same type of thing as .pdf files/plugin.Most cad programs allow you to save files in alternate formats using the "Save as" function which would probably be found on the "File" pulldown. Or perhaps under "Export". Other common, universal file formats are .gif , .wmf .bmp and .html. Unless you are on a MAC - don't know anything about them.
*
A friend and I have been having an on-going discussion (argument) about the pros and cons of 2x6 vs. 2x4 exterior stud walls.
I say that the extra expense for 2x6 studs is justified because along with the additional insulation and energy savings, you also get a much stiffer house.
He says that a "properly" framed home with 2x4 studs will be just as strong and the pay back in energy savings is too long to worry about. He stated that 22 years was the pay-back period.
NOTE: We both frame our houses using 7/16" exterior wall sheathing and house wrap.
I would like some opinions and hard facts to support either case. If you can, give me some supporting documents or web sites to visit.
Thanks, John Doe