Morning All,
I know some of you have enjoyed the past couple of days of me not being around. 🙂 Sorry, they had me in training the past couple of mornings (learned little and spent more time sitting in traffic than I did learning) and this was mornings.
Anyway, I am curious as to some of the potential reasons for why a track builder wouldn’t use SIP-method of construction if and when the combined labor+material costs for shell and insulation are about equal. I do not know if any track builders are regulars of FHB, but I thought I would throw this out there.
I am not aware of any track builders in my area using SIP panels, but last year became aware of a manufacturer of SIP panels near me (which is always a good thing).
Replies
Because at the moment, the total material + labor costs are NOT equal to traditional construction. While potentially, they could be equal with regard to the actual framing component at some point, there are other trades that have higher costs when working with SIPS (such as electrical), and others that just have to change the way they think (like plumbers who can't run lines in exterior walls anymore), which is a major shift in our industry- everyone is too stubborn.
If you watched the "Building America's Home" series on the Discovery Home Channel, there was a SIPS house built in your area- Pam Sessions of Hedgewood Properties built it in her Vickery subdivision in Forsyth County (and ruined the character of the subdivision with it- but that's a different topic). The series showed some of the problems that are encountered with SIPS, which will have to be overcome before any tract builder is going to make the switch.
Bob
Bob, thanks for the reply. I sparingly watch Discovery Home channel as it seems to trivialize things, but I may be wrong. And I've never heard of the Building America's Home show. What exactly in regards to the SIP-home in the Vickery development did it ruin? Was it the use of SIPs, or something else, such as poor use/envision of SIPs in the architectural style, or was it a non SIP-related aspect that ruined the project?
I agree that stubborn industry is the chief problem. I seldmon see a need anymore for running plumbing in exterior walls when they can be brought thourhg truss floor systems and interior walls. But, for a motivated builder I wondered about the obstacles that lead to a stubborn condition.
"I agree that stubborn industry is the chief problem."
I don't buy that at all. There's nothing all that great about SIPs that makes them superior to stick built houses.
Over the 20+ years I've been in this business, I've seen half a dozen different things that were supposedly going to revolutionize construction. Like ICFs, steel framing, icynene insulation, and SIPs.
There's nothing wrong with any one of them. But no one system is so superior to anything else that EVERYONE should use it.
So there's a LOT more than just stubbornness to consider....
I went to a seafood disco last week... and pulled a mussel.
So there's a LOT more than just stubbornness to consider....
Yet, Boss, you haven't given me a single thing to consider. This is what I am asking for. What things am I to consider that could affect the decision not to consider a SIP endeavor for a development?
I'll admit to being wrong in my statement of agreement, because I am not a builder, let alone a track-builder--which is the foci of this thread. I do not know who on FHB is a track builder, and as such I am interested in hearing from them (if they exist on FHB) the reasons for not considering them, or considering them and deciding not to use them.
Unless one is a track builder and has considered SIP then I suppose everything offered is more speculation than anything else, no? Who on FHB is a track builder?
I have no intention of getting into a debate about SIPs or any specific framing practice. My point ws just to say that stubborness has very little to do with it.
How do you know if your mission in life is complete? If you're still alive, it isn't. [D. Sewell]
Sorry, I didn't realize I was debating you. :) My agreement with Bob on stubborn-condition tract builders is unfounded, of course. I recant.
What exactly in regards to the SIP-home in the Vickery development did it ruin?
If you've ever been to Vickery, you know that it's an absolutely beautiful community of old-world style homes- Craftsman, Georgian, etc.- every house looks like it was built 100 years ago, but the floor plans are designed for modern living. Some of the quality could be better (especially for the prices they're charging), but that's par for the course in the Atlanta tract home market. I visited the subdivision when I was there in the fall of 2004, and they were just about done with Phase 1, and it was great.
The SIPS home on the program is the Better Homes and Gardens "American Home" (or whatever they call it)- it was designed by a California designer, and it's a butt-ugly, contemporary, flat-roofed turd with tons of glass. I'm sure some people like it, but to me it's ugly, and even if it wasn't it certainly doesn't belong comingled with the homes at Vickery.
They had major problems with the SIPS erection- it was a combination of some dimensional errors on the plans, the floor framing being out of tolerance (which could have been adjusted for with traditional framing), and just plain ole' unfamiliarity wit the system on the part of the South-of-the-border framing crew members. At several points during the construction, chainsaws were used to "make things fit".
If you get a chance, take a ride up to see the subdivision- it's off of 400. It should be no problem to find the house I'm talking about- it sticks out like a sore thumb amongst its neighbors.
Bob
Bob, I may just do that this weekend! Let me see if I can find the place, and if I have the time I'll bring the camera with me. I can see where the lack of familarity in material-method could be a problem, and how an out-of-place a contemporary design can 'stand out', but these are not necessary issues with the method, but rather the implementor.
I guess this is probably why the local (Gainesville, GA) SIP panel manufacturer doesn't erect panels, but rather just delivers them to the job-site.
Funny thing is, if I recall correctly, the panels were made someplace way up in the Northwest, rather than right in Gainesville. I can't remember where exactly, but I remember them making a big deal about the trip being thousands of miles.
That's gotta really help with the cost benefit, huh? lol
Bob
There's no good reason NOT to use SIPS, but you need to plan accordingly and carefully - it's not a bunch of sticks to bang together.
One of the most important things I learned when sheathing my timber frame with SIPS is that wiring chases are a) best done in the factory; b) you cannot have too many of them and c) it's a pain to 'create' chases where there are none. I put three chases in at 10" 18" and 48" above finish floor, and if I did it again, I'd put vertical chases every 16" in each panel. It's better to have them and not use them, than not have them and try to bore a 10' long hole lengthwise through a panel.
On the good side, windows and doors were very easy to do. Siding worked nicely due to the flat walls, sheetrock went on smoothly, much fewer screw holes and joints, walls for cabinets and built-ins nice and flat, etc.
I'd do it again in a heartbeat, with some better planning.
I always looked at the beauty of SIP-constrauction in that using double-sided OSB often eliminated the need for additional structure to support the shell. Where I am at (last northerly exit of I-85, Gwinnett county, GA), its becoming increasing more common to build closer and closer to commercial and industrial locations where noise is becoming an increasing factor. A nice 10" SIP wall and 12" ceiling would help both acoustically and thermally. Sounds, to me, like a no-brainer, but we are not talking about my brian. :)
Anyway, I am curious as to some of the potential reasons for why a track builder wouldn't use SIP-method of construction if and when the combined labor+material costs for shell and insulation are about equal.
That is a pretty big assumption. I imagine the reason is that a SIP house may cost 5% more when all costs are considered (purely conjecture on my part) and since no one is willing to pay for it that comes out of the profit margin of the builder.
How much more would you be willing to pay for SIP? And the big question, how many of your neighbors would be willing to spend the same amount extra?
Jon Blakemore
RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
John, you ask a question that, as far as I know, has never been asked, or offered, to the homebuyer. I've never known or seen a tract builder to offer SIP as product or solution. I look at SIP as being energy efficient over stick, if done right. So, if I were to commute the question to an energy home then I'd say a lot of people would. Basis for my conclusion? Well, there is a community that adopted a 'penny-sense' program to make the home better-built for the sake of energy efficiency, with steps taken to reduce energy lost due to heating and cooling. They sold like hotcakes. Unfortunately, I missed that opportunity.
And its easy to forward a conclusion that no homebuyer is interested if the industry isn't offering them it, no? BTW, if the increase in construction is 5% of the overall cost of construction (let's use my home, but I have no idea what it cost to build) I'd say a 5% premium isn't too hard to swallow considering the potential energy savings of the unsealed envelopes being passed around.
Now, to answer the question, I would have said YES! But then again I've known about SIPs for sometime. I can see where a consumer (homebuyer) having never heard of SIP might not be enticed into any benefits over the Latino stick construction method.
I guess any advantage in timesavings for a tract builder is completely lost in inexperienced subs taking more time to put in mechanicals and such.
why a track builder wouldn't use SIP-method of construction
That's been one of those questions for which no good answer seems to pertain. I mean, it's not like Pulte, ot Toll Bros, or Village Builders has that many sets of plans, and even in flipped "left" and "right" pairs, that would seem to be relatively easy to make SIP production line specs for.
Of course, the same argument could be made for "panelizing," too.
With the caveat for for both being that you'd have to have the 'plant' nearby enough that the shipping (especially any "oversize") charges did not 'wipe out' the profits.
Because the only other thing I could think of would be that "they" would not want any customer to see the under construction houses and think they were getting other than a "traditional' house. That's a scary level of cynicism, and presumes a lot of national, corporate, leadership--but, that could be as likely as anything else.
Mind you, the big national builders are not putting so very much into traditional-looking "stick" building, either (might actually be cheaper than panels).