Sorry if this had been talked about before, but anyone read Building an Affordable House by Fernando Ruiz (Taunton (of course) Press)?
I generally liked the ideas presented, though he goes against the grain of a lot of what has been said at Breaktime–especially about insulation and framing 24″ on center. I read some of the ideas, like no closet doors, bump out closets, gravel driveways, etc., to my wife and he response was like, “Put the book down and back away… Do it now!”).
I did like his explaining why some “money saving” ideas don’t really work and liked a lot of his suggestions, though I disagreed with many–like the wonderfulness of using water-resistent drywall. He did back up most of his ideas with facts and research results. I was surprised that he recommended electric water heaters over gas, but had good reasons for it.
The chapter on insulation was well researched and interesting because it touted conventional kraft-faced fibergalss insulation and recommended polyethylene only on ceilings below attic. Anyway, I thought it was an excellent starting point for thinking about saving money when building. I liked that he backed up most of his opinions with research and since the book was written recently (2005), the research is up to date.
Replies
What does the book say about "insulation and framing 24" on center"? - just curious
He says you save money going 24" o.c. and that 16" was developed because lath was too wobbly at 24", but now that we don't use plaster on lath we can go to 24. That 24" o.c. even with joists and rafters is just as strong. Says kraft faced fg insul. is fine if efforts are made to seal so no air infiltration--actually is better than dense pack cellulose. Recommends blown cellulose for ceilings though. Hard to summarize two chapters in a paragraph here, so I am not really doing the book justice.
Our code doesn't allow 24" O.C studs on beariing walls (includes all exterior) except for single story houses - still you never see it. Some of the national builders use 24" OC on interior non-loadbearing walls - saves them a SWAG of 12 studs per 1000 sq ft...
I havn't seen the book but it sounds like just some more opionins to be taken into account. Matt
I enjoyed the article but the electric heating system wouldn't work here. Our electric rates are 3 time what they are in his area. If you don't have gas heat in my neck of the woods you are on your way to bankruptcy. DanT
Electric heat/hot water wouldn't work in most of upstate NY either...Niagara Mohawk had (and maybe still does) have the most expensive rates per KWH in the nation.....I know that natural gas was a far cheaper alternative to anything else, except maybe oil fired boilers and HWH's for getting the most bang for the buck. When I build up there in the near future we're going oil all the way and a gas range in the kitchen....seems as I recall from my days of working for a major oil/propane company in NY the BTU breakdown was as follows:#2 Fuel Oil- approx 198,000 BTU's/GallonPropane-Approx 98,000 BTU's/gallonNatural gas, measured by the "therm", can't remember the multiplier for that one and kerosene was sort of mid range between Fuel oil and propane.....gimme an oil tank in the basement any day of the week and let the oil prices do as they will, it's the best alternative because kero/propane/natural/ is going to go up just like fuel oil does and in the day and age of 60$ barrels it's all relative.....If you aren't one of the one's I'm talking about,you shouldn't have any complaints....
In fairness to the author, I should have mentioned he liked electric applainces and heaters because they were almost always initially cheaper, and didn't need to have ducts or chimneys for exhaust, but he did mention the operating costs varied according to the region where you live and that therefore, other fuels were sometimes a better choice.
""He did back up most of his ideas with facts and research results. I was surprised that he recommended electric water heaters over gas, but had good reasons for it."
Gas rates vary, but electric vary drastically.
And some electric companies have time of day or peak load sharing rates that are extremely cheap.
On another forum someone mentioned that they rent a electric HW storage tank system from the utility company. It has a large mass and has a load sharing system. They get a rate reduction for the electric bill that is higher than the rental cost of the WH.
So it really needs to be priced out based on local cost.
"The chapter on insulation was well researched and interesting because it touted conventional kraft-faced fibergalss insulation and recommended polyethylene only on ceilings below attic."
Building Science ( http://www.buildingscience.com ) only recommends poly in the walls in the very coldest climates. But I think that there prime vapor barrier is air tight DW.
I remember reading that it is best to not overlap the kraftpaper facing on the face of the studs, but staple it to the sides of the studs--allowing drywall to be glued to exterior walls. This seals the individual stud spaces better and greatly increased strength of exterior walls. Isolating the stud spaces from each other and sealing the drywall to top and bottom plates more than makes up for slight compression of fiberglass by stapling to the stud sides. Waddayathink?
Here's the link to the Building an Affordable House book:
http://www.taunton.com/store/pages/070727.asp
Edited 7/16/2005 7:47 pm ET by basswood
Stapling the insulation to the sides rather than the faces of the studs does make sense because it does allow the drywall to be glued to each stud. In the book the airtight drywall approach (ADA) uses a self adhering gasketing material only on top and bottom plate edges, around door and window openings and at intersections of other walls. I suppose though that screwing the drywall to each stud would press it hard enough against the kraft paper facing to sort of isolate each stud bay and would strengthen the walls anyway. The nice thing about gluing it to the studs is there are less holes in the drywall for air and water vapor to get through and also less mudding to do.