Boss man handed me plans for 2 two story houses he wants me to build. Steps are shown (as best I can scale it out) with an 8″ rise and a 9″ run. Presumably the treads would be 10″ wide as they will have a 1″ nosing. Within code, but, man, those are going to be kinda steep… I know these type steps are common in old houses, but this is new construction.
These are aren’t big houses – (1500 – 1600 sq ft) and there isn’t much of any room for more steps in the floorplan. Personally, I’d like about 2 more feet of run to add 1 riser and make all the treads wider but I don’t think that is gonna happen. One house has winders too. Rough ceiling height is 109.5″ and the 2nd floor system is ~10″ thick.
Thoughts? Stan Foster – you there?
Thanks in advance,
Edited 10/25/2004 7:21 am ET by DIRISHINME
Replies
That sounds like our house. We were trapped into a steep stairway, just about the same rise & run as the one you describe. I'll tell you from experience - it is STEEP! Any strangers to the house always comment about it. Wife & I have adjusted to it, and only notice it when doing something unusual - like being on crutches. We at least prepared for old age by making it wide enough to add an electric chairlift.
I really think that the code should be a bit more stringent - though legal, it is too steep for real comfort.
Don
Anyone else have soome thoughts?
Thanks,
Sounds like somebody modified the plans by increasing the ceiling height and didn't (or couldn't) adjust for the stairs.
I'd voice my concern to whoever your boss man is, and let him take it from there. Not your responsibility to cover the archy's butt.Our quarrel with the world is an echo of the endless quarrel within us. - Eric Hoffer
Excellent tag line, Mike!You're unique! Just like everyone else! Scott Adams
What code you operating under? While that may have worked before, or might still in some places, it doesn't fit the 2000 IRC.
In my house I had the same problem. My stairs came up from the garage into the seating end of the kitchen. I sunk the floor at the dining area one step to give me a better ratio on the stairs. from the dining area of the kitchen you step up to the cabinet end or step up to the family room.
The sunken dining area is pretty cool by itself. It gives the impression of a higher cieling and also turns a long kitchen into separate areas.
I wouldn't build to the specs you presented. In all of my own designs, I like to start with about a 7.5" rise and a 12" tread. I have big feet (size 16), and do not like walking on my toes up a set of stairs or turning my feet to a 45 degree angle to get full bearing. In my current house, which I did not build, but have been improving for four years, I have berber carpet upstairs and on the stairs, wide pine on the first floor. When the weather gets dry, the carpet gets a bit slick. Being used to walking on framing lumber twenty to forty feet up, I can negotiate the stairs in the morning before my legs and feet loosen up. I do not think it is responsible to expect other seniors to negotiate slippery carpet on narrow steps, even if they have small feet.Les Barrett Quality Construction
Size 16!!! my gaud. I bet you are a heck of a swimmer! :-)
Matt
Matt,
The stairs you describe don't seem that steep to me; in my own place I built the two staircases at 9¼" rise x 9" run. (The house is only 20' from front to back, and has an exposed beam running lengthwise down the center.)
At 6'1", I've got fairly long legs and I find the 9¼" rise extremely comfortable. On 'normal' 7/11 stairs, I always have to take the stairs two steps at a time to avoid feeling like I'm wasting time and effort...which of course translates into a 14" rise, and is just a bit too much for comfort, especially going downhill.
Ryan grew up with these stairs; he too finds them normal and has no trouble with them in spite of his legs being a lot shorter than mine. But it's true that most visitors (not all, though) comment on their steepness. As to code, NBCC allows 'off-spec' stairs for residences based on the principle that the owners will get used to them and they will not present a danger; IIRC it's in Appendix A but don't hold me to that it's been a while since I needed to check....
I solve the problem of bumping one's toe on the riser of a steep flight of stairs by not using any whenever I can sell the HO on the concept of open stairs. This usually doesn't work too well for basement staircases (noise and dust tend to drift up through the riser spaces) but if handled well can make a very nice design 'statement' from the ground floor to the second storey. Try building them out of 8/4 x 12 with uncut mortised stringers.
BTW, our worries about children falling through open-back stairs turned out to be insubstantial: Ryan never showed the slightest interest in crawling through there, even when he was less than a year old. He came down the stairs facing forward, on his bum, just like other kids do on 'normal' stairs. The bigger issue on steep stairs would definitely be owners with mobility problems. Handrails on both sides of a relatively narrow staircase (say 30-36") usually solves this. Dinosaur
'Y-a-tu de la justice dans ce maudit monde?
Extra handrails - that's a thought... Another thought I just had was to tilt the risers just a bit to allow for wider treads... I've seem them drawn that way, but have never actually built like that. Anyone done that? BTW - these are to be site built stairs.
Stan... You around? Matt
The double handrails won't do any good unless the staircase is narrow enough so the person can hold both rails at the same time comfortably. Kind of like a ship's ladder. It winds up being a tight compromise between narrow enough to be comfortable, yet still wide enough to get the furniture upstairs without bringing in a crane and hoisting it in through the bedroom windows....
Dinosaur
'Y-a-tu de la justice dans ce maudit monde?
IMHO, 9/0 ceilings in small houses are out of place. Taller ceilings are OK for grand spaces, and small houses usually don't have any.
Go into the first floor powder room of an ill-though-out house with 9/0 ceilings, one where they didn't drop the powder room ceiling, but left it at 9/0. Feels funky, right? Sort of like a holding cell.
Save on all your building materials, and some of the labor, by whacking down the wall heights to 97-1/8". That's a precut 8 stud, one bottom plate, and two top plates, for your exterior walls. Two runs of 48" gypboard will then work, with one center seam. At 109.5 wall height, even two runs of 54" rock won't cut it.
Who dealt this mess?
You will get a lot more comfortable stair that way, riser-height-wise.
Now . . . let's figure out how to gain some tread width. Some of my guests have big feet.
Finished a couple hallways in a highrise condo, about twenty years ago - somebody screwed up and didn't get 54" DW. Hangers put the 12" rip at the floor - got real good at doing the duck walk.Our quarrel with the world is an echo of the endless quarrel within us. - Eric Hoffer
Thanks for reminding me of that... I actually did my takeoff on 4x12 sheets. Need to revisit...
Matt
Not for nothing, but all the row homes in the historic section of the city I used to live in had at least 9/0 ceilings. These row homes were anywhere from 13' wide to 24' wide and dated back to the 1800's. As small as 900 sf. Worked well for them.
Shotgun shacks.Our quarrel with the world is an echo of the endless quarrel within us. - Eric Hoffer
Matt
I dont think that would pass code where I am.
We have to have 10" from the edge of the step to the edge of the next step. Make sense?
You would only have 9" from front of one edge to front of the next.
Doug
A few years ago when the houses were not so huge, 24' wide was common. This often meant that the cellar stair would land 30" from the foundation wall. You can gain one more riser if the bottom step can be a platform. Doesn't work if you land in front of a door. The "comfort zone" on stairs changes with the rise and run. As the rise gets shorter, the tread gets wider. Same thing in reverse, taller rise, shorter tread. An 8" rise with a 10" tread isn't all that bad. The ideal for me is 7 5/8" rise with 11 1/4" tread. That includes nosing. 8" rise is acceptable for utility stairs but there are plenty of homes that are pretty close to that on the main stairs. Old New England houses can have rises of 10" and treads at 6". They tuck them into closets. You climb them like a ladder, no need for a handrail. Make sure the RO is long enough if you can add a platform. No good having a more comfortable rise if you hit your head going up.
Beat it to fit / Paint it to match
I have seen a design that has a dropped floor section at the top of a run of steps, to create a landing, and then the stairs turn and go up a couple more steps to the second floor.
That way, you only have to lower the ceilings for a portion of the footprint. In this way you can maybe lengthen your run and shorten your rise, so as to have an acceptable staircase.
The one you described sounds like a stairs in an old farmhouse.
Bob:
Thanks for your ideas.
Re the 9 ' ceilings in small houses, I hear ya. Someone in our neighborhood built what I would call a modern souther traditional style house - big white columns on the front porch, etc. The whole main floor and 10' ceilings - and as you said, the bathrooms were like phone booths.
On the other hand these houses I'm building are what I'd call quasi historic styled. And most of the houses in this city, say c1900 - 1920, had 9' ceilings on the first floor and, maybe 8' on the second like these. The City has there hand in this thing too - and they specified 9' ceilings and some other stuff. The deal is that the city sells the the lots for cheap, but then gets their say in some stuff. Some architect for the city drew up some plans that were authentic in exterior appearance, but just didn't work worth a d@mn on the inside. For example, who wants a master bedroom with only 1 wall space longer than 4'! Stairs were steep in those plans too. Boss man apparently took one look at those plans and tossed them in the trash. Had his own drawn. The man builds 1.8 mil spec homes!!, so believe me, he knows what he is doing. His idea is to build somewhat authentic looking houses from the outside, with modernized floor plans. BTW -- these are spec homes too. So, no, I'm not gonna suggest nixing the 9' ceilings. (2nd floor is 8') The first floor rooms in these houses are pretty good sized. For example, on one plan, kitchen/breakfast area is 12'2" x 20' with a 16' wide opening into the family room which is 18'x15' and the dining room is 12'x14'. Between those rooms, a powder room, 2 closets and a foyer, that does it for the first floor. Also, once you get used to living with 9' ceilings, 8' feels cramped. My home has 10' ceilings in the central living area, with 9' wings for the bedrooms.
I am going to mention framing down the ceiling in the powder room a bit. Also, another idea is a simple/cheap molding deal where you do crown, and a piece of base cap about 6" below that. Then the painters paint the crown, base cap and the 6" strip all with trim paint. Gives the impression of very wide cornice molding and seems to bring the ceiling down a bit.
Re the steps, see my next post.
Also, I understand that these style houses are likely very foreign to people in other parts of the country. For example, here, we do all painted molding - a house with stained is a hard sell... In a $1mil house, you might see a study with stained trim and a way cool cofered ceiling, but that is about it for the natural finished wood. Matt
Thanks all for the thoughts.
At this point I'm gonna stretch out each tread 1/2" to 1". Also, I'm gonna talk to the framer and the guy who designed the house and see what they think. BTW code here in NC is a max rise of 8.25" and min run of 9". In any case, I try to keep the ratio such that rise x run = ~75. BTW - the stairs are 4' wide, so they are not too nasty that way... Cloud: Re code, I thought you lived in NC? Matt
>Cloud: Re code, I thought you lived in NC?
I do, but design all over the US, so I focus on IRC unless told otherwise. And if the 7 3/4" max riser represents a change, then there are just as significant ones on tread depth for winders and circular stairs that's making their fitting trickier than before.
Yea, I looked it up before I wrote it just to make sure. I sometimes run up against the 8.25 requirement so I knew that one, but the 9" tread is ridiculous. Matt
Be careful with the winders. That it one of the most common mistakes that I see in both design and construction. Typically I find them built to where the treads come to a point at the inside corner. However, code requires that the smallest point be no less than 6". And at a point 12" in from the small side the depth of the tread is a min. 10".
I visited a house for a banker awhile back and his stairs has a winder with about 6 steps. They all come to a point. And if you were to slip on the top step you would fall about 3' to the first full step. The trim carp. said almost broke his neck several times while trying to put the rail in.
Good points. Here, winders are allowed to be as narrow as 4" at the narrow side and there is a min width at the 12" out mark, but I can't remember what it is right now. Handrail has to be by the narrow part of the steps. Inspectors here are usually quite tight on winders. Matt
So, anyone have any expierence with or thoughts about framing steps with stringers that look similar to the attached pic?Matt
You still have to figure your tread from the nosing down plumb to the preceding tread. You don't actually gain anything from the recess. Even though you can put your foot in there, you have to "back out" to climb the stair, there's no improvement going down. Too much recess and you trip.
Beat it to fit / Paint it to match
I've never seen a set like that in person but I have seen alternating tread sets, I think they're called "ship stairs" or something like that.
In the right application they could work but as the main stairway in a normal sized house, they seem skimpy.
Jon Blakemore
I've seen concrete steps like that, maybe not that sharp an angle. I assumed it was to create some toe space without a narrow concrete edge on the tread nose that would be too easy to break off.
yeah, me too. As a matter of fact, one of my early jobs was with a contractor who had the steel stairs deliverd , and all that he had to do was pour the treads. Well somehow they were fabbed a smidge too short, and seeing the angle on the risers he thought "brainstorm!!!" just stretch the steel to make it fit and the risers will just be plumb..WRONG.
Some how he DID stretch the carriages, and poured the crete. On inspection (this was a nursing home in NJ, emergency exit stairs) the inspector informed him the treads were unlevel..by a 1/4" low on the nose. No Go Joe.
My first day with the crew I was handed a RT angle grinder and a cup wheel to grind the backs of the treads down...and I was hired as a carp. I quit after 20 earsplitting minutes..a stairwell 4 floors of blockwalls and a grinder is deafening even with hearing protection, and forget about the dust...arrggh.
Spheramid Enterprises Architectural Woodworks
Repairs, Remodeling, Restorations.
They have made it very difficult on us here in Alabama. The max rise can only be 7.5. Two risers and one tread can not be over 25 inches. All the plans I get these days have risers that violate the code. I am to the point now where the first thing I do is look at the plans and take it up with the builder. I have to much to do to be doing the architects job. WE have had instances where the inspector would let a higher riser go because there simply was not any more room. What do you do?
James Hart
A guy built a custom house for my parents with steps like this (actually a little worse), apparently for no good reason. My parents were in ther 80s at the time. I wasn't around to watch things, and my younger brother, supposedly a carp, "approved" them. I'd like to strangle both of them.
Check out this link it might be worth printing out.
http://www.arcways.com/IRC2000a.pdf
Joe Carola
Nice document Joe, and I did print it out. I especially like the graphics. Saved it to disk too.
Unfortunately, as I said, our NC code will allow the 8" rise and 9" run steps that are drawn on the plans, so it's not a code issue here. (actually, up to an 8.25" rise is allowed.
Question:
If I make the treads a little wider (maybe an inch), how will this interact with the winder portion of the steps (if at all)? In other words, can the winders stay as is? Pic of plans attached. (actually the framer will build the stairs - to give credit where credit is due...) Matt
When the floor plan is small, you have to make compromises somewhere. If the stairs meet code where you are then I wouldn't worry about it. Yeah, they're kind of steep, but they work. Personally I like 4' wide stairs and hallways so two people can pass without too much awkwardness but how often do you see that?
As for the ceiling height, it's easy enough to sheetrock if you run a 1' wide piece in the middle of the wall to make it easy on the tapers. The extra height makes a big difference in how a small space feels. In bathrooms and hallways, it's nice to drop the ceiling for two reasons--one, so you don't get the "holding cell" effect, and two, when you go from the hallway into the larger, high-ceiling room it feels even larger.
At this point, I'm leaning toward forgetting about extending the width of the treads by having the risers cut at an angle other than 90 degrees (to the treads). In the previous post to Joe I attached the pics of the house plans where I can extend the risers a bit as space does permit.
Attached are the pics of the plans of the other house where space is really tight. This is the house where I was thinking about the angle cut risers, but I bet the framer won't like the idea, and I know the trim cap would hate having to cut the riser material at an angle.
A house redesign is out of the question at this point because the plans have already gone to permitting.
BTW - I discussed this steep stair thing with my boss and he said it would be fine. He has built literally hundreds or maybe even thousands of houses, so no way can I argue with him. Plus, he signs my pay checks!!! Matt
Stairs or no stairs; I don't like the designer because they don't know how to properly dimension a plan. Dimensions are to the center of interior walls and to the outside of exterior walls.
I could barely tolerate a designer who would dimension to the same side of every wall, so you would atleast have the center to center measurements on all but the first and last wall. We have a local chick who dimensions to the edges of walls and uses a differant edge every time. I swear one of these days I'm going to walk in her office and burn the crap right in front of her!!!
...Two deep breaths later...
Oh, well atleast she keeps me on my toes.
That's pretty short sighted of you. most drafrtsmen and designers will setdims to what you ask for, if you are sharp enough to ask. Some guys like dims to center of wall and others like to edge of studs. Some interior design folks draw to finished wall surface. As long as it is clearly labeld it can easily be built.
I have seen the question come up a number of times in various forums how the local framers want the dims shown. Designers are willing to accomadate and it is easy to change with cad programs.
So, Have you thought about asking nicely?
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
Piffin, the designers shouldn't have to be asked to stay consistent.
blueBe cautious when taking any advice from me. Although I have a lifetime of framing experience, some of it is viewed as boogerin and not consistent with views of those who prefer to overbuild everything...including their own egos!
Wjhat about asking framers to stay consistant. Some want dims to center of wall and some want to edge. She may have many framers who want to edge. That's how I draw because that's how I frame.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
It has more to do with what the standard is than consistency. Every AIA, AIBD, and college textbook that I have ever seen always shows the proper way to dimension. Where does softplan (autodim) dimension by default? The Chief Arch demo is the same way. I believe the draftsmen are just to lazy to dimension to the center. Plus, I don't know of any consistent national framing standard.
Kyle, I would think that the minimum standards of dimesionsing would be "stay consistent". It's these new fangled computers, written by code nerds that don't have a basic idea of how or why consistency matters.
blueBe cautious when taking any advice from me. Although I have a lifetime of framing experience, some of it is viewed as boogerin and not consistent with views of those who prefer to overbuild everything...including their own egos!
The computer is never smarter than the user (except for my truck which keeps telling me to put my seat belt on). I takes me about two minutes to put the hidden lines in so that I can dimension to the center of the walls.
Piffin designs his own plans to his own needs. That's fine. But if an individual commisions prints to be drawn for a project, those prints should be on par with what is standard. This goes for every part of the plans, dimensions, elevations, roof plans, etc.
Matt, I'm seeing room to lengthen your run on the winder set, but then I did start this stuff in the 60's<G>... Isn't there room both at the foot and head of the stairs? For that other set, I'm sure you know we've gone back to 1 1/4" nosing projection...not much, but a little more<G> Could help?
Contrary to what some twits think, 9' ceilings are nice, even in a small house. My own is 2200sq', and I have 'em on the 1st floor. Makes for a roomier feel.
I've also got 8 1/4" risers, house is only 15' wide! I did manage 11" treads. Steep, but managable.
We work under pretty much the same code, but you know how inspectors differ...angeling the risers may work, but the BI may want to go with the 1 1/4" nosing projection measured from plumb...I just got a handrail variance on a set of winders...but it was only good if I got one special inspector<G>
...and the winder tread depth can't be less than 9" at a point not more than 12" from the tiny part of the tread (4").
Don't worry, we can fix that later!
"Billy":
Good thought about an inspector maybe wanting to say that angled risers would count as part of the nosing. Another vote against. Scrap that idea.
I think I got it all covered with the house with the winders, but on the "Plan 1500" with the straight steps, I'm kinda stuck.
RE the ceiling height thing, I went today and looked at some model homes of some houses that are the same style that I'm going to be building. They had 9' up and down, which kinda surprized me for homes in that price range (160 - 180k). BTW - some of the steps were steep in these 4 or 5 models I went in. Some were not. I'm thinking that possibly the majority of the "public at large" would not have ever noticed it.
I'd post a pic of one of the model homes, but then probably someone would start going off about the choice of paint or something important like that... :-) Matt
These sound like "starter" homes for your area. Knock down the rise by 1/8th and bump up the run by 1/8"...advertise as "spacious and accomodating"...specs, right<G> Don't worry, we can fix that later!
Those angled risers are the nosing!
In commercial many stairs are poured concrete. They angle the risers to create the nosing.
blueBe cautious when taking any advice from me. Although I have a lifetime of framing experience, some of it is viewed as boogerin and not consistent with views of those who prefer to overbuild everything...including their own egos!
I'm not sure where it goes by default. I set mine to dim at edge. My settings have been same for years now, so I would have to check the book or reset to default to find out. As a guess, I think it is to center of interior walls.
But I stil think it's out of line rto make it a major issue when so many carpenters want it dimed to edge instead of center.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
Why would anyone dimension building floor plans to center of walls?
I don't know. I've heard it explained before but it never sunk in very wel, cause tjhe logic wasn't there for me to grasp.
I think it's more common in California and Arizona.
The guys who want center dims would have to explain it to you.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
It's not so much of a major issue as it is a teeth grinding pet-peeve. To each his own I guess. Like I said before, at least they keep me on my toes.
Also, it stems from the fact that we have more than our share of worthless designers here in Louisiana. And their kiss off let the framers figure it out attitude has gotten a little old.
I know of a home-owner that called his designer because the roof didn't work, and the designer reminded him that he has a clause on his plans where the buyer assumes all liability for accuracy.
Why would the home-owner assume the designers liability?
It's just a chicken crap way of ducking responsibility.
Whatever happened to professional pride?
I know what you mean about half azzed designeers and lack of proof checking on plans, but it did seem like you were really torqued to have to feel like you needed to go stuff them down the designers throat or light a fire of therm in the office or whatever....
I would be more likely to show up with flowers or a good book to warm her up and then explain why it is important to follow your prescription. I can gaurantee that this way, if she doesn't respiond to the request, you will know that she is consciously choosing to despise you, and THEN you can start the war!
But just don't start it without a plan to win, and an exit strategy
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
I like dimensions to the face of walls. Matt
Finished face? or Stud face
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
Doesnt' really matter. All the plans we get around here are drawn to 4" thick walls, so there is some adjustment to be done anyway. I'm guessing that's why kyle wants the dims to the center of the walls. Matt
4", what's with that? Give me centers, I'll take it from there<G> Don't worry, we can fix that later!
Clear it up for us. You PREFER center dimensioning for wall locations, or you can DEAL with it?
Four inch thick walls? What's that about?
What have we got here? Some house designer dope (maybe he's a real archy?) that can't manage his software so as to yield wall thicknesses that match up to common building materials?
Sounds like somebody drawing on twenty dollar playschool cad program
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
Here's what we do when the plans are dimensioned to wall centers.
Snap out on the centerlines, and lay out our wall plates for frame building, but before we build walls, we drill 1/2" dia holes through the bottom plates, in every other stud bay.
The holes work as peepsights for placing the walls on the centerlines. We prefer working this way, and think all framing gangs should do the same. We never have any walls placed on the wrong side of the line, this way.
Now, howzat for ingenuity?
I'd kill myself if I had to peek through holes for living.
I wouldn't mind centers, as long as ALL dimensions were centers.
Center to center = edge to edge. Whats so hard about that?
blueBe cautious when taking any advice from me. Although I have a lifetime of framing experience, some of it is viewed as boogerin and not consistent with views of those who prefer to overbuild everything...including their own egos!
That peephole method works for setting our windows and doors with great precision.
Once again, find the center of the opening, and mark it clearly. Then for each window or door unit, find the center of the sill, and mark it, then drill a 1/2" hole right through.
Now, you have your peepsight again, and can align your unit right over that center mark you made in the opening.
We just use some random gobs of half-cured subfloor adhesive, and plug up the peepholes we made in the sills.
Okay Bob, I see your just as crazy about things as I am crazy about getting done effeciently.
We center our window in the rough opening too....by eye! If we have a stacked situation, we set the upper one and use my dimestore plumbstick to line up the lower one.
Why would you feel it necessary to be EXACT in centering a window in a rough opening.
Are you OCD? That might explain a lot.
blueBe cautious when taking any advice from me. Although I have a lifetime of framing experience, some of it is viewed as boogerin and not consistent with views of those who prefer to overbuild everything...including their own egos!
Hey Blue,
I think Bob was having fun with you. Drilling 1/2" holes in sills, then patching with half-cured glue globs, in the name of high precision? It seems like conscious humor to me, but I've been wrong before.
Bill
Bill, I don't know....he might be goofin on me, but I've met lots of guys like him. I certainly can't say he's wrong....I'm sureeverything he does is perfect.
Perfection can be a sickness though...I suffered many years from it.
Not any more!
blueBe cautious when taking any advice from me. Although I have a lifetime of framing experience, some of it is viewed as boogerin and not consistent with views of those who prefer to overbuild everything...including their own egos!
Blue,
He has to be goofin you. Who in their right mind would drill holes in the shoe to see the center of a line instead of marking 1-3/4" back and then snapping a line. I think he got you Blue ;-)
Joe Carola
We only started drillin the peepsight holes in the plates when the yard stopped sellin us those transparent ones with the embossed centerlines applied.
Smart Aleck.
blueWarning! Be cautious when taking any advice from me. Although I have a lifetime of framing experience, some of it is viewed as boogerin and not consistent with views of those who prefer to overbuild everything...including their own egos
Additionally, don't take any political advice from me. I'm just a parrot for the Republican talking points. I get all my news from Rush Limbaugh and Fox and Friends (they are funny...try them out)!
He got me.
blueWarning! Be cautious when taking any advice from me. Although I have a lifetime of framing experience, some of it is viewed as boogerin and not consistent with views of those who prefer to overbuild everything...including their own egos
Additionally, don't take any political advice from me. I'm just a parrot for the Republican talking points. I get all my news from Rush Limbaugh and Fox and Friends (they are funny...try them out)!
Piff, the framers aren't the ones with the power to make the right, or wrong decision in this matter.
The draftsmen should know that when they choose one method or the other, it would be nice to just stick to it. That simple detail will save many hours of needless mistakes...mistakes that aren't the drafters fault, but nevertheless mistakes that probably wouldn't be made if consistency was consistant.
blueBe cautious when taking any advice from me. Although I have a lifetime of framing experience, some of it is viewed as boogerin and not consistent with views of those who prefer to overbuild everything...including their own egos!