Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: Difference in building materials

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    was Oxford nr Chch, NZ now UK
    Posts
    1,288

    Default Difference in building materials

    When we lived in NZ our new house was built of brick (although I understand it was actually brick cladding). When we were house hunting we saw in a number of the ads various different materials used to build houses - weatherboard being one that I can remember. Can any builders out there give some info on the good & bad points of the various materials used to build houses and which ones would be the best and longer lasting with minimal maintenance?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Chch, NZ
    Posts
    2,226

    Default

    You might be asking too much.

    For newly constructed houses in NZ, virtually all have an air cavity gap of some sort. Linea Weatherboard cladding are batten off from the timber framing. Brick and plaster rely on the air cavity too with no battens. My reason for going with brick veneer is that the motar can be repaired by repointing. In a plaster veneer (which is still plaster over low grade bricks), if the wall cracks, then it's a more labour intense job to repair as you can just patch up the crack. The whole wall ends up having to be repainted.

    Now if you're talking old houses, then you be best to stay away from the polystyrene cladded plaster houses as they're associated with leaky house syndrome.

    Timber weatherboards require maintenance (painting all the time).

    Drive around the new sub-divisions and see what new houses are using. There's good reason why virtually all are brick veneer.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Ōtepoti, Aotearoa
    Posts
    2,736

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Super_BQ View Post
    Brick and plaster rely on the air cavity too with no battens.
    but on ties generally to connect them to the timber frame.


    Quote Originally Posted by Super_BQ View Post
    In a plaster veneer (which is still plaster over low grade bricks),
    or over polystyrene...


    Quote Originally Posted by Super_BQ View Post
    Now if you're talking old houses, then you be best to stay away from the polystyrene cladded plaster houses as they're associated with leaky house syndrome.
    The issue being that polystyrene has been used inadequately: It does not go very well with light timber frames but has its value when used over massive materials like bricks, blocks or concrete. The problem is that to comply with the requirements for temperature and moisture the series of materials in a building's section are opposed.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Canterbury to UK
    Posts
    2,755

    Default

    For minimal maintenance and long lasting it has to be brick I'd say

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Christchurch from Scotland
    Posts
    2,226

    Default

    But make sure that there are adequate brick ties!!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    was Oxford nr Chch, NZ now UK
    Posts
    1,288

    Default

    Thanks for the advice guys. I raised this question as I have been looking at property and seen a number of different materials listed as being used. When we lived in NZ before we had a new brick built house. Now our budget is slightly reduced we may have to look for older properties. I would like to stay with brick but wondered what the advantages or disadvantages of other materials were. It seems we really need to be looking for brick built if possible. Shame as I have seen some lovely non-brick houses within our price range. However as we don't intend to move for at least a couple of years things may change.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Chch, NZ
    Posts
    2,226

    Default

    If you're on a budget. I would recommend buying an old "state built" house. These houses were built all over NZ during the 40s to the 60s and quite frankly, there isn't a lot to go wrong. The Chch earthquake had proved many of them to be still standing and livable. Their shortfall is the lack of insulation and draftyness but most had permanent materials like copper spouting and drain pipes (something even high end houses wouldn't use today).

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Scotland to Wellington
    Posts
    1,454

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Super_BQ View Post
    most had permanent materials like copper spouting and drain pipes (something even high end houses wouldn't use today).
    Copper spouting is still alive and well in certain parts of Wellington and being used in new renovation projects. (not in ours, I add very quickly)

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Ōtepoti, Aotearoa
    Posts
    2,736

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mamee & Co View Post
    But make sure that there are adequate brick ties!!
    That might be rather difficult. Generally there is no access to the wall sections to literally see it.
    So you probably will have to rely on documents. Unfortunately, often these are not updated when changes occurred during construction; especially not in case of omissions.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    at the bottom of the top bit
    Posts
    3,405

    Default

    lockwood as far as i know, survived the quakes very well indeed

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •