Drywall seams not matching up during shower rebuild

Looking for some advice on an issue with a "wall thickness" issue I'm deali ng with in a shower rebuild.

After teardown to studs of the existing shower, I can see that in previous work done on the house the original plaster/metal mesh make up of the walls (house built in 1959) has been replaced by a double thickness of drywall h alfway down the walls. As a result the walls are not plumb, as the double d rywall portion of the wall (bottom half of the wall) is approximately at le ast 1/4" thicker than the top half, meaning that if you're standing at the entrance to the shower the walls slant like:

\ / (luckily not at that extreme of a slant, but you get t he idea)

The problem I now have is how to compensate for this as I rebuild the new s how walls, as they are level and plumb in order to accommodate the new larg e format tiles and shower doors I will be installing - having a small subwa y tile and curtain allowed the previous build to cover up these inconsisten cies.

So my question is: how do I bridge the gap where the new wall thickness of the shower does not meet up consistently with the thickness of the walls th at meet it? drywall compound and a lot of feather and sanding to try to bui ld up the low parts of the wall to meet up with the shower? Help!

Reply to
Chris Jenkins
Loading thread data ...

I thought you'd torn back to studs--they're not plumb? Or do you mean you've just exposed the previous underwall surface now?

If the latter, I'd recommend going back to the studs and then replacing the drywall with rock designed for shower instead; then you'll have both the water resistance should have as well as a suitable tile backing. If there needs some shimming done, do it to plumb/square everything before installing the sheeting.

Reply to
dpb

After teardown to studs of the existing shower, I can see that in previous work done on the house the original plaster/metal mesh make up of the walls (house built in 1959) has been replaced by a double thickness of drywall halfway down the walls. As a result the walls are not plumb, as the double drywall portion of the wall (bottom half of the wall) is approximately at least 1/4" thicker than the top half, meaning that if you're standing at the entrance to the shower the walls slant like:

\ / (luckily not at that extreme of a slant, but you get the idea)

The problem I now have is how to compensate for this as I rebuild the new show walls, as they are level and plumb in order to accommodate the new large format tiles and shower doors I will be installing - having a small subway tile and curtain allowed the previous build to cover up these inconsistencies.

So my question is: how do I bridge the gap where the new wall thickness of the shower does not meet up consistently with the thickness of the walls that meet it? drywall compound and a lot of feather and sanding to try to build up the low parts of the wall to meet up with the shower? Help!

  1. bevel grout along edge

2.cut narrow strips from the tiles with a bevel at top edge as caps

  1. rondec
    formatting link
Reply to
dadiOH

"Chris Jenkins" wrote

As a result the walls are not plumb, as the double drywall portion of the wall (bottom half of the wall) is approximately at least 1/4" thicker than the top half

And someone graduated the joint compound to blend the two halfs together? There are only two options I can think of:

1) Bulid up the tile backer to just below the higher level, leaving about 1/8" for thinset, so that you can put tile on and have them overlap onto the drywall slightly, sitting flat. Then fill in compound in the section of the wall that's slightly set back, feathering it back away from the shower. That's typically necessary to some extent, anyway, in cases where the tile needs to end up flush on the drywall. The existing wall is often not perfectly in line with tile backer that's attached to studs. 2) Come up with some kind of transition piece, such as a molding, that will be higher than either side.

Normally I'd go for #1 unless it's something like a budget rental apt job and there's a good molding option. In many cases a molding will just look out of place. And if your main wall is on two levels you'd still be having that look odd where it meets the molding.

Reply to
Mayayana

If this was my project, I'd much rather replace all the sheetrock in a small room than spend hours and hours trying to feather the mud to match, and still have uneven walls in the end. When you take into account the amount of time to apply all that mud and it's cost, it may be cheaper in the end to just replace all the walls. After all, your time has value too, and sheetrock is cheap.

Or, at least replace the sheetrock on the wall that adjouns the shower, so you only have to match up an inside corner, and not the whole wall. If I understand what you have there, it sounds like someone did a half assed patch job, sometime during the past (roughly 60 years) since that home was built, and now you have to try to match up to that messy patch job.

Plus, if your tile will match the old walls, it will be noticably uneven and require more tile cutting and "hack-work".

Reply to
Paintedcow

Sorry, I think I explained poorly; the walls of the old shower were plumb, its all the rest of the bathroom that's not, so I'm trying to figure out th e best way to compensate. Everything in the shower is square/plumb/level, i t's where it meets the not-plumb walls of the room where the issue is. It l ooks to me like in the past the lower half of the walls were torn out to up grade plumbing and electrical, and the drywall they replaced it with makes those new walls thicker than they used to be.

This is our eighth year in this house and the last room to be remodeled, an d I swear something like this has come up during every single project we've tackled...

Reply to
Chris Jenkins

Yeah, option 1 seems to be the best answer, short of tearing out the walls of the entire bathroom (very small room, so not an impossible task) and sta rting over so that everything is as it should be. In the original (or at le ast most recent) build they seem to have done exactly what you described, e xcept for instead of using compound to feather out the depth difference whe re the wall is "low" they used the grout they used for the shower to fill i n the "wedge" of space under the tiles above the low point of the wall. Fig ure I could do something similar with paintable caulk and just match to the new wall color, but I'm going to be doing some patching due to minor wall damage during teardown, so I figured it would be a better solution to try t o build up that low point of the wall and feather out. Would this be with s tandard drywall joint compound, or would there be another recommended produ ct?

Reply to
Chris Jenkins

"Chris Jenkins" wrote

Yeah, option 1 seems to be the best answer, short of tearing out the walls of the entire bathroom (very small room, so not an impossible task) and starting over so that everything is as it should be. In the original (or at least most recent) build

they seem to have done exactly what you described, except for instead of using compound to feather out the depth difference where the wall is "low" they used the grout they used for the shower to fill in the "wedge" of space under the tiles above the low point of the wall.

Ick. :)

Figure I could do something similar with paintable caulk and just match to the new wall color, but I'm going to be doing some patching due to minor wall damage during teardown, so I figured it would be a better solution to try to build up that low point of the wall and feather out.

Yes. building up grout or filling with caulking will look tacky.

I start with Durabond 90 for anything but light coating. It mixes with water and dries to something like non-brittle plaster. You can build up a thick coat on the first coat and get a very strong base. (Normal compound cracks easily in a thick coat.) I then finish with lightweight joint compound. Just the regular stuff. There's EZ Sand for topcoating if you're in a hurry, but that doesn't sponge well and costs more, so there's no real benefit except where it all needs to be done in one day.

Reply to
Mayayana

I agree with a total rip. Been there. When done you will be glad. Think about a new layout too. I moved everything.

Reply to
Thomas

"Thomas" wrote

|I agree with a total rip. Been there. When done you will be glad. | Think about a new layout too. I moved everything.

But you don't know the details, so how can you say that? No one could possibly make such a decision without seeing the room, figuring out how much work would be involved, and looking at the alternatives. Have you ever demo'ed old fashioned plaster on metal lath? It's 1 1/4" of what's essentially concrete. A lot of work. A lot of weight.

Reply to
Mayayana

Sure have. Paid once and regretted it. Do it yourself if capable makes a hurt back but not a hurt wallet. Basement Accessible?

Reply to
Thomas

Further, if you have a flat tire, fix it or...

Reply to
Thomas

Would you want to buy a house that had a bathroom remodel hack like that?

Reply to
Mike Hollmmes

"Mike Hollmmes" wrote

| > So my question is: how do I bridge the gap where the new wall thickness of the shower does not meet up consistently with the thickness of the walls that meet it? drywall compound and a lot of feather and sanding to try to build up the low parts of the wall to meet up with the shower? Help! | | Would you want to buy a house that had a bathroom remodel hack like that? |

I'm guessing you live on the West Coast. Where I am in Boston, most houses are 80+ years old. The house I live in was built in 1835. Unless the building is gutted down to framing, various "hacks" are done over the years to deal with aging plaster and partial remodelling, to fix cracks in old horsehair plaster, affix loose plaster, and blend in new drywall with existing walls.

There's nothing hack about leveling walls. The wall described is made of drywall. Soft gypsum composite wrapped in paper. That in itself is arguably a hack. A layer of setting-type compound over that makes it stronger, not weaker.

Without seeing the actual job and knowing the budget you really have no basis for a judgement.

It's an interesting issue. Much of what goes on in construction these days could be called hack. Vinyl disposable windows. Hollow doors made of masonite. Crap flooring made of plywood with a thin wood veneer. Veneer "bricks" for exterior. Walls made of gypsum composite and paper. Cabinets made of particle board. Sheathing made of flakeboard that has no structural strength and may disintegrate in a few years if the glue breaks down. (And if it does we'll all say, "Who could have seen that coming?". Everyone should see that coming. It's idiotic. No one saw it coming that sprayfoam insulation would offgas formaldehyde and eventually turn to useless powder. Why not? And now we have new, improved sprayfoam insulation. They use it on This Old House. This time it's really good.... I bet.)

I'm looking at a job now where floor tiling was done over the new-ish plastic waffle sheeting. The tilers didn't fully fill in the waffle holes with thinset and now the grout is coming out, after less than one year. The idea of ceramic tile over a plastic sheet is about as hack as one can get, yet it's now considered to be cutting edge technology. In a world where construction is meant to be disposable, and the next homeowner will be ripping the whole thing out, anyway, I guess maybe it is cutting edge.

I once lived in Tucson for a time, where cold weather and dampness are not a problem. Their idea of siding on new construction was to attach wire mesh to plywood sheathing and put veneer stucco over that. Instant regional/ethnic atmosphere. Then the stucco cracks later. But at least they had real sheathing. Maybe they can come up with a better covering, like sandstone-themed contact paper. :)

All of the things I've listed are widely considered to be adequate building practices. They're all hacks. Leveling plaster is not a hack.

Reply to
Mayayana

Reply to
Chris Jenkins

+1

Many times the path that appears more work turns out to be the same of less work. And you know you're going to have it look right. With attempts at patching, when it's done, tiled, painted, finished, suppose you wind up still seeing a defect? How would you feel then?

Reply to
trader_4

I'm in Central Florida, in a neighborhood that's been around since the

1920s. As I look at the scope of the work that we were already planning on doing (rebuild shower, replace toilet, replace standing sink with vanity) the argument for just removing the walls and starting over seems more and more compelling.

It might make sense. But you're not replacing the floor? Vanity and toilet are typically small jobs by themselves.

If you decide to demo the walls you'll need to decide whether to take it all down or just take down the original plaster. Then you'll end up with a wall that's either 1/2" or 1" (assuming you doubled up new drywall to match the double drywall section.) The original wall is probably 1 1/4". So there might be an issue with the floor perimeter. There'll also likely be an issue with trim. You'll need to remove all of that and put it back, with spacer pieces if necessary. And getting out that concrete is going to need a sledgehammer. So if you demo you may need to consider doing a new floor.

There are also possible code issues if you demo. Wall insulation. Fan. If you don't have a ceiling fan you'd need to put one in in most places, once you demo, if you don't already have one. That may be easy, or it may not. Sometimes it's nearly impossible to vent them. And you might need an electrician to set it up.

Then there's the lead-safe law to consider if you're "disturbing more than 6 square feet". I've yet to see a contractor who's working in accord with that law because it's just so unrealistic. I haven't yet seen exterior painters who are even using the required amount of plastic dropcloths, much less the suits, masks, caution tape and "danger" signs, and all the other complications the law requires just to scrape paint. But I got a license myself and do work in accord with it. I figure that I can't afford to just hope the law won't be enforced. I just turn down inside jobs where I can't legally do the work. And I'll turn down much outside work for the same reason. It's not worth the trouble. I mainly have the license to give me authority to test for lead, so that I can legally do jobs where lead is not present.

I'm guessing the you don't intend to accord with lead-safe law and I'd also guess that you run almost zero risk of getting into trouble, but the penalties *can* be outrageous. So far they only seem to be going after big companies, like Lowes. I don't remember exactly how it applies to homeowners doing their own work, but if I remember correctly even you would need to get a license for your own work, which you'd need to be authorized to test surfaces in order to check whether there's lead. Then you'd need to follow all of the protocols and buy yourself an expensive HEPA vacuum in order to do the work. Some states also regulate disposal of the debris.

Those are all considerations you might want to think about. They may or may not be obstacles in your case.

Reply to
Mayayana

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.