replying to Electric Comet, Iggy wrote: Drywall nor lathe and plaster have no "advantage" over paneling. Paneling is the advantage. Drywall and plaster are just seamless, and drywall's installed wrong by most everyone (horizontal idiots listening to the likes of Moron Frauderson) to kill any minimal hedge of fire protection.
Paneling never needs to be thrown out. You can remove it and put it back as many times as you want to do wiring 1-year, piping the next year and insulation in a decade. No waste ever, can't easily pop a hole through it, it doesn't ding and dent, no crumbing from hanging a picture, can be painted or stained and highly resistant to water...compared to any gypsum stuff.
Lath and plaster is BY FAR the most expensive, the most work, and the most mess. Panelling is "so 70s" - definitely simple and cheap if you buy cheap panelling, and is generally NOT fire rated, so cannot legally be used in many places without putting drywall up first (no sanding required) - and drywall is "generally" more damage resistant than most "panelling"
Drywall is fast. I think it became the norm during the 1950s and the post WW2 housing boom. A couple guys could drywall, finish the interior, of an entire house in a couple days and the house was done!!! Kind of like why c arpet became the norm too. Easy and quick to install flooring in the whole house in a few hours!!! You're done! When you are building 100 houses a year or more, being able to do things quickly and still look good or at lea st OK, is important. And as important, the skill level is not that high. No offense to anyone here, but you do not need a high school degree to pain t walls, hang drywall, trowel mud, or install carpet. All things that crea te the finish you see in houses today. Not much thinking required. As for replacing lath and plaster. Have you ever seen old time lath and plaster? Wooden strips overlapped and nailed on the wall and filled with lots and lots of mud plaster. Lot of work involved. Much easier to screw a 4'x8' s heet of drywall to the wall. Or 4x12 or 4x16 sheet. I think drywall comes in 4.5 and 5 foot widths too. You can cover a hell of a lot of area in mi nutes with drywall. Boom. Done. Kind of like using a roller instead of a paint brush to paint a wall. Drywall is damned efficient.
You have obviously never platered. You put on the lath, either wood, mesh, or GtpRoc, then you apply the "scratch coat " and let it dry, then you apply the finish coat - and if you think THAT is easy --- Well - let's just say the reason lath and plaster has gone almost entirely from thehomebuilding industry is there is virtually no-one left under 70 who knows how to do it, or is willing to learn to do it properly. It is a skill - an art, and a science, all rolled into one. It is NOT simple, and it is NOT fast - and it most definitely is NOT CHEAP!!!
With current state of the art materials and equipment, a house can be totally rocked in one day, and totally taped and mudded in another day
- ready for priming. A good mudder/taper can get the finish coat on smooth enough it virtually does not need sanding if the primer is put on with a texture gun - makes the wall finish just a WEE bit gtainy - not silky smooth like plaster or sanded drywall compound. With airless spraying, getting a whole house primed takes a matter of hours, not days.
The pros are FAST!!! (which translates to pretty darn cheap compared to plastering.
If they could spray it on and do it quickly, efficiently, and cheaply, it would be done on every house. They can't, so it isn't.
Even stuccoing or parging is labour intensive - and it's a LOT simpler than plastering. Getting a perfectly smooth and straight plaster finisg is EXTREMELY difficult work.
Are you trying to bait us, or are you really being serious? Assuming the la tter, not sure if you are referring to prefinished paneling so popular in t he 60's and 70's or t&g/shiplap boards...In either case, material cost is d rastically different, maintenance and ease of installation, is so much simp ler with GWB (other than the short learning curve of properly dealing with butt joints). There are any number of tape and finishers that will do the d irty (skilled) work after you install the GWB for incredibly reasonable cos t...
replying to DerbyDad03, Iggy wrote: Oh, the horizontal drywall absurdity? I can provide proof for that truth. You'll be surprised how flawed it is, which is in everyway.
replying to Leon, Iggy wrote: Fill, I will. Here's what's wrong with Horizontal and why it'll never be right:
1 ? DEFECTIVE SEAM - Horizontal rows needing more than one drywall panel CREATES (instead of AVOIDS) butt-joint HUMPS, which are NOT flat and are a TWICE (minimum) the effort DEFECT. Outlet and switch cover-plates, window and door trim, baseboards, pictures, mirrors and cabinets don?t sit flat. Using ANY "butt-joint product" erases ALL "claimed" benefits of Horizontal!
2 ? UNSUPPORTED SEAM ? Horizontal?s tapered seam is 90% unsupported, only
10% (instead of Vertical's 100%) contacts framing, the seam WILL AND DOES crack. Light switch and countertop electrical boxes within the seam equals MORE weakness and butt-joint doubled, MINIMUM, efforts.
3 ? STRUCTURAL DEFECT - Horizontal only reinforces a wall height of 4? or less, a full-height wall's top-plate is never connected to the bottom-plate. As in and due to #2 above, Frictional Contact is MINIMIZED (instead of maximized by Vertical).
4 ? SEAM DECEPTION...(4'x8' PANELS) ? Example 1: 48? tall by 102? long wall, Horizontal = 48? (technically) and it?s a 24? wide butt-joint or a MINIMUM of doubling the 48" (Vertical = the same, generously, 96? but they?re easy 6? wide joints). Example 2: 96? tall by 102? long wall, Horizontal = 222? with 50% being 24? wide butts (Vertical = 192? of 6? wide easy joints, yes LESS)...in a Kitchen, Horizontal = 100% of 24? wide butts (Vertical = 0%). Yes, Horizontal does the taper area twice (MINIMUM) in order to hide its butts, so VERY minimally just another 24? was added AND #5 below was not factored into Horizontal's monumental FRAUD.
5 ? SELF-DEFEATING ANGLES ? Horizontal only uses ONE of a panel?s tapered edges and PUTS the other taper at the ceiling corner and baseboard, CREATING (instead of AVOIDING) a twisted angle that MUST be shimmed or ADDITIONALLY mudded. This too, instantly erases ALL "claimed" benefits of Horizontal by DOUBLING the seam amount, patching itself to equal Vertical!
6 ? UNFRIENDLY SEAMS ? Horizontal celebrates the chest height seam and PRETENDS there?s no 24?-WIDE floor to ceiling butt-joint OR the EVER present baseboard bevel of UNFINISHED WORK (Vertical has easy joints and the top's screwed, taped and mudded later with the ceiling corner and the baseboard SPOTS can also be done separately).
7 - FIRE HAZARD LIABILITY - Horizontal only fills the coin-thin SEAM'S FACE and has NO back-blocking, CAUSING smoke and fire?s spread by inviting fuel-air for a fire's growth (Vertical is full depth and airtight once simply screwed-in).
8 - UNSAFE INSTALLATION - Horizontal needs 2-PEOPLE for a safe installation and the panel is airborne, literally CREATING the chance to CAUSE injury (Vertical easily tilts-up with just 1-person). Panel lifters aren't even as easy and safe as Vertical?s tilt-up.
9 - ADDITIONAL WASTE - When correctly covering a knee wall, half wall, tub front, column or soffit by first removing both tapered edges, Horizontal CAN'T use the tapers elsewhere (Vertical can and does). AND, Horizontal WASTES 4-times the mud on their completely unnecessary butt-joints AND baseboard bevel's...if ever done.
10 - DESTRUCTIVE IGNORANCE - Foundation and Framing crews go to great pains to make everything flat, level, plumb and square. Horizontal DESTROYS those efforts with their DEFECTIVE humps and baseboard bevels (Vertical keeps the perfection).
11 - GRASPING AT STRAWS WITH OUTRIGHT FRAUD - Horizontals FALSELY AND UNKNOWINGLY wave the absurdly INVALID (FPL439) 1983 testing ?Contribution of Gypsum Wallboard to Racking Resistance of Light-Frame Walls? by the self-convicted fraud Ronald W. Wolfe. FPL439 found that ALL tapered paper-wrapped edges must be FULLY INTACT for Horizontal to beat Vertical, PERIOD. In the real-world, Horizontal's bottom paper-wrapped edge is REMOVED BY LAW, for spacing from all floors and thereby COMPLETELY NEGATE Wolfe?s inexcusably deceitful and worthless "study" (LAUGHABLE) and summation.
12 - JOINT OR SEAM TREATMENT - According to the ASTM's C840 8.2, Horizontal's seams MUST be mudded to provide ANY fire, smoke and air travel resistance (Vertical's SO GOOD that it's NOT REQUIRED to have its seams treated AT ALL).
13 - COSTLY SLOW COMPLICATION - Horizontal's depend upon PRICEY special muds and even messy tape or taping tools that WASTE mud. Taping tools still require a 2nd step of knifing the tape and the muds require a mixing step. That's MORE expense, MORE time, MORE tools and equipment and MORE water...for an INFERIOR job! Vertical's SUPERIOR with the cheapest ready-mix bucket muds and dry self-adhesive tape. Again, Vertical's seam treatment is JUST for looks.
14 - FIRE RATING FAIL - Most Single-ply or Single-layer drywall for Commercial Work is required to be installed Vertically, to obtain drywall's ACTUAL fire rating. This is well-known by the majority of Horizontals, but you and your children don't matter to a Horizontal. And for what, to honor the FRAUDS that taught them wrong? You've now seen that Vertical's FASTER overall and immensely BETTER in every way.
Only promote HORIZONTAL AS WRONG and confidently cite the above incontestable FACTS.
All valid points but in the Houston area I do not see these problems and the vast majority of dry wall goes up horizontally. Because homes in this also have other than 8' ceilings, 10, 11, 12 footers are common, even 16'10' tall walls are common, the but joint is unavoidable regardless of how the drywall is stacked. Again, I don't see issues, and that is a visual inspection. The bigger issues are non straight studs, no drywall direction hides that and creates the issues you mentioned above concerning pictures and mirrors.
Maybe all the builders are doing it wrong.
Agreed again but you are assuming that the studs are actually 16" OC. Often studs are 20" OC and walls are not always a perfect length to avoid butt joints.
I could be wrong but I don't think dry wall helps much to reinforce the connection between the top plate and bottom plate. I do however know that it helps to prevent racking.
Well the bottom is typically covered by base boards so no need to mud the bottom. The top has to be taped and floated anyway to join the ceiling.
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.