Help me pick out new hardwood floors

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a basic honey oak floor right now that are original to the house (1960's) and for many reasons are getting ripped out and replaced. We renovated the house DIY when we bought it 6 years ago and the floors remain the biggest single thing that I regret not doing.

What I want is something like an unstained hickory or a gunstock oak. I grew up in the south in an old house and we had heart of pine floors, and I love that look, with the knots and grain. Obviously you can't get heart of pine floors anymore, but I can't really figure out what is kind of close to that.

I like the first two hickory links, but not the third: (sorry, I can't remember how to link images!)

https://images.app.goo.gl/BZ972sCHqbuWBEZ89
https://images.app.goo.gl/Pkqe9D63ErRKFNWA6

https://images.app.goo.gl/qPxYKrCQ5UGNtpWz7 (too splotchy)

Thoughts?

There is no such thing as boney oak. It is either red oak or white oak. Honey is the stain.

I'd say go with oak again, a combo of red and white oak for variation, those old homes had really old oak which was so beautiful with a ton of variation. Everything these days is young and so monotone.

Personally I'd salvage what I have and feather some new in. Crazy talk to some a superior product for an inferior one.

*1000000000000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a basic honey oak floor right now that are original to the house (1960's) and for many reasons are getting ripped out and replaced. We renovated the house DIY when we bought it 6 years ago and the floors remain the biggest single thing that I regret not doing.

What I want is something like an unstained hickory or a gunstock oak. I grew up in the south in an old house and we had heart of pine floors, and I love that look, with the knots and grain. Obviously you can't get heart of pine floors anymore, but I can't really figure out what is kind of close to that.

I like the first two hickory links, but not the third: (sorry, I can't remember how to link images!)

https://images.app.goo.gl/BZ972sCHqbuWBEZ89
https://images.app.goo.gl/Pkqe9D63ErRKFNWA6

https://images.app.goo.gl/qPxYKrCQ5UGNtpWz7 (too splotchy)

Thoughts?

There is no such thing as boney oak. It is either red oak or white oak. Honey is the stain.

I'd say go with oak again, a combo of red and white oak for variation, those old homes had really old oak which was so beautiful with a ton of variation. Everything these days is young and so monotone.

Personally I'd salvage what I have and feather some new in. Crazy talk to some a superior product for an inferior one.

*1000000000000

Agree. Classic oak will always look good and never out of style

[Anonymous]

We just moved into a 1960s home with red oak floors stained honey color. Had then sanded and stained a color that was more our style and we are so happy we did. There were a few damaged boards they replaced but most of it was fine and just needed a refresh. Much cheaper than ripping out perfectly good floors and it completely changed the feel of the house.

[Anonymous]

Don't change the wood on the floors. You cannot get the same wood that they used in the 60's. You will be disappointed.

Signed,

person who changed the wood floors in a 1960's house and I'm sure the company that took them out reclaimed them . . . we had no idea what the difference would be

[Anonymous]

The problem with squeaks is not your wood floor. It's the underlay. You need thicker underlay (half inch plywood and it probably only has quarter inch right now).

[Anonymous]

I highly highly recommend our flooring guy Madera floors. We put in number 1 common oak which is cheaper and has more variation with knots and stuff and then a matte finish on it. I really thought we could keep our old floors from our 50s ranch but there turned out to be horrible pet stains everywhere and out only option would’ve been super dark refinish. I couldn’t do it.


https://www.instagram.com/p/BWxcKAMg8Jz/?igshid=nhl5zflqq2i6


That said, if you got relatively unstained oak, I don’t think you’ll feel great ripping it all out for new oak. Maybe try a matte finish instead? All the poly stains are what make the honey color

[Anonymous]

That said, if you got relatively unstained oak, I don’t think you’ll feel great ripping it all out for new oak. Maybe try a matte finish instead? All the poly stains are what make the honey color

If the squeaks are what bothers you, look for another solution to that and try to keep the nice hardwood that is on top . . . it will be worth it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

That said, if you got relatively unstained oak, I don’t think you’ll feel great ripping it all out for new oak. Maybe try a matte finish instead? All the poly stains are what make the honey color

If the squeaks are what bothers you, look for another solution to that and try to keep the nice hardwood that is on top . . . it will be worth it.

Oh yea, we also ended up needing a new subfloor. Our house wasn’t in great condition. I do really love our new stuff and I’m glad we did it, but if you do go the rip out route...be ready to find more problems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I highly highly recommend our flooring guy Madera floors. We put in number 1 common oak which is cheaper and has more variation with knots and stuff and then a matte finish on it. I really thought we could keep our old floors from our 50s ranch but there turned out to be horrible pet stains everywhere and out only option would’ve been super dark refinish. I couldn’t do it.


https://www.instagram.com/p/BWxcKAMg8Jz/?igshid=nhl5zflqq2i6


That said, if you got relatively unstained oak, I don’t think you’ll feel great ripping it all out for new oak. Maybe try a matte finish instead? All the poly stains are what make the honey color

Good luck getting a call back from these guys.

[Anonymous]

To the PPs above who mentioned the quality of today's floors, why are they so bad? In my head, oak is oak, right?, no matter if it's 1960's oak or 2000's oak.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I highly highly recommend our flooring guy Madera floors. We put in number 1 common oak which is cheaper and has more variation with knots and stuff and then a matte finish on it. I really thought we could keep our old floors from our 50s ranch but there turned out to be horrible pet stains everywhere and out only option would’ve been super dark refinish. I couldn’t do it.


https://www.instagram.com/p/BWxcKAMg8Jz/?igshid=nhl5zflqq2i6


That said, if you got relatively unstained oak, I don’t think you’ll feel great ripping it all out for new oak. Maybe try a matte finish instead? All the poly stains are what make the honey color

Good luck getting a call back from these guys.

?

I’m on a tight a budget in Annandale and the house is 1000sq ft and these were some of the most patient and kind contractors I’ve ever worked with. Maybe you’re the jerk?

[Anonymous]

To the PPs above who mentioned the quality of today's floors, why are they so bad? In my head, oak is oak, right?, no matter if it's 1960's oak or 2000's oak.

Old growth wood was much denser and had more fiber. It provides a very sturdy, stable floor that has much more "character" (lines, shades, etc.) than what you find today. The wood you get today is much more "monotone". The trees from that time also did not have to endure the air pollution we have now (all air is more polluted now). It came from timber that had been growing for hundreds of years. This is not the case for today's lumber. Older timber has much more stability than fresh timber. These are just a few of the reasons people are willing to pay for reclaimed lumber. When you see the new wood, you understand the difference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

To the PPs above who mentioned the quality of today's floors, why are they so bad? In my head, oak is oak, right?, no matter if it's 1960's oak or 2000's oak.

Old growth wood was much denser and had more fiber. It provides a very sturdy, stable floor that has much more "character" (lines, shades, etc.) than what you find today. The wood you get today is much more "monotone". The trees from that time also did not have to endure the air pollution we have now (all air is more polluted now). It came from timber that had been growing for hundreds of years. This is not the case for today's lumber. Older timber has much more stability than fresh timber. These are just a few of the reasons people are willing to pay for reclaimed lumber. When you see the new wood, you understand the difference.

No one notices or cares

[Anonymous]

It really is different. I looked at some wood in a historic home : 300 years old and still in place. A solid piece of wood!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
To the PPs above who mentioned the quality of today's floors, why are they so bad? In my head, oak is oak, right?, no matter if it's 1960's oak or 2000's oak.


Old growth wood was much denser and had more fiber. It provides a very sturdy, stable floor that has much more "character" (lines, shades, etc.) than what you find today. The wood you get today is much more "monotone". The trees from that time also did not have to endure the air pollution we have now (all air is more polluted now). It came from timber that had been growing for hundreds of years. This is not the case for today's lumber. Older timber has much more stability than fresh timber. These are just a few of the reasons people are willing to pay for reclaimed lumber. When you see the new wood, you understand the difference.


No one notices or cares

Except for the person who has lived with the old kind and then switches to the new . . . you notice and maybe you care and maybe you don't.