Anonymous
09/28/2025 22:32
Subject: Older homes
Anonymous wrote:What about new builts post pandemic? Are those typically draft and leaky?
What does the pandemic have to do with energy and building codes?!
Anonymous
09/28/2025 22:23
Subject: Older homes
How many people will actually pay to have all asbestos removed before buying a property or before moving into one?
Anonymous
09/28/2025 13:52
Subject: Older homes
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What about new builts post pandemic? Are those typically draft and leaky?
They use thermoply for exterior sheathing now. It's supposed to be better, but it's basically cardboard.
Older homes don’t necessarily have good bones. They were built with lumber and brick veneer, just like new homes, but without proper codes for weather resistance and insulation. If not brick veneer, many older homes used materials like asbestos siding, which is even worse.
These older homes were cheaply built “Mc-shacks,” thrown up to accommodate the post-WWII housing boom. If they were built during WWII, they often used low-quality materials due to wartime shortages.
Newer homes, on the other hand, are built under the latest building codes, which provide better standards for safety, insulation, and weatherproofing. The only real advantage older homes might have is that, over time, they’ve passed through multiple owners who may have corrected some of the original issues. New homes haven’t gone through that process yet, but they do come with warranties to address problems as they arise.
No thanks.
New homes around here are built with OSB, not Thermo-Ply like in cheaper areas of the US.
I think the pre-war versus post-war distinction continues to be a good rule of thumb. Pre-war home were not built with brick veneer or asbestos!
Beware that asbestos can still turn up. Our home was built in 1915, but during a renovation we uncovered old floor covering that had asbestos in it. Even though it was a small amount, it required special handling and added. Few thousand dollars to the cost of the project.
Well not everyone is nutso, I had that and just put wall to wall carpet over it.
Removing asbestos isn’t exactly nutso.
Don’t you have to disclose if you know there is asbestos in your house, even if you carpeted it?
Is it more dangerous to remove asbestos than to leave it alone and put new flooring over it? Asbestos is only a danger when it is disturbed. The mastic is loosened and becomes friable and enters the air space. That's why plenty of people say leave it and encapsulate it.
Asbestos, like lead paint, is one of those things that some people will never tolerate and can even be silly about, while others are more pragmatic. My sainted mother, back in the 70s, decided she didn't like the loose black asbestos tiles in her laundry room so she ripped them all up with no protection or gear, scraped the floor of the mastic, and threw it away and had new tiles put down. She's still with us, healthy and fit, in her 80s.
But it’s the best to hire a firm and remove the asbestos entirely.
I would think a house loses 8 out of 10 prospective buyers if you say you have asbestos…but don’t worry it’s under carpet. The headline risk is too high.
It’s not as though carpet is the best thing to cover it as carpet degrades over time and asbestos particles will get through.
You encapsulate an asbestos floor, and then there’s no risk to anyone. It didn’t bother us when we were looking for houses. Unless you like setting money on fire paying for removal.
Anonymous
09/28/2025 13:36
Subject: Older homes
Anonymous wrote:Do older homes have mold? Or is it not usually an issue in older homes?
Old or new, if there is Water and moisture problem then you have mold problem.
Anonymous
09/28/2025 13:19
Subject: Older homes
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What about new builts post pandemic? Are those typically draft and leaky?
They use thermoply for exterior sheathing now. It's supposed to be better, but it's basically cardboard.
Older homes don’t necessarily have good bones. They were built with lumber and brick veneer, just like new homes, but without proper codes for weather resistance and insulation. If not brick veneer, many older homes used materials like asbestos siding, which is even worse.
These older homes were cheaply built “Mc-shacks,” thrown up to accommodate the post-WWII housing boom. If they were built during WWII, they often used low-quality materials due to wartime shortages.
Newer homes, on the other hand, are built under the latest building codes, which provide better standards for safety, insulation, and weatherproofing. The only real advantage older homes might have is that, over time, they’ve passed through multiple owners who may have corrected some of the original issues. New homes haven’t gone through that process yet, but they do come with warranties to address problems as they arise.
No thanks.
New homes around here are built with OSB, not Thermo-Ply like in cheaper areas of the US.
I think the pre-war versus post-war distinction continues to be a good rule of thumb. Pre-war home were not built with brick veneer or asbestos!
Beware that asbestos can still turn up. Our home was built in 1915, but during a renovation we uncovered old floor covering that had asbestos in it. Even though it was a small amount, it required special handling and added. Few thousand dollars to the cost of the project.
Well not everyone is nutso, I had that and just put wall to wall carpet over it.
Removing asbestos isn’t exactly nutso.
Don’t you have to disclose if you know there is asbestos in your house, even if you carpeted it?
Is it more dangerous to remove asbestos than to leave it alone and put new flooring over it? Asbestos is only a danger when it is disturbed. The mastic is loosened and becomes friable and enters the air space. That's why plenty of people say leave it and encapsulate it.
Asbestos, like lead paint, is one of those things that some people will never tolerate and can even be silly about, while others are more pragmatic. My sainted mother, back in the 70s, decided she didn't like the loose black asbestos tiles in her laundry room so she ripped them all up with no protection or gear, scraped the floor of the mastic, and threw it away and had new tiles put down. She's still with us, healthy and fit, in her 80s.
But it’s the best to hire a firm and remove the asbestos entirely.
I would think a house loses 8 out of 10 prospective buyers if you say you have asbestos…but don’t worry it’s under carpet. The headline risk is too high.
It’s not as though carpet is the best thing to cover it as carpet degrades over time and asbestos particles will get through.
Anonymous
09/28/2025 13:02
Subject: Older homes
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:We live in a 1950s ranch. Renovated it, so more open with high ceilings. Had to redo plumbing, electric, but everyone comments on how well-built it is. Our HVAC inside system is in a weird area because originally no central air, so to get it serviced or when we need a new one that will be annoying (we did not put the system there, previous owners did).
Neighbors have new build from maybe 2019, it is poorly built. Neighbors complain all the time and inside it just looks cheap. It is a larger home (4000-4500 square feet not including basement), but they are having issues with almost everything.
Pros and cons to everything. You have lead and asbestos, but who knows what all the new construction materials will do to us over time either.
I think the only issue is if you have to disturb it. In most cases, people just go over it, no?
False. I have a friend whose kid is in really poor shape just from living in an old home and it wasn’t even “disturbed”. Think every time you open a door or window, lead particles enter the air and also your childrens’ brains causing permanent damage.
Live new. We bought a gorgeous new build in part for that reason.
In my state (Illinois) every child living in a 70s or older home gets tested for lead as a toddler. I had my kids tested multiple times because we did so much renovation in our 1920s house. They never had high lead. Do you really know that this kid was tested?
Anonymous
09/28/2025 11:47
Subject: Older homes
Do older homes have mold? Or is it not usually an issue in older homes?
Anonymous
09/25/2025 22:43
Subject: Older homes
Pros
- depending on the period and location, older homes can offer a certain architectural charm
- more established neighborhoods
- often bigger lots
- often in more desirable locations
Cons
- restoration can be challenging as certain materials and practices don't exist anymore, so if you need a "period appropriate" solution it can be harder to find
- certain decades, locations, styles are inherently problematic b/c of the building materials used so you need to do thorough due diligence during the inspection (as someone else mentioned, galvanized steel interior pipes and orangeburg sewer pipes are ticking time bombs)
- as you renovate, you'll discover other "problems" that must be dealt with
- depending on the period and location, older homes can offer a certain architectural charm
- more established neighborhoods
- often bigger lots
- often in more desirable locations
Cons
- restoration can be challenging as certain materials and practices don't exist anymore, so if you need a "period appropriate" solution it can be harder to find
- certain decades, locations, styles are inherently problematic b/c of the building materials used so you need to do thorough due diligence during the inspection (as someone else mentioned, galvanized steel interior pipes and orangeburg sewer pipes are ticking time bombs)
- as you renovate, you'll discover other "problems" that must be dealt with
Anonymous
09/25/2025 22:38
Subject: Older homes
I would look for damage from termites, carpenter ants, and any wood rot issues.
Anonymous
09/25/2025 22:35
Subject: Re:Older homes
Anonymous wrote:My favorite thing about older homes in this area is that they still have yards. Builders these days fill every inch of property with a ridiculously large house so there isn't a reasonable backyard at all. I like having outdoor space for a swing set, patio, garden, and place to kick a soccer ball or host a birthday party. You can't find that with a new build. They're built right up to the property line so you're staring into the windows of the neighbors with no buffer space. Yuck.
Yes, depending on which neighborhood you're talking about. Arlington has always been pretty jam packed with houses cheek to jowl, but Falls Church, Burke, Reston, Vienna, Hollin Hills, and McLean are all places where you can find homes on nice lots. The LB troll will pop up and come after me once he/she reads this, but the Sleepy Hollow and Lake Barcroft areas of Falls Church have some of the most charming homes on large wooded lots. Lake Barcroft has the additional benefit of a private lake with five beaches that are only accessible to residents.
Anonymous
09/25/2025 18:23
Subject: Older homes
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What about new builts post pandemic? Are those typically draft and leaky?
They use thermoply for exterior sheathing now. It's supposed to be better, but it's basically cardboard.
Older homes don’t necessarily have good bones. They were built with lumber and brick veneer, just like new homes, but without proper codes for weather resistance and insulation. If not brick veneer, many older homes used materials like asbestos siding, which is even worse.
These older homes were cheaply built “Mc-shacks,” thrown up to accommodate the post-WWII housing boom. If they were built during WWII, they often used low-quality materials due to wartime shortages.
Newer homes, on the other hand, are built under the latest building codes, which provide better standards for safety, insulation, and weatherproofing. The only real advantage older homes might have is that, over time, they’ve passed through multiple owners who may have corrected some of the original issues. New homes haven’t gone through that process yet, but they do come with warranties to address problems as they arise.
No thanks.
New homes around here are built with OSB, not Thermo-Ply like in cheaper areas of the US.
I think the pre-war versus post-war distinction continues to be a good rule of thumb. Pre-war home were not built with brick veneer or asbestos!
Beware that asbestos can still turn up. Our home was built in 1915, but during a renovation we uncovered old floor covering that had asbestos in it. Even though it was a small amount, it required special handling and added. Few thousand dollars to the cost of the project.
Well not everyone is nutso, I had that and just put wall to wall carpet over it.
Removing asbestos isn’t exactly nutso.
Don’t you have to disclose if you know there is asbestos in your house, even if you carpeted it?
Is it more dangerous to remove asbestos than to leave it alone and put new flooring over it? Asbestos is only a danger when it is disturbed. The mastic is loosened and becomes friable and enters the air space. That's why plenty of people say leave it and encapsulate it.
Asbestos, like lead paint, is one of those things that some people will never tolerate and can even be silly about, while others are more pragmatic. My sainted mother, back in the 70s, decided she didn't like the loose black asbestos tiles in her laundry room so she ripped them all up with no protection or gear, scraped the floor of the mastic, and threw it away and had new tiles put down. She's still with us, healthy and fit, in her 80s.
Anonymous
09/25/2025 18:06
Subject: Older homes
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What about new builts post pandemic? Are those typically draft and leaky?
They use thermoply for exterior sheathing now. It's supposed to be better, but it's basically cardboard.
Older homes don’t necessarily have good bones. They were built with lumber and brick veneer, just like new homes, but without proper codes for weather resistance and insulation. If not brick veneer, many older homes used materials like asbestos siding, which is even worse.
These older homes were cheaply built “Mc-shacks,” thrown up to accommodate the post-WWII housing boom. If they were built during WWII, they often used low-quality materials due to wartime shortages.
Newer homes, on the other hand, are built under the latest building codes, which provide better standards for safety, insulation, and weatherproofing. The only real advantage older homes might have is that, over time, they’ve passed through multiple owners who may have corrected some of the original issues. New homes haven’t gone through that process yet, but they do come with warranties to address problems as they arise.
No thanks.
New homes around here are built with OSB, not Thermo-Ply like in cheaper areas of the US.
I think the pre-war versus post-war distinction continues to be a good rule of thumb. Pre-war home were not built with brick veneer or asbestos!
Beware that asbestos can still turn up. Our home was built in 1915, but during a renovation we uncovered old floor covering that had asbestos in it. Even though it was a small amount, it required special handling and added. Few thousand dollars to the cost of the project.
Well not everyone is nutso, I had that and just put wall to wall carpet over it.
Removing asbestos isn’t exactly nutso.
Don’t you have to disclose if you know there is asbestos in your house, even if you carpeted it?
Anonymous
09/25/2025 17:56
Subject: Older homes
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What about new builts post pandemic? Are those typically draft and leaky?
They use thermoply for exterior sheathing now. It's supposed to be better, but it's basically cardboard.
Older homes don’t necessarily have good bones. They were built with lumber and brick veneer, just like new homes, but without proper codes for weather resistance and insulation. If not brick veneer, many older homes used materials like asbestos siding, which is even worse.
These older homes were cheaply built “Mc-shacks,” thrown up to accommodate the post-WWII housing boom. If they were built during WWII, they often used low-quality materials due to wartime shortages.
Newer homes, on the other hand, are built under the latest building codes, which provide better standards for safety, insulation, and weatherproofing. The only real advantage older homes might have is that, over time, they’ve passed through multiple owners who may have corrected some of the original issues. New homes haven’t gone through that process yet, but they do come with warranties to address problems as they arise.
No thanks.
New homes around here are built with OSB, not Thermo-Ply like in cheaper areas of the US.
I think the pre-war versus post-war distinction continues to be a good rule of thumb. Pre-war home were not built with brick veneer or asbestos!
Beware that asbestos can still turn up. Our home was built in 1915, but during a renovation we uncovered old floor covering that had asbestos in it. Even though it was a small amount, it required special handling and added. Few thousand dollars to the cost of the project.
Well not everyone is nutso, I had that and just put wall to wall carpet over it.
Anonymous
09/25/2025 17:47
Subject: Re:Older homes
For me it's about solidity. My 1910 rowhouse just feels solid. Doors can be closed and provide more than a towel's worth of sound barrier. Kids can run up and down the stairs without rattling the rest of the house (though the floors do squeak!) The floor joists are like 18 inches of rock-hard oak. Solid brick provides insulation from noise and temperature fluctuations. Plus we've replaced the old single-pane windows and added extra insulation to the attic.
It just feels all safe and solid and warm, and I don't think I could live in one of those toothpick-and-tyvek new builds with its great room and palladian windows and non-human scaled spaces.
It just feels all safe and solid and warm, and I don't think I could live in one of those toothpick-and-tyvek new builds with its great room and palladian windows and non-human scaled spaces.
Anonymous
09/25/2025 09:04
Subject: Older homes
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What about new builts post pandemic? Are those typically draft and leaky?
They use thermoply for exterior sheathing now. It's supposed to be better, but it's basically cardboard.
Older homes don’t necessarily have good bones. They were built with lumber and brick veneer, just like new homes, but without proper codes for weather resistance and insulation. If not brick veneer, many older homes used materials like asbestos siding, which is even worse.
These older homes were cheaply built “Mc-shacks,” thrown up to accommodate the post-WWII housing boom. If they were built during WWII, they often used low-quality materials due to wartime shortages.
Newer homes, on the other hand, are built under the latest building codes, which provide better standards for safety, insulation, and weatherproofing. The only real advantage older homes might have is that, over time, they’ve passed through multiple owners who may have corrected some of the original issues. New homes haven’t gone through that process yet, but they do come with warranties to address problems as they arise.
No thanks.
New homes around here are built with OSB, not Thermo-Ply like in cheaper areas of the US.
According to your post, this is all older houses. There is more to older houses than the post war mcshacks. Just as there is more to new houses than the cheaply built townhouses in outer exurbia. Any contractor or inspector can tell you horror stories of new construction despite being built to the latest codes. Shoddy materials, crappy finishings, inexperienced labor.
It always comes down to the specific house, not so much its age. Having blind faith in one or the other doesn't really help you.