Actor123 wrote:

Hi all:

I am installing carpeting in two rooms where the current baseboard is
too low for the carpet to be tucked. I am debating between removing
the baseboard and re-installing at the proper height for tucking (not
sure if baseboard will survive being removed so this may involve
installing all new baseboard) or simply running the carpet right up to
the baseboard and not tucking. Its pretty tall baseboard so losing
the bottom 1/2" of it or so isn't a factor at all. We're looking at
installing a medium pile carpet (saxony)

This is a high-end home and I want it to look as such. I've heard
different opinions from the two carpet installers. One says that an
untucked carpet will be noticeable and will not look "high-end", and
thus I should re-do the baseboard. The other says that I will not be
able to notice an untucked carpet at all looks-wise, and the only
possible difference would be in 5 or so years its possible that the
carpet may need to be retacked if it starts to pull up.

Can anyone chime in with their opinion as to which is best. I'd
rather not spend the money to re-do the baseboard if I'm not going to
be able to see a difference.

Many thanks

FWIW, baseboards can be undercut to fit tile under it..we had our
baseboards undercut when tile was installed so that it would look
original, rather than have grout slathered around the bottom of the trim
and baseboards. I have never seen carpet under a baseboard, though.
Our tile contractor had an employee or sub- who does only the
undercutting. It was freshly painted when it was done, and not a
scratch or ding. Only thing that tile guys did that bothered me was
leave a couple of dirty handprints on the wall, but they came off )