wrote:
On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 18:28:17 GMT, Max wrote:


Please allow me to share a few universal, immutable Truths about the
wood flooring found in older homes.

When you hear the words "... and there's a wood floor under the carpet,"
what you should think is: " ... and the abused damaged ruined remnant of
a once-beautiful tongue and groove plainsawn oak floor lie beneath this
urine-stained berber."

Carpets are generally put on top of wood floors for a reason, and in my
experience -- this 50's ranch being my third, after two early 1890's
Vic's -- those reasons have a lot more to do with concealing/cheaply
covering up damage than it does with comfort, sound or any other very
plausible explanation.



Sorry to hear of your troubles, but those are not immutable truths. I
bought a 1950's ranch in 1995 from the original owners. It had wall to
wall carpet throughout, including inside all the closets. The carpet
was ancient and awful. Underneath it was a brand new 1952 oak floor
that had never been walked on other than to install the carpet. Back
in 1952, the houses in my neighborhood were built with oak floors as
standard, and wall to wall carpet as an extra cost option. If you went
for the carpet, they put it OVER the oak floor. When we had our
closing, we went straight over to the house and ripped up all of that
nasty carpet the same day. The floor underneath was in pristine
condition, and did not even need to be waxed. Not a mark on it.

Barney
I'm kind of in between on this. I just started
taking up the carpet in my house, built in 1962.
So far I have done one room, and the floor is in
fair condition. I waxed it and it doesn't look
bad. This is my bed room. My biggest concern
will be the living room.

Bill Gill