We are contemplating hardwood floors in an 1860 house we are
renovating. It currently has two layers (1.5 inches total) of pine
floor -- the rough-sawn subfloor covered by painted pine boards.
Everything sits on 2 x 8 joists (older style) set 30" OC.

I'm planning on tearing up the top layer of boards and putting down
3/4 T&G flooring (Advantech). But I'm worried that the amount of flex
(bounce) in the floor from the widely spaced joists will cause
problems down the road.

Has anyone here tried anything similar? What luck?

Thanks,

John

jgold723 wrote:
We are contemplating hardwood floors in an 1860 house we are
renovating. It currently has two layers (1.5 inches total) of pine
floor -- the rough-sawn subfloor covered by painted pine boards.
Everything sits on 2 x 8 joists (older style) set 30" OC.

I'm planning on tearing up the top layer of boards and putting down
3/4 T&G flooring (Advantech). But I'm worried that the amount of flex
(bounce) in the floor from the widely spaced joists will cause
problems down the road.

What's the dimensions of the present versus the proposed? Is it T&G or
simply butt seams? What about the thickness of each layer?

If the 1-1/2" is two 3/4" and the hardwood isn't some manufactured
product for which I have no information for on stiffness, hardwood such
as oak will be as, or stiffer than pine. If, otoh, the top level is 1"
and the underlayment is only 1/2" (which would be most unusual for the
age if it is original), then you would be removing material.

Unless the existing pine is in really bad shape, you might consider
simply refinishing it as being more in keeping w/ the age of the house.

--

There are two layers of 3/4 boards -- the subfloor are wide, roughsawn
boards and the top layer is 8-inch boards butted against each other.
The top layer is in bad shape -- painted many times, cupped in spots.
We've been told it's not worth refinishing and I'd tend to agree. The
lead dust alone would probably qualify the house as a Superfund site.

On Dec 29, 2:36*pm, dpb wrote:
jgold723 wrote:
We are contemplating hardwood floors in an 1860 house we are
renovating. It currently has two layers (1.5 inches total) of pine
floor -- the rough-sawn subfloor covered by painted pine boards.
Everything sits on 2 x 8 joists (older style) set 30" OC.

I'm planning on tearing up the top layer of boards and putting down
3/4 T&G flooring (Advantech). But I'm worried that the amount of flex
(bounce) in the floor from the widely spaced joists will cause
problems down the road.

What's the dimensions of the present versus the proposed? *Is it T&G or
simply butt seams? *What about the thickness of each layer?

If the 1-1/2" is two 3/4" and the hardwood isn't some manufactured
product for which I have no information for on stiffness, hardwood such
as oak will be as, or stiffer than pine. *If, otoh, the top level is 1"
and the underlayment is only 1/2" (which would be most unusual for the
age if it is original), then you would be removing material.

Unless the existing pine is in really bad shape, you might consider
simply refinishing it as being more in keeping w/ the age of the house.

--

jgold723 wrote:
There are two layers of 3/4 boards -- the subfloor are wide, roughsawn
boards and the top layer is 8-inch boards butted against each other.
The top layer is in bad shape -- painted many times, cupped in spots.
We've been told it's not worth refinishing and I'd tend to agree. The
lead dust alone would probably qualify the house as a Superfund site.
....

Do what you want, of course; but I'm personally very much prone to
retain the "old" in old houses. What about turning the top level over
to the under side rather than losing all that history?

--

dpb wrote:
jgold723 wrote:
There are two layers of 3/4 boards -- the subfloor are wide, roughsawn
boards and the top layer is 8-inch boards butted against each other.
The top layer is in bad shape -- painted many times, cupped in spots.
We've been told it's not worth refinishing and I'd tend to agree. The
lead dust alone would probably qualify the house as a Superfund site.
...

Do what you want, of course; but I'm personally very much prone to
retain the "old" in old houses. What about turning the top level over
to the under side rather than losing all that history?

And, btw, as another way to restore such vintage places -- in Lynchburg,
VA, did these routinely of old antebellum houses in downtown during
revitalization.

Rather than sand in place which often would require far more material to
be lost or difficulty, since we were doing bare-wall restorations
anyway, we would take material such as this to a commercial shop w/ a
thickness sander. W/ one of these dudes, it's a snap and working
individual pieces is more material-saving than the whole floor. Some
distress and marks are "character", not defects, also...

Where are you located? If anyways close by, I'd take the material you
don't want in a heartbeat...

--

On Dec 30, 4:08 pm, dpb wrote:
dpb wrote:
jgold723 wrote:
There are two layers of 3/4 boards -- the subfloor are wide, roughsawn
boards and the top layer is 8-inch boards butted against each other.
The top layer is in bad shape -- painted many times, cupped in spots.
We've been told it's not worth refinishing and I'd tend to agree. The
lead dust alone would probably qualify the house as a Superfund site.
...

Do what you want, of course; but I'm personally very much prone to
retain the "old" in old houses. What about turning the top level over
to the under side rather than losing all that history?

And, btw, as another way to restore such vintage places -- in Lynchburg,
VA, did these routinely of old antebellum houses in downtown during
revitalization.

Rather than sand in place which often would require far more material to
be lost or difficulty, since we were doing bare-wall restorations
anyway, we would take material such as this to a commercial shop w/ a
thickness sander. W/ one of these dudes, it's a snap and working
individual pieces is more material-saving than the whole floor. Some
distress and marks are "character", not defects, also...

Where are you located? If anyways close by, I'd take the material you
don't want in a heartbeat...

--

I owned a house built in the 60's that had floor joists 48" oc! It
had a 1 1/8" fir plywood subfloor and had slight bellies between the
joists, but not too bad. I went over it with 1 1/2" strip oak and it
turned out great. In your case I'd be a little concerned about the
two layers of 3/4--though I really couldn't say for sure either way.
1 1/8" t & g plywood is readily available. You might consider that.

Manufacturer's warranties aren't worth the paper they are written on.