Hi, all.

Whilst there's major building work here, I've taken the opportunity to flood
fill the place with co-ax from the head-end, and with cat6 from the network
cabinet.

This has involved a certain amount of plasterboard cutting.

During patching, I've noticed that the original plasterboard seems to be an
odd thickness. It's somewhere between 9.5 and 12.5. If I patch with
12.5, it sits noticably proud of the finished surface.

I guess I could use 9.5 and skim it to the finished level.

But any ideas why it seems to be non-standard?

70's build house.

--
Ron

"Ron Lowe" ronATlowe-famlyDOTmeDOTukSPURIOUS wrote in message


I guess I could use 9.5 and skim it to the finished level.

But any ideas why it seems to be non-standard?

70's build house.

--
Ron




Does it really matter?

On Sun, 19 Oct 2008 21:17:18 +0100, Ron Lowe wrote:

Hi, all.

Whilst there's major building work here, I've taken the opportunity to flood
fill the place with co-ax from the head-end, and with cat6 from the network
cabinet.

This has involved a certain amount of plasterboard cutting.

During patching, I've noticed that the original plasterboard seems to be an
odd thickness. It's somewhere between 9.5 and 12.5. If I patch with
12.5, it sits noticably proud of the finished surface.

I guess I could use 9.5 and skim it to the finished level.

But any ideas why it seems to be non-standard?

70's build house.

It's probably the 'old' Imperial 1/2" board.

Don.

I've noticed that the original plasterboard seems to be an
odd thickness. It's somewhere between 9.5 and 12.5. But any ideas
why it seems to be non-standard?

70's build house.


It's probably the 'old' Imperial 1/2" board.

Don.

That was my thought too.

But I thought 12.5 was meant to be the same as 1/2 inch.
( basically a metricisation of 1/2 inch, like 9.5 was 3/8 )

Harmonisation without changing anything.
Like 8' x 4' sheet material becoming 2440 x 1220mm.

Hmm.
Perhaps with the change-nothing metricization, the tollerances changed
enough to make things a bit off.

--
Ron

"George" wrote in message
om...

"Ron Lowe" ronATlowe-famlyDOTmeDOTukSPURIOUS wrote in message


I guess I could use 9.5 and skim it to the finished level.

But any ideas why it seems to be non-standard?

70's build house.

--
Ron




Does it really matter?



It does if I have tons of 12.5 mm board, and no 9.5!

--
R

"Ron Lowe" ronATlowe-famlyDOTmeDOTukSPURIOUS wrote in message
...
"George" wrote in message
om...

"Ron Lowe" ronATlowe-famlyDOTmeDOTukSPURIOUS wrote in message


I guess I could use 9.5 and skim it to the finished level.

But any ideas why it seems to be non-standard?

70's build house.

--
Ron




Does it really matter?



It does if I have tons of 12.5 mm board, and no 9.5!

--
R


So what are you going to do?

So what are you going to do?

Probably purchase some 9.5 and skim.
You seem rather unnecessarily unhelpfull and agrassive in your tone.

The reason I asked is because there may have been some other possibility I
hadn't considered.

Something like: " Oh, in the '70s there was a fad for 11mm board. You can
still get it he www.groovy.plasterboard.far.out.com"

--
Ron

"Ron Lowe" ronATlowe-famlyDOTmeDOTukSPURIOUS wrote in message
...


So what are you going to do?

Probably purchase some 9.5 and skim.
You seem rather unnecessarily unhelpfull and agrassive in your tone.

The reason I asked is because there may have been some other possibility I
hadn't considered.

Something like: " Oh, in the '70s there was a fad for 11mm board. You
can still get it he www.groovy.plasterboard.far.out.com"

--
Ron







You asked why something is not standard anymore,and if it isn't then why
worry and ask the silly question of why it isn't.

You ever thought of dot&dabbing the PB that needs to be raised out to bring
it level? rather than filling it out.

Simple,yes.

In article , Ron Lowe
ronATlowe-famlyDOTmeDOTukSPURIOUS@?.? scribeth thus


So what are you going to do?

Probably purchase some 9.5 and skim.
You seem rather unnecessarily unhelpfull and agrassive in your tone.

The reason I asked is because there may have been some other possibility I
hadn't considered.

Something like: " Oh, in the '70s there was a fad for 11mm board. You can
still get it he www.groovy.plasterboard.far.out.com"


I've seen this before and its best to put the thinner stuff on then skim
up to the required thickness....
--
Tony Sayer

"Huge" wrote in message
...
On 2008-10-19, George wrote:


So what are you going to do?

Killfile you, for a start.


--
"Be thankful that you have a life, and forsake your vain
and presumptuous desire for a second one."
[email me at huge {at} huge (dot) org dot uk]


See ya.

"Ron Lowe" ronATlowe-famlyDOTmeDOTukSPURIOUS wrote:

"George" wrote in message
om...

"Ron Lowe" ronATlowe-famlyDOTmeDOTukSPURIOUS wrote in message


I guess I could use 9.5 and skim it to the finished level.

But any ideas why it seems to be non-standard?

70's build house.

--
Ron




Does it really matter?



It does if I have tons of 12.5 mm board, and no 9.5!


If it's just for small patches perhaps Bear Claw clips might do the job
http://www.drywall-emporium.com/Bear_clip_webpage.htm. I haven't actually
tried them but they look as though they line up the front surface rather
than the back.

--
Mike Clarke