drywall is a lot of work and i think next time i will do paneling or
maybe lath and plaster

drywall probably gives better sound proofing but what other advantages
are there over paneling

drywall is heavy but easy to cut but it is fragile
once you get it on the wall you have to tape it

then the mud coats and the mess
then the multiple sandings and all the mess
then you have to primer and then a coat or two of paint

paneling you cut it nail it and finish it with a clear coat and you are
done


maybe drywall is cheaper but i am guessing that some engineered panel
products might get close in price


and really maybe metal lath and plaster is the cheapest fastest way to
go

now come to think of it how did drywall replace lath and plaster

On 10/30/2017 6:10 PM, Electric Comet wrote:


drywall is a lot of work and i think next time i will do paneling or
maybe lath and plaster

drywall probably gives better sound proofing but what other advantages
are there over paneling

drywall is heavy but easy to cut but it is fragile
once you get it on the wall you have to tape it

then the mud coats and the mess
then the multiple sandings and all the mess
then you have to primer and then a coat or two of paint

paneling you cut it nail it and finish it with a clear coat and you are
done


maybe drywall is cheaper but i am guessing that some engineered panel
products might get close in price


and really maybe metal lath and plaster is the cheapest fastest way to
go

now come to think of it how did drywall replace lath and plaster




Depending upon where you want to use it, think fire and flame spread
ratings.

On 10/30/2017 6:10 PM, Electric Comet wrote:


drywall is a lot of work and i think next time i will do paneling or
maybe lath and plaster

drywall probably gives better sound proofing but what other advantages
are there over paneling


Not sure what kind of paneling you are looking at. Is it 1960 again?

replying to Electric Comet, Iggy wrote:
Drywall nor lathe and plaster have no "advantage" over paneling. Paneling is
the advantage. Drywall and plaster are just seamless, and drywall's installed
wrong by most everyone (horizontal idiots listening to the likes of Moron
Frauderson) to kill any minimal hedge of fire protection.

Paneling never needs to be thrown out. You can remove it and put it back as
many times as you want to do wiring 1-year, piping the next year and
insulation in a decade. No waste ever, can't easily pop a hole through it, it
doesn't ding and dent, no crumbing from hanging a picture, can be painted or
stained and highly resistant to water...compared to any gypsum stuff.

--
for full context, visit https://www.homeownershub.com/woodwo...ll-811751-.htm

On Monday, October 30, 2017 at 8:44:06 PM UTC-4, Iggy wrote:
replying to Electric Comet, Iggy wrote:
Drywall nor lathe and plaster have no "advantage" over paneling. Paneling is
the advantage. Drywall and plaster are just seamless, and drywall's installed
wrong by most everyone (horizontal idiots listening to the likes of Moron
Frauderson) to kill any minimal hedge of fire protection.

Paneling never needs to be thrown out. You can remove it and put it back as
many times as you want to do wiring 1-year, piping the next year and
insulation in a decade. No waste ever, can't easily pop a hole through it, it
doesn't ding and dent, no crumbing from hanging a picture, can be painted or
stained and highly resistant to water...compared to any gypsum stuff.
I

You are so funny! Who writes your stuff?

replying to DerbyDad03, Iggy wrote:
Oh, the horizontal drywall absurdity? I can provide proof for that truth.
You'll be surprised how flawed it is, which is in everyway.

--
for full context, visit https://www.homeownershub.com/woodwo...ll-811751-.htm

On 10/31/2017 7:14 AM, Iggy wrote:
replying to DerbyDad03, Iggy wrote:
Oh, the horizontal drywall absurdity? I can provide proof for that truth.
You'll be surprised how flawed it is, which is in everyway.


Please fill us in.

replying to Leon, Iggy wrote:
Fill, I will. Here's what's wrong with Horizontal and why it'll never be right:

1 €“ DEFECTIVE SEAM - Horizontal rows needing more than one drywall panel
CREATES (instead of AVOIDS) butt-joint HUMPS, which are NOT flat and are a
TWICE (minimum) the effort DEFECT. Outlet and switch cover-plates, window and
door trim, baseboards, pictures, mirrors and cabinets dont sit flat. Using
ANY "butt-joint product" erases ALL "claimed" benefits of Horizontal!

2 €“ UNSUPPORTED SEAM €“ Horizontals tapered seam is 90% unsupported,
only 10% (instead of Vertical's 100%) contacts framing, the seam WILL AND DOES
crack. Light switch and countertop electrical boxes within the seam equals
MORE weakness and butt-joint doubled, MINIMUM, efforts.

3 €“ STRUCTURAL DEFECT - Horizontal only reinforces a wall height of 4 or
less, a full-height wall's top-plate is never connected to the bottom-plate.
As in and due to #2 above, Frictional Contact is MINIMIZED (instead of
maximized by Vertical).

4 €“ SEAM DECEPTION...(4'x8' PANELS) €“ Example 1: 48€� tall by 102€� long
wall, Horizontal = 48€� (technically) and its a 24€� wide butt-joint or a
MINIMUM of doubling the 48" (Vertical = the same, generously, 96€� but
theyre easy 6€� wide joints). Example 2: 96€� tall by 102€� long wall,
Horizontal = 222€� with 50% being 24€� wide butts (Vertical = 192€� of 6€�
wide easy joints, yes LESS)...in a Kitchen, Horizontal = 100% of 24€� wide
butts (Vertical = 0%). Yes, Horizontal does the taper area twice (MINIMUM) in
order to hide its butts, so VERY minimally just another 24€� was added AND #5
below was not factored into Horizontal's monumental FRAUD.

5 €“ SELF-DEFEATING ANGLES €“ Horizontal only uses ONE of a panels
tapered edges and PUTS the other taper at the ceiling corner and baseboard,
CREATING (instead of AVOIDING) a twisted angle that MUST be shimmed or
ADDITIONALLY mudded. This too, instantly erases ALL "claimed" benefits of
Horizontal by DOUBLING the seam amount, patching itself to equal Vertical!

6 €“ UNFRIENDLY SEAMS €“ Horizontal celebrates the chest height seam and
PRETENDS theres no 24€�-WIDE floor to ceiling butt-joint OR the EVER
present baseboard bevel of UNFINISHED WORK (Vertical has easy joints and the
top's screwed, taped and mudded later with the ceiling corner and the
baseboard SPOTS can also be done separately).

7 - FIRE HAZARD LIABILITY - Horizontal only fills the coin-thin SEAM'S FACE
and has NO back-blocking, CAUSING smoke and fires spread by inviting
fuel-air for a fire's growth (Vertical is full depth and airtight once simply
screwed-in).

8 - UNSAFE INSTALLATION - Horizontal needs 2-PEOPLE for a safe installation
and the panel is airborne, literally CREATING the chance to CAUSE injury
(Vertical easily tilts-up with just 1-person). Panel lifters aren't even as
easy and safe as Verticals tilt-up.

9 - ADDITIONAL WASTE - When correctly covering a knee wall, half wall, tub
front, column or soffit by first removing both tapered edges, Horizontal CAN'T
use the tapers elsewhere (Vertical can and does). AND, Horizontal WASTES
4-times the mud on their completely unnecessary butt-joints AND baseboard
bevel's...if ever done.

10 - DESTRUCTIVE IGNORANCE - Foundation and Framing crews go to great pains to
make everything flat, level, plumb and square. Horizontal DESTROYS those
efforts with their DEFECTIVE humps and baseboard bevels (Vertical keeps the
perfection).

11 - GRASPING AT STRAWS WITH OUTRIGHT FRAUD - Horizontals FALSELY AND
UNKNOWINGLY wave the absurdly INVALID (FPL439) 1983 testing €œContribution of
Gypsum Wallboard to Racking Resistance of Light-Frame Walls€� by the
self-convicted fraud Ronald W. Wolfe. FPL439 found that ALL tapered
paper-wrapped edges must be FULLY INTACT for Horizontal to beat Vertical,
PERIOD. In the real-world, Horizontal's bottom paper-wrapped edge is REMOVED
BY LAW, for spacing from all floors and thereby COMPLETELY NEGATE Wolfes
inexcusably deceitful and worthless "study" (LAUGHABLE) and summation.

12 - JOINT OR SEAM TREATMENT - According to the ASTM's C840 8.2, Horizontal's
seams MUST be mudded to provide ANY fire, smoke and air travel resistance
(Vertical's SO GOOD that it's NOT REQUIRED to have its seams treated AT ALL).

13 - COSTLY SLOW COMPLICATION - Horizontal's depend upon PRICEY special muds
and even messy tape or taping tools that WASTE mud. Taping tools still require
a 2nd step of knifing the tape and the muds require a mixing step. That's MORE
expense, MORE time, MORE tools and equipment and MORE water...for an INFERIOR
job! Vertical's SUPERIOR with the cheapest ready-mix bucket muds and dry
self-adhesive tape. Again, Vertical's seam treatment is JUST for looks.

14 - FIRE RATING FAIL - Most Single-ply or Single-layer drywall for Commercial
Work is required to be installed Vertically, to obtain drywall's ACTUAL fire
rating. This is well-known by the majority of Horizontals, but you and your
children don't matter to a Horizontal. And for what, to honor the FRAUDS that
taught them wrong? You've now seen that Vertical's FASTER overall and
immensely BETTER in every way.

Only promote HORIZONTAL AS WRONG and confidently cite the above incontestable
FACTS.

--
for full context, visit https://www.homeownershub.com/woodwo...ll-811751-.htm

On Tue, 31 Oct 2017 07:45:43 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 10/31/2017 7:14 AM, Iggy wrote:
replying to DerbyDad03, Iggy wrote:
Oh, the horizontal drywall absurdity? I can provide proof for that truth.
You'll be surprised how flawed it is, which is in everyway.


Please fill us in.
Remember Iggy is short for ignoramous. It's obvious where he got his
name.

On Tuesday, October 31, 2017 at 8:14:06 AM UTC-4, Iggy wrote:
replying to DerbyDad03, Iggy wrote:
Oh, the horizontal drywall absurdity? I can provide proof for that truth.
You'll be surprised how flawed it is, which is in everyway.


Why did you pick out that one item? Why did you snip the rest of your list?

The discussion was about drywall vs. paneling, not about one method of hanging drywall
vs. another. Your list of reasons of why paneling is better then drywall is what I find humorous.

On 10/31/2017 11:13 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Tuesday, October 31, 2017 at 8:14:06 AM UTC-4, Iggy wrote:
replying to DerbyDad03, Iggy wrote:
Oh, the horizontal drywall absurdity? I can provide proof for that truth.
You'll be surprised how flawed it is, which is in everyway.


Why did you pick out that one item? Why did you snip the rest of your list?

The discussion was about drywall vs. paneling, not about one method of hanging drywall
vs. another. Your list of reasons of why paneling is better then drywall is what I find humorous.


Iggy has been preaching the value of vertical drywall for years. Sadly,
few people listen to him so we are all doomed to inferior houses.

replying to DerbyDad03, Iggy wrote:
Sorry, I didn't see how commonsense, truth, fact and reality was in question.

--
for full context, visit https://www.homeownershub.com/woodwo...ll-811751-.htm

On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 15:10:38 -0700, Electric Comet
wrote:



drywall is a lot of work and i think next time i will do paneling or
maybe lath and plaster

drywall probably gives better sound proofing but what other advantages
are there over paneling

drywall is heavy but easy to cut but it is fragile
once you get it on the wall you have to tape it

then the mud coats and the mess
then the multiple sandings and all the mess
then you have to primer and then a coat or two of paint

paneling you cut it nail it and finish it with a clear coat and you are
done


maybe drywall is cheaper but i am guessing that some engineered panel
products might get close in price


and really maybe metal lath and plaster is the cheapest fastest way to
go

now come to think of it how did drywall replace lath and plaster









Lath and plaster is BY FAR the most expensive, the most work, and the
most mess. Panelling is "so 70s" - definitely simple and cheap if you
buy cheap panelling, and is generally NOT fire rated, so cannot
legally be used in many places without putting drywall up first (no
sanding required) - and drywall is "generally" more damage resistant
than most "panelling"

On Monday, October 30, 2017 at 5:10:41 PM UTC-5, Electric Comet wrote:
drywall is a lot of work and i think next time i will do paneling or
maybe lath and plaster

maybe drywall is cheaper but i am guessing that some engineered panel
products might get close in price

and really maybe metal lath and plaster is the cheapest fastest way to
go

now come to think of it how did drywall replace lath and plaster

Drywall is fast. I think it became the norm during the 1950s and the post WW2 housing boom. A couple guys could drywall, finish the interior, of an entire house in a couple days and the house was done!!! Kind of like why carpet became the norm too. Easy and quick to install flooring in the whole house in a few hours!!! You're done! When you are building 100 houses a year or more, being able to do things quickly and still look good or at least OK, is important. And as important, the skill level is not that high. No offense to anyone here, but you do not need a high school degree to paint walls, hang drywall, trowel mud, or install carpet. All things that create the finish you see in houses today. Not much thinking required. As for replacing lath and plaster. Have you ever seen old time lath and plaster? Wooden strips overlapped and nailed on the wall and filled with lots and lots of mud plaster. Lot of work involved. Much easier to screw a 4'x8' sheet of drywall to the wall. Or 4x12 or 4x16 sheet. I think drywall comes in 4.5 and 5 foot widths too. You can cover a hell of a lot of area in minutes with drywall. Boom. Done. Kind of like using a roller instead of a paint brush to paint a wall. Drywall is damned efficient.

On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 18:25:59 -0700 (PDT)
" wrote:

the finish you see in houses today. Not much thinking required. As
for replacing lath and plaster. Have you ever seen old time lath and
plaster? Wooden strips overlapped and nailed on the wall and filled
with lots and lots of mud plaster. Lot of work involved. Much

i have seen wood lath and metal lath like a coarse screen put it on
with a staple hammer in very little time

i imagine now they can spray on the plaster but maybe it is the finish
that is the hard part

but they may have solved that problem too with advanced materials
in other words it flows on easier and behaves uniformly


easier to screw a 4'x8' sheet of drywall to the wall. Or 4x12 or
4x16 sheet. I think drywall comes in 4.5 and 5 foot widths too. You
can cover a hell of a lot of area in minutes with drywall. Boom.
Done. Kind of like using a roller instead of a paint brush to paint
a wall. Drywall is damned efficient.

it does not seem that efficient to me with all the steps involved just
to get to the paint stage

On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 18:39:48 -0700, Electric Comet
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 18:25:59 -0700 (PDT)
" wrote:

the finish you see in houses today. Not much thinking required. As
for replacing lath and plaster. Have you ever seen old time lath and
plaster? Wooden strips overlapped and nailed on the wall and filled
with lots and lots of mud plaster. Lot of work involved. Much

i have seen wood lath and metal lath like a coarse screen put it on
with a staple hammer in very little time

i imagine now they can spray on the plaster but maybe it is the finish
that is the hard part

but they may have solved that problem too with advanced materials
in other words it flows on easier and behaves uniformly


easier to screw a 4'x8' sheet of drywall to the wall. Or 4x12 or
4x16 sheet. I think drywall comes in 4.5 and 5 foot widths too. You
can cover a hell of a lot of area in minutes with drywall. Boom.
Done. Kind of like using a roller instead of a paint brush to paint
a wall. Drywall is damned efficient.

it does not seem that efficient to me with all the steps involved just
to get to the paint stage

Try it once and see if you still think it's so efficient.

On Monday, October 30, 2017 at 9:16:19 PM UTC-5, J. Clarke wrote:
On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 18:39:48 -0700, Electric Comet
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 18:25:59 -0700 (PDT)
" wrote:

the finish you see in houses today. Not much thinking required. As
for replacing lath and plaster. Have you ever seen old time lath and
plaster? Wooden strips overlapped and nailed on the wall and filled
with lots and lots of mud plaster. Lot of work involved. Much

i have seen wood lath and metal lath like a coarse screen put it on
with a staple hammer in very little time

i imagine now they can spray on the plaster but maybe it is the finish
that is the hard part

but they may have solved that problem too with advanced materials
in other words it flows on easier and behaves uniformly


easier to screw a 4'x8' sheet of drywall to the wall. Or 4x12 or
4x16 sheet. I think drywall comes in 4.5 and 5 foot widths too. You
can cover a hell of a lot of area in minutes with drywall. Boom.
Done. Kind of like using a roller instead of a paint brush to paint
a wall. Drywall is damned efficient.

it does not seem that efficient to me with all the steps involved just
to get to the paint stage

Try it once and see if you still think it's so efficient.

"once"? Ha ha ho ho. I've drywalled a few rooms and many walls over the years. It is damned efficient to hang drywall. Full 4x8 foot sheets cover 32 square feet. Four on a wall and the whole wall is covered. 30-60 minutes later you are done hanging and taping and spreading the first coat of mud. Wait a day and smooth and apply the second mud coat in a few minutes. Wait another day and smooth and apply a finish third mud coat. Smooth it a day later and your are ready to paint. You might have 2-3-4 hours of total time in drywalling and taping and mudding an entire room. Pros of course can probably hang and apply the first coat of mud in under a day to an entire house, including the ceilings. Drywall is cheap and efficient!!! House builders LOVE it for those reasons. And it makes a good looking wall when done too.

On 10/30/2017 8:39 PM, Electric Comet wrote:
On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 18:25:59 -0700 (PDT)
" wrote:

the finish you see in houses today. Not much thinking required. As
for replacing lath and plaster. Have you ever seen old time lath and
plaster? Wooden strips overlapped and nailed on the wall and filled
with lots and lots of mud plaster. Lot of work involved. Much

i have seen wood lath and metal lath like a coarse screen put it on
with a staple hammer in very little time

i imagine now they can spray on the plaster but maybe it is the finish
that is the hard part

but they may have solved that problem too with advanced materials
in other words it flows on easier and behaves uniformly

And ignores the laws of gravity. . . right!

On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 22:11:02 -0500, Unquestionably Confused
wrote:

On 10/30/2017 8:39 PM, Electric Comet wrote:
On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 18:25:59 -0700 (PDT)
" wrote:

the finish you see in houses today. Not much thinking required. As
for replacing lath and plaster. Have you ever seen old time lath and
plaster? Wooden strips overlapped and nailed on the wall and filled
with lots and lots of mud plaster. Lot of work involved. Much

i have seen wood lath and metal lath like a coarse screen put it on
with a staple hammer in very little time

i imagine now they can spray on the plaster but maybe it is the finish
that is the hard part

but they may have solved that problem too with advanced materials
in other words it flows on easier and behaves uniformly

And ignores the laws of gravity. . . right!
If they could spray it on and do it quickly, efficiently, and
cheaply, it would be done on every house. They can't, so it isn't.

Even stuccoing or parging is labour intensive - and it's a LOT simpler
than plastering. Getting a perfectly smooth and straight plaster
finisg is EXTREMELY difficult work.

On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 18:39:48 -0700, Electric Comet
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 18:25:59 -0700 (PDT)
" wrote:

the finish you see in houses today. Not much thinking required. As
for replacing lath and plaster. Have you ever seen old time lath and
plaster? Wooden strips overlapped and nailed on the wall and filled
with lots and lots of mud plaster. Lot of work involved. Much

i have seen wood lath and metal lath like a coarse screen put it on
with a staple hammer in very little time

i imagine now they can spray on the plaster but maybe it is the finish
that is the hard part

but they may have solved that problem too with advanced materials
in other words it flows on easier and behaves uniformly


easier to screw a 4'x8' sheet of drywall to the wall. Or 4x12 or
4x16 sheet. I think drywall comes in 4.5 and 5 foot widths too. You
can cover a hell of a lot of area in minutes with drywall. Boom.
Done. Kind of like using a roller instead of a paint brush to paint
a wall. Drywall is damned efficient.

it does not seem that efficient to me with all the steps involved just
to get to the paint stage






You have obviously never platered.
You put on the lath, either wood, mesh, or GtpRoc, then you apply the
"scratch coat " and let it dry, then you apply the finish coat - and
if you think THAT is easy --- Well - let's just say the reason lath
and plaster has gone almost entirely from thehomebuilding industry is
there is virtually no-one left under 70 who knows how to do it, or is
willing to learn to do it properly. It is a skill - an art, and a
science, all rolled into one. It is NOT simple, and it is NOT fast -
and it most definitely is NOT CHEAP!!!

With current state of the art materials and equipment, a house can be
totally rocked in one day, and totally taped and mudded in another day
- ready for priming. A good mudder/taper can get the finish coat on
smooth enough it virtually does not need sanding if the primer is put
on with a texture gun - makes the wall finish just a WEE bit gtainy -
not silky smooth like plaster or sanded drywall compound.
With airless spraying, getting a whole house primed takes a matter of
hours, not days.

The pros are FAST!!! (which translates to pretty darn cheap compared
to plastering.

On Tue, 31 Oct 2017 00:37:53 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 18:39:48 -0700, Electric Comet
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 18:25:59 -0700 (PDT)
" wrote:

the finish you see in houses today. Not much thinking required. As
for replacing lath and plaster. Have you ever seen old time lath and
plaster? Wooden strips overlapped and nailed on the wall and filled
with lots and lots of mud plaster. Lot of work involved. Much

i have seen wood lath and metal lath like a coarse screen put it on
with a staple hammer in very little time

i imagine now they can spray on the plaster but maybe it is the finish
that is the hard part

but they may have solved that problem too with advanced materials
in other words it flows on easier and behaves uniformly


easier to screw a 4'x8' sheet of drywall to the wall. Or 4x12 or
4x16 sheet. I think drywall comes in 4.5 and 5 foot widths too. You
can cover a hell of a lot of area in minutes with drywall. Boom.
Done. Kind of like using a roller instead of a paint brush to paint
a wall. Drywall is damned efficient.

it does not seem that efficient to me with all the steps involved just
to get to the paint stage






You have obviously never platered.
You put on the lath, either wood, mesh, or GtpRoc, then you apply the
"scratch coat " and let it dry, then you apply the finish coat - and
if you think THAT is easy --- Well - let's just say the reason lath
and plaster has gone almost entirely from thehomebuilding industry is
there is virtually no-one left under 70 who knows how to do it, or is
willing to learn to do it properly. It is a skill - an art, and a
science, all rolled into one. It is NOT simple, and it is NOT fast -
and it most definitely is NOT CHEAP!!!

With current state of the art materials and equipment, a house can be
totally rocked in one day, and totally taped and mudded in another day
- ready for priming. A good mudder/taper can get the finish coat on
smooth enough it virtually does not need sanding if the primer is put
on with a texture gun - makes the wall finish just a WEE bit gtainy -
not silky smooth like plaster or sanded drywall compound.
With airless spraying, getting a whole house primed takes a matter of
hours, not days.

The pros are FAST!!! (which translates to pretty darn cheap compared
to plastering.





Plaster is still done but they put up Blue board then plaster in two
coats, cost more than just dry wall. Just go rustic log cabin and then
you do not need no stinking drywall.

Markem wrote:

Just go rustic log cabin and then
you do not need no stinking drywall.

Chip & Jo loves them some shiplap!
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/02..._1024x1024.JPG
https://www.pinterest.com/explore/fixer-upper-shiplap/

On Monday, October 30, 2017 at 9:39:51 PM UTC-4, Electric Comet wrote:
On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 18:25:59 -0700 (PDT)
" wrote:

the finish you see in houses today. Not much thinking required. As
for replacing lath and plaster. Have you ever seen old time lath and
plaster? Wooden strips overlapped and nailed on the wall and filled
with lots and lots of mud plaster. Lot of work involved. Much

i have seen wood lath and metal lath like a coarse screen put it on
with a staple hammer in very little time

i imagine now they can spray on the plaster but maybe it is the finish
that is the hard part

but they may have solved that problem too with advanced materials
in other words it flows on easier and behaves uniformly


easier to screw a 4'x8' sheet of drywall to the wall. Or 4x12 or
4x16 sheet. I think drywall comes in 4.5 and 5 foot widths too. You
can cover a hell of a lot of area in minutes with drywall. Boom.
Done. Kind of like using a roller instead of a paint brush to paint
a wall. Drywall is damned efficient.

it does not seem that efficient to me with all the steps involved just
to get to the paint stage

Are you trying to bait us, or are you really being serious? Assuming the latter, not sure if you are referring to prefinished paneling so popular in the 60's and 70's or t&g/shiplap boards...In either case, material cost is drastically different, maintenance and ease of installation, is so much simpler with GWB (other than the short learning curve of properly dealing with butt joints). There are any number of tape and finishers that will do the dirty (skilled) work after you install the GWB for incredibly reasonable cost...

On Tuesday, October 31, 2017 at 4:17:04 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Monday, October 30, 2017 at 9:39:51 PM UTC-4, Electric Comet wrote:
On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 18:25:59 -0700 (PDT)
" wrote:

the finish you see in houses today. Not much thinking required. As
for replacing lath and plaster. Have you ever seen old time lath and
plaster? Wooden strips overlapped and nailed on the wall and filled
with lots and lots of mud plaster. Lot of work involved. Much

i have seen wood lath and metal lath like a coarse screen put it on
with a staple hammer in very little time

i imagine now they can spray on the plaster but maybe it is the finish
that is the hard part

but they may have solved that problem too with advanced materials
in other words it flows on easier and behaves uniformly


easier to screw a 4'x8' sheet of drywall to the wall. Or 4x12 or
4x16 sheet. I think drywall comes in 4.5 and 5 foot widths too. You
can cover a hell of a lot of area in minutes with drywall. Boom.
Done. Kind of like using a roller instead of a paint brush to paint
a wall. Drywall is damned efficient.

it does not seem that efficient to me with all the steps involved just
to get to the paint stage

Are you trying to bait us, or are you really being serious? Assuming the latter, not sure if you are referring to prefinished paneling so popular in the 60's and 70's or t&g/shiplap boards...In either case, material cost is drastically different, maintenance and ease of installation, is so much simpler with GWB (other than the short learning curve of properly dealing with butt joints). There are any number of tape and finishers that will do the dirty (skilled) work after you install the GWB for incredibly reasonable cost...


I was reading your post and could not figure out what GWB meant. Thought about it awhile and figured out its "Gypsum Wall Board". Drywall.

On Tue, 31 Oct 2017 02:17:02 -0700 (PDT)
wrote:

material cost is drastically different, maintenance and ease of
installation, is so much simpler with GWB (other than the short

obviously i disagree with maintenance and ease of installation

cost not sure about but drywall requires taping and mud which are
pretty cheap but still is a factor plus corner bead


learning curve of properly dealing with butt joints). There are any
number of tape and finishers that will do the dirty (skilled) work
after you install the GWB for incredibly reasonable cost...

this is diy

On Wed, 1 Nov 2017 20:17:07 -0700, Electric Comet
wrote:

On Tue, 31 Oct 2017 02:17:02 -0700 (PDT)
wrote:

material cost is drastically different, maintenance and ease of
installation, is so much simpler with GWB (other than the short

obviously i disagree with maintenance and ease of installation

cost not sure about but drywall requires taping and mud which are
pretty cheap but still is a factor plus corner bead


learning curve of properly dealing with butt joints). There are any
number of tape and finishers that will do the dirty (skilled) work
after you install the GWB for incredibly reasonable cost...

this is diy









If you can't teach yourself to tape and mud drywall, you don't stand a
chance with lath and plaster!!!! You can't handle a few 6-8 inch wide
joints, how are you EVER going to get an 8 x 12 foot wall perfectly
flat and smooth without defects?????

On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 18:25:59 -0700 (PDT)
" wrote:

a wall. Drywall is damned efficient.

for a crew yeah with square plumb level walls and ceilings
and separate crews to hang tape and finish

but for one man operation it is like a make work project

depends too

add coved ceilings or slanted ceilings
ten foot walls

fire codes requiring thicker dry wall


if i ever have to decide on the walls i will go with lath and
plaster

not wood lath of course

On Wed, 1 Nov 2017 19:52:55 -0700, Electric Comet
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 18:25:59 -0700 (PDT)
" wrote:

a wall. Drywall is damned efficient.

for a crew yeah with square plumb level walls and ceilings
and separate crews to hang tape and finish

but for one man operation it is like a make work project

depends too

add coved ceilings or slanted ceilings
ten foot walls

fire codes requiring thicker dry wall


if i ever have to decide on the walls i will go with lath and
plaster

not wood lath of course









I can just see you half way through - totally defeated and discusted
with yourself for being so stubborn - and then having to pay through
the nose to get ptos to finish the job ot go back to drywall - - -

Rither that or I can see a mediocre job, finished LONG after the
target date.

On Wednesday, November 1, 2017 at 9:52:59 PM UTC-5, Electric Comet wrote:
On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 18:25:59 -0700 (PDT)
" wrote:

a wall. Drywall is damned efficient.

for a crew yeah with square plumb level walls and ceilings
and separate crews to hang tape and finish

I'm just one man and I have hung and taped and mudded more than a few sheets of drywall over the years. Picking up and hanging heavy sheets of drywall is not easy or fun. But it can be done by one person. I have hung 4x12 sheets of 1/2" drywall all by myself. The mesh tape is easier for me to use than the wet paper tape. Applying mud requires care and detail. You have to be careful smoothing everything out nicely. Takes some time but not a huge amount of effort or technical skill. Touch is needed, is the best way to describe it.



but for one man operation it is like a make work project


No. Its not snap your fingers easy. But its not a huge amount of work that requires an unbelievable amount of technical skill. No offense to anyone connected to the drywall trade, but none of the kids hanging drywall have a college degree. And its likely many did not even finish high school with a degree. Its not rocket science, to use a cliché.

add coved ceilings or slanted ceilings
ten foot walls


Ceilings do require extra equipment to hang the drywall. And or extra people. Ten foot walls don't need any extra equipment. A 5 foot high seam isn't any harder to mud than a 4 foot high seam. And both 8 foot and 10 foot ceilings both require ladders or those stilt things to tape/mud the wall-ceiling corners.

fire codes requiring thicker dry wall


I think 5/8" drywall is fire rated. 1/2" is not. I've hung some 5/8" drywall and it is heavier. But not a lot heavier. Its not 2, 3, 4 times heavier. Its 25% heavier. 5/8" is 25% thicker than 4/8" (1/2").

I think you are just imagining and making up excuses to not work with drywall. No need to do that. Just say I don't want to use drywall and go with something else. That is it. Be done and move on. Just don't distort the real world of drywall hanging.

On Wed, 1 Nov 2017 21:13:45 -0700 (PDT)
" wrote:

I'm just one man and I have hung and taped and mudded more than a few
sheets of drywall over the years. Picking up and hanging heavy
sheets of drywall is not easy or fun. But it can be done by one
person. I have hung 4x12 sheets of 1/2" drywall all by myself. The
mesh tape is easier for me to use than the wet paper tape. Applying
mud requires care and detail. You have to be careful smoothing
everything out nicely. Takes some time but not a huge amount of
effort or technical skill. Touch is needed, is the best way to
describe it.

i still will not call drywall efficient
does that mean the current alternatives are more efficient
nope

but there is much room for improvement and i am surprised at what a
make work workflow doing drywall is


No. Its not snap your fingers easy. But its not a huge amount of
work that requires an unbelievable amount of technical skill. No
offense to anyone connected to the drywall trade, but none of the
kids hanging drywall have a college degree. And its likely many did
not even finish high school with a degree. Its not rocket science,
to use a cliché.

nor rocket surgery

the task does not tax me mentally and it is more that the process
does have room for vast improvement

doubt improvement will come from the hangers and tapers of the world


I think you are just imagining and making up excuses to not work with
drywall. No need to do that. Just say I don't want to use drywall
and go with something else. That is it. Be done and move on. Just
don't distort the real world of drywall hanging.


no imagining here just the first job doing drywall larger than a patch
from a stray elbow or so

but i like the idea of wiping when still wet with a wet cloth

On Thu, 2 Nov 2017 20:11:19 -0700, Electric Comet
wrote:

On Wed, 1 Nov 2017 21:13:45 -0700 (PDT)
" wrote:

I'm just one man and I have hung and taped and mudded more than a few
sheets of drywall over the years. Picking up and hanging heavy
sheets of drywall is not easy or fun. But it can be done by one
person. I have hung 4x12 sheets of 1/2" drywall all by myself. The
mesh tape is easier for me to use than the wet paper tape. Applying
mud requires care and detail. You have to be careful smoothing
everything out nicely. Takes some time but not a huge amount of
effort or technical skill. Touch is needed, is the best way to
describe it.

i still will not call drywall efficient
does that mean the current alternatives are more efficient
nope

but there is much room for improvement and i am surprised at what a
make work workflow doing drywall is


No. Its not snap your fingers easy. But its not a huge amount of
work that requires an unbelievable amount of technical skill. No
offense to anyone connected to the drywall trade, but none of the
kids hanging drywall have a college degree. And its likely many did
not even finish high school with a degree. Its not rocket science,
to use a cliché.

nor rocket surgery

the task does not tax me mentally and it is more that the process
does have room for vast improvement

doubt improvement will come from the hangers and tapers of the world


I think you are just imagining and making up excuses to not work with
drywall. No need to do that. Just say I don't want to use drywall
and go with something else. That is it. Be done and move on. Just
don't distort the real world of drywall hanging.


no imagining here just the first job doing drywall larger than a patch
from a stray elbow or so

but i like the idea of wiping when still wet with a wet cloth





Ever patch plaster?? Cracks, or impact damage (chips) or loss of
"traction" with the lath?

Makes patching drywall childs' play.

On 11/1/2017 10:52 PM, Electric Comet wrote:
On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 18:25:59 -0700 (PDT)
" wrote:

a wall. Drywall is damned efficient.

for a crew yeah with square plumb level walls and ceilings
and separate crews to hang tape and finish

but for one man operation it is like a make work project

depends too

add coved ceilings or slanted ceilings
ten foot walls

fire codes requiring thicker dry wall


if i ever have to decide on the walls i will go with lath and
plaster

not wood lath of course


Good for you. Report back when you are doing the second wall and let us
know what method you are using.

On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 15:10:38 -0700, Electric Comet
wrote:



drywall is a lot of work and i think next time i will do paneling or
maybe lath and plaster

drywall probably gives better sound proofing but what other advantages
are there over paneling

drywall is heavy but easy to cut but it is fragile
once you get it on the wall you have to tape it

then the mud coats and the mess
then the multiple sandings and all the mess
then you have to primer and then a coat or two of paint

paneling you cut it nail it and finish it with a clear coat and you are
done


maybe drywall is cheaper but i am guessing that some engineered panel
products might get close in price


and really maybe metal lath and plaster is the cheapest fastest way to
go

now come to think of it how did drywall replace lath and plaster

they're all a lot more work than the shift and punctuation keys.

Electric Comet writes:


drywall is a lot of work and i think next time i will do paneling or
maybe lath and plaster

Ha. Ha Ha Ha. That's funny.

On 10/31/2017 7:40 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
Electric Comet writes:


drywall is a lot of work and i think next time i will do paneling or
maybe lath and plaster

Ha. Ha Ha Ha. That's funny.



He is from the persuasion of people that believe if they can think it
they can do it.

Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:
On 10/31/2017 7:40 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
Electric Comet writes:


drywall is a lot of work and i think next time i will do paneling or
maybe lath and plaster

Ha. Ha Ha Ha. That's funny.


He is from the persuasion of people that believe if they can think it
they can do it.

On its face it's easy to do, especially for a single person. Perhaps even
more forgiving. Doing it well so it doesn't look like your 5-year-old took
point... that's an entirely different matter.

I keep meaning to practice on some exposed lathe underneath my staircase.

The previous owner of my house cheaped-out fixing a leaky southerly wall of
a stairwell. His contractors didn't fix the leaks properly. Then they used
drywall to replace the plaster on that entire wall.

I've had (or I think I've had) two of the biggest culprits fixed, but
there's still too much moisture penetration on that wall. The drywall is too
damp and beginning to sag--probably didn't hang it right. An adjacent wall
is still the original plaster+wood lathe, and even with a leaky window (took
awhile to realize) the only serious damage was some peeling paint and a
small, contained area of plaster that needed patching. (Painter got to do
that; not me

At some point I'm going to have to take that drywall down just to see what
the previous homeowner was hiding. And I'm definitely not going to put
drywall back up. The house is too old (1926) and passes too much moisture
(near the ocean). That's fine for plaster, but not kind to drywall. Removing
all the cladding (3 sides clapboards, 1 side stucco) and re-wrapping[1] the
house would be way too expensive (can't even entertain that idea) and
unnecessary.

There are good plasterers here. I live in a major city where there's enough
work to keep the skill alive, not just for high-end restoration work.
(Though I suppose any job putting up new plaster might be considered
high-end.) But they're still expensive given the amount of time involved. So
I may give it a go myself if I can find the time to practice first. I also
need to parge[2] the foundation, which I'm hoping will help me learn some.


[1] The house is wrapped in tar paper, but it's not as impermeable as the
modern stuff, and at 90 years old probably no longer as impermeable as it
once was.

[2] I think the previous owner tried to parge with a portland cement
mixture, which failed horribly. (Pretty sure he was trying to hide some
disintegration.) AFAIU, portland cement is much less water permeable than
the cement used in the old foundation. The parge coat is popping off in
large chunks. The parge coat needs to have the same permeability as the
concrete so the water and salts can pass through to the surface. The parge
coat becomes a sacrificial layer, I guess, extending the life of the
foundation. Presumably a bad parge coat hastens disintegration. Like with
the stairway wall, using modern products piecemeal is just a really bad
idea.

On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 15:10:38 -0700
Electric Comet wrote:

drywall is a lot of work and i think next time i will do paneling or
maybe lath and plaster

drywall probably gives better sound proofing but what other advantages
are there over paneling

drywall is heavy but easy to cut but it is fragile
once you get it on the wall you have to tape it

then the mud coats and the mess
then the multiple sandings and all the mess
then you have to primer and then a coat or two of paint

also there is corner bead to buy and install
and the dust from sanding is everywhere

maybe wet sanding is the key

one pro for drywall is the fire delay factor and in some
munis is a requirement

On Wednesday, November 1, 2017 at 10:27:08 PM UTC-5, Electric Comet wrote:
On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 15:10:38 -0700
Electric Comet wrote:

and the dust from sanding is everywhere

maybe wet sanding is the key


With my drywall "work" now, I always use wet sanding. Not really sanding. Just take a damp/wet cloth and rub over the dried drywall. It smoothes it out very well.

On Wed, 1 Nov 2017 20:57:46 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On Wednesday, November 1, 2017 at 10:27:08 PM UTC-5, Electric Comet wrote:
On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 15:10:38 -0700
Electric Comet wrote:

and the dust from sanding is everywhere

maybe wet sanding is the key


With my drywall "work" now, I always use wet sanding. Not really sanding. Just take a damp/wet cloth and rub over the dried drywall. It smoothes it out very well.
a firm sponge is my choice of tool.

On Thursday, November 2, 2017 at 12:15:49 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 1 Nov 2017 20:57:46 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On Wednesday, November 1, 2017 at 10:27:08 PM UTC-5, Electric Comet wrote:
On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 15:10:38 -0700
Electric Comet wrote:

and the dust from sanding is everywhere

maybe wet sanding is the key


With my drywall "work" now, I always use wet sanding. Not really sanding. Just take a damp/wet cloth and rub over the dried drywall. It smoothes it out very well.
a firm sponge is my choice of tool.

This must be baiting...True plaster work is an art form...Please, please, please, video-record your project and post to YT so we may all learn how easy, cheap and expedient plaster work is (and in HD, especially while you attempt the ceiling work).
Sanding, while cleaner/neater/better done wet, can be nearly avoided using several thinned finish coats of JC rather than trying to do it all in 2-3 passes. Even resultant dust from dry sanding can be kept under control using readily available (and inexpensive) wet vacuum collection systems and sanding screens... I installed 94 sheets for an addition I DIYed and by the time I was finished, I had 1 major takeaway - I wished I had thought to use 12' sheets for my ceilings to reduce the butt joints, but otherwise pretty please with the outcome. This was the first time I had ever install GWB...Next time I would seriously consider contracting out the T & S...