List of prefabricated house companies providers

So, the idea that small timber builders mostly haunt the '70s is rather a rumor. I know plenty who were already building with ventilation systems 30 years ago and earlier, at times when many didn't even know how to write that. I don't even want to start on heat pump technology. Or diffusion-open wall construction, that's where the true challenges begin. 1-3 may be fine, but architects who really know wood (!!) are currently still in the minority. And I can't always implement heavy construction 1:1 in wood. If I want wood, then 1-3 can sometimes be useless. Or even better, if costs run away in heavy construction, then timber construction is supposed to fix it, haha.

No, there isn't. Who should work something like that out? It's not inherently bad what a prefabricated house does differently. Sometimes the materials differ only by a tiny bit, suggesting an "innovative construction method," all marketing. More important is that, for example, the KfW40 construction method is properly executed – without defects or thermal bridges (and the like).

My layperson's attitude towards this was simply different. But I would trust you if it doesn't make sense to put it into a table like that. I thought it would be that simple. It's a pity that it isn't.

Look, for example here it was rather your gut feeling (or internet nonsense?) that led to this decision?! That's basically not wrong. Others tend towards solid houses – that too is basically not wrong. Because there is no right or wrong.

Not just gut feeling or internet nonsense. For me, there are already a few reasons for the timber prefabricated house (construction time, shorter periods where the house is exposed unprotected to the weather, more quality assurance than with on-site brick-by-brick construction.)

With a question mark behind it, I would say: Yes, you are wrong if you base yourself only on market leaders or the first 10 hits of Google ads and the house price on the internet.

Thank you! I didn't search for market leaders. But I still trusted the internet nonsense a lot. So I looked at what some YouTube channels and related websites say.

I think developing a feel for something or "gathering experiences," even if only through self-research, developing your own tables, setting your own priorities, no one can do that for you. Because the questions arise anyway: why (is this done), how (is it done), and for what reason (is it done). Why doesn't everyone do it the same way? What is better? Answer: nothing is better, no Porsche is better than a Smart or Passat, no electric car better than diesel, because each has its target group, even if (only) regional. I don't like this car comparison much, but it is just the way it is: all cars can drive, one needs it for long distances, another for the city. Then one wants it to look good, the other doesn't care, one values comfort equipment or extension packages, the other values their own configuration. One is fine with 2 seats, the other needs 7. Then you have to weigh the price, external circumstances decide for convertible, all-wheel drive or gable roof with lots of photovoltaics, and ultimately you sign the purchase contract.

You are right. The car comparison is a bit off for me or at least so abstract that it is hard to transfer to houses for me. One should make this comparison oneself as well. But completely alone, I think it will be difficult, you have to get the information after all. Therefore, of course, I hope to get many infos here first in order to properly plan the next steps, e.g. also the visit to a building consultant. At the topic of type/catalog houses I am still quite at the beginning. I cannot really imagine that these can then be transferred to the plot or I don't want to choose a developer just because they have a suitable floor plan with a type house. But maybe one does not have to do that either?

My layman’s perspective on this was simply different. But I would trust you if it makes no sense to put it into a table like that. I thought it was that simple. Too bad it isn’t.

Ultimately, you distract yourself from the more important points with such comparisons. No one is stopping you from setting preferences for the wall construction, e.g., no styrofoam. But what is not constructive would be an Excel table for wall construction with 50 checkmarks per company. In the end, you put down a thousand checkmarks, excluded 2 out of 20 companies (which you could have done without a table), and with the remaining 18 companies, you’re still comparing apples to oranges...

For me, there are already a few reasons for the wooden prefabricated house (construction time, shorter periods in which the house is exposed to the weather unprotected, more quality assurance than onsite brick-by-brick.)

Forget about construction time. A prefabricated house is indeed erected quickly, but in the end, only the time between building permit and moving in counts. And there are quite different factors involved here, foremost the workload of the specific house builder. What good is a prefabricated house if you have a 10-month waiting time for the house and the builder is poorly organized? In fact, the two construction methods don’t differ much in construction time. And this also applies to quality, by the way. I would not even look at catalogs at first. Make a list of all the things that are important to you. Number and size of rooms, possibly orientation, ... and let this list grow over a certain period. Against this list, you can then compare catalog floor plans and decide better than based on a nice rendering.

I can also contradict the arguments

Construction time

It is even said that you have to wait 18 months for delivery instead of 10.

Shorter times in which the house is exposed to the weather without protection

During that time, the already sometimes laid foundation slab is already mossy or the solid house is already inhabited.
Also, in the 48/72 hours when the house is set, the wood can become extremely saturated – more than perhaps a solid house, which is constantly ventilated.
Ok, plaster counters that. But it is not uncommon to incorporate wooden studs on the upper floor.

More quality assurance than on site stone by stone

When I see solid shell constructions, I see the mistakes. With finished walls, I do not know what kind of “butter sandwich” was built in there.

Therefore, I naturally hope to get a lot of information here to properly plan the next steps, for example.

Yes, read, ask… you are in the right place.

I wouldn’t even look at catalogs at first

Easier said than done! I think, especially with the internet, which significantly differentiates and influences our life compared to life 50 years ago, that is not feasible. Because after all, you want to know what is being built out there. You just have to let go of wanting to have that one picture exactly like that at home. Because the next day you have forgotten it anyway, because a new feature is tempting. You can see that well with Pinterest: many things pinned, but never looked at again.

Sorry, I completely forgot to answer that! So it’s supposed to be a turnkey house, as I have little time and knowledge for the finishing work. [...] The region is near Alzey, Rhineland-Palatinate

Oh, did you think of Massa Haus because of Alzey? ... in any case, we’ll find something for you there.

Thanks also for the other provider tip regarding Steinler. I hadn’t had that on my radar.

Gussek Haus is a timber builder. But you mentioned the Steiner Viebrockhaus, and its most exciting duel is against Gussek Haus, so you basically have Steffi versus Boris there.

Here’s another answer since my reply from yesterday was deleted. It’s not so easy to follow the rules here.

Were you naughty and included an external link?

You’re right, I think I still hadn’t understood it properly. There is also a partner site from the expert you named that "mediates" architects. Can you trust something like that or how else do you get a good expert who regularly builds prefab houses?

I regularly name several colleagues I consider recommendable; the term "expert" in my eyes is close to an insult. But if another professional calls himself an expert, I assume he doesn’t feel insulted by it. From your description, you probably mean Mr. Beuler, and with the partners "a better Place." What exactly they are (collective or association?) I haven’t fully figured out yet; in any case, I rate them as recommendably competent. They just fit well with the "prefab house expert" but are not limited to timber (and not even just to "prefab" houses). In my assessment, they are cost-effective without offering too little. I can gladly name you even more recommendable contacts – you know the way, I have already mentioned several of them here quite often. I can only repeat myself: there are so many of my kind that you almost have to be blind to walk past them.

I worry that the architects there only do service phases 1-3, and that was a sign from you for architects rather not true to cost.

Architects of the type " warns" love mandates limited to service phases 1 to 4 because then they are off the hook after the stamp and can hide their weak points in competence. Not always, but with a high hit rate, those budget-ignorant "artists" avoid service phase 5 like the devil avoids holy water. Your misunderstanding that architects offering only service phases 1 to 3 could be cut from the same cloth seems logical – thanks for this hint! But it is often simply the most practical and market-appropriate scope of services when the builder (even if out of resistance to advice) wants to go to a general contractor (at least a timber one). Advisable remains at least the 'dough rest' (and better also the setting of the course) between service phases 2 and 3.

1-3 may be fine, but architects who know timber (!!) are currently still in the minority. And I can’t always implement a massive plan 1:1 in timber. So if I want timber, 1-3 can be useless. Or better yet, when costs run away with massive, then timber construction should fix it, haha.

I like to laugh out loud at that. No construction method is per se cheaper – except maybe that the gymnastics exercise EH40 is usually more cost-effective with timber. That many architects are not equally skilled with both hands and left-handers are in the minority, you are unfortunately right. But even among timber specialists, compatibility is not full; a timber-planning architect is best explicitly trained in the system of the desired provider – which, however, applies similarly for stone planners. "Stone upon stone," the plans for a house made of stone X are also easily implementable in stone Y. Service phase 3 is basically "the service phase after the setting of the course," which explains (among other things) its place in the house-building schedule.

So that the small timber builders seem to only haunt the 70s is more a rumor. I know enough who built with ventilation systems 30 years ago and earlier, at a time when many did not even know how to write that. I don’t even want to start on heat pump technology. Or diffusion-open wall structure, that’s where the master disciplines start.

You misunderstood me there. My assessment refers to their maturity regarding the industrialization of their processes and does by no means imply they build old-fashioned walls. They even often have installation levels more frequently than the "big" competitors.

My layman’s attitude was simply different. But I would trust you if it doesn’t make sense to put it into a table like that. I thought it was that simple. Too bad it isn’t.

It doesn’t hurt at all that it isn’t. And it’s a routine operation for a (certified) medical assistant.

Ultimately, you distract yourself with such comparisons from the more important points. [...] In the end, you have checked a thousand crosses, excluded 2 of 20 companies [...] and among the remaining 18 companies, you’re still comparing apples to oranges...

… and the table has more footnotes than columns.

Not just gut feeling or internet nonsense. For me, there are already several reasons for the timber prefab house (construction time, shorter time the house is exposed unprotected to weather, more quality assurance than on-site stone by stone.)

So it is nonsense from the offline internet aka pub talk or bakery flower / pharmacy magazine. Only the erection time is shorter with the "prefab" house, and ISO 900x GTI 16V and the "quality seals" of any consumer magazines of your choice you also get with the stone builders. Which sticker they license is decided by the respective marketing department. That’s why you usually don’t get any at the local builder (whether mason or carpenter) without them working worse for it.

Thank you! I was not looking for market leaders. But I had still trusted that internet nonsense. So looked at what some YouTube channels and associated websites say.

The qualitative market leaders don’t have billboards at intersections on the internet either. You find them via appropriate guides or follow the scent of satisfied customers.

But I think it will be hard alone; you have to get the info. So of course I hope to get many infos here already to plan the next steps correctly, e.g., also the way to a building consultant.

For the latter, always as early as possible (around the plot purchase or its reservation), and don’t forget: architects are also recommendable as such, provided you find them yourself and not mediated through a general contractor.

I’m still quite at the beginning regarding type/catalog houses. I can hardly imagine that these can then be transferred to the plot, nor do I want to choose a developer just because he has a suitable floor plan in a type house. But maybe you don’t have to?

Developer anyway not, if the plot is already yours. A catalog house has (to the extent it already exists not only in the catalog) the essential advantage of the series model – meaning none at all if you build a model from the Meier catalog with Müller. And it fits if you choose the right base model – a free consultant, who can also happily be an architect, can help with that. Catalog models regularly "fit" for "normal families" (2 adults, 2 children, sum of rooms in the category child / guest / work: 3) and a plot that does not require a basement according to the 11ant basement rule. With deviations from this pattern, again, "ask your architect or other free building consultant." It regularly doesn’t fit when, for example, with the deviation "three children plus home office" a base model of the according to square meters "fitting" size is selected. That then leads into a similar frustration loop as starting to plan yourself with the less complex upper floor.

Oh, were you thinking of Massa Haus because of Alzey? ... anyway, we will find something for you there.

Gussek-Haus is a timber builder. But you mentioned Steiner Viebrockhaus, and its most exciting duel you get against Gussek, so you basically have Steffi against Boris.

Thanks! There really are many Massa Haus houses here and therefore the name is of course very well known here. However, I have meanwhile heard too many bad things from builders when it comes to the DFH group. That was always my negative example.

Architects of the type " warns" love mandates covering the scope of service phases 1 to 4 because then, after the stamp, they are off the hook and can hide their weak points of expertise. Not always, but with a high hit rate, the budget-ignorant "artists" avoid service phase 5 like the devil avoids holy water. Your misunderstanding that architects offering service phases 1 to 3 might be cut from the same cloth seems logical – thanks for this hint!
But it is often simply the most practical and market-appropriate scope of service when the client (even if out of consultation resistance) wants to go to a general contractor (at least a timber one). It remains advisable here to have at least the resting period (and preferably also the setting of the course) between service phases 2 and 3.

Thank you for the clarification!