Solid wood house / partial self-labor, wall structure / differences

@Friedrich: What kind of gentlemen, you joker? Here there is real women power! Truly Emanzipated - Powerful - Intensive ...

Great chatter, by the way the thread starter is a woman, what is the lady supposed to think about the gentlemen of creation???

To err is masculine.

I actually didn’t want to get involved anymore and wanted to delete my account again. I don’t know who has which interests here. I thought this was a forum where you get neutral explanations from people who know their stuff, since everyone tells something different and as a layperson you no longer know whom to believe. I also want to make it clear that back then, when it was certain that we would build, I consulted an experienced architect. It’s not like one is just stingy and doesn’t value consulting services.

I also visited the traveling exhibition from the Federal Ministry for Housing and have kilograms of brochures about building materials and insulation materials here. But if you don’t understand much about the subject, that still doesn’t help to find the right provider for the house. The architect advised me back then against wooden houses altogether and recommended solid construction. At that time, it wasn’t even about the budget issue.

But when I informed myself at the exhibition and looked at some wooden houses, I was of the opinion that wooden houses are something great. We were only really convinced when we stayed overnight in the Nurholz Hotel. The climate there was great and I slept just as wonderfully there as in the clay wood holiday apartment in Kaiserstuhl.

We didn’t shy away from the effort to drive 800 km to look at the manufacturers. Our opinion as laypeople was that the Rombach family provides good wood, quality workmanship, and can be trusted. But they do not build directly themselves. So we had to find a carpenter nearby as well. We also trust him. But it turned out that our budget is not quite enough for our dream house. So that means either we have to save on size or equipment, or we have to resort to a completely different type of construction.

Maybe not build a bungalow after all if that is cheaper. But there are different statements about that as well. I can’t judge that. I only understand that the foundation slab and roof cost twice as much as when I have it on two levels. But whether the extra cost balances out with the elimination of intermediate floors or not, I cannot judge myself. I rely again on the architect’s statement. We can hardly do anything ourselves.

And on the topic of architects, I want to say a few words as well. If you’re lucky to find a good one, then that is really great and worth every euro. It’s not so easy. And the argument that one saves costs by doing it oneself is not always true either. We have three acquaintances who were all satisfied with their developer or prefabricated house manufacturer but were disappointed by their architects. Some cases are even in court. A coworker said last week that he fired the architect during the construction phase because the costs exploded completely and he couldn’t manage the whole situation.

I would also find it good if the professional questions were more in the foreground here.

I actually wanted to disconnect for good after yesterday's PMs.

Well, I’ll try again.

The problem is that you are extremely resistant to advice.

You keep going on about your Rombach wood. No one is denying that it’s not good. But if you cannot afford it, then you really have to let it go.

Of course, timber construction is great, but it does not consist of Rombach alone.

If you have fallen in love with such a niche product but cannot afford it, then you naturally have to throw their advertising claims in the trash. Of course, every company will praise its product highly and negatively assess other construction methods to have enough reasons for their own product.

If you reject cross-laminated timber for reasons I cannot understand, then you have to deal with timber frame construction. If you reject the OSB board usually used there, then you have to consider diagonal boarding. Someone has to explain how to make the construction airtight and windproof with it. There are a thousand possibilities. Leading you to understand this here in the forum is probably asking too much.

For every suggestion one makes, you immediately come up with counterarguments; how are we supposed to help you?

Which construction method is best and most affordable for you is not something that can be addressed in a few words. It requires extensive investigative work. Hopefully, you do not expect that from the forum.

I told you to finally free yourself from the system providers; what do I get in response:

"We have 3 acquaintances who were all satisfied with their developer or prefab house manufacturer but disappointed with their architects. Some of it is even in court. A colleague said last week that he also threw out the architect during the construction phase because the costs exploded and he couldn’t manage it."

Acquaintances are no good advisers:
"The brother-in-law of a colleague knows someone who heard from someone else." Nice text I once found on the internet.

Already tried that; the satisfaction or dissatisfaction of another person is more than subjective; it does not have to apply to you at all.

I am trying to make you understand that you have to say goodbye to the system providers because they cannot meet your requirements. You yourself initially recognized this (everyone offers something different or something like that you wrote). Now you are back with the system providers again. I am not talking about architects who make the objects of a prefabricated house provider or developer ready for construction, but about a free and neutral architect who plans your house with you. Who converts your wishes and deal-breaker criteria into an affordable plan. But I think he will soon give up in frustration if you do not discard the accumulated junk information.

Of course, it is somewhat tedious to find a suitable architect who is also experienced in timber construction. I am sure the Nuremberg Chamber of Architects can help you.

Regards, Friedrich.

I believe I wrote in the text myself that we then have to look for alternatives. It is not exactly the case that we are fixated on Rombach. The first architect was recommended to me by the chamber as completely independent and experienced. I believe by now everyone has their own opinion about what is good or bad. One swears by Poroton bricks, another by KVH wood, and yet others by the glue-free woods.

Good evening,

Actually, I didn’t want to get involved anymore and delete my account again.

To then do what?

I thought this was a forum where you get neutral explanations from people who know their stuff, because everyone tells something different and as a layperson you don’t know whom to believe anymore.

Don’t you find it a bit naive to assume that this forum is exclusively inhabited by selfless minds, when this forum is used by people who are part of our society today?

I also want to make it clear that back when it was decided that we would build, I consulted an experienced architect. It’s not that one is just stingy and doesn’t appreciate consulting services.

In our society today, if that were the case, you would be part of the larger segment of the human intersection.

At that time, it wasn’t even about the budget.

That is always a point that I don’t quite understand. If I want to build a house – regardless of system or provider – isn’t it wise to look at how much money I can put towards it “before” having further project discussions?

But when I informed myself at the exhibition and looked at some timber houses, I thought timber houses are great. We weren’t really convinced until we stayed overnight at the Nurholz Hotel. It had a great climate there and I slept just as wonderfully there as in the claywood holiday apartment in Kaiserstuhl.

Let me be provocative: you would have also slept well if you had stayed in a model house of the provider "xyz." Such events have a narrative arc... which is skillfully built up and at the end of the day the statements made before the event are confirmed.

Maybe not build a bungalow if it is cheaper after all. But there are also different statements about this. I cannot judge. What I do understand is that the base plate and roof cost twice as much as if I had it on two levels. But whether the extra cost balances out with the omitted intermediate floors or not, I can’t judge myself. Again, I rely on the architect’s statement. We ourselves can hardly do anything.

A bungalow is more expensive because the entire room program including technical equipment, which is usually spread over 2 floors in single-family house construction, has to be accommodated on a larger, ground-level area. So logically not only the base plate area increases, but also the roof area. That is what drives the cost of a bungalow up; by the way, independent of system or provider.

And a few words about architects: if you’re lucky to find a good one, that’s really great and worth every euro. It’s not that easy.

Actually, it is simple; you just are not looking in the right places. Free yourself from family and friends’ experiences and go to a new build area near you and ask the builders there about their experiences and whether they can recommend their architects. You can inquire at the architects’ chamber responsible for you, the consumer advice center, or relevant professional associations; even the TÜV accompanies quite a few building projects.

And the argument that they save their costs isn’t always true either. We have 3 acquaintances who were all satisfied with their builder or prefabricated house manufacturer but disappointed with their architects. Some cases are even in court. A colleague told me last week that he kicked the architect out during the construction phase because the costs exploded and he couldn’t get a handle on things.

They could have informed themselves in forums or – again – at the architects’ chamber. An architect doesn’t work with fixed prices – if he did, he would be a general contractor and liable not only for his planning but for the entire construction project.

And – you surely believe you “know” your acquaintances – but can you be sure that their disappointment with the architect isn’t partly due to how they managed their relationship with their architects?

I would also like it if more of the professional questions were in the foreground here.

The HBF is not a wish concert – you are not the first to experience this firsthand and certainly not the last.

I believe by now everyone has their own opinion about what is good or bad. One swears by Poroton bricks, another by KVH timber, and yet another by glue-free woods.

That’s exactly how it is because there is no “the” brick or “the” wood system; every system has its advantages and disadvantages. I myself have written that, I don’t know how many times. While you would prefer that professional questions were more prominent, I would prefer you to be among those who make the effort to read the many posts here in the forum.

You have received many good answers – also and especially on the topic of adhesives. You will always have to make compromises; I did not write for nothing at one point that everyone must stop breathing if they want to survive the day without harm from pollutants. First get clear about exactly what you want and then go in search of people who can answer your questions in a multi-hour conversation. Avoid system providers for that – because they obviously want to sell their product. Instead, look for independent advice; the Association of Independent Experts could be a point of contact. Among them are specialists for almost every material to be installed. The advantage – besides independence – is that they are up to date; so they always know about current information.

Once you have found "your" system that way, you can look for the provider that suits you.

Rhenish greetings