This^^ We opted for finished engineered wood because we didn't want the extra 3/4 inch of height with a plywood subfloor. The engineered wood looks amazing and I wouldn't hesitate to get it again IF we didn't have a zoo in our home. I may have it refinished with a burlier finish to hide future damage. I saw what I am almost certain was engineered wood flooring at my doctors office and the finish was so "natural" I couldn't tell what was a scratch and what was part of the finish. It looked great.
Ugly color and looked odd since it was only one room in the house. Plus it had been carpeted over many times so it was pitted all along the edges. When we looked at houses I always hoped for a house with the entire thing doen in terrazo. I like the look.
i hear ya, but i'm not too worried about my floors getting a little beat up. i think it adds character.
You know what's funny? When I see other people's wood floors with some scratching and wear-and-tear, I think it adds character and makes the home look more "lived in". When I see that on my floor, I think it looks like my floor is ruined.
Wood, what real people walk on. Seriously though, we chose wood strickly for resale value. It's basically the first thing we do when we buy property.
Only? That's like my business partners starting the sentence with "Just..." or "Alls you need to do is...". Almost guaranteed to see me crack a smile every time. It is possible but the cost of raising the door frames, every cabinet, all the base boards and litterally every sqft of flooring in the main floor (assuming that's what you are doing) and you don't want to step off/on. Doable? Yes. Practical? Not IMO.
Well I have 2 quotes from 3 contractors. One guy is a little more pricey (about $700) but has stellar reviews and the other was recommended to me from a friend but I has no reviews online. I'm thinking I will go with the more pricey guy because he does seem a little more detailed oriented and has a track record. The third contractor that I did not get a quote from was for putting engineered on top of the tile. He seemed pretty adamant about doing it that way, which i thought was odd, but I have a feeling that's because it makes the job quicker and he can get in and out of there quick and not have his guys tied up on a "smaller" project (it's about 545 sqr ft). Anyways, the cost of tearing up the tile and adding real wood to match the existing is not all that much more than engineered, relatively speaking. Demo, leveling and moisture barrier only adds about $1000. In the scheme of things I think having a real hardwood floor matching is worth it. There is approximately 2 inches of lightweight concrete under the tile to the foundation so there should be plenty of room to have the floors meet with as little of a transition as possible. Unfortunately, there will be some color variance but that's just how it goes when matching new wood to almost 60 year old wood.
Agree. Go with your gut and if you can afford to get it done right, you won't regret it. How are they going to install the hardwood? Is there something they can nail it?
They were gong to remove some of the light weight concrete to be able to lay down a wood base to nail to
Nice. If they have the room to put a wood base and a vapor barrier down and it matches the floor height of the rest, then yes I'd say that is your 1st choice. Post some pics when your/their done.
Started demo this morning. Yes, they said they will be able to match the floor height, which was honestly the thing I was most worried about. And of course, as i'm typing this the guy just called me...Apparently the lightweight concrete only extended about 6 inches into the addition, at which point the foundation stepped up to that 2 inches. So now we are back to gluing which i'm bummed about because I would rather have the nailed down so that you can use longer wood planks. Ugh
