mgbinspect

2.0 CC Four-banger. And, I gotta tell ya. I've owned and worked on a lot of vehicles, but I think a strong four cylinder vehicle is tragically under-rated. They're typically tough and dependable little engines that will get the job done. I had a Datsun four-banger that I sold with 209,000 miles on it, and the things I put that truck through are shameful (in terms of hard work). It was rated half ton, but I fooled it often into thinking it was a 5/8 ton truck. Hey, brick are heavy! I just kept the majority of the weight forward of the rear axle. Truth be told, I'll take a four cylinder over anything else. There's very little one can't do, for themselves, on one. I've even lowered a whole manual transmission, bell housing and all, on my chest and rolled out from under the truck on a creeper. And, it's pretty exciting to pop the hood and actually see a little street, instead of mangled spaghetti (wires and vacuum hoses). Everything's so easy to get at: plugs, wires, the distributor, even the starter! You can't beat 'em for being mechanic friendly. The Datsun had an overhead cam and solid lifters. I used to keep the valves adjusted perfectly, which makes one heck of a difference in how those little power plants run. Every time I ever adjusted the valves, it brought the tiger out in it. At any rate, if you couldn't tell, I love the little engines. Among the big pluses with them - they HAVE to work hard, so the heads and valves don't get anywhere near as fouled up.

As a part of this drastic repositioning of my life, I'm retiring my Ford F150, which is going to be hard to part with. She's got 269,000 miles on her an runs perfectly. It even has the ORIGINAL clutch and water pump, and doesn't, burn or even leak, a drop of oil. It's a crew cab, but the the only seat that's ever seen any action is the driver seat. I Linexed the bed the day I bought it. I think that the best testimony I can offer regarding this Ford F150, is that, with the exception of dead batteries, this truck has never once died on the road or failed to start. That's truly amazing. But, 16 - 19 MPG, is unacceptable now. Click to Enlarge 64.53 KB Click to Enlarge 74.18 KB Click to Enlarge 63.56 KB So I'm resurrecting my previous work horse - a 1984 Ford Ranger, which I was just using for dump runs - etc. She's got 127,000 on her and also runs like a top. She just needs a paint job. But she goes into full service tomorrow morning, and 22 - 28 MPG is more like it. Click to Enlarge 73.77 KB Goodbye $88.00 fill-ups and hello $47.00 fill-ups. The quest to pinch pennies continues...

It's a train wreck. That's for sure. [:-bigeyes

Don't beat around the bush, John. Tell us what you REALLY think...

That 4th pic is what I thought the brick would look like close up (wire-cut), simply based upon the color range from a distance. That had me wondering, with you original post as now, if those brick are original to the building. I don't think they were using those brick at the turn of the century. I think they showed up on the scene more like the 30s or 40s - Bill?

Thanks Mike. I'll be sure to post any concerns I find here at the forum. So, does the correct softer mix of mortar typically have a lighter shade such as in this picture? How can the condition of the adjoining units affect this one? John, this is where it gets a bit tricky. As I'm confident Bill will agree, if the brick is as hard as nails, then mortar hardness is far less of a concern. So start there. If the brick appears well fired (dark shades of red and very dense and hard), there probably isn't that high a potential for future damage, even if they did use a harder mortar. But, if the brick are poorly fired - lighter shades of red and porous/soft, then mortar compatiability becomes critical. All of that aside, another more cosmetic tragedy in re-pointing is bringing the new mortar out flush to the face of the brick, if the brick edges have weathered (rounded). Doing this makes the joints appear fatter than they actually are , because of the rounded brick edges (simple geometry). If the bricks are weathered, you need to stop the mortar right where the weathering of the brick edge begins, and slick the surface right there. Make sense? I understand what you're saying Mike. Just to be clear, bringing mortar out flush to the face over rounded edges as you mentioned, that's just a cosmetic issue, correct? No. Actually, soft weathered brick with rounded edges pointed out to the face of the brick with excessively hard mort is the WORST possible combination. The wider cementicious joints act as a bit of a dam - preventing moisture from evaporting from the brick corners. This is preciesely what accelerates the deterioration, through freezing and expansion. THAT is the scenario that causes major brick face spalling - where the face is deeply receeded (deteriorated away). Got it. It was because you said "cosmetic tragedy" in your previous post that had me asking to make sure. I understand that there are various combinations of right and wrong. The span can run from just fine to totally whacked. I'll just have to see what I find tomorrow. It might be raining so I wonder if that would hide efflorescence that might give off tips to issues. Nope, Efflorescence will still be apparent. Just remember - the softer the brick, the more mortar compatibility matters. You'll do fine. Looks like a nice home.

I am constantly amazed by the publishid material you post. Have you ever contemplated what to do with your collection someday?

Thanks Mike. I'll be sure to post any concerns I find here at the forum. So, does the correct softer mix of mortar typically have a lighter shade such as in this picture? How can the condition of the adjoining units affect this one? John, this is where it gets a bit tricky. As I'm confident Bill will agree, if the brick is as hard as nails, then mortar hardness is far less of a concern. So start there. If the brick appears well fired (dark shades of red and very dense and hard), there probably isn't that high a potential for future damage, even if they did use a harder mortar. But, if the brick are poorly fired - lighter shades of red and porous/soft, then mortar compatiability becomes critical. All of that aside, another more cosmetic tragedy in re-pointing is bringing the new mortar out flush to the face of the brick, if the brick edges have weathered (rounded). Doing this makes the joints appear fatter than they actually are , because of the rounded brick edges (simple geometry). If the bricks are weathered, you need to stop the mortar right where the weathering of the brick edge begins, and slick the surface right there. Make sense? I understand what you're saying Mike. Just to be clear, bringing mortar out flush to the face over rounded edges as you mentioned, that's just a cosmetic issue, correct? No. Actually, soft weathered brick with rounded edges pointed out to the face of the brick with excessively hard mortar is the WORST possible combination. The wider cementicious joints act as a bit of a dam - preventing moisture from evaporting from the brick corners. This is preciesely what accelerates the deterioration, through freezing and expansion. THAT is the scenario that causes major brick face spalling - where the face is deeply receeded (deteriorated away).

I frequently tell folks exactly how I think something should be repaired. I also warn them of what others will try to sell them. Good. We're in the same camp. Sometimes leaving it to the alleged specialist is a death sentnce.

Thanks Mike. I'll be sure to post any concerns I find here at the forum. So, does the correct softer mix of mortar typically have a lighter shade such as in this picture? How can the condition of the adjoining units affect this one? John, this is where it gets a bit tricky. As I'm confident Bill will agree, if the brick is as hard as nails, then mortar hardness is far less of a concern. So start there. If the brick appears well fired (dark shades of red and very dense and hard), there probably isn't that high a potential for future damage, even if they did use a harder mortar. But, if the brick are poorly fired - lighter shades of red and porous/soft, then mortar compatiability becomes critical. All of that aside, another more cosmetic tragedy in re-pointing is bringing the new mortar out flush to the face of the brick, if the brick edges have weathered (rounded). Doing this makes the joints appear fatter than they actually are , because of the rounded brick edges (simple geometry). If the bricks are weathered, you need to stop the mortar right where the weathering of the brick edge begins, and slick the surface right there. Make sense?

John, regarding turn of the century mortar: My pop was one of the assistants to the Architect to the US Capital. They elected to have the Capital power Plant re-pointed (built around the same time as your subject house). The masonry contractor came back to my dad asking for a considerable change-order, because the mortar was so hard. They flatly abandoned the project. It was not a Portland based mortar. (Not all lime based mortars are soft. If it's mixed and cured properly it can be quite hard.)

Ha, we were typing at the same time, Bill. Didn't mean to step on your toes.

Looks like a decent re-pointing job (materials compatability aside.) And, it looks like a decent brick. If things look as nice close up as they do in this picture, I'd simply mention that re-pointing is a science, which if done wrong, can accelerate deterioration. You have no way of knowing how it was done. Feel free to shoot me closeup pics of any area that concerns you, John.

You're probably correct. I've heard that species mentioned often. The older woods must indeed be rot resistant, because the deterioration is typically so isolated that the joist appears notched. Only the crush of the remaining wood, evidenced in the grain of the wood, and the appearance of the other unaffected joists tip you off that it's deterioration. It could be Douglas Fir, from the appearance of those joists. Or Pine, certainly a softwood, of which Fir is best. That's what I think too, John. I can't identify the exact species, but that certainly appears to be a fairly clear grained softwood. I have seen some oak joists and studs here, and it's pretty hard to miss (typically rough-cut).

Bill, I am interested to learn how you handle this situation. There are a lot of inspectors here that will ride, in like a cowboy, and condemn the whole floor system - calling for major invasive repairs. I'm very much opposed to that. I always warn my clients that there's about a 50/50 chance they'll deal with a buyer listening to one of those cowboy inspectors, when they sell the place. So, they should be sure to disclose the condition of the floor system, and make it an "as is" situation - non-negotiable. If you don't like it, don't waste our time with an offer - period. Most of the cowboys insist that all affected joists be sistered from bearing point to bearing point, which I understand is the latest requirement. But, I see it as absurd overkill - especially when it's just the bearing end of the joist that is in question. Fortunately, an engineer can supersede code around here, so I tell folks to avoid the unreasonable constraints of the code by getting an engineer instead. They'll probably save a ton of money that way. I typically suggest lifting all the joists with a properly sized steel lintel (upside down) or a steel channel, and bolt it to the foundation. Of course, that won't work with stone. As a backup, I suggest beams on columns (or piers) on proper footings just inside the foundation. What's your typical recommendation? When I inspect the building it: A) Needs to be repaired. B) Has already been adequately repaired. C) Has had a lame attempt at a repair. In this area, almost every repair has been to simply add beams, supported by posts or columns. About 35-40% of these repairs are well executed and will support the affected joists for another century. The other 60-65% of the attempts at repairs are bits of lumber assembled to look like it might be doing something. Click to Enlarge 58.82 KB Do you ever make a general stab at what you feel is the best direction to go, regarding the method of repair or reinforcement? I am willing just from the standpoint of trying to preserve any historical features or appearance. BTW, I just hung up from talking to my favorite structural engineer, who pretty much agreed with my attitude and position regarding the condition of this particular floor framing. I'll refer them to him, if they wish an engineeer. He's a geological structural engineer - a soils guy. He explained that most of richmond is clay over what must have been swamp. The good news - settlement happens fast and when the water's squished out of the soil, it finds equalibrium.

I suspect I've seen that a number of times and didn't have a clue that's what it was. Cool. Bill, I am interested to learn how you handle this situation. There are a lot of inspectors here that will ride, in like a cowboy, and condemn the whole floor system - calling for major invasive repairs. I'm very much opposed to that. I always warn my clients that there's about a 50/50 chance they'll deal with a buyer listening to one of those cowboy inspectors, when they sell the place. So, they should be sure to disclose the condition of the floor system, and make it an "as is" situation - non-negotiable. If you don't like it, don't waste our time with an offer - period. Most of the cowboys insist that all affected joists be sistered from bearing point to bearing point, which I understand is the latest requirement. But, I see it as absurd overkill - especially when it's just the bearing end of the joist that is in question. Fortunately, an engineer can supersede code around here, so I tell folks to avoid the unreasonable constraints of the code by getting an engineer instead. They'll probably save a ton of money that way. I typically suggest lifting all the joists with a properly sized steel lintel (upside down) or a steel channel, and bolt it to the foundation. Of course, that won't work with stone. As a backup, I suggest beams on columns (or piers) on proper footings just inside the foundation. What's your typical recommendation?

Will do, Mike. I do have a ton of books (all none fiction). This transition is something I've dreamed of doing for about ten years. As it stands right now, I just met with a couple, from a networking group I'm a member of, who will sell EVERYTHING I own, through an estate sale. I've always been pretty good about only keeping things that have genuine value, and it's about to pay off. When the guy arrived to assess the situation, he told me that almost everything I own will probably sell outright at the initial sale, and what doesn't will sell at his consignment shop or over the internet, in a matter of months. So, in a matter of days from the sale, I'll get a decent check, followed by several more on the 15th and 30th of each month until everything is sold. In a matter of days, I'll go from completely nailed down to a fixed spot on the planet to completely mobile. And, my cost to live will be reduced by another 50% or more (that will make the total I've reduced my cost to live in about two and a half years to about 75%) and my ability to save will skyrocket. I'm on track to be completely debt free in about a year or two. And, my life will be boiled down to simply the things that actually matter to me: Working; Saving; Seeing the kids and grand kids; wilderness hiking and biking; wildlife photography; Snowboarding and Travel. I still plan to do as many home inspections as ever - just get lean and mean on the living side, which seems prudent, based upon the times. If I decide it's time to relocate tomorrow, just turn the key and go. [:-thumbu]

My burdensome sense of naivety has been thrust into new territory... No pun intended, of course... Well, I'll assume that any books I've acquired are worthless - fire starters.

Will do, Jim... I think the closest I can get is "The Scarlet A".. [:-tophat]

I do have a training manual from an HVAC association, which Terence will quickly ask why I never read. when I get home I'll post it.

Interesting. I'm certainly not emotionally attached to them, and have no problem sending them to the landfill. I just kinda figured someone might want them. [:-wiltel]

I kinda thought Carson Dunlop was as serious as it gets. Oh well, it's all down hill from there. And, I can't part with my Architectural Graphic Standards. I'll be buried with it.

Well, after years of talking about it, I'm in the process of actually down-sizing to my travel trailer. That will make it possible to actually pay the bills on a mere four inspections a month. I'm kinda tired of the anchor of home ownership. I'll probably keep the house and rent it out. But the reason for this post is that a lot of decent HI stuff will need to find a new home. This first item is a real opportunity for a HI just getting started: The complete Carson Dunlop study at home series - in perfect condition. I never touched them. (I'm a little compulsive ((ya think?)) and got the series as reference material and a way to earn CEUs at home, but I like travel and seminars so much that I never used the series. I'm a CEU junkie. One year I think I racked up 54 CEUs.) At any rate, we're talking several three-ringed binders with the testing correspondence paperwork for each section. My original cost many moons ago was $3000. If you are interested, e-mail me and make me an offer. And, remember there will be shipping costs, as this is thousands of pages.

OK, here are photos from the crawlspace, which was a real challenge to navigate. I could only truly inspect about 15% of the floor framing. And, it was so tight that it was impossible to turn around, at the end of the ditch. I simply had to back out the way I came in. At any rate: Below is one of the beams on screw jacks which lift the floor joists off of the settled foundation bearing pockets. The screw jacks, thankfully, are on poured concrete footings. (As you can see, the clearance, based upon the brick coursing, is about 10" (except in the ditch). Click to Enlarge 61.39 KB Below is a good shot of a notched joist end lifted up off the settled foundation. The wood grain does suggest a species of pine, I guess. But I'll let you wood gurus make that call. (The decayed joist ends were visible, but not photographable. They were too far down the small space between foundation and the added beam to successfully photograph.) Click to Enlarge 47.52 KB Below is the best shot I have to identify the wood species. Click to Enlarge 50.83 KB Below is the ditch, with the dead end ahead. (love the wiring fastened to the temporary shoring... Yes!... [:-propell Click to Enlarge 44.06 KB Most of the shoring is decent - a good attempt, but then there's support like this. Oh well, I suppose it's been like this for easily twenty years or so, but I am going to offer a budget for the perfectionist. Click to Enlarge 47.08 KB All things considered, I told the folks that the overall condition of the place is great! Regarding the first floor framing, I said, "I guess the big question is what will happen if I don't do anything to the first floor framing? And, I think that nothing will happen - what you see is what you get. But, if you want someone to go down there and make every support perfect, budget between $5000 - $7000 which represents a lot of labor and cussing. One of the other homes here had major floor problems and it was easiest to simply pull up the flooring and plank sub-flooring to make the repairs.") The attic did have knob and tube wiring and plaster over wood lath ceiling, so no insulation to date. I made that priority number one. All of this is pretty normal for really old homes around here. The good news: Typically the wood on these old homes is kinda petrified - it reaches a point that fungus and wood boring insects can't deal with it any longer. Also, for some reason, most of the crawlspaces under these old homes are as dry as dust.

You're probably correct. I've heard that species mentioned often. The older woods must indeed be rot resistant, because the deterioration is typically so isolated that the joist appears notched. Only the crush of the remaining wood, evidenced in the grain of the wood, and the appearance of the other unaffected joists tip you off that it's deterioration.