hi

i'm sorta sitting on the fence trying to decide whether to build my own home with logs or timberframe. would someone be nice enough to give me the pros/cons of each method?

thanks,
graham

not really but thanks anyway. :-) i was thinking more on the line of insulation differences between the 2. most log home owners tend to talk about thermal mass whereas timberframe homes seem to stick
with the R value.

If you want thermal mass then I would recommend Insulated Concrete Forms to inclose a Timberframe. IFC's have the thermal mass and the R-value, Best of both worlds. Tom

I like the idea of strawbale but the humidity here in the mid-west worrys me. Sorry, Derek, no debate here. I'm a firm belever in protecting wood from the elements if you want it to last. Tom

The thermal mass or R-value issue aside for a moment.
I think the first decision to make is: Do I want to see a lot of logs stacked on top of each other and live in a wooden "box" ( walls, ceiling, floor furniture) or do I prefer less wood and admire the joinery? Sure wood is a beautiful/interesting material to look at but if there is too much of it at once it will be overwhelming.
Are you thinking high or low maintenance house?
Logs should be sealed to last longer. American TFs are enclosed and therefore protected from the elements thus last longer. A log house can "show off" because of the way it is build in and outside. An American TF cannot unless you get to see the inside of the house.
Thermal mass is a great thing and so is a good R-value and an air tight house. Then there is sound control. I would assume that SIPS, though they might be a good insulator, are not necessarily a great sound deadener. Where insulated concrete certainly is. So, lots of choices and decisions to make here.

One consideration depending on your location is financing. The banks around here won't finance a log home.

lots of good information, i appreciate it. when i was a kid we lived for about 6 years in a log home my dad built(see pic). i'm sort of impartial to them for that reason but i love the look of the TF house and the fact you can make them airtight which is a big plus due to high heating costs. this house i eventually build will also be going off-grid. the house we were living in had a lot of air/water/snow infiltration issues.

The logs on log homes nowadays are usually double tongue and groove with gaskets between each layer. So the infiltration issue you mentioned should not occure. I am just talking in theory here since I have never lived in a log home or known anyone who ownes one.
I could imagine the house you and your father built years ago was very drafty just looking at the gaps between the logs.

If you like the look of a log home you could veneer half logs to the exterior walls (like siding) this way you can frame your house conventionally and then apply the logs just for looks. And if they fail (rot) just replace them like you would with siding. Of course you would not get the cabin look you might want inside the house. But on the outside you would never be able to tell.
Or build a TF with SIPs or whatever you feel comfortable with as enclosure and instead of siding you apply the logs. So you get a TF home where you can admire the joinery and the cabin look on the outside. Best of both worlds .

In my area log homes that have survived have been sided mostly with so-called "German siding" a coved 1 x 6 shiplap type nailed to vertical furring, the technique forms a weather screen that keeps the logs dry and preserves the chink. The recent trend is to strip the siding and expose the logs.

One huge difference between green log walls and timber framed walls is shrinkage in height of the wall. With green logs you must plan for and adjust the building as it dries.

Roger,

how does this work with the corner details typically seen on log homes? Do they just leave them flush with the exterior side of the walls? Otherwise you would have to build out the furring a lot.

By the way, why isn't siding in general installed on furring strips? It would minimize paint peeling and rot seen on a lot of homes here in this area since the water trapped between siding and house wrap can actually run off.

Yes, the log ends are flush, there is some variety in the notching with dovetail notch as the prefered technique. The logs are hewn on the inside and outside surfaces producing a uniform wall thickness. Often the inside surface was plastered again with lath over vertical furring. Certainly the siding and plaster work was done a few years after assembly of the logs.

On the modern siding issue habit, ignorance or a cost vs quality problem. I am also concerned that since the housewrap is a better moisture barrier the siding will suffer from direct contact whereas felt (the previous material of choice) will absorb water and moderate the water problems with siding.

Have you considered the resale value of a timber frame vs a log home? Go grab a "homes for sale" magazine from the grocery store and see how many timber frames there are listed for sale vx log homes.

My guess would be if you had a timber frame for sale it would be the only one listed. You could probably find several log homes. I think I would like to be the guy with the ONLY timber frame for sale.

You might also want to talk to your insurance agent to see if there isn't a difference between the insurance premiums on the two.

pegs_1,

that might depend on where you live. If I look through the real estate guide here I can find almost always several old or new TF homes offered but not so many log homes.

One large problem in the construction business is that homes are more of an investment than they are a shelter to live in for generations to come (like it is in Europe). So the builder has a hard time to sell quality ( which will cost a bit more) to the home owner if they are only looking for cosmetics and are going to sell the house within a few years anyway.
But seriously, how much more time and material does it take to run furring on the walls before the siding goes up? My guess is, a lot less then having to come back and "fix" the paint peeling and rot every year. So it is up to the builder to explain to the home owner initial cost of building and long term cost of maintaining.

NOVASCROLLER...........I HAVE A PAGE ON THE NET WHERE I DISCUSSS THE PRO`S AND CON`S OF SOME OF THE ALTERNATIVE BUILDING SYSTEMS.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alternative_building
YOU WILL FIND INFO ON CONVENTIONAL LOG BUILDING,CORDWOOD,STRAWBALE AND I`M NOT SURE WHAT ELSE.
I`M VERY KNOWLEGEABLE ABOUT LOG BUILDING AND CORDWOOD(OBVIOUSLY).SO I`M GOING TO MAKE SOME COMMENTS ON SOME OF THE REPLIES TO THIS THREAD.HOPEFULLY I WON`T GET ANYONE UPSET WITH MY FIRST POST.

INSURANCE WISE:
LOG BUILDINGS AND CORDWOOD ARE RATED HIGHER THAN CONVENTIONAL HOMES FOR BEING FIRE RESISTANT.SO IF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT CELLULOSE OR STRAW AS INFILL BETWEEN PANELS
THEN TF WOULD BE HIGHER RISK.

TF LASTING LONGER THAN LOG BUILDINGS:
WELL THERE IS A VERTICAL LOG CHURCH IN SOUTHERN ENGLAND THATS BUILT IN THE 800`S.[THERE ARE LOG HOMES ON THE BOTTOM OF THE BLACK SEA 13,000 TO 18,000 YEARS OLD.]EDUCATE ME ABOUT TIMBER FRAMES OLDEST STRUCTURE.

DEWPOINT:
DEREK CAN YOU TELL ME WHERE YOU GOT THE IDEA THAT
LOG WALLS ROT FROM THE INSIDE OUT?
LOGS IN A CONVENTIONAL LOG HOME WOULD BREATH NATURALLY THROUGH THE END GRAIN UNLESS SEALED IMPROPERLY.
PLUS IN A 10" MEAN LOG WALL I`M NOT SURE THAT THE DEW POINT WOULD OCCUR.
WHY WOULDN`T TF`S BE SUBJECT TO THIS PROCESS?

R-VALUE:
IF YOU WANT AN IDEA OF THE R-VALUE OF A CONVENTIONAL LOG WALL.THE NATIONAL HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION DID SOME TESTS
WITH HUD.A GOVERNMENT LAB DID THE CALCULATIONS.
[IE:THEY GAVE CEDAR AN R=3.72 PER INCH...AS DETERMINED BY THE EFFICIENCY OF THE LOG HOME.]SO WE ARE LOOKING AT THE AVERAGE PART OF THE WALL BEING R=37.2O.I QUESTIONED THE TEST AND NHBA
STANDS BY THEIR FIGURES.
AS FOR CORDWOOD I GAVE INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO BUILD
AN R=96 WALL.IF R-VALUE WAS ALL ONE WANTED.
A FRIEND OF MINE AND PARTNER IN A LOG BUILDING SCHOOL WE CO-OWNED STUDIED LOG BUILDING IN BC.THEY LEFT A LOG STRUCTURE FOR SEVERAL DAYS IN COLD WEATHER AND WHEN THEY RETURNED HE SAID IT WAS STILL WARM.JUST SO YOU CAN GET AN IDEA OF HOW TIGHT A SCANDINAVIAN SCRIBE FIT JOINT IS...SOME PEOPLE CAN`T FIT THEIR KNIFE BLADE BETWEEN THE LOGS.

SILLPLATE:
THERE WAS SOME MENTION ABOUT THE SILLS.PROPERLY BUILT 24" OFF THE GROUND WITH A VAPOUR BARRIER WILL GIVE THE SILLS A VERY LONG,LONG LIFE.REMEMBER ALSO THAT ALL THE LOGS ARE TREATED AS WELL.

CORDWOODGUY
PS:NOVASCROLLER....I`M A BLUENOSER AS WELL.

This ought to be good....Daiku ! ! ! ! I got the root beer and some popcorn.

EH...no doubt about the geographical location.....

if you're building it yourself you should consider what kind of work you enjoy doing. beyond trusses, i'd never done timberframing before, and it is a very different process. log building is more sculptural in terms of how you work the logs, whereas there is more picky measuring with timbers. i had a log building and a timberframing mentor, and their ways of dealing with wood were quite different. the one was more artistic and intuitive, the other more exact.

also what kind of wood and equipment you have access to. timberframing is nice because you can work alone without a crane and get your friends together at the end to put it up. log building by yourself without heavy equipment is slow. the log goes up, scribe, the log comes down, cut, back up and hopefully that's it. a gin pole or ramps can do that but it's slow.

i decided to timber frame this building i'm working on now because i had some big trees down that i could barely move, but once they were squared up a friend and i could get them out of the bush. full length logs in the round are heavy. timber framing allows you to make bigger structures out of shorter, more manageable pieces of wood.

i've felt cosy in both kinds of buildings though.

DEREK......I`VE NEVER WITNESSED THE LOGS ROTTING ON THE INSIDE IN CONVENTIONAL LOG BUILDINGS.THE HEARTWOOD IS MORE RESISTANT THAN THE EXTERIOR SAPWOOD.ALTHOUGH SOME TREES ARE SUBJECT TO HEART ROT AND SOME GET PUNKY.WHERE YOU SAID THE ROT FOLLOWS A CHECK THIS WOULD BE TRUE AS THE WATER COULD LAY AND RAISE THE MOISTURE CONTENT TO OVER 19% WHICH IS IDEAL FOR ROT.
BUT IN SCANDINAVIAN SCRIBE FIT THE LOGS HAVE WEDGES DRIVEN TO CREATE A CHECK IN THE JOINT.TO ELIMINATE EXTERIOR CHECKS..NOT 100% EFFECTIVE.PLUS AFTER ALLOWING THE LOGS TO DRY AND SEASON AND WHEN TREATED PROPERLY CHECKING CAN BE ELIMINATED ACCORDING TO SOME COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS.SHOULD THEY CHECK AFTER SEASONING FOR AWHILE YOU CAN JUST TURN THE CHECK DOWN TO DRAIN NATURALLY.PLUS A GOOD OVERHANG OR WALK AROUND PORCH CAN PROTECT THE LOGS EVEN FURTHER.TREATING THE LOGS WILL KILL OF THE MICRO ORGANISMS ,SO IF THEIR FOOD SUPPLY IS CUT OFF NO ROT.
ALL WOOD CAN ROT ON THE EXTERIOR FROM WEATHERING ... EITHER FROM MOISTURE OR UV RAYS.THATS UNLESS THE WOOD IS TREATED.
DEW POINT WOULDN`T EXIST IN ALL WALLS.AIR TIGHT CORDWOOD WALLS 24" THICK OR 30"+ EARTHSHIP WALLS SHOULDN`T HAVE
ANY DEWPOINT.WHEN THE MASS IS THICK ENOUGH THE WARM AIR AND COLD AIR SHOULDN`T MEET TO FORM MOISTURE/DEW POINT.WALLS THAT HAVE MOISTURE PROBLEMS WOULD HAVE A VAPOUR BARRIER.VAPOUR BARRIERS AREN`T REQUIRED IN LOG BUILDING,CORDWOOD OR EARTHSHIPS.LOG BUILDINGS ARE KNOWN TO BREATH NATURALLY AND CONTROL THE MOISTURE THATS WHY NO VAPOUR BARRIER TO MEET CODE.
DEREK......WOOD BREATHS,MASONRY BREATHS AND CONCRETE BREATHS.LOGS EVEN IN THE 1000+ YEAR OLD CHURCH I MENTIONED WOULD BREATH.A CONVENTIONAL LOG HOME WALL SHRINKS AND SWELL TO MEET THE EQUILIBRIUM MOISTURE CONTENT OF THE AIR.THEORETICALLY,A LOG WALL WILL RISE AND FALL ABOUT 1" EVERY YEAR WITH THE SEASONS.
SWELLS IN WET SEASONS AND SHRINKS IN DRY SEASONS.TO PROVE THIS
LOG HOMES HAVE STEEL THREADED RODS THAT HAVE SPRINGS TO COMPENSATE FOR THIS.I`M SURE EVERYONE HERE ON THIS FORUM HAS HAD A WOODEN DOOR SWELL AND THEN SHRINK BACK LATER THE SAME PROCESS
DEREK......WOOD KEPT WET CONDSTANTLY IS DEPRIVED OF OXYGEN.THEY ARE MINING 400 YEAR OLD LOGS OUT OF THE GREAT LAKES AND SOME MAJOR WATER WAYS USED IN LOGGING IN BYE GONE DAYS.
THESE LOGS ARE PERFECT FOR MILLING.THEY EVEN DUG SOME CEDAR LOGS OUT OF AN ANCIENT BOG AND MILLED THEM.FOR WOOD TO ROT YOU NEED THE RIGHT TEMPERATURE,OXYGEN AND MOISTURE.REMOVE ONE OF THESE ITEMS AND THE WOOD IS PRESERVED.NOT ALL WOOD ROTS IN CONTACT WITH THE GROUND.PAO LOPE CAN LAY ON THE GROUND IN BRAZIL FOR OVER 50 YEARS WITHOUT DAMAGE.HURON PINE CAN LAY FOR CENTURIES ON THE GROUND AND THEN BE USED.I BELIEVE I READ A POST HERE ON THIS FORUM WHERE A GUY FOUND A LARGE LOG LAYING ON THE GROUND.HE KICKED IT AND FOUND IT SOLID ON THE INSIDE.HE DECIDED TO USE IT AND FOUND IT SOLID ON THE BOTTOM.THE ONLY ROTTING I`M AWARE OF IS IN SILL LOGS AND AROUND WINDOWS WHERE THERE WERE LEAKS.THIS CAN BE PREVENTED WITH BETTER BUILDING PRACTICES.IN THE SCANDINAVIAN SCRIBE FIT METHOD,WATER WOULD HAVE TO DEFY GRAVITY TO CAUSE ROT IN A WALL.THE WALL NATURALLY SHEDS RAIN WATER.
THERE ARE CORDWOOD SAUNAS
DEREK...NOT ALL LOG HOMES USE LOGS HORIZONTALLY,THERE ARE VERTICAL LOG HOMES AS WELL.[THESE ARE POPULAR IN ALASKA.]


CORDWOODGUY

the idea of a dewpoint within the logs is an interesting one that seems tough to solve. logs do allow moisture through, but like Derek says in winter the vapour will not be evaporating off the outside. perhaps the closed-in, wrap-around stave-work porches on scandinavian buildings would move the dewpoint further out and protect the logs. it's more likely though that the long-surviving scandinavian log buildings allowed moisture out through drafty doors and windows- or even the smoke hole in the roof!

another time-tested way to preserve the logs would be to hew away all sap wood, either by squaring or making ovals of the logs, as the norwegians did. also turning the checks down, as the Cordwood Guy says, and also the little detail of hewing the timbers upside down so when they;re flipped the cut edges feather down.

as far as water from the outside goes, in log design its all about the big overhang. that seems to be a recurrent difference between log and timber structures. in a log home it is worth the risk of exposing plate logs and rafters by extending them to carry the roof out to protect the corner-work, lower logs, window and door openings, and sills. by contrast many roofs on timber frames have little overhang (and look to my eye like too-small hats) because the structural members are generally wrapped up inside the building.

Typically my stick frame home with poor quality doors runs in the 40% rh range in winter. I've thrown a meter into the framing and read about 8% in the dryest part of winter. Moisture inside the logs is going to disperse somewhat uniformly, I don't think you'll be able to meter any log or timber in a properly built home in the winter and see mc's in the 20%+ range necessary to support fungi.

Now today... EMC is closing in on that here.

I think a log wall is going to beat just about any cavity wall in terms of condensing room moisture inside the wall.

Piece en piece?