Fake Tudor Beams

rubble2

We bought our 20 year old house about 30 months ago. On the estate we are in there are three or four different designs of 4 bedroom detached houses, our particular design has timber beams on the front elevation in a 'tudor' style design.

When we first moved in we had the exterior painted and the painter mentioned that the beams were showing signs of rot, we are now looking to address this somehow but are unsure of how best to go about it.

The options seem to be : 

1) remove the beams completely (the area behind the beams is rendered so I would assume that the render would need patching up/replacing. We are not particularly fond of the Tudor effect but find it difficult to picture the house without them - may look a bit bland.

2) replace the beams with new timber, who would we approach to do this?  a joiner or a general builder?

3) do as one of the neighbours has done and replace the beams with plastic moulded replacements, I tend to think that if there is one thing worse than fake Tudor beams it is Plastic fake Tudor Beams, so that is probably a non- starter.

4) maybe replace some of the beams but in a reduced 'Beam Pattern' if that makes sense - fewer pieces of wood than at present.

Would appreciate any input from anyone who has had the same problem and would be interested in hearing how you reolved it.

Thanks

FreeBear

rubble2 said: 1) remove the beams completely (the area behind the beams is rendered so I would assume that the render would need patching up/replacing. We are not particularly fond of the Tudor effect but find it difficult to picture the house without them - may look a bit bland.

Take a picture or two and then edit the images in Photoshop or Gimp to remove the timber - That would give you an idea of what the final result would look like.

At the moment, the price of timber is just plain silly, and many sizes are in short supply. Personally, I prefer a smooth crisp render finish over mock whatever and dislike pebble dash (the big chunky stuff). Would never replace faux timbers with uPVC, that is just silly....

Section62

rubble2 said:

We bought our 20 year old house about 30 months ago. On the estate we are in there are three or four different designs of 4 bedroom detached houses, our particular design has timber beams on the front elevation in a 'tudor' style design.

As well as thinking about how your house would look without the beams, you also need to visualise it in context with the neighbouring properties.  If all the other houses had beams, yours might look odd without.  But as there are other design styles already then if you replicate one of those, you could be Ok.

Otherwise I agree with FreeBear's points.

But if you decide to get rid of the beams then budget to have the whole of the wall re-rendered rather than just patching up. No matter how carefully the patching is done, you will still have 'ghost' beams to a greater or lesser extent.

Also, note particularly the point about timber costs. The same can be said about labour.  Now is not a good time to be doing work which is mainly cosmetic and isn't required for other reasons (e.g. you are planning to sell, or the beams are likely to fall off). If you can delay for a year or so then you have a reasonable chance of getting it done cheaper and better than you will by having it done now.

Belenus

How rotten are the beams?

Unless the rot is bad you could try treating them with a preservative and painting them black or brown or another suitable colour.

Jeepers_Creepers

Hi Rubble.

Near to where we are there's a whole estate done out in Tudor style. It's both weird and quaint. It's actually quite pretty, and I imagine is also quite sought-after.

So, I'd suggest, if you can live with it, stick with the current design. I think you'll devalue your house if you don't. If, after what FB suggests, you figure out that an alternative will look a lot better and is more 'you', then by all means go for it. I'm just saying, be sure it will be before changing things.

Meanwhile, what to do if you want to rescue what you have? That depends on how bad the 'signs' of rot are. I suspect, not very. I suspect they will be easily treatable, easy to fill any bad bits that need cutting away, and definitely easy to paint again in 'Tudor Black' or whatever shade they are (there are bound to be specialist paints for this, or just go Bedec 'Barn' paint.)

Choose a dry day after a number of dry days, and get your painter (or competent handypeep) to check out the extent of this rot. Any soft bits, cut them out. The rest you soak in a good timber preservative like Everbuild Lumberjack, which is solvent-free and easy to apply (Ie, any spills up there will be easy to wipe away with a damp cloth and won't leave any stains. Keep applying until no more is soaked in. This can also be done using a small hand sprayer bottle - just keep getting it in there.

Once you've done this, the rot should stop.

Once dry, you look at any bits that need filling. I guess a 2-part filler is best, and you'd need to roughly match the texture of the timber - I don't know what the rest is like, but if it has a defined grain, then perhaps a hard bristle brush?

Once set, paint.

rubble2

Thanks for all the replies,

Further consideration has led us to conclude that we need to investigate repair of the existing timber followed by painting as suggested above.

Plastic replacement is definately out as is total removal of the beams which leaves us with complete replacement of the existing faux tudor but may as well try localised repairs first and see how we go from there.

Thanks again for taking the time to respond.

Rosa_Damascena

Why is the timber rotting after only 20 years?

If one house gets rid more are bound to follow.

Section62

rubble2 said:

Further consideration has led us to conclude that we need to investigate repair of the existing timber followed by painting as suggested above.

Plastic replacement is definately out as is total removal of the beams which leaves us with complete replacement of the existing faux tudor but may as well try localised repairs first and see how we go from there.

Sometimes with fake beams the first failure points are around the fixings (e.g. screws) as these are often places where drilling or other damage is caused during fixing, but after the wood has been treated.

Consider whether you need to add additional fixings if the existing ones have failed. Don't rely on a repair around an existing fixing to have any 'structural' strength.

On older previously-treated wood I would also suggest a solvent-based wood preservative instead of Everbuild Lumberjack. Solvent products typically have better penetrating power, and dry faster than water-based products.  The wood must be dry before you attempt to fill it. And check compatibility between the chosen preservative and the filler.

If you are DIYing it, this would be my personal preference https://www.toolstation.com/wood-protective-treatment-5l/p68513
- followed by an oil/solvent-based finish.

Always check the safety instructions (that applies equally for Everbuild Lumberjack too) and be particularly careful if spraying any chemical product as the mist/vapour is likely to be harmful to health. Likewise, if you get someone to do the job for you, take an interest in what products they are using and the required safety precautions.

Jeepers_Creepers

It's always a bit of a 'mare finding the right product for a certain job.

I do agree in principle with what S62 says about solvent-based wood treatments, as in most situations they do appear to be absorbed better than their solvent-free counterparts (water-based micro-emulsions). It's like comparing petrol with water - one is less viscous and 'wetter'.

I have used Lumberjack quite a bit, tho', and - just like it claims - it seems to be readily absorbed, and is also not put off if the timber is slightly damp (tho' I would absolutely recommend applying it to bone-dry timber). On weathered timber, it gets 'sucked' right in to end grain really impressively.

It seems to work.

What is not in dispute, I don't think, is that solvent-free is far nicer to work with. Yes, of course, you always wear the right gear including a suitable mask, but it's far more pleasant if spraying it than solvent products. For getting it into gaps and cracks, a hand 'trigger' sprayer is often ideal - you hold the nozzle close, and it fires the liquid into every gap.

On that point of choosing the right product, the solvent-based treatment linked to by S62 also appears to contain a water repellant - the pic on the tin and some of the reviews report the way it leaves a 'sheen' which causes water to 'bead'. This is great, but only - I imagine - if you are not planning to apply a top-coat over it. If you are, then it'll be worth confirming that the chosen top coat will adhere to it.