I'm building a new house this fall.  I'm buying the lot this week, and have a rough floor plan picked out.  Before I have real plans drawn up by a designer, I'd like to go ahead and decide on a building technology.  These are the 3 I have settled on:

1.   SIPs - I really like the metal ones because the thought of water damage to OSB drives my crazy.  But OSB is much more popular, so I haven't ruled it out either.

2.   ICF (walls at least) - Never really considered them until today when I met a Nurdura rep.  Looks like a great product, and the pricing looks to be in the ballpark of SIPs.

3.   Conventional frame - I would use Bluwood (it's produced close by), Zip System sheathing, and spray foam insulation.  By the way, I found out today that open cell vs. closed cell is like Auburn vs. Alabama.  Each side thinks the other is the devil.  I would probably decide on the open cell due mainly to cost considerations.

There's plenty of threads in this forum to tell me why each of the choices above is the right one (and even more threads to tell me why each is awful).  What I'm interested in is how others went about choosing.  Was it based solely on price?  Did you do a life cycle cost comparison? (ugh, even though I'm an engineer that scares me) Or was it something else entirely?

Thanks for your input!

depends if you can find a builder for the alternative types of construction. that would be the hardest part.
would you want a conventional or sip roof. when i looked at sips the main thing that turned me off was they are not real good at sound deadening. icf is pretty cool but there are lots of details to the overall package. I am building with conventional 2x6 with dense pack cellulose and 1.5" xps on exterior over 7/16 osb sheating then i will buck out the windows with 2x8. my house theoretically has a hers score below 50.
good luck

I will tell you why I started ICF Construction. I had been an insurance adjuster and construction consultant for 15 years. I had inspected thousands of homes, all of them with problems. Mold, wind damage, water damage, fire, condensation, air and water intrusion and nothing eliminates those problems as practically as ICFs. When or if something else better comes along, I will dump ICFs and do that.

Bruce designs neat homes.... I would build it for $200/sqft with granite countertops,

http://www.aaepassivesolar.com/

Posted By awhite on 14 Mar 2010 08:14 PM
I'm building a new house this fall.  I'm buying the lot this week, and have a rough floor plan picked out.  Before I have real plans drawn up by a designer, I'd like to go ahead and decide on a building technology.  These are the 3 I have settled on:
.
.
.

The point above about finding contractors who are competent at working with the particular technology you select is very valid. I build homes for a living and therefore hire all types of subcontractors. Finding the right contractor for a job is key. For example, I wouldn't hire a flatwork concrete contractor to build a basement, but likewise I likely wouldn’t have a basement contractor do my flat work - he would probably be too expensive. It's all concrete though... right? Wrong! Whenever I'm talking to a sub and he says "we do it all" it is always a red flag. So that is a big consideration for you weather you are going to act as the general or hire a general.

On another forum a poster complained that he had "hired the best ICF guy he could find" but that the concrete mix wasn't right (or something) and the ICF concrete had a large number of voids through out the whole job. Sounded like a real nightmare. Really though I think the guy doing the complaining should have been checking with the man in the mirror. It didn't sound like the job was well managed and ICF just might not have been right for his geography if he couldn't find a competent sub. I think it was in GA if I remember correctly. I'm sure it is much easier to find a great ICF contractor in Canada - for example. Same could apply to SIPs.

Really though you are going to have to do some major homework. You need to do a cost/benefit analysis of the various types of construction and make sure it fits within your budget. If the budget isn't workable, you may need to decide on another building technology or reduce the home size. It's kinda the chicken and the egg thing though. In order to do a complete takeoff and cost analysis of the different methods, you need a plan set. Yet, you don't want to develop a grandiose plan set only to find out you can't afford to build it. So you need to work off some kind of plan that at least approximates what you think you want to build. Maybe you could get the designer to do a concept plan set, and then you could do a few months of homework. Even if you want to hire a general contractor to build the house, you will still need to decide on most things before getting any kind of an accurate price though. My boss has had me do build cost estimating off of an 8.5"x11" page out of a house plan book. Believe me I hated it and I was definitely 'winging it' on a number of aspects. I went high on the numbers though and it all came out good. That is what I do for a living though, so you mileage may vary.

 Next when you go through your 3 scenarios (ICF, frame/foam, and SIP) be sure and take into account all contributing factors. With ICF, what kind of exterior facade will be applied? If it is siding, for example, how will it be fastened? If there are to be furing strips, who will do that and how much will they charge? Will the siding guys charge extra? They probably will if whatever you are doing is gonna slow them down. How much will the electricians charge to burrow through the foam - if that is what needs to be done? How will SIP be different? Can you find someone with a lot of experience with those? My guess would be that for either SIP or ICF having plumbing on exterior walls would be out. Lots of things to think about.  A person with a vested interest in a product (ie a salesmen) is not always a good objective info source, although with sips or ICF perhaps the mfg could give you local references for contractors.

Awhite, Other factors to consider:

1. Where are you building and which technology is better suited to your climate? For example, I live in Kansas, mixed climate so any of the three would work here. BUT, high winds, tornado threat and prairie fire potential (we burn fields here) make ICF my preference.

2. Is this your final dream home? If not, then will you be able to recoup your investment when you move again in a few years. We've planned our home for the duration (of our lives) and are willing to soak the $'s and sweat in making it as energy efficient and comfortable as we can.

3. Why build a home with a temporary building material such as wood? To make a long lasting stick framed home requires careful planning and execution and recurring mx and repair. The 2000 year old structures we saw in Spain and Italy that were constructed of stone and concrete represent a proven technology.

4. Is that U of Arizona?? If so, then you don't need to worry about termites.

Good luck, Dave

Thanks for the advice, guys.  Finding a builder is the problem, it looks like.  I would have to travel 100 miles to the nearest ICF builder, and 60 miles to a SIP builder.  It appears both products are in fairly common use in north Alabama and in the gulf coast, but not so much in central AL.

Matt - I'm leaning towards going ahead and drawing plans and pricing conventional frame with spray foam.  Then take one last stab at ICF's and SIP's before signing a contract.

Dave - That's the logo of my alma mater, Auburn.

I went through a lot of the same headaches -ultimately decided ( begrudgingly) on stick framing. Cost was the primary consideration for me - SIPs in my area priced out very high.

A couple other things to consider..

Climate - ICF's seem better suited to areas with big swings in temp - really hot days, cold nights. Our future next-door neighbor is building an ICF house right now, so I'm going to be interested to get to know him & his utility bills. The upfront cost of ICF can be higher, from what I've seen - a big part of that is extra charges for pumping concrete - at around $1000 each time you pump, it can add up.

As someone else mentioned, if I live in an area prone to wildfires, hurricanes, or tornados I would definitely consider ICF's (I'm thinking "three little piggies" right now)

Budget - everyone has a budget - if you have to cut corners elsewhere to pay for the system you want, you probably won't see the results you expect (e.g. if SIP or ICF costs more so you have to go cheaper on windows or attic insulation)

Here's one that was kind of a shocker for me - because of the interior foam on ICF's, it requires something fire-rated covering it (drywall). Obviously this isn't an issue in your finished areas, but if, like me, you have an unfinished basement, you need to cover the inside of the ICF before you can get your occupancy certificate.

awhite,
Before you do anything else, contact Alton Keown, who posts on this forum as 'Alton'.
He is a retired professor of archeticture at Auburn U. His email is '[email protected]'.
I suggest that he probably knows more about alternative construction in central Alabama than
all the rest of us combined, and he likes to help people who want to build quality, energy efficient homes.

Auburn, eh? So you're in Alabama and do need to consider termites in your decision.

My wife and I have decided security, strength and durability were the key factors in deciding on ICF for our home. Sure a life cycle cost analysis would help you make an objective decision, but what period of time would you use, i.e., the house's life or yours. In addition, we will do most of the work ourselves, so we'll be able to save significantly on costs. If we had a builder do all the work, then we'd probably have to downsize the footprint, but would still build with ICF. Just feels sturdier!

The only way we'd consider stick built is as an interim abode. So is this your dream home?