Surfsup wrote:
R19 Batts Unfaced (regular fiberglass - I learned with little airflow and being kept warm, fiberglass is ~100% R-value ... and inexpensive and easy to "fix") Actually R19s are only performing at R18 when installed perfectly, in air-tight 5.5" deep 2x6 cavites, according to the manufacturers' own compress ion charts. That's a bit less than "~100% R-value" if looking at the labeled R:
At a 25% framing fraction (typical of 16" o.c. stud spacing) R18 cavity fill ends up being about an R1 lower "whole wall R" than if you'd used R21HD fiberglass, or about R1.6 less than R23 rock wool.
The wall you have with the R19s & R7.5 XPS is about R21.1 whole-wall, which is code-min for climate zone 6, better than code for zone 5 & lower.
With R23 rock wool it would come in at about R22.7, with 7% lower wall losses than if insulated with R19s.
Whether the higher density batts are "worth" the upcharge varies with your goals & energy costs. Low density R19s
are really cheap, and going with R23 rock wool instead is the performance equivalent of adding another ~3/8" of thickness to the exterior foam. (My own inclination would be to use something higher density, particularly in a wall.)