|
Re: Houses
Originally Posted by Souvenir
(Post 6800601)
Ah. A coffee-keyboard moment.
|
Re: Houses
Originally Posted by fledermaus
(Post 6800398)
I dont have penis but I have access to one.
Does that help?
Originally Posted by dbd33
(Post 6800493)
I suspect you meant "I do too" but I rather wish you meant "I do two".
|
Re: Houses
Originally Posted by dbd33
(Post 6800044)
I have a penis........It's been a source of great joy to me though it hasn't helped me to understand issues related to construction.
|
Re: Houses
Originally Posted by BristolUK
(Post 6801499)
Not even the erection aspect?:ohmy:
|
Re: Houses
Originally Posted by MB-Realtor
(Post 6801817)
Thats more hydraulics. :rofl:
|
Re: Houses
Originally Posted by MB-Realtor
(Post 6801817)
Thats more hydraulics. :rofl:
Originally Posted by Butch Cassidy
(Post 6801849)
I always thought it was Pump action:confused:
|
Re: Houses
Originally Posted by Steve_P
(Post 6801855)
Either way...:(
have you tried the new Irish Airline Cuni Lingus;) |
Re: Houses
Originally Posted by Butch Cassidy
(Post 6801857)
Steve,
have you tried the new Irish Airline Cuni Lingus;) |
Re: Houses
I see Hanson manufacture bricks in Ontario and Quebec for the north american market. If the bricks are of the correct grade and building details suitable for shedding water successfully then spalling can be minimised.
Brick has minimal insulating value but would always be used with a cavity and inner leaf of thermal blocks. Cavity may be insulated to varying degrees with the result that a brick house may be very thermally efficient. When I was in toronto I saw quite a lot of houses with brick as a facing material but these would have had a timber frame. Didn't see any residential housing in Edmonton or Winnipeg with brick exteriors, only "public" buildings. |
Re: Houses
Originally Posted by dbd33
(Post 6799952)
I lived in a brick cavity wall house in Toronto. It was standing when the area was surveryed in 1926 and is still there now. I'm sitting in a turn of the century (the other one) brick house looking across the street at a 4 storey brick building from, I guess, the 50s. I suspect that brick is viable but wood is cheaper. I have a penis.
and it thrumms with every post ......:devil_smile::rofl::tounge_smile: |
Re: Houses
Originally Posted by queen anne
(Post 6800427)
Sorry if I upset you Steve, that wasn't my intention, I was merely reminding you that the Parliament buildings went up around the mid 1800's, were built with the traditional English methods, they are still here and in relatively good shape. So it follows that brick houses built around the same time could be a viable option and made 'snugglier' (not a real word I guess).
My Dad is a contractor in Canada - he has all his certs in UK, Alberta and Ontario.... To put it simply he says - UK methods of construction have no place in current Canada. Most of the UK methods will not stand up over time in the canadian fluctuating climate. My dad specializes in reconstructive masonary. On the buildings built around the 1800's, he winterizes them and does reconstructive "surgery" on each and every brick to bring it back to the original state. One of his recent projects was the ROM in Toronto. He has also done Castle Loma. As my dad is a "old" yorkshireman he loves to have a good moan. lol So we as his family hear it all! On another note - what UK laughingly calls central heating is archaic. That is called radiator heating over here and most avoid it like the plague. Too old fashioned. Forced Air for the win! |
Re: Houses
Originally Posted by needasmack
(Post 6808284)
as his family hear it all!
On another note - what UK laughingly calls central heating is archaic. That is called radiator heating over here and most avoid it like the plague. Too old fashioned. Forced Air for the win! Its not archaic necessarily, but it is a liability in this climate if it goes wrong for a prolonged period as the pipes are likely to burst creating amajor headache. On the other hand, in floor radiant heat using an unfreezable glycol system is a pretty efficient and comfortable variation on the same theme, but you are going to need ducts for your AC anyway (who wants to live here without it?), so you might as well use forced air heat. |
Re: Houses
Originally Posted by iaink
(Post 6808333)
(who wants to live here without it?)
|
Re: Houses
I heard once (can't remember from whom) that Canadian houses are so efficient at retaining heat in the winter that sometimes it's possible to have the heating off at times.
True or false? :confused: |
Re: Houses
Originally Posted by seanyg
(Post 6808343)
I heard once (can't remember from whom) that Canadian houses are so efficient at retaining heat in the winter that sometimes it's possible to have the heating off at times.
True or false? :confused: Its possible to have the heat on low once its warmed through but when its 10, 20 below the house would soon get cold with no heat. Frozen pipes etc. We turn the thermostat down to 15 or 16 at night or when we arent in. When its really cold we found that its cheaper to keep the thermostat at that so that the house doesnt get too cold and then cost a fortune to heat up again. |
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 1:20 am. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.