Forum
« studio apartment for rent Carpet and Install for Stairs »
November 6, 2008
here is the wall in question (thorocote)
Thanks again for your suggestions and thoughts. I guess I understand that thorocote is waterproof but does not allow the bricks to "breathe" or expand and contract naturally. Is this correct? And is there anything in this photo that changes anyone's opinion. Thanks everybody!
Comments
I'd leave the brick as it is. If it needs repointing then that's all I'd do. The deck doesn't meet code but maybe you know that already.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at November 6, 2008 6:21 PM
Deck was only at the beginning phases there Dave. Looks totally different now. As to whether or not it meets code, what were you reacting to?
The brick is going to be repointed for sure. What is the problem with thorocote?
Posted by: wasder at November 6, 2008 11:11 PM
I think it would be best to repoint, it's always best to let the bricks breathe as much as possible . Thorocote does breathe a little and is used often on the back of buildings. It's not the same as paint. My buildings back wall was thorocoted a long time ago and it is just fine. I think people often use therocote because it's less time consuming than pointing.
Posted by: Rick at November 7, 2008 6:49 AM
I think Rick's answer is the best one regarding the thorocote. As far as the deck, there can be no structural elements (posts, joist or decking) that are combustible (wood) within 3' of the side property lines. Mandating that it's gotta be steel.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at November 7, 2008 8:04 AM
wasder...i spoke to the mason who built my chimney and fireplace in Bucks County last night. He deals with all types of both stone and brick masonry and was one of the most highly recommended around. He said he'd never allow a customer to paint anything over brick for the reasons that many gave in the other post..it doesn't allow the brick to breathe and it just doesn't last very long. On the other hand, applying a wire mesh and multiple coats (one scratch, one finish) of stucco products is a different story and much longer lasting but still not a finish he would recommend. His best advice was to repoint the brick. It will last the longest of all the applications mentioned and unless there was SERIOUS damage to the bricks and they were all falling apart, not to go the stucco route. He said you really only see that type of damage to bricks that were poorly made and that certainly wouldn't be the case for bricks layed in the late 1800s or early 1900s.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at November 7, 2008 9:14 AM
If the surface of the brick is in good condition, ie it has its "fired" or Baked surface in good shape, then pointing is the correct solution. a good Pointing job will last 40 -80 years depending upon the orientation of the building.When pointing it is important that the joins be raked to a depth of approx 3/4 inch or until you reach solid mortar. then the new mortar should be in all likelyhood a high lime or type N mortar.
If thesurface of the brick has lost its face, then a surface sealing material is appropriate. There are a lo of products out there, but the ones we prefer are Strong Coat SW11, or a clear penetrating sealer. The exact product should be determined in consultation with a good knowledgeable mason.
Thorocote is in our experience - poor
Posted by: Brendan Coburn at November 7, 2008 9:26 AM
Thanks everybody. I think I will go with the consensus here and have it repointed where it needs it and nothing more. The entire front of the house was repointed this week and I just needed to decide how to handle the back of the building. I don't know why the guy who is doing the repointing was so gung ho to thorocoat but I will head that off. I really appreciate the input.
Posted by: wasder at November 7, 2008 11:01 AM
Wasder,
I had the front of my house repointed this summer (the back was fine). Would you mind sharing how much you were charged? Everyone seems to think I paid too much (10K). I thought it was in line considering the technique and expertise involved.
Thanks- THL
Posted by: TownhouseLady at November 7, 2008 1:20 PM
Hey THL--I was quoted 8000 for the front and back to be repointed. The front needed complete repointing (as well as having a coat of paint power washed off the front) and the back needs spot repointing. So your quote is a little higher but not in a different ball park.
Posted by: wasder at November 7, 2008 2:20 PM
I wouldn't coat the wall for all the reasons outlined above. Bricks in decent condition do not need to be coated. Looks like you've got some paint or some kind of coating that's weathering off. Repointing can solve all manner of moisture problems, because most often (like 99 percent of the time) the water is getting in via the mortar joints, not through the bricks.
Not to raise a whole other issue here, but if you're adding a deck back there (where people can get close to and touch the wall), I would have that remaining coating tested for lead. Even if there is lead in that coating, there are good ways and bad ways to remove it from brick.
Posted by: BrooklynButler at November 7, 2008 2:58 PM
Thanks BrooklynButler. I appreciate the insight. Will check for lead on the wall.
Posted by: wasder at November 7, 2008 3:29 PM
friend just need to add my 2 cents. Naturally it is better to point , but do not underestimate the usefullness of throcaot, I much prefet a product very similar called thorolastic. It is more flexible and expands and contracts. Looks the same as the other products but much better. It will last up to 15 years. used it on my back wall brownstone 4 years ago and looks perfect
Posted by: tart at November 10, 2008 8:36 AM
I guess I did pay too much. I'll file that in the "spilt milk" column.
Posted by: TownhouseLady at November 10, 2008 10:44 AM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.