1920's vs 1950's buildings. Which is better for investment?

Question

Looking for insight on which buildings would be better for investing. 1920's era vs 1950's.

Bill Gulley · Answer

As James mentioned, all things being equal, but they never are really. He's right, newer is usually better.

20s, you'll have knob and tube wiring, fuse box, often 60 to 100 amp service, iron pipe for water lines, lath and plaster walls, wood work, fixtures and hardware that will be difficult to replace or duplicate, small closets with single doors, often you'll have stone foundations, odd size windows and smaller rooms. Usually smaller lots and more often old neighborhoods that may or may not be desirable. You may find dysfunctional floor plans or awkward rooms, small kitchens. Noinsulation, rock wool or even newspaper might be in the walls.   The plus side, lumber is cured rock hard (sometimes not so good to work with) true 2x4 or dimensions. Real oak, cherry or maple wood floors in wider plank sizes. You'll usually have mature landscaping, larger trees. You'll get greater craftsmanship, attention to detail and charm that is in high demand, especially in nicer or historic areas.

50s you'll have romax wiring, could have a fuse box but much newer or breakers, 100+ amp service. You may still have iron pipe but with better fittings. Sheetrock walls, woodwork, fixtures and hardware easier to replace, standard electrical outlet boxes, wall closets with sliding doors, functional floor plans with larger rooms, poured foundations, windows are more standardized but can still be odd sizes, dimensional lumber but better quality than we usually get today. You won't have HVAC ducts in a 20s structure, usually an octopus gravity heating, (coal burner conversion)  duct work. Window air?  You'll have bat-insulation or rock-wool in the attic. Depending on the region you may have un-insulated walls, cheap fuel bills then. Neighborhoods won't be as old, locations vary, you'll still have mature landscaping and large trees. You may have better craftsmanship than new homes cost up to 50% or even more as built today but not much detail in tract homes. Larger kitchens and bathrooms than older saltbox or cottage homes. Wood floors are pine or maple usually and thinner planked T&G.

You'll find both in an updated condition, tile sewer lines probably replaced, electrical updates, either can be expensive updates. HVAC is usually updated, but not always. 50s homes will have a furnace closet that will accept modern HVAC systems, 20s homes won't unless updated.

Location, location, location, demand in that area drives marketability. Which one is best will be more dependent on these factors and the condition of the property than the difference in age.

A 20s home that is modernized and rehabbed to original style with a functional floor plan can sell for much more than a 50s rancher in similar size.

Rehabbing a 50s will be less expensive on the average than a 20s structure, more standardized materials, no plaster walls to float out to sheetrock, may take more craftsmanship to repair existing materials in the 20s home, more time.

Two different worlds, it's not that one is better as it is in being different. Here, there would be more demand for a 20s home in the 120-175K range than a ranch in that price range, hold time would be less, vacancy time would be less given the locations in that price range.

Pick you poison! :)

James Wise · Answer

All other things being equal the newer construction would be better.