Engineered vs real wood?

[EmmaStone]

We're looking to replace the flooring in our living room, it's quite a large space, and is covered by an insurance claim. There's carpet in their currently, but I would want wood.

The insurers have initially proposed approx £50/m2 (materials and fitting), which basically rules out real wood without us topping up, although they suggest it might stretch to engineered wood.

In a previous house, we had reclaimed parquet put down, and may go down that route again (or similar), but that's a pretty enormous job, so before I go down that rabbit hole, I wondered what MN experiences of engineered wood have been. I very much expect this floor to be in forever, would engineered wood be durable enough?

It’s not a question of durability, it’s the thickness of the wood layer. We’ve had engineered down for almost 3 years and it’s been fab. It does scratch like you’d expect real wood to but that adds to the feel of it. We had some building work done last year which let a lot of black mortar dust out into the house, which settled in the grain of the wood. We had to Resand and finish it, and it’s perfect again. However as the wood layer is only 2mm or so thick you only get to resand it a couple of times before you’re through wood and into the board underneath.

I’d recommend it as long as you’re not in a black mortar area!

Engendered wood, I was under the impression is longer lasting than wood

It’s more stable. Real wood will warp, engineered won’t.

Well my four hundred year old floor isn't remotely warped,,so not sure that's right.

Op, parquet the costs are in the laying.

I'd get quotes then decide. See some samples.

We had engineered oak in our last house and I would never have it again. It scratched and dented so easily. We had it all re sanded, buffed and sealed twice over (once was after tenants had lived in our house when we lived abroad and it was a state when we got back) and it came out lighter in colour each time we had it done. We were also told that realistically we’d only be able to get it done once or twice more and that would be it. It was awful in the kitchen for picking up grease stains. The slightest, quickest spill and it would have stained it.

Oh, and my brother’s engineered oak floor warped due to underfloor heating and a rug trapping heat in the boards.

I've just has a google, and it's the opposite, it's engineered wood that is more prone to warping that real wood. Generally it's humidity induced.

As said, my wooden floorboards, exposed, are four hundred years old and still going strong.

We have engineered wood in two properties, on lot has been down 20years and the other 10. We chose engineered because it's more stable if there is movement in the buildings and was more appropriate than a solid sheet of timber. There is still a decent thickness of the chosen timber though. Our floors are different timbers from different shops. Both come with enough thickness to be sanded down and refinished 7 times. Weve not had either touched yet, so proper engineered wood should last a long time. How long your engineered floor lasts is down the the quality of the manufacture and laying but also the hardness to the top layer and how thick you choose it to be. You need to select one that gives you an allowance for a few re finishes over years.(Our floors are covered in hard wax oil so any scuffs can just be rubbed over with wax polish and the floor is perfect again).

I have to say, I'm naturally suspicious of engineered wood, but fully trust solid hardwood. Probably from growing up in an 600 year old house, I have a tendency to replace materials with things that could have been in existence for 100+ years (ie undateable). My DH has fewer materials hangups than me , but that doesn't necessarily make him right...

I think we had some engineered wood in our last house (put in by original developers), it was ok, but suffered terribly in the kitchen. I always found it looked too perfect, I like my floors to have a bit of aged character to them.

I'm talking myself back into the parquet, aren't I? lol

I'm with you, my thoughts are from living in an old house too obviously , but also coupled with my friends engineered oak floor, which was extortionate, but certainly not as resilient and very "perfect". So perfect it didn't look real, as lovely as it was.

I think both options are good though, but I'd say the real stuff has way more character.

And I say so perfect it didn't look real, because in isolation it looked fine, but not compared to the real deal.

She had engineered oak, I have oak floor boards, and even with mine just sanded and varnished you could tell immediately which was real and which was man made. On its own you'd likely believe it was real.

I have oak floor boards, they worked out cheaper than parquet or engineered wood overlayed