I dont know why they have to lie about it. At $5/8ft board you’d think I paid for the full 1.5. Edit: I mixed up nominal with actual.
I dont know why they have to lie about it. At $5/8ft board you’d think I paid for the full 1.5. Edit: I mixed up nominal with actual.
I thought we were discussing what qualifies as structural. I guess we’re just talking about whatever you feel like talking about.
I’ve been defending my points about how certain components of structural assemblies are structural.
You can also use a sheet of plywood in non-structural ways. No different than claiming that these furring strips and sheets of drywall aren’t structural. I can point out plenty of places where plywood isn’t structural, but that doesn’t change that it’s still used structurally.
I think this thread is being taken over by people with zero education on this subject. What’s with all the insults for pointing out the painfully obvious? Oh that’s right, people don’t like being proven they are dumb and lash out as a last result. That’s right.
Blocked.
But, furring strips don’t have the integrity or quality control to be structural components. Part of why they’re so cheap is because they’re complete junk structural.
I think might be confusing furring strips (a specific type of wood product) with anything laid against another structure (brick wall, studs, etc).
Why do you claim that? Lots of assembly details call them out.
They aren’t cheap though? Almost all dimensional lumber is paid by the board foot. A 2x2 furring strip is about 50% the price of the same length 2x4.
Why are you being continuing to be disingenuous and still moving goal posts…? They are absolutely structural. They are used to hold up ceiling panels, which is always a load bearing structural use.