We are having a turn of the century house renovated and wanted to replicate the existing 3/8" X 2" hardwood in the new kitchen. The current kitchen subfloor is the old 3/4" X 3" pine tongue and groove and is in reasonable, but not fantastic condition. The hardwood guy showed up today and put down the new 3/8" X 2" oak floor in the kitchen, but did not use tongue and groove planks, but solid rectangular planks. He faced nailed all of it over the pine subfloor. He used 2" because it matched the rest of the house.

The area in question sits over a fairly dry basement, so I anticipate no moisture problems. My question is this - does it bother anyone that the new flooring is not tongue and groove? Is this normal for period floors? Would you expect and buckling and/or loosening?

I'm not sure if no t&g is normal for that period. I will be surprised and learn something new if it is.

I have done alot of work on homes that were originally installed with 1/2" x 2" Oak, they are all t&g. I know this product is still available. Why the installer didnt use this product is what bothers me. Why face nail a floor and have no t&g when this is available, and I would think it accomodates the period of the home.

Seems strange to me too. I know there are areas in the states that used a lot of 3/8th inch square edge material that was face nailed, but never heard of it being done recently.
Unless he used glue as well, I have concerns about future squeaking and vertical movement of individual boards that may expose unfinished edges of adjoining boards.
Since the tongue and groove would not be visible, I cannot see any reason to do an "exact" duplication of the original. Although, the counter-sunk surface nails will still be visible to a degree, perhaps that was his reasoning.

Dont get bent out of shape too quick. there are many floors from that peroid that were square edged and top nailed. Do you live in California or the Northeast? Thats where you see the majority of them. Did you happen to see the floor that was removed? Did it have square edges? If done proper then you should be fine.

I'm not a pro, just a diy-er. I'm interested in seeing t&g 3/8" flooring. Seems to me that the wood is pretty thin to have tongues and grooves milled, no?

There are actually a number of manufacturers that offer 3/8 or 5/16 solid t&g. But, regarding the original post, I wouldn't be concerned if the installer is reputable....not unusual at all, especially for restorative jobs, to see that type of flooring utilized.

We still do tons of it up here, all T&G, and in 1 1/2, 1 3/4, and 2 inch widths
And might I mention Bruce's Natural Choice Collection which is a mere 5/16th inch product, 2 1/4 wide and all T&G

I've seen 1/4 solid t&g come out of LL

There is a 5/16" solid wood flooring in oak that is supposed to be face-nailed. If that is the flooring you previously had, then your installer most likely used the same type of flooring. There is no cost benefit to using 5/16" flooring, so it is not a matter of the installer using cheap materials. This should have been discussed prior to him doing the work. For more info on 5/16" oak flooring, go to: http://www.lebanonoak.com/

A belated thanks to all for your posts. I thought the original flooring in the house was t & g, but it is also square edged plank that has been face nailed and has lasted 100 yrs.. They replicated the same material and method and the new floors look great. Thanks for all your info. Here is the finished job (the red room has the new plank). http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2041294&id=1359760996&l=75eca82c05

in the UK most floors before 1900 were face nailed and filled this is also true of the former colonies. if you look at most British colonial buildings, the roofs are designed to take the weight of 2ft of snow as this was a British building standard at the time. in some countries it`s still normal to lay square plank floors face nailed as this was always the way.

If your happy withe the floor then all is good. Im not trying to stir the pot but if it were me I would have installed T&G and just replicated the face nailing. Why not put the best floor possible down. It still would have matched and you would have had the added benefit (really its more a industry standard than a benefit) of T&G.

Dale seems to run into a few of those. There are three video's of this job he made at FI.com. Course you must join up to get past the first page...again. lol

http://flooringinstaller.ning.com/video ... oor-repair

Industry standard? Where did you get that? Simply because most systems today use T&G does not mean it's superior. It depends on the product. Also, the 5/16" T&G flooring available is prefinished and 2 & 1/4" in width, not the 2" width the OP needed. The OP's contractor did the correct thing. He identified the original flooring correctly and added on to it with the same flooring as was used in the rest of the home. IMO, this is the correct way to remodel and restore older homes. If the OP was replacing all the flooring in the entire house, then changing to a T&G floor would be acceptable.

Gary, I didnt intent to offend. Like I said, if the homeowner's happy then all is well. Maybe I shouldn't have said "industry standard" but I do stand by the fact that a quality millied T&G is superior. The issue with the width and thickness is no issue at all. Most good mills will accomadate a customers request (for a price obviously). I also should not necessarily have said "thats what I would have done". In hindsight, I would discuss the matter with the homwowners including the advantages and price differences. I am not calling the Contracters integrity into question because I have never seen his work and the customer is very happy with the floor.