Wouldn't a house be a lot stronger if it were built with screws instead of nails?

Actually NO. True, screws ';thread'; into the wood and grip very well. HOWEVER, screws by their design are more apt to break or shear. Additionally, nails have a higher tinsel strength in the steel used to make them and if properly selected, have a coating to give them additional bond to the wood. Contact a reputable home builder in your area...some answers they provide will surprise you.Wouldn't a house be a lot stronger if it were built with screws instead of nails?
Have you recently priced the costs of screws versus nails and the cost of a worker using a nail gun versus one driving screws? We are talking about major diffferences in money, both materials and man-hours. Then there is the efficacy issue. Yes, houses would be stronger. However, most of us don't live in areas in which we experience level 7 earthquakes, so we don't need that strength -- nails work well in this case.





As long as nails work, and are the cheaper option, people are going to want to spend additional money on things which really serve aesthetic purposes, such as expensive carpet, fancy moldings, and surround sound.Wouldn't a house be a lot stronger if it were built with screws instead of nails?
yes, there are a lot of things to make a house a home, but those are not the things that sell houses
The Florida Man is right on the money. We use screws in residential construction for installing drywall and cabinets. Try pulling the coated nails sometime and see for yourself. Especially the ring shank nails.
Yes, but the framing time would be quadrupled or more. They use nail guns that put a nail into the wood in a split second. With your best power driver, a screw will take several seconds. Screws are also more expensive.





I personally rarely use nails when I work with wood. I prefer the strength of wood glue and screws.
I agree with Forida Man except screws are still stronger than the wood they are holding.


If you nail a board down, it will come back up easier than if it was screwed down. If, however, you twisted the board, the nails would bend whereas the screws would probably break.


In either case, though, the damage has been done and the board will probably need replaced but the screw head can be removed much more easily that the nail.


Screws are better but take MUCH longer and more expensive.
I agree with answer # 2
This falls into the same category as the use of more or thicker wood. Chances are your entire neighborhood is made of homes with nailed 2x4s or 2x6's forming the support structure. Such houses have withstood the test of time over the years. So, your house would be stronger with screws but it would be stronger than it needs to be to withstand the test of time.
no if you are building the frame you only need screws for the drywall
Yes, but screws are more time-consuming.


When my mom's ex-bf redid he house, he used screws instead of nails for the dry-wall. It look longer, but they won't work their way out and leave marks in his wall or loose drywall panels later.
This is a common misconception, the truth is no, Nails have a stronger base than screws. My husband is a contractor and is always answering this question. Carpenters nails are very strong!
who cares most houses can last over a 100 years with no problems.
No, if built correctly, theoretically, you would be able to pull all the nails out and the house still stand. When building, all the stresses of the structure should put the nails in shear stress only. If they are in tensile stress, the house is being built wrong. If it's built wrong, screws aren't going to help much.