The other day I came across a sample of flooring sent into one of our consultants for species identification. It consisted of a length of quarter-sawn V-jointed, tongued and grooved solid woodstrip flooring with a rich red/brown colour and fine texture.
It was very dense (900-1000kg/m3) and identified as “mutenye” (deceptively known as olive walnut, otherwise Guibourtia arnoldiana). It had stepped stress-relieving grooves which appeared to be machined in two separate operations and was sealed on front and rear faces with lacquer which extended over the V-profile, but not onto the edges or the surfaces of either tongues or grooves.
It was a work of art – the type of flooring you see only in your dreams. Thought had been given to coating both sides to minimise moisture pick-up and improving dimensional stability, even down to the level of ensuring that there was no finish on the interlocking surfaces to avoid problems during installation. Here was a product designed to last. Some day, I thought, all floors will be made this way!
Other manufacturers presented with such a high performance floor as something they should aspire to, may well respond that not everyone can, or will, pay for the best. That argument may hold water, but it does not follow that buyers should not have a quality product.
The key issue is choice. It might not be wise to invest in an expensive floor in a house you may sell in the near future. It is true that a high specification floor can add value to a property, but not if the future owner does not like it. The installation of a cheaper alternative also means it can be easily changed when the owner wants a new look.
Striking a balance
There is a balance to be struck by manufacturers. By producing only high specification products, they can reap immediate gains by supplying to a narrow market sector, consisting mainly of one-off purchases: the floor that will last ‘forever’. However, by offering cheaper alternatives, they can significantly extend the range over the long term to include secondary purchases – which is good news for the wood flooring sector.
The caveat is that lower specification should not become synonymous with lower quality; nor should important functional considerations be compromised.
There is an equally delicate balance to achieve, since a lower specification could mean a reduction in functionality. But can manufacturers compromise on functional details? I would suggest not. If a cheaper wood species with greater movement characteristics is being advocated, there might be a case for applying lacquer to the rear face which may counterbalance the greater anticipated movement. And this might be a cheaper, but functional alternative to an engineered design.
Holistic approach
Manufacturers must take an holistic approach, or risk lowering not only standards, but also end user confidence. I have seen too many floors where a cost-cutting reduction in functionality has rendered the floor virtually unserviceable after only a short time. If this scenario is repeated too often it will spell disaster for the industry.
Providing choice from top of the range to cheaper alternatives will undoubtedly give the industry the future it deserves. The industry must itself be vigilant, however, that function does not fall victim to lower costs. It is possible to produce a serviceable, realistically priced product if the balance of functional details is maintained.
