Pros & Cons of MH

[Helen]

I have been living in a site built home for 25 years, but am looking to re-locate and have had the opportunity to look at some MH's. They are quite impressive to look at and have certainly come a long way since my brother and his family used to travel and live in them as they went from one oil field job to another.
I'd just like to know some of the pluses of an MH over a site built home. Could I expect to live in one for 25 years? What kind of re-sale value do they have? How well do they hold up ( and I know that depends on the manufacturer, but I have no plans of going the "cheap" route), how structurally sound are they?
I guess I want someone who is neutral to convince me that this might be a way to go, vs. building, buying, or renting a site built home.
Thanks for any answers you can provide.

[John]

A MH will run $26-$55 per sq foot and a site built, depending on your location will run $65-$100++ so you do get more home for the money with a MH. From a construction standpoint a quality MH is as good as a site built. There are shoddy MH manufacturers and dealers and there are shoddy builders so you have to do your homework because the dealer is just as important as the manufacturer. A site built home is constructed of wood exterior walls either 2x4 or 2x6 ( go with 2x6) and a MH is the same. A site built home has wood interior walls covered with 1/2" drywall and a quality MH has the same. A site built home has wood floor joists and a MH has the same thing but has a steel undercarriage to support it (that is really a plus). In many ways a quality MH is superior to a site built because it is manufacturered in a controlled environment. The selection of a quality dealer is the key to success much the same as a quality builder.
I have a 1978 MH that is in great shape and I expect it to last at least another 10 years unless I get a newer one.
As to resale of a MH, that is a very debatable issue. You will get faster and higher appreciation from a site built home than a MH. A lot has been said that they appreciate the same and it depends on the land but I have never seen this to be true. With a MH you decrease the available buying market because there are a significant number of people that will not consider a MH because of the preceived shoddy image.

[Dan F]

Well said John,
the only thing I will comment on is that I have witnessed mfd homes appreciate at the same rate as sitebuilt sometimes faster because the initial cost of the factory built home is lower. This in turn creates a large equity in a shorter amount of time. This is all based on location, I live in the SF bay area in CA where the housing market is very aggresive. Partly due to less confidence in the stock market forces people to invest elsewhere. the median home price here dispite the econemy went from 389,000 to 429,000 since last January. Hope this helps. Location, location, location.

[Mac]

Not sure where you live, but here in NW Oregon, we lived in a 25-year-old, poorly maintained MH on five acres of forest and pasture, a half-hour outside Portland. We looked at replacement - starting with a log home shell, working with custom builders, working with cookie-cutter builders (keep cost down by building fixed models), and looking at MH. For us it was a matter of how long we wanted to work to pay off the house. We got the design we wanted, on a concrete slab with block foundation, great insulation, vinyl windows and other materials that are identical to site-built, Hardi-Plank lap siding - for about 2/3 the price of the cookie-cutter houses, less than 1/2 the customs or log shells. It's all 2x6 construction, and there are a couple items I'd prefer were stronger (window/door headers) - but we are easy on houses, picky about maintenance. I expect to live there 50 more years, at which point we have a fire and spread my ashes over the property.
20 years from now, I'll get a good look at the roof deck.

So far, we are very pleased. The old house is in Montana, keeping a young family housed at a low cost.