Why are most houses in the US build from prefabricated panels, wood and other "low quality" materials?
I get that it's cheap but what's the point when you live in a place where tornadoes are known for example? Why not invest a bit more so the house stands(mostly) after a storm?
In the Netherlands almost all houses are build with a stones/concrete fundation with a double stone outer wall on top. It's almost all concrete or stone material and only wood for finishing.
Is there a reason why most US homes are plug & play and not really 'build'?
@stux There are many reasons. But it mostly boils down to historical reasons and culture. Settlers started with cheap frame houses, as they had no stone to build with and needed something quick. The 50s spurred this even more, when the automobile allowed to access lots further out, so land price was not an issue anymore but building materials became a limiting factor.
If you are interested, google for "why are US houses flimsy" or something similar and you will find even more explanations.
@attilakinali @stux it depends on the type of structure. Single family homes are mainly wood framed where I am (on top of concrete foundations, typically with full height basements). Inexpensive, strong enough to last 50-100 years+, and easy to alter as needs change. Multifamily dwellings tend to be more levels and reinforced concrete for internal and most external cladding (though glass is strangely common for "floor-to-ceiling" views at cost of efficiency
@attilakinali @stux if we were in a tornado alley, the structures would be different. Though it can be less expensive to rebuild (and build better) after initial problems. Iterating can surprisingly be much less expensive than creatimg stronger structures that are inflexible and need extensive repair after disaster