I've
received more feedback on
last
month's discussion about U.S. vs. European approaches to shower valve
installation than any article to date. (Okay, so it was two emails and a
phone call, but hey, compared to previous issues, this was a flood of
responses.)
Some interesting background and explanation on the "great cultural
plumbing divide" was provided in this message from
Pat Jonte
at
Delta:

“I
read your blog with interest. As the old saying goes, necessity is the
mother of invention. From experience (some would call it knowledge) working
with European Masco companies, the biggest reason on-wall and hand showers are
so popular in Europe is primarily due to construction methodology of typical
homes. You see most homes there are constructed of block or cement. My
guess is it goes back to the dark ages of stone castles where everyone wanted
to have their own "personal castle".
Anyway, traditionally
most European homes are built to last many hundreds of years and, in many parts
of Europe, the tradition has been that when you built a new home, err castle - when
your kids or your kids-kids grew up, you'd make room for them by adding on.
You'd even build rooms for your farm animals. As one grew old and
eventually died, your relatives would assume ownership. With stone wall
construction in-wall type plumbing is impossible so pipes were mounted to the
surface of interior wall at first. This was the birth of the traditional
on-wall valve, although probably for bathtubs. Europeans being sooo
traditional have stuck with this construction method even up to today, albeit
with a twist. Most homes now are constructed of prefab or poured cement walls
like your basement - yes, interior walls, too. That's why you see these
big tall cranes everywhere in residential areas in Europe.
Most
of today's European homes have pipes (mostly iron) buried into the wall or in
wall trenches and the supplies are stubbed out and permanently anchored in concrete.
The wall is then tiled over never to be opened again. Now the shower valve can
simply be mounted on the surface. OK, you say, what about the hand shower vs.
shower head, why? Simple answer, most older European valves were derived from
traditional tub fillers also on-wall mounted. All they'd need to do is
flip the valve over and attach a hose, and voila - instant hand-shower
valve.
Eventually
someone got the bright idea of raising the thing up to allow more reach for the
same length hose, and since we have this big ugly pipe running up the wall, we
might as well make it useful and hang the hand shower on it. Europeans
secretly scoff at our cheap tinder box method of home construction, citing poor
noise isolation, flammability, lack of solid structure - but mostly the
temporary nature of wood. Remember, European's frame of reference for
history is 700+ years, and they also remember their parents’ homes/estates/castles
being 200 years old. About the only thing we American boomers remember
about our parents’ home(s) is how many of them we've lived in and how cheaply
they were constructed. Good or bad, in my opinion things like this are a
reflection of our cultural differences.”
Thanks,
Pat. Your explanation of the construction differences between U.S. and
European interior walls touches on a rationale for resisting wall-mount shower
valves I have heard over the years from U.S. design engineers. This
argument begins with the assumption that our preferred concealed approach to
shower valve installation provides firm anchoring of the valve body within the
stick-built wall. So then, the reasoning goes, if we are not going to be
anchoring the valve body securely within the framing of the wall, that means we
are going to rely on some sort of fixing of the valve to the finished wall
material itself (backer-board covered with tile, marble, solid surface, etc. - or
fiberglass).
Yikes - is
that really so scary?
First of all, anybody who thinks that concealed shower valves are
consistently anchored well inside the wall by plumbers today is probably under
a similar delusion that the entire piping system of the house always gets
flushed. Secondly, how do you think we have been mounting concealed valves
in the case of fiberglass enclosures and surrounds all these years? (Can you
say "thin wall mounting kit?")

Illustration of conventional concealed shower valve mounted onto
fiberglass wall courtesy of Price Pfister.
But
let's get back to the concern about depending on the mounting integrity of a
conventional "non-fiberblass" wall. (To clarify one point here,
I'm assuming a typical pressure balance body that would come through the wall
as a single projection, not the European thermostatic variety that has separate
hot and cold supplies coming through.) At minimum, the most common
construction would give you a wall thickness of about 5/8" (3/8" for
the backer-board and 1/4" for the tile).
The
"receiver" for a wall-mount valve would be tightly clamped to this
wall material, and since most installations would include a fixed showerhead
similarly clamped onto the wall above, the connecting shower riser would
provide even more stabilization. Do we really think some gorilla is going
to yank one of these installations out of the wall? (If anything, it seems
to me that this approach would assure a more consistent anchoring of the valve
than is typically the case with concealed valves where the installer often
saves himself 15 minutes by opting for his favorite half-assed shortcut. And
hey, given a little creative engineering here, there is probably a way to
anchor the back side of the valve body receiver to a cross-piece between the
studs, anyhow.
This would also be the end of frantic calls for extension kits whenever valves
get roughed in too deep to meet the trim. (On second thought, maybe that's
a negative - there's a lot of money to be made selling those "desperation
parts.")
Am I wrong
here? I'd like to hear from more of you on this (maybe we can break the record
and get four responses this time). Write me at:
donarnold@earthlink.netLinks