The bedroom walls have old plaster with hairline cracks and a few uneven patches. Most of it sounds solid when tapped, but one area near a former repair is crumbly. A contractor suggested covering everything with drywall for a smooth finish. That seems quicker, though it would bury the original surface and alter trim details. If the plaster is generally sound, is patching and skimming worth the mess? I'm trying to distinguish cosmetic cracks from a reason to replace the surface.
Choosing between patching old plaster and covering it with drywall
- home-improvement
- choosing
- between
- patching
21
3 replies
If most of the plaster sounds solid, I’d patch the bad spot and skim the walls before I covered the whole room. The crumbly area is the one...
If most of the plaster sounds solid, I’d patch the bad spot and skim the walls before I covered the whole room. The crumbly area is the one to inspect closely, because loose plaster there can keep spreading if it isn’t fixed back to a stable edge.
Agree on the weak area, but I wouldn’t assume the whole wall needs replacing just because one repair failed. Tap test helps only so much. If you get hollow spots or lots of movement, that’s different from hairline cracking.
And if the trim details matter to you, drywall over everything is the easy answer that changes the room a lot. Sometimes “quicker” is really...
I’ve seen people cover sound plaster and regret losing the depth around the windows and baseboards. If the surface is mostly okay, I’d rather live with a little mess than turn it into a flat box.