# Solid Surface vs Granite and Quartz



## jbeall (Dec 3, 2009)

Hi All,
My wife and I are debating whether to go with a solid surface countertop (that's Dupont Corian, Samsung Staron, etc.), or a granite or quartz (e.g., Silestone).


Solid Surface would be a *little* cheaper, but the pricing is close enough that we want to go with whichever would be a wiser choice for us.


At this moment we're leaning towards a solid surface because we've heard stories about how granite chips and cracks--something we would not have a problem with if we did a solid surface. However, solid surfaces can scorch easier than granite or quartz, and they scratch easier to. But from everything I can tell, they are easier to repair--damage can be buffed out with a scotch-brite or other very fine abrasive.


Also, there's the hardness issue. We've got kids and it's just inevitable that somebody is going to bang their head on a corner, or a drop a glass on the counter. Solid surfaces, being an acrylic resin, are not quite as hard as granite, and that, to me, seems like it's a pro for solid surfaces--they're less likely to bust a head or shatter a glass. Not that we're going to intentionally do either of those things 



But, what are the opinions here? Experiences with one, both, or the other?
Thanks!


-Josh


p.s. this is for a house we plan to *live* in, not a house we're going to try and flip.


----------



## Bob Mariani (Dec 1, 2008)

It's a matter of style and choice. I have both and find both to be great counter tops. I also concrete counter tops. My leaning is towards the solid surfacing since I have more options with creativity and prefer the seamless and cleaner installation.


----------



## ARI001 (Jun 26, 2009)

Do a search on lava stone. It has all the advantages of granite, concrete, and solid surface without the disadvantages.


----------



## jbeall (Dec 3, 2009)

*Based on that description, I'm thinking I can't afford it*



ARI001 said:


> Do a search on lava stone. It has all the advantages of granite, concrete, and solid surface without the disadvantages.


Hmm. Sounds good, but based on that description, I'm guessing I can't afford it. We're looking at Samsung Staron (solid surface) for $37/sqft, or a Uba Tuba granite for $40/sqft. Both those are the installed prices and include a free sink.

We've got 57 square feet of countertop, including backsplashes.

What should I expect lava stone to set me back, $80/sqft? 

But thanks, I will do some checking on this.

-Josh


----------



## jbeall (Dec 3, 2009)

*Enameled lava stone?*

Is this what you're referring to? (scroll down to "enameled lava stone)":
http://www.thesexykitchen.com/natural-stone-kitchen-countertops.html

Quote:

Enameled lava stone is mostly produced in France by a limited amount of suppliers and due to this lack of manufacturers involved in glazing this stone, it is a very expensive product, well over US$225 sq. ft installed. If you can afford it, consider Enameled Lavastone countertops because they can be extremely opulent.

At $225/sqft, I could only afford it if I completely skipped kitchen cabinets and only had countertop. Somehow I don't think that's a good trade off 

-Josh


----------



## concretemasonry (Oct 10, 2006)

Granite is not a magic word and all granites are the same. Some of the "pretty" are really not that good and can have high absorption even if they are hard and "granite". there is some pretty, but cheap and inferior granite offered because there is no standards that must be met other than saying it is "granite" (geologically).

I discovered this a few years ago when I had to look at granite veneered buildings. When you look at them after a rain, you see the obvious absorption of moisture. Some people seem to sell pretty and cheap granite based on looks and then advertise a "lifetime" sealer application. A chemical application only works if the granite will have enough absorption to incorporate the chemicals and may not be around when they slowly lose effectiveness.

I would take a hard look at the manufactured countertops (there are several different product names), but they are very dense, hard materials with low absorption that are made to a specific standard under controlled conditions and have a wide variety of appearances that easily mimic granite or other materials. I do not know about the price, but no one gives away a product when it is better than the other competing materials.


----------



## jbeall (Dec 3, 2009)

*Manufactured countertops = solid surface?*



concretemasonry said:


> I would take a hard look at the manufactured countertops (there are several different product names), but they are very dense, hard materials with low absorption that are made to a specific standard under controlled conditions and have a wide variety of appearances that easily mimic granite or other materials. I do not know about the price, but no one gives away a product when it is better than the other competing materials.


Hi Concretemasonry,

By "manufactured countertops" you're referring to "solid surface" countertops like DuPont Corian, Samsung Staron, LG Hi Macs, Avonite Surfaces, and so on? Or do you mean something else?

Thanks!

-Josh


----------



## concretemasonry (Oct 10, 2006)

According to your classifications, I was talking about the high quartz manufactured tops that are marketed with different names, but are high density manufactured products using different quartz/high silica materials using different color and size particles. The different size and color products give the variety of appearances.

Natural granite is high in quartz/silica, but there are other materials and striations between the crystals that seem to cause the higher absorption even though they give the finish an appearance that sells. the consumer.

I would put Silestone and other similar products in the same category of manufactured surfaces but some use larger particles of crushed purer natural stone. They are more costly than the granites normally used. Some use polymers, while others use pressure, vacuum and vibration in the manufacture with more natural materials and some polymers for enhancement.


----------



## vsheetz (Sep 28, 2008)

Granite - 

I have never had a maintenance problem with granite. For resale, granite is the most desireable. I like the look of granite.

IMHO -


----------



## ccarlisle (Jul 2, 2008)

'concretemasonry' is quite correct about the descriptions and qualities of the various hard surface, natural stone and stone-like conglomerate countertop materials; in the end, _it's your choice _but one dimension of the suitability of a countertop material has to be - as it is everywhere else where "stone" is considered - and that is _maintenance._

There are issues with all 'stone' and 'stone-like' materials - some more complex and more elaborate than others - and no moreso than in kitchens where the variety of punishments to the surface is wide; from the width of the pH scale and the colour scale, from the use or disuse of certain scouring pads, from oxidizers to reducers, from sharp-pointed objects to dull, from heavy to light, from a buff with sandpaper to a full rehoning or polishing restoration procedure, from touch-up paints to replacement, they're all to be considered at purchase long before the unfortunate accidents happen. 

To make things worse, there's the whole misunderstood issue of natural stone 'sealers'...so, if a single blemish on your countertop is likely to cause you sleepless nights, if you just can't live with a synthetic material in your home, if you have one eye on the resale value of your house, well then you'll have to make the appropriate choice of a countertop material. Price per square foot naturally enters the picture at the beginning so please just consider 'maintenance' as part of the overall cost. A lower cost material may have a higher price tag in the end.

Oh, and "Banging one's head" isn't on that list. They're all "hard" surfaces. There are bigger issues than that...:whistling2:


----------



## jbeall (Dec 3, 2009)

I can't tell if you're saying that you'd consider a solid surface (like Corian) higher maintenance than granite, or if granite or quartz would be higher maintenance.


----------



## ccarlisle (Jul 2, 2008)

That's because there are too many variables to be able to say that "product A is better than Product B'...depends on what yardstick you use. Look at it this way: a relatively inexpensive Formica kitchen countertop with a burn mark on the surface is almost a candidate for complete removal and replacement. Maintenance almost = 0; cost: low. Asset value = 0.

Now, a blemish on a true granite surface _that causes the same amount of anguish to the consumer_ as the burn on the Formica, might mean a repolishing of the whole surface. That's oversimplifying, I know, but calls for a professional stone refinisher. Cost? up to $1000? maybe. Maintenance: medium. Asset value: high.

As for a conglomerate like a quartz stone embeddded in an epoxy resin, it's somewhere in between, probably similar to Corian or other solid plastics like that. Cost: medium. Maintenance: medium. Asset value: medium.

I'd say marble has a high maintenance, high cost and high asset value in a kitchen - but that's not the case here.

But maintenance is an issue that deserves to be quantifed with the manufacturer and, believe me, it's not an issue most of them bring up. They will say how great it looks, talk to the ease of cleaning etc but not the price tag attached to the lifetime of the piece. Ask _who_ can restore it if..._x _happens to it - where x is something you can see happening in your kitchen. If you think that a refinisher is expensive at $500 per incident, then you'll have to plan for extra scratch to be available for when that incident happens. 

I can't speak to the relative merits of each surface and don't ask me to make your mind up...that's a personal decision. But from a stone refinisher's point of view and knowing the full scale of possibilities, I am just pointing out the issue. Ask each supplier for a full breakdown of "what happens if" scenarios with reference to their products. And remember it's a compromise because the perfect product hasn't been found yet.

Proabably never will.


----------



## ARI001 (Jun 26, 2009)

jbeall said:


> Is this what you're referring to? (scroll down to "enameled lava stone)":
> http://www.thesexykitchen.com/natural-stone-kitchen-countertops.html
> 
> Quote:
> ...


Yes this is what I was referring to. I never said it was cheap.


----------



## Phillysun (Jun 19, 2008)

Granite is harder than any manufactured product. Take a kitchen knife to a showroom and try to scratch the granite - all you will do is dull your knife. Granite does require resealing on an annual basis but that is a very quick task. The problem with granite is more one of the weight and the cabinets need to be able to support the added weight or be reinforced and it is more labor intensive to install and finish. 

For my kitchen I bought some pre-finished slabs in 24x96 (2) and 30x96 (1) size that already had the edges rounded. The installers had to fit the 3 pieces together and make the holes for the cooktop, sink, and faucet, which took 2 workers one long day. The total cost was 25% less than what I was quoted by Home Depot for their manufactured product with its installation. The granite just looks like stone and the artificial products I looked at all looked like artificial products (i.e. cheaper looking).


----------



## user1007 (Sep 23, 2009)

I really like the look of both solid glass and the terrazo like countertops made from old bottles, traffic lights and so forth. They are hard as stone and the color choices amazing. They are also lighter in color than most natural stone which is nice if light is an issue in your kitchen. Since they are renewable and recyclable resources you may get a tax or other green credit? Here is one manufacturer. 

http://www.vetrazzo.com/

Concrete counters can be beautiful too and you can mold the sinks and things into them in any interesting way. You can pour them in place or get them like any other counterop material. You can do terrazo type finish and the color choices are extensive and near unlimited.

Nothing at all against stone countertops either by the way. Not so wild about things like Corian.


----------



## Bob Mariani (Dec 1, 2008)

no tax credit available for such products.


----------



## Just Bill (Dec 21, 2008)

I'll add my $.02. Not a fan of granite, needs to be sealed, you must select the eact piece as to color/texture. Solid surface, truly seamless once installed, easily renewable surface finish, repairable, many colors, manufacturers. Quartz or man made stones--consistent color, requires no sealing, wide variety of color, manufacturers, I like it.


----------



## gregzoll (Dec 25, 2006)

Solid surface looks cheap. Lets start by asking what are the home prices and income median for your area? If income is in the 100k plus, and home prices are the same, go with Silestone, Quartz, Soapstone.


----------



## tomson2101 (Mar 12, 2011)

The same debate you and your wife are having most people are having nowadays. I would either go for the engineered stone or granite, solid surface is a bit expensive and doesn't have as much durability as the other two. But that's just my opinion.


----------



## Jim F (Mar 4, 2010)

jbeall said:


> Also, there's the hardness issue. We've got kids and it's just inevitable that somebody is going to bang their head on a corner,
> 
> quote]Yeah, you wouldn't want them denting the solid surface material with their heads, better go with the stone.:laughing:


----------



## High Gear (Nov 30, 2009)

Shoot you can shatter a glass on a wood floor ...I've done it .

The wife and I had the same agonizing decision a few yrs back.

WE went with LG- High -Macs ....no regrets.

Sure granite has the edge in looks but to many negatives for me,

your mileage may vary.

A friend has had Corian for several years now and his kitchen is extremely 

high end ..no regrets either.


----------



## MrsFix-it (Mar 10, 2011)

Hi, I'm a kitchen designer and I get this question a lot. I personally prefer granite. As long as it's sealed it's very durable and beautiful. You also make your $ back in resale. Same with quartz, it just has a more consistent look then the natural variations in granite. Acrylic counters are durable, but can lack luster. They also scratch. But you can buff the scratches with some comet. They can also blush if you put a hot pot on it. Usually it can withstand 220degrees, but it's not recommended to put anything on on them. And don't go black with acrylic! You'll see so many scratches, it's so hard to maintain the darker colors. Have you checked out Eco glass counters? Or soap stone?


----------



## jbeall (Dec 3, 2009)

As you can see if you read through this thread, my wife and I made our decision about a year ago and went with Samsung Staron (a solid surface) because Home Depot honored a pricing mistake in their advertising and we got it for the same price as laminate  And, we're very happy with it. My wife wanted a matte finish (not shiny), so no issues with the Staron there.

We have some friends that hate their granite countertop (they say it chips all the time, it never looks clean due to all the pits they've got) and wish they had gotten a solid surface, having seen ours.

We have some other friends who went with some Uba Tuba granite and couldn't be happier. They love it.

So I think there's a lot of personal preference here.  We're happy with our solid surface, though.

One of the big selling points for us on the solid surface was the integral sink. There's no other countertop (that I'm aware of) that gives you that seamless integral sink. You can do an undermount sink with granite, but it's not seamless and it's not integral--it's undermount.


----------



## pyper (Jul 1, 2009)

My wife and I got a Corian counter top about 8 years ago and we have been very pleased. I think that's what we'll put in the new house too, once the cabinets are done.

I like the integral sink we got with the counter 8 years ago. My wife really like the cast iron sink that's in the new house. It's a big double sink in excellent condition, so I think we'll end up under mounting it in the Corian counter.


----------



## FixitDragon (Feb 9, 2011)

I think with granite it has a lot to do with the variant chosen. There are many many colors, some is more poreous, some is harder, some softer. We picked black galaxy, which is a mottled black with gold/copper color flecks, fairly hard, and not too poreous variety. It is georgous, and has been virtually maintenance free, just a polish once a year. It does not chip, does not show scratches or dirt, does not absorb stuff and change color. We have a large offset under mount sink and the installer did a very nice job. We could not be happier with our choice.


----------



## kcremodeling (Mar 3, 2010)

I'm a fan on concrete countertops. It's about $80-$120 sf around here. Every house in my area has granite countertops.


----------



## hyunelan2 (Aug 14, 2007)

Outside of this site, I've never seen a concrete countertop.

We are currently going through the same issues. We've basically ruled-out the corian/staron/etc at this point. It doesn't look much better than a laminate, at WAY more cost. In solid white/off-white it looks ok, but the "rock look" finishes of Corian look cheap. If I'm going to pay that much, it better look nicer than the cheap laminate.

Granite vs. Quartz is our main debate now. The granite we've looked at all comes with a 15-year sealant, so that takes care of the needing to be sealed aspect. Even if it doesn't hold up and needs to be resealed every or every-other year, that's not a hard task. Quartz is probably the superior surface: no seams, no sealing, etc. However, the prices we've got back from most places put Quartz at about 1.5x the cost of Granite - both in 3cm thickness.


----------

