Hardwired vs. wireless in a 1910 brick building, which one of us is wrong?

I spent 2 days in a downtown St. Louis loft running hardwired contacts through plaster and firewalls, while my partner swore a wireless retrofit would've been done in 6 hours. We finished the job and it works fine, but the client is already asking about expanding to the third floor, so I'm wondering if we should've just gone all wireless from the start. Anyone else face this old-building choice and regret one way or the other?

2 comments

2 Comments

davis.casey18h ago

Hardwired in a 1910 building is basically future-proofing, but only if you mapped out every wall before sealing it up. Thing is, plaster and brick kill wireless signals way worse than drywall, so that third floor expansion might turn into a dead zone nightmare if you go all wireless now. Plus, those old firewalls can be thick as hell, I've seen 2.4GHz drop between rooms in places like that. You already did the hard part on the second floor, so mixing both might be the play, hardwire the main spots and wireless only where it's actually needed for the add-on. But honestly, the client asking this soon means they're gonna keep growing, so locking in a solid backbone now beats patching it later every time.

margaretk8914h ago

2.4GHz drops through plaster? That's 5GHz you're thinking of.