Microcement, terrazzo or tile: what we chose for a bathroom in a 1960s building
Three candidates, one budget and walls that wander by two centimetres. An honest comparison with prices, weight, thicknesses and what I now do differently.
A 3.8-square-metre bathroom in a five-storey brick building from 1962. Once the tiles came off, we found what you always find: walls out of plane, up to two centimetres' difference between corners, a cracked screed, the riser slightly off vertical. The owner wanted "smooth surfaces without joints"; I wanted something that wouldn't need redoing in five years. There were three candidates.
Microcement
Beautiful, seamless, two to three millimetres thick. On the sample in the studio, perfect. On this job, no, and here is why. Microcement follows its substrate: any crack in the screed or the plasterboard will eventually show as a hairline on the surface. To prevent that you need a rigid base, two layers of moisture-resistant plasterboard or cement board on a metal frame, with full waterproofing and reinforcing mesh under the microcement. In a small bathroom that eats 6 to 8 centimetres off every wall, nearly half a square metre in all. Then the price: material and labour from proven applicators start at 9,000 roubles per square metre, so about 200,000 for 22 square metres of walls and floor. And the maintenance: no abrasive cleaners, and the protective lacquer renewed every few years. For a shower zone where water and shampoo run every day, I wouldn't recommend it.
Terrazzo
Real terrazzo is a cement slab with stone chips, 20 to 30 mm thick, ground on site or supplied as factory tiles. A floor made of it is wonderful and lasts a hundred years. But it is heavy: a 600 by 600 slab weighs about 20 kilos, a wall in a five-storey block doesn't much want that, and the floor structure wants it even less. Factory terrazzo tiles started at 12,000 roubles per square metre before laying. We considered it for the floor only and dropped it because of the weight, and because in a small room there would still be joints between the slabs, so there would be no "seamlessness" anyway.
Porcelain tile
That's what we chose, and not a dull version. Large format, 600 by 1200, matt, with a terrazzo pattern that is neither glossy nor contrasty: fine chips on a warm grey ground. Four tiles covered a wall almost without joints, grout matched to the ground, a 1.5-millimetre joint. On the floor, the same collection in 600 by 600 with an R10 anti-slip surface. Material 3,400 roubles per square metre, labour 2,500, so about 140,000 for 22 square metres including cuts. The substrate: walls plastered true to screed rails, liquid waterproofing under the tile on the floor and 30 centimetres up every wall, to the ceiling in the shower.
What I now do differently
First: I no longer propose microcement in a shower zone. Only on the walls of the dry part, and only if the client doesn't mind hearing "hold on, we'll renew the lacquer". Second: look at samples on site, not in the studio, under the light that will actually be there. We had no window, and the warm grey under 3000 K lamps turned almost beige; luckily the owner liked it. Third: in any bathroom in an old building, put wall levelling in the estimate as a separate line. Here it cost 38,000, and that is the money that separates tile that looks expensive from tile that looks like tile.