Shop Products
Houzz Logo Print
chloe_s_mom

Carpet under dining table: 20 inches each side enough?

chloe_s_mom
15 years ago

Hi folks,

I have a small diningroom, and didn't want the carpet to be too big, so I picked up an area rug that is 6 x 8. My table is 3.5 x 5. Is 20" on each side enough? I read somewhere that the chairs should still be on the carpet, when people are sitting at the table (which occurs). But, the chairs do come off the carpet if pulled out completely....thoughts?

Comments (6)

  • ingrid_vc so. CA zone 9
    15 years ago

    The chairs should be on the carpet when they're pulled away from the table. Even if the room is small, the look is skimpy and uncomfortable if the carpet isn't big enough for the chairs to move on it.

  • budge1
    15 years ago

    Yup, I agree with Ingrid. I hate that feeling of "falling off " the edge of the rug when you pull your chair back.

  • Valerie Noronha
    15 years ago

    Ingrid is correct. That is the standard recommendation.

    I was in very similar situation to you an opted for a smaller rug--a Karastan which is 5'9" x 9'4". I felt this size was more in scale with the size of the room. We do have the chairs 1/2 on 1/2 off the carpet when seated, but it works OK and we do not dine there that often. Getting the next size up, 8x10, would've covered almost the entire floor and I did not want to do that.

    Here is what it looks like:

    {{!gwi}}

    {{!gwi}}

  • chloe_s_mom
    Original Author
    15 years ago

    Thanks everyone! And thank valinsv for posting the pics (looks great - love your curtains too). I'm still concerned about people getting caught up on the edge of the carpet, after they sit down and then try to pull their chairs in. But, like valinsv, don't want to cover the room too much and don't want to have my sideboard half sitting on the rug (silly reason, it is up on high legs and I find it hard to clean underneath when half is rug, half is wood). And the sideboard is a bit wobbly too when only the front legs are under the carpet.

    I think that I'll hang onto the current carpet (and the receipt) and keep looking.

  • kswl2
    15 years ago

    Eventually, if you use the dining room much, the edges of the rug will curl up from the repeated drag of the chair legs.

    Frankly, I think no rug at all is preferable in many cases, and especially preferable to having one that is too small---i.e. does not accomodate the chairs when they are pulled out from the table. It looks (and is) skimpy and non-functional.

  • Valerie Noronha
    15 years ago

    In my case, what kswl describes with the rug getting curled does not happen because when someone is seated on the side chairs where it is "skimpy" the back legs remain completely off the carpet so no drag. In any case, I bought an inexpensive used Karastan, but extremely thick and good quality, so if it were to get damaged, I could replace it. Having a rug there protects my floors from the chairs scraping and adds more interest than none at all. While some I am sure will disagree, it works for us and I would choose it again over getting a larger rug that butted up to the buffet or walls. For me it was a matter of scale and proportion: smaller dining room, smaller rug and a smaller sized dining set (which is one of the reasons I choose an antique dining set where the chairs are smaller sized). If I were to put a larger rug, I would probably have to get rid of the buffet--which I did not want to do.

Sponsored
SK Interiors
Average rating: 5 out of 5 stars49 Reviews
Loudoun County's Top Kitchen & Bath Designer I Best of Houzz 2014-2022