Brick bungalow in midwest US. Scraped and shingled in 1997. No visable leaks, curling, cracking, etc. Shingles were rated for about 15 years.
Building code allows 2 layers of shingles.
Should I wait for visable problems with the old shingles or should I look for another way to determine when to add a new layer?
TIA, Will
15 year shingles!!!!! I didn't know they even made such a product. The cheapest crap available. Next time buy a better line of shingles and you won't be looking to pay to have them replaced over again.
"EXT" wrote in news:4ea1faca$0$2618$ snipped-for-privacy@auth.newsreader.octanews.com:
They're what you call "builder quality". And that's not a compliment.
Everything I've ever been told by reputable roofers is that doubling-up shingles is a poor idea. Professionals usually won't even warranty a double-up job, if they'll agree to do it at all. The correct approach is to remove the old shingles and redo from scratch.
Maybe the OP doesn't want to pay the landfill fees...
My view is "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."
You may be in an abnormally mild climate, or had more than your share of cloudy days. You may have a batch of 40-year shingles that were mislabeled.
Further, if you have a mischievous hail-storm next week, your insurance company may pay for it.
Don't add a second layer. Do a tear-off and start from the bare sheathing. That way you can not only repair any vulnerabilities but you can take advantage of newer materials and technology. For example, the new mylar reflecting material that replaces tar paper. It is even more leak proof than felt and keeps your attic cooler.
Years back, and old roofer friend stated "the second roof is the best
- and the third the worst"
If the shingle still look good and are laying flat, I'd wait another year or so. Mine 15 year shingles were 22 years when I put a new roof on.
There are varying opinions on tear off. If the shingles are curling, warped, flashing bad, it is best to tear off. If they are in general good condition, it is possible to put a second layer. Talk to a reputable roofer about that and have him take a look.
In my case, I left them on and after 10 years, everything is just fine.
I'll second that. Total tear-off, AFAIAC, is the ONLY proper way to redo a roof. Labor is half the cost or more for the job, and the extra years you get by NOT double-layering will pay for the additional day to strip the roof, and the extra dumpster. People at work know I grew up in the business, so when they seek my advice, that is what I always tell them. The 'upscale' roofing company in town pushes those T-lock 'floating overlay' roofs. When I was getting estimates, I basically threw the guy out of my house when he claimed there was no benefit to stripping old roof.
Plus, bare deck is the best way to check for soft spots that need patching, and refresh the flashing and drip edge, plus add the overhang and valley ice shield a 1997 roof is unlikely to have.
My last shingle set lasted 30 years. I put them on over the new tongue and groove yellow pine I put on the stripped down roof. I had new shingles put on by pros and they said how beautifully the shingles nailed down, and I said that is because of the wood under the single layer of shingles. No need to remove the old ones. It has bee 6 years and all is well. Center city Philadelphia,
I think it's often (not always) like that around here. Maybe
30-50% more than rated duration under certain conditions.That was my understanding.
Sounds good to me.
Glad to hear.
Thanks, Will
30 lb.
Medium brown.
Elec. fan, tstat set to 108-112.
No.
Yes.
Yes.
Or so.
Thanks, Will
aemeijers wrote in news:Se2dnSfeLaO1pD_TnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@giganews.com:
Which is exactly what my neighbor ended up needing. When we had our roofs done a few years ago, he had one corner where most of the gravel had worn off the shingles. Under that was wood that had rotted and needed to be replaced. Removal of the shingles exposed the wood.
I don't see how you could properly do those without a bare roof to start with.
Around here you are LUCKY to get 70%
Harry makes a good point though. Houses in the US are often built with high maintenance materials that last 20 to 30 years. Houses in Europe are often hundreds of years old with stone, brick, state, or clay that needs little of no maintenance.
A few weeks ago, we stayed in a place in Italy that was built in 1200 and refurbished in the 1400s. Of course, it has been upgraded, plumbed, and electrified since then.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.