*
My house is 15 years old and the Indiana weather has curled the shingles where the snow has laid. The roof doesn’t leak but a home inspector and all my contractors buddies say I am going to need a new roof. I have a lot of roof. The debate, do I shingle over the one layer or rip it off? Pros and Cons?
Discussion Forum
Discussion Forum
Up Next
Video Shorts
Featured Story
The RealTruck AMP Research Bedsteps give you easy access to your truck-bed storage.
Featured Video
Highlights
"I have learned so much thanks to the searchable articles on the FHB website. I can confidently say that I expect to be a life-long subscriber." - M.K.
Replies
*
no question, ripoff if you want the job done right.
Rick Tuk
*Maybe this would be a good question for an FAQ section. It seems to come up frequently.I suspect it would be a short FAQ thread, though. Most everyone seems to agree that tearing it off is the way to go.
*Not everyone agrees that tearing it off is the way to go.As I have pointed out before,in many cases a layover is a perfectly good alternative.In this instance though,the customer clearly states that the 1st layer is curled. Definite sign for a tear-off.Most of my income now comes from Tear-offs.If most everyone agrees that tearing it off is the way to go,why am I profiting from so many 2-3 layer tear-offs?I can't think of the last time I encountered a house over 25 years old that did not have 2-3 layers on it.Many of these houses are 80+ years old and have NEVER had a tear-off( asphalt over slate,2 asphalt over shake,3 asphalt)If anything,in the real world,these facts show that very few people who actually DO the work,or PAY for the work agree that a tear-off is preferable
*Even the bundles have printed instuctions for adding a second layer of shingles. If the decking is sound and the tabs are not curled, why would you tear off the existing roof?? Is there a sound reason for this, or is it just "the way things are done"? I have always wondered this. In the meantime of course, I go ahead an roof over the old shingles up to three times ( trusses are supposed to carry the load, right? ). Just some thoughts.
*One and Two family code says one overlay is OK, after that you need to rip off or get a variance. The reason this became part of the code is that Homeowners had/have no idea what a roof could carry. Sad to say, an awful lot of roofs were installed by "hit and run" roofers. The fastest way to make a buck is an overlay, no doubt about it........no liability, no dumpster, no clean up , no flashings, no sidewall...just slam, bam, thank you Mam, and a taillight warranty. So, just as Steve says, 3 and four layer roofs are not rare in older neighborhoods.We just installed a skylight in a triple decker, one layer of cedar, two layers of three-tab, and a top layer of Wind-lok....brrr ! And the rafters were 3x4's at 4' OC.I would estimate that in the last 50 roofs, 4 have been overlays. Mostly because there were already two layers there , or usually, the homeowner waits until the roof is too far gone to do an overlay in good conciense (sic.) where is that spell-check when you need it ?My roof is getting onto 16 years, so we'll see which way I jump. It's a Jet shingle in good shape, so I'm thinking of a Hatteras overlay.
*One thing people fail to realize about a re-roof is you are only replacing part of the system. The shingles are not the only part of the system with a life expectency. If it was my house it would all go. Remove siding and re-flash. Lay down some ice-gaurd. Add some vents(if you believe in venting). I like to start with a " clean slate". Keep that in mind when you are laying over a shingle against a cheekwall and nailing through the old roof and flashings .
*
I'm with Reinhard on this. I always say if it's your own roof, do it right and tear it off, take a good look at your sheathing, get that straight and solid and then put on a good roof. If your old roof only lasted fifteen years, there may be a reason-but you'll never know unless you get down to solid wood.
MD
*
I would go over the original roofing to save money. The new shingles won't lay down as good if you did a tear off. But in time the summer heat will make it lay down ok.If you have extra change in your pocket-- Then by all means tear it off.
L. Siders
*
I'd agree with most of what the others have to say. I live near St. Peter, MN, which was victimized by a tornado not all that long ago. The town was deluged shortly after by "storm chaser" roofers, who further victimized the town with shoddy, wham it bam it workmanship.
While it is true code allows for new shingles to be laid over old, I find this to be a poor practice. It does save time, but shingles are only a part of the entire system. The flashing is as important, if not more, than the shingles and rarely gets replaced, even with tear offs. I have seen too many newly shingled roofs with old, leaky flashing all goobered up with sealant.
I'd take a hard look at your ventilation as well. I too live in a Northern climate, and I can't stress the importance of ventilation enough.
Tear off that old roofing! Make sure the sheathing is sound. Replace all the flashing. Vent that roof. Use ice and water protection, and the best quality materials you can afford.
*
uh-oh ... the "V-word".
*Which one- and two-family code are you referring to? In the Sept. 1999 issue of Professional Roofing, an article about BOCA code changes says that "all existing layers of roof coverings" must be removed.
*CABO one & two family: Section 910.3"Recovering vs. Replacement"........you must first remove existig roof coverings when........existing roof has THREE or more layers of any type of roofing.However, in RI, that was amended to read TWO or more layers.Also 910.2 you have to strip if it's wood, slate, clay or cement tile.Ain't national (NOT) codes great ?
*R.A., I had the experience two years ago of selling my late mother's house in Indiana which had a second layer of shingles applied. Just like here in Virginia, appraisers and realtors viewed the second layer as an el-cheapo approach to home maintenance, and home inspectors know that the "re-roofing" occurred without inspection and repair of sheathing and flashing. I've been told that on nicer homes, a second layer of shingles will decrease the value of the residence immediately upon application, since there is a suggestion that the owner is not willing to spend money on critical home maintenance.No home is any better than the foundation it sets on or the roof over it.Even if you plan to stay in your house for a long time, recognize that you're gonna have to pay for that tear-off sooner or later (sooner if you agree with many that overlays don't last as long as fresh roofs) .And while we're discussing this subject, I lean towards "40-year" shingles, vs. ""25-year" ... the marginal increase in materials cost does not bump up the overall cost that much. (Stephen Hazlett, any thoughts on this?)Good luck, Steve
*
Seems everyone agrees that this roof must be torn off.
MD
*
Jared -
Trusses are designed to carry 3 layers of shingles, at least in the area I live in. But that may vary from one area to the next - I really don't know.
Maybe this is kind of getting off the subject, but......... We recently did trusses for an older house. The owner hired a roofer to come in and put a new roof on their house. They didn't tear off, but were going to shingle over. When they stocked the roof, they put all the shingles in piles up at the ridge. About the time they got done, the rafters collapsed from the added weight.
Fortunately, no one was seroiusly injured. The ceiling joists held up, so the house wasn't seriously damaged.
*Steve Turner,My personal opinion is that choosing a 40 year shingle over a 25 year shingle is a smart thing to do.On the size and type of houses we work on,using a 40 year shingle might increase the total cost of the roof by maybe 15%,but it virtually DOUBLES the life of the roof.Seems like a smart way to spend money to me.The problem is customers rarely see it that way.Most common customer response?..." I won't even be alive 40 years from now" Second most common response?"I won't be living in this house 20 years from now,let alone 40 years from now"Regaurding appraisers:I have a close, personal friend of over 20 years who is a licensed appraiser,operating his own business. He also teaches a course in real estate appraisal at the local university.He has told me many,many times that a new roof has negligable effect on the APPRAISED VALUE of a house. all other things being equal, a house with a brand new roof will be appraised at the same value as a house with a 10-15 year old roof(IF THE 10-15YEAR OLD ROOF IS STILL VISIBLY IN GOOD SHAPE). No appraised value is added by a new roof,however, appraised value is DEDUCTED for a visibly bad roof.1 layer vs 2 layers is of no importance to the appraiser or the apprraised value as long as the roof is not leaking and appears to have several years of life remaining. Also remember that the appraiser has most likely done the appraisal to protect the interests of the mortgage lender,Not the home buyer.The appraised value is almost entirely determined by what "comparable" houses nearby have sold for in the last 6 months.The realtors input will be almost identical to the Appraisers,based almost entirely on comps. He or she is primarily interested in selling the house(or at least getting the listing and having someone else sell the house)Since their fee is usually a percentage of the sale their interest is in selling the house for the highest possible price.Regaurding Home inspectors: I have never seen one on a roof.If they have any doubts about the condition of the roof( when viewed from the safety of the ground) they generally suggest having it inspected by a licensed roofing contractor.Regaurding the flashing after a layover:There are quality layovers and bad layovers,just as there are quality tear-offs and bad tear-offs.The concept that a layover must consist of slapping on another layer of shingles and ignoring the flashing is simply not true.As I have stated several times before,most of my income is derived from tear-offs. When appropriate we will do a layover.During one of our standard layovers the chimney flashing is replaced,waste stack flashing is replaced,new valley flashing installed,old vents replaced,new drip edge installed.Many,many houses have no sidewall flashing,(for instance a ranch or a colonial with no lower level roofs)but even the roofs that do...can have new step flashing installed in most cases.I agree that a poorly done second layer will not last as long as a well done first layer.What I am advocating is the consideration of a well done second layer.Based on the age of the houses I work on,and the number of layers I tear-off,even 3 layer roofs can get 25-30 years per layer.I AM NOT SUGGESTING 3 LAYERS ! Just stating that I have seen them.I think the original poster in this thread was R.A. May who clearly noted his existing roofing was curled. I believe I also noted in my first post that THAT was a sure sign of a tear-off. There are other instances when a 2nd layer application is logical.good Luck,All,Stephen
*Thanks, Stephen for a prompt and thoughtful reply. I wish there were more folks like you in the roofing business.Regards, Steve
*Steve Turner,Thanks for your comment. The truth is ,that I am nothing very special. There are any number of roofers in my area as good as or better than me and I am sure it's the same in your area.If there is anything that sets us apart from the pack it is the self-knowleddge that we are roofers and that our area of experience or expertise is best confined to roofing.I am sure in almost any area of the country you can find contractors who specialize in roofing and are professionals in their approach.Each ones advice and opinions will be based on the experience gained from working on literally thousands of roofs and a long record of satisfied customers.Although most carpenters may have strong opinions about how roofing should be done,their opinions will be based on very limited practical experience.The kind of roofer you want is one who KNOWS he is a roofer,is content with being a roofer,and is involved with more roofing projects each year than a carpenter is apt to be involved with during his entire career.Un-like a carpenter,the roofer you want, knows his expertise is limited to one narrow area of the construction industry.It's not rocket science,but it's not all written on the shingle wrapper either.Good Luck,All,Stephen
*Ouch! Did the fact that the stacks were more of a point load have anything to do with it? Dinky rafters or rafter/joist connections? Just curious.
*A roofer who READS the shingle wrapper? You're hired!Seriously, I helped out a dyslexic plumber who wanted his own license but couldn't pass the written licensing exam by pointing out that since he had last tried the passage of the Americans With Disabilities Act meant they now had to account for his slow reading in giving the exam. A friend i told this to expressed doubt, saying don't plumbers have to read all those instructions (yeah, especially in a time-crunch!). After I stopped laughing i set him straight about the average tradesman's attitude towards instructions.
*Good to hear from you Andrew.Actually its been quite some time since I read a shingle wrapper.I do however read 2 different business journals,2 different trade journals specific to the roofing industry,Fine Homebuilding,and I attend seminars put on by suppliers and manufacturers to attempt to keep up with improved methods and materials like seamless rubber and modified bitumen etc.All of this convinces me of how little I do know.Since I devote myself full time(well excluding baseball) to a comparitively narrow segment of the industry,and even so realize that my knowledge is incomplete, It amuses me to find generalists like a carpenters stating categorically how a roofing project should be done.I may have definite opinions on how a house should be framed,trimmed,plumbed,wired etc. but how pertinent would those opinions be?We are all specialists,but some of us don't realize it yet.good luck,stephen
*<>In my area (NW Ohio) most of the inspectors walk most roofs, and my impresssion from talking with other HI's from around the country is that many, if not most, walk roofs. (Personally, I walk every roof so long as I'm confident that I'll be in control of where & when I comne down.) I'd estimate that I walk 70-80% of the houses I do. If I can't walk it, I view it form on edge at several locations & with binoculars.<> How many home inspections have you actually seen, or at least seen the report from? Is it a self-selecting group? That is, as a roofer, are you seeing only those reports which recommend evaluation by a roofer? That can lead to a misperception as to how many HI's walk the roof.Bob Walker
*Bob Walker,you are probably right in that it could be a self selecting group.I am thinking of a house that was sold about a month ago.Inspector felt the chimney flashing was leaking and required new flashing installed.He completly missed the 3 gaps in mortar on the back of the chimney so large that birds could enter,and the 4th gap so large it was caused by a completly missing brick. ( The missing brick was about 6 feet below the top of the chimney) We won't even discuss the over all deterioration of the mortar and the completly shredded mortar cap. This guy clearly never ventured onto the roof.I have encountered countless situations like this,and this is one of several reasons I now rarely get involved with projects where the house is being bought or sold.Possibly the area you operate in has a lot of low pitched roofs.The roofs I generally work on are 10/12 and steeper and not to many people are "walking "those.your binoculars are of rather limited value unless they see around corners or through chimneys. A lot of areas can have cracking or nail holes that are simply not visible unless you are right on top of them. when you say" Personally I walk every roof as long as I am confident that I will be in controll of where and when I will come down" you sum up the whole enchilada.You would not have that confidence or controll on these houses.good luck,All,Stephen
*
I had my roof done last year and I opted to have it all ripped off. Shingles were 15 years old and in one large area there was a lot of "smoke" or what was left.
Here were the reasons:
less weight
gave me an opportunity to inspect
the plywood
less heat so I expect more life out of the new, upgrade
shingles.
Negatives: more expensive (did not even price roof over)
roofer did a good pickup but there was still plenty of nails for me to pick up.
AND, for what's it worth, this town only allows a single roof over. Ball in your court.
Jerry
*
I plan to leave my single layer in place when I reroof, however I am going with an epoxycote metal roof and plan not to do it again in my life or my childrens lives. I am tired of twenty year shingles that you can get sixteen or seventeen out of or thirty year shingles that are good for twenty four or five. In my book metal is the way to go.
*Phillip,Can you share some more detail about this system?What are the costs involved,any condensation problems anticipated,what does the stuff look like(slate,shake,standing seam)?Any and all other info.Some of the roofing magazines I read indicate Metal is a small(3-7%)part of the market,but a growing part.I would love to offer a product to my customers with a durability and longevity which would eclipse asphalt shingles.I do suspect that the cost factor will prevent ready customer acceptance.It is already tough enough to sell an upgrade from a 25 yr. shingle to a 40 yr.,when the customer knows statistically he won't be living in the same house 7 years down the road.Good Luck All,Stephen
*Hey gents. I am going to be replacing my Aluminum roof, that was improperly installed by the previous owner. It has leaked from day one, he installed galvanized valley, and made 3 serious errors that caused pretty serious leaks that were persistant and not easily cured. So the aluminum, that they fastened with nails, is going onto the shop and the house is getting shingles again. The metal roofing does last a good long time, but, if you are going to be installing it, you had better be good on a brake and know your roofing inside and out. I have also noticed many of these factory coatings fail from UV. Remember, Frank Lloyd Wright had many a roof that leaked.L
*YeahBut he was an artist. . .and never used steel roofing!!-pm
*
Tear off always better no question.
that way we can install new felt,flashing properly,and ice and water shield. Witch is code up here.
*To me it is a matter of looks and money.Tearing it off makes a better looking roof but coast more,both end up serving the same purpose if done correctly.ted
*I think tearing off old roofs is the answer.You need to inspect the boards and replace bad ones. ice and water shield and all new drip edge and flashings help also.
*
As if you don't already have lots of input on your re-roofing dilemma, I'd like to throw my two cents in too. The last house that I stripped and re-roofed was a medium size home with three layers of composition roofing on it. The weight of the 30 yard dumpster, when filled, was just over 12,000 pounds. Last time I weighed my 1988 Chevy S-10 pick-up truck, it weighed about 3800 pounds. So I always ask my clients, "would you like the weight of 3 Chevy S-10's sitting up on your 2x4 rafters?" Usually the answer is "no". I wouldn't either. This house, like most of the older urban homes in Portland, was built with 2 x 4 rafters 24 inchs on center. This house was designed to hold light cedar wood shingles in 1915, and I suspect that the weight of 3 layers of composition shingles never figured into the load design. Composition roofing is extremely heavy! If you have ever removed even a small section of three layers of 3-tab, say to install a skylight, and then moved that debris to the dump pile, you'll know what I'm talking about. Aside from that, applying successive layers makes each layer less and less flat and uniform, in turn reducing the lifespan of the shingle because it tends to open it exposing the asphault to UV's. Further, I think that it doesn't look as good when the roof is all rumpled. Further still, I think (make that, I know)that you can do a better job with flashings and trims if you are working with a single layer. 3 layers looks like garbage sitting on your house and it makes my back ache to think about all the weight that that poor house is holding up. And I do live in an earthquake zone which is yet another disadvantage of having a top-heavy house! I don't know if I have changed your mind, but when I re-roof my own house this summer, I'm going to invest some extra time and money and do it right. I'm strippin' it clean, and putting on a fifty year light-weight imitation slate roof. I'll sleep better at night, and if I sell the house, it will pay for itself or darn near I think...Jon Gerlach
*
My house is 15 years old and the Indiana weather has curled the shingles where the snow has laid. The roof doesn't leak but a home inspector and all my contractors buddies say I am going to need a new roof. I have a lot of roof. The debate, do I shingle over the one layer or rip it off? Pros and Cons?