On Saturday, July 13, 2013 6:01:11 PM UTC-4, Higgs Boson wrote:
On Saturday, July 13, 2013 8:11:01 AM UTC-7, woodchucker wrote:

On 7/12/2013 2:55 PM, wrote:



On Friday, July 12, 2013 12:57:30 PM UTC-4, TomR wrote:



Higgs Boson wrote:







On Wednesday, July 3, 2013 7:23:15 AM UTC-7, TomR wrote:







Higgs Boson wrote:















Small -- 4x6 +- wooden . . . overhang on back porch. . . ,







Have to replace old worn cover (what we used to call "tar paper").















Any difference between individual shingles and sheet, in terms of







wear?















Any chance that you could upload a photo . . ?







(through http://tinypic.com















OK, here is pic to show angle of "eyebrow" roof on back porch.















http://tinypic.com/r/35ko77d/5















Hope this will help recommend shingles vs ??















Also: must shingles be underlaid with ? specific name of product?















The photo definitely helps, along with the part that you later wrote about







not being too concerned about aesthetics since there is no other visible







roof to match etc.















To me, it looks like a very simple job for any roofer or any handyman with a







little knowledge of roofing.















If it were me, I would probably skip the idea of using shingles and just use







roll roofing. Roll roofing is cheap and you don't need much.



















You use the term "tar paper", but it's definitely not "tar paper". If you







go to Home Depot or Lowes etc. and look at "roll roofing", you'll see what







roll roofing is. In the same section, they will have "tar paper" -- but it







will be called roof underlayment or roof felt -- and that is not what you







now have for a roof.















One reason why I would skip the shingles is that they need to be nailed in







place. But, it looks like you have a plywood roof deck and I think the







nails would come through the plywood and would show underneath.











Good point. I didn't realize it's just exposed plywood underneath.



The nails would come through, so I agree shingles are out.



























Instead, I would get roll roofing such as this (which comes in white or







"summer sage" color):







http://www.homedepot.com/webapp/cata...rolled+roofing .















And, after removing the old roofing material, I would basically just "glue







down" the new roll roofing using something like this:







http://www.homedepot.com/p/Gardner-4...5-GA/100317802 .























You will also need a piece of drip edge to replace the drip edge that you







already have. And, I guess roof cement where the roof meets the building.











That needs to be flashed.























You want tar paper not underlayment which is felt. Tar paper for unaided



roofing is much sturdier and resists water, the underlayment is a for



breathing (vapor barrier and allows it to dry out and breathe).







I would just nail shingles, you said it's not aesthetic... just go for it.



--



Jeff\



I am getting more confused by the minute.



Somebody else said avoid shingles because it looked like roof was plywood and nails might go through. So I was all set to use roll roofing -- which I was told didn't need underlayment.



???!!!!



HB

I think it was TomR that pointed out that all you have there is
a plywood roof deck where you can see the bottom of it and if you
shingle it, the nails will show. He's right. Shingle nails need
to be long enough to go through the sheathing in order to hold.
Folks still suggesting shingles probably didn't see the pic that
shows the bottom of the roof deck is the ceiling of the overhang.
Roll roofing is what you want.