5 years ago we had our original slate roof replaced on our house built
in 1915 with 30 year Elk asphalt architectural shingles. The roofers
did not have to replace any woof as it was all solid and in good shape.
The wood beams on the roof are butted close to each other with little
to no space between them.

Recently a large 6' x 4' section of shingles slide down the south side
of the roof exposing the felt paper below. The original roofer is long
gone. We called out another well known roofer in the area to
inspect/repair the section that fell.

His immediate reaction was that the roof wasn't nailed correctly. He
threw down a section of shingles and showed us how the nail heads had
pulled right through the shingles. He explained that there is a nail
strip where you are supposed to nail into the shingle. These were
nailed several inches above the area where he said was the proper
place.

Only the south side has been effected so far and to be safe and sure we
are going to have the entire roof replaced again.

The question I have is about the underlying wood and kind of shingles
we can use. The roofer who came out and told us about the nail strip
suggested that if we want to use an architectural shingle again that we
re-sheet the entire roof with new wood. He says that the nail strip on
an architectural shingle is too narrow and would need new wood. The
nail area on a 3-tab is much larger and would not require new wood to
nail on.

Another roofer says that's BS and if he did encounter any spots that
were questionable, he would only re-sheet that area. The difference is
about $2000 to have it re-sheeted or not.

Any other opinions? We'd really like to keep the architectural shingle
look but are not sure whether or not we need to re-sheet the entire
roof as the first roofer suggested. As I said above the wood is in good
shape and there are no soft spots anywhere.

Todd

In oups.com,
Todd typed:
5 years ago we had our original slate roof replaced on our
house built
in 1915 with 30 year Elk asphalt architectural shingles. The
roofers
did not have to replace any woof as it was all solid and in
good
shape. The wood beams on the roof are butted close to each
other with
little to no space between them.

Recently a large 6' x 4' section of shingles slide down the
south side
of the roof exposing the felt paper below. The original roofer
is long
gone. We called out another well known roofer in the area to
inspect/repair the section that fell.

His immediate reaction was that the roof wasn't nailed
correctly. He
threw down a section of shingles and showed us how the nail
heads had
pulled right through the shingles. He explained that there is a
nail
strip where you are supposed to nail into the shingle. These
were
nailed several inches above the area where he said was the
proper
place.

Only the south side has been effected so far and to be safe and
sure
we are going to have the entire roof replaced again.

The question I have is about the underlying wood and kind of
shingles
we can use. The roofer who came out and told us about the nail
strip
suggested that if we want to use an architectural shingle again
that
we re-sheet the entire roof with new wood. He says that the
nail
strip on an architectural shingle is too narrow and would need
new
wood. The nail area on a 3-tab is much larger and would not
require
new wood to nail on.

Another roofer says that's BS and if he did encounter any spots
that
were questionable, he would only re-sheet that area. The
difference is
about $2000 to have it re-sheeted or not.

Any other opinions? We'd really like to keep the architectural
shingle
look but are not sure whether or not we need to re-sheet the
entire
roof as the first roofer suggested. As I said above the wood is
in
good shape and there are no soft spots anywhere.

Todd

I'd go with the guy that only replaces what's bad. It makes his
estimate less accurate, but it makes more sense and is how we did
it. Roof's now about ten, and in perfect shape.
Get all the details & supplies in writing.

Pop`

His immediate reaction was that the roof wasn't nailed correctly. He
threw down a section of shingles and showed us how the nail heads had
pulled right through the shingles. He explained that there is a nail
strip where you are supposed to nail into the shingle. These were
nailed several inches above the area where he said was the proper
place.

Only the south side has been effected so far and to be safe and sure
we are going to have the entire roof replaced again.

The question I have is about the underlying wood and kind of shingles
we can use. The roofer who came out and told us about the nail strip
suggested that if we want to use an architectural shingle again that
we re-sheet the entire roof with new wood. He says that the nail
strip on an architectural shingle is too narrow and would need new
wood. The nail area on a 3-tab is much larger and would not require
new wood to nail on.

I don't know much about roofing, but I can see his logic if if your
description of the wood underneath is accurate.

What you have are planks, right? Probably a good chance that there are gaps,
however small, between the planks.

To keep the architectural shingles in a straight row he might end up with
the nail strip right on one of these gaps, giving no hold to the shingles
there.

Have you considered steel roofing? It can come in many patterns and should
go down on that planking with little effort.

Why didnt you just repair the slate, get a few more bids, I think you
have been dealing with crooks.

at lewast make a warranty claim with the shingle manufacturer. what do
you have to lose?

heck they may give you some sort oif discount and cant hurt. if the
installer was a factoiry authorized one they might cover the entire
cost.....

they also would have opinion on all new wood.

i would rather spend extra money on that rubber sealing underlayment
than all new wood

Don't the asphalt shingles require (according to the manufacturer and
warranty) sheathing?] Those planks are great for slate (although they
are _supposed_ to have fairly large gaps, IIRC) -- and its a shame you
(had to?) get rid of them. Nothing you put on will ever look as nice or
last as long. Anyway, I'd have put sheathing on the first time around
before the shingles. Now its a toss up. But the first guy is right
about the nails -- it is going to be a pain to get those nails in the
right places. It is unlikely to affect the whole roof. But it is sure
to show up as a problem again and again for several years, until all of
the poorly nailed sheets come off.

-Kevin


wrote:
at lewast make a warranty claim with the shingle manufacturer. what do
you have to lose?

heck they may give you some sort oif discount and cant hurt. if the
installer was a factoiry authorized one they might cover the entire
cost.....

they also would have opinion on all new wood.

i would rather spend extra money on that rubber sealing underlayment
than all new wood

On 30 Jul 2006 15:38:02 -0700, "Todd" wrote:

5 years ago we had our original slate roof replaced on our house built
in 1915 with 30 year Elk asphalt architectural shingles. The roofers
did not have to replace any woof as it was all solid and in good shape.
The wood beams on the roof are butted close to each other with little
to no space between them.

Recently a large 6' x 4' section of shingles slide down the south side
of the roof exposing the felt paper below. The original roofer is long
gone. We called out another well known roofer in the area to
inspect/repair the section that fell.

His immediate reaction was that the roof wasn't nailed correctly. He
threw down a section of shingles and showed us how the nail heads had
pulled right through the shingles. He explained that there is a nail
strip where you are supposed to nail into the shingle. These were
nailed several inches above the area where he said was the proper
place.

Only the south side has been effected so far and to be safe and sure we
are going to have the entire roof replaced again.

The question I have is about the underlying wood and kind of shingles
we can use. The roofer who came out and told us about the nail strip
suggested that if we want to use an architectural shingle again that we
re-sheet the entire roof with new wood. He says that the nail strip on
an architectural shingle is too narrow and would need new wood. The
nail area on a 3-tab is much larger and would not require new wood to
nail on.

Another roofer says that's BS and if he did encounter any spots that
were questionable, he would only re-sheet that area. The difference is
about $2000 to have it re-sheeted or not.

Any other opinions? We'd really like to keep the architectural shingle
look but are not sure whether or not we need to re-sheet the entire
roof as the first roofer suggested. As I said above the wood is in good
shape and there are no soft spots anywhere.

Todd

I'd either go with a completelyh new metal roof system - very
expenive but will last 50 years plus and look fabulous,.
or
Only patch what is necessary

depending on how tight money is.

"Todd" wrote in message
oups.com...
5 years ago we had our original slate roof replaced on our house built
in 1915 with 30 year Elk asphalt architectural shingles. The roofers
did not have to replace any woof as it was all solid and in good shape.
The wood beams on the roof are butted close to each other with little
to no space between them.

It's a pity you got rid of your slate roof. Our old neighborhood in
Pittsburgh consisted of houses built between 1910 and 1935, nearly all were
stone & brick houses and many of them had their original slate roofs. It's
hard to find a competent person to work on them but by golly they last.

I'm currently in Ithaca, working at Cornell University in the civil
engineering department. I was doing some archival work and found a campus
wide roof inventory and a subsequent study about roof maintenance procedures
done in the 1980s. Many of the older buildings on campus were built with
slate roofs and in the 1970, campus maintenance started to replace those
roofs with asphalt shingles (it was the modern thing to do). However the
conclusion of the study was that it was, by far, more cost effective to keep
the slate roofs. While a slate roof does need individual slates replaced
every so often and maintenance (regular attention to flashing & leaks before
they become a problem), overall they last pretty much forever. OTOH, asphalt
roofs need to be completely replaced every 10-20 years.

Chris

If the roofer dead, if not then take to small claims for the maximum,
its fairly quick

Slate detoriates over time and costs too much to replace.

It weathers away very slowly till its paper thin. walking on it is very
dangerous leads to cracking, nails rust off and the felt paper
underneath is GONE, and thats really the waterproofing

theres recycled plastic that looks like slate withn a guarantee longer
than shingles to maintain the look at a fraction of the cost.....

like everything else slate doesnt last forever. my best friend had his
slate roof replaced with shingles a few years ago. the slate some
looked like lorraine swiss cheese really thin with all holes. arease
that hadnt weathered were great and perhaps 5 times thicker

I would have loved to keep the slate but it was in poor shape. When we
purchased the house someone had applied some kind of thin rubber
coating over the slate to make it look better / seal some leaks. Well
that just made everything worse as over time it allowed water in and
softened much of the roof up.

the original roofer - it was a sub-contractor and that company is
no-where to be found. We contact the state attorney generals office and
they say that the statute of limitations in Ohio is two years. The
original workmanship warranty from the sub-contractor was one year. Not
much we can do now.

Warranty claim - we did contact Elk and they sent out a warranty
package. They wanted a sample of a shingle which clearly shows that it
wasn't nailed correctly. No sense bothering with that.

Todd wrote:
I would have loved to keep the slate but it was in poor shape. When we
purchased the house someone had applied some kind of thin rubber
coating over the slate to make it look better / seal some leaks. Well
that just made everything worse as over time it allowed water in and
softened much of the roof up.

the original roofer - it was a sub-contractor and that company is
no-where to be found. We contact the state attorney generals office and
they say that the statute of limitations in Ohio is two years. The
original workmanship warranty from the sub-contractor was one year. Not
much we can do now.

Warranty claim - we did contact Elk and they sent out a warranty
package. They wanted a sample of a shingle which clearly shows that it
wasn't nailed correctly. No sense bothering with that.

I have a similar problem. In 1994 I had
a new roof put over the original
1972 roof. That roof is now dead.
There are probably 1000s of people
with is problem. The shingles are from
Certainteed and it has been determined
thay are defective. Certainteed will
pay a pro-rated amount on the shngles
(big deal) but nothing on the labor,
which is about 80% of the cost. There
are presently class action suits being
filed in several states.

On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 21:20:18 -0500, JimL wrote:

I'd either go with a completelyh new metal roof system - very
expenive but will last 50 years plus and look fabulous,.

Is that true? I was told by a usually trustworthy person that the
fasteners are supposed to be 'serviced' every 12 years, IIRC.

G

On Tue, 01 Aug 2006 01:29:45 GMT, George
wrote:

On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 21:20:18 -0500, JimL wrote:

I'd either go with a completelyh new metal roof system - very
expenive but will last 50 years plus and look fabulous,.

Is that true? I was told by a usually trustworthy person that the
fasteners are supposed to be 'serviced' every 12 years, IIRC.

G

Riduculous. Absolutely not true. You shouldn't let anyone on your
roof for 50 years. Really.

On Tue, 01 Aug 2006 01:37:05 -0500, JimL wrote:

On Tue, 01 Aug 2006 01:29:45 GMT, George
wrote:

On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 21:20:18 -0500, JimL wrote:

I'd either go with a completelyh new metal roof system - very
expenive but will last 50 years plus and look fabulous,.

Is that true? I was told by a usually trustworthy person that the
fasteners are supposed to be 'serviced' every 12 years, IIRC.

G

Riduculous. Absolutely not true. You shouldn't let anyone on your
roof for 50 years. Really.

Depends on what you're using for a metal roofing system,
and what you mean by "serviced".

Noozer wrote:

Have you considered steel roofing? It can come in many patterns and should
go down on that planking with little effort.

How do you steel roofing? Just pry it up from the neighbor's house when
nobody's home and sneak it over to your house? (sorry, having one of
those days..)

wrote:
Slate detoriates over time and costs too much to replace.

It weathers away very slowly till its paper thin. walking on it is very
dangerous leads to cracking, nails rust off and the felt paper
underneath is GONE, and thats really the waterproofing

Also, major trouble if the rafters catch on fire

On Tue, 01 Aug 2006 08:49:18 -0400, Goedjn wrote:

On Tue, 01 Aug 2006 01:37:05 -0500, JimL wrote:

On Tue, 01 Aug 2006 01:29:45 GMT, George
wrote:

On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 21:20:18 -0500, JimL wrote:

I'd either go with a completelyh new metal roof system - very
expenive but will last 50 years plus and look fabulous,.

Is that true? I was told by a usually trustworthy person that the
fasteners are supposed to be 'serviced' every 12 years, IIRC.

G

Riduculous. Absolutely not true. You shouldn't let anyone on your
roof for 50 years. Really.

Depends on what you're using for a metal roofing system,
and what you mean by "serviced".


My roof is regular asphalt shingles. My family has always done our own
roofs, and I find them interesting. Lately, I've been seeing more of
what I'd call 'formed metal' roofing (mostly blue, if that helps). So,
I asked someone about them.

As best I recall, he said there were two types. One has the fasteners
are exponsed, but driven through a a rubber washer to seal them. The
other has blind fasteners - I assume under the interlock of the metal
pieces. I think he said that the first kind has very poor durability,
and even for the second kind, the specs called for something to be done
to it (my memory fails me here) about every 12 yrs.

G

z wrote:
Noozer wrote:

Have you considered steel roofing? It can come in many patterns and should
go down on that planking with little effort.

How do you steel roofing? Just pry it up from the neighbor's house when
nobody's home and sneak it over to your house? (sorry, having one of
those days..)

Yep.
Another non-funny day for zlibturd.
Why should today be any different?

z wrote:
wrote:
Slate detoriates over time and costs too much to replace.

It weathers away very slowly till its paper thin. walking on it is very
dangerous leads to cracking, nails rust off and the felt paper
underneath is GONE, and thats really the waterproofing

Also, major trouble if the rafters catch on fire

Yep.
Another non-funny day for zlibturd.
Why should today be any different?

Bawana wrote:
z wrote:
wrote:
Slate detoriates over time and costs too much to replace.

It weathers away very slowly till its paper thin. walking on it is very
dangerous leads to cracking, nails rust off and the felt paper
underneath is GONE, and thats really the waterproofing

Also, major trouble if the rafters catch on fire

Yep.
Another non-funny day for zlibturd.
Why should today be any different?

Hey, my stalker's back! Hey everybody, say hi! What's with the name
change? Your ISP get wise to ya?

z wrote:
Bawana wrote:
z wrote:
wrote:
Slate detoriates over time and costs too much to replace.

It weathers away very slowly till its paper thin. walking on it is very
dangerous leads to cracking, nails rust off and the felt paper
underneath is GONE, and thats really the waterproofing

Also, major trouble if the rafters catch on fire

Yep.
Another non-funny day for zlibturd.
Why should today be any different?

Hey, my stalker's back! Hey everybody, say hi! What's with the name
change? Your ISP get wise to ya?

Yep.
Another non-funny day for zlibturd.
Why should today be any different?

wrote:
Slate detoriates over time and costs too much to replace.

It weathers away very slowly till its paper thin. walking on it is very
dangerous leads to cracking, nails rust off and the felt paper
underneath is GONE, and thats really the waterproofing

theres recycled plastic that looks like slate withn a guarantee longer
than shingles to maintain the look at a fraction of the cost.....

like everything else slate doesnt last forever. my best friend had his
slate roof replaced with shingles a few years ago. the slate some
looked like lorraine swiss cheese really thin with all holes. arease
that hadnt weathered were great and perhaps 5 times thicker

this is almost complete bs!!!

My closest friend bought a fire damaged house over 20 years ago and
stripped the slate, redid the roof and replaced the removed slate.

hasn't touched it since[in any serious way anyway]

He would probably be due a roof by now if he had put asphalt

SO I will go with slate over plastic, his slate is by an large 150 years
old now, and doing just fine.

hasn't touched it since[in any serious way anyway]

He would probably be due a roof by now if he had put asphalt

SO I will go with slate over plastic, his slate is by an large 150 years
old now, and doing just fine.


Not all slate is the same.

Goedjn wrote:

hasn't touched it since[in any serious way anyway]

He would probably be due a roof by now if he had put asphalt

SO I will go with slate over plastic, his slate is by an large 150 years
old now, and doing just fine.


Not all slate is the same.

yeah some is harder than others or weathers away differently.

sadly nothing lasts forever even heavy copper is rated at about a 100
years.

some rain has more acids etc leading to faster detoriation