Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hi there. That other roofing topic gives rise to my current dilemma. We are having our thirty year old roof replaced and thankfully it will be covered by insurance. The contract called for GAF shingles. I made a selection - Pewter Gray - only to find out that the insurance will not cover the heavier shingles required for the roof and hip. As a result, there will be an upcharge and I don't find it particularly nominal at this time.
Our contractor suggested that we do most of the roof using GAF shingles in my preferred color, but for the roof and hip we can use Tamko. Their shingles match the closest and the insurance will cover them. They are lighter weight, however.
Based on a comment here and online, I've read some bad things about Tamko products. I don't want to put cheap stuff on the house since the roof it's replacing is top notch and well constructed. The shingles are 25 year, but the roof is 30 and one can technically get maybe a few more years out of it. It's just nearing the end of its lifespan. I don't want to replace good quality stuff with inferior stuff, especially since this home is a custom home and overall demands higher quality materials (within budget of course).
HOWEVER I *really* like pewter more than the next appealing color, slate. And it will only be for the "ridge and hip".
What do you think? What are your experiences with TAmko? If it's just for the roof and hip, is that ok?
My first thought is to dispute the insurance company if the existing roof is built to the better standards. A public adjuster can be hired to force the issue. Just the mention of one might cause a change in attitude.
My second thought is "how old are you, and do you plan to live out your life there?" At some point, a roof will have a longer lifespan than you, and it won't be considering the cost of your replacement.
The third thought is that Tamko is fine. I have them on my roof and have not noticed any excessive shedding, etc. There was a very slight color variance in a couple of the bundles, but the crew caught it and blended that batch successfully.
Fourth, the underlay is more important in many ways than the shingles themselves. Upgrade to synthetic and even heavier in valleys and a couple feet up from the edges.
My first thought is to dispute the insurance company if the existing roof is built to the better standards. A public adjuster can be hired to force the issue. Just the mention of one might cause a change in attitude.
My second thought is "how old are you, and do you plan to live out your life there?" At some point, a roof will have a longer lifespan than you, and it won't be considering the cost of your replacement.
The third thought is that Tamko is fine. I have them on my roof and have not noticed any excessive shedding, etc. There was a very slight color variance in a couple of the bundles, but the crew caught it and blended that batch successfully.
Fourth, the underlay is more important in many ways than the shingles themselves. Upgrade to synthetic and even heavier in valleys and a couple feet up from the edges.
Hi there. That other roofing topic gives rise to my current dilemma. We are having our thirty year old roof replaced and thankfully it will be covered by insurance. The contract called for GAF shingles. I made a selection - Pewter Gray - only to find out that the insurance will not cover the heavier shingles required for the roof and hip. As a result, there will be an upcharge and I don't find it particularly nominal at this time.
Our contractor suggested that we do most of the roof using GAF shingles in my preferred color, but for the roof and hip we can use Tamko. Their shingles match the closest and the insurance will cover them. They are lighter weight, however.
Based on a comment here and online, I've read some bad things about Tamko products. I don't want to put cheap stuff on the house since the roof it's replacing is top notch and well constructed. The shingles are 25 year, but the roof is 30 and one can technically get maybe a few more years out of it. It's just nearing the end of its lifespan. I don't want to replace good quality stuff with inferior stuff, especially since this home is a custom home and overall demands higher quality materials (within budget of course).
HOWEVER I *really* like pewter more than the next appealing color, slate. And it will only be for the "ridge and hip".
What do you think? What are your experiences with TAmko? If it's just for the roof and hip, is that ok?
Hi there. That other roofing topic gives rise to my current dilemma. We are having our thirty year old roof replaced and thankfully it will be covered by insurance. The contract called for GAF shingles. I made a selection - Pewter Gray - only to find out that the insurance will not cover the heavier shingles required for the roof and hip. As a result, there will be an upcharge and I don't find it particularly nominal at this time.
Our contractor suggested that we do most of the roof using GAF shingles in my preferred color, but for the roof and hip we can use Tamko. Their shingles match the closest and the insurance will cover them. They are lighter weight, however.
Based on a comment here and online, I've read some bad things about Tamko products. I don't want to put cheap stuff on the house since the roof it's replacing is top notch and well constructed. The shingles are 25 year, but the roof is 30 and one can technically get maybe a few more years out of it. It's just nearing the end of its lifespan. I don't want to replace good quality stuff with inferior stuff, especially since this home is a custom home and overall demands higher quality materials (within budget of course).
HOWEVER I *really* like pewter more than the next appealing color, slate. And it will only be for the "ridge and hip".
What do you think? What are your experiences with TAmko? If it's just for the roof and hip, is that ok?
Perhaps you are referring to my comment in this thread?
If so, I apologize for causing you concern. TAMKO shingles are not junk by any means. In the other topic I was referring to my experience with both companies. My thought is that GAF is slightly longer lasting based on what I observed. And truthfully, If GAF turned out to cost significantly more to purchase than TAMKO, I would not hesitate to go back to TAMKO. But, all things being equal I would buy GAF over TAMKO. If you decide to use TAMKO, you’ll be fine.
If insurance is paying for the roof, I suspect hail damage may be involved (or maybe some other type of weather damage). No guarantees the same weather event won’t happen next year, and then what difference is that 25 year roof vs. the 30?
I’ve had two roofs replaced due to hail. One was 9 years old and the other 4 years. I barely escaped replacing another roof that was 10 years old.
Whatever you decide, I wouldn’t mix two different brands.
I think you’re referring to my roofing thread. I don’t know who your insurance company is, but ours tried the exact same thing with hair cutting on hip and ridge elements. Basically they undershot the cost by about $5k overall for us (we have a steep slope and multiple angle areas, complicated-ish setup. Our roof contractor redid their estimate sent it directly to the adjuster, and all taken care of.
Insurance is never going to start at the top. I would share the estimate with the contractor and see what he/she can do. If your contractor doesn’t deal with insurance companies, then I might suggest a different contractor. Look at GAF’s website - they offer you the ability to find a master installer of their products in your market - which is what you want to use because it’ll extend the warranty tremendously for you to use one of their trained outfits.
Don’t accept first estimate from insurance. They’re banking on you doing just that and not knowing how to debate effectively on the topic. Have the roof contractor do that for you (it’s in their best interest anyway).
I will also add, it’s in the insurance company’s best interest to get the roof correct too.
How are you getting the insurance company to pay for replacement of a 30 year old roof?? I would think if it was hail damage they would prorate it.
After prorating you should be able to buy a box of roofing nails with the settlement money.
Insurance companys are not in business to replace worn out roofs, lots of luck trying to come close to breaking even.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
