- I’m in the same boat—first house, and the roof was already double-layered when I bought it.
- Inspector said it was “fine for now,” but I keep side-eyeing the attic rafters every winter.
- No sagging yet, but my place is only 30 years old.
- Heard from a neighbor with a 100-year-old house that his rafters started bowing after a second layer... not sure if that’s just old wood or what.
- Honestly, I wish there was a clear answer. Feels like it’s always a gamble between saving money now and risking bigger problems later.
I get the struggle—my place had a double layer too when I moved in, and I spent way too much time poking around the attic with a flashlight. My inspector said it was “within code,” but that didn’t exactly make me sleep better. From what I’ve read (and seen), older houses with undersized rafters or old-growth wood seem to have more trouble handling the extra weight. My house is late ‘80s construction, so the lumber’s beefier, but I still worry about snow load in winter. If I had to do it over, I’d probably just bite the bullet and do a full tear-off. It’s pricier up front, but at least you know what you’re dealing with under there.
Title: Why does picking between layering new shingles or ripping everything off have to be so confusing?
I went through something similar about five years ago. My place is mid-70s, so the rafters are decent, but not exactly overbuilt. I had three quotes—two said a second layer was fine, one insisted on a tear-off. I ended up going with the tear-off, mostly because I wanted to see what was under there after decades of patch jobs. Turned out there were a couple of soft spots in the decking that would've been missed otherwise.
The weight issue always nagged at me too, especially after a heavy snow year. Technically, code allows for two layers here (Midwest), but it just felt like kicking the can down the road. Not to mention, I read somewhere that stacked shingles don’t vent as well and can trap more heat, which might shorten their lifespan.
It was a bigger upfront cost for sure—almost 30% more—but at least now I’m not wondering if there’s rot brewing up there. If you’re planning to stay put for a while, I’d lean toward tear-off every time... even if it stings a bit at first.
Technically, code allows for two layers here (Midwest), but it just felt like kicking the can down the road.
I get where you’re coming from, but I’ve seen plenty of homes with two layers that held up just fine—especially if the first layer was still in decent shape. The added weight is a concern, but unless you’ve got undersized rafters or a history of sagging, it’s usually within safe limits per code. Sometimes a second layer can actually help with wind resistance, too. That said, you’re right about ventilation—if the attic isn’t vented well, heat buildup can be an issue. It’s not always a black-and-white call.
- Definitely agree about attic ventilation—makes a bigger difference than most folks realize.
- One thing I’ve noticed: if the first layer is wavy or has curled shingles, adding a second layer just copies those problems. Makes the new roof look rough, and water can sneak in easier.
- Tear-off is messier and pricier, but you get a look at the decking for rot or soft spots. Found a few surprises that way on older homes.
- Around here (northern Illinois), ice dams are a pain. If you’re layering, it’s even more important to have good ice/water shield at the eaves.
- Not always a simple call… depends a lot on what’s already up there and how long you want the new roof to last.
