I get where you’re coming from—sometimes the budget just doesn’t stretch to a full tear-off, especially with all the other stuff that can go wrong in an older house. I’ve managed a few properties where we went with a second layer for similar reasons, and honestly, it held up fine for years. The main thing I’ve noticed is that resale can get tricky if you’ve got two layers, since some buyers (and inspectors) get nervous about it.
One thing I always wonder about is how much weight those extra shingles add over time, especially on older rafters. Did your roofer say anything about that? I’ve seen a couple of places where the roofline started to sag after a second layer, but maybe that’s more of an issue with really old framing or heavier shingles.
Curious if anyone’s run into insurance headaches after adding a second layer? Some companies around here get picky about coverage if you don’t do a full tear-off.
- I get the budget thing, but I actually went with a full tear-off last year after talking to a few local roofers.
- My place is from the 60s, and the rafters aren’t the beefiest. The extra weight from a second layer made me nervous, especially with heavy snow loads here in Michigan.
- Tear-off let us spot a couple of soft spots in the decking that would’ve been hidden otherwise. That was a surprise, but glad we found it before it got worse.
- Insurance was easier too—my agent said some policies here won’t cover two layers, or they’ll jack up the premium.
- It cost more upfront, but I’m hoping it saves headaches (and maybe cash) down the line.
Full tear-off was the route I took too, and honestly, I think it’s underrated. When I replaced my roof (also mid-century, Midwest), we found some rot around a vent that would’ve gone unnoticed with just a new layer. The upfront cost stings, but I’d rather deal with it now than pay double later for hidden deck damage or insurance headaches. Weight is a real thing too—two layers plus ice and snow? That’s just asking for sagging down the line. I get why folks want to save, but sometimes “cheaper” isn’t cheaper in the long run.
Weight is a real thing too—two layers plus ice and snow? That’s just asking for sagging down the line.
Couldn’t agree more. I’ve seen neighbors go the “just add a layer” route and end up with wavy, uneven roofs after a couple Midwest winters. Full tear-off’s a pain, but at least you know what you’re working with underneath. Plus, warranties usually don’t cover double layers anyway.
Full tear-off’s a pain, but at least you know what you’re working with underneath.
This is exactly it. I get why people want to skip the hassle and just shingle over the old ones—especially when money’s tight or you’re dreading the mess—but man, I’ve seen what happens when you don’t check what’s lurking under there. My neighbor did a second layer a few years back, thinking it’d save time and cash. First big snowstorm, his roofline started looking like a rollercoaster. Ended up costing him way more to fix the decking and replace both layers later.
It’s not fun tearing everything off (I still remember hauling those heavy bundles down the ladder), but at least you get peace of mind. Plus, you can spot any rot or soft spots before they turn into bigger headaches. The warranty thing’s no joke either—my roofer wouldn’t even touch a double-layer job for that reason.
Yeah, it’s more work upfront, but in my experience, it saves you from surprises down the road.
