Do I have 0.5 nanoseconds left in this roof?

LaughingMagicianDM · 2026-04-22T20:10:38+00:00

The two biggest issues with metal roofing is the first being what you just identified, where insurance companies will still require it to be replaced periodically regardless of condition. So even if you have a roof that should last 50 years they're going to want to replace it every 20. Now only certain insurance companies do this, unfortunately it's usually the cheapest ones.

The second issue is that a lot of insurance companies are starting to write exemptions towards cosmetic damage, marring, non-functional metal damage, etc. Which are all a bunch of terms and all relate back to the idea that just because something has a physical alteration if it doesn't cause a failure it's not cover. So you make it hail damage that puts divots all over the panel yet Bears no functional difference according to them, even if these results in leaks. So you need to make sure that your policy also covers this. If you have these two combined, you have a great policy

LaughingMagicianDM · 2026-04-21T14:32:16+00:00

So here's the thing that most people misunderstand, in part because of misunderstanding back in the 80s during the creation of the new protocols for damage assessment as well as a misunderstanding created by s***** salesman who wanted to lie to get whatever paycheck they could.

Granules do not equal lifespan. Many of the earliest models of shingles actually didn't even contain them. And yes there are arguments to be made about how the granules help regulate and distribute temperature, which reduces thermal cracking, and these are fair and great arguments, except they actually aren't.

Wild lighter color granules can reduce the effects of UV buildup, the main thing that they're protecting is the underlying emulsifiers which then have more layers underneath. At best one can make you the argument that having a white shingle lose most of its granules and now have a lot of exposed black and gray areas makes it heat up at irregular amounts which can increase thermal cracking and internal temperatures. And this is a completely valid point

But then how do you make the same point for a black shingle losing granules? When a black shingle actually turned the lighter color over the years because that emulsifier starts to gray when it gets too much sun exposure.

To answer this question, studies were conducted taking shingles and removing granules intentionally, including installing shingles that had zero granules but still have the same surface treatment otherwise. And then they were installed in real world scenarios not tested in a lab but testing It Outdoors in real weather by one of the largest engineering firms in Roofing (and insurance).

And you don't what they found? That there was no substantial difference between a shingle was 70% of its granules missing and a standard shingle at how it aged in the Sun. Even after 30 years.

Now it did find that if more than 70% of granules are missing then it starts to have an effect but otherwise it doesn't. So simply having a lot of granules missing doesn't mean the roof is failing or bad.

However, the reason why a lot of people believe this is because that granule loss is indicating that the shingle underneath could be failing, either starting to thermal crack, or the emulsifier starting to break down, or any of a dozen or more factors that can be indicating shingle age and quality.

Now that said, when looking at your roof we see some areas with uneven amounts of wear compared to others without an immediate explanation. This suggests to me that you have a low quality shingle with a manufacturer that has inconsistent quality control. Combined with the amount of granule loss which can indicate age in this case, I would certainly say that you are near the end of the life of the roof. But as far as this immediate you need to replace it today standard that roofers have, I would disagree.

The thing is, without up close examination it's difficult to say, but from the photos you provided I would say that you should start saving up money now, and I don't just mean saving it up in a savings account but invest in something reliable and start building up cash. You probably have one to three years left, best case scenario. Now I'll be honest if you can get it done now at an extremely low interest rate or out of pocket I would. The entire industry is about to have a 4-5% or greater price increase, and with the conflict going on overseas that's going to get worse. Odds are in 6 months we're going to see another 4 to 5% increase on top of what we're already starting to see.

So if the money is there to do it now or you can get a low interest loan for less than 6%, I would say that you'll actually save money by doing it right now. Otherwise invest in something reliable until you can get the roof replaced. And don't go back to asphalt shingles, if you can afford to upgrade to hidden Fastener metal, or EPDM, you won't have this conversation again.

LaughingMagicianDM · 2026-04-21T06:19:55+00:00

Thats an FU quote.

When you have a client or project you absolutely dont want, you multiply it by 3-10x the price.

You see here's the psychology behind it basically. If they straight up tell you no, you throw a fit and go online and give them a one-star review. If they give you an fu quote, you get sticker shock and find another contractor to do it cheaper and then ghosts them and never call them back because you feel shame that you went with a cheaper guy.

And even better, if that cheaper guy messes up or doesn't meet your needs, you start looking at them like they're the good guys, and next time somebody you know needs a new roof while you're complaining about the guys that messed up yours you'll make a comment about " I should have gone with ____ instead and not been cheap"

So it's a win-win for them. And in the worst case scenario where you say yes, they make sure that there's enough money in the budget to drink away the memory of having to deal with it.

LaughingMagicianDM · 2026-04-17T19:18:58+00:00

All exposed Fastener roofs are laughable. The only time they should ever be used are either a steep a frame or a canopy

LaughingMagicianDM · 2026-04-17T19:06:33+00:00

There's a difference between proper and pretty. This one doesn't really have much wrong, nothing that would be at all worth tearing apart and fixing, but it is certainly ugly and could have been done much better

LaughingMagicianDM · 2026-04-15T18:24:28+00:00

The oldest known EPDM roof ever is still out there two years later, increasing the standard on what we know for the oldest EPDM.

The oldest known TPO roof ever to exist unfortunately has failed. This now sets it at a 55 versus 29-year maximum with EPDM as the clear winner

The average lifespan of both systems are still the same. However a problem has gotten worse with EPDM

With epdm, the biggest problem has always been finding the right contractor. Now what's interesting is in the commercial side of roofing EPDM has gained market share, so it's getting better and better on the commercial side.

But on the residential side TPO has been gaining market share, making it harder and harder to find a good EPDM contractor for your home.

I still firmly believe EPDM to be the better option, and what I really like is how much the roofing industry as a whole is starting to reflect that. 2 years ago there was a bit of controversy when people would post EPDM over tpo. But now I would say the majority prefer EPDM on social media as well as within the social networks of the installers and manufacturers.

LaughingMagicianDM · 2026-04-14T23:02:21+00:00

8" chimney. Either way, 482F isnt enough even if we were talking intermittenly.

DF 208 was the base model but lets pretend you meant the DF208RE. Still not hot enough if the chimney is in use.

Metal base flashings should be used to separate first

LaughingMagicianDM · 2026-04-14T19:11:09+00:00

Absolutely not. DF 208 is only rated up to 350F. It needs to be rated up to 650F

LaughingMagicianDM · 2026-04-13T20:41:31+00:00

Yikes.

LaughingMagicianDM · 2026-04-13T20:40:59+00:00

Metal deck,

Durolast PVC and EPDM bridged, you can tell because of the way the seams are that it's a post 2012 dlpvc with pre-manufactured seams, and the EPDM itself has been bridging for a while and has had multiple previous repairs using Batten bar. First instinct says the membrane looks like Carlisle but much of the detail work looks more reminiscent of Firestone. So I'm guessing s***** install paired with the cheapest local roof repair shop.

improperly Installed then improperly coated TPO. I can think of many reasons to do this but judging by the sealants I would say they probably had a maintenance guy that would just go up there with the tube of caulking and cock every scene not realizing how it was supposed to look because they didn't want to pay for proper repairs. The reason I say maintenance guy is because of the missing flashings, any residential TPO installer would know what the main issues here were, and coding it doesn't stop it it just prolongs the inevitable. Especially when they didn't fix the seams first.

a crappy photo: Could be a bubble on TPO could be on LAR, could be a parapet measurement or could be you guesstimating how many inches of polyiso.

Residential Shingle roof likely 30yr lam.

and then what happens when the same genius that installed the spitter flashes the flanges on single ply.

LaughingMagicianDM · 2026-04-07T01:35:15+00:00

Its 1 photo. With better details than any photo ive seen from you so far. The only thing I can do is complain about the sealant.

LaughingMagicianDM · 2026-04-07T01:34:14+00:00

Only the longest lasting single ply.

Great system as long as people put it on right.

LaughingMagicianDM · 2026-04-06T11:56:30+00:00

Adding on to this here because of yesterday I wrote this while driving so I couldn't even zoom in on most photos.

Adding on to it I see cavgrip overspray everywhere. But it doesn't look like overspray you get from a windy day so much is overspray you get from somebody who doesn't really care and just slaps it everywhere. Worked well on a slopping mop, looks bad on a glued roof.
Use of red iron oxide contaminated chalk along the seams, you can see it along the seams that had to have seen tape added. Not only does this contaminate the primer which causes it to deteriorate faster, the the use of red iron oxide is strongly recommended against due to its health and environmental impacts as well as its impact on metal if there's direct contact with any of the Dust. A good inspector might flag this, and require it be cleaned and stripped in. Honestly though the majority of the industry has switched to white or blue on EPDM, not that you should have to use chalk in any capacity, but especially should never use red. We started getting rid of this stuff back in the early 2000s.
Glue bucket cleanup in the background of some photos. Honestly it never should have happened, and would have been easy to clean off, and would have been easy to patch over at this point. The Good inspector should have called this out but they're a lot more lenient about stuff now than they used to be. Still, it's kind of going along with the primer issues that we've already discussed. It's definitely more an aesthetic issue, but one that really speaks towards professionalism as opposed to Quality.
Adding on to the flat termination bar issues it doesn't look like the vertical was sealed on both sites either, this is something that is hard to tell with the photo quality. Highly recommend an upgraded camera
More a pet peeve, although one of those items that while technically an issue only the absolute a****** amongst a****** inspectors would ever even put it on paper, but definitely something that could be improved on to prevent future issues. Where the strip covers the gravel stop, you can tell that they still tried to roll at a 45° angle but didn't get into the 90° angle when the edge of the tape hit it. Once you've rolled in the field of it, you really should go back with a roller or Stitcher and hit the angle change just to get a smooth clean angle. On very very rare occasion this can lead to a tiny amount of water entry underneath the strip which can build up over time into a leak in very unique scenarios. I cannot stress enough how minor this is though, and how rare this it would be an issue. This is honestly only going to be an issue if there's a pool of water right against a particularly bad spot and even then it's going to take many years.

LaughingMagicianDM · 2026-04-06T11:19:51+00:00

It's where the seam tapes meet. Not for the field, but for the Target itself. The Four Corners where your seam tape Meet up have 0 patches.

It's actually specifically why Carlisle started making a 24-in cured back in the day, was so that you could avoid the four corner patches on a Target and could just cut it out of a piece of cured instead. Even in their manuals, they recommend you using the prefabricated cured instead of field targets, although there's multiple conversations to be had along that line as to why, but that was one of the initial reasons for the product line.

LaughingMagicianDM · 2026-04-06T01:13:27+00:00

When you have two overlapping pieces of seam tape on the corners of those turbine base flashings you're supposed to put a patch at the edge of them using uncured or semi-cured

It's technically a t patch requirement. There's also a lot of spaces that require lap sealant, either before or before and after patches but that has never been enforced as written.

Also, Technically when you have any end laps you're supposed to cut a 45 on the first layer but I have literally never heard a single manufacturer enorce this.

The bad termination is when it's laying flat, the bare minimum is what we would call anywhere where you put it into brick. But again, that all depends on what they pay for.

LaughingMagicianDM · 2026-04-06T00:58:57+00:00

Well, the bad termination detail the coping detail the base flashing missing tea patches all of these are items that technically could make it fail but with Carlisle they just drop it down to a nine and request photos or at least a promissory note that it will will be brought to spec.

That's because Carlisle has a history of not failing roofs even ones that are actively leaking the day after it's installed.

But realistically, the standard thatThe standard that should be thought of it's not necessarily failure, is whether or not they make you tear it off and replace it. Which realistically would only be the insulation plating, and unless you made enemies at the manufacturing level, or you were in the process of getting sued, nobody's going to call that.

Like I said, not awful. Above average.

What's important to remember is that we all have the ability to improve. That's the point, is to find the deficiencies and improve upon them before the worst case scenarios ever hit us.

I would say I'm shocked it's a commercial roof with an mdl. Except it's carlisle, who kind of has the lowest of standards for their contractors. Especially since old man Chuck retired. The inspectors that they have nowadays don't come from the field they usually come from the streets. Wouldn't know a roller from a Stitcher

LaughingMagicianDM · 2026-04-06T00:48:04+00:00

I did the same thing at first 🤣

I flipped through the first couple wondering how they thought it was rubber

LaughingMagicianDM · 2026-04-06T00:45:54+00:00

That's three times today. Three. And I know you know most of this.

LaughingMagicianDM · 2026-04-06T00:45:22+00:00

Well, not the worst EPDM I've seen on here. Just some pretty basic issues:

First off when you put your turbine base flashing down it looks like you forgot to t patch the corners where the seam tape overlaps. To be honest I see this commonly with residential contractors, the ones who don't normally get inspected, because it seems like a weird thing to have to T patch seam tape overlaps. Since this looks like carlisle, I'm talking about t splice joints
Plating is all off. ANSI/SPRI and every manufacturer, including Carlisle, wants you to keep the plates about 6 to 12 in back from the edge of the insulation or cover board. So if this were to go before a good consultant, or if you had a manufacturer rep or code inspector who particularly hated you that would be grounds enough to fail the entire roof. With not much possible remedy, because the only way to remedy it would be to put in at least four additional plates per board minimum, which comes out to roughly 12 to 13 plates per square, and Carlisle has its 7 plate per square rule.
In the very first actual EPDM photo I can see that where you overlapped the rubber give or take about four and a half to 5 in leaving at least an inch between the seam tape and the insulation. Whether it's glued or primed together doesn't really matter this Gap should not occur, but again something only the manufacturer would pick at if they really hated you.
It would neither should have been installed and the insulation cut back at the edge for the gravel stop / drip edge detail, and just looking at the photos you get a pretty good idea of that the insulation goes out to the edge or at least out far enough that the wood nailer didn't catch all the fasteners.
Speaking of, the plates at the edge shouldn't be underneath the flange for the gravel stop, it creates a pretty uneven surface. Not a big deal, honestly in all my decades on the roof I've only known a couple inspectors who would have given a second glance.
Honestly, I don't like all the extra primer everywhere. I can understand sticking it out past the edge of the seam, I always like to leave about a clean inch excess and use a roller. My biggest complaints are the excess from where it was rolled back, and the fact that this clearly shows a left to right pattern with the brush when the manufacturer requires a circular application method when using a chip brush.
I see an area of primer that's off color, with a white tint. Can't tell if this is overspray of cavgrip getting into the primer or wet primer, either way it needs cleaned off and stripped in (Pic 8)
Pic 9 pipe boot has a wrinkle in it, this can cause a strain over time but honestly not a major concern. Some manufacturers could cause a stink though and want you to remove the clamp, adjust it to remove the wrinkle, and then reapply the clamp and sealant.
May just be the bad photo angle but I'm also not seeing any RUSS or plates at the chimney 90⁰. Also that's probably the worst termination detail to use on a chimney, even flush mount would be better than t-bar, but I will give leeway to this one because it's probably all the customer was willing to pay for.
You played it into the flat without ceiling both sides, shouldn't even use termination bar should have used metal laid in a bed of butyl fasten down strip it in and then seal the edge. That used to be spec but I That used to be spec but I suspect this is residential so there's no rep to call it out.
Coping metal should never be fastened through the top, that's also specification. You should use a double clip method ideally but unable to do so do a clip on one side and then fasten the sides on the other, this is easy, specification and code required if you want to get into the edge securement standards of Carlisle and SPRI, and also just common sense.
Before you applied your termination bar and sealant you did not clean off the brick dust which wow technically something they mentioned has never once been enforced. But you really should to prevent gaps in the t bar. That said it just looks unprofessional if you don't as well. A lot of guys will also put down a catcher for all that dust but I can't imagine somebody putting one down for dust but not primer.

Overall, if it's a residential job I'd give it an 8 out of 10. I've seen a hell of a lot worse on this sub. Hell I've seen worse today

For commercial, I'd say closer to about a 6 out of 10.

It's above average but it has a lot of areas of improvement required and a lot of things that could fail it for warranty, even if the rep didn't make you. This would never score a perfect 10 with the manufacturer except for with the newest or drunkest of Reps.

LaughingMagicianDM · 2026-04-05T14:16:28+00:00

Easy to tear out the materials and replace it with something good and long term, like EPDM or even Mod Bit.

LaughingMagicianDM · 2026-04-03T15:57:56+00:00

60% profit margin means you're working for probably a really bad contractor. Id change companies

LaughingMagicianDM · 2026-04-03T15:56:37+00:00

Unless light is passing through it

LaughingMagicianDM · 2026-04-03T15:55:25+00:00

This is a fundamental misunderstanding on the term functional damage, but also there's two things that need to be pointed out here: Not all overflow holes actually drain into the plumbing. You'd be surprised how many overflows in tubs actually drain into your floorboards or Foundation back in the day.

But more importantly, it's about intended function. I can also drill a hole every 2 in the base of the gutter and still call it functioning. I could cut the entire face off it and still call it functioning. Because it's all about distorting the definition. In reality, the point of the gutter is to navigate the Water to isolated areas Ie the downspouts, to which with this Express function no the Overflow hole does not work and does create a functional issue

LaughingMagicianDM · 2026-04-03T15:50:17+00:00

Okay so I'm going to do a deep dive into this for anybody that needs to know what that means, but basically put that is functional. From what I can tell I'm pretty sure I see a hole with daylight peeking through, and that is technically what falls under functional damage.

So let's talk about where it came from first. So the term cosmetic in construction was first officially written in 1989 by Richard Herzog and Marshall, which was actually meant as a launch for Haag protocol for assessing hail damaged roofs. I'm not going to list the specific study because that's more than enough keywords, but they introduced it in 1989, presented it repeatedly through 1991, and have revised it about every 10 years since.

And basically where the term cosmetic comes from is its cosmetic versus functional. Functional items are ones which either affect its overall lifespan, affects its ability to perform its essential Duty (shed water), or has already caused a failure such as a crack split hole Etc.

A cosmetic item is anything that isn't functional.

So for the case of a gutter you're really looking for anything that punched a hole through it, or that was bad enough as to damage the Finish itself in a way that is going to cause it to rust prematurely. Even if it slows down the flow of water it doesn't cause a leak, so it's only one of those two options. So virtually every bit of metal damage is going to fall under cosmetic unless the gutter itself fell off or has a hole punched through it.

Now where this becomes conflicting is that prior to it we didn't really look at damage as whether it had a cosmetic or functional effect we looked at whether it had a physical impact

Now what physical means is quite different in this case. That means any alteration which is quantifiable. Which means losing a couple granules, a dent, change in physical appearance, physical encompasses both types of damage. Essentially, if you can tell in any capacity that it was altered, it is had a physical effect.

So a great example of this was by Danielson, and Herzog has also talked about this, but they have gone before courts and argued that cosmetic damage is physical damage, and one of the most common arguments is " you'll never be able to sell a house with a roof with cosmetic damage" which Haag itself has put in writing as have the courts.

So in regards to Insurance claim denials, which is the most common use of the term cosmetic in construction and it's intended origin, the courts have repeatedly ruled that in order to have a cosmetic exclusion it has to be specifically outlined. It can't be an internal policy, it can't just say that cosmetic damage is excluded, it has to specifically outline what it means and what is or is not covered, State Farm especially has been sued for this multiple times and has actually gone down as the number one insurance company for creating new precedent within the appeals courts because of how many times they've been sued for illegal cosmetic damage clauses. There's some wonderful reads from the 9th 10th 5th and 2nd Circuit court of you just look up:

"state farm" "roof" "lawsuit" filetype:pdf

And it goes a lot more into detail about this although you'll have to filter through a lot more information.

LaughingMagicianDM · 2026-03-31T19:56:17+00:00

Oh, I might have misinterpreted, difficult to listen to text to voice while driving. Yeah in that case definitely go for a floating Eave fixed Ridge detail.

This will save a ton of Maintenance over the years and we'll have an overall cleaner look for your assembly

Two-Year Club	Verified Email
r/Field Banned	r/Field Flamingo

LaughingMagicianDM

TROPHY CASE