| Author |
Message |
Greg Scott (Gregs14)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 31, 2001 - 12:31 am: | |
David,
Sorry, hit the post button too quickly. The roof nailing example is not quite correct. A 20 year 3 tab is 12" X 36". You are correct in assuming the mfg wants four nails in that shingle and they ARE placed, as you say, just above "eyes" which are often referred to as keyways or water slots by manufacturers and just below the sealant strips. However the slots are 5.5 inches on a common 3 tab and the sealant is at the 6 inch mark. If correctly nailed at the 5.5 - 5.75 inch mark, the shingle on the course below will have 8 nail holes with four at the proper spot and another four about 11 - 11.5 inches up the shingle just below the top edge. Nailing higher on the shingle in the sealant area can cause less holding power for the self-sealing strips. The shingles on the second course from the ridge can have another four nail holes ear the top edge made by ridge shingle fasteners.
Greg |
Greg Scott (Gregs14)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 31, 2001 - 12:00 am: | |
David, the example you describe is not correct. Sorry.
Greg |
David P Bennett (Whitey)
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 30, 2001 - 11:38 pm: | |
Just some basic information, on most low to medium sloped roofs you will find that the manufacturer designs the three tab shingle for 4 nails applied just below the seal strip and just above the eyes of the shingle. If the 2nd shingle is applied properly the nails in this shingle should just miss the top of the lower shingle. Now on Mansard roofs and Steep roofs you may find up to 6 nails per shingle.
As we all have found, some roofers will use as little as two nails or staples, some three and some who follow the installation recommendations of the various manufacturers.
Now felt may be required by the manufacturer of certain types of shingles to qualify the warranty provided. Felt is not required for all roof installations, although your local building code may require the installation of the felt, thus making it part of the roofing scope. |
Ghostbuster (Ghostbuster)
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 30, 2001 - 9:11 am: | |
Well Boys and Girls,
Looks like a lot of lines are being drawn in the sand out here. And, since Greg is the only one offering up a conclusive field test of his idea, It looks to me that it is now time for his detractors to be the ones to either PUT UP or SHUTUP! |
Greg Scott (Gregs14)
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 30, 2001 - 3:43 am: | |
Gale, while I appreciate your concern, I am not married to any of these guys or gals. We're not talking about how long brake shoes last either. Do you really think people are trying to shut me up?
I wholeheartedly agree! There is a QUICK way to do that. It is for one or all of the pompous individuals who want me to be quiet to step forward and take the Charity Challenge.
To the Dave Bennett's of this world who say there are only three or four nails in each composition shingle and to the Jim Flynts of this world who find a way to call me names by proxy, and the others, there is not a one of you brave enough to accept the Charity Challenge! All the Amen's in the world don't change that telling fact!
I've been married to the same lovely lady for 31 years and we've built our relationship on trust, truth, respect and principles.
This issue is one of principles. I have mine but denying the existence of debris because a carrier says you should, proves others don't.
The Charity Challenge may interest a few DOI's since no one can refute the premise. I guess I'll have to find out.
Until the miscreants who attack the messenger take the Charity Challenge in lieu of calling names and relating how much they know about debris removal, they are all just big bags of hot air, who, like Ostriches, have their heads buried in the sand.
I was surprised to see the thread yanked. I understand Roy's dilemma but I wish he would reconsider. I wouldn't want to be the one responsible for negating his hard work but I am disappointed that certain forces are working behind the scenes to squelch the real facts and to pressure Roy Cupps, whose only sin was to give us a forum.
I suppose it was from a fear that vendors and carriers were displeased. I'm sure the emails are FLYING fast and furious because many of you have been kind enough to warn me about the forces at work. Censorship is a dangerous thing and fear of carriers and vendors proves who the real rule makers are.
You're right about one thing, Gale, "He who has the gold, rules!" IF we let him!
The net tear off scam is and always has been a "bean-counter" thing. No more, no less. It cheats the claim by using an incorrect formula. It is truly as simple as that.
I look out there and see a bunch of guys who have let carriers run over them with lowered schedules in the past 15 years while gas and auto expenses have gone up and I see cowering little "yes" men who will continue to have their fees lowered and be "thankful" for the fewer and fewer crumbs thrown their way by carriers and vendors.
Question that rationale for once in your lives.
Greg |
Gale Hawkins (Gale)
| | Posted on Monday, January 29, 2001 - 11:35 pm: | |
Greg I gather the point some are trying to get over to you without coming right out and saying it is, “Shut up”.
As I have tried very hard to understand the minds of some of the better CAT adjusters over the last several years and it seem that most are like you in the fact they feel a certain way is the “Right Way”.
Unlike you they still believe a certain way is the “Right Way” but have accepted the other golden rule, “He who has the gold makes the rules.”
They seem to have learned from working for many masters over the years that their income is higher and stress level is lower if they show up at the storm with an open mind and follow the guidelines they are given by the storm manager that reviews their work. Most will walk if asked to commit a crime.
When first got married I realized my wife had not been correctly taught how to drive a straight shift to maximize the life of the brakes. Greg my point is it did not take long for me to figure out there were things that were more expensive than brake shoes.
When we cross the line and lose our audience our words are without true value is a fact I can attest to personally. Your determination is great but perhaps if you changed your focus somewhat it would better serve the industry. Sometimes when you know you are right you just have to stay the course and in time the others will realize you knew more than they first thought.
Just because others disagree with you does not make you wrong or them right or the other way around. CAT adjusters do not have the same concerns as do staff adjusters and the DOI. If the rules of the game change after a CAT there are clean up crews that deal with those issue because the CAT adjuster is off somewhere else putting out a fire for some other CAT manager.
The lack of black and white in the industry disqualifies some from working in the industry. I would loose my mind if I took serious all of the different ways I am told are the “Right Way” to handle issues for the same carrier. Being in the position to go to the top I often find that several “Right Ways” are the results of different opinions of different claims managers with the same carrier. The adjuster that fights the claims manager that he works for may be “right” but “right” out of a job.
Conflict is one way we learn. Perhaps the wisest are those that learn from conflict how to reduce conflict. Greg, there are things that are more expensive than brake shoes. |
Bruce (Bholling55)
| | Posted on Monday, January 29, 2001 - 10:18 pm: | |
Why are so many people afraid of the truth??? If this site is designed for professional people and to educate the industry, why is their censorship on a simple subject as "How to Measure a Roof"?
Out of the 74 post there were some very good examples showing the correct way to figure roofing, just because some believe different, is not a good reason to deprive open minded people the right to learn different ways to measure a roof. Instead of the one way they were told was right, but do not dare question it.
Adjusters, engineers, contractors etc can learn, when someone knows it all they become worthless. Be proactive and allow people to draw there own conclusion. |
Greg Scott (Gregs14)
| | Posted on Monday, January 29, 2001 - 9:34 pm: | |
Relevant? You been on any impact resistant losses? It amuses me to see people who profess to be so knowledgeable but are afraid to make a peep questioning a carrier or vendor. And it further validates my point about so many of my detractors not knowing how to properly figure debris removal. As soon as someone takes the Charity Challenge, we'll actually know who is right, won't we? I love all this Amen stuff. It's a good substitute for facts and a great way to avoid answering the real questions I've posed. Greg |
JimLakes (Jimlakes)
| | Posted on Monday, January 29, 2001 - 9:25 am: | |
AMEN and WELL said Russ Doe. |
Russ Doe
| | Posted on Monday, January 29, 2001 - 8:26 am: | |
I dont understand why greg14 posts on this Forum. His subject matter is irrelevent to any Cat Adjuster. I think this information would be welcomed at Catroofer.org.The information is not educational or of any value to the betterment of our Industry. |
Greg Scott (Gregs14)
| | Posted on Sunday, January 28, 2001 - 5:05 pm: | |
Mark, I guess by your post, you think certain manufacturers should take pot luck on getting the round piece of ice instead of the jagged one, when their material is tested. The round ball bearings give a basis to compare exact performance under identical conditions where ice guns may not. Sorry you didn't understand the theory, but then there are a lot of people who act as if they don't understand things I say on this board, either. Greg |
mark (Olderthendirt)
| | Posted on Sunday, January 28, 2001 - 12:55 pm: | |
It a good thing hail stones are always perfectly round, think what it could do to these test results if hail was ever jagged! |
Bruce (Bholling55)
| | Posted on Sunday, January 28, 2001 - 2:07 am: | |
The problem that is going to come back and haunt the insurance companies are the metal roofs that the contractors are installing over wood roofs.
Do you guys remember all the laminated shingle that the insurance companies really pushed in the early 80's. They went as far as waving deductibles and giving all kinds of perks, trying to get rid of wood roofs. Well it backfired. They are still costing them lots of money. How many of those roofs had to be torn off and redecked? All because of TDI. Well you have not seen anything yet. The cost to replace those metal roofs is going to make the laminate shingle laid over wood look cheep.
All these metal roofs are being lad over wood roofs also, but when they put them on they are now having to re-build the whole frame of the roof with 2x4s. When we have a hail storm like the one that hit Arlington, Tx in 1981 and 1993 then these roofs will be damaged and the insurance company will have to pay to remove the metal which will be nearly impossible because of the way they are installed. When the roof is removed then the 2x4s will have to be taken off and then the wood shingles will have to be torn off and the house will need to be redecked. Now we will have to pay to reframe the decking to where it will take the metal roof. Metal roofs are costing around 400 per square now, but a re-roof could cost 124 per square for decking, 100 for reframing, and 100 to remove the wood members and metal roof. Then installing the new metal roof will run around 300 this will be a total of 625.00. Again the insurance companies will get egg on there face for pushing something that is a short term solution to a long time problem.
I can see several problems in the next major hail storm where these roofs are involved.
These roofs are being pushed by insurance companies and many adjusters. Is that really what they want to do?
Bruce |
Greg Scott (Gregs14)
| | Posted on Sunday, January 28, 2001 - 12:34 am: | |
You are right about nothing being Hail PROOF! The reason I liked the 2" steel ball bearing was the ability to achieve comparisons from product to product. By the way, the roofing industry is careful NOT to say hail proof! In fact, they don't mention the word "hail". They're officially known as an "impact resistant" products.
I was fortunate enough to be able to inspect side by side 70 square identical pitch homes after baseball hail. The 1 year old modified laminated shingle showed NO marks or bruises and the 1 year old fiberglass top of the line 40 year laminate was a total loss with silver dollar sized bruises devoid of granules but with fractures in the mat.
I think the only unknown with the modified asphalt products is the elasticity factor over time.
By the way, class 4 products withstand 2" ball bearings dropped from 20 feet other classes use smaller sizes and lower drop points according to U.L.
Best wishes,
Greg |
David P Bennett (Whitey)
| | Posted on Saturday, January 27, 2001 - 11:37 pm: | |
Been in this industry for over 25 years, and have yet to see any man made material withstand hail damage. That goes for bricks and concrete blocks. As for your 2 1/2" steel ball I personally don't think this test is better than the gun. My experience has been, the size of the hail is not near as important as the density and the wind velocity behind it. Hail resistant shingles, probably not in my lifetime or yours. That's like saying you have a hurricane proof home. When mother nature is violent, nothing stands in the way.
Metal Roofs, you are right, they do dent in hail and the funny thing is the courts have considered this as damage and as the policy pays for damage, then the roof should be replaced. Of course there are alternatives which a good adjuster has at his disposal. As for dimunition in value, this has been tried in the past and most of the courts have not recognized this as a direct physical loss under the policy. I say most, there are always a couple of renegades.
Good luck with your involvement on the hail proof shingle. |
Greg Scott (Gregs14)
| | Posted on Sunday, January 21, 2001 - 6:31 pm: | |
I was involved closely with much of the Impact Resisitance project at The Texas Department of Insurance. It actually stemmed from work done by the Loss Mitigation Advisory Committee that was formed by TDI.
What have been your experiences with the U.L. 2218 standard and it's effect on our industry to date? The list of approved materials is growing but I am especially concerned about the entrance of metal roofs into this impact resistance program by using a cosmetic damage waiver. Basically, consumers are opting for the discount program by signing the waiver.
Will we be looking at more reinspections when buyers and sellers of homes don't agree on whether damage is cosmetic or not? Are we making a mistake by allowing metal roofs into the program at all when we know they may dent and cause some future "Diminished Value" litigation?
The test, in case you are not familiar with it, is performed by dropping steel ball bearings of varying sizes on roofing material assemblies that are submitted for testing.
1 1/4", 1 1/2", 1 3/4" and 2" steel ball bearings were used to simulate the impact of hailstones. Passing the test at each incremental size gave the product a different class rating, with class 1 being the lowest eschelon and class 4 withstanding the 2" ball bearing. The U.L. Test with ball bearings was chosen over tests with ice guns and other methods for its uniformity. I happen to believe in the testing and think the 2" ball bearing's higher density will be a good indicator larger hail resistance, say up to three inches in diameter depending on the hardness of the individual hailstone.
I have been on some of the new modified shingle roofs after major hail and have made some further observations about their impact resistance. I'll share them after I hear some of your comments.
One more thing, was anybody close to the Colorado situation where Genstar supposedly had a class 3 shingle but it still suffered hail damage when struck by less than golfball sized hail?
Comments please
Greg |
|
