I’ve been doin some research on metal detectors to do roof mitigation nail spacing. The Zircon mt-6 seems to be the most popular. Milwaukee makes one (model# 2290-21) that has a few more features but for a few more bucks. Just wondering if anyone is using this one and if you liked it?
Get the most expensive one you can find.
To quote John Shishilla,“If you are not using a MT-6”…
Spend the $100.00 at Lowes and you will make it back on your first inspection…or…in some instances…your third or fourth! :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
LMAO. I’ll be sure to do that Michael with all my equipment. haha. Seriously I kinda figured theres no need to spend to much on one. Was looking on ebay and found the Milwaukee model.
LMAO…that is some funny stuff right there!
I spent 125 on a zircon. Maybe mine wasn’t on sale but I needed it so if you figure in gas, time,the cost yes it will take a few WM’s to make it back if you are charging at least a 100 bucks.It’s the same with all the tools you buy. You purchase it becuase you have the need and will make it back…most of the time.:mrgreen:
The only metal detector ever approved for wind mits is the MT-6.
John is right. Get the Zircon mt-6
Interesting… I didn’t realize you had to use the zircon since its approved. I geuss that means if they find out that you used anything other than a zircon the insurance could deny the report. i’ll be getting a zircon.
What wind mitigation class did you take?
I took the INACHI course. I seen the video on how to operate the mt6 in the course but don’t recall the mention of it being the only one approved for wind mits.
Now that we do not need it for the walls I see no reason you have to use it.
I use it but I have tried another and did find the MT6 to be better than the little multi meter I used. If it beeps on metal in wood then you should be ok.
The whole process is a joke because it could be staples beeping for all anyone knows. Making marks on wood for underwriters is asinine and should be illegal. It proves nothing.
We should use it as a tool and also use our own knowledge.
Asking us to photograph a shiner is also wrong because in a perfect home they should not be seen.
We should use the tools we have available to us and then make our determination of what it is.
That determination should stand unless the insurance company decides to send their own guy.
Bosch makes a nice looking model as well. Can’t remember the number but it was mentioned in a class with Bill York. Not that it was endorsed but, some in attendance were looking into it. It does scan to about 4 1/2" so it would work nicely for the nail spacing. The only concern is as John has mentioned, if the insurance companies are used to the Zircon, you’d have a tough time convincing them any different.
How on earth would they know?
The insurance companies must accept a form from a qualified inspector.
If they do not they must send their own on their dime.
You have only scratched the surface of how right you are. This procedure is B.S. as it defines incompetence. The only way to be closely accurate would be x-ray technology. The metal detectors are a joke, due to many factors.
Going in for a shoulder operation , my opinion, from those difficult pics required in the attics.
Draw the stupid lines, find a shiner, play the game and let the proccess allow hard workers to make money in these difficult times.
Fight for what is right.
The issue with staples is not the staples but the installation. The over driven and missed staples were the issues. Staples under proper conditions would do the job well. The issues became clear only after the having contractors use the guns without proper training.
You nailed it Nick. The insurance companies could easily enough deny us the ability to provide this service. Follow their procedures, Take the pictures, fill out the paper work honestly, and collect your money. We don’t wanna have to be “approved” by the insurance companies.
I agree that using an inaccurate method to determine something is improper. How do you know which nails are which if the roof used 6D nails when it was put on and then renailed?
The only time these inspections should be required is if there is no permit information available.
It appears as though USAA agrees as I have heard from several sources if the home has a permit date after 3/1/2002, no wind mit will be required. I have an inquiry in right now if that policy will extend to Dade and Broward for homes built after 9/1/1994.
How do you know that the panels stacked neatly in the garage are actually enough for all of the windows?
I have said it before, it is a scam.
Sorry about the shoulder…if it isn’t a pinched nerve for me, I may be joining you in shoulder surgery!
I have said it from the beginning it is a scam.
I’m going back when it started, it was a joke.