To me there is just too much granule lost on the inner lower part of the shingles to be foot traffic. Your foot when walking on top of the roof would not touch these lower areas.
Your foot most certainly can touch these ares. It may still not be the problem. What is your opinion on the granular imperfections.
Possibility of hail dmamage - not big enuff stones to put dents but at least make marks -
Defective product??? Those look like Owens Corning Duration shingles, not sure if they ever recalled them.
I agree Peter, don’t look like foot traffic damage that I have seen before.
Hi Marcel, Looks defective to me.
Hope all is well with you.
Next time you are on a roof look how your foot rests on the top of the shingles. There would be deeper abrasions on the very top and the edges and less in the lower middle because of the pressure applied by your foot.
That’s the way I see it too James. And when I see that happen, I am sorry guys, get off the roof.
Never hire a roofer that wears hicking boots.
My guess is poor quality asphalt resulting in a non-uniform granule bond to shingles. Picture number 2 (valley) might be footwear but picture number one shows granule loss across the roof that’s not uniform.
Defective? Well, where does poor quality stop and defective start? How old are the shingles and what does the manufacturer’s warranty say? If they seem to be a significant distance from the warranty period, I’d recommend going for replacement if the warranty terms made it worth it. Pro-rating terms might not make it worth it.
How do you check for cropped valley shingles David?
Not hail damage.
Mostly worn in valley and on some edges but not throughout.
Anyone who has laid architectural shingles for a living know that those packs weigh close to 100 pounds. Putting several packets upon walk boards to lay shingles in order to get the job done while still being able to use walk boards often result the shingles getting scuffed up in various areas…add to traffic areas such as valleys, roofs can easily exhibit the similar signs.
Roof defects fall basically into three categories…
- manufacturer defect
- installation issues
- external forces such as weather.
Most of the time is installation issues, once in a while its external forces, rarely is it manufacturer issues.
From what I see of the pictures I would comment as to their condition and if further evaluation or repairs would be warrant… personally I dont see that…not unless you want to speculate as to the projected service life of the product…which we dont do.
It happens more than you think.
The granules are what protect the shingles from UV.
Life expectancy will be shortened.
Thanks for all the info guys. I’d also be interested in hearing your method for checking this David.
You think of the number of homes with fiberglass shingles and then how many of them actually have a manufacturer defect…its rare; yes you may have a bad production line, but its rare. I know of all the homes I have built and shingles that were installed since 1978… not one defect.
Without a doubt the biggest problem is installation issues.
I see nothing to indicate that the shingles in the pictures have any defects but rather installation issues…if that.
Most architectural shingles will give you around 25+ years of service…for that price that one is paying…that’s a good investment.
Granules protect the fiberglass mat, provide some protection for fire / wx and give aesthetic value to the client…yet you will have loss of granule which of expected… too many times I see roofs being called out for granule loss which is for the most part ridiculous…we have quite a few storm chasers around here who tell homeowners that their roof has hail damage as is evident by lost of granules…that is total BS.
Anyone who knows how to inspect a roof for hail damage knows that is a crock…unfortunately many insurance companies and adjusters dont know that so you end up having insurance companies paying for roofs that they should not have paid for.
I will call Carson Dunlap and my past Instructor to let them know they are wrong.
Seriously ,will look more into this over the weekend though.
Granules make up about 1/3 of the weight of a shingle… I have already stated their purpose. It is normal to have some granule loss, especially that of a new roof…they are call riders.
In addition to the loss of riders, with any storm you will have granule loss… which can be classified as aesthetic or functional loss…most roofs will have aesthetic loss.
Other losses often fall into the mechanical category which are those losses outside of normal wear and that of wx.
Sorry Bob but I don’t put a whole lot of stock in home inspection mills (or GC mills)… I put my stock from directly dealing with manufacturers, engineers and personal observations from building homes since 1978 which includes hands on knowledge from surveying, footings and foundations, framing, roofing, insulation etc.
I am no fan of storm chasers neither am I a fan of hired gun wannabees (Haag) who parrot what they are told in order to save money for insurance companies like Erie (basterds)… I probably detest some of those sob’s more than the storm chasers simply because most of them don’t understand the dynamic relationship that one building system has with the other… but I digress.
There have been ongoing studies for over 10 years as to how much granule loss truly does affect the service life of fiberglass shingles…yet in all my roof inspection reports I do not allow my self to be drawn into the granule loss argument… as of this writing I am batting around 98% which is why I have people calling me from all over the US including insurance companies, adjusters, roofers, etc… most of the pictures they send me (taken by storm chasers) are not that much different than what was originally posted here.
I advise for those HI’s who are not as verse on shingles, especially anomalies, is to simply report what they observe and if necessary recommend that the manufacturer inspect same…calling most roofers to inspect the service life of a roof is like calling a fox to inspect a hen house.