New Roof Many Exposed Nails

[Garfield]

Greetings, I have a new GAF 30 yr roof. Have about

100 nails exposed under the seams of shingles.

Roofer says no worries it won't leak. I think sooner or somewhat latter it will.

[John Dirks Jr]

So you can see nail heads between the tabs without having to lift the row above?

[Garfield]

Well the shingles butt up pretty snug so on the vast majority you do have to lift a tab to see the nail. on some where they are not butted so tight against one another you can see the nail between the the two shingles.

[Bob White]

http://www.gaf.com/Content/Documents/22740.pdf

[Jerry Simon]

Originally posted by Garfield

Greetings, I have a new GAF 30 yr roof. Have about

100 nails exposed under the seams of shingles.

Roofer says no worries it won't leak. I think sooner or somewhat latter it will.

Exposed nail heads corrode and will likely allow leakage, someday. Call the shingle manufacturer for backup to show the *roofer*. (Uhmm...or, just ask Bob.)

[Jim Katen]

Originally posted by Garfield

Well the shingles butt up pretty snug so on the vast majority you do have to lift a tab to see the nail. on some where they are not butted so tight against one another you can see the nail between the the two shingles.

If I understand you correctly, the nails are in the correct location vertically but they're in the incorrect location horizontally; they fall directly below the butt joints between shingles. Is this right?

If the nails are properly placed and the shingles are properly offset, the nails shouldn't be anywhere near those butt joints.

Water will run over the nail heads and they will eventually rust. If they're hot-dipped, it'll take many years. If they're electroplated, they'll rust 1 hour after the roofer’s installation warranty expires.

The nail heads are really quite easy to fix. Just apply a tiny (pea-sized) daub of roofing mastic to each nail head. They'll be fine.

I'd be more concerned about the overall nailing pattern. If the nails are where they shouldn’t be that means they're not where they should be. (Damn, I hope Bonnie isn't reading this.) The roofer might have to add nails to meet GAF’s minimum nailing requirements.

Also check the offsets. The worst possible situation here would be that the nails are in the correct places but the shingles are improperly offset. Each course should be roughly 5" to the side of the preceding course.

-Jim Katen, Oregon

[Chad Fabry]

On architectural shingles with no keys to direct nailing it's inevitable that some nails will be exactly where the butt joint is on the following course of shingles.

Most of the laminated shingles can be overlapped a half inch or so to give coverage without affecting the aesthetic of the roof. Of course it takes a cognizant, quality conscious roofer to catch these instances as they come up and fix them. It works even better if you select a shingle with only one lamination on the side to be overlapped. If this is done there's absolutely no noticeable lumpy look.

Jim's black goo fix will probably last the life of the roof: goo=3/4 of good.

Another solution is to slip an inch wide section of single layer shingle over the nail.

[Brandon Chew]

Originally posted by Jim Katen

The nail heads are really quite easy to fix. Just apply a tiny (pea-sized) daub of roofing mastic to each nail head. They'll be fine.

Originally posted by Chad Fabry

Jim's black goo fix will probably last the life of the roof: goo=3/4 of good.

Garfield says this is a "new GAF 30 yr roof" and the GAF tech sheet that Bob posted says "Any type of roof cement or caulk used as a method of repair is not considered a permanent repair. This method of repair is an exclusion from coverage."

While I agree with Jim and Chad that the mastic would probably work ok for a while, if you want GAF to stand behind that 30 year warranty then the roofer is going to have to carefully remove the improperly nailed shingles, replace them with new shingles, and then nail them on the right way.

As Jerry said, call the manufacturer's tech rep to back you up when you deal with the roofer.

100 shiners sound like a lot to me. How big is the roof?

[Jim Katen]

Chad writes:

On architectural shingles with no keys to direct nailing it's inevitable that some nails will be exactly where the butt joint is on the following course of shingles.

For the first time in my memory, I'm going to disagree with Chad. If the shingles are properly offset, the nails should occur about 5-6 inches away from the butt joints. It takes a sorry-ass roofer to miss his mark by 6 inches. It's not inevitable; it's just sloppy.

Most of the laminated shingles can be overlapped a half inch or so to give coverage without affecting the aesthetic of the roof. Of course it takes a cognizant, quality conscious roofer to catch these instances as they come up and fix them. It works even better if you select a shingle with only one lamination on the side to be overlapped. If this is done there's absolutely no noticeable lumpy look.

The problem with that solution is that, once you start shifting shingles left & right, you can screw up you offsets.

Brandon writes:

Garfield says this is a "new GAF 30 yr roof" and the GAF tech sheet that Bob posted says "Any type of roof cement or caulk used as a method of repair is not considered a permanent repair. This method of repair is an exclusion from coverage."

I wouldn’t necessarily call it a repair. ARMA (and almost certainly GAF) instruct installers to use mastic under shingles to seal them against high winds. They also direct installers to protect the heads of exposed nails (for instance at the last ridge or hip cap) with a dot of mastic. This technique is part of the installation instructions.

While I agree with Jim and Chad that the mastic would probably work ok for a while, if you want GAF to stand behind that 30 year warranty then the roofer is going to have to carefully remove the improperly nailed shingles, replace them with new shingles, and then nail them on the right way.

I disagree. If they do that, they'll screw it up worse than it was. At the end of the day, a simple dot of mastic is less likely to fail.

As for the warranty, it isn't really a warranty issue. If the roof leaks and you call GAF, they'll say, "This isn't a product failure. It's an installation failure. Call the installer. Our product is fine."

As Jerry said, call the manufacturer's tech rep to back you up when you deal with the roofer.

The manufacturer's tech rep will almost always back the roofer.

- Jim Katen, Oregon

[Jerry Simon]

Originally posted by Jim Katen

If the roof leaks and you call GAF, they'll say, "This isn't a product failure. It's an installation failure. Call the installer. Our product is fine."

As Jerry said, call the manufacturer's tech rep to back you up when you deal with the roofer.

The manufacturer's tech rep will almost always back the roofer.

- Jim Katen, Oregon

Uhmmm...on the one hand, you imply the manufacturer will blame the installer.

On the next, you imply the manufacturer will side with the installer.

I'm so confused...

[Chad Fabry]

For the first time in my memory, I'm going to disagree with Chad. If the shingles are properly offset, the nails should occur about 5-6 inches away from the butt joints. It takes a sorry-ass roofer to miss his mark by 6 inches. It's not inevitable; it's just sloppy.

It is sloppy. The problem is, with the featureless landscape of an architectural shingle, no one measures the cuts for the starter shingles. I have never viewed an installation that follows manufacturers guidelines for the starter shingle dimensions.

Well, my roof is installed correctly, but except for my roof I haven't seen one.

[Jim Katen]

Originally posted by Jerry Simon

Originally posted by Jim Katen

If the roof leaks and you call GAF, they'll say, "This isn't a product failure. It's an installation failure. Call the installer. Our product is fine."

As Jerry said, call the manufacturer's tech rep to back you up when you deal with the roofer.

The manufacturer's tech rep will almost always back the roofer.

- Jim Katen, Oregon

Uhmmm...on the one hand, you imply the manufacturer will blame the installer.

On the next, you imply the manufacturer will side with the installer.

Sure. It depends on whether or not a claim has been filed. If there's no claim, and you're just calling to ask if the installer's done something wrong, the manufacturer will suck up to the installer and tell everyone it's fine. They want to sell more shingles to this guy. If they piss him off, he'll go buy another brand next time.

On the other hand, if a roof fails, the manufacturer isn't going to take responsibility for mis-application of its product. They'll just say, truthfully, that their warranty doesn't apply to the installation of the shingles. (Certainteed's Surestart Plus warranty is an exception.)

It's not like it makes much difference. The warranty curve is so steep that it's practically useless anyway.

I never refer people to the manufacturer because I never know what the manufacturer will say. I refer people to the "manufacturer's printed instructions" because I know exactly what they say.

- Jim Katen, Oregon

(Certainteed MSA Wizard)