I'm facing some roofing issues and I'm curious about why repairs seem to be an all-or-nothing scenario. I've got a damaged peak shingle, some venting problems causing mildew, and I need a couple of new sheets of plywood. I've read expert opinions arguing for a complete roof replacement, but it feels frustrating when I know I could easily fix a section of siding without having to redo the whole thing. Is it about matching the shingles? Do roofing companies design their products in a way that discourages partial repairs? It seems like asphalt roofs are part of our throwaway culture. Does anyone else feel like a 30-year roof that only lasts 15 years is a scam? I recently saw the Historic Timberline Lodge repair their roof after a fire without needing a full replacement, so why is my situation different?
2 Answers
It's actually very possible to repair asphalt shingle roofs, contrary to what you might think. Most roofers tend to avoid partial repairs due to liability concerns—if they touch one part and something else leaks later, they could be blamed. Plus, the financial side plays a role; repairs can cost more in the long run since they charge higher margins just to make it worthwhile. Shingles are designed to overlap, which makes it tricky to replace just one area without affecting others. So, there’s a whole bunch of reasons behind that all-or-nothing push from roofing companies.
You've touched on a key point here. Many contractors shy away from smaller jobs simply because of potential complaints. Even if your leak is unrelated, customers tend to blame recent repairs when new problems arise. And you're right about matching shingles too; manufacturers can't always guarantee consistency since they come from different batches. It can lead to mismatched colors, which is another factor in why full roof work is promoted over partial repairs.