When does this roof need replacing?

Davesnave

Jazzonaut wrote: »

What was the reason for changing the battens and taking down the roof tiles?

The underfelt was perished and the battens weren't up to today's standards for strength, so I did the job with an eye to adding solar panels. We also straightened a wonky bit, which was OK structurally, but didn't look good.

I've done a whole property refurb, so renovating the roof was a basic part of that.

moneyistooshorttomention

Watching this thread nervously - as I "knew" when I bought my house (a 1970s one - with those concrete tiles instead of slates) that it would be fine for my lifetime. Reason being - I had been the one having to replace roof on my last house - but it was about 110 years old when it came to that point.

I'm guessing - from what Dave says - that my roof won't need me to spend any money on it during my lifetime? - as I'm not planning on putting any solar panels up there.

Guessing I should be safe for not having to spend a penny on it ever - as I'm okay as long as it works fine until, presumably, some point in the 2030's and, most definitely not beyond early 2040's.??

Davesnave

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Guessing I should be safe for not having to spend a penny on it ever -

It should be fine, but only you know about the state of underfelt or membrane, which in theory isn't necessary, but may come in handy as a fail-safe, depending on the pitch of the roof, the spacing of the tiles, the exposure to strong winds etc etc etc.

Mine was ropey at the ends pf the building and at the eves. It could have been patched-up, but I also wanted something more breathable.

Your battens are probably OK .

But, in short, nobody here can tell you!

road2manchester

I once removed 2.5 tons of wet moss of a 1970's bungalow. I know it was that heavy as van was weighed by VOSA on the way home. Now anyone who states that moss does no damage has not taken adding that weight to the roof. Also moss can create a 20mm root system into concrete, so yes it can do damage. Marley tiles also state that 35-50 years is normal lifespan of concrete tiles. BUT unless they start to break up i wouldnt bother.unless the felt is going.

stator

Felt's not that important either if they aren't cracked. Many old houses won't have any underlay.

Furts

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Watching this thread nervously - as I "knew" when I bought my house (a 1970s one - with those concrete tiles instead of slates) that it would be fine for my lifetime. Reason being - I had been the one having to replace roof on my last house - but it was about 110 years old when it came to that point.

I'm guessing - from what Dave says - that my roof won't need me to spend any money on it during my lifetime? - as I'm not planning on putting any solar panels up there.

Guessing I should be safe for not having to spend a penny on it ever - as I'm okay as long as it works fine until, presumably, some point in the 2030's and, most definitely not beyond early 2040's.??

Redland are a huge concrete tile manufacturer. In the 1980s they came with a 100 year guarantee - so clearly in order to avoid claims Redland expected the tiles to last longer than this. Tile testing was thorough and previous years tiles were probably as good. How long a tile lasts will depend on the quality and the manufacturer. MiL has 55 year old concrete tiles which are still functioning fine. A little bit delicate but they are unbranded tiles so were probably cheap local ones from that era.

But you are lucky here money. You have no industrial pollution eating into your tiles and few frosts. These two items are ultimately crucifying to concrete tiles.

Ectophile

My house is just under 50 years old and has Redland tiles.

I had to have the roof stripped and re-laid about 5 years ago as the woodwork was rotting. The tiles went straight back on again - nothing wrong with them. A few reclaimed tiles were added to increase the overlap.

My Dad used to work for Redland, and also told me that the tiles are intended to last 100 years.