New Roof Tiles, or Keep Old?

paperclap

Hi all,

So, I think we need a reroof. 

I know I have had people on here say we shouldn’t get one, or don’t need one, or that we don’t need felt if the tiles are in good order, or should wait until we do a loft conversion, etc.

Those comments may very well be correct… if we didn’t have multiple leaks, which we sadly do. We have spots where plasterboard ceiling has been wet. We have wet purlins and rafters. Wet battens. In multiple locations.

We could repair the necessary parts, but frankly, I think it might just be a false economy.

Now, we do need new felt (and battens, of course). That’s a given.

But, some roofers have said to keep costs down we could re-use our existing tiles, as they are in good order (despite being 66 years old). This may be the case, but no doubt some will be damaged, or get damaged in the process. So odd ones will need replacing.

I am sort of in the mindset that since the roofers are already stripping the roof, up on the scaffolding, etc… it might be best to just it’s the bullet and pay the extra for new tiles.

It will (probably) look better. 

I assume it would be a worthwhile investment (old tiles are prone to cracking, not fitting as well, becoming porous, etc).

It would also give us a chance to fit ridge and hip ventilation. Maybe a dry ridge system.

I suppose there are several questions here.

Are new tiles made “like they used to make them”? Strong, sturdy and built to last 50+ years?

Is it a worthwhile investment, especially as we are looking to refelt anyway?

Thanks one and all. Always appreciate your help and advice.

stuart45

laurencewhymark said:

Is it a worthwhile investment, especially as we are looking to refelt anyway?

You need a decent roof, or it will cost more in the long run. New 49's are only about a quid each, so it might be worth getting new as it should be the last time you need to do it.

NSG666

Personally I'd fit new tiles although it will increase materials and disposal costs. I also took the opportunity to fit uPVC soffits and fascias but I have friends in the trade so it all cost me a fraction of what a regular customer would pay.

The 45 year old concrete tiles that came off my roof were in surprisingly good condition and the builder reused half of them.

knightstyle

It all depends on the extra cost for new ones, plus check if they are heavier than the old ones as the roof may need reinforcing if they are.

goodwithsaving

New tiles like for like. If I pay that much for a new roof (which I have), I want to visibly see it!

cattom

I wouldn't go to the trouble and expense  of having a new roof, using the old tiles. no way. if they've been up there all those years, they've done there day. time for new in my c/o.

ChasingtheWelshdream

We did half and half.

The main, tallest part of our roof was new tiles. The secondary roof, (sort of a separate extension) we reused as many as we could. 

The reasoning being that the taller roof required huge amounts of scaffold which we don’t want to be paying for again any time soon, so new tiles was a no-brainier.

The secondary part is much easier to access and as we could salvage enough tiles, it saved some £££ on the basis that we could easily replace any that may fail and it doesn’t look ‘odd’ being visually disconnected from the main section.

That being said, this was an unexpected and reluctant re-roof so we were looking to save where we could. If money was no object, we would have chosen new tiles throughout.

stuart45

If you go for new, sell the old ones.

EssexExile

66 years isn't old for roof tiles.

fenwick458

EssexExile said:

66 years isn't old for roof tiles.

it's old enough. Marley concrete roof tiles seem to go porous and crumbly at 50 years old.
I really wouldn't entertain trying to re use them

MACKEM99

A roof near me was redone not so long ago with brand new tiles.  The guys did not use scaffold but scrambled up and down the roof whilst doing it.  Ok its a bungalow, but I cringed when I seen them up there.