On our recently installed roof, I notice that the installers didn’t really hit the middle of the nailing area much. Instead they hovered very much on the bottom line, and some percentage of the nails are slightly below the line (maybe 10% to 15%).
In most cases even when the nails are below the line, they nails are not exposed, but every once in a while I do find an exposed nail.
Thus far the installer has indicated that where the nails are not exposed it’s not a problem at all, and where nails are exposed they will replace those shingles (and not just try to put sealer over the nail).
Apparently the installers try to stay closer to the bottom line to get the best strength against wind damage.
My question is this. Is it really ok for the next shingle to just barely cover the nail, as long as you can’t actually see the nail? It looks to me like if they stayed more in the target nailing area, the nails would be sealed up better by the next shingle above.
If the nails are close to the edge (but still not exposed) couldn’t wind driven rain get back to the nail, and also wouldn’t the nail be more exposed to the elements and more likely to rust over time?
The problem is that they did it this way pretty much over the whole roof, not just one area. So there is no easy solution, other than start over, or me just accept it the way it is, as long as you can’t see the nail. I’m planning to accept it the way it is, as long as there are no exposed nails. Does that make sense?