OC Oakridge vs Duration

I am trying to understand the Consumer Reports, June, 2009 ratings of shingles. Of all the 30yr shingles rated, OC Oakridge is rated best and OC Duration is rated worst. They must have done the same tests on both, so there must be some significant differences between the 2 models of OC shingle.

Has anyone worked with both Oakridge and Duration? Can you explain why Oakridge is rated so much better?

That’s funny. :stuck_out_tongue:

OC shingles are ok, Durations are definitely better than Oakridges, by a wide margin.

I have worked with both, and I don’t really like either. OC’s seem to scar very easily even in the shade on a 70 degree day.

I have only done one roof with each shingle. Both roofs had a few bundles that did not look like the rest but both laid out straight. Both home owners wanted cheap and thats exactly what they got a cheap shingle.

I did see a seven year old Oakridge 25 year laminate roof last year with cracks all over them.

Have heard stories of Duration causing nail heads to rust due to having a constant tar line.

Around here the Duration is not an inexpensive shingle. I’m not a big fan of the solid sealdown strip. Laminates don’t need that for wind warranty, and it looks to me like it has the potential to trap condensation.

The idea that a manufacture wants you to put your nails above the double thickness is a joke,especially when you’ve taken their shingles out of the wrapper and had them fall apart.And I think a few years down the road we’ll notice alot of roofs under 6/12 pitch with troughing problems.