Tylertown was more violent than I initially thought.
Please understand:
I am not saying this tornado deserved to be rated higher. I am just genuinely curious because the DAT description is scanty. This is from the EF4 rated damage.
Here's what the DAT says: "Well built two story home. Wood bolted to foundation. Some bolts pulled off of foundation. Found some clips but most of the damage is thrown behind the house and inaccessible."
That's ambiguous, though. Did the bolts shear or did the concrete shear out? Was the anchoring reasonable? By contrast, in my opinion anyway, the photos from Diaz seem to show a clear anchoring performance indicating the structural connections held until the bolts themselves couldn't handle the wind load (note that the washers were still present in the case of the badly sheared Diaz bolts).
The far right anchor bolt in the first picture is clearly deformed, but not as badly as Diaz. I'm guessing sill plate failure was the dominant failure mode, though? (which is less extreme than the Diaz case)
The images are too big, so here are the links
Hard to grade context from this, but it does look closer to old school F4 than F5, IMO.
Here are the 3 pictures on the DAT. Again, I just want to know if anyone knows more about why they stuck with EF4. Am I on the right track in assuming that there was some sill plate failure + lower context in the judgment? Anyway, it was definitely a very, very violent tornado.