Panel alternatives?

[SoCalRunner]

I received my initial design from Tesla today and they spec'd (14) Q Cell 340w panels. This, unfortunately, only gets us about 2/3 of what we need. I've received proposals from 2 other companies who spec'd 18 (x400w) and 21 (x 375w) panels, respectively. I immediately emailed my Tesla rep to ask if they can add panels and increase the power by using Q Cell 400w panels.

Based on my reading in these forums, it appears I may be able to convince them to add panels by re-configuring the layout, but they won't move away from Q Cell 340w panels, is that accurate?

I'm so disappointed, I was really hoping to go with Tesla (the price can't be beat in LA County) but given the shape and orientation of my roof, it seems I need greater capacity panels.

 

[BrettS]

Based on my reading in these forums, it appears I may be able to convince them to add panels by re-configuring the layout, but they won't move away from Q Cell 340w panels, is that accurate?

Yes, I believe that is the case. One of the way that Tesla keeps the price down is by offering very limited options. The 340W panels are the only ones that tesla is working with right now. Assuming you have the roof space you should have no problem having them add panels to increase the system size, but you won’t get them to switch to a different panel entirely.

 

[wjgjr]

That is accurate, as I understand it. Tesla has low prices in part because there is only one panel option. Hopefully they can at least match the 18-panel (which I assume are larger with a 400W rating) layout with a re-configuration (and if you have the 18-panel layout, maybe that can be used to suggest the better layout to Tesla,) though it is possible the other installer is doing things Tesla won't in terms of layout with respect to setbacks, vents, or otherwise.

 

[SMAlset]

The 340s are designed specifically for Tesla Energy to use with the inverter/optimizers and ZEP hardware (SC at end of product name...I always thought maybe stood for SolarCity — this from data sheet on them and they are different in several specs from the Q-Cells on Hanwha’s website sold to the public). Makes sense for TE to train for one product and provide faster installs with less chance of messing up an install. Also likely gives them pricing advantage ordering all the same panels.

 

[SoCalRunner]

Thanks all, that's helpful. The 340 panels mean I can't go with Tesla, which is unfortunate since Tesla was at $1.48/kW, whereas the other 2 from whom I received proposals are at $2.27 and $3.05.

 

[SMAlset]

That’s too bad if you can’t add other panels to other roof sections to reach the level you want. Do sign a contract regardless of who you go with particularly if you are getting PWs as part of the order. That way when supply of them is available to third parties you’ll be earlier in the line for install.

 

[vickh]

Yes, I believe that is the case. One of the way that Tesla keeps the price down is by offering very limited options. The 340W panels are the only ones that tesla is working with right now. Assuming you have the roof space you should have no problem having them add panels to increase the system size, but you won’t get them to switch to a different panel entirely.

Correct commoditize, more streamlined. But is it as efficient as others?

 

[wwhitney]

Thanks all, that's helpful. The 340 panels mean I can't go with Tesla, which is unfortunate since Tesla was at $1.48/kW, whereas the other 2 from whom I received proposals are at $2.27 and $3.05.

I suggest looking at the marginal cost of the extra system size that the non-Tesla outfits can offer you. Let me round those numbers to $1.50/W and $2.25/W.

If Tesla can give you 2 Watts at $3.00, and the other outfit can give you 50% more total Watts, so 3 Watts at $6.75, then you're paying $3.75/W for those extra Watts. Is it worth it at that price? Or is the smaller Tesla system more economically efficient?

[With the $3/W outfit, it would be $6/W for those extra Watts, so definitely not worth it, I would say.]

Cheers, Wayne

 

[nwdiver]

Or is the smaller Tesla system more economically efficient?

If you shop around online for panels you can see that there's a HUGE jump in cost per watt when panels exceed 340w.

$0.72/w vs $1.11/w

 

[SoCalRunner]

I suggest looking at the marginal cost of the extra system size that the non-Tesla outfits can offer you. Let me round those numbers to $1.50/W and $2.25/W.

If Tesla can give you 2 Watts at $3.00, and the other outfit can give you 50% more total Watts, so 3 Watts at $6.75, then you're paying $3.75/W for those extra Watts. Is it worth it at that price? Or is the smaller Tesla system more economically efficient?

[With the $3/W outfit, it would be $6/W for those extra Watts, so definitely not worth it, I would say.]

Cheers, Wayne

Good point. I wonder if I hold off until next year if 1) Tesla will eventually have 400w panels available, and 2) if other providers will reduce pricing to better compete with Tesla. I'll miss the 26% fed tax credit but it may be better to lose out on a 4% tax credit and have a properly sized system vs installing now but with an undersized system. And now that I look at the numbers again, the configuration Tesla proposed only nets us about 55% of what we need.