Calculate Solar Cost For Your Home - www.solarreviews.com/solar-estimator?aff=66965&cam=713 Get Solar For Your Home (DIY or Pro) - projectsolar.sjv.io/EKmxNn Promo Code (Waves The $100 Deposit) = ES2024 Solar Tilt Angle Calculator - www.everydaysolar.com/calculators/tilt-angle-calculator/ Supplies Harbor Freight 100W Panel - sovrn.co/14lbutm Rich Solar 100W Panel - amzn.to/3NuvlZI SAE To MC4 Cable - amzn.to/3zVjOQi EcoFlow Delta 2 - amzn.to/4f61Fht EcoFlow Delta 3 Plus - amzn.to/3A28W32 Power Meter - amzn.to/3BP1uIZ DISCLAIMER: This video and description contain affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission.
Another advantage to the harbor freight panel, especially for rv owners is that you can easily replace a broken panel anywhere in the US, but they do seem to be very sturdy.
Good test and video and quite informative. At about the 9:50 mark, you total the watt-hours of the Rich Solar panels to be 432 - but it is actually 423 (232 + 191 = 423). This amounts to about 2% additional advantage to the Habor Freight panel.
That was a fantastic test. I would like to have seen the price comparison (at time of filming) and a $/Wh column to get a better feel for the price difference. edit: from my own research the Rich Solar panels are about 30% cheaper ($80 vs. $120. So 17% less power for 30% less money might make a difference in the calculation of value. if you want to price max the setup at $240 the Rich Solar is going to net 1269W, while the Harbor freight is going to come in at only 990W. That puts Rich Solar at a 20% advantage above this cost break point.
A critique: Solar review will not work without collecting my email and phone number. Stop shilling for these people as they spammed the heck out of me. Took a long time and a lot of money given to Aura for them to stop spamming me. This includes some really shady characters who wanted me to lease equipment and just disappeared when I started asking questions.
This was an excellent comparison. I have one Harbor Freight Thunderbolt panel and 4 other 100watt panels. I think two are from NewPowa and are 9BB; two are from Bouge RV and are 9BB. We were without power for about 5 days recently after Hurricane Helene. I had the 4 100 watt panels in series charging one 100AH LIFEPO4 battery and the HF panel charging a second identical battery. While the 4 panels in series obviously brought in more power, none of them individually brought in as much as the one HF panel. The HF panel had a slightly higher amperage. I was very surprised at this. Angles were as close to the same as I could get them.
Did you have MPPT solar charge controller between the 4 in-series panels and the batteries? If not, you are throwing away most of the energy. The MPPT controller constantly adjusts the load current on the panels to extract the most power and downconverts the voltage to match the need of the battery. Victron makes a wide range of MPPT solar charge controllers that are very high quality. There or plenty of others on the market that are much cheaper.
Yes. Plus, (according to my difference calculator) the “difference” between 423 and 495 = 15.686%; 423 to 495 = 17.021% increase; 495 to 423 = 14.545% decrease; 423 = 85.455% of 495; 495 = 117.021% of 423. 😊
Fun twist: The HB solar in this test provided 4.13Wh per dollar The Rich Solar in this test provided 5.29Wh per dollar The Rich Solar is more "bang" for the buck, but really when I think of 100W panels, I expect them to be for some small system use like camping, small shed, etc. If I was building an array I wouldn't look at either in my opinion.
Only buy the Harbor Freight panels when they have sales on them. Which is quite frequently. Plus HF are all over the US so replacing, or adding them is easy.
Great comparison. I only buy Harbor freight panels when they go on sale. You can usually find a coupon for 85 to 99 dollars per panel on them. Makes them much better for the price and they have legs attached. I would not pay full price. I do not like the SAE wire connector but that is okay. Compared to any of the other 100 watt panels I have, the HF ones do perform a little better. I have HQST and a couple of portable panels that just do not want to do more than 80 watts, usually around 75. The Harbor Freight seem to be steadily in the 80s to 90s for me, but that may just be angle, time of day and location. I definitely would like to see more comparisons against the HF panels.
I have 4 Renogy 100 watt flexible panels and 4 HF 100-watt panels (rewired to MC4). The HF consistently outperforms the Renogy on a given day. I recently put the Renogy PVs in 2S2P to up their wattage into a 40amp MPPT (Epever) for a "power cart" with 4 Renogy 6v 260Ah AGM batteries in 2P2S, 6240AH power storage. I'm in the panhandle of Florida. The power cart actually runs my entertainment center, wifi, and my refrigerator as a UPS, and has for the last year. This setup has reduced my grid bill significantly.
Hi I live on Panama City, Florida in the Panhandle. I have a couple of EcoFlows. How did you adapt that connection on the Harbour Freight panel to mc4? I'm not tech savvy so I need some detailed info. Maybe with pictures LHOL
My only complaint about HF panels is the cable that comes with them. If I was using them for more than temporary use, I’d replace the cables with #12 solar wire and MC4 connectors.
I don't know if anybody has mentioned this, but the 2 panels are about equal in efficiency. The Harbor Freight panel created 17% more power but it's also 15-18% bigger than the Rich Solar panel. Depending on which area is divided by each other gives different percentages. I show the Rich Solar panel is 15% smaller or HF panel is 1.177 of the smaller panel, or 17.7% bigger. It basically wins because it's bigger.
But the issue is that Rich Solar panel is rated at the same power output. So Rich Solar is saying that their smaller panel will output the same power as the larger HF panel and this video anecdotally shows this is not the case.
@leokolev Maybe in some ideal condition, the Rich solar panel can achieve 100W, so they market and sell it as 100W. In reality, a larger panel will produce more power and is more properly rated as 100W. In some cases, like the person using it on top of an RV, the smaller size will work better. In a situation where the size isn't an issue, the bigger one will produce more power. They save money in production by making it smaller and charge less. Just decide whether the initial price or actual production is more important.
@@christiansmith7666so you didn't watch the video and just came here to insult harbor freight. Got it you're one of harbor freight hating trolls who are stuck a decade in the past.
All my Renogy stuff has sucked. A while back I bought 2 of the new(er) HQST controllers because ppl in one of Hobotech's videos were saying Victron was the "way bigger company" Hobo was talking about in the video, to allegedly be the company that makes them. After receiving them, they say Renogy on the box, not Victron, now I'm scared to death they're going to give up the ghost like every other Renogy thing I've ever had. Everything about Renogy's stuff appears top notch, look great, solid feel..then I got a bunch and it ALL went to hell. Then u need an interpreter to understand customer support, if u can get them at all.
I am noticing that quite a few panels on amazon are not only heavily discounted, but also many are mislabeled as to their wattage. Some links I had used in the past changed the physical panel they were selling, too. Very annoying. I bought a Newpowa 75W panel a few months ago for a small system and used the same link to buy a second one just a few weeks and the panel was still advertised as 75W, but what I got was a 70W. When I look at the link now it has changed to 70W (so at least they matched it up now)... but this is the same amazon link I had used months ago to buy the 75W panel. I recently bought a few Eco-worthy branded 100W panels because of the extreme discount on them... $50 per 100W panel ($102 for a 2-pack), which I see is still up on amazon today. But these panels are under-performing. I didn't do a strong comparison but I am not impressed. Still, they are a winner for the price I got them for. So far my favorite 100W's are the HQST 9BBs (I haven't tried the 10BBs). I am very happy with the 9BB panels. They have holes in all the right places and perform well. In anycase, I really dislike crimps inside the black box. I don't like them for the MC4's either to be honest... it's a failure point because they aren't cold welds for wires that small. I crimp my kitted MC4's, but then I solder in addition to the crimp. -Matt
Thanks for this video. I have a HF 100 panel and was considering a second one. I can get them for $100 or less now. You have convinced me to pick up another one. 😉
This is an awesome test!!! Exactly what I was looking for. I have four 100W Ecoflow panels right now that I plan to put on a shed. But I need 8 more panels, and plan to wire them in 2-panels-in parallel, and then series the set to maximize the watts from 12 panels total into a Ecoflow Delta Pro Ultra. Not sure what 8 to buy yet, I was thinking Eco-Worthy simply because of cost. But I'd Love to see Harbor Freight vs Renogy vs EcoFlow vs Eco-Worthy, etc.
Good tests, bad math. 232+191=423, not 432. Still, HF outperformed Rich significantly. Like to see a comparable test using the builders favorites for a 48 volt system.
The wires on the harbor freight panel look really thin for a 100w panel. On the rich solar, I'd probably solder it myself as those crimps with the fold in style aren't great for long-term durability. Crimp then solder makes for a great connection unless there is a lot of flex/vibration.
Thanks for the head to head comparison. My thought is the way those panels are labeled, Rich Solar is standard and HF is under labeled. Based on number of cells, HF is more likely a 120w panel. Standard practice for manufacturers labeling is output at standard elimination (1000w/sq meter). Also the lack of a standard label on the HF panel add to my suspicions. But I don’t want to sound like I am badmouthing HF panels. Just point out my observation and experiences with solar panels. If the size and price aren’t a constraint, go for it.
I have watched your videos for a while and wondered about the accuracy of those power meters. I have several and none agree when compared against others and especially something more accurate like a Victron Smart Shunt. The cheap ones are wildly off in terms of accuracy. For this test, I would like to see you at least swap meters to see if there is any difference and/or compare against something more accurate.
The one piece of data I think you could add to your charts here and it could be important as you move along in your comparative studies is you did show in the beginning their physical size difference as well and then calculate out roughly Watt hours per square inch or square foot so that someone was going to do a large installation. They could figure out roughly how much the peak power they could put in an area, whether it be a roof or an external stand and then you could even throw in estimated cost of each panel at the time of the study being published to put up more data available
Great comparison, but maybe I missed you mentioning it, but though the HF won, it's $120 vs $80 for the RS. So the HF is 50% more expensive. Plus with HF you need to crimp MC4's or buy the $15 converter.
That 17% is no big deal. The simple fact that 976 sq inches is 17% larger than the 829 sq inches should yield 17% more power, otherwise the larger panel is just wasting valueable space.
Still, both rated at the same power yet one is undershooting it with 17% that is a big difference. Yes the weaker one is a lot smaller but their claims should be real and not lie 🤥. When you get beaten by harbour freight you have screwed up 😂
@@tullgutten I do not how you can decide that one is beaten by another. Energy per square feet is what matters because you do not have infinite roof area. And then there is matter of long term use, durability and reliability. I am not convinced either one is good enough. I am just pointing out that simple metric is not good enough to make a decision.
HF are easy to get, stores are everywhere and sales every month. The legs on the HF are a big plus me. I have used Goal Zero, BougeRV, Jackery 100w portable panels, and the HF ( I have both the HF briefcase and the flat panel) are simple, cheapest and as my other panels fail I replace with HF.
HQST and Newpowa look to be a couple other popular brands to check out, with poly/mono/high-efficiency variants. I've seen a few people take panels shaped like the Rich Solar and give them hinges and feet to fully fold up for travel. Would be good for portable power!
For the RV crowd, it would be interesting to see the GoPower panels tested. Since Dometic bought them, a lot of new RVs are coming with at least 1 panel factory installed, and it would be great to know how they stack up and if it is worth sticking with them when expanding capacity.
I really want the winner to be based upon watt per surface area. Any company can label a 120w panel as a 100w one but only a great design can use higher efficiency parts and less gaps between them. I live on on a boat where space is a premium.
It would be cool to see a chart with physical dimensions and price included in the end. The rich solar looks smaller than the harbor freight. So if you could fit 5 rich solar panels in the same space as 4 harbor freight panels, in the end the rich solar may be better suited for a given area.
But you could buy 3 of the Rich Solar panels for the cost of 2 Harbor Freight panels. So the wattage per dollar is better despite the per panel output being lower.
So the Harbor Freight has 17% more area, and captures 17% more energy. I think this is less about which panel is best and more about which panel is accurately advertised. Seems like Rich Solar panel should really be advertising their panel as an 85W panel.
The part he didn't talk about was price. 3 of these Rich Solar panels cost the same as 2 of the Harbor Freight ones and end up putting out 20% more power.
The harbour freight panel surface area is larger: 976 vs 829 is 17.7%. Which is almost identical to the power output difference you observed. So it's a panel size difference
Interesting. The area of the Harbour Freight is 17% larger, so I guess the panel efficiency is really the same. The size difference accounts for everything. I'll be watching for other tests. Thanks.
Due to the larger size of the HF I wouldn't be surprised if they are really 110w panels just labeled as 100w- hense no data sheet sticker. The dimensions are very similar to my nature power 110w panels. The cons on the HF: cable wire is thin and not PV cable so it is not UV rated. The SAE connector is by far the worst connector (XT60/5521/7909/MC4) they get really hot and get loose after multiple plug/unplugging. It is also not waterproof like the MC4. The pros: the legs are nice if you go mobile or don't have a rack for permanent install. You can walk in a HF and buy one that day and return in person if broken. I would like to see a partial shade test on both these panels. I would assume the Rich solar would perform better due to the 9bb design.
I think it's important to compare by price as well. The Harbor Freight panel (at $120 currently) comes out to $0.242 cents per watt hour, while the Rich Solar panel (at $80) comes out to $0.185 cents per watt hour. So for 17% more efficiency with the Harbor Freight panel, you're paying 31% more. I can get 3 Rich Solar panels for the same price as 2 Harbor Freight, which means a solar generator setup with the Rich Solar panels would provide me with 1.296kWh compared to 0.99kWh Harbor Freight.
@everydaysolar You forgot to include possibly the most important calculation, the cost. Approximately 21 hours after publishing this video, using the links in the description, the Harbor Freight panel cost 50% more than the Rich-Solar panel. Calculating for the difference in the cost of the panels the Rich-Solar panel made 5.29w/$1 and the Harbor Freight made 4.13w/$1. The Rich-Solar panel actually won this competition. 🤓
You didn’t do the math on area difference in percent, but the Harbor Freight is 17.7% larger than the Rich Solar panel. That’s very close to the 17% difference in watt-hours collected! Not a coincidence. BTW, I have had bad experiences with Rich Solar. They shipped me wrong parts multiple times, and items missing in the box, as well. One time when they shipped wrong part, the replacement part was the same wrong part. And customer service has been exceptionally bad. I had a panel fail during 1st year, and they said they would replace, but then tried to get out of that. I had to elevate and fight them for a few months before they finally agreed to ship the replacement. It was a flexible CIGS panel on van roof and delaminated due to weather and humidity. I sold the replacement and went with a different rigid panel from Renogy. I like Renogy and Bouge RV, so far. But I won’t buy anything ever again from Rich Solar.
I'd be interested to see the HF Mono panel up against the HF Amorphos Panel array. I know that historically, Amorphos does better than Mono, but I think Mono is catching up.
However: footprint of the panel matters for RV applications: on the roof of my camper, I couldn’t get a large number of square panels, but Rich Solar makes some longer, narrow panels that allows more panels to be installed.
I would like to know how they would perform with overcast days because we need to see how they accumulate the wattage. While I understand that the preference for clear sunny skies is the ideal condition, we need to compare against the unpredictably of nature. I would expect to see accumulated wattages to drop due to overcast skies, but it would also give us something to chew on.
I suspect Harbor Freight is rated higher than 100W seeing as they aren't listing the spec data on the panel. Also suspect they only provide a rated output and no open/short specs. I want to also suggest when testing long rectangular panels to place them in horizontal positioning parallel to the movement of the sun. It does make a difference.
As far as solder connections you need to familiarize yourself with the National Electrical Code (NEC) 110.14 B Soldering splices SHALL first be spliced or joined so as to be mechanically and electrically secure without solder and then be soldered. The reason for this is solder is not an especially good conductor and will generate substantial amount of heat if current passes through the solder rather than directly from wire to wire. Not my words. Don’t believe me search for the answer. I would give the HF panels a negative point because of the solder. Enjoyed your video.
I have the 200-watt 24-volt panel from Rich Solar 9BB on my van. It can produce over 200 watts in ideal conditions and does well in partial shade. They now have a 250-watt 24-volt panel that is just a little larger which is my next upgrade. The HF panel may be underrated. The measurement at 1:08 minutes shows 6.1 amps which is higher than its rating. I didn't get to see a measurement from Rich Solar.
@everydaysolar Scott: How did the % energy output compare with the percentage area of the panels? ...since you spoke of the larger HF area at the beginning. Buy my calcs off your measurements, the HF is 17.7% larger than the other.
Would panel temperature make a difference in the panel capability? The HF panel has more surface area allowing it to shed heat better in a warm environment.
I'm pretty virgin to solar, but I've installed a pair of 100wt Thunderbolts to the roof of my Club Car & a Genasun boost controller , and I can't get it off standby mode yet.
I have 7 HQST panels and my maximum outputs are about the same as the Rich panels. The HQST panels are about the same size as the Rich panels and are available on Amazon for $59.99 , half the price of the $120 Thunderbolt panel. The Rich and HQST and most other Chinese 100 watt panels take up about the same amount of real estate, where the Thunderbolt is substantially larger. I wonder what the power output per square inch is? But it is true that most 100 watt panels will not produce 100 watts
All well and good for now, but how do these panels compare say 5 years or 10 years down the road? I have a friend who has four older Harbor Freight panels which no longer produce nearly as much power as they once did after 5 years time. To me that's almost as important as power output and initial cost.
Interesting, but size also has its value. Easier to configure if space is limited. And you would get more of the smaller panels on that same roof area. Looking at power output per sq ft there is only a 4% difference.
Overall pretty good video. I think tho to add more valuable information would be "when" the solar panels start producing power. At what angle to the sun hitting them do they make power. Another thing is that swapping test meters is great and all, but switching mid-way through day isn't good enough. There's different conditions morning vs afternoon such as dust, heat, moisture, etc. Swapping the meters between "2 consecutive days" would be far better as it would give a more overall picture of performance. Another issue with pitting the winner here, HF in this case, with other brands 1 at a time, you will get different comparisons as you do this as the season progresses. This overall test should be done side-by-side with each solar panel on the same days. Just a few degrees of the sun moving south is enough to throw your results off, not to mention the difference in the temperatures of the days, with or without wind, possible dust, etc. So many variables to factor in when spreading the test results over several weeks, or months. I get that you want more videos, but the quality of the video and the amount of information is far more valuable. Split the tests up into several different videos if needed instead of a single one if you want to have test results. But accuracy is key here when presenting this kind of information that is prone to high variability based on the day, weather, etc conditions.
Had issues buying with flea bay solar panels Did current & voltage tests on a clear day with the sun overhead and the panel facing the sun perpendicular. This should be within 10% panel rating. Second method calculates the theoretical best performance The incidence solar radiation @ noon on a clear sunny day is about 1000w / sq M. Measure the surface the effective area the panel in question. Incident watts x area of panel in M x cell conversion efficiency = power generated For example 1000w x 1 sq M x 17% = 170 W mono crystalline =17% poly crystalline = 14% amorphous cells about 8%
Is there a stated efficiency rating for each panel? Also, are there other design differences between the panels such as monocrystalline vs polycrystalline?
What a LOT of homeowners don't realize is that even with a solar system, if you are connected to the grid and power goes out, your solar system does NOT supply you with power during an outage. That is a big thumbs down on solar. The only way to have your power from solar is to cut yourself off completely from the grid. They say it is a safety factor, I say have an auto relay that shuts off the grid and when power comes back on manually reset the relay, or INTERLOCK. It not rocket science.
It is almost lined up with the percentage power output difference. Energy collected was 17% higher for the Harbor Freight as compared to Rich Solar and the area was 18% larger for the Harbor Freight as compared to Rich Solar.
Now would you divide it by surface area to get what the power output would be per A^2 in case you wanted to maximize your surface area (say on a roof) to determine which output would be best if you had a smaller area to work with?
