Solar installer wants to remove my concrete tile roof

[chazack]

Hi, I have a quote from an installer that says he will remove my concrete roofing tiles and lay down asphalt shingles while installing the "Quick Mount PV" mounting system under the 10 panels.
He says that if you are going to keep the panels forever then there isn't any need for the tiles and the installation and maintenance is much easier with the tiles out of the way. Further he says that it, naturally, reduces the risk of tile breakage.
In some cases he says that it actually protects that part of the roof better since some of the tiles are already cracked.

The tiles are removed starting at the downward edge of the roof and the panels are thus placed adjacent to the downward edge. This seems like it could look a bit funny but the roof is not facing the street so I don't know that it matters.

There is some logic and simplicity to this concept that I find appealing after reviewing some of the other panel mounting systems that drill through and/or cut the tile.

My main concern would be wind and rain blowing up under the intersection of the existing tiles and the newly installed shingles. I presume that some sort of sealant might be used on this barrier.

Further my particular tile (see attachment) seems rather intricate (not sure whether that really matters, though).

Does anyone have any comments about this approach?

3kw system, 10 panels
San Diego, CA

[inetdog]

Properly done, this could be a viable alternative plan.
But make sure that the shingles used are rated for at least the life of the panels.
As for the joint between the tiles and the shingles, no pitched roof should ever depend on sealant alone for integrity.
You will need properly designed flashing for the junction points. A group of roofers with experience in just this sort of mixed roof should be doing the design and the work.
But other people have had equally good long term results from proper mounting hardware through the tile roof. It will probably involve removing and replacing the tiles around the attachment points and the solar laborers will have to be extra cautious to avoid breaking the tiles while walking on them.
Some varieties tiles are just too soft of brittle for this to be practical, in which case the shingles are the way to go.

[J.P.M.]

Hi, I have a quote from an installer that says he will remove my concrete roofing tiles and lay down asphalt shingles while installing the "Quick Mount PV" mounting system under the 10 panels. He says that if you are going to keep the panels forever then there isn't any need for the tiles and the installation and maintenance is much easier with the tiles out of the way. Further he says that it, naturally, reduces the risk of tile breakage. In some cases he says that it actually protects that part of the roof better since some of the tiles are already cracked. The tiles are removed starting at the downward edge of the roof and the panels are thus placed adjacent to the downward edge. This seems like it could look a bit funny but the roof is not facing the street so I don't know that it matters. There is some logic and simplicity to this concept that I find appealing after reviewing some of the other panel mounting systems that drill through and/or cut the tile. My main concern would be wind and rain blowing up under the intersection of the existing tiles and the newly installed shingles. I presume that some sort of sealant might be used on this barrier. Further my particular tile (see attachment) seems rather intricate (not sure whether that really matters, though). Does anyone have any comments about this approach? 3kw system, 10 panels San Diego, CA

Yes. In my opinion only, but in the strongest possible terms : DO NOT DO THIS. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The only benefit in such a scheme is to the installer. He saves time by not needing to replace the tiles and by not needing to be quite so careful (some would say less professional) and maybe a few bucks not spent on broken tiles. Outside of some probably bogus save story, there is NO benefit to the owner..................... Think about where the rain that falls on the roof above the array will go. It will go under the array, flow down the roof and UNDER the tiles below or near the lower edge the array. Then, it will get at the roof by flowing (or eventually leaking when the non inspectable magic sealant fails) under the shingle/tile transition where it will sit, moist and warm when the sun comes out. Then, having taken everything that washed off the roof - all the leaves, bugs, dead critters, bird crap and who knows what else with it, it will be a great soup , cooking, rotting and probably smelling. Also, after a while, all that runoff stream bedload will settle under the tiles and/or at the transition. The junk at the transition will quickly form a damn and you'll have standing water on your roof - actually standing crap soup - smelling, breeding mosquitoes and probably contributing to early roof problems under an array that will probably need to be at least partially removed and replaced for the reair. Sealants will fail. You will not see or be able to inspect or repair the transition. You will be living with this job for a long time. The installer will not. If you allow this, you will regret it. Leave the tiles in place. Quick Mount can be used with concrete or clay tiles. To repeat: The only advantage to this scheme is with the installer. You MAY be told you're saving some money. It's a bad choice. Penny wise and pound foolish. You'll be buying a problem. Don't do it.

[Willaby]

Chazack -

I'd done a fair amount of research on this install option over the past year prior to my install (last month). Pulling the tile and laying roll asphalt is actually considered a best option (over tile hooks or stanchions), and a little more expensive because it is MORE work for the installer. It is a better option for my type of tile though, which is 4" high Spanish "S" tile, because it recesses the panels right to the top of the tile peak. Your tile is quite flat, so less benefit. It is always nice to have the panels mounted as low as possible, least visible.

The installer will pull tile from the roof top ridge down to the eve and 2' on either side. He will lay the asphalt, install racks, then install the panels nearly flush followed by re-installing the tile only framing the panel perimeter. The tiles will actually be installed slightly under the panels, framing the entire array, with the panel edge overlapping them. You can picture the panels shedding rain onto the lower tiles. There would be no standing water, leaves, etc and almost no rain (or sun) on the asphalt section.

The asphalt has a 20-30 year life in full sun, but with the panels completely covering them, it is likely doubled.

There are a few posts on this subject, some knowing how it is done and others guessing why it is not a good option. I wouldn't rule out this installer for offering this type of install (and contrary to JPM's "expert" opinion). I opted not to do this install as my array is nearly invisible from the street anyway.

[solarix]

We quit using QuickMount products as we find them to not be quick and not "resepctful of the roof" either. This post's installer is recommending removing the tile as the Quickmount tile system is horribly time consuming. For aesthetic reasons, recessing the array into the tile produces a nice look and in new construction is a good way to go, but we prefer to use the ProSolar TileTrac system as it is much cleaner and easier to install and just as reliable.

[J.P.M.]

Chazack -

There are a few posts on this subject, some knowing how it is done and others guessing why it is not a good option. I wouldn't rule out this installer for offering this type of install (and contrary to JPM's "expert" opinion). I opted not to do this install as my array is nearly invisible from the street anyway.

Who said I was an expert ? I never wrote that. All I know is I see it as a problem waiting to happen that doesn't need a roofer to recognize it, just a few minutes thinking about it and some small amount of common sense. Probably the only reasons problems have not surfaced yet is because some installers have only been doing this B.S. for a relatively short time and not all, or maybe even very few installers think it a good idea. But, like I do say and write, opinions vary, and one of mine is that I see NO advantages to the owner and a lot of potential and probably unknown problems waiting to happen.........................................

Take what you want of the above. Scrap the rest.

[lkruper]

Hi, I have a quote from an installer that says he will remove my concrete roofing tiles and lay down asphalt shingles while installing the "Quick Mount PV" mounting system under the 10 panels.
He says that if you are going to keep the panels forever then there isn't any need for the tiles and the installation and maintenance is much easier with the tiles out of the way. Further he says that it, naturally, reduces the risk of tile breakage.
In some cases he says that it actually protects that part of the roof better since some of the tiles are already cracked.

The tiles are removed starting at the downward edge of the roof and the panels are thus placed adjacent to the downward edge. This seems like it could look a bit funny but the roof is not facing the street so I don't know that it matters.

There is some logic and simplicity to this concept that I find appealing after reviewing some of the other panel mounting systems that drill through and/or cut the tile.

My main concern would be wind and rain blowing up under the intersection of the existing tiles and the newly installed shingles. I presume that some sort of sealant might be used on this barrier.

Further my particular tile (see attachment) seems rather intricate (not sure whether that really matters, though).

Does anyone have any comments about this approach?

3kw system, 10 panels
San Diego, CA

I would consult with a roofer who does not have anything to gain from the transaction. Isn't a concrete roof higher quality and better looking than shingles? I would also suspect that some shingles are higher quality than others.... what does he propose to use?

It also would not hurt to get two more quotes from installers, if you have not done that already.

As Lily Tomlin said "No matter how cynical you become, it's never enough to keep up."

[Willaby]

Who said I was an expert ? I never wrote that. All I know is I see it as a problem waiting to happen that doesn't need a roofer to recognize it, just a few minutes thinking about it and some small amount of common sense. Probably the only reasons problems have not surfaced yet is because some installers have only been doing this B.S. for a relatively short time and not all, or maybe even very few installers think it a good idea. But, like I do say and write, opinions vary, and one of mine is that I see NO advantages to the owner and a lot of potential and probably unknown problems waiting to happen.........................................

Take what you want of the above. Scrap the rest.

JPM - I realize I didn't follow up with you on this topic, sorry, and to help understand it is not "B.S.". I'm going to have to take your offer and "scrap all" of your quote. There is no easier, more efficient, foolproof install than on an asphalt tile or roll roof. New construction tile roof solar homes are installed this way, look great when the slate tile color is close to the panel color and panels protect the shingles. The mounts are simple bolted "L" brackets and the shingles easily lift and bend 60 degrees installing at a fraction of the time and cost of QuickMounts. They don't crack, don't need to be cut, they self flash, easily double flash, etc, all common-sense stuff. Now, another plus, for those who already have newer all asphalt roofs (like my rental), it is relatively easy to re-roof without removing the entire array. Unlike tile, the panel can be easily released, tipped up slightly and the flexible shingles can be slid in place quickly, under the rack but over the existing shingles (code allows two layers of this type of shingle, sometimes even three layers). Again, the tiles overlap the surrounding tile, or are installed down to the edge to shed water and debris.

Again, it is more work and cost to retro-install this way, but with many advantages to do so for certain tile roofs. I'm not an expert either, but I consulted with ABC Roofing Supply in San Marcos and San Marcos Roofing and I have also done three shingle roof jobs in my life. I did opt not to do my solar install this way due to cost and my roof being inspected good and also my panels being not visible from street level anyway, but it was close. Maybe solarix can chime in as he is in the business.

I doubt your opinion can be swayed, but I hope this helps.

[lkruper]

JPM - I realize I didn't follow up with you on this topic, sorry, and to help understand it is not "B.S.". I'm going to have to take your offer and "scrap all" of your quote. There is no easier, more efficient, foolproof install than on an asphalt tile or roll roof. New construction tile roof solar homes are installed this way, look great when the slate tile color is close to the panel color and panels protect the shingles. The mounts are simple bolted "L" brackets and the shingles easily lift and bend 60 degrees installing at a fraction of the time and cost of QuickMounts. They don't crack, don't need to be cut, they self flash, easily double flash, etc, all common-sense stuff. Now, another plus, for those who already have newer all asphalt roofs (like my rental), it is relatively easy to re-roof without removing the entire array. Unlike tile, the panel can be easily released, tipped up slightly and the flexible shingles can be slid in place quickly, under the rack but over the existing shingles (code allows two layers of this type of shingle, sometimes even three layers). Again, the tiles overlap the surrounding tile, or are installed down to the edge to shed water and debris.

Again, it is more work and cost to retro-install this way, but with many advantages to do so for certain tile roofs. I'm not an expert either, but I consulted with ABC Roofing Supply in San Marcos and San Marcos Roofing and I have also done three shingle roof jobs in my life. I did opt not to do my solar install this way due to cost and my roof being inspected good and also my panels being not visible from street level anyway, but it was close. Maybe solarix can chime in as he is in the business.

I doubt your opinion can be swayed, but I hope this helps.

I think you made the right decision not to replace your concrete tiles with shingles. To me, replacing the roof to make it easier for the solar is letting the tail wag the dog.

[Willaby]

I think you made the right decision not to replace your concrete tiles with shingles. To me, replacing the roof to make it easier for the solar is letting the tail wag the dog.

If it would have cost about the same I would have done it, because of my 4" high s-tiles. Note it is only removing the tiles under the panels not the whole roof and I failed to mention you only want to do this with a rectangular array. Here's a sample pic I googled: http://reisolar.com/gallery/tile-roof-1/ search for "flush", "integrated", "recessed".

[solarix]

Yes, recessing the array into the tile by removing tile and putting down comp. roofing under it is a nice way to go. Definitely costs more, but looks very nice and this can make it worth it. An on new construction is less expensive as it saves on tile cost.

[J.P.M.]

JPM - I realize I didn't follow up with you on this topic, sorry, and to help understand it is not "B.S.". I'm going to have to take your offer and "scrap all" of your quote. There is no easier, more efficient, foolproof install than on an asphalt tile or roll roof. New construction tile roof solar homes are installed this way, look great when the slate tile color is close to the panel color and panels protect the shingles. The mounts are simple bolted "L" brackets and the shingles easily lift and bend 60 degrees installing at a fraction of the time and cost of QuickMounts. They don't crack, don't need to be cut, they self flash, easily double flash, etc, all common-sense stuff. Now, another plus, for those who already have newer all asphalt roofs (like my rental), it is relatively easy to re-roof without removing the entire array. Unlike tile, the panel can be easily released, tipped up slightly and the flexible shingles can be slid in place quickly, under the rack but over the existing shingles (code allows two layers of this type of shingle, sometimes even three layers). Again, the tiles overlap the surrounding tile, or are installed down to the edge to shed water and debris.

Again, it is more work and cost to retro-install this way, but with many advantages to do so for certain tile roofs. I'm not an expert either, but I consulted with ABC Roofing Supply in San Marcos and San Marcos Roofing and I have also done three shingle roof jobs in my life. I did opt not to do my solar install this way due to cost and my roof being inspected good and also my panels being not visible from street level anyway, but it was close. Maybe solarix can chime in as he is in the business.

I doubt your opinion can be swayed, but I hope this helps.

I can have my mind changed when a better way comes along. You may do and think as you wish.

[J.P.M.]

Yes, recessing the array into the tile by removing tile and putting down comp. roofing under it is a nice way to go. Definitely costs more, but looks very nice and this can make it worth it. An on new construction is less expensive as it saves on tile cost.

And creates a sump on your roof.

[lkruper]

And creates a sump on your roof.

If that were to happen, would your homeowners insurance cover it? Or would it be handled by the warranty on the solar system?

[J.P.M.]

If that were to happen, would your homeowners insurance cover it? Or would it be handled by the warranty on the solar system?

I'm not an insurance co. so I can't say. I'd think like the insurance company. It's a lousy idea anyway. I still haven't had anyone explain to me where any advantage of this method benefits anyone besides the installer. As hard as I try, I can't think of any long term benefit to the homeowner.