Wouldn’t it be cool if Ecoflow did this for the Cybertruck?

[hemiarch]

Wouldn’t it be awesome if there was a Cybertruck version of this product which I personally didn’t know existed until today.
https://us.ecoflow.com/products/eco...DU-uy-njdtBiiVPpPYximtT_jqRnZds4aArH5EALw_wcB

Sponsored

 

[mcm4ss]

no cybertruck kits yet. I would love one.

 

[Mark V]

That looks awesome. I am guessing the trick is the connection to the trucks electrical system.

 

[SlegMD]

This is good

 

[mcm4ss]

it does not connect to the truck but a solar generator in the back which can be used to charge the truck when stopped or whatever.

 

[Mark V]

it does not connect to the truck but a solar generator in the back which can be used to charge the truck when stopped or whatever.

If this is the case, then wouldn't any system be useable with any car with the same connector?

 

[henchman24]

The big issue on any of these types of panels is the payback and real world usability. The Model Y version is said to produce 1.5 kWh per day. At 15 cents per kWh that is 22.5 cents per day... at the peak (and realistically, it would be ~70% of that). Assuming you get that and there are no conversion losses you're at ~2,400 days of payback. Add in conversion losses and cloudy days... you could easily add 50% back to that. It could easily be a 8-10 year payback just on the panel, and prior to any powerstation added to it. Then on top of all of that, these flexible panels tend to only last 5-6 years before delaminating.

Then on top of all of that, even if you don't utilize sentry mode, this would pretty much only over vampire drain.

In the very best case scenario assuming full sun, power and no conversion or vampire drain losses on a RWD M3... the 1.3kWh that produces would give you ~6 miles of range a day.

The idea is great, but we're not at the point in technology where it really makes sense. Could be neat as a camping accessory, but even then you'd be better off with a more standard portable panel.

 

[Ri22]

There was a Chinese supplier working on a flexible 385w panel which would attach to the tonneau, but has since abandon development due to poor CT sales and release of "tonneau-less" CT.

 

[JackCypher]

I like and use Ecoflow products...this would be a good use of the expansive flat real estate of the CT roof.

 

[TyPope]

The big issue on any of these types of panels is the payback and real world usability. The Model Y version is said to produce 1.5 kWh per day. At 15 cents per kWh that is 22.5 cents per day... at the peak (and realistically, it would be ~70% of that). Assuming you get that and there are no conversion losses you're at ~2,400 days of payback. Add in conversion losses and cloudy days... you could easily add 50% back to that. It could easily be a 8-10 year payback just on the panel, and prior to any powerstation added to it. Then on top of all of that, these flexible panels tend to only last 5-6 years before delaminating.

Then on top of all of that, even if you don't utilize sentry mode, this would pretty much only over vampire drain.

In the very best case scenario assuming full sun, power and no conversion or vampire drain losses on a RWD M3... the 1.3kWh that produces would give you ~6 miles of range a day.

The idea is great, but we're not at the point in technology where it really makes sense. Could be neat as a camping accessory, but even then you'd be better off with a more standard portable panel.

MINUS whatever aero penalty and weight penalty carrying around panels and an extra battery would cost. Would it sap 0.5% of your range? That would undo their advantage.

 

[CyberGuyHawaii]

https://cybertruckco.com/product/cybertruck-200w-hood-flexible-solar-panel/

CybertruckCo makes one. It fits perfectly on the front hood.

 

[henchman24]

MINUS whatever aero penalty and weight penalty carrying around panels and an extra battery would cost. Would it sap 0.5% of your range? That would undo their advantage.

I'd guess the aero impact is there, but likely not 0.5%. Not sure if it would be enough to even notice. The extra weight definitely won't impact range enough. In the CT case, an extra 100lbs (bigger than the vast majority of solar generators out there) makes zero noticeable difference in efficiency.

Financially and efficiency wise, you'd be better off buying a single bifacial panel for $500 (for that price probably 500-500w), mounting it at home, and plugging that in to a power station to utilize than this setup. Portably, any 300w portable panel would gain more power when setup than this and cost ~70% of it.

This is purely a novelty product. Saying that if I had a M3 LFP/RWD and given their efficiency, it might be fun to mess around with.

 

[scottyah]

I would absolutely love something like this. My case is:
- San Diego charges more than 50 cents per kwh
- My work's parking is in the full sun, so cabin overheat is most of my drain (equals the actual commute in the summer I'm finding)
- I spend time putting an interior windshield cover on everyday anyway, which is less effective than an external one.

For me to have an easy-deploy solar cover that goes from frunk to tailgate would solve a lot of problems at once. It'd be trivial to have a solar generator in the bed or frunk that collects all those electrons, and either put them back in the truck right away or take them home and use them around the house.

 

[Shadowmite]

I don't really see the point, I mean if you really want to try to charge via the sun it would seem better to just buy 2 actual 400w+ panels and mount them to a rack up top connected to a large series of batteries in the back to take the power. Why settle for a lower output panel?

 

[JimBuck333]

The big issue on any of these types of panels is the payback and real world usability. The Model Y version is said to produce 1.5 kWh per day. At 15 cents per kWh that is 22.5 cents per day... at the peak (and realistically, it would be ~70% of that). Assuming you get that and there are no conversion losses you're at ~2,400 days of payback. Add in conversion losses and cloudy days... you could easily add 50% back to that. It could easily be a 8-10 year payback just on the panel, and prior to any powerstation added to it. Then on top of all of that, these flexible panels tend to only last 5-6 years before delaminating.

Then on top of all of that, even if you don't utilize sentry mode, this would pretty much only over vampire drain.

In the very best case scenario assuming full sun, power and no conversion or vampire drain losses on a RWD M3... the 1.3kWh that produces would give you ~6 miles of range a day.

The idea is great, but we're not at the point in technology where it really makes sense. Could be neat as a camping accessory, but even then you'd be better off with a more standard portable panel.

Concur; not practical from an energy or economic point of view. This product is effectively an expensive, custom window shade that also provides a bit of power. And particularly on the Cybertruck, the windshield is even bigger than the roof glass, so even as a sun shade up top, it wouldn't be making much of a positive difference. And in terms of providing energy in the case of camping, simply charging the truck an additional few percent (perhaps in just an additional few minutes at any decent Supercharger) would provide a similar amount of kilowatts as those panels and power station would in a week of solar production (or way more, truthfully)... A lot of gear for no reason; the investment in the 123kWH battery can be amortized for this purpose instead.

And still, with all those shortcomings, it would be pretty interesting to see a trapazoidal solar panel in that size... (I always wonder why rooftop solar never comes in any triangular shapes for gabled roofs; so many installations are both ugly and highly inefficient in layout.)

Sponsored