Solar Trickle Charger Setup (with Black Friday deals)

[CT_AZ_4x4]

1.6kw solar input is a bit of a bummer though for something that charges the car at twice that rate.
Big advantage of the bluetti here with 2.4kw expandable to 6.4kw solar input. That’s better than even the delta 3 pro at 2.6kw total high and low PV inputs….
$800 is great deal on the Pecron but I think 1299 for the apex 300 is still a better one.

The Apex300 also outouts 240v, something I don’t think the Percon includes. 240v on parallel Apex300s makes for faster charging.

Sponsored

 

[hemiarch]

The Apex300 also outouts 240v, something I don’t think the Percon includes. 240v on parallel Apex300s makes for faster charging.

You’re right. I must have misread that. The older one the they sold (the 3600lfp) could do that when there was a pair I think but also required a special hub.

 

[hemiarch]

When charging, it's not vampire drain, but it is using power just being on (agree, not 800W). The 48V is running/ charging from the PCS, the contactors are engaged, all modules are awake (or Etherloop at least), and the thermal system is pumping coolant.

That's why 120V charging is inefficient. The first few hundred watts are spent running the truck. Only power above that can go to charging the battery. (Versus the charger itself being 60% efficient in converting 120V to 400V. )

This consumption is accurate but true for both 120v and 240v. Levels 1 OR 2.
Mr. @HaulingAss, I agree with you on a lot of things but you’re missing a surprising finding with respect to level 2 charging the Cybertruck. I also had a hard time believing it but I tested it.
It is absolutely NOT vampire drain that eats about 600w when doing this at either 240v or 120v.
I think it’s a rather hungry battery temperature management system and maybe some of the above mentioned awake items, I don’t know. Even at very nice moderate temps.
I have physically tried it at both environmental conditions of 60ish degrees and temps in the 90’s. Something (not open doors, camp mode, sentry, cabin overheat or anything like that) eats the first 600-800w you put into the car.
If anyone knows of a way to eliminate that, it would be a game changer for charging at camp or for car roof solar complete share.

 

[hemiarch]

Since this conversation has evolved a little, may as well mention this is a pretty good option specwise too.
Don’t know if it will operate laying on its back.
https://a.co/d/a01gnhk

 

[HaulingAss]

This consumption is accurate but true for both 120v and 240v. Levels 1 OR 2.
Mr. @HaulingAss, I agree with you on a lot of things but you’re missing a surprising finding with respect to level 2 charging the Cybertruck. I also had a hard time believing it but I tested it.
It is absolutely NOT vampire drain that eats about 600w when doing this at either 240v or 120v.
I think it’s a rather hungry battery temperature management system and maybe some of the above mentioned awake items, I don’t know. Even at very nice moderate temps.
I have physically tried it at both environmental conditions of 60ish degrees and temps in the 90’s. Something (not open doors, camp mode, sentry, cabin overheat or anything like that) eats the first 600-800w you put into the car.
If anyone knows of a way to eliminate that, it would be a game changer for charging at camp or for car roof solar complete share.

It's absolutely true at cooler temperatures (and probably searing hot temps too, I'm not sure on that one because temperatures that high never happen around here). But in a range around 65-80F, I've never seen it anywhere near that high (assuming all the unnecessary power consumers were disabled). That's where I think many go wrong.

The nice thing is the newish "Low Power Mode" makes it quick and easy to disable all the unnecessary consumers without having to go through and do it manually. As a side note, I've seen my Model 3 so cold-soaked that it couldn't add a single mile of range for 6 hours using the full 12 amps and 120V of a standard 15 amp outlet. Everything changes dramatically if it's cold out. In mild enough temps the typical charging overhead is closer to 200-250W. And I've been hammering on this for years, especially when people suggest to new EV owners that they don't need to install EVSE if they only drive 35 miles per day, that they can charge off a 120V 15 amp outlet. Sure, it might work in a mild enough climate year round, but they will be giving up a lot of efficiency compared to charging at a higher amperage and letting the EV go to sleep.

 

[HaulingAss]

Don’t know if it will operate laying on its back.
https://a.co/d/a01gnhk

I doubt it has been tested lying on it's back.

When I asked the AI helper on Amazon if it could be used this way it responded:


The Anker SOLIX F3800 Plus Portable Power Station should not be used lying on its back. Like most power stations and electronic devices, it's designed to operate in its normal upright position.

Why orientation matters:

• Ventilation system needs proper airflow for cooling - lying flat could block air vents
• Internal components are designed for upright operation
• Safety considerations - improper positioning could affect performance or safety
• Port accessibility - the 15 power outlets are positioned for upright use

The unit measures 27.6" × 15.6" × 15.3" and weighs 135 pounds, so it's designed as a stationary unit that sits upright on a stable, level surface. Keep it in its intended vertical position for optimal performance and safety.

Which makes sense!

 

[hemiarch]

I doubt it has been tested lying on it's back.

When I asked the AI helper on Amazon if it could be used this way it responded:


The Anker SOLIX F3800 Plus Portable Power Station should not be used lying on its back. Like most power stations and electronic devices, it's designed to operate in its normal upright position.

Why orientation matters:

• Ventilation system needs proper airflow for cooling - lying flat could block air vents
• Internal components are designed for upright operation
• Safety considerations - improper positioning could affect performance or safety
• Port accessibility - the 15 power outlets are positioned for upright use

The unit measures 27.6" × 15.6" × 15.3" and weighs 135 pounds, so it's designed as a stationary unit that sits upright on a stable, level surface. Keep it in its intended vertical position for optimal performance and safety.

Which makes sense!

Yeah. That’s my worry about running my delta pro 3’s on the side too. It’s one thing to run a little wave ac off them but pumping 5.2kw of solar in and the same amount out using the 50 amp hub is actually making those things work and the cooling has to be functioning optimally.
Hence the appeal of the apex 300.

 

[mongo]

I doubt it has been tested lying on it's back.

When I asked the AI helper on Amazon if it could be used this way it responded:


The Anker SOLIX F3800 Plus Portable Power Station should not be used lying on its back. Like most power stations and electronic devices, it's designed to operate in its normal upright position.

Why orientation matters:

• Ventilation system needs proper airflow for cooling - lying flat could block air vents
• Internal components are designed for upright operation
• Safety considerations - improper positioning could affect performance or safety
• Port accessibility - the 15 power outlets are positioned for upright use

The unit measures 27.6" × 15.6" × 15.3" and weighs 135 pounds, so it's designed as a stationary unit that sits upright on a stable, level surface. Keep it in its intended vertical position for optimal performance and safety.

Which makes sense!

Counterpoint:
It has no connections, nor vents, on the rear
The manual makes no mention of vertical orientation
The unit is designed to be lifted on its back, and has feet to provide a gap when in that position.

 

[hemiarch]

Counterpoint:
It has no connections, nor vents, on the rear
The manual makes no mention of vertical orientation
The unit is designed to be lifted on its back, and has feet to provide a gap when in that position.

I’d feel better about running that one oriented as shown than the dp3 but I’m actually going to try that before spending money

 

[hemiarch]

Alright…so, I feel like I’m about to get flamed for this but why can’t we just install a powerwall 3 on its back under the cybertent?

 

[HaulingAss]

Counterpoint:
It has no connections, nor vents, on the rear
The manual makes no mention of vertical orientation
The unit is designed to be lifted on its back, and has feet to provide a gap when in that position.

I think transporting and operating are two completely different things.

For example, the Tesla Powerwall 3 is shipped horizontally but the installation manual says this:

Powerwall 3 requires adequate clearance for installation, cabling, and airflow. The spacing on either side of units and between units is required to ensure there is sufficient clearance for venting and thermal management features. Do not install anything inside the required clearance above Powerwall 3, or anything that might fall and damage the unit. Do not mount Powerwall 3 horizontally or upside down.

 

[mongo]

I think transporting and operating are two completely different things.

For example, the Tesla Powerwall 3 is shipped horizontally but the installation manual says this:

Powerwall 3 requires adequate clearance for installation, cabling, and airflow. The spacing on either side of units and between units is required to ensure there is sufficient clearance for venting and thermal management features. Do not install anything inside the required clearance above Powerwall 3, or anything that might fall and damage the unit. Do not mount Powerwall 3 horizontally or upside down.

Yah, and the F3800 has no such instructions nor warnings. (At least in the downloadable manual nor FAQ).
It has been done: https://diysolarforum.com/threads/will-the-anker-solix-f3800-operate-laying-on-its-back.84419/

 

[TickTock]

When charging, it's not vampire drain, but it is using power just being on (agree, not 800W). The 48V is running/ charging from the PCS, the contactors are engaged, all modules are awake (or Etherloop at least), and the thermal system is pumping coolant.

That's why 120V charging is inefficient. The first few hundred watts are spent running the truck. Only power above that can go to charging the battery. (Versus the charger itself being 60% efficient in converting 120V to 400V. )

I ran a couple experiments the last two days. Charged overnight at 240V/10A and again at 240V/5A. Compared those to a prior 20A charge. Mongo is (surprise) right - doing the math it comes to about 500-700W power being wasted just to charge. So 1300W in will be only 50% efficient.

I tried to break down the losses to static and IR but ended up with a resistance of -10 (yeah negative 10) Ohms resistance when I fit the data. So wire loss is insignificant and the increased efficiency at higher current is not just the reduced impact of a static load. It appears the DC converter is tuned for higher current (truck wastes not just less energy for the same charge but less power at 5kW rate than at 1.4kW)

Avg A

Avg V

Avg P

Used kWh

Added kWh

Time

%

hours

Avg P In

Avg P add

P waste

linear loss (R=-10)

static loss

19.9​

242.2​

4819.8​

27.8​

24.8​

5:44​

89%​

5.7​

4848.8​

4329.1​

519.8​

-199.0​

718.8​

9.9​

245.8​

2443.3​

32.3​

23.9​

13:09​

74%​

13.2​

2453.2​

1815.2​

638.0​

-99.4​

737.4​

5.7​

245.8​

1396.1​

15.4​

8.2​

10:57​

53%​

11.0​

1409.1​

746.1​

663.0​

-56.8​

719.8​

 

[mongo]

Alright…so, I feel like I’m about to get flamed for this but why can’t we just install a powerwall 3 on its back under the cybertent?

Need a Gateway or remote energy monitor also, plus those explicitly want to be vertical.

 

[hemiarch]

I ran a couple experiments the last two days. Charged overnight at 240V/10A and again at 240V/5A. Compared those to a prior 20A charge. Mongo is (surprise) right - doing the math it comes to about 500-700W power being wasted just to charge. So 1300W in will be only 50% efficient.

I tried to break down the losses to static and IR but ended up with a resistance of -10 (yeah negative 10) Ohms resistance when I fit the data. So wire loss is insignificant and the increased efficiency at higher current is not just the reduced impact of a static load. It appears the DC converter is tuned for higher current (truck wastes not just less energy for the same charge but less power at 5kW rate than at 1.4kW)

Avg A

Avg V

Avg P

Used kWh

Added kWh

Time

%

hours

Avg P In

Avg P add

P waste

linear loss (R=-10)

static loss

19.9​

242.2​

4819.8​

27.8​

24.8​

5:44​

89%​

5.7​

4848.8​

4329.1​

519.8​

-199.0​

718.8​

9.9​

245.8​

2443.3​

32.3​

23.9​

13:09​

74%​

13.2​

2453.2​

1815.2​

638.0​

-99.4​

737.4​

5.7​

245.8​

1396.1​

15.4​

8.2​

10:57​

53%​

11.0​

1409.1​

746.1​

663.0​

-56.8​

719.8​

Very nicely laid out. Even slightly more baseline consumption in my case. My math was around 800w. 500w would be better.
I know what you’re saying to be true about efficiency at lower rates from my past experience. The big question in my mind is what I’d get out in terms of mph added from about 2kw which is about what I’ve been able to consistently achieve with the solar panels I carry. Four of these:
https://a.co/d/6sAxspS
The fact that the apex 300 has a box that can add another 4kw of solar is awesome and so is the fact that you can string two together for faster charging but I don’t know how I’d carry that much in terms of panels.
I believe that carrying more battery is a losing proposition for this purpose in terms of weight and also in terms of usability of the vault.
And as for @mongo, him being right is slotted just after death and taxes in my book.

Sponsored