DC Input for Portable Solar Panels

[chris san diego]

When I go camping, I usually put out a portable solar panel with a charge controller to keep my old Scout II Traveler battery at full charge. It would be great if I could connect a regular external solar panel to the direct current (DC) input on the new Scout Traveler. Is it possible to trickle charge the DC? Maybe we could add a low input socket?

 

[ID_ENG]

I'm curious on what the energy amount could be on a summer day. Is it worth it? Or are we talking about 1-2 miles a day?
If that's the case I'd probably opt to save the extra costs associated with it.
Upvoting to give it some thought.

 

[Logan]

Interesting idea.

Small folding solar panels that connect to an external hookup and directly charge the battery. Its basically the same thing as the "solar roof" idea, but making it modular, and something you use separately if needed/desired.

I just checked, and the first solar panel I checked was ~31in wide, and 102in long, and provides up to 350w. I presume that is per hour? Which means... 3 of them would be about... as fast as a 120v trickle charger (~1050w/hr, or 1.05kw/hr).

BLUETTI PV350D Solar Panel | 350W

www.bluettipower.com

Since we know the maximum, and minimum ranges (350miles for largest BEV version, 150EV only range on harvester), and can guess on the efficiency (~2miles per KW, between a Rivian, and a Hummer) that means we know the rough effective battery sizes (~175kw for the BEV, and ~75kw for the Harvester).

Which means for the Harvester, you could gain ~1.4% (1.05/75) of charge per hour? And the BEV would gain 0.6% charge (1.05/175) of charge per hour.

So on a summer day parked in an idea location... you could get a handful of %% (maybe 3-5%?) for the Harvester.

Now, I don't know tons about solar, and its possible my maths are way, way off. But I think that is an interesting option, particularly if you're going to be camping for a few days.

 

[pwrofgrayskull]

It’s definitely worth exploring. Upvote added.

 

[chris san diego]

Sometimes I leave my Scout parked and go hiking for days, leaving a 25 watt solar panel (through a charge controller) to maintain the battery. Other campouts, I stay at the truck with a Starlink, using up juice, so I bring two 150 watt solar panels. A place to plug in a solar panel would be swell.

 

[J Alynn]

I'm curious on what the energy amount could be on a summer day. Is it worth it? Or are we talking about 1-2 miles a day?
If that's the case I'd probably opt to save the extra costs associated with it.
Upvoting to give it some thought.

If asking for a connector port I think that’s a valid request. Built in units however aren’t worth the cost or the amount of warranty issues SM would likely deal with after sales

 

[Albal]

I also think that having it “solar ready” would be great.

 

[offroadelectric]

This is exactly what I've been hoping for on the Terra...

Probably wouldn't add much range but would be great to negate any range loss from fridges, and other camping gadgets while providing some minimal range for when in a pinch.

Could be mounted on a pop-up tent to charge at all times or while camping and parked you could set out a bunch or solar if you need more power

 

[BeerParty]

According to the EcoFlow website, the EcoFlow Delta Pro 3 has a battery capacity of 4096Wh - so just over 4KWh. A single 400W solar panel will charge it from 0 to 100% in about 37 hours of sunlight. That works out to about 0.1KW per hour.

• The rigid 400W solar panel is 67.8×44.6×1.38 inches and 48.1lbs.
• The portable 400W solar panel is 41.7x24.4x1.0 inches (folded), 41.7x93.1x1.0 inches (open) and 35.3 pounds.

We can confidently assume that the BEV will have at least a 100kWh battery. So, with a single 400W solar panel and 10 hours of sunlight the solar panel will add less than 1% charge to the BEV battery. Assuming the solar panel can generate enough voltage to add power to the battery at all (spoiler alert - a single 400W panel can't).

if you search YouTube, there are a couple of videos of people using a EcoFlow Delta Pro to charge a Tesla, I believe the results were that a fully charge Delta Pro could add 3% to the battery of a Tesla in about 90 minutes. These were an earlier model of the Delta Pros, so not quite 4kWh, but pretty close. So, from a single 400W solar panel it is 37 hours to charge the Delta Pro, from the Delta Pro it is 1.5 hours to add 3% to the Tesla (which has a smaller battery than the Scout).

It is not worth the complexity to add a direct solar feed into the vehicle, the math just doesn't work out. If you want to carry around a bunch of solar panels to try and charge the truck, I suggest you use a small power station with solar input. Run the solar into the power station and then plug the power station into the truck.

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

When I go camping, I usually put out a portable solar panel with a charge controller to keep my old Scout II Traveler battery at full charge. It would be great if I could connect a regular external solar panel to the direct current (DC) input on the new Scout Traveler. Is it possible to trickle charge the DC? Maybe we could add a low input socket?

I started another discussion about something similar.

Thread 'Solar-Ready package (especially for the Traveler)'

Apr 22, 2025

One of the great things about taking an EV camping is the silence. You can run all the things-electric from the vehicle without having to listen to a generator.

But, one of the challenges of camping with an EV is that some trips are more difficult when you’re going out boondocking far from “civilization.” When I used to drive a gas vehicle, I’d put a 5-gallon can in the bed so we could get up to 30 miles (60 round trip) farther from everyone.

With a decent solar system and auxiliary battery, the same can be accomplished with an EV. When camping and on road trips, I carry a 5.1 kWh...

• SpaceEVDriver
• Replies: 22
• Forum: SUGGESTION BOX

• 

Solar that’s portable cannot generate enough voltage to charge the high-voltage battery of a BEV directly. But carrying an auxiliary battery can help with that. And I that’s what I do.

I carry a 5120 Wh power station that can provide Level 1 charging rates. I also carry 600-1200 Watts of solar.
I charge the power station at home. It powers our fridge while we’re driving. At every DCFC on our way to camp, I recharge the power station. It’s a tiny amount and doesn’t measureably change how much time the truck takes to recharge.

Once we reach camp, I plug in the portable charger and start recharging the truck. I also set out the panels. The power station provides about 1.2 kW to the truck. I let the battery discharge to about 10-20% depending on the weather. This adds about 4 kWh to the truck. On the Lightning, which has a 131 kWh useable battery, that’s a little over 3%, and accounts for about 12-15 miles of range. More if we’re driving slowly on forest service roads.

The next day, the solar panels start recharging the battery. With 600 watts, it takes 4kWh/600W ~7 hours to recharge, at the fastest. In our camping season, that starts at around 05:00 and ends around 12:00. Once the auxiliary battery reaches 100%, I start recharging the truck again. For the next 7-8 hours, the Sun is putting in ~500-600 watts and the truck is taking ~1200 watts, for a net of about -600 Watts leaving the auxiliary battery. By the evening, the auxiliary battery is at its ~10% lower limit and the truck has regained about 1.2 kW * 8 hours = 9.6 kWh. That’s approximately 7% of the 131 kWh battery. So in the first night-day of camping, I’ve added about 10% back to the battery. For a 4-night, 3-day camping trip, I get about 15-25% battery recharge. That’s an extra up to 80 miles range, which lets me get an extra 40 miles away from civilization.

But it requires a big auxiliary battery and a good 400-1200 watts of solar. The small 12V accessories battery used in most BEVs isn’t long-lasting and doesn’t hold enough capacity to manage that. And you don’t want a critical component being used for this sort of option.

We have a couple of very long camping trips coming up and I’m looking for a larger inverter and larger battery to dump energy into the truck faster, along with more panels to generate more power.

 

[Logan]

Another use case of easily accessible solar power inputs for the Scout, is maybe not even "for" recovering range. But more for maintaining it during extended camping trips, while you're also using the scout to run camping accessories (camp stoves, inflating things, recharging devices, etc, etc). A few small foldable panels that you setup when you arrive at camp, could easily cover most/all of your "parasitic" draw, and even give you some more on top of that.

 

[absentEE]

.... Assuming the solar panel can generate enough voltage to add power to the battery at all (spoiler alert - a single 400W panel can't).

This is navigated via panels in series and/or a DC-to-DC converter.

... If you want to carry around a bunch of solar panels to try and charge the truck, I suggest you use a small power station with solar input. Run the solar into the power station and then plug the power station into the truck.

The setup described is less than ideal as conversion losses would be higher than otherwise necessary... portable/initial battery loss > DC to AC loss > AC to DC loss > vehicle battery VS DC to DC loss > vehicle battery.

Imo, the Scout brand kind of always put the ‘U’ in SUV... didn’t the original ones even have a PTO option? So seems reasonable that owners like the OP would expect their Scout EV to have a direct interface for solar.

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

This is navigated via panels in series and/or a DC-to-DC converter.


The setup described is less than ideal as conversion losses would be higher than otherwise necessary... portable/initial battery loss > DC to AC loss > AC to DC loss > vehicle battery VS DC to DC loss > vehicle battery.

Imo, the Scout brand kind of always put the ‘U’ in SUV... didn’t the original ones even have a PTO option? So seems reasonable that owners like the OP would expect their Scout EV to have a direct interface for solar.

A “high-voltage" panel will typically have an open circuit voltage of around 40-50 volts. To get to the >800 volts needed to provide charge to the Scout battery, you would need to serialize 20 of them.

A single cell (6”x6", 36 inches square) typically produces 0.5 volts, so you would need 1600 cells to serialize them for 800 volts. That’s ~37 meters square, not counting any frame or other spacing between the cells. The Traveler has about 9.8 meters square of sunward-facing surface area, multiplying width by length.

You could use a step-up buck converter, but its losses end up being about the same as the DC->AC->DC inverter-converter losses. The embedded solar panel solution has been attempted a couple of times and it’s never amounted to a cost-effective solution.

A better and cheaper solution for Scout would be to offer some simple upfitter options so DIY-ers or upfitters who seriously want solar can do it themselves. The overall cost of buying the factory-installed options of solar are always higher and less flexible than a DIY solution.

 

[absentEE]

A “high-voltage" panel will typically have an open circuit voltage of around 40-50 volts. To get to the >800 volts needed to provide charge to the Scout battery, you would need to serialize 20 of them.

A single cell (6”x6", 36 inches square) typically produces 0.5 volts, so you would need 1600 cells to serialize them for 800 volts. That’s ~37 meters square, not counting any frame or other spacing between the cells. The Traveler has about 9.8 meters square of sunward-facing surface area, multiplying width by length.

As mentioned in previous threads on this topic, would like to see larger solar accessories in the future as well.

Similar to these:

You could use a step-up buck converter, but its losses end up being about the same as the DC->AC->DC inverter-converter losses.

The poster discussed charging/discharging an external battery, this process incurs losses which depends on the round trip efficiency of said battery; this is in addition to the DC>AC>DC related losses. But perhaps they meant something else. Also DC>AC>DC vs DC>DC is not the issue but rather the belief that one integrated solution of either variety designed by one company will achieve higher efficiency than a solution that involves multiple devices, designed separately by multiple different companies.

A better and cheaper solution for Scout would be to offer some simple upfitter options so DIY-ers or upfitters who seriously want solar can do it themselves. The overall cost of buying the factory-installed options of solar are always higher and less flexible than a DIY solution.

Hoping for a more integrated solution with respect to the power electronics, taking advantage of or modifying subsystems that already exist for other purposes in EVs (e.g. the hardware used to maintain 400V supercharger backward compatibility); as this imo will prove to be the most convenient, user friendly, and efficient solution that can in addition accommodate larger accessories. The aftermarket could then focus on designing solar accessories to Scout’s spec... which would ideally become an open standard.

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

As mentioned in previous threads on this topic, would like to see larger solar accessories in the future as well.

Similar to these:

These are the sorts of things I'm thinking of as well, both smaller for camping and as large and larger for emergency aid situations.

But I don't think it's worth the premium to pay Scout to integrate the hardware and software necessary to have a built-in solution. I especially don't think it's worth bumping up the cost of every Scout to pay for the R&D required for Scout to integrate that into just a few Scouts. There are already existing solutions whose efficiencies are not bad enough to justify the extra cost. A small panel that enables external systems connections is simpler, requires minimal R&D, and if it's set up as an upfitter's panel, it enables all sorts of integrations, not just a one particular niche like solar.

 

[absentEE]

These are the sorts of things I'm thinking of as well, both smaller for camping and as large and larger for emergency aid situations.

Well at least we agree on this.

But I don't think it's worth the premium to pay Scout to integrate the hardware and software necessary to have a built-in solution. I especially don't think it's worth bumping up the cost of every Scout to pay for the R&D required for Scout to integrate that into just a few Scouts. There are already existing solutions whose efficiencies are not bad enough to justify the extra cost.

All one can do is speculate about the cost at this point but if Scout plans to maintain backward compatibility with 400V tesla superchargers similar to how Hyundai and Lucid did, piggybacking off of this system to accommodate solar may not be as costly as one might think. Furthermore the feature could be software locked/unlocked in order to distribute the related costs amongst those who want the feature, as many would be willing to pay a decent amount for it.

A small panel that enables external systems connections is simpler, requires minimal R&D, and if it's set up as an upfitter's panel, it enables all sorts of integrations, not just a one particular niche like solar.

Solar accessories would be less of a "niche" if using them were simple, would like to see solar become a core competencies of EVs but particularly for those like the Scout. Though we may be talking past each other... small panel with what types of connections?

 

[J Alynn]

Well at least we agree on this.


All one can do is speculate about the cost at this point but if Scout plans to maintain backward compatibility with 400V tesla superchargers similar to how Hyundai and Lucid did, piggybacking off of this system to accommodate solar may not be as costly as one might think. Furthermore the feature could be software locked/unlocked in order to distribute the related costs amongst those want the feature, as many would be willing to pay a decent amount for it.


Solar accessories would be less of a "niche" if using them were simple, would like to see solar become a core competencies of EVs but particularly for those like the Scout. Though we may be talking past each other... small panel with what types of connections?

I’m curious as I’ve seen the comment or similar comment above many times over the past 2-1/2 years- “many would be willing to pay” ? How many is Many? If the option costs $499, how many people would pay for the feature? If SM can produce 200,000 vehicles a year are we talking 100 people? 1,000 people?
I’m not asking to be a jerk, quite the opposite -I’m just always curious what people perceive as A LOT? How many of those options need to be purchased to cover the R&D costs and manufacturing costs in house when an outside source that is better equipped can modify a part that it already produces to be fitted on a Scout?
I think at some point or another everyone of us has fallen into the trap of having something we find valuable that 99% of other buyers don’t want or need. I’ve offered ideas that I know would be limited use/take rate and would be expensive but I think would be unique and I try to avoid saying those ideas are critical for SM success. For example, as a rough count these solar topics have been with approximately 20 people on the forum. Compared to 200,000 vehicles a year. Those wanting solar are a Very small percentage and then a specific type of solar feature is even smaller.
I think all the ideas on this forum are great including solar charging and can benefit enthusiasts of all types but just trying to understand the comments like: Many, must have, will fail if you don’t, everyone benefits, etc… It’s just something I’ve seen a lot of in 2-1/2 years and makes me wonder. On each and every topic suggested I’d guess only 20% of the ideas on here are well received by the majority of forum members. But does that mean all other ideas should wither and die?
This leads me to wonder as SM looks at the forum is there a behind the scenes spread sheet that maps our ideas or percentages of interest in any given suggestion here on the forum? Would be cool to see a giant spread sheet with all the categorized ideas we’ve offered and then rated with viability due to cost, interest, etc…. Somebody running a great formula could really extrapolate a lot of data from all of these suggestions. Would be great to figure out a way to cast/poll take rate votes of various ideas from the forum and see what ideas truly are viable for SM to do in house or push out to trade partners to produce or just kill the idea due to too many obstacles.
Any Excel enthusiasts on here looking to work for SM?

 

[absentEE]

I’m curious as I’ve seen the comment or similar comment above many times over the past 2-1/2 years- “many would be willing to pay” ? How many is Many? If the option costs $499, how many people would pay for the feature? If SM can produce 200,000 vehicles a year are we talking 100 people? 1,000 people?
I’m not asking to be a jerk, quite the opposite -I’m just always curious what people perceive as A LOT? How many of those options need to be purchased to cover the R&D costs and manufacturing costs in house when an outside source that is better equipped can modify a part that it already produces to be fitted on a Scout?
I think at some point or another everyone of us has fallen into the trap of having something we find valuable that 99% of other buyers don’t want or need. I’ve offered ideas that I know would be limited use/take rate and would be expensive but I think would be unique and I try to avoid saying those ideas are critical for SM success. For example, as a rough count these solar topics have been with approximately 20 people on the forum. Compared to 200,000 vehicles a year. Those wanting solar are a Very small percentage and then a specific type of solar feature is even smaller.
I think all the ideas on this forum are great including solar charging and can benefit enthusiasts of all types but just trying to understand the comments like: Many, must have, will fail if you don’t, everyone benefits, etc… It’s just something I’ve seen a lot of in 2-1/2 years and makes me wonder. On each and every topic suggested I’d guess only 20% of the ideas on here are well received by the majority of forum members. But does that mean all other ideas should wither and die?
This leads me to wonder as SM looks at the forum is there a behind the scenes spread sheet that maps our ideas or percentages of interest in any given suggestion here on the forum? Would be cool to see a giant spread sheet with all the categorized ideas we’ve offered and then rated with viability due to cost, interest, etc…. Somebody running a great formula could really extrapolate a lot of data from all of these suggestions. Would be great to figure out a way to cast/poll take rate votes of various ideas from the forum and see what ideas truly are viable for SM to do in house or push out to trade partners to produce or just kill the idea due to too many obstacles.
Any Excel enthusiasts on here looking to work for SM?

Ultimately we’re here to forum engineer, speculate, and monday-morning quarterback… Scout on the other hand has already made many decisions that make much of what we post here impossible to implement now and hopefully we all understand that. Best one can hope for is its taken into consideration for future models or the refresh.

As to what “many” means, it means people who think they're outdoorsy… Off-road SUV/Truck buyers, preppers, that and those who really dislike phantom drain. Could I be wrong? Definitely.

 

[MasterSpam]

I started another discussion about something similar.

Thread 'Solar-Ready package (especially for the Traveler)'

Apr 22, 2025

One of the great things about taking an EV camping is the silence. You can run all the things-electric from the vehicle without having to listen to a generator.

But, one of the challenges of camping with an EV is that some trips are more difficult when you’re going out boondocking far from “civilization.” When I used to drive a gas vehicle, I’d put a 5-gallon can in the bed so we could get up to 30 miles (60 round trip) farther from everyone.

With a decent solar system and auxiliary battery, the same can be accomplished with an EV. When camping and on road trips, I carry a 5.1 kWh...

• SpaceEVDriver
• Replies: 22
• Forum: SUGGESTION BOX

• 

Solar that’s portable cannot generate enough voltage to charge the high-voltage battery of a BEV directly. But carrying an auxiliary battery can help with that. And I that’s what I do.

I carry a 5120 Wh power station that can provide Level 1 charging rates. I also carry 600-1200 Watts of solar.
I charge the power station at home. It powers our fridge while we’re driving. At every DCFC on our way to camp, I recharge the power station. It’s a tiny amount and doesn’t measureably change how much time the truck takes to recharge.

Once we reach camp, I plug in the portable charger and start recharging the truck. I also set out the panels. The power station provides about 1.2 kW to the truck. I let the battery discharge to about 10-20% depending on the weather. This adds about 4 kWh to the truck. On the Lightning, which has a 131 kWh useable battery, that’s a little over 3%, and accounts for about 12-15 miles of range. More if we’re driving slowly on forest service roads.

The next day, the solar panels start recharging the battery. With 600 watts, it takes 4kWh/600W ~7 hours to recharge, at the fastest. In our camping season, that starts at around 05:00 and ends around 12:00. Once the auxiliary battery reaches 100%, I start recharging the truck again. For the next 7-8 hours, the Sun is putting in ~500-600 watts and the truck is taking ~1200 watts, for a net of about -600 Watts leaving the auxiliary battery. By the evening, the auxiliary battery is at its ~10% lower limit and the truck has regained about 1.2 kW * 8 hours = 9.6 kWh. That’s approximately 7% of the 131 kWh battery. So in the first night-day of camping, I’ve added about 10% back to the battery. For a 4-night, 3-day camping trip, I get about 15-25% battery recharge. That’s an extra up to 80 miles range, which lets me get an extra 40 miles away from civilization.

But it requires a big auxiliary battery and a good 400-1200 watts of solar. The small 12V accessories battery used in most BEVs isn’t long-lasting and doesn’t hold enough capacity to manage that. And you don’t want a critical component being used for this sort of option.

We have a couple of very long camping trips coming up and I’m looking for a larger inverter and larger battery to dump energy into the truck faster, along with more panels to generate more power.

I can barely lift my 3,000 wh PS.

My Teardrop has a 100AH LiFePo battery with 220 watts PV mounted. I carry a 100Wh PS and an additional 200Wh of folding PVs for longer trips while boondocking. This supplies all my camping needs but I have no illusions of using this to attempy to charge my PHEV as I have only 120, 15A outputs on those. I don't intend to try bringing the 3kWh PS. which has a 30A output, as I'd spend a goodly amount to time with a back ache from trying to move that around.

 

[absentEE]

I can barely lift my 3,000 wh PS.

My Teardrop has a 100AH LiFePo battery with 220 wats mounted. I carry a 100Wh PS and an additional 200Wh of folding PVs for longer trips while boondocking. This supplies all my camping needs but I have no illusions of using this to attempy to charge my PHEV as I have only 120, 15A outputs on those. I don't intend to try bringing the 3kWh PS. which has a 30A output, as I'd spend a goodly amount to time with a back ache from trying to move that around.

Yeah that’s the crux of things really, personally would not be interested in it if it entails purchasing, lugging around, and laboriously daisy chaining external devices in order to enable solar add-ons.

However would be interested in a feature that allows one to purchase a solar tonneau cover, topper, roof mount, tent, trailer, etc that simply plugs into a well placed port (with a handshake protocol for safety) and taps into the vehicle’s onboard power electronics and battery. Imo this is low hanging fruit and an obvious feature that “adventure” focused EV/EREVs should offer and would set them apart from their ICE counterparts.