2026 test14 productsJump Starters & Car Power

Which Solar Car Battery Chargers Brand Wins?

We compared 14 solar car battery chargers options head to head. FlexSolar came out on top. See the measured results, the runner-up, the budget pick, and a link to the full test video.

The verdict
Winner

FlexSolar

Price shown in test: $80

Check price on Amazon

Affiliate link. We may earn a commission at no extra cost to you.

Runner-up

Grecell

Price shown in test: $50

Check price on Amazon

Affiliate link. We may earn a commission at no extra cost to you.

Budget pick

Grecell

Price shown in test: $50

Check price on Amazon

Affiliate link. We may earn a commission at no extra cost to you.

The measured results

Every number below is read straight from the test. Scroll sideways to see all measurements. Products are listed in the order they finished.

ProductWeightPanel sizeRated wattage claimOvercast, flat / 28 deg angleHot sunny conditionsFloat charge testReverse polarity testScratch resistance (Mohs pick)Impact resistance (4 ft drop test)Average overcast productionEfficiency
1SHASUXTING$18154 g5 x 12 in, 65 sq in, the smallest of all 14 panels30 W (the highest claimed rating of any brand tested)0.8 W at 19.47 V flat; 0.76 W at 28 degrees2.22 WSAFETY ISSUE: began charging a near-dead battery at under 1 V, but never stopped charging even after the battery reached 15.5 V (overcharged); no functioning cutout observedpassed; only a tiny spark, no damagedamaged easily at pick #5not durable, quite a bit of visible damagenot testednot tested
2Hoysicy$281,598 g / 3.52 lbnot tested20 W6.09 W at 22.13 V (charge controller read 22.5 V) flat; 6.47 W at 28 degrees16.49 W, about 3.5 W short of its 20 W rating (3rd place in this test)SAFETY ISSUE: began charging at under 1 V, but its factory float charge is supposed to cut out around 14 V or less; the battery reached 16.2 V and it was still overchargingnot testeddamaged at pick #8held up just finenot testednot tested
3Newpowa$30746 g / 1.64 lbnot tested20 W3.35 W at 18.97 V flat; 2.68 W at 28 degrees (worse than the Hoysicy)just over 14 W, notably impacted by the heatSAFETY ISSUE: began charging at under 1 V, but never stopped charging even after the battery reached well over 15 Vnot testeddamaged at pick #6soft panel, left a pretty big dentnot testednot tested
4VOLT HERO$301,510 g / 3.32 lbnot tested20 W4.13 W at around 20 V flat (2nd place behind Hoysicy at that point); 4.11 W at 28 degrees15.55 W, handling the heat better than Newpowa (2nd place at that point in testing)cut-in voltage 13.1 V, cutout voltage 14.1 V; functioning cutout observednot testeddamaged at pick #9 per the main test narration ('performed the best yet'), though the closing summary recap states pick #8 for this brand; this is a numeric inconsistency between the two parts of the transcript and both figures are preserved hereheld up just fine, no damagenot testednot tested
5TBER$301,274 g / 2.81 lbnot tested20 W6.37 W at just over 22 V flat, the best flat result up to that point in testing; 4.57 W at 28 degrees14.37 W, over 5 W short of its ratingSAFETY ISSUE: began charging at under 1 V, but never stopped charging even after the battery reached 15.5 Vnot testeddamaged at pick #9 per the main test narration (tied with Volt Hero), though the closing summary recap states pick #8; both figures preserved heresurvived without any damagenot testednot tested
6EBL$251,024 g / 2.26 lbnot tested25 W4.87 W at 13.14 V flat; 4.18 W at 28 degrees, about 21 W below its ratingjust over 14 W, over 10 W short of its 25 W ratingcut-in voltage 12.6 V, cutout voltage 13.8 V; functioning cutout observednot testedhas a rubberized coating; earned a perfect 10 with no damage from any pick testedheld up just fine, no visible damagenot testednot tested
7Grecell$501,034 g / 2.28 lbnot tested25 Wjust over 7 W at just under 14 V flat, moving into the lead at that point; 8.87 W at 28 degrees15.71 W, continuing to outperform the visually similar EBLcut-in voltage 13.3 V, cutout voltage 14.1 V; described in the closing summary as better cut-in/cutout points than the FlexSolarpassed (not one of the two brands that failed)has a rubberized coating; earned a perfect 10 with no damage from any pick testedheld up just as well as the EBL, no damage7.95 W, 2nd place overall behind NXQWLLnot tested
8SOLPERK$501,324 g / 2.92 lbnot tested20 W5.81 W at around 20 V flat; 3.85 W at 28 degrees (angle hurt performance)14.51 W, well below its 20 W rating; noted as very hot to the touch in direct sunlightbegins charging at 5 V; cut-in voltage 13.7 V, cutout voltage 15.2 V, which the reviewer flags as 'seems too high'not testedno rubberized coating; damaged at pick #8WORST RESULT: ruined by the impactnot testednot tested
9NXQWLL$59524 g / 1.15 lb165 sq in (3rd smallest mentioned)20 W maximum output10.67 W at 14.7 V flat, moving into the lead; 10.49 W at 28 degrees16.77 W, moving into the lead at that point (2nd place in the final hot-sun ranking behind FlexSolar)cut-in voltage 13.8 V, cutout voltage 14.5 V; functioning cutout observedFAILED: experienced a pretty significant spark and the wiring became extremely hot; the reviewer notes a continuous connection would likely have caused damage, though the tool still worked fine after the brief testnot very durable, damaged at the relatively soft pick #3, the worst scratch result of any brandexperienced a pretty big dent but the panel still works fine10.58 W, the best of all 14 brands in this test0.1 W per square inch (tied with PulseTech for 2nd behind FlexSolar); 14.52 W per pound (close 2nd behind FlexSolar)
10TogoPOWER$601,462 g / 3.22 lbnot testednot tested2.68 W at around 10 V flat, described as underpowered and not enough to charge a car battery; 2.28 W at 28 degrees, still around 10 V14.19 W, struggling in the heatcut-in voltage 13.8 V (same as NXQWLL), cutout voltage 14.5 V (same as NXQWLL); functioning cutout observednot testeddamaged at pick #8, much better than the NXQWLLsurvived without any damagenot testednot tested
11FlexSolar$80636 g / 1.4 lbnot tested20 W (per the hot-sun test section)4 W at around 19 V flat; just under 5 W at 28 degreesjust over 21.5 W, the best of all 14 brands, exceeding its own rating and seemingly unaffected by heatbegins charging only at 5 V or higher (will not charge a battery under 5 V); cut-in voltage 14.1 V (described as a little high), cutout voltage 14.4 V (also described as pretty high)passed (not one of the two brands that failed)has a rubberized coating; earned a perfect 10 with no damage from any pick testedsmall dent from the impactnot testedbest of all 14 brands: 0.12 W per square inch and 15.35 W per pound
12SUNER POWER$86stated in the transcript as '284 g or 4.59 lb', which is numerically inconsistent (284 g would be about 0.63 lb, not 4.59 lb); described as by far the heaviest brand up to that point in testing, so the 4.59 lb figure (about 2,082 g) is likely the more accurate one and '284 g' is likely a caption/transcription error; both figures are kept verbatim here per the no-invention rulenot tested20 W7.33 W at around 22 V flat, performing better than average; 5.79 W at 28 degrees14.75 W, about average for the 20 W-rated chargersbegins charging at around 5 V; cut-in voltage around 13.8 V, cutout voltage around 14.3 Vnot testedpretty durable, damaged at pick #8held up just fine6.56 W, 3rd place overallnot tested
13Schumacher$1124,926 g / 10.86 lb, described as 'absolutely massive' and 'quite a behemoth', by far the heaviest panel in the videonot tested15 W3.08 W at around 20 V flat; 2.25 W at 28 degrees, described as performing poorly compared to the competition11.86 W, described as really struggling for its sizedesigned to only begin charging a battery with at least a 3.3 V charge (cannot jump-start a fully dead battery like most other brands); cut-in voltage 12.3 V (below a fully charged battery's baseline of 12.6 V), cutout voltage 14.4 Vnot testedlight scratches at pick #7, deeper grooves at pick #8held up just finenot testednot tested
14PulseTech$265994 g / 2.19 lb125 sq in (referred to in the transcript as 'the PTSE', likely a caption mangling/abbreviation of PulseTech; resolved by elimination and context, at lower confidence)12 W maximum energy production, the lowest claimed rating of any brand tested0.12 W at around 18.3 V flat, the worst result in the entire competition; 0.1 W at 28 degrees11.97 W, about 3 W short of its rated output (the transcript states this is 'about 3 watts short of its rating' after describing the rating as 15 W in this section, versus 12 W stated in the brand's intro; see notes)powers on at just under 1 V; cut-in voltage 13.8 V; during testing the battery reached 15.5 V and the charger still had not reached a cutout voltage, leaving its actual cutout point unresolvedFAILED: delivered a pretty hot spark and the wiring became hot very quickly; the reviewer notes an extended reverse connection would likely have caused damage, though the tool still worked fine after the brief testscratches pretty easily at the relatively soft pick #3, despite being the most expensive charger in the videopretty soft, experienced a dentnot tested0.1 W per square inch, tied with NXQWLL for 2nd best behind FlexSolar

How it was tested

  • solar production under overcast skies, panel flat and at a 28-degree angle (watts, volts)
  • solar production in hot, direct sunlight at an optimized angle (watts)
  • efficiency: watts produced per square inch of panel and per pound of weight
  • charging a near-dead battery and float-charge cut-in/cut-out voltage behavior
  • reverse polarity protection (deliberately reversed charger clamp connections)
  • scratch resistance via a Mohs hardness pick set (higher pick number survived = more resistant; perfect score = no damage from any pick)
  • impact resistance (4 ft drop test with a foot-long, half-inch socket extension onto the panel)

the Flex Solar came out on top with the best average finish of 3.5.

From the test video verdict.

More Jump Starters & Car Power