Compact crossover vs family SUV, matched on solar
The BYD Atto 3 and the Skoda Enyaq sit in different size classes — a compact crossover against a full family SUV — yet they're almost perfectly matched on efficiency. The Atto 3 Extended Range uses 15.4 kWh/100km and the Enyaq 85 just 15.5 kWh/100km, a difference of only 0.1 kWh per 100km. Where they diverge is battery and range: the Enyaq's 82 kWh pack and 566km range dwarf the Atto 3's 60 kWh and 420km. Because solar sizing follows consumption, not battery size, the two end up needing a strikingly similar array for the same annual mileage.
Atto 3 and Enyaq are evenly matched here — check the metrics below for the trade-off that matters most to you.
Enter your address and driving habits — the results above update with real solar data.
Common Questions
Because their consumption is almost identical (15.4 vs 15.5 kWh/100km), the two need a very similar number of 400W panels for the same annual driving — despite the Enyaq being the much larger car. VoltSun calculates the exact count for your address below.
No. The Enyaq's 82 kWh pack is far larger than the Atto 3's 60 kWh, but panel count depends on energy used per 100km, not battery capacity. The bigger battery gives the Enyaq more range per charge, not a bigger solar footprint.
They're effectively tied — 15.4 kWh/100km for the Atto 3 Extended Range versus 15.5 kWh/100km for the Enyaq 85. That 0.1 kWh/100km gap is far too small to meaningfully change your solar system size.
On energy alone, yes — near-identical consumption means near-identical solar-charging cost for the same mileage. The Enyaq simply carries more battery for longer trips; it doesn't cost more solar to keep charged per km.