Anker SOLIX C1000 vs EcoFlow DELTA 2
Compare 1,056 Wh vs 1,024 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
- Anker SOLIX C1000: 1,800 W AC output
- EcoFlow DELTA 2: 1,800 W AC output
portable power station comparisons
Build a source-aware shortlist of two to eight models, or open a curated comparison with matched assumptions, visible unknowns, and linked evidence.
Compare two to eight source-linked stations in one table. Unknown values stay visible and no model receives a score.
Values come from the linked model records. Missing fields are not estimated or scored. This label describes availability in the cited region only. It does not imply that another model is universally better, compatible, or an official replacement.
| Specification | Jackery Explorer 1000 v2Open model record | EcoFlow DELTA 2Open model record |
|---|---|---|
| Battery capacity | 1,070 Wh | 1,024 Wh |
| Usable capacity | unknown | unknown |
| Battery chemistry | LiFePO4 | LFP (LiFePO4) |
| AC output | 1,500 W | 1,800 W |
| Surge output | 3,000 W | 2,700 W |
| DC output | 120 W | 126 W |
| USB-C output | 100 W | 100 W |
| Solar input | 400 W | 500 W |
| Weight | 10.8 kg | 12 kg |
| Lifecycle status | Unknown | Unknown |
| Confidence | Verified | Verified |
| Last verified | Jun 24, 2026 | Jun 24, 2026 |
| Source region | Global/general sources | US source |
| Sources |
|
|
The link stores model IDs only.
Model IDs: jackery-explorer-1000-v2, ecoflow-delta-2
Values come from the linked model records. Missing fields are not estimated or scored. This label describes availability in the cited region only. It does not imply that another model is universally better, compatible, or an official replacement.
| Specification | Jackery Explorer 1000 v2Open model record | EcoFlow DELTA 2Open model record |
|---|---|---|
| Battery capacity | 1,070 Wh | 1,024 Wh |
| Usable capacity | unknown | unknown |
| Battery chemistry | LiFePO4 | LFP (LiFePO4) |
| AC output | 1,500 W | 1,800 W |
| Surge output | 3,000 W | 2,700 W |
| DC output | 120 W | 126 W |
| USB-C output | 100 W | 100 W |
| Solar input | 400 W | 500 W |
| Weight | 10.8 kg | 12 kg |
| Lifecycle status | Unknown | Unknown |
| Confidence | Verified | Verified |
| Last verified | Jun 24, 2026 | Jun 24, 2026 |
| Source region | Global/general sources | US source |
| Sources |
|
|
Shareable comparison linkhttps://wattruntime.com/compare/?models=jackery-explorer-1000-v2%2Cecoflow-delta-2
Each page includes neutral spec verdicts, visible unknowns, and source links.
Compare 1,056 Wh vs 1,024 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 1,056 Wh vs 1,070 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 1,056 Wh vs 1,152 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 288 Wh vs 245 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 768 Wh vs 768 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 768 Wh vs 640 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 2,048 Wh vs 1,516 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 3,840 Wh vs 3,994 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 1,152 Wh vs 1,070 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 2,048 Wh vs 2,048 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 205 Wh vs 288 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 448 Wh vs 286 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 504 Wh vs 768 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 768 Wh vs 768 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 2,074 Wh vs 2,560 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 1,024 Wh vs 1,024 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 1,024 Wh vs 1,070 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 512 Wh vs 245 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 1,024 Wh vs 1,152 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 1,024 Wh vs 1,056 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 1,024 Wh vs 1,070 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 4,096 Wh vs 5,040 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 768 Wh vs 768 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 286 Wh vs 288 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 297 Wh vs 288 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 677 Wh vs 768 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 1,265 Wh vs 2,048 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 1,070 Wh vs 1,024 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 1,536 Wh vs 1,516 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 2,043 Wh vs 3,600 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 2,042 Wh vs 2,048 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 288 Wh vs 505 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 640 Wh vs 768 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Compare 3,072 Wh vs 2,048 Wh with the same runtime assumptions and visible unknown fields.
Aggregate tracked model coverage without turning brand pages into affiliate-style rankings.
Compare model coverage, capacity ranges, output limits, and linked model comparisons.
Compare model coverage, capacity ranges, output limits, and linked model comparisons.
Compare model coverage, capacity ranges, output limits, and linked model comparisons.
Compare model coverage, capacity ranges, output limits, and linked model comparisons.
Compare model coverage, capacity ranges, output limits, and linked model comparisons.
Compare model coverage, capacity ranges, output limits, and linked model comparisons.
Compare two stations against the same device load before opening the full spec table.
Uses 500 W and the scenario duty cycle with the same runtime assumptions on both sides.
Uses 40 W and the scenario duty cycle with the same runtime assumptions on both sides.
Uses 500 W and the scenario duty cycle with the same runtime assumptions on both sides.
Uses 40 W and the scenario duty cycle with the same runtime assumptions on both sides.
Uses 32 W and the scenario duty cycle with the same runtime assumptions on both sides.
Uses 12 W and the scenario duty cycle with the same runtime assumptions on both sides.
Uses 12 W and the scenario duty cycle with the same runtime assumptions on both sides.
Uses 100 W and the scenario duty cycle with the same runtime assumptions on both sides.
Uses 85 W and the scenario duty cycle with the same runtime assumptions on both sides.
Uses 50 W and the scenario duty cycle with the same runtime assumptions on both sides.