BougeRV makes two very different 200W flexible panels: the Arch Pro, with 25%-efficient N-type TOPCon cells in a 53 × 31-inch sheet, and the Yuma, a CIGS thin-film panel at 17% efficiency that’s about 82 inches long and bends a full 360°, according to BougeRV’s spec tables. On BougeRV’s US store on October 17, 2026, the Arch Pro 200W was $269.99 and the Yuma 200W was $439.99 with adhesive backing or $399.99 with pre-punched holes. I run an Arch Pro 200W on my own off-grid Starlink setup. This comparison covers size, electrical specs, shade claims, which power stations and controllers each one suits, and which to pick for your roof.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases, at no cost to you.
Amazon listings: BougeRV Arch Pro 200W and BougeRV Yuma 200W CIGS (with tape). Specs come from BougeRV’s product pages, checked October 17, 2026. I haven’t tested the Yuma myself, and calculations are labelled as estimates.
Quick verdict
- Choose the Arch Pro 200W if roof space is tight, you want the most watts per square foot, or you’re feeding a 12V/24V MPPT controller. It’s also the cheaper of the two.
- Choose the Yuma 200W if your surface is strongly curved (a boat bimini, a teardrop roof or an Airstream-style shell), weight matters a lot, or you deal with lots of partial shade and want BougeRV’s thin-film shade performance.
Spec-by-spec comparison
| Spec (BougeRV) | Arch Pro 200W | Yuma 200W CIGS |
|---|---|---|
| Cell type | N-type TOPCon mono, 16BB | CIGS thin film |
| Cell efficiency | 25% | 17% |
| Max power | 200W ±5% | 200W ±5% |
| Vmp / Imp | 31.1V / 6.43A | 24V / 8.52A |
| Voc / Isc | 36.4V / 6.7A | 30.4V / 9.48A |
| Temp. coefficient (Pmax) | -0.35%/K | -0.38%/°C |
| Temp. coefficient (Voc) | -0.3%/K | -0.28%/°C |
| Size | 53 × 31 × 0.1 in | Adhesive: 82.2 × 26.0 × 0.06 in; punched: 82.8 × 27.1 × 0.06 in |
| Weight | 7.9 lb | Adhesive: 8.44 lb; punched: 5.95 lb |
| Flex | Up to 270° | 360°, can be rolled up |
| Bypass protection | 28 bypass diodes | Multiple bypass diodes |
| Series fuse rating | 15A | 10A |
| Waterproofing | IP68 | Not listed in spec table |
| Warranty | 5-year materials; 25-year 80% output | 10 years; 25-year performance |
| Price (BougeRV US, Oct 17, 2026) | $269.99 | $439.99 adhesive; $399.99 punched |
Size and roof space: the biggest real difference
Both panels make 200W, but the Yuma’s lower efficiency needs more area to get there. Working from BougeRV’s dimensions:
| Panel | Area (estimate) | Watts per sq ft (estimate) |
|---|---|---|
| Arch Pro 200W | About 11.4 sq ft | About 17.5W |
| Yuma 200W (adhesive) | About 14.8 sq ft | About 13.5W |
At almost 7 feet, the Yuma’s length is the real constraint. It suits long, narrow surfaces like an RV roof between vents, a boat deck or a cargo trailer, but it won’t fit across most SUV roofs. The Arch Pro’s 53 × 31-inch shape fits a mid-size SUV or a hardtop. For car-roof mounting, my Arch Pro 200W review shows the panel up close.
Shade and heat: what BougeRV claims
BougeRV says the Yuma CIGS panel produces up to 38% more energy over an 8-hour cloudy day than conventional monocrystalline panels, thanks to its thin-film cells and multiple bypass diodes. It also says the panel keeps working when partially damaged. For the Arch Pro, BougeRV highlights 28 bypass diodes for hot-spot protection and “anti-shading” performance, and its page quotes a user who saw nearly 180W in winter after tilting the panel.
Those are maker claims, not my measurements. In my own Arch Pro setup, the output stayed steady enough to keep Starlink speed tests and video streaming stable, even while I swapped inverters mid-test. If your site has trees or roof gear that throw moving shadows, the Yuma’s design is aimed squarely at that problem. In full sun, the Arch Pro’s efficiency advantage counts for more.
On heat, the two panels are close. The Arch Pro loses 0.35% of its power per degree Celsius above 25°C, and the Yuma 0.38%. At a 65°C cell temperature (common on a dark roof in summer), that’s about 14% and 15% below rating (estimate). Flexible panels glued flat to a roof run hotter than tilted rigid panels with airflow, so plan for it either way.
Which chargers and power stations each one suits
This is where the voltage difference matters. The Arch Pro runs higher voltage at lower current; the Yuma runs lower voltage at higher current.
| Connected to (maker limit) | Arch Pro 200W | Yuma 200W |
|---|---|---|
| Small station with 12–28V input (e.g. BLUETTI Elite 30 V2) | No, 36.4V Voc too high | No, 30.4V Voc too high |
| Jackery Explorer 1000 v2 (16–60V, 10.5A, 200W per port) | Yes, one per port | Yes, one per port |
| BLUETTI Elite 100 V2 (12–60V, 20A) | Yes; 2 in parallel OK (13.4A Isc) | Yes; 2 in parallel OK (19A Isc) |
| EcoFlow Delta 3 Max (60V Voc, 18A Isc max) | Yes; 2 in parallel OK (13.4A) | One panel yes; 2 in parallel (19A) exceeds 18A |
| Two in series on a 60V input | No, about 73V | No, about 61V before cold-weather rise |
| 12V MPPT controller rated 100V+ (e.g. SunSwift 60A, 150V) | Yes, including 2 in series | Yes, including 2 in series |
Parallel and series figures are my calculations from BougeRV’s Voc and Isc and each maker’s input limits. Always check your own controller’s datasheet. My solar panel specs guide explains why Voc rises in the cold, and my series vs parallel guide covers the wiring.
Worked example: charging a 12V 100Ah battery (estimate)
Through an MPPT controller, both panels deliver similar watts, because MPPT converts the voltage difference. Assume 75% of rating in good sun, or about 150W. Into a 12.8V LiFePO4 battery that’s roughly 11.7A, and five good sun hours bring in about 750Wh, a bit more than half of a 1,280Wh battery. With a PWM controller the picture changes: PWM pulls the panel down to battery voltage, so the Arch Pro’s 6.43A or the Yuma’s 8.52A at around 13–14V gives you only about 85–115W. If you’re on PWM, the Yuma loses less. My MPPT vs PWM guide explains why.
Scaling up to 400W or 600W (estimates)
Most van and RV builds end up with more than one panel, and the roof-space gap grows with every one you add.
| Array | Arch Pro area | Yuma (adhesive) area | Daily energy in good sun (5 hours at 75%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2 panels (400W) | About 23 sq ft | About 30 sq ft | About 1,500Wh |
| 3 panels (600W) | About 34 sq ft | About 45 sq ft | About 2,250Wh |
On a typical van roof, the extra 7–11 square feet for the Yuma is often the difference between fitting a roof fan or not. In partial shade, the energy column could move in the Yuma’s favour, per BougeRV’s cloudy-day claim, so treat these as clear-sky figures.
Mounting
- Arch Pro: BougeRV lists hanging holes, adhesive backing and glass glue. On my setup I use it portably with a 20-foot 10AWG extension run to the controller.
- Yuma: two versions. The adhesive model peels and sticks to smooth surfaces with no drilling. BougeRV says it’s walkable and suited to RV and boat decks. The punched model has pre-drilled holes for fastening, and it’s the lighter of the two at 5.95 lb.
Whichever you choose, clean and dry the surface first, seal the screw holes or cable entry, and run cables where they won’t rub. Flexible panels pick up dust and pollen quickly; my CLEANTITE cleaner review shows how I clean mine without scratching the surface.
Cost per watt and warranty
| Panel | Price (Oct 17, 2026) | Cost per watt | Warranty |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arch Pro 200W | $269.99 | About $1.35 | 5-year materials, 25-year 80% output |
| Yuma 200W punched | $399.99 | About $2.00 | 10 years, 25-year performance |
| Yuma 200W adhesive | $439.99 | About $2.20 | 10 years, 25-year performance |
The Yuma costs more per watt but carries the longer product warranty. BougeRV runs frequent sales, so check current prices.
Who should buy which
| Your situation | Better pick |
|---|---|
| SUV, truck cap or hardtop with limited flat space | Arch Pro |
| Long RV or cargo-trailer roof with room to spare | Either; the Yuma suits gentle curves and shade |
| Boat bimini, canopy or strongly curved shell | Yuma |
| Feeding a 60V-input power station with two panels in parallel | Arch Pro (lower current) |
| Tight budget | Arch Pro |
| A roof under trees with moving shade | Yuma, per BougeRV’s shade claims |
FAQ
Is CIGS better than monocrystalline?
Not overall. CIGS bends further, and BougeRV says it handles shade better, but at 17% versus 25% the Yuma needs about 30% more area for the same 200W.
Can the Yuma 200W be rolled up?
BougeRV says yes: the CIGS cells bend 360° without cracking, so it can be rolled for storage.
Which is lighter?
The punched Yuma at 5.95 lb. The adhesive Yuma (8.44 lb) is slightly heavier than the Arch Pro (7.9 lb).
Can I connect either one to a small power station?
Only if its solar input accepts at least 36.4V (Arch Pro) or 30.4V (Yuma) open-circuit. Many compact stations top out lower, so check the spec first.
Do I need an MPPT controller?
For a 12V battery bank, yes. It’s the most efficient way to use either panel, and it lets you run two in series.
Bottom line
For most car, SUV and van owners, the Arch Pro 200W is the better buy: it’s smaller, more efficient and cheaper, and it has run my own Starlink setup without a hiccup. The Yuma 200W earns its place on long, curved or shaded surfaces where a crystalline panel would struggle to fit or perform, especially boats and trailer roofs, and it backs that up with a 10-year warranty.