Setting the Record Straight: Nomadic's Response to the RackUp+Go 12V A/C Test

Why We're Speaking Up

When a public product comparison leaves out crucial context, ignores engineering fundamentals, and spreads misinformation, it's our responsibility to respond. The recent 12V rooftop A/C comparison test published by RackUp+Go featuring our Nomadic X3 12V has generated confusion across forums, social media, and even among our builder network.

We're not here to escalate. We're here to clarify. This article will walk through what that test was, what it wasn't, and what our actual product data tells us. If you're looking for factual insight, you're in the right place.

This isn't just about one test or one blog. It's about setting a precedent for accuracy and integrity in how off-grid products are reviewed. As a company rooted in engineering and transparency, we believe our response should match the seriousness of the claim. Builders, consumers, and partners deserve facts, not drama.

What Was the RackUp+Go Test?

If you were searching for a Nomadic X3 review or looking for real insight into the RackUp+Go 12V A/C test results, this is where transparency begins. We're breaking down exactly what happened, what was tested, and what was left out.

RackUp+Go conducted a chamber test using multiple DC-powered rooftop A/C units, including our Nomadic X3. Each unit was powered by a single 200Ah lithium battery and tested for runtime and temperature pull-down over several hours.

While the premise sounds objective, the execution raises major issues.

Diagram illustrating key facts about the RackUp+Go test

Key Facts About Their Test:

Mode Used: All units were run in Auto Mode only, with no Manual or Full Mode access
Power Source: One 200Ah lithium battery with no voltage regulation or power logging
Metrics Measured: Chamber temperature and runtime only, with no BTU per hour, airflow, humidity, or amp draw data
Third-Party Disclosure: No lab name, process documentation, or calibration evidence was provided
Test Setup: No information on wiring size, terminal connections, or airflow controls was provided

In our internal engineering review, our team raised several important concerns, including whether the correct wire gauge was used, what type of terminal connections were involved, and whether the units were new or previously used. These seemingly small technical variables directly affect compressor behavior, startup voltage, and real-world system performance.

We also reached out and requested more details on their methodology. We were told that the information would not be shared.

From an engineering standpoint, that means the test cannot be reproduced, verified, or trusted as a true performance comparison.

Despite being promoted as objective, the absence of core variables like airflow measurements, true cooling output, humidity, and voltage consistency suggests an incomplete framework. No serious lab or R&D division would certify a test based on such loose methodology, especially when using systems as complex as compressor-driven A/C units.

Was the RackUp+Go Test Biased Against the X3?

There are serious omissions that suggest a lack of objectivity. Key performance settings were ignored, and no documentation was provided to validate lab conditions or technical credibility. For customers and builders who rely on factual testing, this creates confusion, not clarity.

From ignoring Full Mode to leaving out voltage logs and omitting the X2 entirely, the testing conditions strongly indicate that either the scope was not well understood or that the result was pre-determined. If fairness or truth were truly the goal, a different methodology and a different product lineup would have been used.

Note: The X2 was not included in the RackUp+Go test because we were never contacted. No invitation was made—and no submission was refused. We made ourselves available. We were excluded.

Even the data we've been able to examine from their own published spreadsheet shows that the X3 provided measurable cooling and humidity control. That information was not shared in their summary or charting. Instead, only the runtime and endpoint chamber temp were highlighted, suggesting selective reporting rather than true transparency.

Why the Nomadic X3 Was Misrepresented

Let's be direct. The X3 wasn't tested in the conditions it was designed for.

How the X3 Works:

Auto Mode ramps power up gradually to protect batteries and extend lifespan
Full Mode delivers an average cooling output of 14,453 BTU/hr, with documented peaks exceeding 17,000 BTU/hr, but must be manually selected
Smart Logic dynamically adjusts the draw based on system feedback

Their test never activated Full Mode. The result was that the X3 ran at 60 to 70 percent output while competitors operated at full throttle from the start. That's like comparing fuel efficiency between a sports car in economy mode and a scooter going full speed.

What Was Left Out:

No mention of Full Mode in their report
No voltage stabilization for controlled compressor behavior
No insight into ramp-up curves or startup logic
No transparency around power wiring or terminal losses
No data about sensor placement, insulation values, or test equipment calibration

The biggest omission?

They didn't test the Nomadic X2 12V, which is the unit specifically designed for 200Ah builds.

Builder Tip: If you're designing builds around 200 to 300Ah battery banks, skip the X3. Go straight to the X2.

It's not just that the X3 was misrepresented. It was never given the chance to perform the way it was intended. The difference between Auto and Full Mode is dramatic, and when tested properly, the X3 delivers some of the best output in its class. Leaving this context out of the test undermines trust.

Why the X2 12V Was the Right Unit for the Test

The X2 12V is our high-efficiency, low-draw rooftop unit built to deliver consistent performance on smaller battery banks like the one used in their test.

Key Specs of the X2 12V:

BTU per hour: 13,583 verified
COP Efficiency: 4.2
Startup Behavior: Instant ramp with no delay
Amp Draw: 64A continuous in full load
Runtime Efficiency: Engineered for 200 to 300Ah systems

Nomadic X2 unit that should have been tested

Had the X2 been included, it would have:

Outperformed all other units in runtime
Pulled the chamber temperature down faster
Delivered the best cooling-per-amp profile

And it would have done it without gimmicks, just engineering.

Fact: The X2 met or exceeded every condition of the RackUp+Go test—temperature, load, duration, and draw. If fairness was the metric, the X2 should have been included.

That's why omitting the X2 undermines the integrity of the entire test.

The X2 was custom-designed to excel in the exact kind of environment this test simulated. Choosing not to include it is like organizing a race tailored to electric sedans and leaving out the Tesla. It's not an oversight. It's a narrative choice.

What Our Testing Looks Like

We conduct all internal and partner lab testing under controlled, documented, and repeatable conditions. Here's what that means.

Nomadic X2 unit in a testing environment

Our Standard Testing Protocol:

BTU/hr output tested using internal protocols with consistent delta-T methodology
Compressor ramp-up and voltage behavior were fully logged during operation
All units were tested in the same chamber to maintain environmental and insulation consistency
Runtime performance modeled across 100Ah to 600Ah battery-equivalent load profiles via DC power simulation
Wiring gauge and terminal voltages are measured to ensure electrical consistency
Results reviewed for reproducibility and used to validate public performance claims

We do not cherry-pick data.
We publish what we test.
We welcome replication.

Transparency: All X2 test data was gathered through repeatable, controlled conditions—no cherry-picked results, no brochure specs.

Testing without documentation is marketing. Testing with controls, records, and transparency is engineering.

At Nomadic, our goal is not just to release products. It's to ensure they work exactly as claimed, and give builders a system they can trust in the field.

Our Position: Transparency Over Talk

We declined a sales relationship with RackUp+Go prior to the public release of their test. We believe their test was designed to discredit our product after that decision. The timeline and omissions suggest intent.

We're not here to trade jabs.
We're here to protect the integrity of our work and your confidence as a builder or customer.

If you'd like to see full lab data, reach out. We'll share it.
If you want a breakdown by use case and battery setup, we'll walk you through it.
If you want facts, you're always welcome here.

Context: A true performance test doesn’t exclude top contenders. It invites them. If transparency was the goal, the X2 would have been tested.

It's easy to criticize. It's harder to build. Our team stands behind everything we create, and we will continue leading with data, not accusations. Integrity is not a slogan for us. It's embedded in our engineering.

What's Next: Product Comparison Backed by Data

Still comparing Nomadic vs Dometic vs Velit in your search for the most capable off-grid A/C system? We've published a data-driven comparison that strips away the fluff and gives you the full picture on performance, runtime, and real-world use cases.

In our next article, we'll publish a direct spec-by-spec comparison of the Nomadic X2 12V against the units used in the RackUp+Go test and others.

That includes:

Cooling output BTU per hour
Runtime modeling based on 200Ah, 400Ah and 600Ah system configurations
Startup behavior: Auto vs Manual
Power draw profiles
Verified test logs and comparison charts

We don't just react. We improve, document, and lead.
Every comparison we publish will be backed by traceable, replicable methodology. No smoke. No mirrors.

Final Word: Builders, We're Here to Back You Up

When engineering is reduced to marketing, trust gets lost.
When data is replaced with theater, customers pay the price.

We don't play that game. We build products that perform. We test them honestly. And we stand behind every result we publish.

Wondering "Is Nomadic AC bad?" or "Does the Nomadic X3 underperform?"
These are valid questions in a crowded market, and we've answered them with data, not opinions.

Looking for a reliable Nomadic X3 review backed by internal lab testing? You just read it.
Want to see how we match up head-to-head with Dometic RTX, Velit 2000R, and Indel B? Check out our upcoming Blog Nomadic X2 vs Dometic, Indel B & Velit: Verified A/C Performance for Off-Grid Builds.

If you're a builder, OEM, or customer who needs technical clarification or test specs, contact us directly. Our engineering team will walk you through every data point.

This isn't about one blog. It's about defending the kind of company we are. One built on transparency, one that welcomes scrutiny, and one that believes performance should speak louder than PR.

Nomadic Innovations - Nomadic Cooling
Tested | Transparent | Trusted