Database Info

Powerbank that support Quick Charge 2.0

Any good powerbank out there. At least a 10000 mah above.
To be able to use fast charging feature in Note 4.

Actually that sounds like it would be really cool if it exists, I'd also be interested in knowing if there's a powerbank that supports quick charge. I've held off on picking up a powerbank for a while now, but if something like this is even possible it would probably get me interested, it'd be pretty awesome to be able to just plug in to a backup battery and have it charge up the phone with quickcharge speed ;P I wouldn't be surprised to find out it's not possible though... Anyone know?

Think the dual voltage 5 and 9 volt needed for quickcharge wil be a problem to design a powerbank with a feature like that. I don't say it's impossible but probably won't be cheap or small formfacfor

Yea. Is cool if fast charge powerbank then bring out to fast charge note 4. Lol.

There is this compact power bank (and it supports quick charging itself within 3 hours - via 2.1A input - at least on paper)
APE MP5200Q on Alibaba (not aliexpress)
Weight: 132g
Input: 5V/2.2A
Outport: 5V/3.5A,9V/1.5A,12V/1.5A
3 output ports: 2 USB ports and 1 built-in micro USB cable
Over-charge/discharge, over-current,short protection
Quick Charge output port: output 9V/1.5A or 12V/1.5A on Quick Charge state
Battery Cell type: Samsung Li-ion 18650
Quick charge 2.0: Class A
and it looks good too!
the only missing thing to make it a perfect power bank, would be 15W wireless charging capability...

Please everyone do say what Power bank you have
& how much time does it take to fully charge a Drained battery
So we know which charges how many times, Once or twice or more ....
Thank you all

I have aukey quick charge the silver 10400mah model its charge lg g4 same as qc2.0 wall charger I have mah meter

I also have an aukey but the PB-T2 model 12000mAh. Have quick charge USB outlet and also a normal 1A USB outlet. Has a 2A microusb input for charging an a so-so LED light built in. A bit heavy and slightly longer than the Note 4 in size. Cons: I would have preferred a 2.1A instead of the 1A USB outlet for fast charging other non quick charge devices.

yosef019 said:
I have aukey quick charge the silver 10400mah model its charge lg g4 same as qc2.0 wall charger I have mah meter
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As above Aukey Quick Charge 2.0 external battery packs are pretty good. They do them in different sizes and go above 10000mah

BlitzWolf looks good.
banggood.com are doing pre order, to be sent out 20th November.
From a store rep..
We use the newer chip FP6600 that not only supports QC but also standard fast charging, the Aukey does charge at QC speeds with their THY100 but will not fast charge other devices such as your iPhone at fast speeds. BlitzWolf's newer IC provides compatibility beyond just QC devices. The battery of the BlitzWolf is is LG and also of a higher standard than Aukeys domestic Chinese brand batteries. In terms of safety and compatibility this is one step ahead of Aukeys 6 month old version.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Use coupon "12blitzw" for 12% off.. (Don't know when it ends)

I am using Aukey Power Bank with 15000maH.
Supports Quick Charge and PowerBank itself charges as Quick Charging.
jianrong said:
Any good powerbank out there. At least a 10000 mah above.
To be able to use fast charging feature in Note 4.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Hmm... we have Note 4's a removable battery is more compact and supports quick charge. Just have to get a battery charger that supports it. There would also be less power loss because it would be more efficient than transferring energy from one battery to another. Just my opinion.

Tronsmart Latest Quick Charge 3.0 USB Turbo Wall Charger Now Available $29.99

If you guys have been waiting for a quick charge 3.0 compatible charger, the Tronsmart Quick Charger 3.0 which will be be compatible with the A9 is now available on Amazon:
http://goo.gl/vb4Ryl
Featured with the latest Charging Technology Quick Charge 3.0, 27% faster than Quick Charge 2.0.
38% most efficient compare to the previous generation Quick Charge 2.0
Decrease the extra heat of the compatible phone upto 45%
Backwards compatible with Quick Charge 2.0 & Quick Charge 1.0
Package Content:1 x Tronsmart Quick Charge 3.0 Wall Charger, 1 x Quick Charge 3.0 Charging Cable, 1 x Warranty Card.

Aukey also has one available, and it looks slightly more compact:
http://www.amazon.com/Qualcomm-Certified-Aukey-Charger-Included/dp/B015FPKEM8/ref=cm_rdp_product

thisisjason said:
Aukey also has one available, and it looks slightly more compact:
http://www.amazon.com/Qualcomm-Certified-Aukey-Charger-Included/dp/B015FPKEM8/ref=cm_rdp_product
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I saw the Aukey 3.0 charger it became available a day or two after the Tronsmart charger. I have an Aukey qc 2.0 wall and car charger which are both excellent. I went ahead and ordered the Tronsmart charger I listed which is also qc 2.0/1.0 compatible, I should have it tomorrow. I wanted to compare the build quality between them.
Both have proven track records so more than likely either one will be a safe bet regardless of which one you choose. I'll post a follow up once I receive it!

gheymann said:
I saw the Aukey 3.0 charger it became available a day or two after the Tronsmart charger. I have an Aukey qc 2.0 wall and car charger which are both excellent. I went ahead and ordered the Tronsmart charger I listed which is also qc 2.0/1.0 compatible, I should have it tomorrow. I wanted to compare the build quality between them.
Both have proven track records so more than likely either one will be a safe bet regardless of which one you choose. I'll post a follow up once I receive it!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Looking forward to your thoughts on it. I have a Tronsmart QC 2.0 car charger, very good quality.
I also noticed that the Tronsmart includes a longer USB cable, which is nice.

gheymann said:
I saw the Aukey 3.0 charger it became available a day or two after the Tronsmart charger. I have an Aukey qc 2.0 wall and car charger which are both excellent. I went ahead and ordered the Tronsmart charger I listed which is also qc 2.0/1.0 compatible, I should have it tomorrow. I wanted to compare the build quality between them.
Both have proven track records so more than likely either one will be a safe bet regardless of which one you choose. I'll post a follow up once I receive it!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How about the build quality between them? Any update?

haic said:
How about the build quality between them? Any update?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi
The Tronsmart qc 3.0 charger is very solidly built and smaller than I expected, it is close to the same size as my Aukey 2.0 quickcharger although it feels slightly bigger in the hand due to the the defined edges while the Aukey is rounded on either side and relatively flat on top and bottom.
I don't have any qc 3.0 devices at this point to be able to give a comparison of charge times between the qc 3.0 and 2.0 charging, although I don't have any reason to doubt the quoted specs since the qc 2.0 times have proven to be correct over time.
I will say that anecdotally there does seem to be a little bit of a difference when charging a qc 2.0 phone with the Tronsmart 3.0 charger, and that is that it seems to take slightly longer to charge the phone when compared with the Aukey 2.0 charger but the phone doesn't seem to get as warm when quick charging.
This wasn't a scientific test just a general observation, so your mileage may vary, I hope this is helpful. I can say that I wouldn't have any problem recommending Tronsmart or Aukey chargers going forward they have similar specs and are both priced competitively.
I cancelled my HTC one a9 pre-order after the shipping was delayed, so I'm not sure when I will have a qc 3.0 device to test it with.

Just bought the Tronsmart QC 3.0 and it came today, and Quickcharge 3.0 isn't as fast as I expected it to be... I got home from work and did a little experiment, Phone was at 6%, and as I plugged it in, I set a timer. 32 minutes into charging, my phone (HTC One A9) was only at 43%. Much slower than I expected... 37% in 32 minutes, nowhere near the advertised speed of 85% in 35 minutes on a 3300mAh battery. Airplane mode was also turned on while charging.
Would not recommend.

hyudryu said:
Just bought the Tronsmart QC 3.0 and it came today, and Quickcharge 3.0 isn't as fast as I expected it to be... I got home from work and did a little experiment, Phone was at 6%, and as I plugged it in, I set a timer. 32 minutes into charging, my phone (HTC One A9) was only at 43%. Much slower than I expected... 37% in 32 minutes, nowhere near the advertised speed of 85% in 35 minutes on a 3300mAh battery. Airplane mode was also turned on while charging.
Would not recommend.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have read some news that the early version of HTC One A9 just comes with QC2.0 support, but a future software update will bring the QC3.0.

appleli1 said:
I have read some news that the early version of HTC One A9 just comes with QC2.0 support, but a future software update will bring the QC3.0.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Even at qc 2.0 speeds, it shouldn't be charging at around 1% every minute right? or am I wrong. When I saw the quick charge statistics of 60% in 30 minutes, I imagined around 2% a minute

hyudryu said:
Even at qc 2.0 speeds, it shouldn't be charging at around 1% every minute right? or am I wrong. When I saw the quick charge statistics of 60% in 30 minutes, I imagined around 2% a minute
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That fast charge 0-60% in 30 min is the test done by qualcomm in the lab. Actually there will be some errors between different devices which support QC 2.0 technology.

hyudryu said:
Just bought the Tronsmart QC 3.0 and it came today, and Quickcharge 3.0 isn't as fast as I expected it to be... I got home from work and did a little experiment, Phone was at 6%, and as I plugged it in, I set a timer. 32 minutes into charging, my phone (HTC One A9) was only at 43%. Much slower than I expected... 37% in 32 minutes, nowhere near the advertised speed of 85% in 35 minutes on a 3300mAh battery. Airplane mode was also turned on while charging.
Would not recommend.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you have that usb mah meter i have one and lg g4 charge at 9v 1.35A while note 5 9v 1.65a so its up to deive manufacture get the voltage done and qualcom test is at max qc2.0 speeds thats 12v 1.5a or more? thats double the 9v charging so yea 2% per min

yosef019 said:
Do you have that usb mah meter i have one and lg g4 charge at 9v 1.35A while note 5 9v 1.65a so its up to deive manufacture get the voltage done and qualcom test is at max qc2.0 speeds thats 12v 1.5a or more? thats double the 9v charging so yea 2% per min
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No I don't have a current meter that can measure USB currents. It's only 1% a minute when charging my phone. Quick charge is way too hyped up.

I always look into verified purchaser ratings in amazon while buying anything. I found the following Quick Charge 3.0 which (brands) are listed in qualcomm website (website doesn't have 3.0 listing of accessories, but these manufacturers of accessories are found:
1. JDB Quick Charge 3.0 18W USB - $26.99 (61 customers - 5stars) - http://www.amazon.com/Qualcomm-JDB-...860&sr=1-6&keywords=qualcomm+quick+charge+3.0
2. Anker PowerPort+ 1 (Quick Charge 3.0 18W USB Wall Charger) - $25.99 (45 customers - 5 stars) - http://www.amazon.com/Qualcomm-Anke...860&sr=1-1&keywords=qualcomm+quick+charge+3.0
I am still waiting on my HTC A9 pre-order to be delivered, would pick any of these. If anyone bought either of these please give me your opinions on these. By the way, has A9 received the update that would support quick charge 3.0 yet (it was told that, the new s/w update later in the year would support QC 3.0)
Edit: Also found this one for $15, and it says qualcomm quick charge 3.0. Looks very cost effective, but none of the review highlight on QC 3.0. Did anyone try this? http://www.newnow.com/products/tc-0...INWCtxjqipuNSxwZhGJVeE3T1EaAjWI8P8HAQ#proDesc

hyudryu said:
Even at qc 2.0 speeds, it shouldn't be charging at around 1% every minute right? or am I wrong. When I saw the quick charge statistics of 60% in 30 minutes, I imagined around 2% a minute
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I bought this same charger too and I'm with you, doesn't seem any faster that my regular charger. the Anker 3.0 wasn't listed (or I missed it) when I ordered the Transmart or I would have ordered that one instead.
i'll check the voltage & amps in GSam next time I charge to see what it says.

I bought the JDB QC 3.0 charger on eBay from China for $18 (also available on AliExpress for $14). It seems like a good deal and good quality if one can be patient.
I do wish those of you posting performance comments would hold your water until your phone actually supports version 3.0; until then the 3.0 chargers aren't likely to be any faster with 2.0 phones (e.g. the A9 with current firmware).
FWIW the 3.0 spec defines charge voltages every 0.2V from 3.6V (some places say 3.2V) all the way up to 20V. That does not mean that all chargers offer this range, or that all devices can use these voltages (the phone determines which of the available voltages to use through time). The 2.0 spec only had a few charge voltages to choose from so the more granular voltage choices with 3.0 should be a win for all devices. All of the chargers mentioned so far offer a top voltage of 12V at 1.5A (compared to HTC's 2.0 max of 12V at 1.25A). At 9V there is 2A available (compared to 1.67A for 2.0). In the range around 5V the different products list different currents between 2A and 3A but at this stage I suspect the spec differences are probably not real (2.0 is 1.67A for comparison). So potentially 3.0 can provide up to 20% more current than 2.0 across the voltage range. In practice the greatest benefit will be to devices with large batteries (i.e. not A9) as they can absorb charge faster - it is quite possible that the A9 will not benefit from the higher available currents at all (but still benefit from the smaller voltage steps). I look forward to getting real world measurements.
Greg

CarinaPDX said:
I bought the JDB QC 3.0 charger on eBay from China for $18 (also available on AliExpress for $14). It seems like a good deal and good quality if one can be patient.
I do wish those of you posting performance comments would hold your water until your phone actually supports version 3.0; until then the 3.0 chargers aren't likely to be any faster with 2.0 phones (e.g. the A9 with current firmware).
FWIW the 3.0 spec defines charge voltages every 0.2V from 3.6V (some places say 3.2V) all the way up to 20V. That does not mean that all chargers offer this range, or that all devices can use these voltages (the phone determines which of the available voltages to use through time). The 2.0 spec only had a few charge voltages to choose from so the more granular voltage choices with 3.0 should be a win for all devices. All of the chargers mentioned so far offer a top voltage of 12V at 1.5A (compared to HTC's 2.0 max of 12V at 1.25A). At 9V there is 2A available (compared to 1.67A for 2.0). In the range around 5V the different products list different currents between 2A and 3A but at this stage I suspect the spec differences are probably not real (2.0 is 1.67A for comparison). So potentially 3.0 can provide up to 20% more current than 2.0 across the voltage range. In practice the greatest benefit will be to devices with large batteries (i.e. not A9) as they can absorb charge faster - it is quite possible that the A9 will not benefit from the higher available currents at all (but still benefit from the smaller voltage steps). I look forward to getting real world measurements.
Greg
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just did a little experiment with my HTC one a9 and my old iphone 6. I used both till they are the same battery level (16%), and (With airplane mode on for both devices) I plugged my HTC to the tronsmart qc 3.0 adapter, and my iphone into the HTC charger that came in the box. A little while later, I checked the percentages and they were exactly the same. Either my HTC is charging at conventional speeds, or the iPhone charges at the same speed as Qc 2.0 (Roughly 1% every minute), Never owned a Qc 2.0 device so not sure if that's the normal speed... Anyone have any input on this?

It's not just comparing apples and oranges, there are multiple differences: battery capacity, age, and charging regimens available in both phones and chargers. I don't see any comparability. As for charging regimens, the new A9 is a QC 2.0 device (for now) charging on a QC 3.0 charger, which means the CPU will only request voltages that are available in QC 2.0 and only with slightly higher amperage available from the charger (which may not even be usable with the A9's small battery). So I expect little or no improvement over a QC 2.0 charger. We will have to wait for a test of QC 3.0. The iPhone uses Apple's own charging regimen, which usually doesn't charge fast unless connected to an Apple charger, or one able to act like one. I suspect the QC chargers have that ability, as it is increasingly common, so the question is how much current is available in the charger for the Qualcomm implementation of the Apple protocol?
I think the identical charging times is just an accident.

hyudryu said:
I just did a little experiment with my HTC one a9 and my old iphone 6. I used both till they are the same battery level (16%), and (With airplane mode on for both devices) I plugged my HTC to the tronsmart qc 3.0 adapter, and my iphone into the HTC charger that came in the box. A little while later, I checked the percentages and they were exactly the same. Either my HTC is charging at conventional speeds, or the iPhone charges at the same speed as Qc 2.0 (Roughly 1% every minute), Never owned a Qc 2.0 device so not sure if that's the normal speed... Anyone have any input on this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you owned any HTC Phone since One M8 series, all of them came with QC 2.0 charger, including the A9 bundled charger

Cashreedhar said:
If you owned any HTC Phone since One M8 series, all of them came with QC 2.0 charger, including the A9 bundled charger
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So you're saying that QC 2.0 is supposed to charge at 1% every minute? That's very slow compared to Qualcomm's advertised speeds. And if the iPhone 6 charges at the same speed as the HTC One A9, then does that means the iPhone supports QC 2.0? I find that weird because Apple's specs say nothing about quick charging.

hyudryu said:
So you're saying that QC 2.0 is supposed to charge at 1% every minute? That's very slow compared to Qualcomm's advertised speeds. And if the iPhone 6 charges at the same speed as the HTC One A9, then does that means the iPhone supports QC 2.0? I find that weird because Apple's specs say nothing about quick charging.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not sure if it is 1% per minute. My M8 charges 70% in an hour. QC 2.0 is the technology of qualcomm and nothing to do with Apple. Apple doesn't use the the qualcomm technology but they have their own, and advanced Apple iPhones have charging capacity similar to QC 2.0 . QC 3.0 is going to be the new technogy when qualcomm makes it available through HTC update, which we are expecting to be a great upgrade (which is not available on A9 yet, though the hardware is all set to do that)

Car Turbo Charger

Does anybody know of a car charger that does turbo charge the Moto Z? Apparently Motorola/Lenovo doesn't offer one and a third party QuickCharge 3.0 I tried failed...
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

I got this one :Nekteck 5.4A USB-C Car Charger from Amazon for 15$ and it does turbo charge my phone .

I don't believe that the Z Force is set up for Qualcomm Quick Charge. And while it doesn't Turbo charge, I use the Verizon brand rapid USB-C car charger. I've also read that we have to be careful with what charging cables we use with our Z Force phones.
Sent from my Moto Z Force Droid using Tapatalk.

zaki67 said:
I got this one :Nekteck 5.4A USB-C Car Charger from Amazon for 15$ and it does turbo charge my phone .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you, I will try that one then ?.
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

karlmf said:
I don't believe that the Z Force is set up for Qualcomm Quick Charge. And while it doesn't Turbo charge, I use the Verizon brand rapid USB-C car charger. I've also read that we have to be careful with what charging cables we use with our Z Force phones.
Sent from my Moto Z Force Droid using Tapatalk.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
At least Motorola claims it supports QuickCharge if I'm not mistaken. Apparently, though, it also has additional requirements for turbo charging to kick in... I looked at the Verizon charger, too, but a) there's not much info on its website, b) calling Verizon didn't help - they don't have a clue, and c) there is some comment / review saying that it "burned out" some user's battery (which is of course unconfirmed to be related to this charger, may have been something else).
Anyways, given the utter lack of info and the suspicion of harming the battery, I stayed away from it... not to mention the ridiculous $40 price tag.
On an other note, though, Verizon has the original Motorola TurboCharger (wall charger) at a 50% discount.
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

pb1379 said:
At least Motorola claims it supports QuickCharge if I'm not mistaken. Apparently, though, it also has additional requirements for turbo charging to kick in... I looked at the Verizon charger, too, but a) there's not much info on its website, b) calling Verizon didn't help - they don't have a clue, and c) there is some comment / review saying that it "burned out" some user's battery (which is of course unconfirmed to be related to this charger, may have been something else).
Anyways, given the utter lack of info and the suspicion of harming the battery, I stayed away from it... not to mention the ridiculous $40 price tag.
On an other note, though, Verizon has the original Motorola TurboCharger (wall charger) at a 50% discount.
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No USB-C device can support Quick Charge - it violates the USB-C spec. Any quality USB-C charger that is higher amp will TurboCharge a phone. Moto screwed up by using TurboCharging name with both QuickCharge and USB-C - they are different.

The Moto Z is absurdly picky when it comes to quick charge specs.
I have a Blitzwolf QC2.0 with a type C and a Type A connector in my wifes car, and it will ONLY enter quick charge if I use the Type C to Type C cable I bought from Blitzwolf.
It will not turbo charge if I use a high end Type A to Type C cable, but my wifes LG G5 will do so happily.
I also bought a QC3 compatible charger, with the cable integrated like the original charger, and this works too, and is faster than the QC2 charger.
Both are definitely charging at more than 10 watts, the maximum for 5V 2A mode chargers.
And in fact, using a Non-QC 5V 3A charger, caused my cable to melt, and start to glow.
Incredibly my phone charging port survived.
Blitzwolf may very well be the only brand that works fully, as I just bought a Chuwi QC3 power bank, and it will refuse to quick charge my phone.
But works on some others.
And on another note, I used the Type C to Type C in a modern laptop a while back, and when I plugged it in, my phone displayed the message about receiving quick charge.
If I'm not mistaken, the Type C spec allows quick charging, but only if you use C to C, with the extra pins it's able to keep better track of the charging process I guess.

Shadowdancer123 said:
The Moto Z is absurdly picky when it comes to quick charge specs.
...
And on another note, I used the Type C to Type C in a modern laptop a while back, and when I plugged it in, my phone displayed the message about receiving quick charge.
If I'm not mistaken, the Type C spec allows quick charging, but only if you use C to C, with the extra pins it's able to keep better track of the charging process I guess.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, it seems all matter of cables...!
I have a Blitzwolf QC3.0 too BUT I'm able to obtain "Turbocharge" indication only using a *single* micro USB to type C adaptor. This with every cable and every charger. Even when connected to a USB port!
If I use every other cable or similar adaptors (I've tested many...), the "Turbocharge" never shows (except original charger obviously...).
With Blitzwolf QC3 and this cable/adaptor I got a full charge from less than 5% in about 70-75 min... during the charge cable was OK, while the adaptor (with metallic/aluminium exterior) was quite warm but never really hot in dangerous way...

Here's more information than any of you probably care about, but I'm tired of seeing the same misinformation and confusion being thrown around (not just in the Moto Z forum, but in a bunch of others, too).
chromedome00 said:
No USB-C device can support Quick Charge - it violates the USB-C spec.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's not true. Case in point: my ZTE Axon 7 and LeEco S3 both use QC 3.0 and both are USB-C. The common confusion comes from using "USB-C" (a connector) and "Type-C" (interchangeably used to refer to the connector and the power specification) incorrectly. Clarification below.
chromedome00 said:
Any quality USB-C charger that is higher amp will TurboCharge a phone. Moto screwed up by using TurboCharging name with both QuickCharge and USB-C - they are different.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is mostly true. "TurboPower" is the stupid name Moto uses to refer to the Type-C power specification. Actually, I'm being unfair: it's confusing that they called it "Type-C" in the first place and Moto took the opportunity to market the spec as their own thing.
Before going any further, let's use a common analogy to make the relationship between, wattage, voltage, and amperage easier to understand in broad terms. Wattage is the amount of water going through a pipe. Voltage is how fast that water is moving and amperage is the size of the pipe. 15W is 15W, but you can get there by having a tiny pipe (1A) with water moving really fast through it (15V) or a really big pipe (3A) with water going more slowly through it (5V). They both move the same amount of power, but in different ways. Got it? Good.
Anyway, Type-C has a fixed voltage and maxes out at 15W ([email protected]). Quick Charge 1.0 does only 10W ([email protected]), 2.0 does 18W (5/9/12V @ 3.6/2/1.5A respectively), and 3.0 does 18W with varying voltage (3.6-20V) and amperage (5-0.9A) to match. That is the advantage of QC over Type-C: a higher voltage can (usually) be run through those old and cheap USB cables without issue since voltage tolerance is determined largely by the phone and the charger. As long as the amperage doesn't exceed the capacity (gauge) of the wire, higher voltage is fine.
Amperage, though, that's what causes non-compliant or crappy cables to burn up. Really old or especially cheap cables can handle 1A max (heck, if they were built to spec, only 500mA for USB 2.0), but most cables of reasonable quality can handle 2A without much issue. They tend to use lower gauge (thicker) wires and should *not* feel warm at all when using it to charge. Some manufacturers (Samsung, for example) used to disable data on their USB cables and use it for additional amperage capacity, which is why you would occasionally buy a phone with a cable that wouldn't work for data transfer in the computer but would charge your phone just fine.
Moving on. Technically, QC 1.0 and QC 3.0 do not violate the Type-C power spec. QC 1.0 because it can't exceed it and QC 3.0 because it's variable. That said, QC 3.0 (and possibly QC 1.0, I don't know) require protocol negotiation; if that negotiation is lacking (in the case of the Moto Z), it's going to default to a "safe" charging rate (around 5W, plus or minus some). Your QC 2.0 does technically violate the Type-C spec because its voltage and amperage rates are fixed: you can get 5V at up to 3.6A. The "up to" bit is the important part. I have seen in various threads folks claiming their non-QC 3.0 phones will work with QC 2.0 chargers just fine and it's probably because the amperage tolerance is there (ie. it will actually allow 3.6A, violating spec) or it gets throttled (ie. sticks to 3A, keeping to spec).
Shadowdancer123 said:
The Moto Z is absurdly picky when it comes to quick charge specs.
...
And in fact, using a Non-QC 5V 3A charger, caused my cable to melt, and start to glow.
Incredibly my phone charging port survived.
...
If I'm not mistaken, the Type C spec allows quick charging, but only if you use C to C, with the extra pins it's able to keep better track of the charging process I guess.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All Type-C and USB-PD compliant devices are picky about the charge specs, not just the Moto Z. Or, at least, they're supposed to be for the reasons outlined above (namely the amperage). QC devices are less picky because it frequently uses higher voltage, which we established above as being much more tolerable for cables of varying quality.
Your cable melting and glowing is to be expected when you push 3A through a cable that likely can't handle more than 2A or so. Your phone charging port survived because it's designed to handle 3A.
I'm not entirely sure about which pins do what on a USB-C connector, but you're right in the C-to-C is the only connection that (should, according to spec) support Type-C and USB-PD (Power Delivery). The rate is negotiated via the USB Power Delivery 2.0 "power rules", which define four acceptable voltages (5/9/15/20) and variable amperage (0.1-5) to obtain charge rates as low as 0.5W and as high as 100W. "Type-C" is part of the Power Delivery spec, but is usually limited to only the 5V rule. I'm fairly certain the Moto Z does not support anything past the first level power rule, which is why you likely won't find the Moto Z to charge significantly faster with the TurboPower 30 included with the Moto Z Force than it does with its original TurboPower 15 charger. No clue as to whether that's a hardware or software limitation.

Also, to answer the OP's original question: any reputable (Anker, Aukey, Choetech, Belkin, etc) that uses an actual USB-C port will work. Most (if not all) dual port units will have a USB-C port that will work with the Moto Z (or any other Type-C/USB-PD device) and a QC 3.0 compatible "traditional" USB-A port. I have yet to find one that includes two USB-C ports and I really hate the ones with integrated cables.
My personal favorite is the Choetech for $16 since its QC 3.0 USB-A port is reversible: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01AAGH8OY/
This Aukey is cheaper ($15) and would be fine: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01E764DXM/
Here's a Tronsmart for $16, as well: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B018K7LHBU/
Even this $10 Vinsic should be okay: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B014F2NQ36/
Just for funsies, here's a spreadsheet of the Benson Leung cable and charger tests: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wJwqv3rTNmORXz-XJsQaXK1dl8I91V4-eP_sfNVNzbA/edit#gid=0
Interestingly, the $10 Vinsic is on his list of approved. So there. Go buy a $10 car charger and be happy.

I have the aukey 6 port usb charging station with two QC 3.0 ports, I am using high quality braided usb 3.0 to type c cables - I have tested both QC 3.0 ports and the other ports (using ampere) - Every port lists charging as "normal" - QC port 1 shows a min of 640mA and a max of 1040mA. QC Port 2 shows - min of 530 mA and a max of 980 mA. Regular ports 3-6 all show a min of 270mA and max of 870 mA. Not one port indicated it was ever turbo or fast charging. This same charger does fast charge my lg G5 and Samsung S7 Edge.

this one is verified to give the "TurboPower connected" message when plugged in.
From what I have read, both QC 2.0 and 3.0 doesn't turbo charge moto phones. Qualcomms QC charging works by increasing the voltage and decreasing the amps. So you can have 12v and 2amp for a total of 24 watts, but that won't turbo charge the moto z. Moto works on 5 volts but needs at least 3 amps. It is the amps that seem to engage the Motos into turbo charge mode, and they have to be at least 3 amps.
This Belkin model, for example, is what Benson Leung uses for his pixel xl. Its one of the few on Amazon that is USB-IF certified for 5v 3amp.

rczrider said:
Here's more information than any of you probably care about, but I'm tired of seeing the same misinformation and confusion being thrown around (not just in the Moto Z forum, but in a bunch of others, too).
That's not true. Case in point: my ZTE Axon 7 and LeEco S3 both use QC 3.0 and both are USB-C. The common confusion comes from using "USB-C" (a connector) and "Type-C" (interchangeably used to refer to the connector and the power specification) incorrectly. Clarification below.
Moving on. Technically, QC 1.0 and QC 3.0 do not violate the Type-C power spec. QC 1.0 because it can't exceed it and QC 3.0 because it's variable. That said, QC 3.0 (and possibly QC 1.0, I don't know) require protocol negotiation; if that negotiation is lacking (in the case of the Moto Z), it's going to default to a "safe" charging rate (around 5W, plus or minus some). Your QC 2.0 does technically violate the Type-C spec because its voltage and amperage rates are fixed: you can get 5V at up to 3.6A. The "up to" bit is the important part. I have seen in various threads folks claiming their non-QC 3.0 phones will work with QC 2.0 chargers just fine and it's probably because the amperage tolerance is there (ie. it will actually allow 3.6A, violating spec) or it gets throttled (ie. sticks to 3A, keeping to spec).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you are propagating mis-information. If you want to catch up on why QC 2.0/3.0 violate the USB-C spec, here it is from the horses mouth:
https://plus.google.com/+BensonLeung/posts/cEvVQLXhyRX
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/201...omm-quick-charge-with-android-incompatibility
Interestingly Qualcomm has QC 4.0 now and they call out integration with USB-C and USB-PD https://www.qualcomm.com/news/relea...livers-20-faster-charging-improved-efficiency
"Quick Charge 4 also integrates USB Type-C and USB-PD support, making the industry’s most popular battery charging solution available on the widest variety of cables and adapters."
USB-C has 24 pins while standard USB-A has 4. Quick Charge chargers (2.0/3.0) only have the 4 pins of USB-A - so if it can't use the data lines, then it can't quick charge via USB-C. Since there are only 4 outputs, plugging a USB-C cable into a QC 2.0/3.0 charger will not change anything. Still only 4 wires originating from the charger. The data lines are not allowed to be used for voltage, so your QC charger will only supply a fixed 5V to the phone. So no Quick Charge.

If QC3 supports [email protected] couldn't it supply power at [email protected] to turbocharge?
Looking for a solution to turbocharge my Moto Z and support QC3 for LG G5/Samsung S7.

The TurboPower 15 wall charger delivers hours of power in just minutes of charging. It includes micro USB and single USB charging cables so you can use it on compatible smartphones, tablets, digital cameras and more.
Have a Moto Z or another USB-C enabled device? The TurboPower 30 wall charger is USB-C compatible.
Looking for a car charger? Shop at Motorola Home.

zaki67 said:
I got this one :Nekteck 5.4A USB-C Car Charger from Amazon for 15$ and it does turbo charge my phone .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just ordered one of these. This one specifically
Hopefully it'll work out well

This one works fine.
https://store.google.com/product/belkin_15w_usb_c_car_charger
Sent from my XT1650-03 using Tapatalk

swejuggalo said:
This one works fine.
https://store.google.com/product/belkin_15w_usb_c_car_charger
Sent from my XT1650-03 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
YES! I can confirm it!

QuickCharge 3.0, across 6 chargers, is somehow not working on my V20

I picked up a T-Mobile V20 2 days ago. Rooted it the same night, and tested out a few chargers I had laying around to make sure the ones I had, along with cables, worked properly after having most everything not work properly with my Pixel XL.
The stock charger would not charge my phone at more than 3 watts (but I never touched the stock charger until I started noticing the issue).
A Samsung QC charger, with any cable, would not charge my phone more than 9 watts.
An Anker PowerPort+ 1, Type C, QC 3.0 charger, with any cable (to include Anker cables and the Pixel XL OEM cable), will not charge over 12 watts.
Absolutely NONE of my QC 3.0 car chargers register as "fast charging" - these include an iVoler Type C and USB A, Anker USB A, Tronsmart Type C, with various cables. A standard cabled Type C charger from i-Orange does not say "fast charging," but seems to be charging at 5V/3A as it is MUCH faster than all the others.
The ONLY charger that is fast charging my phone is the Pixel XL OEM charger. Measured at the wall, it has peaked at 19.2 watts.
I'm really confused. I don't know if my QC 3.0 has been defective since I got the phone, or if plugging my phone into the USB PD Pixel XL charger somehow screwed things up...
Does anyone have any ideas here?

All my old QC chargers work and I'm currently using the note 7 oem one atm as it does not get as hot (charger not phone) as the LG oem one under load. What does the app ampere say your getting?

It takes a while, try a very low battery and give it 10 minutes or more screen off, must be cool too

I got an existing aukey qc 2.0 fast charging fine while using a Samsung adaptive fast charger also fine, I am waiting for my qc 3.0 aukey one to be arrived possibly tomorrow to see if I could charge faster and lower temperature than my existing ones, I cannot check the watts though

My phone is either defective (not surprising given LG's GARBAGE quality control) or the software has somehow screwed up from root, etc. (highly unlikely as I am the only one with an issue).
With that said, I made an interesting discovery. My phone, using USB Power Delivery, charges much faster than my girlfriend's, using QuickCharge 2.0 or 3.0. I tested this 2 times from 5% battery on both phones. I tested this with a QC 3.0 car charger and the OEM QC 2.0 charger. The difference is substantial... first test was about 40 minutes. My phone was near 80%, hers was at 55%. The 2nd test was only 15 minutes. Mine was near 40%, hers only 27%.
reaverclan said:
All my old QC chargers work and I'm currently using the note 7 oem one atm as it does not get as hot (charger not phone) as the LG oem one under load. What does the app ampere say your getting?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't remember what Ampere says, but it was <500mA. Also, I used a USB current meter. It hovered around 5V/0.5A no matter what charger I used. I don't have a Type C/Power Delivery current meter, so I couldn't test those chargers... but USB PD is CLEARLY working very well on the V20. Much better than QC.
wing_addict_usa said:
It takes a while, try a very low battery and give it 10 minutes or more screen off, must be cool too
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It does not take awhile - takes <5 seconds to begin the QuickCharge process. Phone does not need a very low battery - will show fast charging regardless of the %. Does not need to be cool - fast charging is shown when the QC handshake occurs - not based on actual charging current. My girlfriend also has a V20. Every charger I tested with mine (which did not work), successfully QuickCharges hers.

Are you you using 56 k resistor cables?plus being rooted a kernel app would have a section to disable fast charge or enable it. Most devs disables by default. So if using custom kernel something to look in to. As I doubt there is anything wrong with your phone.
Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

Just got the aukey PA-T15 qc 3.0 seems fast charging fine though I have no time for a 0% to 100% test yet

Dark Jedi said:
Are you you using 56 k resistor cables?plus being rooted a kernel app would have a section to disable fast charge or enable it. Most devs disables by default. So if using custom kernel something to look in to. As I doubt there is anything wrong with your phone.
Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All of my cables are good. No custom kernel, and I've never seen a dev disable fast charging by default... that would be very unpopular.
Anyway, it seems that LG's recent phones, to include the G5 and V20, are actually supporting both QC 3.0 and USB PD. This is also probably why QC 3.0 chargers that use Type C do not work (the Anker PowerPort+ 1 in my case). On a C to C connection, with USB PD present, USB PD will take precedence over QC 3.0 (since QC 3.0 is illegal with C to C anyway). But that still doesn't explain why my phone doesn't QC via USB A to C... so I'll chalk it up to LG's garbage quality control.
I'm glad it worked out this way. USB PD charges my phone WAY faster than QC 3.0 charges my girlfriend's V20. So I would suggest you all dump QC 3.0 (because it's non-compliant to anyway) and grab USB PD equipment since it's the way of the future anyway.

I'm starting to think that there's something wrong with the way V20 handles QC 3.0. I'm in a somewhat similar situation with you, tested three different QC 3.0 using almost 10 different A->C cable (including the OEM cable) and none of them would deliver QC 3.0 speed. (I just came in a from Axon 7 and the difference between charging speed is night and day).
Additionally, I wish there's an app to properly identify what's going on during charging.
Using the built-in battery test from Service mode (see screenshot), it always says that I'm on QC 2.0 whenever I'm charging using QC 3.0 chargers.

My unit (LG-H990DS) is charging very quick though.
Using stock charger & cable, charging time is very consistent from 0 to 100%. 95 mins is all it takes.

yluxion said:
My unit (LG-H990DS) is charging very quick though.
Using stock charger & cable, charging time is very consistent from 0 to 100%. 95 mins is all it takes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The stock charger that LG sent with the V20 is actually a QC2.0 unit.
and with QC3.0, it'll take you less than an hour to fully charge.

baymon said:
The stock charger that LG sent with the V20 is actually a QC2.0 unit.
and with QC3.0, it'll take you less than an hour to fully charge.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Original Charger
Aukey QC3.0 Charger
Both results are similar.
So now LG V20 under utilise the Aukey QC3.0?

yluxion said:
Original Charger
Aukey QC3.0 Charger
Both results are similar.
So now LG V20 under utilise the Aukey QC3.0?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can't say for sure, because I have no way to get a baseline on how fast a QC 3.0 charger charge at the correct QC3.0 rate on the V20....
At least according to the battery test from the service mode menu, none of my QC3.0 chargers are being recognized as QC3....and it definitely doesn't charge as fast as 3.0 based on my previous experience with axon 7.
on The Axon 7, I can still be playing Mobius FF (which is very battery intensive) and still charging up at about 1% per minute.

I'm pretty sure our phone doesn't have QC3 as I just mentioned in another thread. I'm like.. 97% sure? I remember reading early on that it was QC2, and a blend of LG that got it a little more robust than that. I'm not sure all of what's required for QC3 to work, obviously the 820 SOC supports it, but, not sure why I read that we don't have QC3.,

dbornack said:
I'm pretty sure our phone doesn't have QC3 as I just mentioned in another thread. I'm like.. 97% sure? I remember reading early on that it was QC2, and a blend of LG that got it a little more robust than that. I'm not sure all of what's required for QC3 to work, obviously the 820 SOC supports it, but, not sure why I read that we don't have QC3.,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I'm starting to believe that's the case now. I just updated the thread btway, now they're saying that 3.0 isn't enabled by LG.
Not sure this is the case of Tmo employee not knowing their sh*t or what.

baymon said:
Yeah, I'm starting to believe that's the case now. I just updated the thread btway, now they're saying that 3.0 isn't enabled by LG.
Not sure this is the case of Tmo employee not knowing their sh*t or what.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
FWIW, I have a couple of Aukey chargers. One is QC2, and one is QC3. They both "fast-charge" my phone, but I don't think I get the fastest charge on anything but the LG adapter. Usually it's fast enough for me, but I guess if I was 10-15% left, and I needed 100% in less than an hour, it might not happen.

I just picked up a US996 (Unlocked V20)... and found this site while trying to make a decision on buying new chargers, cables, etc.
I opened a chat with LG to ask them if the V20 supports USB-PD... and I got this response:
Merwin
Not that we can verify, Ryan we because we have not tested it. I highly suggest you to use the OEM charger of the V20.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So... no help from Merwin @ LG. It seems they're not allowed to comment on it, and can only recommend the OEM charger. I was unaware that it was only QC2.0, according to the testing above.
Has anyone done more testing since? Can I buy a USB-PD charger and C-to-C cable? Should I avoid QC3.0?
Thanks

I'm interested in this as well having bought 2 QC3 chargers and neither charge my phone as fast as QC3 advertises.
I have used my brothers stock Nexus 6p charger from Google and the times are about equal to my QC3 chargers I bought

I'm using a Samsung QC 2.0 charger for mine:
https://www.amazon.com/Samsung-EP-TA20JWE-Travel-Charger-Devices/dp/B00TEUVEIO
I use it because I lost the LG one. It does quick charge but I can't measure the rate in the service menu. It just stays blank.

This is real easy, it happens with qc 3 on my v20 and s8+
The phone does not quick charge when the battery is warm or when the screen is on. Its really that simple. You can get faster charge times using a qc 2.0 charger or a dumb 18 watt adapter. Neither one is as picky about sending power to a warm battery, but your batteries life will be shorter than it was designed to be.
QC 3 will charge a cold empty battery faster, but in real life, it will preserve your battery over fast charging the phone.

Question Max charge rate for Moto G Stylus (2021)?

So when you buy a Moto G Stylus (2021), it comes with a 10W charger. And 10W that is sort of what is cagily listed on the Moto website for this device. But when I plug it into a QC3 charger, I get about a 14W charging rate (5V x 2.8A). Does anybody know the maximum charge rate for this device, and specific charger models that can provide it? Would a USB-C PD charger at a higher wattage be able to charge at a faster rate? Thanks in advance for your comments on this matter.

To answer your question, yes a USB C PD adapter would provide faster charging. So long as it's QC 3.0 or higher. 18W or 30W should be fine, I believe the phone input charge maxes out at 15 Watts (absolutely no permission to quote me on that lol) so if you don't mind a bit of heat and the potential of degrading your battery slightly faster than with charging on a standard 1A, 2.4V charger, then the 18W or 27W USB C wall adapter that is compatible with QC 3.0 or 4.0, should be sufficient. Don't forget to grab a couple good grade USB C to C cables as they are often the first thing to go bad and prevents turbocharge from kicking in.

Thanks for the comments, @mario0318 So if I am currently seeing 14W (5V x 2.8A) with a QC3 charger, it sounds like I may be near the max already if it is only 15W. I have no USB-C PD chargers yet that I can use to test, but there was a 25W Belkin model on sale today (for Black Friday) for just $10 so I ordered myself one. When it comes in, I'll test it versus the QC3 charger to see if there is any significant difference.

So I have a basic update here. The QC3 charger I mentioned has an LED readout on it, and that is where I got the estimated 14W charge rate (as 5V x 2.8A). The new 25W Belkin charger I got does not have an LED readout for V & A on it, however. So I turned to the Ampere app on the Play Store. Then I swapped back and forth between the two charging systems and watched the estimated charge rate on Ampere. The 25W Belkin charger definitely shows higher charge rates according to the Ampere app. But I've ordered myself a USB C charge meter (like the old USB "doctor" meters, but with USB C connections) from China to document it more closely.
I might be missing something, but one thing I see lacking with the Ampere app is logging capability--it seems like its strength is just showing rates in real time. It would be cool to find an app that can not only monitor in real0time, but also log charging events with V & A stats, etc. I see AccuBattery may potentially provide this. Or any suggestions out there for another battery charge monitoring app that you think might do the trick?
For those potentially interested in the 25W Belkin charger, the specific model is the "WCA004dqWH", and it is on sale now for $10. It is actually mentioned in a news snippet here at XDA:
https://www.xda-developers.com/belkin-usb-c-25w-charger-deal-november-2021/

I think the Battery Manager app by 3C allows recording logs for power charging events. But I forget if there's a limit with the free app compared to the paid/donate unlocked features.
Regarding the charger wattage, I'm fairly sure anything past 25W would be over kill for charging a single device like the 2021 moto g. At that point it becomes more suitable for two devices, with anything far higher like 60W or 85W being totally unnecessary and potentially harmful.

Thanks again, @mario0318 , for your new comments. I agree that anything beyond 25W would be overkill for this phone.
As a further update, I decided to swap over to AccuBattery, and upgrade to the Pro version. As my Stylus was already charged, I decided to try the two chargers with a Nord N10 5G that had arround a 40% charge. The QC3 charger was charging at an average of 1993 mA with the screen off after I left it sit for a few minutes. When I swapped to the 25W Belkin sytem, it jumped to 2993 mA under the same scenario so like a full 1 Amp difference. These are about the same differences I noticed between the two chargers when charging my G Stylus (2021), but I did not want to say that above because they were off-the-cuff observations. But I took screenshots with AccuBattery this time so no apprehension in stating values this time around. I'll do the same with my G Stylus next time it needs a charge.
AccuBattery suggests only charging up to 80% capacity vs. 100% capacity given the wear and tear difference on the battery. I guess I'll try that, but in the long run, replacing the battery on the G Stylus (2021)--if it ever becomes necessary--looks pretty doable based on teardown videos.