Related
Got this in tonight, thought I'd share some pics. All of the paperwork that came with it is pretty much either how to return stuff you don't like or how to post a review on Amazon lol. The pictures attached show you all the information on the actual charger. I obviously don't have anything that can use the Type C for it yet but I will charge my lg g3 with a regular micro USB tomorrow. If anyone knows of a way for me to do some testing and tells me how I'm more than willing to do it.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
I got the StillGut, look like the exact thing. I'll take some picture.
Download Battery Monitor Widget app. That'll show you roughly what the charge rate is.
Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk
]
Hayaku said:
Download Battery Monitor Widget app. That'll show you roughly what the charge rate is.
Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll get it now.
Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk
Yoobao looks the same as the Visnic and Stilgut
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...car charger&qid=1444181035&ref_=sr_1_6&sr=8-6
Hayaku said:
Download Battery Monitor Widget app. That'll show you roughly what the charge rate is.
Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I see several in the Play Store, which one? I downloaded and tried one out but they said that my wireless charging is -7000 percent.
RED ZMAN said:
I see several in the Play Store, which one? I downloaded and tried one out but they said that my wireless charging is -7000 percent.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=ccc71.bmw
Or
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.gsamlabs.bbm
They might not be calibrated for your G4(?). If it shows some whacky +/- 4000mah, then it's obviously wrong.
I got this too. I would try it with my Pixel, but I'm not sure there is any way to measure the charging current. I also need to wait for my type-c to type-c cables to show up from China...
It's says 3A on the charger by the ports, but does that mean its 3A divided among both usb points or 3A in each point?
Sent from my Nexus 5
DrunkFuX666 said:
It's says 3A on the charger by the ports, but does that mean its 3A divided among both usb points or 3A in each point?
Sent from my Nexus 5
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As per one of the description on Amazon:
2x 1.5A if both ports are in use
or 1x 3A if single port (which is what RED ZMAN is hopefully able to test for us)
AFAIK you can't deliver 5V @ 3A over a USB-A connector... that is wholly unique to USB Type-C. The best you can do with USB Power Delivery spec is 5V @ 2A. So IF this charger can really deliver 15W power, it will only be via the USB-C port. I plan on testing with my Chromebook Pixel using a USB-A to USB-C and a USB-C to USB-C. I don't think I can measure actual wattage, but I can compare "time to full" calculations using each port.
Hayaku said:
As per one of the description on Amazon:
2x 1.5A if both ports are in use
or 1x 3A if single port (which is what RED ZMAN is hopefully able to test for us)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I messed around with it today along with several different apps to try to measure the actual charge rate but wasn't successful. The LG g3 seems to have issues with most of these apps and the ones that showed readings that looked meaningful we're showing things like 520 mAh. This was with a decent quality cable that I have grown to trust quite a bit.
I have some types C cables coming but without anything to plug it into I really can't do much more measuring. I will say this does not feel like a cheap charger and I'm kind of impressed with how good it looks in the car. It also did seem to be charging my phone very well, and was a consistent 50 to 70 mah higher than the other charger I was using which was the accessory USB A port for a Tylt Qi wireless charger dock/mount.
Hopefully somebody with a USB C device they can measure with is able to get us good readings.
Skitals said:
AFAIK you can't deliver 5V @ 3A over a USB-A connector... that is wholly unique to USB Type-C. The best you can do with USB Power Delivery spec is 5V @ 2A. So IF this charger can really deliver 15W power, it will only be via the USB-C port. I plan on testing with my Chromebook Pixel using a USB-A to USB-C and a USB-C to USB-C. I don't think I can measure actual wattage, but I can compare "time to full" calculations using each port.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm pretty sure you're right about the limits of the USB-A. I think it's limited to 2.1A, so yeah, you'll need to have a type-c to type-c cable with a 5v/3a charger to get this to work. Ah well, the micro-usb run was nice while it lasted.
Question for the OP also, how well does the charger fit in the outlet? I read a few reviews on Amazon that say it's pretty loose in some and doesn't stay seated.
akwally1 said:
I'm pretty sure you're right about the limits of the USB-A. I think it's limited to 2.1A, so yeah, you'll need to have a type-c to type-c cable with a 5v/3a charger to get this to work. Ah well, the micro-usb run was nice while it lasted.
Question for the OP also, how well does the charger fit in the outlet? I read a few reviews on Amazon that say it's pretty loose in some and doesn't stay seated.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We had no problems at all with it staying in place. I use a lot of retractable cables so you're pulling on them to let them retract and it never moved unless they directly pulled on the charger. Tight fit.
Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk
interested in updates. although i'd like to see a charger that doesn't split the amperage between ports. i have a BT receiver and a charging cable in the device that i have now, so if there's one that can provide power to both A and C without splitting, that would be ideal.
who know, it's 3A at 5V, no one will know until we have the 6p
Skitals said:
AFAIK you can't deliver 5V @ 3A over a USB-A connector... that is wholly unique to USB Type-C. The best you can do with USB Power Delivery spec is 5V @ 2A. So IF this charger can really deliver 15W power, it will only be via the USB-C port. I plan on testing with my Chromebook Pixel using a USB-A to USB-C and a USB-C to USB-C. I don't think I can measure actual wattage, but I can compare "time to full" calculations using each port.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why does the google usb a to usb c cable say it can do 3A 5V?
Chilidog said:
Why does the google usb a to usb c cable say it can do 3A 5V?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm, you got me there. I got in my Cable Matters USB-C to USB-C cable, to go along with my USB-A to USB-C cable. Sometime soon I will try both with the Vinsic charger and my Chromebook Pixel and see if they both charge at the same speed. I'm still not sure if Chrome OS has a "time to full" charging indicator or anything, though. With the Pixels 60W Type-C charger, the thing charges so dang fast it's almost always fully charged
You can use an app called GSam battery to measure the current, very interested to know if the A port is a proper 3A one
Considering how screwed up the 5V3A situation is, I decided to jump off that bus and order some regular, high quality, low price, 2.4A (per port) Aukey chargers that can be used with cheap ass cables that no one wants. They will be Type A to Type C so other phones and tablets can use them. And no QC 2.0 because they are about 1/2 the price and if QC 2.0 or 3.0 becomes an issue with other devices in my house, I will buy new ones. The car charger is $12.99 (They sell a bigger one for $6.99) on Amazon and the wall one is $7.99. Google's massive FUBAR solved!
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Yep don't know what half the smartphone world is on about with all this 3A rubbish.
How many people charge their phone over night - MOST
How many people are truly upset and really feel annoyed that their device is not charging at 3A to the point where they will go out their way to get 3A everything.
Chances are alot of these people come from using 1.2A chargers or turbo chargers or QI charging - did you see them whine about how slow it was back in those non 3A days ? not many
its just the utterly butt hurt whiners and those who suck the exlixer from googles every word andneed 3A leads / chargers.
if you charge over night a 1A or a 1.2A or a 2A or QI wont make any difference when you wake up in the morning.
A have a 3A from the phones box and a turbo charger and "normal" chargers from older phones and a 2.4A car charger and it charges plenty fast enough.
for those who wish to tell me that the turbo charger wont work with fast charge go do one, I plug it in and it charges fast enough for me to not cry all over the internet simply beacuse some google pixel dude is reviewing usb leads and mine is not one yadda yadda.
Isn't the problem with cheapass (USB-C) cables is that they pull more power than the adapter can push? and possibly fry it?
hutzdani said:
Yep don't know what half the smartphone world is on about with all this 3A rubbish.
How many people charge their phone over night - MOST
How many people are truly upset and really feel annoyed that their device is not charging at 3A to the point where they will go out their way to get 3A everything.
Chances are alot of these people come from using 1.2A chargers or turbo chargers or QI charging - did you see them whine about how slow it was back in those non 3A days ? not many
its just the utterly butt hurt whiners and those who suck the exlixer from googles every word andneed 3A leads / chargers.
if you charge over night a 1A or a 1.2A or a 2A or QI wont make any difference when you wake up in the morning.
A have a 3A from the phones box and a turbo charger and "normal" chargers from older phones and a 2.4A car charger and it charges plenty fast enough.
for those who wish to tell me that the turbo charger wont work with fast charge go do one, I plug it in and it charges fast enough for me to not cry all over the internet simply beacuse some google pixel dude is reviewing usb leads and mine is not one yadda yadda.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Neat.
catire said:
Isn't the problem with cheapass (USB-C) cables is that they pull more power than the adapter can push? and possibly fry it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is also my understanding. People can use any charging brick they prefer as long as they are using quality type A to type C cables that are designed to spec.
jTink010 said:
People can use any charging brick they prefer as long as they are using quality type A to type C cables that are designed to spec.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly. Thank you.
catire said:
Isn't the problem with cheapass (USB-C) cables is that they pull more power than the adapter can push? and possibly fry it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Both the phone and these chargers have over-current and thermal protection in the device circuits. Hence, the chargers won't try to provide more current than it can reliably deliver. No worries!
dwswager said:
Both the phone and these chargers have over-current and thermal protection in the device circuits. Hence, the chargers won't try to provide more current than it can reliably deliver. No worries!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think what they are trying to say is, the problem is not on the charger itself, but on the cheap/wrongly spec'ed cables. If you had a bad cable which tries to pull 3A from any USB-A charger (which supports up to 2.4A), it would fry the charger.
ctbear said:
I think what they are trying to say is, the problem is not on the charger itself, but on the cheap/wrongly spec'ed cables. If you had a bad cable which tries to pull 3A from any USB-A charger (which supports up to 2.4A), it would fry the charger.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The issue is that the phone will think it can pull 3A because the cable design and the charger will try to deliver and will over heat and burn out. But the phone should have under-voltage lockout and the charger has both over-current and over temperature protection.
dwswager said:
The issue is that the phone will think it can pull 3A because the cable design and the charger will try to deliver and will over heat and burn out. But the phone should have under-voltage lockout and the charger has both over-current and over temperature protection.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
...which is not even needed on a 3A charger because it supports the 3A current pull. By switching to another charger and lowering the maximum current output, you are actually increasing the risk of a fire, because now your faulty cable will try to pull 3A (when it shouldn't) from a 2.4A charger.
ctbear said:
......you are actually increasing the risk of a fire, because now your faulty cable will try to pull 3A (when it shouldn't) from a 2.4A charger.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Repeat after me, a cable represents an open circuit to the charger and draws no current. The phone is the load. The cable presents resistance to the flow of current.
Lightning deal
well reading more, 2.1a and 1.0a
dwswager said:
Repeat after me, a cable represents an open circuit to the charger and draws no current. The phone is the load. The cable presents resistance to the flow of current.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Except that a usb cable is more than just a conducting wire. There is a lot more information the phone requires before it "negotiates" how much current it should draw from the power source. The reason why this even makes the news is that some cables (with a USB-A end) uses a much lower resistor pullup value that expected in the USB specifications, which leads the phone to believe that the other end is capable of producing the 3A current (according to USB-C specs). This has been reported numerous times by different articles and mentioned by the Google engineer himself, and can be found in the actual USB-C specification document. If you don't believe me, at least read his reviews on Amazon. He certainly knows and explains a lot better than I do.
The Amazon basics car charger that I already have adds juice to the phone while Waze is running. Good enough for me. I don't charge my phone overnight, I just charge it when I get up before I leave for work. Leave with 100% battery every day
dwertz said:
well reading more, 2.1a and 1.0a
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Without a link, I would suspect this is a standard dual port charger with one port 2.1A and the other 1A!
ctbear said:
Except that a usb cable is more than just a conducting wire. There is a lot more information the phone requires before it "negotiates" how much current it should draw from the power source. The reason why this even makes the news is that some cables (with a USB-A end) uses a much lower resistor pullup value that expected in the USB specifications, which leads the phone to believe that the other end is capable of producing the 3A current (according to USB-C specs). This has been reported numerous times by different articles and mentioned by the Google engineer himself, and can be found in the actual USB-C specification document. If you don't believe me, at least read his reviews on Amazon. He certainly knows and explains a lot better than I do.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't get me wrong, any cable should be designed to USB specifications. But so should the devices! The Fundamental problem is 5V/3A. Google apparently designed the phone around the connector spec instead of the USB 2.0 specification. 3A is the design requirement in USB Type C spec for what a standard cable must be able to handle, not a USB power specification. Look around and count the number of 5V/3A USB devices you find. I can only think of one...a specific Asus Transformer model that came with a captive 5V/3A charger with a Micro USB connector and warning labels not to plug it into any other USB devices. Even so, the Transformer did port detection so it wouldn't try to over draw from compliant source ports.
The BC1.2 (Battery Charging Spec) outlines three distinct types of USB port and two key monikers. A "charging" port is one that delivers currents higher than 500mA. A "downstream" port signals data as per USB 2.0. The BC1.2 specification also establishes both how each port should appear to the end device, and the protocol to identify what type of port is implemented. The three USB BC1.2 port types are SDP, DCP, and CDP:
1. Standard Downstream Port (SDP) This port features 15kΩ pulldown resistors on both the D+ and D- lines. The current limits are : 2.5mA when suspended, 100mA when connected, and 500mA when connected and configured for higher power.
2. Dedicated Charging Port (DCP) This port does not support any data transfer, but is capable of supplying charge currents beyond 1.5A. It features a short between the D+ and D- lines. This type of port allows for wall chargers and car chargers with high-charge capability without the need for enumeration.
3. Charging Downstream Port (CDP) This port allows for both high-current charging and data transfer fully compliant with USB 2.0. It features the 15kΩ pulldown resistors necessary for the D+ and D- communication, and also has internal circuitry that is switched in during the charger detection phase. This internal circuitry allows the portable device to distinguish a CDP from other port types.
Bottom line - if this phone is of such poor design that it starts fires, what will the common element of all those fires end up being? The Phone!
dwswager said:
Don't get me wrong, any cable should be designed to USB specifications. But so should the devices! The Fundamental problem is 5V/3A. Google apparently designed the phone around the connector spec instead of the USB 2.0 specification. 3A is the design requirement in USB Type C spec for what a standard cable must be able to handle, not a USB power specification. Look around and count the number of 5V/3A USB devices you find. I can only think of one...a specific Asus Transformer model that came with a captive 5V/3A charger with a Micro USB connector and warning labels not to plug it into any other USB devices. Even so, the Transformer did port detection so it wouldn't try to over draw from compliant source ports.
The BC1.2 (Battery Charging Spec) outlines three distinct types of USB port and two key monikers. A "charging" port is one that delivers currents higher than 500mA. A "downstream" port signals data as per USB 2.0. The BC1.2 specification also establishes both how each port should appear to the end device, and the protocol to identify what type of port is implemented. The three USB BC1.2 port types are SDP, DCP, and CDP:
1. Standard Downstream Port (SDP) This port features 15kΩ pulldown resistors on both the D+ and D- lines. The current limits are : 2.5mA when suspended, 100mA when connected, and 500mA when connected and configured for higher power.
2. Dedicated Charging Port (DCP) This port does not support any data transfer, but is capable of supplying charge currents beyond 1.5A. It features a short between the D+ and D- lines. This type of port allows for wall chargers and car chargers with high-charge capability without the need for enumeration.
3. Charging Downstream Port (CDP) This port allows for both high-current charging and data transfer fully compliant with USB 2.0. It features the 15kΩ pulldown resistors necessary for the D+ and D- communication, and also has internal circuitry that is switched in during the charger detection phase. This internal circuitry allows the portable device to distinguish a CDP from other port types.
Bottom line - if this phone is of such poor design that it starts fires, what will the common element of all those fires end up being? The Phone!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually no. The phone is compliant with the USB-C spec, which allows for considerably more than 3W (See: the Apple Macbook USB-C charger, the Chromebook Pixel USB-C charger and so on.) If you are using a C->C cable, with a compliant C charger, there should be no issue. The issue comes into play with a C->A cable which is not compliant, which causes the phone to think it's got a C connection and thus try to draw more power (3W) than the power supply can put out (effectively, it shorts out the power supply.) This can smoke the power supply. Literally.
Solution: (a) Use only C->C charging (this is your best bet, since it is the fastest) or (b) use a compliant C->A cable with any USB A charger. The phone will then negotiate an appropriate charging rate, either very slow (straight USB) or BC 1.2 (if available) which will still be slower than C->C.
Personally, I'd just stick with C->C and not worry much about the cable, *except* if you are using a C->A cable for data purposes, in which case, choose that cable wisely or risk frying your USB port.
I personally will be getting this http://goo.gl/CXIaHi to replace my car charger and possibly a second home charger. Along with getting a Type C - C cable from Google to eliminate any cable concerns. If you stick with Type c-c cables for charging you will be more than fine. I don't plan on charging my 6p using a Type A - C cable ever anyways.
Specifications:
Input (Micro): 5V/9V/12V 2A Max
Input (Type-C): 5V/3A Max
USB Output: 5V/ 2.4A
Type-C Output: 5V/3A Max
QC 2.0 Output: 5V/2.4A, 9V/1.5A, 12V/1.2A Max
dwswager said:
Bottom line - if this phone is of such poor design that it starts fires, what will the common element of all those fires end up being? The Phone!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, because that's what a company like google willingly intends to do. Provide a phone that is capable of burning down houses and cars and entering into massive lawsuits in the process...because that's smart business.
It seems to me that companies are just inaccurately advertising to make a quick buck out the gate. They know that they can seriously capitalize on a situation when newer technology is involved. Doesnt that seem a little more feasible? Most consumers read reviews and only care the cable has proper connectors, a decent length, and doesnt feel thin and cheap. Most consumers dont realize how much more goes into cables as you can tell by 98% of the reviews.
At this point I'm just waiting for Google to get more cables in stock in the Play Store because the price is the just about the same as all these off brand cables and I feel they should work better since they make the damn phone.
ctbear said:
Except that a usb cable is more than just a conducting wire. There is a lot more information the phone requires before it "negotiates" how much current it should draw from the power source. The reason why this even makes the news is that some cables (with a USB-A end) uses a much lower resistor pullup value that expected in the USB specifications, which leads the phone to believe that the other end is capable of producing the 3A current (according to USB-C specs). This has been reported numerous times by different articles and mentioned by the Google engineer himself, and can be found in the actual USB-C specification document. If you don't believe me, at least read his reviews on Amazon. He certainly knows and explains a lot better than I do.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd be interested in reading his reviews, do you have a link?
DebauchedSloth said:
Actually no. The phone is compliant with the USB-C spec, which allows for considerably more than 3W (See: the Apple Macbook USB-C charger, the Chromebook Pixel USB-C charger and so on.) .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
BINGO...and that is the fail! The Type C Spec is not a power spec, it is for the design of the connectors and cables which happen to carry power! You do not design a device around the specification for a 20 cent piece of metal. You design the device around the USB 2.0, 3.0 or 3.1 specification so it is interoperable with connected devices and when you decide to use a Type C connector, that spec also gets added to your design requirements. It does not replace the USB 2.0 specification which includes Battery Charging and USB Power Delivery.
BC1.2 requires comparing D- to Vdat-Ref at detection and then there are over and under voltage compliance allowing the PD to disconnect and renegotiate.
Under USB specifications, using a Type C connector you can deliver up to 100W. The Type C Spec is Item 34 in both the USB 2.0 and 3.0 specs. Point is, you don't get to pick and choose only what you want out of the larger spec and ignore the other applicable parts.
If a plethora of 5V/3A USB Type C products start appearing, then Google will have set a new standard. However, the Z5 and Lumia 950XL, both Type C, both are reported to support QC 2.0 which doesn't have a 3A capability. Even QC 3.0 doesn't support a 3A. It has voltage range from 3.6V to 20V in 200mV increments, but tops out at 2A.
Yes I've read the google engineer's reviews. However, he basically says that it's unsafe to plug in those Type-C to Type-A cables if they're uncompliant, as they'll try to pull 3A, which might not be available.
However, what if you have a Type-A charger that DOES support 3A (e.g. the 5 port chargers from Tronsmart, Aukey, Anker - these support 8-10A or so over all ports, and can do 3A on one port), and you pair it with one of those incompatible cables?
I'm thinking it might be able to do 3A output safely? Ofcourse you would have be careful not to plug that cable into other incompatible usb adapters.
Has anyone tried something similar? If so, what cables are working for you?
lellouchftw said:
Yes I've read the google engineer's reviews. However, he basically says that it's unsafe to plug in those Type-C to Type-A cables if they're uncompliant, as they'll try to pull 3A, which might not be available.
However, what if you have a Type-A charger that DOES support 3A (e.g. the 5 port chargers from Tronsmart, Aukey, Anker - these support 8-10A or so over all ports, and can do 3A on one port), and you pair it with one of those incompatible cables?
I'm thinking it might be able to do 3A output safely? Ofcourse you would have be careful not to plug that cable into other incompatible usb adapters.
Has anyone tried something similar? If so, what cables are working for you?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you are pulling 3A from a Type-A port, something has gone wrong. Please see http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=63732463&postcount=228. Type-A will only supply, at most, 2.4A. If you have a charger that has a *RATED* output of 3A or more, chances are the charger has more than one Type-A port and supplies 1.5A per port, or more, depending on the charger. For example, some dual port chargers are *rated* to output 4.8A - or 2.4A per port.
In the USB battery charging spec 1.2, the port is rated for up to 5A : http://composter.com.ua/documents/BC1.2_FINAL.pdf (p44).
If a cable identifies itself as 3A, and a charger can safely supply 5V/3A, then shouldn't the 6P be able to charge at full speed without any issues?
lellouchftw said:
In the USB battery charging spec 1.2, the port is rated for up to 5A : http://composter.com.ua/documents/BC1.2_FINAL.pdf (p44).
If a cable identifies itself as 3A, and a charger can safely supply 5V/3A, then shouldn't the 6P be able to charge at full speed without any issues?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Examine section 4.6.1. Also, table 5.2 for the "Allowed PD current draw".
I think many charger brands such as anker, tronsmart, aukey will release their 3A chargers in near future. I have checked the reviews of Benson. Seems there is not any charger can offer 3A.
I have not personally got 3A to the 6P from a Type A connection because I do not as yet have a Type A charger capable of outputting 3A. When I do, I will check it with both the Google supplied cable and a "faulty" cable to check. Most I've seen is a little over 1900mA from a 2A charger.
While there are various USB specifications for power, the correct answer to the question "How much current can be sent over a Type A to Type C connection?" is that amount at which the physical hardware experiences failure. People get totally confused between a paper specification and what is actually possible in the real world!
This in no way considers what the 6P on the C end or the Charger on the A end will actually do. If the 6P knows it is plugged into a legacy port (non-Type C), it might artificially limit the current draw. I suspect (but do not know) that this is what the "faulty" cables are trying to avoid. But, remember, most of the A to Micro B charging scenarios that we see in general practice today were at their origin out of specification when they were introduced. Products have been overcharging USB ports forever.
I have been using a type A to mini B cable with one of those little type C adapters for almost a week now hooked up to my hootoo usb 3.0 hub. It will not give you rapid charging obviously but it's perfectly safe and gives you the standard middle speed charging.
I use it at the office where I am not in a hurry to get the fastest charge possible so it's totally adequate for that and was way cheaper than buying a whole new A to C cable and I can still charge my nexus 4 and bluetooth headphones by removing the little type c adapter. Data transfer speeds seem to be right in line with typical 2.0 usb speeds.
Disclaimer: I'm not an electrical engineer, and don't claim to have read all of the USB specification documentation. I can't guarantee the accuracy of what I say.
USB type A will not and never will support 3 amps. This would require increasing the diameter (gauge) of the wires and possibly the pin design. USB type C was designed from the ground up with wire gauge and pin design capable of higher amperage (up to 5 amps I think). When you have a cable with a type A end and a type C end, it has to go with the lowest common denominator for the amperage, the type A end. The cable must identify itself to the USB C device by using the proper resistor, so the USB C device doesn't attempt to draw more amps than USB A can handle.
The way Qualcomm QuickCharge gets around this using USB type A is by increasing the voltage, not the amps. Remember, Electrical Potential (Volts) * Current (Amps) = Power (Watts). Increasing amperage requires a larger gauge wire, but generally speaking, this is not so with a voltage increase. QuickCharge increases the voltage to 9 or 12 volts, therefore increasing the power to the device without increasing the amperage. This is a proprietary Qualcomm specification.
The only way you will get 3 amp charging with a USB C device like the new Nexus phones is by using a USB C charger and USB C to USB C cable. With a USB A charger and a USB A to USB C cable, the max you should see is 2.0 amps. If you are getting more, something is wrong and you have a cable and/or charger that isn't following specification and you could risk damage and/or fire.
I recently got 2-2 packs of these USB-C to Micro USB Adapter, TechMatte®. I have one in each car and in my electronics survival pack so I can charge wherever I might go. I think I might order a USB C to Micro B cable to test a C to B to B to C line from the original Google charger just to see what it does.
dwswager said:
I recently got 2-2 packs of these USB-C to Micro USB Adapter, TechMatte®. I have one in each car and in my electronics survival pack so I can charge wherever I might go. I think I might order a USB C to Micro B cable to test a C to B to B to C line from the original Google charger just to see what it does.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are taking a big risk if you use those. See here: http://www.amazon.com/review/R2BM6N...&channel=detail-glance&nodeID=541966&store=pc
Just gonna slide in here and say that one of the USB 3.1 power configurations is at 3A (for type A) but the circumstances for that power profile are 1. rarely used and 2. not conducive to charging the N6P.
Just get a decent USB A charger and USB A to C cable per what is to spec (see other threads) and live with that charge rate. If you want faster charging then just buy more usb c chargers and C to C cables.
dwswager said:
I recently got 2-2 packs of these USB-C to Micro USB Adapter, TechMatte®. I have one in each car and in my electronics survival pack so I can charge wherever I might go. I think I might order a USB C to Micro B cable to test a C to B to B to C line from the original Google charger just to see what it does.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I bought these too, before I got the phone, after reading the Google dev reviews, I threw them away, a little cheap convenience isn't worth possibly nuking my phone.
rmkilc said:
Disclaimer: I'm not an electrical engineer, and don't claim to have read all of the USB specification documentation. I can't guarantee the accuracy of what I say.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not an engineer, but I have read both the USB Battery Charging Spec and the USB 3.1 Spec which includes the specification around Type-C plugs at great length and have a decent working knowlege of how consumer electronics work.
The battery charging spec (which is different from Power Delivery) discusses several scenarios, one of which is called DCP or dedicated charging port. This is the part of the spec that people seem to ignore and keep misquoting the power delivery figures that are only relevant when connected to a data source. DCP is applicable when talking about wall and car chargers, because it specifically designed for the scenario where no data transfer will ever take place. It allows for up to 5A to be delivered, regardless of the port type on either end of the cable. This can be seen on page 54 of the first link. This is the part of the spec that people have been using to build chargers for phones and tablets for the last 3 years.
The issue that has been discussed by the Google engineer doesn't mean that a type-A port can't handle 3A, to the contrary it actually proves it can. The issue described by the engineer is what the USB spec tries to cover and prevent. If you read the 3.1 spec, specifically the section on Type-C to legacy connector, it describes a scenario that means the cable should incorporate a resistor that limits the current draw to 1.5A. This is to prevent damage to legacy chargers and doesn't reflect on the capability of the cable/port.
Consider the scenario before the 6P and 5x; no phone or tablet drew more than 2.4A maximum. The way a wall charger works is it simply provides power from the socket, the device on the other end of the cable decides how much current / voltage it can draw. Considering no device could draw more than 2.4A, the chargers didn't have to cope with that scenario. The issue that USB 3.1 provides a scenario that means it can draw more than 2.4A and if your charger is incorrectly built and your cable doesn't identify itself as legacy, it could potentially draw more current that the charger is rated for. There are 3 outcomes to using an out of spec cable on a legacy charger:
The charger is well built, resists the extra current and supplies a lower current, probably 2.0A or 2.4A depending on the charger
The charger isn't smart, but has high quality parts that can safely provide the extra 0.6A and operates at full capacity
The charger fails to limit the current and has cheap components
The third result is bad, very bad indeed, but it is the minority scenario. Best case in this scenario, the charger dies and stops working. The worst case in this scenario is that the charger could actually burst into flames. This is why the USB IF have decided that for legacy implementations, the old ports (Type A and B) should be limited, even if the phone and the cable is capable of providing the current.
What we have been seeing is that people have been ignoring the spec and building cables that pull the full 3A. In the majority of cases, most chargers react by fulfilling item 1 on my list; they correctly provide the max current they are rated for, and you get slightly slower charging at 2.4A. The reason they have done this is so that when they build chargers with Type-A ports that can provide 3A/5V, their cables will work fine at the full speed, and the vast majority of chargers will behave correctly when one of these out of spec cables is plugged in and lower the current draw. Several manufactures have stated they are working on 3A/5V chargers with Type-A ports.
The USB IF have aired on the side of caution, and said that to comply with the spec type-A to type-C shouldn't provide high current despite being able to handle it, because of legacy issues. This is also done to drive the adoption of type-C forward, which is correct behavior for a standards body. This doesn't mean everyone has to build to the spec, they are guidelines, and people have been ignoring them for years.
Are these cables / chargers out of spec? Yes, they are, but 90% of the chargers that come with your phone in the last 3 years are. The specs have never really kept up with the battery charging needs of our devices and the USB IF are very slow to react. With the new PD spec allowing for up to 100W, everyone should be able to have spec compliant chargers and needs met for the foreseeable future. In the next 3 - 5 years however while Type-C gains traction, we will still be using out of spec chargers while everyone plays catch-up.
Hope this helps clear up any confusion.
Big Cam said:
I bought these too, before I got the phone, after reading the Google dev reviews, I threw them away, a little cheap convenience isn't worth possibly nuking my phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They are being used successfully, without damage, by numerous people with the 6P and 5X, including me. Look in the reviews and you will find 5-star reviews with pictures of people using them with the 6P.
The "out of spec" part is intended to signal to the device not to draw more than 1.5A. Both the device and the charging port will successfully manage current draws, however. The spec is there to protect what you might call "legacy-legacy" stuff before resettable overcurrent protection was required and the devices had no intelligence.
---------- Post added at 06:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:49 PM ----------
vido.ardes said:
Are these cables / chargers out of spec? Yes, they are, but 90% of the chargers that come with your phone in the last 3 years are. The specs have never really kept up with the battery charging needs of our devices and the USB IF are very slow to react. With the new PD spec allowing for up to 100W, everyone should be able to have spec compliant chargers and needs met for the foreseeable future. In the next 3 - 5 years however while Type-C gains traction, we will still be using out of spec chargers while everyone plays catch-up.
Hope this helps clear up any confusion.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am an Engineer (work on a DoD cyber campus) reviewing critical components. And you hit the nail on the head. If 5V/3A catches on as a device design parameter, then it won't take long for companies to figure out how to supply 5V/3A via a Type A charger. Just like chargers for QC 2.0 distinguish between regular and QC compliant devices, these chargers will manage current flow with the portable device. These 'hacks' have been very positive for USB adoption because they force the collection of companies that make up the forum to react, since they are not proactive.
I just don't see 5V/3A catching on for Portable Devices. It is too much current for anything, but battery charging. And just dumping more current (faster charging in general) is not usually healthy for the battery because the chemistries don't react well to the higher induced temperatures. Peripheral items, thinking spinning platter hard drives and disc writers, maybe.
Yes. Using the Ampere app on my 6P, I have seen 3A using the following charger and cable. I got 3060ma on one port and about 2800ma on the others.
(Amazon links):
Anker 36W 4-Port USB Wall Charger Travel Adapter with PowerIQ
USB 3.1 Type C,NewLobo(TM) 1Pack 3.3ft/1m Reversible Design Hi-speed Micro USB 3.1 Type C Male to Standard Type A USB 3.0 Male Data Cable
I get about 2600ma on this charger:
Anker 5-Port Desktop Usb Charger with PowerIQ
These chargers are rated for 2.4 amps per port and the cable is not spec-compliant so use at your own risk. I have not had any problems or apparent overheating.
vido.ardes said:
I'm not an engineer, but I have read both the USB Battery Charging Spec and the USB 3.1 Spec which includes the specification around Type-C plugs at great length and have a decent working knowlege of how consumer electronics work.
The battery charging spec (which is different from Power Delivery) discusses several scenarios, one of which is called DCP or dedicated charging port. This is the part of the spec that people seem to ignore and keep misquoting the power delivery figures that are only relevant when connected to a data source. DCP is applicable when talking about wall and car chargers, because it specifically designed for the scenario where no data transfer will ever take place. It allows for up to 5A to be delivered, regardless of the port type on either end of the cable. This can be seen on page 54 of the first link. This is the part of the spec that people have been using to build chargers for phones and tablets for the last 3 years.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is incorrect. The document you are referring to is a Compliance document used for testing and submitting devices to the USB IF devices for certification. The actual specifications are located here: http://www.usb.org/developers/docs/devclass_docs/BCv1.2_070312.zip
In the BC1.2_Final.pdf document contained in that zip, it clearly defines the parameter values for charging. See Table 5-2 for allowable currents. (Also, keep in mind, in this document PD = Portable Device, not power delivery.) It defines that a portable device shall not draw beyond 1.5A.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
In one of his posts, the Google engineer stated that BC2.1 only allows for 1.5A of current draw, but it was other proprietary protocols which allow for more current to be negotiated for and drawn. That's the big question for me - if BC2.1 is being used per Type-C specifications on Type-A ports, what protocols are actually being used when drawing more than 1.5A? That's the big missing link here. Because the phone clearly draws more than 1.5A when connected to QC and other dedicated charging ports. Without that information, we can examine USB specifications all day long and never get the correct answer.
vido.ardes said:
The issue that has been discussed by the Google engineer doesn't mean that a type-A port can't handle 3A, to the contrary it actually proves it can. The issue described by the engineer is what the USB spec tries to cover and prevent.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't follow your reasoning here. You state that type-A port specifications limiting current to amounts less than 3A proves they can handle currents up to 3A? You then state that the specs try to prevent exactly that from happening. It's a confusing statement.
vido.ardes said:
If you read the 3.1 spec, specifically the section on Type-C to legacy connector, it describes a scenario that means the cable should incorporate a resistor that limits the current draw to 1.5A. This is to prevent damage to legacy chargers and doesn't reflect on the capability of the cable/port.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For clarification, no where in the 3.1 specs does it cover Type-C specifications. The Type-C specs cover Type-C and 3.1 specs. Further, the pullup resistor on the CC line is there to signal to Type-C devices what type of cable termination is on the other end. Nowhere have I found that this is designed to prevent damage to legacy chargers, as charging current isn't flowing over the CC line in on a legacy connection. Charging current is transferred over the VBUS wire(s).
vido.ardes said:
Consider the scenario before the 6P and 5x; no phone or tablet drew more than 2.4A maximum. The way a wall charger works is it simply provides power from the socket, the device on the other end of the cable decides how much current / voltage it can draw. Considering no device could draw more than 2.4A, the chargers didn't have to cope with that scenario. The issue that USB 3.1 Type-C provides a scenario that means it can draw more than 2.4A and if your charger cable is incorrectly built and your cable doesn't identify itself as legacy, it your phone could potentially draw more current that the charger is rated for. There are 3 outcomes to using an out of spec cable on a legacy charger:
The charger is well built, resists the extra current and supplies a lower current, probably 2.0A or 2.4A depending on the charger
The charger isn't smart, but has high quality parts that can safely provide the extra 0.6A and operates at full capacity
The charger fails to limit the current and has cheap components
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fixed a few things. You're confusing 3.1 for Type-C - or perhaps typing 3.1 when you meant type-c. I agree though that the charger's job is to sit there as a power supply, the device pulls current from it. BC2.1 is there to allow negotiation of current beyond the 500mA/900mA provided by base USB specs. The BC2.1 spec does show that currents drawn above max are supposed to initiate a shutdown, but I've yet to see this happen on certified USB type-a chargers, Type-C cables, and devices. Again, this leads me to believe that while BC2.1 spec is being used for negotiation of current, the negotiations are leading to current draws outside of the BC2.1 specifications - probably using proprietary protocols or specs.
vido.ardes said:
The third result is bad, very bad indeed, but it is the minority scenario. Best case in this scenario, the charger dies and stops working. The worst case in this scenario is that the charger could actually burst into flames. This is why the USB IF have decided that for legacy implementations, the old ports (Type A and B) should be limited, even if the phone and the cable is capable of providing the current.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is also that Type-C is much more intelligent when negotiating current between Type-C devices. These new methods (CC/VConn in Type-C), from a physical wiring perspective alone, are completely incompatible with legacy ports. When it can't use a CC wire negotiation, it has to fall back to methods that are compatible with these ports such as BC2.1 or legacy 500mA/900mA charging methods.
vido.ardes said:
What we have been seeing is that people have been ignoring the spec and building cables that pull the full 3A. In the majority of cases, most chargers react by fulfilling item 1 on my list; they correctly provide the max current they are rated for, and you get slightly slower charging at 2.4A.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Correct, but I have a slight issue with chargers fulfilling item 1 on your list. Protection mechanisms to prevent over-current or over-voltage situations aren't typically meant to be used 100% of the time the device is in use. It's like a "break glass in case of emergency" situation. I don't want to have to break that glass every time I'm plugging in. You can't un-break the glass. Or, if you rather, I'd prefer not to turn on my kitchen lights, then go outside and flip the tripped breaker, just to keep the light every time I want to cook dinner. Not only would that be annoying, but it indicates something is *wrong*. I don't want wrong, I want right.
If this amount of risk is acceptable to you, then by all means... continue. I don't, and won't.
It seems we both want to ensure people know what the risk is here so that they can at least make an informed decision - Which is cool, I dig it. We just disagree on the little details.
Also, I wanted to clarify: I'm not trying to state that it is unsafe to draw 3A of current from a port designed to provide 3+A, just that it is unsafe to draw 3A from a 2.4A rated port. As you said, typical legacy charging devices were not built to deliver more than 2.4A per port, so the risk is very prevalent with chargers users already own.
Further, I can't at all imagine why a manufacturer would actually design a Type-A / 3A capable port for these devices when using the existing Type-C port would be simpler and future proof.
I think these concerns about cables pulling 3A may be overblown in particular with cheap cables that cheat with the resistor. In order to carry that current you need some good thick wires inside. I've seen high quality OEM cables before that could barely carry 600mA when the phone could pull 1.2A and the charger at the other end was rated up to 2.4A.
I think in order to be concerned you need a cable that uses thick wires, well built and that cheats with the resistor. It doesn't seem to be easy to make cables that can actually carry 3A.
I have a non-compliant Pleson cable. I'm waiting for my 6P's battery to get down to 35% and I will test it with various wall chargers, a car charger and computer ports. I have a USB dongle to measure the current and I will also use the Ampere app. I'll report back.
Sorry But I have to disagree on pretty much all of your points here.
Elnrik said:
This is incorrect. The document you are referring to is a Compliance document used for testing and submitting devices to the USB IF devices for certification. The actual specifications are located here: http://www.usb.org/developers/docs/devclass_docs/BCv1.2_070312.zip
In the BC1.2_Final.pdf document contained in that zip, it clearly defines the parameter values for charging. See Table 5-2 for allowable currents. (Also, keep in mind, in this document PD = Portable Device, not power delivery.) It defines that a portable device shall not draw beyond 1.5A.
View attachment 3537633
View attachment 3537640
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The link I supplied is the current Battery Charging specification, and has the same information as the doc you linked. If you read the table in the picture you posted the third row clearly shows Dedicated Charging Port can have a max of 5A. This is how people can use that spec to draw more than 1.5A.
Elnrik said:
I don't follow your reasoning here. You state that type-A port specifications limiting current to amounts less than 3A proves they can handle currents up to 3A? You then state that the specs try to prevent exactly that from happening. It's a confusing statement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The point is that the specification are designed to artificially limit type-A ports to a lower current when used with a type-C cable. The port itself has no such limitation without deliberately downgrading what it can draw by adding an extra resistor, and the cables that flaunt the spec prove that they can handle 3A fine.
Elnrik said:
For clarification, no where in the 3.1 specs does it cover Type-C specifications. The Type-C specs cover Type-C and 3.1 specs. Further, the pullup resistor on the CC line is there to signal to Type-C devices what type of cable termination is on the other end. Nowhere have I found that this is designed to prevent damage to legacy chargers, as charging current isn't flowing over the CC line in on a legacy connection. Charging current is transferred over the VBUS wire(s).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is not true, The current USB specification (found by going to USB.org, clicking developers in the top row, then clicking documents) is the "Universal Serial Bus Revision 3.1 Specification". Amongst other things, this contains the "USB Type-C Cable and Connector Specification Revision 1.1" and the "USB Type-C Port Controller Interface Spec". The pull up resistor is designed to limit legacy cables to default USB power (see table 4-13, page 157)
Elnrik said:
Fixed a few things. You're confusing 3.1 for Type-C - or perhaps typing 3.1 when you meant type-c. I agree though that the charger's job is to sit there as a power supply, the device pulls current from it. BC2.1 is there to allow negotiation of current beyond the 500mA/900mA provided by base USB specs. The BC2.1 spec does show that currents drawn above max are supposed to initiate a shutdown, but I've yet to see this happen on certified USB type-a chargers, Type-C cables, and devices. Again, this leads me to believe that while BC2.1 spec is being used for negotiation of current, the negotiations are leading to current draws outside of the BC2.1 specifications - probably using proprietary protocols or specs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes I did mean type-C, but your edit from charger to cable is misleading. My point there was that regardless of what cable you plug into it, a properly built charger should regulate it's own current and power draw, most transformers will limit what they can provide despite what is being asked of them, which is why a 1A charger will only provide 1A despite me plugging in a dumb cable and a device that can pull 2.4A. A crap charger however will not, and this will be a problem with ALL cables and not just Type-C 3A ones.
Elnrik said:
Correct, but I have a slight issue with chargers fulfilling item 1 on your list. Protection mechanisms to prevent over-current or over-voltage situations aren't typically meant to be used 100% of the time the device is in use. It's like a "break glass in case of emergency" situation. I don't want to have to break that glass every time I'm plugging in. You can't un-break the glass. Or, if you rather, I'd prefer not to turn on my kitchen lights, then go outside and flip the tripped breaker, just to keep the light every time I want to cook dinner. Not only would that be annoying, but it indicates something is *wrong*. I don't want wrong, I want right.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As with above, I'm not talking about overvoltage or overcurrent protection, the chargers that are built properly won't need to apply these mechanisms because they won't provide over-current in the first place. Think of it like when you plug your phone into a car charger, and run the GPS. A lot of the time, your battery will still drain because the charger can't provide enough power, despite the fact that if you plugged it into a higher rated charger it would. The charger itself should be smart enough to limit the current without tripping any protection mechanism, and I would expect the majority of chargers on the market to behave in this manner, otherwise we would of had reports of people burning their house down by plugging iPads into 1A chargers.
The clearest point I can make on this is from the USB Type-C spec, page 25/24 Table3-1 & Table 3-2. It states cable types and expected current ratings. There is also the below quote when talking about building a legacy cable, lifted directly from the spec:
The following describes the behavior when a legacy host adapter that has an Rp to VBUS so as to mimic the behavior of a DFP is connected to a DRP. The value of Rp shall indicate an advertisement of Default USB Power (See Table 4-13), even though the cable itself can carry 3 A. This is because the cable has no knowledge of the capabilities of the power source, and any higher current is negotiated via USB BC 1.2 or by proprietary means.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Emphasis is mine, DFP is Downstream Facing Port (the charger), UFP is Upstream Facing port (the phone). The spec clearly states the current is to be limited to default USB power (which for the uninitiated is 5V up to 1.5A) despite being capable of 3A. It also gives you and out and says you can negotiate higher power using USB BC1.2 or a proprietary method of signalling higher currents, which is what phone and table manufactures have been doing for years.
EDIT: I just want to clarify my point. There seems to be this idea that Type-A connectors are somehow incapable of supplying 3A/5V, and that is what I am trying to correct. I have seen it here, Reddit, Android Central, and it is simply false. At the end of the day the plug, socket and wire are all able to carry 3A of current. I believe the issue the Google engineer has described, whilst real, has been blown out of all proportion, and in the real world the vast majority of these Type-A to Type-C cables are fine, and will provide fast charging when someone comes out with a compatible charger. The thing a lot of people are forgetting or not realising is that pretty much every phone made in the last 3 years isn't "in spec" either. The manufacturers have all come up with proprietary standards for drawing more current, and these latest cables are just a continuation of that process.
I think this is a perfect example where a little bit of knowledge is dangerous.
vido.ardes said:
Sorry But I have to disagree on pretty much all of your points here.
The link I supplied is the current Battery Charging specification, and has the same information as the doc you linked.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I really hate to pick nits here, but... No, it isn't. Document you linked:
Document I referenced:
While the two may have similar information, one is going to define the specifications, the other is not. That is an important distinction readers of this thread should be aware of.
vido.ardes said:
If you read the table in the picture you posted the third row clearly shows Dedicated Charging Port can have a max of 5A. This is how people can use that spec to draw more than 1.5A.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No. The 3rd row shows what the port should be rated for, not what the specification allows to be drawn. To use the analogy again, it's like the wiring in your house. The wires and plugs are rated for 20A for safety, but specifications define 15A breakers and max draw. (I suppose this is different in the UK, where I have no idea what voodoo or dark magicks make those odd outlets to work. All I know is it's funny to watch US tourists set their hair dryers on fire with them. :silly: ) While I do see your point - that the port is capable of 5A draws - the specification itself doesn't allow for 5A useage.
vido.ardes said:
This is not true, The current USB specification (found by going to USB.org, clicking developers in the top row, then clicking documents) is the "Universal Serial Bus Revision 3.1 Specification". Amongst other things, this contains the "USB Type-C Cable and Connector Specification Revision 1.1" and the "USB Type-C Port Controller Interface Spec". The pull up resistor is designed to limit legacy cables to default USB power (see table 4-13, page 157)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, I think we're saying the same thing in different ways. The usb.org site provides all of the specficiations in a single zip under a download link titled "Universal Serial Bus Revision 3.1 Specification". My point was - if you examine the contained documents, the 3.1 specifications PDF has no specifications relating to type c. You have to specifically view the type c document to get that information.
Also, the "The pull up resistor is designed to limit legacy cables to default USB power (see table 4-13, page 157)" is stated, but reading deeper into this you'll see that this is accomplished by the UFP reading this as an *ADVERTISEMENT* to use Default USB Power for current negotiation. See page 146.
vido.ardes said:
EDIT: I just want to clarify my point. There seems to be this idea that Type-A connectors are somehow incapable of supplying 3A/5V, and that is what I am trying to correct. I have seen it here, Reddit, Android Central, and it is simply false. At the end of the day the plug, socket and wire are all able to carry 3A of current. I believe the issue the Google engineer has described, whilst real, has been blown out of all proportion, and in the real world the vast majority of these Type-A to Type-C cables are fine, and will provide fast charging when someone comes out with a compatible charger. The thing a lot of people are forgetting or not realising is that pretty much every phone made in the last 3 years isn't "in spec" either. The manufacturers have all come up with proprietary standards for drawing more current, and these latest cables are just a continuation of that process.
I think this is a perfect example where a little bit of knowledge is dangerous.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree, it has been blown out of proportion. That said, I believe real world situations exist where manufacturers use ultra-cheap components or don't comply with 3A ratings - because 3A was never needed before - and that some danger exists. I will disagree with the "every phone made in the last 3 years isn't "in spec" either" comment. The phones are "in spec". Yes, they have been supplemented with proprietary methods to augment their capabilities (Qualcomm Quick Charge, as an example). QuickCharge does not negate, override, or invalidate the USB specs - it complies with specs - it just adds an extra feature set. Saying they are not in spec is misleading, something I think we can both agree should be avoided.
Just like everyone else I've been searching for a good aftermarket charger for my phone. I purchased the Choetech rapid adapter along with the cable (sold separately) and it works beautifully.. The Nexus 6p shows rapid charging on the home screen and Ampere showed the same.
How does that compare to the OEM charger that came with the Nexus 6p? The OEM charger charged at 2920ma, while the Choetech adapter and cable charged at 2840ma. So as you can see it's right on par with the OEM charger.
Build Quality:
The build quality is exactly what you expect to received from Choetech. The body of the charger is similar to the OEM charger with smooth sides and flat top and bottom. There's branding on the the front as you see in the pictures, with specifications information next to the electrical prongs. As for the cable there's more Choetech branding on each end, but it's not intrusive and blends in with the cable. The cable material is thick which is a very good thing, as it should be able to provide adequate power and durability. I'm very happy with this cable and plan to buy another soon. Here's my setup and I did a quick video review as well. Be warned I've read reviews showing that some users received a 2.4v model only... If you watch my videos you will clearly see my charger says 3A/5V and it charges at that speed.
<MODERATOR EDITED - SPAM REFERRAL LINKS DELETED>
The quality on this cable is durable. It does pull 3A, as described, without any issues. charged my phone from 17% to 100% in
1 hour 20 min. It charges just as fast as google's provided cable.
and for the USB type-A to type C cable is also reliable. Checkr app tested and confirmed it is safe for the 2.4A (slower)rapid
charging if the power adapter can support upto 2.4A.
I will recommend this to anyone who wants a spare cable for USB-C just like me. leave one at home, and take this with me
anywhere I go to charge the device.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Is it just me or does that cable appear to struggle to charge as well as OEM? Your comparison graph shows the goggle cable working consistently better and the choetech cable never reaching the current the oem cable does.
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
conceyted said:
Is it just me or does that cable appear to struggle to charge as well as OEM? Your comparison graph shows the goggle cable working consistently better and the choetech cable never reaching the current the oem cable does.
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, if you see the graph more closely my phone had less battery percentage for the Google's cable. I believe hungrier the battery, faster it takes. You will never see full capacity current draw at higher battery percentage.
I just bought this USB-C charger with CC cable.
It's on it's way...can't wait to test it.
You also need to make sure you order the updated version. The first version didn't comply with type c standards.
Might just go with the one on the Google website now, since it's only a few dollars more and it'll probably ship faster. Amazon says it'll arrive after Christmas now.
2swizzle said:
You also need to make sure you order the updated version. The first version didn't comply with type c standards.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What are you talking about? There's only one version. I was the first one on this forum to get it (as far as I know) and it works just like the Google charger.
Sent from my LG-v410 using Tapatalk
sharpehenry said:
The quality on this cable is durable. It does pull 3A, as described, without any issues. charged my phone from 17% to 100% in
1 hour 20 min. It charges just as fast as google's provided cable.
and for the USB type-A to type C cable is also reliable. Checkr app tested and confirmed it is safe for the 2.4A (slower)rapid
charging if the power adapter can support upto 2.4A.
I will recommend this to anyone who wants a spare cable for USB-C just like me. leave one at home, and take this with me
anywhere I go to charge the device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So you're saying the cable for sure goes up to 2.4A? Your pictures aren't showing up - just wanted to make sure.
I asked about USB-A to C before and someone was very adamant in saying, "The USB standard for an in spec Type A to C cable will charge at 1.5A. "
What does Benson Leung say about this product?
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
trama09 said:
So you're saying the cable for sure goes up to 2.4A? You're pictures aren't showing up - just wanted to make sure.
I asked about USB-A to C before and someone was very adamant in saying, "The USB standard for an in spec Type A to C cable will charge at 1.5A. "
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't have quick charger 2.0 brick or equivalent. The most I got is a Samsung brick that goes 2A at the most and I did get near that. When I get a hand on better adapter, I will test it out.
For 3A fast charging speeds, USB C Charger with CC cable is the only way
Well, I'm pretty sure that simply put, A to C reaches only 2.4A at maximum, no matter what wall charger you use. If you want full 3A fast charging speeds, C to C is the only way.
I purchased and tried their USB C wall charger with C to C cable. I wasn't disappointed. They are well built and work fine ... at almost the same fast speed as the OEM Charger.
Subiegsr said:
Might just go with the one on the Google website now, since it's only a few dollars more and it'll probably ship faster. Amazon says it'll arrive after Christmas now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not a fan of the Google charger because it's hard wired. Wires tends to go bad before the block so its a cheaper fix than buying a whole new charger.
plokm said:
I'm not a fan of the Google charger because it's hard wired. Wires tends to go bad before the block so its a cheaper fix than buying a whole new charger.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah didn't think about that. Good call!
plokm said:
I'm not a fan of the Google charger because it's hard wired. Wires tends to go bad before the block so its a cheaper fix than buying a whole new charger.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Odd.. do you mean the model you've got has the cable connected to the charger (i.e not removable)? The international edition (H1512) I got in Hong Kong while travelling is detachable and is type C on either end. I didnt' realize there were variations with the included accessories.
plokm said:
I'm not a fan of the Google charger because it's hard wired. Wires tends to go bad before the block so its a cheaper fix than buying a whole new charger.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed, wires do likely wear faster. But should you expect either to go bad in less than a couple of years if handled reasonably?
st8chic said:
Well, I'm pretty sure that simply put, A to C reaches only 2.4A at maximum, no matter what wall charger you use. If you want full 3A fast charging speeds, C to C is the only way.
I purchased and tried their USB C wall charger with C to C cable. I wasn't disappointed. They are well built and work fine ... at almost the same fast speed as the OEM Charger.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Using a physical power meter I've verified that the Nexus 6P will only charge at 1.5A at 5V with standard 2A/2.4A chargers (I've tried 3-4 different USB A chargers). These are far more accurate than ampere as ampere measures net current, current in minus consumed current, not just the incoming current from the charger.
I'm not aware of a physical device that measures power through a type C cable other than the twinkie device that benson mentions and is several hundred dollars.
jpbl1976 said:
Odd.. do you mean the model you've got has the cable connected to the charger (i.e not removable)? The international edition (H1512) I got in Hong Kong while travelling is detachable and is type C on either end. I didnt' realize there were variations with the included accessories.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think he/she is referring to the extra one you buy from the accessories on the Google 6p site. The one included is a removable USB C-C cord.
NCguy said:
Agreed, wires do likely wear faster. But should you expect either to go bad in less than a couple of years if handled reasonably?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes.....sooner or later you will probably have to replace both. I had good luck with all of my samsung charging blocks never had to replace any of them
---------- Post added at 09:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:51 PM ----------
Subiegsr said:
I think he/she is referring to the extra one you buy from the accessories on the Google 6p site. The one included is a removable USB C-C cord.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Correct subiegsr I was talking about the Google store ones
ylexot said:
What are you talking about? There's only one version. I was the first one on this forum to get it (as far as I know) and it works just like the Google charger.
Sent from my LG-v410 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you read the Amazon comments so people where saying they received a different model than the one I've reviewed. As for fast charging with the Choetech after day 3 I still have no issues. It charges my phone from 1% to 100% in around 90 minutes.
Disclaimer: I was sent these items in exchange for an unbiased review.
Tronsmart Presto 12000mAh Powerbank
Unboxing and First look
Overview
I have been searching for a nice powerbank to charge my Nexus 6P since I bought it back in September of last year. Tronsmart finally made what everyone (in my opinion) has been looking for in a battery pack; this battery offers both QC 3.0 and Type-C fast charging due to the way it’s designed. I’ve tried a few different battery/power banks before this one for the Nexus, yet all of them that offer a Type-C port break the USB specification.
Tronsmart claims this powerbank is one of the most efficient on the market giving you the ability to maximize the power it stores to charge your phone. I haven’t tested that claim yet, but I fully intend to do so and publish my results below. I also own a 12000mAh Aukey powerbank, and a 10400mAh Choetech one as well. I do have other batteries, but their capacities aren’t similar enough to compare here.
What’s in the Box
-Tronsmart Presto 12000mAh Powerbank
-Documentation
-USB A-C charging cable with the proper 56k ohm resistor
Build & Design
In the typical Tronsmart style they have opted for a glossy plastic border alongside a matte plastic body. The plastic feels nice, and has a subtle texture on the matte section giving it a more refined feel. I appreciate how Tronsmart carried over their design language across multiple products (chargers, powerbanks etc.) which gives the end user a familiar feel to their products.
On the front of the powerbank you will find two ports; the first is your standard USB-A that offers QC 3.0, while the second only charges via USB-C fast charging. I like how they separated the circuits to offer both standards in one nicely designed battery especially for people like myself that own a Quick-Charge enabled phone (QC 1.0/2.0/3.0).
Along the side you will find a power button that turns on the battery for when you want to charge your phone(s).
Charging breakdown by port
Input (Type-C): DC:5V/3A
Output (Type-C Port): DC 5V 3.0A Max
Output (QC3.0): DC 5V-6.5V/3A 6.5V-9V/2A 9V-12V/1.5A
Summary
This has quickly become my new go to powerbank given the wide range of charging options it offers for both of my phones.
I also really appreciated the compact design, solid construction, and consistent styling offered.
I will follow up this review with a battery test to see how efficient it is while charging my Nexus 6P over USB-C and my S7 Edge via the USB-A QC 3.0 port. I’ll also add a short review of the braided USB A-C cable I was sent tomorrow.
Comparison: Tronsmart Presto vs Choetech, and Aukey Powerbanks
Tronsmart Braided USB A-C Cable
I own a ton (literally/physically) of USB A-C, C-C and MicroUSB cables given the number of phones I have. I first wanted to say how I’m impressed with the quality of this particular cable because it’s built well. I also own the I-Orange USB A-C, and C-C cables, but those are more expensive even though they are also high quality. The Tronsmart one features a nice braided nylon sleeve giving it more durability in the long run couple with nice aluminum housings for each end. The cable offers data transfer at USB 2.0 speeds (480mbs) which is perfect for the Nexus 5X/6P, or any device that doesn’t support USB 3.1 over Type-C. I have no complaints about the cable, and given how it meets the USB spec with the proper 56k ohm-m resistor you shouldn’t run into any issues.
Looks great! The main thing I'd like to know is how fast the 6P charges through the usb-c port in comparison to my oem usb-c cable & brick. So far I haven't seen a power bank that actually charges quickly through the usb-c port and this looks promising!
Is this available to buy yet:?
Sounds great... What's the dimensions and weight? Nm, here it is:
Product Dimensions 7.5 x 3.5 x 1.2 inches
Item Weight 10.7 ounces
you guys sure don't like to use google.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01GVBFBBO/ref=ox_sc_act_title_2?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ALTVS0Q5KJ7M3
I just ordered mine, will be arriving tomorrow.
I'm going to post some more updates to the OP this afternoon. It is available for purchase on Amazon, and other places from what I've seen, but XDA doesn't like when you post product links in the OP.
Disappointing that this is bigger than Anker's while having only 60% of the capacity.
Here's something i don't understand. Back in November, when you reviewed the 20100mah ravpower, you said
Pilz said:
Any USB A-C cables are limited to 1.5A by design so it won't rapid charge with a Type A that is inspec.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But here we see
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Clearly shows QC3 charging due to the higher current, nearing 3A there. So this included-in-the-box a-c can handle more than 1.5A. Why ?
Does not indicate that 3A is reaching the 6P.
can you post a photo which indicates that close to 3A does reach the 6P.
with earlier banks there was always this doubt whether they were putting out close to 3A or 2.4A.
Went digging around for better photos that showed the specs clear and found one.
Note that it allows to charge devices ie. output using QC3 going up to 12V but will only accept 5v3A on the input. Why ?
No phone is going to require 12V on the input but a charger will certainly benefit from 12V QC3 as you can push over 20W with a suitable charger to charge it instead of 14W. Net result is your wait time to full charge of the power bank reduces by 50%.
Will this show Charging Rapidly when I plug my phone in this? Also, can I use the wall charger and C-C cable my phone came with for charging this power bank? Thanks!
cmarkrin2no said:
Will this show Charging Rapidly when I plug my phone in this? Also, can I use the wall charger and C-C cable my phone came with for charging this power bank? Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've just got mine from Amazon and can confirm that it displays CHARGING RAPIDLY. This is only displayed by using the C to C cable which is the one that came with the phone. Hope that answers your question.
I just posted a similar review of the product over on the G5 forums:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/lg-g5/accessories/tronsmart-presto-12000mah-qc3-0-usb-c-t3415369
This is more from the QC3.0 side of things as I do not have a Nexus, so it may not be as relevant to those on this thread.
One difference I believe I'm seeing between our reviews is that in charging my battery pack, it never went above 2.4/5V. It was measured using basically the same technique (USB-A multimeter plugged into a QC3 adapter, connected into a USB-A to USB-C cable, into the USB-C port of the battery). Maybe I'll try a different QC3 AC adapter.
I picked up this powerbank a couple days ago and ran a simple test to compare the charging speeds between the tronsmart powerbank and my wall charger. Both times, I ran the phone's battery down until it powered itself off before starting the test. Here are the results
Through Wall Charger (with 3rd party USB-C to C cable)
@ 15 min - 22%
@ 30 min - 42%
@ 1 hr - 80%
@ 1 hr 15 min - 91%
@ 1 hr 35 min - 100%
Through Tronsmart Powerbank (with 3rd party USB-C to C cable)
@ 15 min - 17%
@ 30 min - 38%
@ 1 hr - 76%
@ 1 hr 15 min - 90%
@ 1 hr 40 min - 100%
So far, pretty happy with the charging speed.
One Twelve said:
Here's something i don't understand. Back in November, when you reviewed the 20100mah ravpower, you said
But here we see
Clearly shows QC3 charging due to the higher current, nearing 3A there. So this included-in-the-box a-c can handle more than 1.5A. Why ?
Does not indicate that 3A is reaching the 6P.
can you post a photo which indicates that close to 3A does reach the 6P.
with earlier banks there was always this doubt whether they were putting out close to 3A or 2.4A.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The USB-C port is only rated for 5V/3A, while the USB-A port is a QC 3.0 port. This is why it will quick charge my S7 Edge over the USB-A port since its using micro USB. I can post more about it when I get home from work tonight.
Didn't get a chance to post what I wanted last night because I got home late from work. I will try to do it today assuming all goes well. For those of you that are curious I managed 2.1 charges using C-C fast charging out of the battery pack resulting in a ~61% battery pack efficiency
just got this and i was not able to get charging rapidly msg on my nexus 6p when using supplied cable or my own a-c cable i purchased from google.
able to get quickcharging with a-c cable on my gf samsung galaxy s6
have not tried the c-c port charging on nexus 6p. will report back with results.
The USB-A port is a Qualcomm Quick Charge port, not a USB-PD port, so you won't get quick charging on the 6P from it.
You need the C-C cable to get quick charging on the Nexus.
Just ordered mine based on this review
I went back and used a different QC3.0 AC charger to charge this battery. This time, it was a nice Tronsmart branded one. The numbers were far better, ~15Ws, about 2.5-2.6A and 5.7V. So the charger you use to juice up the Presto will make a difference in charging times. This confirms the numbers @Pilz was getting.
I am looking for a fast battery charger for Nexus 6p, reading through this thread am I right in assuming then the only way to get a charge above 1.5ish amps is to use a USB C to C connection for the Nexus 6p when charging.