Database Info

[Q] Will charging from usb on 3 amp cause and damage?

Im looking to put a couple usb ports in my car, ive found these on ebay and the price seems right.
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Car-Led-...Electrical_Test_Equipment&hash=item33772bf4ec
Most other chargers ive seen are either 1.1a or 2.1a, will going up to 3a cause any damage to the device or battery?

A device will only draw as much current as it needs. Current is measured in Amperes, abbreviated A. So if you plug a device that needs 1A into a charger capable of delivering 3A, it will only draw 1A.
Problems occur when you do the opposite, like plug a device that draws 2A (a tablet) into a charger that can only supply 0.5A (500mA, an old phone charger). Then the device won't be able to charge at full rate, or maybe not at all.
As with anything sold on eBay, be wary of claims for chargers. They may not actually deliver the advertised current.

ron917 said:
A device will only draw as much current as it needs. Current is measured in Amperes, abbreviated A. So if you plug a device that needs 1A into a charger capable of delivering 3A, it will only draw 1A.
Problems occur when you do the opposite, like plug a device that draws 2A (a tablet) into a charger that can only supply 0.5A (500mA, an old phone charger). Then the device won't be able to charge at full rate, or maybe not at all.
As with anything sold on eBay, be wary of claims for chargers. They may not actually deliver the advertised current.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the reply, yeah i hate ebay claims when it comes to stuff mainly from china, batterys, memory cards etc.
Hopefully it works well, even if it's only 1/3 of the claimed output ill be happy for the price.

[Q] Charger

My moto g (1st gen) is about to arrive but I don't know how to charge it yet. I heard it takes long to charge in PC and I need a wall adapter for charging on the go anyways. Original brand ones are really expensive and I want to avoid that cost if possible. So is it safe to use a generic (most likely without any brand) wall adapter? For example one that says 100-240VAC, 50-60 Hz Output 5.0VDC 1.2mah. If not, what should I take into account when looking for a charger?
Thanks in advance.

It's not necessary to use original moto charger but it's recommended you can use any other chargers for charging With appropriate Voltage values...
Sent from my XT1033

All USB chargers have a regulated output voltage of 5 volts DC, and all of them are compatible with any device that charges via a USB/mini/micro port.
The difference is the maximum charging current, which generally ranges from a low of 300 milliamps to a high of 2 amps. More current will fill up the battery faster, as long as the charging control circuit on the device will accept more power. Regular USB ports like the ones on your computer are specified to put out a maximum of 500 milliamps current, so most device charging circuits will detect when they are on a computer USB port and limit their current drain to 500 milliamps to avoid triggering a "port overload" shutdown on the computer.
Devices with big batteries (like tablets) will take a long time to charge with a low-capacity charger, so you generally want to use a higher-capacity 2 amp charger with those to cut the charging time. Phones are generally somewhere in the middle - they'll charge in a reasonable time with a 1 amp charger, but they might benefit from using a 2 amp charger. You can still charge them using a low-capacity charger or a computer USB port, but you may need to shut the device off while charging if it consumes more battery power in normal operation than the charger can pump into it. And it might take a very long time (like 24 hours) to charge a big battery from a small charger.

jbanti said:
It's not necessary to use original moto charger but it's recommended you can use any other chargers for charging With appropriate Voltage values...
Sent from my XT1033
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
DJames1 said:
All USB chargers have a regulated output voltage of 5 volts DC, and all of them are compatible with any device that charges via a USB/mini/micro port.
The difference is the maximum charging current, which generally ranges from a low of 300 milliamps to a high of 2 amps. More current will fill up the battery faster, as long as the charging control circuit on the device will accept more power. Regular USB ports like the ones on your computer are specified to put out a maximum of 500 milliamps current, so most device charging circuits will detect when they are on a computer USB port and limit their current drain to 500 milliamps to avoid triggering a "port overload" shutdown on the computer.
Devices with big batteries (like tablets) will take a long time to charge with a low-capacity charger, so you generally want to use a higher-capacity 2 amp charger with those to cut the charging time. Phones are generally somewhere in the middle - they'll charge in a reasonable time with a 1 amp charger, but they might benefit from using a 2 amp charger. You can still charge them using a low-capacity charger or a computer USB port, but you may need to shut the device off while charging if it consumes more battery power in normal operation than the charger can pump into it. And it might take a very long time (like 24 hours) to charge a big battery from a small charger.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes I'm aware of all this. The thing is I purchased it from Amazon and it doesn't come with a charger. That's why I need to purchase one. I know it works without problems with samsung, htc, blackberry, etc chargers but I don't know if it works -without problems and risks- with a generic charger. By generic I mean those chinese cheap ones that "imitate" original ones. So are those safe? Thanks again.

There's generally no problem with an inexpensive generic charger, but cheap junk is cheap junk. If it costs $1.99, and the connections are poorly soldered, the components are under-specified, and the construction quality is generally shoddy, then sure it can easily break, overheat, or go up in smoke. It could even conceivably damage your connected device. Just use some common sense in evaluating when something is too cheap.

I just got a samsung charger which seems to be for the note 2.. My worry is that I'm not entirely sure if it's original (even though build quality seems good) or not because of many reasons: a) I just noticed the model on the box (eta0u10ebecstd) is different than what is printed on the charger (eta-u90ewe) , including amperage listed (0.7a on box, 2a on charger) even though the box had the security seal b) I google'd about the model in the charger and I only saw it with the european plug presentation, didn't see a single american plug of that model (and I have the american plug). c) there seems to be 2 "presentations" with different printings (what varies is the location of the certification logos mainly and 1 extra certification for each "model" the other one doesn't have)
So my question is simple: Let's suppose the charger is not original, can it damage my phone? Thanks again.

xzifi said:
I just got a samsung charger which seems to be for the note 2.. My worry is that I'm not entirely sure if it's original (even though build quality seems good) or not because of many reasons: a) I just noticed the model on the box (eta0u10ebecstd) is different than what is printed on the charger (eta-u90ewe) , including amperage listed (0.7a on box, 2a on charger) even though the box had the security seal b) I google'd about the model in the charger and I only saw it with the european plug presentation, didn't see a single american plug of that model (and I have the american plug). c) there seems to be 2 "presentations" with different printings (what varies is the location of the certification logos mainly and 1 extra certification for each "model" the other one doesn't have)
So my question is simple: Let's suppose the charger is not original, can it damage my phone? Thanks again.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If it is not Genuine avoide using as much as you can.
Using a genuine Samsung with Motorola or any charger made by real maunfacturer (Nokia, Samsung, LG, HTC.... etc) with any other phone is ok
but a duplicate charger is always a risk, because you never know what has been compromised.

Alright, I'll get a genuine one asap. Any tips to differentiate between an oem or duplicate charger?

"Genuine" is not a word that applies to USB chargers. Perhaps you mean "same brand as my phone", or "recognized brand name". That's one way to be sure you're getting acceptable quality. But you'll save some money if you just use common sense in evaluating the price and quality of what you're buying. There's nothing wrong with most generic USB chargers, and there's certainly no problem using a different brand-name USB charger with your phone.

DJames1 said:
"Genuine" is not a word that applies to USB chargers. Perhaps you mean "same brand as my phone", or "recognized brand name". That's one way to be sure you're getting acceptable quality. But you'll save some money if you just use common sense in evaluating the price and quality of what you're buying. There's nothing wrong with most generic USB chargers, and there's certainly no problem using a different brand-name USB charger with your phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What I meant is fake copies of brand chargers. It's basically impossible to differentiate between a copy and an oem, isn't it?

xzifi said:
What I meant is fake copies of brand chargers. It's basically impossible to differentiate between a copy and an oem, isn't it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are ways to differentiate then, but you need to measure the output under load and see if there is noise and ripple with an oscilloscope, which is not in everyone's possibilities.
Best way to get a genuine charger for cheap is to buy it from a friend who has it from some old phone. Or just look for brands like Nokia, Sony, Hama, Belkin, Energizer etc in some trusted sellers like Amazon or big local hypermarket.

liveroy said:
There are ways to differentiate then, but you need to measure the output under load and see if there is noise and ripple with an oscilloscope, which is not in everyone's possibilities.
Best way to get a genuine charger for cheap is to buy it from a friend who has it from some old phone. Or just look for brands like Nokia, Sony, Hama, Belkin, Energizer etc in some trusted sellers like Amazon or big local hypermarket.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok so I found 3 chargers on Amazon that seem to have good reviews but I don't know much about brands so I hope you can help me to choose (can't post links). Which brand is more reputable in chargers? New trent, anker or powergen? Thanks

xzifi said:
Ok so I found 3 chargers on Amazon that seem to have good reviews but I don't know much about brands so I hope you can help me to choose (can't post links). Which brand is more reputable in chargers? New trent, anker or powergen? Thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Powergen afaik are making high-power output chargers.You'd be fine with one of theirs, their quality is airtight and the prices are good.

Which of these USB Type C to A cables support fast charging? (Shopping on Amazon)

Which one of these cables support fast charging for the 6P?
I do not want to get new adapters so hopefully one of these cables are good enough
Thanks
1 - http://www.amazon.com/Yoozon®-Hi-sp...45399787&sr=8-3&keywords=usb+type+c+to+type+a
2 - http://www.amazon.com/Multi-Colour-...45399787&sr=8-4&keywords=usb+type+c+to+type+a
3 - http://www.amazon.com/iOrange-E-Bra...45399787&sr=8-7&keywords=usb+type+c+to+type+a
This one mentions this, Support the Maximum 2.4A fast charging and the speed of data sync up to 480 Mbps however I thought it needs to be 3A to support fast charging, if someone could please clarify, thanks
4 - http://www.amazon.com/NewLobo-1-met...45399787&sr=8-6&keywords=usb+type+c+to+type+a
5 - http://www.amazon.com/Cable-Matters...45399787&sr=8-8&keywords=usb+type+c+to+type+a
6 - http://www.amazon.com/JOTO-Standard...5399787&sr=8-11&keywords=usb+type+c+to+type+a

None of them will. You might get close to 2 amps if you are lucky, but no Type-A port will support Type-C fast charging. While cable quality matters, its more dependant on the load the phone can draw from the charger.
See: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=63220997&postcount=1

Continuing off what Elnrik said, you can still go ahead and buy yourself some generic quality USB A to USB C cables (see one plus cables for quality and value). You'll get pretty standard old charge rates through them but they are better than nothing in a pinch, for the time being, unless you want to replace all your old adapters.

I know you said Amazon, but Google sells an a to c cable capable of 5v/3a
https://store.google.com/product/usb_type_c_to_usb_standard_a_plug_cable
Currently out of stock though
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

I am trying to find one as well that will do 3A/5W. So far I have found this one that according to the description will do it.
http://www.amazon.com/Rankie®-Hi-sp...29503&sr=1-1-spons&keywords=usb-c+cable&psc=1

heleos said:
I know you said Amazon, but Google sells an a to c cable capable of 5v/3a
https://store.google.com/product/usb_type_c_to_usb_standard_a_plug_cable
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I really don't know what Google are playing at with the spec for that cable. There's no way in the world a USB Type-A 2.0 cable can deliver 3A. You absolutely need Type-C end to end to achieve that.
If I'm wrong, I'm gonna look like a right chump. But I haven't been ravenously soaking up info on this topic for nothing!

krazyq said:
Which one of these cables support fast charging for the 6P?
I do not want to get new adapters so hopefully one of these cables are good enough
Thanks
1 - http://www.amazon.com/Yoozon®-Hi-sp...45399787&sr=8-3&keywords=usb+type+c+to+type+a
2 - http://www.amazon.com/Multi-Colour-...45399787&sr=8-4&keywords=usb+type+c+to+type+a
3 - http://www.amazon.com/iOrange-E-Bra...45399787&sr=8-7&keywords=usb+type+c+to+type+a
This one mentions this, Support the Maximum 2.4A fast charging and the speed of data sync up to 480 Mbps however I thought it needs to be 3A to support fast charging, if someone could please clarify, thanks
4 - http://www.amazon.com/NewLobo-1-met...45399787&sr=8-6&keywords=usb+type+c+to+type+a
5 - http://www.amazon.com/Cable-Matters...45399787&sr=8-8&keywords=usb+type+c+to+type+a
6 - http://www.amazon.com/JOTO-Standard...5399787&sr=8-11&keywords=usb+type+c+to+type+a
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With the Nexus 6P, none of them. It is not the cable, but the 6P that is the culprit. All those cables will actually support 5V/3A. For some bizarre reason, Google designed the charging system in the 6P around the Type C spec (the spec for a connector) and not around the USB Power Delivery Spec, but then used the configuration channel in USB Type C which eliminates the possibility of using Type A to Type C for putting 5V/3A into the 6P. Even Apple respects USB Power Delivery in the MacBook Pro.
I think Google's mistake (or at least foolish decision) will become apparent next year when the next Nexus phones (and a lot of other laptops, tablets and phones) have Type C, but not 5V/3A and instead support more standard power like 5V/2A and 12V/1.5A. There is a reason Qualcom chose those 2 combinations for Quick Charge 2.0. They didn't pull them out of their butt like Google.
To me, not having the device in my hands, is the biggest single disappointment with the phone. Don't get me wrong, even 5V/1.5A is decent power for charging a phone. Guess the other disappointment also centers around the implementation of Type C and not allowing HDMI via the Type C connector which it was expressly designed to do.

dwswager said:
With the Nexus 6P, none of them. It is not the cable, but the 6P that is the culprit. All those cables will actually support 5V/3A. For some bizarre reason, Google designed the charging system in the 6P around the Type C spec (the spec for a connector) and not around the USB Power Delivery Spec, but then used the configuration channel in USB Type C which eliminates the possibility of using Type A to Type C for putting 5V/3A into the 6P. Even Apple respects USB Power Delivery in the MacBook Pro.
I think Google's mistake (or at least foolish decision) will become apparent next year when the next Nexus phones (and a lot of other laptops, tablets and phones) have Type C, but not 5V/3A and instead support more standard power like 5V/2A and 12V/1.5A. There is a reason Qualcom chose those 2 combinations for Quick Charge 2.0. They didn't pull them out of their butt like Google.
To me, not having the device in my hands, is the biggest single disappointment with the phone. Don't get me wrong, even 5V/1.5A is decent power for charging a phone. Guess the other disappointment also centers around the implementation of Type C and not allowing HDMI via the Type C connector which it was expressly designed to do.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow super lame...
So I'm going to have to buy new type adapters
(wall and car charger) and new type c to c cables?
I have the Moto X Pure right and the only reason I'm getting the 6P is cos of the battery and camera which I'm hoping to be better.

Snarklife said:
I really don't know what Google are playing at with the spec for that cable. There's no way in the world a USB Type-A 2.0 cable can deliver 3A. You absolutely need Type-C end to end to achieve that.
If I'm wrong, I'm gonna look like a right chump. But I haven't been ravenously soaking up info on this topic for nothing!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would tend to agree with you, and the other people that have researched the actual USB spec, but I feel like it's this was an error, they would realize it quickly and change it. The hire some smaht people at Google
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Snarklife said:
I really don't know what Google are playing at with the spec for that cable. There's no way in the world a USB Type-A 2.0 cable can deliver 3A. You absolutely need Type-C end to end to achieve that.
If I'm wrong, I'm gonna look like a right chump. But I haven't been ravenously soaking up info on this topic for nothing!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't confuse the cable's capability to handle 3A with what the SPEC allows. A Type A to Type C cable can actually handle 3A. Both connectors can do it. Even a Micro B can do 3A. The Spec does not support it. And here is the big issue. The spec, both original and the newer ones including USB-PD are set up for simultaneous power and data. For a charger, we are only worried with power and data speed/corruption is not an issue.
USB PD allows 60W (20V/3A) through micro B and100W (20V/5A) through standard A and B. It requires specially 'marked' cables which will be a little beefier than standard 2.0 cables. But the connectors can handle it.

So what is the solution?
Get new car and wall chargers only usb type c cables?

Okay, this is interesting. So, if the cable and both the A and C connectors can both handle 5/3, could you plug this cable into a block that pushes out 5/3 via a female A port and achieve maximum charge velocity?
That goes against what so many have said - that you need C to C - but I'd be delighted to hear it.

EDIT: Just saw @dwswager's post. What he said.
-------
TLDR:
USB TYPE-A has standards not specs, limitations are grounded in physics not words and it is possible for a USB type A to deliver 3A with lower Ohms at 5v with the right power adapter/hub.
USB 2.0 refers to Data rates not charge rates.
Bonus: 3A 5V is one of the Quick Charge Class A power standards for C to C even if 6P isnt yet certified for it. Could be Google pushing for an A to C 3A to 5V Quick Charge USB Class?
Snarklife said:
I really don't know what Google are playing at with the spec for that cable. There's no way in the world a USB Type-A 2.0 cable can deliver 3A. You absolutely need Type-C end to end to achieve that.
If I'm wrong, I'm gonna look like a right chump. But I haven't been ravenously soaking up info on this topic for nothing!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
heleos said:
I would tend to agree with you, and the other people that have researched the actual USB spec, but I feel like it's this was an error, they would realize it quickly and change it. The hire some smaht people at Google
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the conversation over USB "specs" has been misconstrued. What people are looking at are USB standards. Standards are not limits. They are heavily optimized guidelines for creating compatibility and uniformity with as many devices as possible and to protect as many devices as possible from accidental burnout.
USB 2.0 Data rate does not prevent a USB A port from having a 3.1 or similar charging configuration.
As is already clear, Google is not following USB charging standards of any kind with the 6P and noted by @dwswager.
It is entirely possibly to throw 3a INTO a USB A standard cable; ampere limitation isnt the problem USB 3.1 standards for USB A do it perfectly fine but at 3a 12v(4ohm), which is a higher ohm set up than with 3a 5v(1.67ohm). We also know that USB 3.1 standards allow for 2a 5v (2.5ohm), which is even closer to the 3a 5v set up. .The standards are set at those points because the lower the ohms the great the heat created, think of it like a welder, or a sub-ohm vaporizer.
Note that the size of the USB 3.1 pin size don't change due to the change in ohms. What is likely changing is the conducting material and size of the transmission wire.
Most 2a 5v cables run cool because the cable is a 2.5ohm resistance cable and its getting fed precisely 2a, as very carefully designed, which then makes that cable a "5v" (2.5ohm x 2a) cable. A 3a 5v cable would hence need to have a lower resistance of 1.67ohm, which is higher conduction, likely from a more optimized conduit throughout.
The cable can exist under Huawei/ Google's unique of standard setup.
Thing is, nobody as part of the USB standards have ever said you CANNOT put 3a through a USB Type A, but also nobody outside of chinese ebay sales sell anything with USB A that puts out 3a at 5v right now (Google for it, they exist. Wouldn't recommend buying one).
Bonus from Google CS (Source: http://www.droid-life.com/2015/10/19/nexus-6p-nexus-5x-quick-charge/#comment-2315607310):
"Currently, the Nexus 6P isn't listed on Qualcomm's list of devices
that have been tested and certified to be compatible with Qualcomm Quick Charge
2.0 chargers, so I can't say with 100% certainty yet. This is something that can
change the longer the Nexus 6P is out on the market and is tested for
compatibility and interoperability."
---------- Post added at 03:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:42 PM ----------
Snarklife said:
Okay, this is interesting. So, if the cable and both the A and C connectors can both handle 5/3, could you plug this cable into a block that pushes out 5/3 via a female A port and achieve maximum charge velocity?
That goes against what so many have said - that you need C to C - but I'd be delighted to hear it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Turns out electrical engineering and understanding takes more than misconstruing USB standards as specs.

theTqM said:
Turns out electrical engineering and understanding takes more than misconstruing USB standards as specs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have been fighting this corner since the day of the announcement, I am glad to hear someone else say it. There is absolutely nothing about USB Type-C that has any effect on wall chargers and the amount of current it can draw, and equally nothing stopping Type-A from providing aforementioned current / voltage. What it needs its a cable that can handle it (like the offical Google one), and a wall charger that will provide it, simple as that.

vido.ardes said:
I have been fighting this corner since the day of the announcement, I am glad to hear someone else say it. There is absolutely nothing about USB Type-C that has any effect on wall chargers and the amount of current it can draw, and equally nothing stopping Type-A from providing aforementioned current / voltage. What it needs its a cable that can handle it (like the offical Google one), and a wall charger that will provide it, simple as that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank God! Realism
If under USB-PD Profile 5, Type A can handle 20V/5A, why people think it can't handle 5V/3A is a mystery. The question has been will the phone accept it with an undetectable (to the Type C device) Type A to Type C cable by the 6P. The answer appears to be yes it can.

dwswager said:
Thank God! Realism
If under USB-PD Profile 5, Type A can handle 20V/5A, why people think it can't handle 5V/3A is a mystery. The question has been will the phone accept it with an undetectable (to the Type C device) Type A to Type C cable by the 6P. The answer appears to be yes it can.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've bought the cable I linked to from Google (it has already turned up) and I have bought a car charger that claims to output 3A/5V so I will be testing as soon as my device turns up. The car charger wasn't cheap, but it has been rebranded a lot so it's 50/50 as to whether or not it will hold up to it's claim. It has a type-C port as well so I can at least check they output the same.

@vido.ardes @dwswager. If what I quoted earlier from G CS is correct and the Nexus 6P hopefully-perhaps-maybe gets certified by Qualcomm for Quick Charge, and google updates the kernel to enable it then we'll have the entire world of Qualcomm certified 3A Quick Chargers at our disposal. Its a hope.

theTqM said:
@vido.ardes @dwswager. If what I quoted earlier from G CS is correct and the Nexus 6P hopefully-perhaps-maybe gets certified by Qualcomm for Quick Charge, and google updates the kernel to enable it then we'll have the entire world of Qualcomm certified 3A Quick Chargers at our disposal. Its a hope.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not sure how it would get certified. QC 2.0 takes an extra chip in the device and the 810 SOC is not QC3.0 certified.

dwswager said:
Not sure how it would get certified. QC 2.0 takes an extra chip in the device and the 810 SOC is not QC3.0 certified.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're right regarding QC 3.0.. however:
Check out the 5x teardown.. it has a QC 2.0 quick charge chip: http://9to5google.com/2015/10/22/nexus-5x-teardown-repairability/
Chances that the 6P has the same.. high...

theTqM said:
You're right regarding QC 3.0.. however:
Check out the 5x teardown.. it has a QC 2.0 quick charge chip: http://9to5google.com/2015/10/22/nexus-5x-teardown-repairability/
Chances that the 6P has the same.. high...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's interesting!
All this charging crap could have been avoided if Google would have just spent 30 seconds explaining it. I suspect that they used Type C and designed the circuit to take 3A and wanted to call that fast charging without having to actually implement a fast charging solution.
If I had the 6P in my hands I would get a few chargers:
Google Captive (5V/3A)
A Type C 5V/3A
A Type A 5V/3A (or the ASUS Transformer charger with micro B and a micro B to C adapter.
A 5V/1A charger.
Then with phone less than 10% charged plug them in and check the current draw. All of them should be somewhere close to the Nominal rated current output.
Then with the phone above 90% charged, plug them up again and they all should be drawing about the same current because the current draw should be well below the rated current of all the chargers.

Has anyone gotten 3A output from a Type-A charger/cable?

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.

[SPAM]Tronsmart Type A-C, C-C, C Wall Charger, Cables and TypeA/C Car Charger

Disclaimer: All of these items were sent to me by Tronsmart for a fair and honest review.
Backstory:
Tronsmart I a well-known accessory manufacturer known for their cables and chargers. This is my first experience with their products because I usually end up purchasing most of my cables/chargers when I first get a new phone (I used qi charging almost exclusively until this current phone). This year things changed as I’m sure everyone is aware; the USB Type-C standard was initially very confusing for both consumers and accessory manufacturers alike. At first it was hard to find any Type-C accessories let alone ones that were probably in spec. This presented an issue for consumers trying to buy a cable that wouldn’t potentially brown out their charger, cause a fire, or harm their brand new Nexus 5X/6P.
I initially purchased an Aukey Type A-C cable off Amazon, and some OnePlus Type A-C cables/microUSB adapters. Soon after purchasing those items, I learned from Benson Leung that the majority of manufactures weren’t following the proper standard, and intern were using the wrong resister. Now while this was great to know, it also made it hard to buy a product with confidence considering that many if not all of them were potentially dangerous to use. Benson Leung went one step further, and began testing cables, chargers, and other products then posting reviews stating whether or not each one met the USB standard. The initial Tronsmart USB-C car charger fell victim to this problem, but thankfully it was corrected with their new car charger you will see below.
Tronsmart sent me a wide array of items to review on here with each one meeting the proper standard as verified via Check-R, and Benson Leung (except for the car charger as of 12/23 which has not been tested)
Here is are some pictures of the items that will be reviewed:
Tronsmart USB Type-C 33W Car Charger with Dual USB Rapid Charging and Quick Charge 3.0
<MODERATOR EDITED - SPAM REFERRAL LINKS DELETED>
First I will delve into an item that I know will be used on a daily basis, and that’s their car charger. The charger itself features both a USB Type-C port and a USB Type-A port to meet all of your device needs. The USB Type-A port uses something Tronsmart calls VoltIQ which will charger at 5V/3A max meeting the needs of most devices out there now. On the other hand, the Type-C port features QUALCOMM’s Quick Charge 3.0 standard so you can future proof your car by getting this charger. The Type-C port will charge at: 5-6.5V/3.0A, 6.5-9V/2.0A, 12V/1.5A(Max). This should allow the Nexus 5X/6P to rapid charge via the Type-C port, and charge at ~1.5A from the Type-A port as an in spec cable should.
I plugged both Type-C and Type-A cables into the ports to see how each one fits. The Type-C cable seems much more secure than the Type-A which is something that I’ve noticed when testing the car charger. I tested the car charger using Tronsmart’s USB Type A-C, C-C, and MicroUSB-C cables/adapter. Here are some screenshots showing the charging speed of each one on my Nexus 6P:
Update [12/25] I used the car charger on my 7+ hour drive yesterday and didn't have any issues. The C-C port was use for that part of my trip, and I plan to use the A-C cable via the Type-A port on my drive back tomorrow. I will add another update on how that goes after I get home which will be late Saturday, so the update will likely come on Sunday as a result.
Update [12/26] @MrKaon brought a good point to my attention; the car charger works perfectly fine, but it is not in spec for the USB standard. I personally did not encounter any issues with the car charger; however, the Type-C port cannot use QC 3.0 alongside the Type-C fast charging because it goes against the USB standard as outline HERE. I hope Tronsmart fixes this issue as they stated in the google + post, but all of the cables (A-C included) are in spec. The car charger is the only item that is still not correctly meeting the specification.
Update[12/29] After speaking with Tronsmart, and reading through this google plus post I'm still not sure how I feel about the charger. It does technically go against the charging standard as outline in section 4.8.2 which is further detailed by Benson Leung and the USB standard he is referencing (download). It seems that there is still a significant amount of confusion regarding the new standard. According to Benson Leung, Qualcomm has their Type-C quick charge wrong as it currently stands; this created more issues because Qualcomm told Tronsmart that its QC3.0 standard was correct when it still goes against the USB standard. To sum things up it still isn't using the standard, but it works perfectly fine as is. I'm still using it daily with a C-C cable without any issues, and I plan to until someone shows that it could cause damage to my phone/charger/car.
I used the A-C cable during my ~7 hour drive back home today, and didn't have any issues with it. I also tested both ports simultaneously, and did not notice a drop in current; this would be great if the charger was up to the proper specifications, but its not. I will wait on Tronsmart to make a updated on as they mentioned in their google + post I referenced. If Tronsmart sends me an updated one I will post a newer review on it in this OP.
USB Voltage Mult-meter test (showing that it's meeting the USB Spec)
Stock Google A-C Cable
Tronsmart A-C Cable
Pictures:
Packaging:
Input/Output rating
Ports
Charging Speeds Screenshots
C-C
A-C
MicroUSB-C
Tronsmart 6[ft] USB Type A-C 2 pack
Tronsmart Type A-C 6[ft] Cable 2 Pack
I know many people still enjoy using their legacy chargers rather than buy complete new Type-C ones to replace them, this is where Tronsmart’s USB Type A-C cables come into play. These cables come in a pack of 2 (1 white and 1 black) each cable measuring 6[ft]/1.82[m] in length. Since the cables are using the Type-A port they can be used in more places than your convention Type C-C cables. I always keep a Type A-C cable in my backpack, along with a C-C cable just in case I need to plug my phone into my Surface Pro 4 or a PC for any reason.
The build quality of these cables is great, the cable itself is made out of your typical materials, and is somewhat rigid. I assume the cable will become much more flexible as time goes on, but it’s really an observation more than it is an issue for me. The connectors at each end are solid, and feel like they will last a long time by design. The USB Type-C connector is a matte plastic and tapered so it will not interfere with any cases. (it seems to work just fine with all of my cases so far including the CaseMate, and Ringke Fusion that I tested it on). The cable feels nice, and I plan to use it along with their C-C cable on my road trip tomorrow.
I tested the cable and verified that is passes via the Check-R app on my 6P. The dimensions of each end of the cable were measured with my digital caliper and will be listed below so everyone can check and ensure it will work with their intended case. I also plan to create a spreadsheet listing all of the cases, and cable compatibility given my vast assortment of them.
Update [12/25] I spoke with Tronsmart regarding the earlier mention of the cable being 'in spec', and they said all of their Type-C products have been sent to Benson Leung for review. They also noted that due to the holidays it might take a little longer before he posts about them officially. I am confident their cables will pass the test based on what I have seen as well.
Update [1/7] Benson Leung has reviewed and approved the Tronsmart A-C cable. This confirms my earlier tests of the cable. Bensons Review
Pictures:
Packaging & Cables:
Connectors Black:
Connectors White:
Type-C Connector Side View Black:
Type-C Connector Side View White:
Tronsmart 6[ft] USB Type C-C 2 pack
http://www.amazon.com/Tronsmart-USB..._UL160_SR160,160_&refRID=1G77XXSTWZGMBC089VAT
When it comes to Type-C cables, there aren’t many 6[ft]/1.82[m] cables out there to use with the factory Google charger without paying an excessive amount of money. I purchased the Google 22.5W dual port Type-C charger back when I bought my phone, and while it is very nice (so is the 1.82[m] cable) it was costly. The Google cable retails for $19.99 or the charger with the cable is $39.99; this might have been okay a few months ago, but now there are more choices for a fraction of that price. The Tronsmart USB C-C 2 pack comes with 2! of these cables for only $15.99 USD (as of 12/23). These cables are every bit as nice feeling (if not better in some ways) than the Google one I bought a while ago. I like how Tronsmart includes both a white and a black cable allowing you to choose the color based on where you intend to use it, and what one you enjoy more.
The connectors at each end of the cable are exactly the same as the previous one; this means the connector still features the tapered design, and matte finish which is fine with me.
Update [12/25] I used the C-C cable while driving for 7+ hours yesterday and it performed just as you would expect. I also used both cables in my Google Dual Port Type-C charger to charge my wife's 6P and mine last night. The cables have been working great, and my wife enjoys it more than the stock cable because it's much longer, and has a better build overall.
Update[12/25] Part 2: Tronsmart also mentioned that a C-C cable should not have a 56K pull resistor, or any resistor as noted in "3.4.2 "USB 2.0 Type-C Cable Assembly" for instructions on how to build a legal C-to-C cable. Adding a resistor would be wrong". I really appreciate Tronsmart's great service, and how they reached out to me with this information. I rarely see companies go to these lengths without first asking, but Tronsmart did this on their own without me having to ask. I'm going to buy some more of their cables because they have excellent service, and I could always use more cables.
Pictures:
Packaging:
Connector Black:
Connector White:
Type-C Connector Side View Black:
Type-C Connector Side View White:
Tronsmart MicroUSB-C 2 pack
http://www.amazon.com/Tronsmart-Con..._UL160_SR160,160_&refRID=1G77XXSTWZGMBC089VAT
Tronsmart decided to also make a MicroUSB-C adapter so you can use all of your old microUSB cables. These adapters also come in a 2 pack (1 white and 1 black) just like Tronsmart’s cables. I only have a handful of cables left over (primarily for my Nvidia Shield TV PRO), but these will still get used for a variety of reasons. I usually carry a USB Type A-C/C-C cables around, but this adapter is more practical in a different way. I can easily carry this in my backpack just in case I wanted to leave out my other cables, and need to charge my phone. The majority of people I know still use a microUSB cable to charge their phone, and this allows you to charge your 6P via the old cables. It is very small (easy to lose unfortunately, I wish they included a key fob like OnePlus did) but brings exactly what you need if you need to charge your phone but only have access to microUSB cables. I plan to carry one of each cable, and these adapters around with me because I like to be over prepared rather than under-prepare. I also have the TechMatte microUSB adapters, but their quality is far lower than the Tronsmart ones. The adapters remain consistent with Tronsmarts other Type-C accessories and feature a tapered body which makes them less susceptible to breaking. I can’t find any flaws in these adapters other than they don’t come with some form of holder which would prevent them from getting lost easily.
Pictures:
MicroUSB End:
Top View:
Cable Dimensions Table:
Tronsmart 33W Dual Port Type-C, Type-A Wall Charger
Tronsmart Dual Port Type-C, Type-A 33W Travel Charger
Overview
Tronsmart is on a roll with all of their great new products being released. They Dual Port Type-C/Type-A wall charger is no exception with a familiar designto the other dual port charger they sent me. The charger is small enough to easily bring in your bad, and it has the advantage of packing both a Type-A & Type-C port for maximum versatility. I am going to bring this with me to school on a daily basis as a means of an emergency charger/long term test.
Packaging
What’s in the box
A dual port charger, and some basic documentation with Tronsmart's usual contact information.
Build & Design
I've been enjoying the other dual port charger I was sent because of its nice compact form. The addition of a fold-able plug gives the charger the extra portability you need when carrying one around. The charger features Tronsmarts signature glossy edge coupled with a nice matte plastic body. A high quality feeling plastic is used which gives it a better feel than the stock Huawei, or the Google 22.5W dual port chargers.
Ports:
Back:
Top:
Bottom:
Plug Un-folded:
Charging
The Type-A port will charge using Tronsmarts Volt IQ up to 5V/3A, while the Type-C port uses Qualcomms Quick Charge 3.0. I have tested both ports with my 6P, a dock, Shield Controller, and external battery packs. The Type-C port will only push up to 5V/3A and not the QC 3.0 which is good. Tronsmart designed the charger so it would identify the phone, and provide only the current it could handle. This is the same idea behind their Type-C/Type-A car charger I reviewed above which is still working flawlessly. If there are any concerns over the use of QC 3.0 via the Type-C port please refer to the links I posted in the car charger section for a better explanation.
Here is a breakdown of the charging by port:
Type-A: 5V/3A
Type-C: 3.6-6.5V/3A, 6.5-9V/2A, and 9-12V/1.5A
Picture of my 6P, and battery pack charging from both ports (the 6P is "rapid charging", and the battery pack is charging slower because it was nearly full)
Summary
Tronsmart made another excellent charger using the tried and true design language that should last for a long time. I like the versatility of the foldable plug and inclusion of both types of USB ports. I would buy one of these as a gift without hesitation given its performance build, and Tronsmart's exceptional service!
At the request of Tronsmart I removed the 'hide' image tags for the car charger so the pictures can be seen immediately without clicking on each one.
Update #1 [1/12] Tronsmart is adding a PTC (positive temperature coefficient to all of their Type-C products) This is also known as a thermistor to counter some issues people had with the cables. Tronsmart stated that people who did not keep the cables dry during use/clean experienced issues, but I wouldn't worry about it as this time. The addition of the thermistor is more of a preventative measure to ensure there are no issues for anyone despite using a cable incorrectly. I have not experienced any issues personally with their products, and I will continue to use them on a daily basis unless something prevents me from doing so. I was told the Type-C products that I currently have will be replaced which is going above and beyond in my opinion. I will update this statement with any new information as it becomes available.
Update #2 [1/12] PTC is not the standard, but rather a step above in terms of safety. I wanted to add that all of these cables are 100% compliant and meet the USB specification as outlined with Benson Leungs approval. Tronsmart is going above and beyond to ensure consumer safety with their products. No other USB Type-C cables on the market current incorporate a thermistor, so with Tronsmart's revised cables you will never have to worry. (the stock Google cables do NOT have a thermistor) I believe Tronsmart is trying their best to instill confidence in their products, and stand above the rest. This is my personal opinion based on my communication with them regarding issues I've had/seen.

Very professional review! Thanks! Got the tronsmart type c car charger and the type c to a cable:good: Actually I had found the new tronsmart car charger before but didn't find any review here.

jisddwqs said:
Very professional review! Thanks! Got the tronsmart type c car charger and the type c to a cable:good: Actually I had found the new tronsmart car charger before but didn't find any review here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you, I will post an update after my ~7-8 hour roadtrip tomorrow. I'm going to use it to keep my Nexus 6P and my wife's 6P charged during the trip. The charger seems to work just as well as my other Type-C car charger (except that one has a fixed cable), and I like the ability to use a longer cable if I want to.

Pilz said:
Thank you, I will post an update after my ~7-8 hour roadtrip tomorrow. I'm going to use it to keep my Nexus 6P and my wife's 6P charged during the trip. The charger seems to work just as well as my other Type-C car charger (except that one has a fixed cable), and I like the ability to use a longer cable if I want to.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How about the update? Does it work well? PS: The link of "Tronsmart Cables/Car Charger/Adapter Review" in your signature is wrong. Just link to the post"[Review 12/23] Case Comparison: 15+ cases (Hybrid, Clear, Slim, Rugged & TPU)"

Send the product link to Benson Leung without his approval don't buy it.
His reviewed products so far

jisddwqs said:
How about the update? Does it work well? PS: The link of "Tronsmart Cables/Car Charger/Adapter Review" in your signature is wrong. Just link to the post"[Review 12/23] Case Comparison: 15+ cases (Hybrid, Clear, Slim, Rugged & TPU)"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I fixed the link in my signature thank for you the heads up. Next, I was driving all day yesterday and I said I would update it when I had the time; it was noted in the OP that I would be out of town, and update the OP when I have the time because of that. I have a few minutes now so I will add some more to it. I do this in my free time, so please keep that in mind.
MrKaon said:
Send the product link to Benson Leung without his approval don't buy it.
His reviewed products so far
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm well aware of his product reviews as I mentioned very clearly in my OP. Benson Leung doesn't ask companies to send him products, but rather he buys them and conducts testing independently. He doesn't need to approve every cable in order for it to be approved. Check-R is just as accurate, and other people on Amazon who own a Pixel tested it the same way as Benson which resulted in the cable passing the test with flying colors. You cannot say "without his approval don't buy it." when there are tons of cables inspec cables that he hasn't tested. No one can seriously expect him to test every cable hence the Check-R app, and other people conducting their own tests within the same standards.
The A-C, and MicroUSB-C cable/adapter pass Check-R just fine; I see no reason why the C-C only wouldn't as well, but I don't have a Type-C port on my laptop or adapter to verify that. I highly doubt Tronsmart would make the A-C cable compliant and then make the C-C non compliant so it's safe to assume that it is indeed compliant.

Pilz said:
Thank you, I will post an update after my ~7-8 hour roadtrip tomorrow. I'm going to use it to keep my Nexus 6P and my wife's 6P charged during the trip. The charger seems to work just as well as my other Type-C car charger (except that one has a fixed cable), and I like the ability to use a longer cable if I want to.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My car has a bluetooth puck that is powered by a USB port. I read that if you have something connected to the Type C port of a car charger and then connect another device, the charging ability to either device drops like a rock. (I currently have an OMAKER 6.6A 3-port USB Type A charger).
Can you replicate this? I doubt my BT puck needs to draw a huge amount of power, but it definitely has no battery and has to run on power (this was intentional, because I wanted the puck to turn on the moment the car is turned on and turn off with the car).

LiquidSolstice said:
My car has a bluetooth puck that is powered by a USB port. I read that if you have something connected to the Type C port of a car charger and then connect another device, the charging ability to either device drops like a rock. (I currently have an OMAKER 6.6A 3-port USB Type A charger).
Can you replicate this? I doubt my BT puck needs to draw a huge amount of power, but it definitely has no battery and has to run on power (this was intentional, because I wanted the puck to turn on the moment the car is turned on and turn off with the car).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll test it with my wife's 6P and mine on both ports and let you know. I'll need to make sure both batteries are lower so they will draw more power, then let you know how it performs.

OP Updated with more remarks concerning the cable certification as previously mentioned.

Pilz said:
I'm well aware of his product reviews as I mentioned very clearly in my OP. Benson Leung doesn't ask companies to send him products, but rather he buys them and conducts testing independently. He doesn't need to approve every cable in order for it to be approved. Check-R is just as accurate, and other people on Amazon who own a Pixel tested it the same way as Benson which resulted in the cable passing the test with flying colors. You cannot say "without his approval don't buy it." when there are tons of cables inspec cables that he hasn't tested. No one can seriously expect him to test every cable hence the Check-R app, and other people conducting their own tests within the same standards.
The A-C, and MicroUSB-C cable/adapter pass Check-R just fine; I see no reason why the C-C only wouldn't as well, but I don't have a Type-C port on my laptop or adapter to verify that. I highly doubt Tronsmart would make the A-C cable compliant and then make the C-C non compliant so it's safe to assume that it is indeed compliant.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Benson doesn't reviews C to C cable only A-C cables and car chargers (already disapproved other Tronsmart charger) after searching Car Charger Thread I find out his opinion about this charger:
Please read the language in section 4.8.2 closely. It prohibits a proprietary charging method, which is what QC is, from modifying the voltage at the charger or the phone side. It's not possible to be compliant with both at the same time.
The way I read the spec, it is also against spec to charge legacy devices at higher voltages (ie an older phone with a MicroB port and supports QC) out of the same Type C port.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The spec prohibits it because it allowing it would cause significant confusion between two different methods of varying Vbus in a Type-C system. USB PD is the officially sanctioned method, and has some important advantages over any of the existing QCs. Specifically, you will NEVER see a QC hub or charging+data port on your computer because QC completely takes over the USB data lines. USB PD does not do this and there are already fast charging hubs on the market that also hook up USB 2.0 and 3.1 data lines.
Also, allowing it would potentially cause problems with legacy A-to-C cables by changing Vbus, it affects the reading the adc on the device side would read from CC.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Source
So don't buy it.
Only car charger that has passed his review with only 4 star is Vinsic.

Ha ha I am the one he had to clarify too lol.

MrKaon said:
Benson doesn't reviews C to C cable only A-C cables and car chargers (already disapproved other Tronsmart charger) after searching Car Charger Thread I find out his opinion about this charger:
Source
So don't buy it.
Only car charger that has passed his review with only 4 star is Vinsic.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for the link, I read through the Google + posts then amended the OP to reflect what you referenced. Now, despite the car charger not being compliant, the cables are still perfectly in spec and work fine. I appreciate the link, and information. I tagged you in the OP, then inserted the link you provided so other users can have a look at it.:good:

So the important part, does it work properly like the stock charger? AFAIK and researched, Tronsmart made a 2in1 charger (QC 3.0 + 5V*3A) in one port, that's why it's not in spec. But so far on your review, it works perfectly, and is giving 2700ma when charging.
Sent from my SM-N9208 using Tapatalk

swiftden said:
So the important part, does it work properly like the stock charger? AFAIK and researched, Tronsmart made a 2in1 charger (QC 3.0 + 5V*3A) in one port, that's why it's not in spec. But so far on your review, it works perfectly, and is giving 2700ma when charging.
Sent from my SM-N9208 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It works just like the stock charger and will give 2.9-3A when the battery is low. I can take a screenshot later when I drain my battery enough and post it in the OP. I know its not up to the correct spec, but it still works fine. I can't recommend people use it because its not correct, yet I haven't had any issues to suggest its unsafe in any way. I have a different car charger (JOTO I believe) and it has a fixed cable which chargers at 5V/3A as well. I'll test both and take screenshots so you can see the rates each one charges at.

Pilz said:
It works just like the stock charger and will give 2.9-3A when the battery is low. I can take a screenshot later when I drain my battery enough and post it in the OP. I know its not up to the correct spec, but it still works fine. I can't recommend people use it because its not correct, yet I haven't had any issues to suggest its unsafe in any way. I have a different car charger (JOTO I believe) and it has a fixed cable which chargers at 5V/3A as well. I'll test both and take screenshots so you can see the rates each one charges at.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good to know that it's working properly and PERFECTLY. =) Read the whole thread on reddit. The only issue is, you can't mix QC 3.0 and 5V*3A(Type C charging) in one port. Something about the guidelines.
Tronsmart did it anyway, and made it work. Dunno what the issue is about anymore.
While Benson Leung did great on pointing out the defeciencies in the market, I think this scare is already blown out IMO.
But more importantly, thank you so much for the review. ??
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

swiftden said:
Good to know that it's working properly and PERFECTLY. =) Read the whole thread on reddit. The only issue is, you can't mix QC 3.0 and 5V*3A(Type C charging) in one port. Something about the guidelines.
Tronsmart did it anyway, and made it work. Dunno what the issue is about anymore.
While Benson Leung did great on pointing out the defeciencies in the market, I think this scare is already blown out IMO.
But more importantly, thank you so much for the review. ??
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know enough about electronic circuits to say there won't be an issue seeing as I'm finishing a degree in Petroleum Engineering which is quite different. I'm not concerned about it killing my phone unless evidence shows otherwise, but I can't state that people should buy it because of what was mentioned. I still really like the charger, and I will continue to use it daily because its nice. I hope the issue gets sorted out sooner rather than later. I PM'd Tronsmart about the discrepancy, and I will post their response in the OP. I think out of spec A-C cables are more of a hazard personally, but the Tronsmart ones are in spec are made correctly.

Pilz said:
I don't know enough about electronic circuits to say there won't be an issue seeing as I'm finishing a degree in Petroleum Engineering which is quite different. I'm not concerned about it killing my phone unless evidence shows otherwise, but I can't state that people should buy it because of what was mentioned. I still really like the charger, and I will continue to use it daily because its nice. I hope the issue gets sorted out sooner rather than later. I PM'd Tronsmart about the discrepancy, and I will post their response in the OP. I think out of spec A-C cables are more of a hazard personally, but the Tronsmart ones are in spec are made correctly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting, I find that aukey also released a similar charger with quick charge 3.0 and the type c port(the same as the tronsmart one). Also put the quick charge 3.0 into the type c port. Can't post the amazon link here now. You can search"aukey type c charger" then you can find it.

OP Updated [12/29] with even more information regarding the Type-C standard. It creates more confusion, but also clears some other things up.

jisddwqs said:
Interesting, I find that aukey also released a similar charger with quick charge 3.0 and the type c port(the same as the tronsmart one). Also put the quick charge 3.0 into the type c port. Can't post the amazon link here now. You can search"aukey type c charger" then you can find it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
According to Benson Leungs post that charger doesn't meet the USB standard. I think Qualcomm is misleading some of these manufacturers by having their QC 3.0 standard not meet the USB one.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B0119DC9O6/ref=yo_ii_img?ie=UTF8&psc=1
Anyone know if this one is safe to use?