Related
I have many chargers, but this one seems to be a winner for multiple ports with the added quick charge 2.0 port.
http://www.amazon.com/Qualcomm-Cert...mer-Included/dp/B00ZF7XLJU/ref=cm_rdp_product
I've had some more time reviewing this charger since I use it on a daily basis in my car. My original review is still true and can be found below. I've added a couple images of the product to show the quality of the finish as well as a size comparison between a couple other multi-port chargers I have. While this charger is the largest of my stash, it also provides the most charging ports while incorporating a quick charge 2.0 outlet. The size is a double edged sword in my opinion. Many 12v outlets are recessed, so the longer adapter of the Tronsmart charger can be quite beneficial. I know it would help in my Toyota Camry, but not so important in my Honda Odyssey. Due to the longer adapter size, I'm concerned I will one day drop something on it and damage my 12v outlet.
Anyways, on to the review.
Pros:
+4 USB charging ports (1 QuickCharge 2.0 + 3 auto detect 2.4Amp)
+Slim simple design
+No bright annoying LED
Cons:
-none to report (possibly the size)
The Tronsmart 4 port car charger is simply amazing. I have tested it thoroughly over the past week and have decided to use it as my primary car charger! I own many many car chargers, but there are very few that provide 4 powerful charging ports in such a compact design. This charger is rated at 54 watts, but all you really need to know is that it will charge all of your devices with ease. The primary advantage this car charger offers is the 4 port design with 1 being Qualcomm Quick Charger 2.0 certified. This means it is designed for long term use as new phones and products are just now being developed to work with this technology. The remaining 3 ports are not to be forgotten either, rated at 2.4 Amps each. They are also smart charging ports (Tronsmart calls them Volt IQ ports) which basically means the port will automatically sense and charge the connected device at its maximum rate.
I tested this charger using a variety of devices (Samsung Galaxy S6, S5, iPad, iPhone 6, and battery banks) and they all accepted the charge immediately and at similar charging currents as I've seen on with other chargers. My Galaxy S6 registers this charger as fast charging when connected to the Quick Charger 2.0 (blue) port. I used a Portapow V2 USB current meter to verify the charging rates while all four ports were in use. I alternated devices between the ports and the results are consistent with advertised rates. Through my experience testing many chargers, I've come to learn that the charging limitation comes down to either the charger, the USB cable, or the device itself. Rest assured that this car charger is not the limiting factor when you are maximizing your charging speeds.
I received this product at no charge in exchange for an honest review. I am using this charger on a daily basis as my primary charger, so I will update if I notice anything out of the ordinary. Please also let me know if you have any specific questions and I will do my best to answer them.
I agree. I also received this charger from Tronsmart, and it's been great!.
(Mine was sent for free, in exchange for my writing an honest review. [http://www.amazon.com/review/R9A6YSQ37WQZE] And, if I didn't like it, I wouldn't hesitate to say so. After all, it's a $20.00 item. Definitely not worth being a shill for that. Fortunately, I like it very much.)
The charger seems to be one of a number of quality items being manufactured in China, and repackaged under the Tronsmart, Anker, and Aukey brand. (Most of those items were purchased, including others from Tronsmart). But, this isn't a bad thing, as I've used many accessories from each over the past couple of years, and they've delivered good performance at a good price.
My setup is a Nexus 6, while my wife uses (my old) Nexus 5. We both drive Honda CR-Vs. My N6 charges quickly using the Qualcomm QC 2.0 port, although it also charges well with the Volt IQ "intelligent" ports as well. My wife's N5 charges quickly, too, albeit without the QC 2.0.
What I like about this charger is that it's still relatively small, despite having the 4 ports. This is VERY HANDY when my kids are in the car for a long drive, and their own tablets are sucking down battery life. When used with a longer USB cable from Tronsmart (or, Anker, which I've also purchased), they can charge from the back seat.
I bought a single-port Tronsmart QC 2.0 car charger, as well as a two-port Aukey (one port QC 2.0, one a "smart" charging port), and though they all work well, this is the one I have stuck with. Dependable, good quality, and very reasonably priced. If you have more than two devices to charge in the car, you can't really do much better than this at this price-point.
Nice car charger, I have bought a note 5. And also find that tronsmart has the dual 2.0 ports car charger. Both of the ports have QC 2.0. I will get it when it is available at amazon
haic said:
Nice car charger, I have bought a note 5. And also find that tronsmart has the dual 2.0 ports car charger. Both of the ports have QC 2.0. I will get it when it is available at amazon
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The model you are talking already list on amazon, check it here:
http://www.amazon.com/Tronsmart-Qua...TF8&qid=1441770789&sr=8-12&keywords=tronsmart
it's great this model comes with two micro usb cables.
I bought this charger and am mostly happy with it. It does charge at fast charger rates most of the time. Sometimes I have to plug it in a second or third time before the phone recognizes it as a fast charger. The problem I have with it, is it won't stay in the car outlet. It is so skinny, and the side spring contacts cause it to continuously eject from my jeep power outlet. It will pop out just far enough that it will stop charging with out noticing it. Might have to rig it with tape or something.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
I bought the Tronsmart 2-port Quickcharge 2.0 Car Charger... Holy good god, Its become essential in my car for charging my S6 using GPS/Music Streaming. Never had any issues with my S6 or girlfriends Note 5.
If you guys have been waiting for a quick charge 3.0 compatible charger, the Tronsmart Quick Charger 3.0 which will be be compatible with the A9 is now available on Amazon:
http://goo.gl/vb4Ryl
Featured with the latest Charging Technology Quick Charge 3.0, 27% faster than Quick Charge 2.0.
38% most efficient compare to the previous generation Quick Charge 2.0
Decrease the extra heat of the compatible phone upto 45%
Backwards compatible with Quick Charge 2.0 & Quick Charge 1.0
Package Content:1 x Tronsmart Quick Charge 3.0 Wall Charger, 1 x Quick Charge 3.0 Charging Cable, 1 x Warranty Card.
Aukey also has one available, and it looks slightly more compact:
http://www.amazon.com/Qualcomm-Certified-Aukey-Charger-Included/dp/B015FPKEM8/ref=cm_rdp_product
thisisjason said:
Aukey also has one available, and it looks slightly more compact:
http://www.amazon.com/Qualcomm-Certified-Aukey-Charger-Included/dp/B015FPKEM8/ref=cm_rdp_product
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I saw the Aukey 3.0 charger it became available a day or two after the Tronsmart charger. I have an Aukey qc 2.0 wall and car charger which are both excellent. I went ahead and ordered the Tronsmart charger I listed which is also qc 2.0/1.0 compatible, I should have it tomorrow. I wanted to compare the build quality between them.
Both have proven track records so more than likely either one will be a safe bet regardless of which one you choose. I'll post a follow up once I receive it!
gheymann said:
I saw the Aukey 3.0 charger it became available a day or two after the Tronsmart charger. I have an Aukey qc 2.0 wall and car charger which are both excellent. I went ahead and ordered the Tronsmart charger I listed which is also qc 2.0/1.0 compatible, I should have it tomorrow. I wanted to compare the build quality between them.
Both have proven track records so more than likely either one will be a safe bet regardless of which one you choose. I'll post a follow up once I receive it!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Looking forward to your thoughts on it. I have a Tronsmart QC 2.0 car charger, very good quality.
I also noticed that the Tronsmart includes a longer USB cable, which is nice.
gheymann said:
I saw the Aukey 3.0 charger it became available a day or two after the Tronsmart charger. I have an Aukey qc 2.0 wall and car charger which are both excellent. I went ahead and ordered the Tronsmart charger I listed which is also qc 2.0/1.0 compatible, I should have it tomorrow. I wanted to compare the build quality between them.
Both have proven track records so more than likely either one will be a safe bet regardless of which one you choose. I'll post a follow up once I receive it!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How about the build quality between them? Any update?
haic said:
How about the build quality between them? Any update?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi
The Tronsmart qc 3.0 charger is very solidly built and smaller than I expected, it is close to the same size as my Aukey 2.0 quickcharger although it feels slightly bigger in the hand due to the the defined edges while the Aukey is rounded on either side and relatively flat on top and bottom.
I don't have any qc 3.0 devices at this point to be able to give a comparison of charge times between the qc 3.0 and 2.0 charging, although I don't have any reason to doubt the quoted specs since the qc 2.0 times have proven to be correct over time.
I will say that anecdotally there does seem to be a little bit of a difference when charging a qc 2.0 phone with the Tronsmart 3.0 charger, and that is that it seems to take slightly longer to charge the phone when compared with the Aukey 2.0 charger but the phone doesn't seem to get as warm when quick charging.
This wasn't a scientific test just a general observation, so your mileage may vary, I hope this is helpful. I can say that I wouldn't have any problem recommending Tronsmart or Aukey chargers going forward they have similar specs and are both priced competitively.
I cancelled my HTC one a9 pre-order after the shipping was delayed, so I'm not sure when I will have a qc 3.0 device to test it with.
Just bought the Tronsmart QC 3.0 and it came today, and Quickcharge 3.0 isn't as fast as I expected it to be... I got home from work and did a little experiment, Phone was at 6%, and as I plugged it in, I set a timer. 32 minutes into charging, my phone (HTC One A9) was only at 43%. Much slower than I expected... 37% in 32 minutes, nowhere near the advertised speed of 85% in 35 minutes on a 3300mAh battery. Airplane mode was also turned on while charging.
Would not recommend.
hyudryu said:
Just bought the Tronsmart QC 3.0 and it came today, and Quickcharge 3.0 isn't as fast as I expected it to be... I got home from work and did a little experiment, Phone was at 6%, and as I plugged it in, I set a timer. 32 minutes into charging, my phone (HTC One A9) was only at 43%. Much slower than I expected... 37% in 32 minutes, nowhere near the advertised speed of 85% in 35 minutes on a 3300mAh battery. Airplane mode was also turned on while charging.
Would not recommend.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have read some news that the early version of HTC One A9 just comes with QC2.0 support, but a future software update will bring the QC3.0.
appleli1 said:
I have read some news that the early version of HTC One A9 just comes with QC2.0 support, but a future software update will bring the QC3.0.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Even at qc 2.0 speeds, it shouldn't be charging at around 1% every minute right? or am I wrong. When I saw the quick charge statistics of 60% in 30 minutes, I imagined around 2% a minute
hyudryu said:
Even at qc 2.0 speeds, it shouldn't be charging at around 1% every minute right? or am I wrong. When I saw the quick charge statistics of 60% in 30 minutes, I imagined around 2% a minute
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That fast charge 0-60% in 30 min is the test done by qualcomm in the lab. Actually there will be some errors between different devices which support QC 2.0 technology.
hyudryu said:
Just bought the Tronsmart QC 3.0 and it came today, and Quickcharge 3.0 isn't as fast as I expected it to be... I got home from work and did a little experiment, Phone was at 6%, and as I plugged it in, I set a timer. 32 minutes into charging, my phone (HTC One A9) was only at 43%. Much slower than I expected... 37% in 32 minutes, nowhere near the advertised speed of 85% in 35 minutes on a 3300mAh battery. Airplane mode was also turned on while charging.
Would not recommend.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you have that usb mah meter i have one and lg g4 charge at 9v 1.35A while note 5 9v 1.65a so its up to deive manufacture get the voltage done and qualcom test is at max qc2.0 speeds thats 12v 1.5a or more? thats double the 9v charging so yea 2% per min
yosef019 said:
Do you have that usb mah meter i have one and lg g4 charge at 9v 1.35A while note 5 9v 1.65a so its up to deive manufacture get the voltage done and qualcom test is at max qc2.0 speeds thats 12v 1.5a or more? thats double the 9v charging so yea 2% per min
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No I don't have a current meter that can measure USB currents. It's only 1% a minute when charging my phone. Quick charge is way too hyped up.
I always look into verified purchaser ratings in amazon while buying anything. I found the following Quick Charge 3.0 which (brands) are listed in qualcomm website (website doesn't have 3.0 listing of accessories, but these manufacturers of accessories are found:
1. JDB Quick Charge 3.0 18W USB - $26.99 (61 customers - 5stars) - http://www.amazon.com/Qualcomm-JDB-...860&sr=1-6&keywords=qualcomm+quick+charge+3.0
2. Anker PowerPort+ 1 (Quick Charge 3.0 18W USB Wall Charger) - $25.99 (45 customers - 5 stars) - http://www.amazon.com/Qualcomm-Anke...860&sr=1-1&keywords=qualcomm+quick+charge+3.0
I am still waiting on my HTC A9 pre-order to be delivered, would pick any of these. If anyone bought either of these please give me your opinions on these. By the way, has A9 received the update that would support quick charge 3.0 yet (it was told that, the new s/w update later in the year would support QC 3.0)
Edit: Also found this one for $15, and it says qualcomm quick charge 3.0. Looks very cost effective, but none of the review highlight on QC 3.0. Did anyone try this? http://www.newnow.com/products/tc-0...INWCtxjqipuNSxwZhGJVeE3T1EaAjWI8P8HAQ#proDesc
hyudryu said:
Even at qc 2.0 speeds, it shouldn't be charging at around 1% every minute right? or am I wrong. When I saw the quick charge statistics of 60% in 30 minutes, I imagined around 2% a minute
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I bought this same charger too and I'm with you, doesn't seem any faster that my regular charger. the Anker 3.0 wasn't listed (or I missed it) when I ordered the Transmart or I would have ordered that one instead.
i'll check the voltage & amps in GSam next time I charge to see what it says.
I bought the JDB QC 3.0 charger on eBay from China for $18 (also available on AliExpress for $14). It seems like a good deal and good quality if one can be patient.
I do wish those of you posting performance comments would hold your water until your phone actually supports version 3.0; until then the 3.0 chargers aren't likely to be any faster with 2.0 phones (e.g. the A9 with current firmware).
FWIW the 3.0 spec defines charge voltages every 0.2V from 3.6V (some places say 3.2V) all the way up to 20V. That does not mean that all chargers offer this range, or that all devices can use these voltages (the phone determines which of the available voltages to use through time). The 2.0 spec only had a few charge voltages to choose from so the more granular voltage choices with 3.0 should be a win for all devices. All of the chargers mentioned so far offer a top voltage of 12V at 1.5A (compared to HTC's 2.0 max of 12V at 1.25A). At 9V there is 2A available (compared to 1.67A for 2.0). In the range around 5V the different products list different currents between 2A and 3A but at this stage I suspect the spec differences are probably not real (2.0 is 1.67A for comparison). So potentially 3.0 can provide up to 20% more current than 2.0 across the voltage range. In practice the greatest benefit will be to devices with large batteries (i.e. not A9) as they can absorb charge faster - it is quite possible that the A9 will not benefit from the higher available currents at all (but still benefit from the smaller voltage steps). I look forward to getting real world measurements.
Greg
CarinaPDX said:
I bought the JDB QC 3.0 charger on eBay from China for $18 (also available on AliExpress for $14). It seems like a good deal and good quality if one can be patient.
I do wish those of you posting performance comments would hold your water until your phone actually supports version 3.0; until then the 3.0 chargers aren't likely to be any faster with 2.0 phones (e.g. the A9 with current firmware).
FWIW the 3.0 spec defines charge voltages every 0.2V from 3.6V (some places say 3.2V) all the way up to 20V. That does not mean that all chargers offer this range, or that all devices can use these voltages (the phone determines which of the available voltages to use through time). The 2.0 spec only had a few charge voltages to choose from so the more granular voltage choices with 3.0 should be a win for all devices. All of the chargers mentioned so far offer a top voltage of 12V at 1.5A (compared to HTC's 2.0 max of 12V at 1.25A). At 9V there is 2A available (compared to 1.67A for 2.0). In the range around 5V the different products list different currents between 2A and 3A but at this stage I suspect the spec differences are probably not real (2.0 is 1.67A for comparison). So potentially 3.0 can provide up to 20% more current than 2.0 across the voltage range. In practice the greatest benefit will be to devices with large batteries (i.e. not A9) as they can absorb charge faster - it is quite possible that the A9 will not benefit from the higher available currents at all (but still benefit from the smaller voltage steps). I look forward to getting real world measurements.
Greg
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just did a little experiment with my HTC one a9 and my old iphone 6. I used both till they are the same battery level (16%), and (With airplane mode on for both devices) I plugged my HTC to the tronsmart qc 3.0 adapter, and my iphone into the HTC charger that came in the box. A little while later, I checked the percentages and they were exactly the same. Either my HTC is charging at conventional speeds, or the iPhone charges at the same speed as Qc 2.0 (Roughly 1% every minute), Never owned a Qc 2.0 device so not sure if that's the normal speed... Anyone have any input on this?
It's not just comparing apples and oranges, there are multiple differences: battery capacity, age, and charging regimens available in both phones and chargers. I don't see any comparability. As for charging regimens, the new A9 is a QC 2.0 device (for now) charging on a QC 3.0 charger, which means the CPU will only request voltages that are available in QC 2.0 and only with slightly higher amperage available from the charger (which may not even be usable with the A9's small battery). So I expect little or no improvement over a QC 2.0 charger. We will have to wait for a test of QC 3.0. The iPhone uses Apple's own charging regimen, which usually doesn't charge fast unless connected to an Apple charger, or one able to act like one. I suspect the QC chargers have that ability, as it is increasingly common, so the question is how much current is available in the charger for the Qualcomm implementation of the Apple protocol?
I think the identical charging times is just an accident.
hyudryu said:
I just did a little experiment with my HTC one a9 and my old iphone 6. I used both till they are the same battery level (16%), and (With airplane mode on for both devices) I plugged my HTC to the tronsmart qc 3.0 adapter, and my iphone into the HTC charger that came in the box. A little while later, I checked the percentages and they were exactly the same. Either my HTC is charging at conventional speeds, or the iPhone charges at the same speed as Qc 2.0 (Roughly 1% every minute), Never owned a Qc 2.0 device so not sure if that's the normal speed... Anyone have any input on this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you owned any HTC Phone since One M8 series, all of them came with QC 2.0 charger, including the A9 bundled charger
Cashreedhar said:
If you owned any HTC Phone since One M8 series, all of them came with QC 2.0 charger, including the A9 bundled charger
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So you're saying that QC 2.0 is supposed to charge at 1% every minute? That's very slow compared to Qualcomm's advertised speeds. And if the iPhone 6 charges at the same speed as the HTC One A9, then does that means the iPhone supports QC 2.0? I find that weird because Apple's specs say nothing about quick charging.
hyudryu said:
So you're saying that QC 2.0 is supposed to charge at 1% every minute? That's very slow compared to Qualcomm's advertised speeds. And if the iPhone 6 charges at the same speed as the HTC One A9, then does that means the iPhone supports QC 2.0? I find that weird because Apple's specs say nothing about quick charging.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not sure if it is 1% per minute. My M8 charges 70% in an hour. QC 2.0 is the technology of qualcomm and nothing to do with Apple. Apple doesn't use the the qualcomm technology but they have their own, and advanced Apple iPhones have charging capacity similar to QC 2.0 . QC 3.0 is going to be the new technogy when qualcomm makes it available through HTC update, which we are expecting to be a great upgrade (which is not available on A9 yet, though the hardware is all set to do that)
Hi,
Just wanted to share my experience with adaptive/fast chargers.
Recently purchased four different manufacturers chargers from Amazon in an attempt to find one that would live up to its claims of charging at the maximum capacity of the phones battery and be an improvement over the stock charger.
The chargers were tested using an Xperia Z2, Samsung Galaxy S6 and an Xperia Tablet Z.
Below are the four that were purchased:
- AUKEY Wall Charger 3 Ports 30W / 6A USB Travel Adapter
- TeckNet® PowerZone C3 Universal BLUETEK™ USB-C Power Adapter 24W/5V 4.8A 4 Port USB Wall Charger
- Tronsmart 42W 3-Port USB Wall Charger
- Orico 30W 6A 4-Port Mains USB Charger
Initially I tested each charger using Ampere(Play Store) and though the results varied, none of the chargers seemed to output more than 500-850ma. I also noted that in the Ampere App, the Max USB current value was set at 1000ma for all four chargers. When using the stock Sony or Samsung Apaptive Charger, the Max USB current was detected correctly at 1500ma and while the Sony 1500ma charger only ever managed an output of 950-1100ma, the Samsung 2000ma charger managed an output of 1300-1400ma.
With the varying results using Ampere I purchased an inline USB current meter (). I had sent the first three chargers back by this point but still had the Orico.
Using the inline current meter I found it more accurate and if it was showing a reading of 1000ma, Ampere would show anywhere between 200-700ma which makes me wonder how accurate the Ampere App actually is.
Using the inline meter the Orico could only supply 950-1100ma. Given each port is claimed to output upto 2.4 amps I would have expected it to at least get close to 1500ma.
In the end I purchased a cheap Foxconn dual port 2000ma charger and using the inline meter it showed 1400-1500ma.
Not even the Tronsmart which comes with a Quickcharge 2.0 port could manage more than 1100ma on either the Z2 or S6.
I don't really know what all this means but it seems all these manufacturers are maybe using the same internals and the adaptive charging is detecting only 1000ma on the devices I tested them with.
A frustrating experience to find a fast charger but I hope this information is helpful to others and I'd be interested to hear others opinions/experiences with such chargers.
This was my first post so apologies if its not in the right section.
Thanks
I think, Fast charge need to be enabled in the kernel, did you try that
There is a lot of ongoing work by companies to manufacture charging products for new USB Power Delivery (USB-PD) and Qualcomm Quick Charge (QC) devices. Because the USB-PD and QC specifications are at direct odds with each other, the products are difficult to standardize, leading to confusion among consumers. Essentially, anything that does not adhere to the strict USB-C specifications is considered in violation. Google Engineer Benson Leung has tested numerous USB-C cables and chargers and found many to not be within USB-C specification. This implies they may be dangerous for USB-PD devices. However, I have not seen any true proof of QC chargers damaging USB-PD devices, only that they will not fast charge them.
The engineering points are numerous and can get fairly complex, beyond the scope of this review. However, I find it important to add to the fount of knowledge with our new phones and charging devices, and this is my small contribution.
I own a LG G5 phone, and my testing and comments are limited to this device only.
My simple method is to use a USB-A multimeter as well as the Android OS’s amperage reading. There are limitations to this. Primarily, I have been informed that the Android OS amperage is based on a voltage of 5V. This was certainly fine in the days pre-Qualcomm Quick Charge, but now with higher and variable voltage, the amperage readings are not reliable. Secondly, as this is a USB-A meter, I have no way of directly monitoring USB-C amperage or voltage. Thirdly, I do not have the ability to digitally log the voltage off the multimeter, so some of the data points presented are more general than I would like.
Here I am reviewing the Tronsmart Presto 12000mAh battery pack, which has both a USB-C port for USB-PD devices (Nexus 6P, etc) and a USB-A port for QC3.0 devices (LG G5, HTC10). It is available here:
https://amazon.com/gp/product/B01GVBFBBO/ref=ox_sc_sfl_title_4?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ALTVS0Q5KJ7M3
It was provide to me for my review.
The main selling point of this battery pack aside from the QC3.0 capability is the dual types of ports. If you happen to have both QC3.0 and USB-PD devices, this battery pack can theoretically fast charge either. The QC3.0 port is rated at the usual QC3.0 voltages/amperages, and the USB-PD port is rated at 5V/3A. It comes with a short USB-A to USB-C cable to be used with the QC3.0 port. You’ll have to supply your own double-ended USB-C cable if you want to go C to C.
There’s a 4 LED gauge for how much battery is left. During charging, the LED at the end will flash. On the side there’s a button to turn on the charging. The battery is charged through the USB-C port (it’s used both for output and input). Attached to my separate QC3.0 AC adapter, the battery charged at 2.4A / 5V only. I do not have a USB-PD charger to use to charge the Presto.
EDIT: I re-tried the charging measurements using a Tronsmart branded QC3.0 AC adapter and the battery now charged at 15W, ~2.7A and 5.6V. This is better than the prior measurements! Your charging adapter matters!
For this test, I used the included USB-A to USB-C cable for the QC3.0 port. My USB-C to C cable is one provided by ChoeTech (available here https://amazon.com/gp/product/B01H3COF62/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o03_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1)
I drained my phone down to ~20% and plugged in. Here is how the charging times for the Presto battery ports compare:
To go from ~20 to 100% for QC3.0, it took ~70 minutes. For the USB-PD port, it took 90 minutes. The mA readings for the QC3.0 are not accurate, but those reported by the Android OS. The USB-PD amperages are likely correct.
I have previously tested several QC3.0 and QC2.0 chargers. The charging time for the QC3.0 port lines up well with my multiple previous measurements. Those show that for 0-100%, it takes ~80 minutes, with ~20% increase/10 minutes for the first 20 minutes.
For the QC3.0 port, here are some general points collected from me taking notes on the multimeter readings:
Wattage maxed out at ~16-17W. Not bad!
Voltage maxed at 8.70 very briefly. Most of the early measurements (fastest charging) were at 6.4-7.4 volts.
Amperage maxed at ~2.6 briefly.
These measurements all fall within QC3.0 guidelines.
Regarding the USB-C port readings, it seems that despite a recent Gtrusted.com review,
http://gtrusted.com/review/lg-g5-su...-to-qualcomm-quick-charge-3-0-over-usb-type-c
which reported the LG G5 is also capable of negotiating charging over the USB-PD standard, many kinks and incompatibilities remain. Gtrusted.com subsequently found that the G5 cannot charge at all from the Anker or iVoler USB-PD charger USB-C ports:
http://gtrusted.com/review/40938
http://gtrusted.com/review/40937
I did not have that issue with the Presto, but the USB-PD port charging times were suboptimal. They lagged behind QC3.0, and an additional 15-20 minutes was necessary to top off the phone. I doubt the G5 is able to extract the 5V @ 3A the port is advertised to provide for USB-PD devices and that the initial Gtrusted report suggested.
Previous to my testing, I had wondered if the G5 would get the fast charging benefits of USB-PD chargers. In this case, it does not. As I mentioned in the introduction, the standards of USB-PD and QC clash with each other. Specifically, it is very unclear how manufacturers are implementing charging through USB-C ports.
Some earlier models had put QC3.0 into USB-C ports, which is in violation of USB-PD standards. BUT, I want to point out, why and how does that even affect QC capable devices? It really doesn't. The outrage on retailers such as Amazon is driven by the USB-PD side, neglecting entirely Qualcomm’s tested standard. Manufacturers in turn are removing their QC implementation from the USB-C ports and leaving them USB-PD only.
One notable issue I discovered was with the phone after the charging finished on the USB-C port and the battery auto-shutoff. The phone made repeated connecting/disconnecting sounds despite the battery pack being off. I think this is solely a G5’s issue though--perhaps the G5 detects a USB-C device but cannot successfully interface with it. The same thing occurs when the battery pack is off and you first plug in the USB-C cable. This subsides once the battery pack is turned on.
In conclusion, having 2 fast charging solutions in one battery pack is a worthwhile luxury. It’s great to see products like this fill the need. Having full-fledged QC3.0 capabilities in a portable unit makes travel and juicing up quick, easy and convenient.
Pros:
2 different ports to charge either USB-PD or QC3.0 standards! There are few options like this these days.
QC3.0 amperage, voltages, and charging times are similar to AC QC3.0 adapters!
Auto-shutoff is a nice feature to preserve battery life.
Includes a USB-C compliant USB-A to USB-C cable, a necessary touch to charge the battery if you don't already have one
If you have a capable QC3.0 charger, the battery will charge at ~15W
Cons:
The G5 does not charge at 3A/5V with the USB-C port. My estimates suggest it is more like 5V @ 2A. This may not be any fault of the charger but rather the programming controlling the charging from the phone.
Other:
The USB-C port interface with the G5 results in repeated connects/disconnects if the battery is not off. This is more likely an issue with the phone than the Presto.
2 different ports means 2 different cables to carry!
The outrage on retailers such as Amazon is driven by the USB-PD side, neglecting entirely Qualcomm’s tested standard. Manufacturers in turn are removing their QC implementation from the USB-C ports and leaving them USB-PD only.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is not a good power bank to have if one does not already own a device that accepts USB-PD. Reason is this powerbank will only accept 5V3A input to charge itself. The A port cannot be used to charge it. So you cannot QC this powerbank.
So unless you have a charger with a c port that you can connect with a c to c cable, you will only be able to input 7-8W to charge this bank up instead of twice as much. The bank will take twice as long to charge.
That is not true. It *can* take either USB-PD C input or QC input to charge, and it is not only 7-8W, but rather 15W with the QC3 charger. I was afraid of that also, as USB-PD accessories are not so common yet, but my testing (and also from that other review) indicate otherwise.
I had an earlier version of this review using a different brand QC charger, and what you said was the case. Quite slow, 10W charging only (5v @ 2A). But with the Tronsmart QC3 charger, this is not the case.
Does anybody know of a car charger that does turbo charge the Moto Z? Apparently Motorola/Lenovo doesn't offer one and a third party QuickCharge 3.0 I tried failed...
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
I got this one :Nekteck 5.4A USB-C Car Charger from Amazon for 15$ and it does turbo charge my phone .
I don't believe that the Z Force is set up for Qualcomm Quick Charge. And while it doesn't Turbo charge, I use the Verizon brand rapid USB-C car charger. I've also read that we have to be careful with what charging cables we use with our Z Force phones.
Sent from my Moto Z Force Droid using Tapatalk.
zaki67 said:
I got this one :Nekteck 5.4A USB-C Car Charger from Amazon for 15$ and it does turbo charge my phone .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you, I will try that one then ?.
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
karlmf said:
I don't believe that the Z Force is set up for Qualcomm Quick Charge. And while it doesn't Turbo charge, I use the Verizon brand rapid USB-C car charger. I've also read that we have to be careful with what charging cables we use with our Z Force phones.
Sent from my Moto Z Force Droid using Tapatalk.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
At least Motorola claims it supports QuickCharge if I'm not mistaken. Apparently, though, it also has additional requirements for turbo charging to kick in... I looked at the Verizon charger, too, but a) there's not much info on its website, b) calling Verizon didn't help - they don't have a clue, and c) there is some comment / review saying that it "burned out" some user's battery (which is of course unconfirmed to be related to this charger, may have been something else).
Anyways, given the utter lack of info and the suspicion of harming the battery, I stayed away from it... not to mention the ridiculous $40 price tag.
On an other note, though, Verizon has the original Motorola TurboCharger (wall charger) at a 50% discount.
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
pb1379 said:
At least Motorola claims it supports QuickCharge if I'm not mistaken. Apparently, though, it also has additional requirements for turbo charging to kick in... I looked at the Verizon charger, too, but a) there's not much info on its website, b) calling Verizon didn't help - they don't have a clue, and c) there is some comment / review saying that it "burned out" some user's battery (which is of course unconfirmed to be related to this charger, may have been something else).
Anyways, given the utter lack of info and the suspicion of harming the battery, I stayed away from it... not to mention the ridiculous $40 price tag.
On an other note, though, Verizon has the original Motorola TurboCharger (wall charger) at a 50% discount.
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No USB-C device can support Quick Charge - it violates the USB-C spec. Any quality USB-C charger that is higher amp will TurboCharge a phone. Moto screwed up by using TurboCharging name with both QuickCharge and USB-C - they are different.
The Moto Z is absurdly picky when it comes to quick charge specs.
I have a Blitzwolf QC2.0 with a type C and a Type A connector in my wifes car, and it will ONLY enter quick charge if I use the Type C to Type C cable I bought from Blitzwolf.
It will not turbo charge if I use a high end Type A to Type C cable, but my wifes LG G5 will do so happily.
I also bought a QC3 compatible charger, with the cable integrated like the original charger, and this works too, and is faster than the QC2 charger.
Both are definitely charging at more than 10 watts, the maximum for 5V 2A mode chargers.
And in fact, using a Non-QC 5V 3A charger, caused my cable to melt, and start to glow.
Incredibly my phone charging port survived.
Blitzwolf may very well be the only brand that works fully, as I just bought a Chuwi QC3 power bank, and it will refuse to quick charge my phone.
But works on some others.
And on another note, I used the Type C to Type C in a modern laptop a while back, and when I plugged it in, my phone displayed the message about receiving quick charge.
If I'm not mistaken, the Type C spec allows quick charging, but only if you use C to C, with the extra pins it's able to keep better track of the charging process I guess.
Shadowdancer123 said:
The Moto Z is absurdly picky when it comes to quick charge specs.
...
And on another note, I used the Type C to Type C in a modern laptop a while back, and when I plugged it in, my phone displayed the message about receiving quick charge.
If I'm not mistaken, the Type C spec allows quick charging, but only if you use C to C, with the extra pins it's able to keep better track of the charging process I guess.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, it seems all matter of cables...!
I have a Blitzwolf QC3.0 too BUT I'm able to obtain "Turbocharge" indication only using a *single* micro USB to type C adaptor. This with every cable and every charger. Even when connected to a USB port!
If I use every other cable or similar adaptors (I've tested many...), the "Turbocharge" never shows (except original charger obviously...).
With Blitzwolf QC3 and this cable/adaptor I got a full charge from less than 5% in about 70-75 min... during the charge cable was OK, while the adaptor (with metallic/aluminium exterior) was quite warm but never really hot in dangerous way...
Here's more information than any of you probably care about, but I'm tired of seeing the same misinformation and confusion being thrown around (not just in the Moto Z forum, but in a bunch of others, too).
chromedome00 said:
No USB-C device can support Quick Charge - it violates the USB-C spec.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's not true. Case in point: my ZTE Axon 7 and LeEco S3 both use QC 3.0 and both are USB-C. The common confusion comes from using "USB-C" (a connector) and "Type-C" (interchangeably used to refer to the connector and the power specification) incorrectly. Clarification below.
chromedome00 said:
Any quality USB-C charger that is higher amp will TurboCharge a phone. Moto screwed up by using TurboCharging name with both QuickCharge and USB-C - they are different.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is mostly true. "TurboPower" is the stupid name Moto uses to refer to the Type-C power specification. Actually, I'm being unfair: it's confusing that they called it "Type-C" in the first place and Moto took the opportunity to market the spec as their own thing.
Before going any further, let's use a common analogy to make the relationship between, wattage, voltage, and amperage easier to understand in broad terms. Wattage is the amount of water going through a pipe. Voltage is how fast that water is moving and amperage is the size of the pipe. 15W is 15W, but you can get there by having a tiny pipe (1A) with water moving really fast through it (15V) or a really big pipe (3A) with water going more slowly through it (5V). They both move the same amount of power, but in different ways. Got it? Good.
Anyway, Type-C has a fixed voltage and maxes out at 15W ([email protected]). Quick Charge 1.0 does only 10W ([email protected]), 2.0 does 18W (5/9/12V @ 3.6/2/1.5A respectively), and 3.0 does 18W with varying voltage (3.6-20V) and amperage (5-0.9A) to match. That is the advantage of QC over Type-C: a higher voltage can (usually) be run through those old and cheap USB cables without issue since voltage tolerance is determined largely by the phone and the charger. As long as the amperage doesn't exceed the capacity (gauge) of the wire, higher voltage is fine.
Amperage, though, that's what causes non-compliant or crappy cables to burn up. Really old or especially cheap cables can handle 1A max (heck, if they were built to spec, only 500mA for USB 2.0), but most cables of reasonable quality can handle 2A without much issue. They tend to use lower gauge (thicker) wires and should *not* feel warm at all when using it to charge. Some manufacturers (Samsung, for example) used to disable data on their USB cables and use it for additional amperage capacity, which is why you would occasionally buy a phone with a cable that wouldn't work for data transfer in the computer but would charge your phone just fine.
Moving on. Technically, QC 1.0 and QC 3.0 do not violate the Type-C power spec. QC 1.0 because it can't exceed it and QC 3.0 because it's variable. That said, QC 3.0 (and possibly QC 1.0, I don't know) require protocol negotiation; if that negotiation is lacking (in the case of the Moto Z), it's going to default to a "safe" charging rate (around 5W, plus or minus some). Your QC 2.0 does technically violate the Type-C spec because its voltage and amperage rates are fixed: you can get 5V at up to 3.6A. The "up to" bit is the important part. I have seen in various threads folks claiming their non-QC 3.0 phones will work with QC 2.0 chargers just fine and it's probably because the amperage tolerance is there (ie. it will actually allow 3.6A, violating spec) or it gets throttled (ie. sticks to 3A, keeping to spec).
Shadowdancer123 said:
The Moto Z is absurdly picky when it comes to quick charge specs.
...
And in fact, using a Non-QC 5V 3A charger, caused my cable to melt, and start to glow.
Incredibly my phone charging port survived.
...
If I'm not mistaken, the Type C spec allows quick charging, but only if you use C to C, with the extra pins it's able to keep better track of the charging process I guess.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All Type-C and USB-PD compliant devices are picky about the charge specs, not just the Moto Z. Or, at least, they're supposed to be for the reasons outlined above (namely the amperage). QC devices are less picky because it frequently uses higher voltage, which we established above as being much more tolerable for cables of varying quality.
Your cable melting and glowing is to be expected when you push 3A through a cable that likely can't handle more than 2A or so. Your phone charging port survived because it's designed to handle 3A.
I'm not entirely sure about which pins do what on a USB-C connector, but you're right in the C-to-C is the only connection that (should, according to spec) support Type-C and USB-PD (Power Delivery). The rate is negotiated via the USB Power Delivery 2.0 "power rules", which define four acceptable voltages (5/9/15/20) and variable amperage (0.1-5) to obtain charge rates as low as 0.5W and as high as 100W. "Type-C" is part of the Power Delivery spec, but is usually limited to only the 5V rule. I'm fairly certain the Moto Z does not support anything past the first level power rule, which is why you likely won't find the Moto Z to charge significantly faster with the TurboPower 30 included with the Moto Z Force than it does with its original TurboPower 15 charger. No clue as to whether that's a hardware or software limitation.
Also, to answer the OP's original question: any reputable (Anker, Aukey, Choetech, Belkin, etc) that uses an actual USB-C port will work. Most (if not all) dual port units will have a USB-C port that will work with the Moto Z (or any other Type-C/USB-PD device) and a QC 3.0 compatible "traditional" USB-A port. I have yet to find one that includes two USB-C ports and I really hate the ones with integrated cables.
My personal favorite is the Choetech for $16 since its QC 3.0 USB-A port is reversible: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01AAGH8OY/
This Aukey is cheaper ($15) and would be fine: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01E764DXM/
Here's a Tronsmart for $16, as well: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B018K7LHBU/
Even this $10 Vinsic should be okay: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B014F2NQ36/
Just for funsies, here's a spreadsheet of the Benson Leung cable and charger tests: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wJwqv3rTNmORXz-XJsQaXK1dl8I91V4-eP_sfNVNzbA/edit#gid=0
Interestingly, the $10 Vinsic is on his list of approved. So there. Go buy a $10 car charger and be happy.
I have the aukey 6 port usb charging station with two QC 3.0 ports, I am using high quality braided usb 3.0 to type c cables - I have tested both QC 3.0 ports and the other ports (using ampere) - Every port lists charging as "normal" - QC port 1 shows a min of 640mA and a max of 1040mA. QC Port 2 shows - min of 530 mA and a max of 980 mA. Regular ports 3-6 all show a min of 270mA and max of 870 mA. Not one port indicated it was ever turbo or fast charging. This same charger does fast charge my lg G5 and Samsung S7 Edge.
this one is verified to give the "TurboPower connected" message when plugged in.
From what I have read, both QC 2.0 and 3.0 doesn't turbo charge moto phones. Qualcomms QC charging works by increasing the voltage and decreasing the amps. So you can have 12v and 2amp for a total of 24 watts, but that won't turbo charge the moto z. Moto works on 5 volts but needs at least 3 amps. It is the amps that seem to engage the Motos into turbo charge mode, and they have to be at least 3 amps.
This Belkin model, for example, is what Benson Leung uses for his pixel xl. Its one of the few on Amazon that is USB-IF certified for 5v 3amp.
rczrider said:
Here's more information than any of you probably care about, but I'm tired of seeing the same misinformation and confusion being thrown around (not just in the Moto Z forum, but in a bunch of others, too).
That's not true. Case in point: my ZTE Axon 7 and LeEco S3 both use QC 3.0 and both are USB-C. The common confusion comes from using "USB-C" (a connector) and "Type-C" (interchangeably used to refer to the connector and the power specification) incorrectly. Clarification below.
Moving on. Technically, QC 1.0 and QC 3.0 do not violate the Type-C power spec. QC 1.0 because it can't exceed it and QC 3.0 because it's variable. That said, QC 3.0 (and possibly QC 1.0, I don't know) require protocol negotiation; if that negotiation is lacking (in the case of the Moto Z), it's going to default to a "safe" charging rate (around 5W, plus or minus some). Your QC 2.0 does technically violate the Type-C spec because its voltage and amperage rates are fixed: you can get 5V at up to 3.6A. The "up to" bit is the important part. I have seen in various threads folks claiming their non-QC 3.0 phones will work with QC 2.0 chargers just fine and it's probably because the amperage tolerance is there (ie. it will actually allow 3.6A, violating spec) or it gets throttled (ie. sticks to 3A, keeping to spec).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you are propagating mis-information. If you want to catch up on why QC 2.0/3.0 violate the USB-C spec, here it is from the horses mouth:
https://plus.google.com/+BensonLeung/posts/cEvVQLXhyRX
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/201...omm-quick-charge-with-android-incompatibility
Interestingly Qualcomm has QC 4.0 now and they call out integration with USB-C and USB-PD https://www.qualcomm.com/news/relea...livers-20-faster-charging-improved-efficiency
"Quick Charge 4 also integrates USB Type-C and USB-PD support, making the industry’s most popular battery charging solution available on the widest variety of cables and adapters."
USB-C has 24 pins while standard USB-A has 4. Quick Charge chargers (2.0/3.0) only have the 4 pins of USB-A - so if it can't use the data lines, then it can't quick charge via USB-C. Since there are only 4 outputs, plugging a USB-C cable into a QC 2.0/3.0 charger will not change anything. Still only 4 wires originating from the charger. The data lines are not allowed to be used for voltage, so your QC charger will only supply a fixed 5V to the phone. So no Quick Charge.
If QC3 supports [email protected] couldn't it supply power at [email protected] to turbocharge?
Looking for a solution to turbocharge my Moto Z and support QC3 for LG G5/Samsung S7.
The TurboPower 15 wall charger delivers hours of power in just minutes of charging. It includes micro USB and single USB charging cables so you can use it on compatible smartphones, tablets, digital cameras and more.
Have a Moto Z or another USB-C enabled device? The TurboPower 30 wall charger is USB-C compatible.
Looking for a car charger? Shop at Motorola Home.
zaki67 said:
I got this one :Nekteck 5.4A USB-C Car Charger from Amazon for 15$ and it does turbo charge my phone .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just ordered one of these. This one specifically
Hopefully it'll work out well
This one works fine.
https://store.google.com/product/belkin_15w_usb_c_car_charger
Sent from my XT1650-03 using Tapatalk
swejuggalo said:
This one works fine.
https://store.google.com/product/belkin_15w_usb_c_car_charger
Sent from my XT1650-03 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
YES! I can confirm it!