Related
Currently I am using both N6P and M8.
N6P supports 5V/3A but no QC2, and M8 supports QC2.
I don't want to carry 2 chargers all the time, so I did little bit search and found this:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0122P71FC?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00
It seems to be a good one, with 5V 3A, 9V 1.67A, 12V 1.2A, so now I guess I can use it with Zaptip.
Anything similar to that?
liweichen6 said:
Currently I am using both N6P and M8.
N6P supports 5V/3A but no QC2, and M8 supports QC2.
I don't want to carry 2 chargers all the time, so I did little bit search and found this:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0122P71FC?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00
It seems to be a good one, with 5V 3A, 9V 1.67A, 12V 1.2A, so now I guess I can use it with Zaptip.
Anything similar to that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have charger along with a USB-A to C cable. My 6P doesn't register as quick charging when using it.
fallingd0wn said:
I have charger along with a USB-A to C cable. My 6P doesn't register as quick charging when using it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
On 5V 3A?
If that's what it's actually outputting then the nexus doesn't see it that way. I suppose it may be my cables. I don't have a USB-C to A adapter to try the C to C cable that came with the phone.
FYI I have this charger and it registers as fast charging with my Nexus 6p:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00HPTU00E
Can't say for sure if it charges exactly the same power/speed as the stock charger, but did notice it was definitely charging very fast..
It's the $10.99 20W black version.
just4747 said:
FYI I have this charger and it registers as fast charging with my Nexus 6p:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00HPTU00E
Can't say for sure if it charges exactly the same power/speed as the stock charger, but did notice it was definitely charging very fast..
It's the $10.99 20W black version.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Says 5V 2.4A for each port. So I guess it would be slower than the stock one.
liweichen6 said:
Says 5V 2.4A for each port. So I guess it would be slower than the stock one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Possibly but it did say rapid charging and it did charge plenty fast to me.
Honestly the stock charger doesn't seem very fast to me
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
When I plugged in my 6P's 5V/3A charger at 19% it said it would take 1 hour to charge. When I tried my iPad brick(5.2V/2.4A) and a USB C to USB A I got from amazon and it said it would take 1 hour to charge from 18%. Both said charging rapidly. It seems as long as the wall adapter puts out 5V and 2A or more it should charge rapidly, regardless of the wall adapter being USB A or C.
This charger situation is a nightmare. But....
I bought one of these awhile ago for $12 on sale, and I didn't expect for it to quick charge the Nexus 6p, but it does seem to register as quick charging.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...harge aukey&qid=1446247138&ref_=sr_1_7&sr=8-7
The charger listed in the first post will register as quick charging when using a USB 3.1 certified A to C cable.
The Anker Astro E7 is a 26,800mAh external battery that claims 4A over it's three usb ports or up to 3.5A on a single port. Would the 6P charge at 3A with this battery? I don't know if 3A charging is exclusive to USB-C or would it work with the USB-A-to-USB-C short cable that comes with the 6P.
http://www.ianker.com/product/A1210022
Compared to Anker's newer PowerCore+ batteries, which DOES have a USB-C port, BUT is limited to 2.4A per port. One 'improvement' of the PowerCore is support for 5v, 9V, and 12V while I think the Astro is good only for 5V. This may be important to charge a chromebook over usb-c, but not relevant for the Nexus.
http://www.ianker.com/product/A1372011
No it won't. I have a 5V/4A charger and tested 3 approved cables (2 Google and iroange A-C) and it peaks at 1.5A
Pilz said:
No it won't. I have a 5V/4A charger and tested 3 approved cables (2 Google and iroange A-C) and it peaks at 1.5A
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup can confirm this too as I have the same charger and used the same 2 cables
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
1.5A? That is horrible. I have another Anker battery that claims 2.1A out of one port and with my portapow usb monitor, I see only about 1.5A too. Then I tried it with an anker 6-port charger that claims 2.4A per port and I still only get around 1.5A.
Anker claims the Astro E7 can support 3.5A out from a single port and I would like to see this mythical usb-a device that supports that.
I wonder what is at fault: the battery/charger, the usb measuring device, the usb-a to usb-c cable (stock google short one), or the phone itself (maybe it knows it's not a usb-c to usb-c cable and thus limits the charging rate so not to damage the potential computer it's connected to?)
badbob001 said:
1.5A? That is horrible. I have another Anker battery that claims 2.1A out of one port and with my portapow usb monitor, I see only about 1.5A too. Then I tried it with an anker 6-port charger that claims 2.4A per port and I still only get around 1.5A.
Anker claims the Astro E7 can support 3.5A out from a single port and I would like to see this mythical usb-a device that supports that.
I wonder what is at fault: the battery/charger, the usb measuring device, the usb-a to usb-c cable (stock google short one), or the phone itself (maybe it knows it's not a usb-c to usb-c cable and thus limits the charging rate so not to damage the potential computer it's connected to?)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In the case of legacy charging ports, the negotiation is pretty limited and confined to legacy specs. The phone detects a legacy USB port (due to the in-spec cable being used) and uses the USB Battery Charge 2.1 protocol to negotiate for power. The phone says "I would like 5V at up to 1.5A" and the battery says "I can supply 5V at 1.5A" and so you get 5V at 1.5A.
If either battery had a USB-C port on it, and that port were rated for [email protected], where the phone could negotiate for 3A of current using the CC (configuration channel) pins/wires, then the conversation would change. It would go something like this: The Phone and Battery both see an active CC wire, they detect the orientation of the cable, then all kinds of communications and identifications of port and cable occurs between the two, wherein the phone says "I would like 5V at 3A please" and the battery pack says "Happy to oblige! How is your day going?". The Phone says "Been a rough day."
Then let's say you plug in a USB-A device, and the battery says "Hey Phone, I need to balance power - I can only supply 1.5A now" and the phone says "Sounds good to me, switching to 1.5A charging now". The battery, being the polite chap that it is, replies with "So very kind of you! Now I won't overtax myself. You are a gentleman and a scholar." The phone says "I know." ... and all is well with the universe.
As I'm sure you can plainly see, USB-C is much more civilized.
Or (as I understand it), you could intentionally buy an out of spec cable (one that indicates 3A instead of legacy). The 6P would then attempt to draw 3A from a port rated at 3.5A, and likely happily charge at 3A.
*Of course you should never use this cable with anything other than the battery above, or you may damage things, use at your own risk.
**I'm also sure someone will tell you that getting 3A out of a device rated at 3.5A is clearly impossible. 3.5A is clearly out of spec, which only allows for up to 2.4A in certain cases.
Hey all,
Has anyone used the Apple Macbook's 29W charger with their Pixel C? - Any thoughts? did it charge at a higher rate over the standard 15W?
On the same note, anyone tried with the Chromebook Pixel's 60W charger?
I notice Google sells a universal type-C 60W charger but it says the maximum current is 3A, either at 5V, 12V or 20V. I suspect this means it's not going to charge the Pixel any faster since it probably just takes the 5V output.
I would be very cautious of any Type C chargers and cables. I have learned a lot from reading the reviews and google posts from Benson Leung. He keeps a list of devices and cables that he has tested.
https://plus.google.com/+BensonLeung
Anyone use a Targus APA93US APA93 45W Type-C Charger? (Currently on sale at Best Buy for $30. Same on Amazon for prime members)
EDIT: I asked Benson Leung, he worked with the Google Pixel C team and says the charger is PD, although before PD rules were set. So it is missing 9V. But assures me that the Pixel C can also make use of it's capabilities using the 12V/2A to get max fast charge of 24W which is what the Pixel C can use.
Does anyone else have the Motorola TurboPower 30? It is compatible with the MACbook using 5V/5A, wonder if the Pixel C can negotiate, it seems to have a proprietary Power Delivery.
UPDATE: I've tested it. It can only negotiate 5V/3A 15W~ max.
2xbass said:
I notice Google sells a universal type-C 60W charger but it says the maximum current is 3A, either at 5V, 12V or 20V. I suspect this means it's not going to charge the Pixel any faster since it probably just takes the 5V output.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
According to Benson Leung, which worked on the Pixel C at google, it can do 9V/2.67A or alternatively use 12V/2A. Which ever the usb type-c PD charger is capable of. The Pixel C can make use of up to 24W max for fast charging with compatible Power Delivery Chargers.
http://www.usb.org/developers/powerdelivery/PD_1.0_Introduction.pdf
http://electronicdesign.com/interconnects/introduction-usb-power-delivery
UPDATE: I've used the Targus APA93US 45W USB Type-C wall charger and it can negotiate 12V/2A 24.5W~ providing 33% more charging speed. Great for $30 at best buy or prime.
I recently bought this OEM Verizon / Xentris charger XENTVLPD-XX1 / TYPECPDQC3TVL on eBay for $8~ YMMV http://www.ebay.com/itm/351967678957
It can handle 5v/3a 7v/3a 8v/3a 9v/2.7a 12v/2a which is ideal for "faster" charging the Pixel C at 24W max, 33% over stock/OEM charger.
Received both my OEM and Original Verizon / Xentris chargers
XENTVLPD-XX1 / TYPEC27PDQC3TVL today and went to town doing some simple testing with various cables. With screen on it charges at about 15-16W with the screen off it ramps up to 24-25W. It's compact and very sturdy.
My conclusion is, if you're looking for a USB Type-C charger capable of Power Delivery, look no further. This is excellent and for the price $8~ shipped is an incredible deal. I bought mine from this listing on eBay http://www.ebay.com/itm/351967678957
I was a Note 7 refugee so I have the stock Samsung fast AC charger here. Model EP-TA20JWE rated at 9v @ 1.67A and 5v @ 2A. It's in my kitchen.
I have the original AC charger that came with the Pixel XL. Model TC G1000-US rated at 9v @ 2.0A and 5v @ 0.5A I have only used once to get this information.
I also have a mobile charger in my car. It is labeled as Qualcomm QC 3.0 certified which is why I bought it as the Note 7 was a QC 3.0 device. It is a Choetech Model C0051 rated at 9.1v~12v @ 1.5A Max, 5.6v~9v @ 2A Max, and 3.6v~5.5v @ 2.4A Max (the iFixit teardown has revealed a Qualcomm QC 3.0 IC in the Pixel)
Additionally I have a charger by the bed which is from my Nexus 6, Motorola "Turbo Charger" Model SSW-2680US rated at 5v @ 1.6A, 9v @ 1.6A, and 12v @ 1.2A.
All of the chargers are using their original CABLE (USBA to USBC except in the case of the Pixel which is USBC to USBC) included EXCEPT the Motorola Turbo Charger, which is using a 6 foot long braided USBA to Micro USB cable with the Micro USB to USBC adapter that came with the Note 7.
What I found so far was all three work well and all three are recognized by the phone as a rapid charger.
I also found that at 60% charge and plugging in each one long enough for the lock screen to give me the "rapid charging XX minutes until full" message, the Samsung EP-TA20JWE fast charger charges it faster than the Google TC G1000US or the Choetech C0051. The Google and Choetech appear to charge at the same rate based on time until full. The Motorola Turbo Charger charges at an extremely fast rate, like it took it from 58% to 77% in maybe 5-10 minutes and was saying 15 minutes to full at 77%.
My battery life is phenomenal for me at 5-6 hours SOT, I have no issues with any of these chargers, they all see charging time every day. Turbo charger overnight, Samsung Note 7 charger when in the kitchen where I am a lot, mobile charger when driving to work or classes... (except the actual Pixel charger which I haven't found a use for yet but will probably go to work with me.
*Based on my findings I am going to put the Samsung Note 7 charger in the kitchen and the slowest Pixel charger in the bedroom and take the fastest Turbo charger to work.
Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
I know my test method isn't to some people's satisfaction but the time to full calculation is based on how much the phone is charged now (which I kept within +/- 2% for each check) and how much current the device wants to draw from what's available. What's interesting is the device draws power much quicker than the Pixel charger supplies it when it is plugged into more capable chargers.
Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
Good information. It's nice to knows that all the accessories I got for my note won't go to waste lol.
Thank you.
Sent from my SM-G935V using XDA-Developers mobile app
I have been having varying experiences.
My Anker QC 3.0 type C wall charger seems to charge rapidly, although at the 5V/3A only, with a 6.6ft USB 2.0 i-orange cable. Using a 3.3ft USB 3.0 cable, it shows charging rapidly when I first plug it in, but a few minutes later only shows charging.. but seems to be charging rapidly? My Tronsmart type C w/ QC 3.0 car charger, using an Anker Powerline+ type C cable, shows charging rapidly, but said it had 1+ hour until full when at 70%... Ampere only showed 1.6A being sent to the phone too. I tried an iVoler charger with type C and QC 3.0 and got up to 2050mAh, but it was likely only 5V (which I would expect) but still didn't seem to be charging all that fast.
I think this whole USB-PD thing is going to really be dependent on proper chargers and cables. All of these chargers/cables worked perfect on my Nexus 6P - doesn't seem to be the case on the Pixel.
Thanks for the experience folks. I had purchased a qc 3.0 tronsmart on sale at amazon which I was going to return. I got usb c cables with pd from monoprice. I suppose even if it doesn't fast charge at 18w (9v X 2a), I'd be ok with 15 w charging if I don't have to go out and buy a new car charger.
I mean faster is nice but if it still charges at a good rate, the lower current might help the battery last longer too right?
testinguser said:
Thanks for the experience folks. I had purchased a qc 3.0 tronsmart on sale at amazon which I was going to return. I got usb c cables with pd from monoprice. I suppose even if it doesn't fast charge at 18w (9v X 2a), I'd be ok with 15 w charging if I don't have to go out and buy a new car charger.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have bad news for you. I have a Tronsmart QC 3.0 type C charger too - one from a year ago though, don't know if the design has changed - and it is NOT rapid charging my device. It worked perfect on my Nexus 6P. It will start out by saying "charging rapidly" on the Pixel XL, but after several minutes, goes down to "charging" and the charge time is 2+ hours, Ampere shows really low current, etc. It COULD be the Anker Powerline+ type C cable I am using... but I highly doubt it. I think the fact that the type C port has QC 3.0 is not playing nice with the USB-PD chip, and causing it to drop support for 5V/3A all together. I will test this more tonight with the stock cable and see if it works any better.
Did some testing: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=69309771&postcount=30
Man I totally forgot about my Motorola Turbo chargers I got from Groupon. I wish I could find my @zerolemon charger too.. Ill test them with my USB USB Doctor dongles.. When I find them... lol
psa; cables make a huge difference in my experience.
I also have a tronsmart qc2 1 + 3 fast port car charger Ill test and post results.
Perhaps not the right thread but I have just been sent these USB-C cables to review for free.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/B01EEACOVO/ref=ya_aw_od_pi?ie=UTF8&psc=1
Amazon says they are rated to 2.4A but will they damage by Pixel XL? I'm not expecting them to charge 'rapidly' but would be handy to be able to use them with an older 2A charger.
Do you think they are safe?
--
Why do so many people try to get a charger with as high a wattage rating as possible but ignore the fact that USB-C is limited to 3A and all you need to do is find a charger capable of delivering 3A.
What does wattage have to do with things?
Not trying to be a jerk, I'm just assuming I must be missing something here.
CZ Eddie said:
Why do so many people try to get a charger with as high a wattage rating as possible but ignore the fact that USB-C is limited to 3A and all you need to do is find a charger capable of delivering 3A.
What does wattage have to do with things?
Not trying to be a jerk, I'm just assuming I must be missing something here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because more watts = more power. USB-C may be limited to 3A, but it is not limited to 5V. Higher volts at the same amperage = more wattage = more power. If you want the fastest charging possible, you need a 9V/2A+ USB-PD charger.
Nitemare3219 said:
it is not limited to 5V.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didn't realize it was OK to go with higher than 5v now.
Do you know if it's okay to hard wire directly into a 12V system for charging? Like in the car? I'm guessing "no it's not okay" but I'm still learning about USB-C.
---------- Post added at 09:27 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:25 AM ----------
tap = hard wire/splice into. As in, no adapter. Just a USB-C at one end and then snip the connector off the other end and use the two power wires and two ground wires to splice directly into say, the back of a cigarette charger's 12V wiring.
CZ Eddie said:
I didn't realize it was OK to go with higher than 5v now.
Do you know if it's okay to hard wire directly into a 12V system for charging? Like in the car? I'm guessing "no it's not okay" but I'm still learning about USB-C.
---------- Post added at 09:27 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:25 AM ----------
tap = hard wire/splice into. As in, no adapter. Just a USB-C at one end and then snip the connector off the other end and use the two power wires and two ground wires to splice directly into say, the back of a cigarette charger's 12V wiring.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is no way that would work, nor would it be safe. There HAS to be an adapter to safely charge the phone by regulating voltage and current, as well as shutting off the charge once it hits 100%.
Nitemare3219 said:
There is no way that would work, nor would it be safe. There HAS to be an adapter to safely charge the phone by regulating voltage and current, as well as shutting off the charge once it hits 100%.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's my understanding that some/all of the regulating is done on-board some phones.
I know I never had any issues with my 3A 12v to 5v converter hard wired to S4 and Note 3 phones for charging in either my car or Motorcycle.
At least, I didn't notice any issues.
CZ Eddie said:
It's my understanding that some/all of the regulating is done on-board some phones.
I know I never had any issues with my 3A 12v to 5v converter hard wired to S4 and Note 3 phones for charging in either my car or Motorcycle.
At least, I didn't notice any issues.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well you're a brave soul. I wouldn't ever think to try something like that. Especially not with USB-C & Power Delivery now. The phone is responsible for some of the charging regulation, but the charger itself is just as important.
CZ Eddie said:
Why do so many people try to get a charger with as high a wattage rating as possible but ignore the fact that USB-C is limited to 3A and all you need to do is find a charger capable of delivering 3A.
What does wattage have to do with things?
Not trying to be a jerk, I'm just assuming I must be missing something here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because with USB PD the Pixel can charge at 18W by using 2A by 9V. So just looking for a 3A charger doesn't give you the fastest possible charging for the Pixel. Using a standard 3A charger will charge it at 3A by 5V for 15W. You multiply the voltage and amperage to determine wattage.
Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
I have an aukey car charger and my pixel phone rapid charges when I use the QC 3.0 port, but not the USB c port.
Anyone try the other Motorola turbo chargers 15, 25, 30? Id be curious to know if they work any better. They say the phone must support "turbo"..
---------- Post added at 03:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:08 PM ----------
CZ Eddie said:
I didn't realize it was OK to go with higher than 5v now.
Do you know if it's okay to hard wire directly into a 12V system for charging? Like in the car? I'm guessing "no it's not okay" but I'm still learning about USB-C.
---------- Post added at 09:27 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:25 AM ----------
tap = hard wire/splice into. As in, no adapter. Just a USB-C at one end and then snip the connector off the other end and use the two power wires and two ground wires to splice directly into say, the back of a cigarette charger's 12V wiring.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No definitely not. Car Battery supplies too much wattage/amerpage and its missing the PD ic and other protections in most good charger (over volt, under volt, circuit protection, trickle, power cut off, ect). Thats why all this talk about chargers and cables that do not meet requirements burning equipment/phones up.
It will never know when to stop charging or if over charging and catch fire...
Thats why its not advisable to buy cheap no name unbranded batteries, cables and chargers.
Usb c isnt just a connector/ plug theres an ic (computer chip) in control as well on both sides.
The chip in your battery talks w the one in the phone that talks w the one in the charger..
Does anybody know of a car charger that does turbo charge the Moto Z? Apparently Motorola/Lenovo doesn't offer one and a third party QuickCharge 3.0 I tried failed...
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
I got this one :Nekteck 5.4A USB-C Car Charger from Amazon for 15$ and it does turbo charge my phone .
I don't believe that the Z Force is set up for Qualcomm Quick Charge. And while it doesn't Turbo charge, I use the Verizon brand rapid USB-C car charger. I've also read that we have to be careful with what charging cables we use with our Z Force phones.
Sent from my Moto Z Force Droid using Tapatalk.
zaki67 said:
I got this one :Nekteck 5.4A USB-C Car Charger from Amazon for 15$ and it does turbo charge my phone .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you, I will try that one then ?.
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
karlmf said:
I don't believe that the Z Force is set up for Qualcomm Quick Charge. And while it doesn't Turbo charge, I use the Verizon brand rapid USB-C car charger. I've also read that we have to be careful with what charging cables we use with our Z Force phones.
Sent from my Moto Z Force Droid using Tapatalk.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
At least Motorola claims it supports QuickCharge if I'm not mistaken. Apparently, though, it also has additional requirements for turbo charging to kick in... I looked at the Verizon charger, too, but a) there's not much info on its website, b) calling Verizon didn't help - they don't have a clue, and c) there is some comment / review saying that it "burned out" some user's battery (which is of course unconfirmed to be related to this charger, may have been something else).
Anyways, given the utter lack of info and the suspicion of harming the battery, I stayed away from it... not to mention the ridiculous $40 price tag.
On an other note, though, Verizon has the original Motorola TurboCharger (wall charger) at a 50% discount.
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
pb1379 said:
At least Motorola claims it supports QuickCharge if I'm not mistaken. Apparently, though, it also has additional requirements for turbo charging to kick in... I looked at the Verizon charger, too, but a) there's not much info on its website, b) calling Verizon didn't help - they don't have a clue, and c) there is some comment / review saying that it "burned out" some user's battery (which is of course unconfirmed to be related to this charger, may have been something else).
Anyways, given the utter lack of info and the suspicion of harming the battery, I stayed away from it... not to mention the ridiculous $40 price tag.
On an other note, though, Verizon has the original Motorola TurboCharger (wall charger) at a 50% discount.
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No USB-C device can support Quick Charge - it violates the USB-C spec. Any quality USB-C charger that is higher amp will TurboCharge a phone. Moto screwed up by using TurboCharging name with both QuickCharge and USB-C - they are different.
The Moto Z is absurdly picky when it comes to quick charge specs.
I have a Blitzwolf QC2.0 with a type C and a Type A connector in my wifes car, and it will ONLY enter quick charge if I use the Type C to Type C cable I bought from Blitzwolf.
It will not turbo charge if I use a high end Type A to Type C cable, but my wifes LG G5 will do so happily.
I also bought a QC3 compatible charger, with the cable integrated like the original charger, and this works too, and is faster than the QC2 charger.
Both are definitely charging at more than 10 watts, the maximum for 5V 2A mode chargers.
And in fact, using a Non-QC 5V 3A charger, caused my cable to melt, and start to glow.
Incredibly my phone charging port survived.
Blitzwolf may very well be the only brand that works fully, as I just bought a Chuwi QC3 power bank, and it will refuse to quick charge my phone.
But works on some others.
And on another note, I used the Type C to Type C in a modern laptop a while back, and when I plugged it in, my phone displayed the message about receiving quick charge.
If I'm not mistaken, the Type C spec allows quick charging, but only if you use C to C, with the extra pins it's able to keep better track of the charging process I guess.
Shadowdancer123 said:
The Moto Z is absurdly picky when it comes to quick charge specs.
...
And on another note, I used the Type C to Type C in a modern laptop a while back, and when I plugged it in, my phone displayed the message about receiving quick charge.
If I'm not mistaken, the Type C spec allows quick charging, but only if you use C to C, with the extra pins it's able to keep better track of the charging process I guess.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, it seems all matter of cables...!
I have a Blitzwolf QC3.0 too BUT I'm able to obtain "Turbocharge" indication only using a *single* micro USB to type C adaptor. This with every cable and every charger. Even when connected to a USB port!
If I use every other cable or similar adaptors (I've tested many...), the "Turbocharge" never shows (except original charger obviously...).
With Blitzwolf QC3 and this cable/adaptor I got a full charge from less than 5% in about 70-75 min... during the charge cable was OK, while the adaptor (with metallic/aluminium exterior) was quite warm but never really hot in dangerous way...
Here's more information than any of you probably care about, but I'm tired of seeing the same misinformation and confusion being thrown around (not just in the Moto Z forum, but in a bunch of others, too).
chromedome00 said:
No USB-C device can support Quick Charge - it violates the USB-C spec.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's not true. Case in point: my ZTE Axon 7 and LeEco S3 both use QC 3.0 and both are USB-C. The common confusion comes from using "USB-C" (a connector) and "Type-C" (interchangeably used to refer to the connector and the power specification) incorrectly. Clarification below.
chromedome00 said:
Any quality USB-C charger that is higher amp will TurboCharge a phone. Moto screwed up by using TurboCharging name with both QuickCharge and USB-C - they are different.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is mostly true. "TurboPower" is the stupid name Moto uses to refer to the Type-C power specification. Actually, I'm being unfair: it's confusing that they called it "Type-C" in the first place and Moto took the opportunity to market the spec as their own thing.
Before going any further, let's use a common analogy to make the relationship between, wattage, voltage, and amperage easier to understand in broad terms. Wattage is the amount of water going through a pipe. Voltage is how fast that water is moving and amperage is the size of the pipe. 15W is 15W, but you can get there by having a tiny pipe (1A) with water moving really fast through it (15V) or a really big pipe (3A) with water going more slowly through it (5V). They both move the same amount of power, but in different ways. Got it? Good.
Anyway, Type-C has a fixed voltage and maxes out at 15W ([email protected]). Quick Charge 1.0 does only 10W ([email protected]), 2.0 does 18W (5/9/12V @ 3.6/2/1.5A respectively), and 3.0 does 18W with varying voltage (3.6-20V) and amperage (5-0.9A) to match. That is the advantage of QC over Type-C: a higher voltage can (usually) be run through those old and cheap USB cables without issue since voltage tolerance is determined largely by the phone and the charger. As long as the amperage doesn't exceed the capacity (gauge) of the wire, higher voltage is fine.
Amperage, though, that's what causes non-compliant or crappy cables to burn up. Really old or especially cheap cables can handle 1A max (heck, if they were built to spec, only 500mA for USB 2.0), but most cables of reasonable quality can handle 2A without much issue. They tend to use lower gauge (thicker) wires and should *not* feel warm at all when using it to charge. Some manufacturers (Samsung, for example) used to disable data on their USB cables and use it for additional amperage capacity, which is why you would occasionally buy a phone with a cable that wouldn't work for data transfer in the computer but would charge your phone just fine.
Moving on. Technically, QC 1.0 and QC 3.0 do not violate the Type-C power spec. QC 1.0 because it can't exceed it and QC 3.0 because it's variable. That said, QC 3.0 (and possibly QC 1.0, I don't know) require protocol negotiation; if that negotiation is lacking (in the case of the Moto Z), it's going to default to a "safe" charging rate (around 5W, plus or minus some). Your QC 2.0 does technically violate the Type-C spec because its voltage and amperage rates are fixed: you can get 5V at up to 3.6A. The "up to" bit is the important part. I have seen in various threads folks claiming their non-QC 3.0 phones will work with QC 2.0 chargers just fine and it's probably because the amperage tolerance is there (ie. it will actually allow 3.6A, violating spec) or it gets throttled (ie. sticks to 3A, keeping to spec).
Shadowdancer123 said:
The Moto Z is absurdly picky when it comes to quick charge specs.
...
And in fact, using a Non-QC 5V 3A charger, caused my cable to melt, and start to glow.
Incredibly my phone charging port survived.
...
If I'm not mistaken, the Type C spec allows quick charging, but only if you use C to C, with the extra pins it's able to keep better track of the charging process I guess.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All Type-C and USB-PD compliant devices are picky about the charge specs, not just the Moto Z. Or, at least, they're supposed to be for the reasons outlined above (namely the amperage). QC devices are less picky because it frequently uses higher voltage, which we established above as being much more tolerable for cables of varying quality.
Your cable melting and glowing is to be expected when you push 3A through a cable that likely can't handle more than 2A or so. Your phone charging port survived because it's designed to handle 3A.
I'm not entirely sure about which pins do what on a USB-C connector, but you're right in the C-to-C is the only connection that (should, according to spec) support Type-C and USB-PD (Power Delivery). The rate is negotiated via the USB Power Delivery 2.0 "power rules", which define four acceptable voltages (5/9/15/20) and variable amperage (0.1-5) to obtain charge rates as low as 0.5W and as high as 100W. "Type-C" is part of the Power Delivery spec, but is usually limited to only the 5V rule. I'm fairly certain the Moto Z does not support anything past the first level power rule, which is why you likely won't find the Moto Z to charge significantly faster with the TurboPower 30 included with the Moto Z Force than it does with its original TurboPower 15 charger. No clue as to whether that's a hardware or software limitation.
Also, to answer the OP's original question: any reputable (Anker, Aukey, Choetech, Belkin, etc) that uses an actual USB-C port will work. Most (if not all) dual port units will have a USB-C port that will work with the Moto Z (or any other Type-C/USB-PD device) and a QC 3.0 compatible "traditional" USB-A port. I have yet to find one that includes two USB-C ports and I really hate the ones with integrated cables.
My personal favorite is the Choetech for $16 since its QC 3.0 USB-A port is reversible: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01AAGH8OY/
This Aukey is cheaper ($15) and would be fine: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01E764DXM/
Here's a Tronsmart for $16, as well: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B018K7LHBU/
Even this $10 Vinsic should be okay: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B014F2NQ36/
Just for funsies, here's a spreadsheet of the Benson Leung cable and charger tests: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wJwqv3rTNmORXz-XJsQaXK1dl8I91V4-eP_sfNVNzbA/edit#gid=0
Interestingly, the $10 Vinsic is on his list of approved. So there. Go buy a $10 car charger and be happy.
I have the aukey 6 port usb charging station with two QC 3.0 ports, I am using high quality braided usb 3.0 to type c cables - I have tested both QC 3.0 ports and the other ports (using ampere) - Every port lists charging as "normal" - QC port 1 shows a min of 640mA and a max of 1040mA. QC Port 2 shows - min of 530 mA and a max of 980 mA. Regular ports 3-6 all show a min of 270mA and max of 870 mA. Not one port indicated it was ever turbo or fast charging. This same charger does fast charge my lg G5 and Samsung S7 Edge.
this one is verified to give the "TurboPower connected" message when plugged in.
From what I have read, both QC 2.0 and 3.0 doesn't turbo charge moto phones. Qualcomms QC charging works by increasing the voltage and decreasing the amps. So you can have 12v and 2amp for a total of 24 watts, but that won't turbo charge the moto z. Moto works on 5 volts but needs at least 3 amps. It is the amps that seem to engage the Motos into turbo charge mode, and they have to be at least 3 amps.
This Belkin model, for example, is what Benson Leung uses for his pixel xl. Its one of the few on Amazon that is USB-IF certified for 5v 3amp.
rczrider said:
Here's more information than any of you probably care about, but I'm tired of seeing the same misinformation and confusion being thrown around (not just in the Moto Z forum, but in a bunch of others, too).
That's not true. Case in point: my ZTE Axon 7 and LeEco S3 both use QC 3.0 and both are USB-C. The common confusion comes from using "USB-C" (a connector) and "Type-C" (interchangeably used to refer to the connector and the power specification) incorrectly. Clarification below.
Moving on. Technically, QC 1.0 and QC 3.0 do not violate the Type-C power spec. QC 1.0 because it can't exceed it and QC 3.0 because it's variable. That said, QC 3.0 (and possibly QC 1.0, I don't know) require protocol negotiation; if that negotiation is lacking (in the case of the Moto Z), it's going to default to a "safe" charging rate (around 5W, plus or minus some). Your QC 2.0 does technically violate the Type-C spec because its voltage and amperage rates are fixed: you can get 5V at up to 3.6A. The "up to" bit is the important part. I have seen in various threads folks claiming their non-QC 3.0 phones will work with QC 2.0 chargers just fine and it's probably because the amperage tolerance is there (ie. it will actually allow 3.6A, violating spec) or it gets throttled (ie. sticks to 3A, keeping to spec).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you are propagating mis-information. If you want to catch up on why QC 2.0/3.0 violate the USB-C spec, here it is from the horses mouth:
https://plus.google.com/+BensonLeung/posts/cEvVQLXhyRX
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/201...omm-quick-charge-with-android-incompatibility
Interestingly Qualcomm has QC 4.0 now and they call out integration with USB-C and USB-PD https://www.qualcomm.com/news/relea...livers-20-faster-charging-improved-efficiency
"Quick Charge 4 also integrates USB Type-C and USB-PD support, making the industry’s most popular battery charging solution available on the widest variety of cables and adapters."
USB-C has 24 pins while standard USB-A has 4. Quick Charge chargers (2.0/3.0) only have the 4 pins of USB-A - so if it can't use the data lines, then it can't quick charge via USB-C. Since there are only 4 outputs, plugging a USB-C cable into a QC 2.0/3.0 charger will not change anything. Still only 4 wires originating from the charger. The data lines are not allowed to be used for voltage, so your QC charger will only supply a fixed 5V to the phone. So no Quick Charge.
If QC3 supports [email protected] couldn't it supply power at [email protected] to turbocharge?
Looking for a solution to turbocharge my Moto Z and support QC3 for LG G5/Samsung S7.
The TurboPower 15 wall charger delivers hours of power in just minutes of charging. It includes micro USB and single USB charging cables so you can use it on compatible smartphones, tablets, digital cameras and more.
Have a Moto Z or another USB-C enabled device? The TurboPower 30 wall charger is USB-C compatible.
Looking for a car charger? Shop at Motorola Home.
zaki67 said:
I got this one :Nekteck 5.4A USB-C Car Charger from Amazon for 15$ and it does turbo charge my phone .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just ordered one of these. This one specifically
Hopefully it'll work out well
This one works fine.
https://store.google.com/product/belkin_15w_usb_c_car_charger
Sent from my XT1650-03 using Tapatalk
swejuggalo said:
This one works fine.
https://store.google.com/product/belkin_15w_usb_c_car_charger
Sent from my XT1650-03 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
YES! I can confirm it!