Test/review of Zanflare C4

The C4 is showing up regularly at $24, putting it pretty much in the same price range as a complete Lii-500. It works almost identically. Got mine and been cycling/charging cells for a couple days now. Seems reliable, generally runs pretty cool, not having any problems with an assortment of battery chemistries of various ages.

One thing I REALLY like is the [Internal Resistance] DOES WORK! It is ‘stable’ and seems reliable. It tracks pretty close to the IR I get off my Opus. The IR with the Lii-500 is useless, and I’ve tried 3 different units so I know it’s not just a problem with a single charger.

As far as I’m concerned this charger could completely displace the Lii-500 as a bargain analyzing charger, and do it one better with working IR.

Yes and the C4 comes with a working power adapter so that needs to be considered in the cost equation as well. They are effectively the same price when you consider that unless you happen to already have a compatible adapter.

I’m pretty sure that’s what flydiver meant when he wrote “a complete Lii500.” :slight_smile:

Yes, this being BLF people get all excited when they see a Lii-500 for $13-15, and want to know HOW they can get that price.

  1. That is a bare charger, nothing else. So you’ll have to hassle with a decent power supply, and car charger if you care about that.
  2. You are likely dealing with Ali express, which can be it’s own pain depending on where you live. :frowning:
  3. You rarely see a complete Lii-500 for less than $20. $25-30 is not unusual for more accessible, faster, and more reliable shipping sources, depending on location.

From my perspective $24 for the Zanflare C4 is an easy choice. I consider IR to be an important piece of information on battery health and it’s just not available on the Lii-500.

I use from two month ago as principal charger the C4 and runs fine. I am happy. (For the price, perhaps the best option now. )

From the comments it sounds like this charger is becoming a favourite. I hope Gearbest decide to bring this out with an Australian plug so we dont have to use sub standard adaptors.

I bought this charger based on HKJ’s review. Particularly it’s ability to measure internal resistance with some accuracy.
I’ve now put it through the paces and like it very much as a straight forward, simple to use charger.
As to measuring internal resistance, I’ve tested banks of batteries by loading them multiple times in the same bays and then through rotating through all bays and recording the results. My unit measures IR consistently within a range of 6 mOhms, which is plenty good enough for my purposes.

+1, all of my chargers have to use US or EU to AU adapters.

Can anyone confirm if the Zanflare C4 can charge 18350 batteries? Most sites don’t list it in the description.

Yes it can charge 18350 :+1:

Ordered one from GB for 23$. The fact that the display shows all slots at the same time and the working analyzing functions, in addition to good NiMH charging makes it an ideal replacement for my Lii-400, that I’m going to give to my father.

I am using 2 of these and have a 3rd spare (they were cheap!). Thought I should probably do a test run on the spare, and just as well: Channel 1 turned out to be dead.

4 screws below the rubber feet, so easy to open…wrong. This thing is glued shut pretty well. Finally had to punch through the glued seam with a sharpened flat-blade screwdriver and work it open from there.

Problem turned out to be the soldering for the cell+ contact plate, there was none!

Could not find any online photos of the insides, so below are some for reference. Looks decent, but the hand-soldering quality (needed for awkward components) is mediocre at best. 2 or 3 production ‘patches’ are also visible. The culprit contact plate had a bent leg, so could not insert properly into the PCB.

Separating the PCB required the springs to be de-soldered. And it is tricky to put back together, so not recommended to do this unless really necessary. Ended up with some cosmetic damage along the seam, but it is still usable (and now also serviceable).

  • No solder on those two slots bottom right:

  • Springs de-soldered:

  • UI control board, unplugged:


  • Culprit:

  • Power circuit. Four TO-220 N-channel MOSFETs, probably used as active loads for the discharge tests. Two incognito controller chips:


  • Ugly patch from 3rd inductor to sense resistor:

  • 5 V output boost circuit:

  • Floating diode patch:

My C4 normal test results are very volatile.
I tested one 35E at 3539 mAh. Couldn’t believe I was so lucky, re-tested. 3418 mAh.
Another was lower than expected, 3350 re-test OK, 3364.
A third cell that I tested twice, 18650B, a bit used, 3529 on the first test, 3438 on the next.

Also, resistance numbers are very different from one insertion to another. I can get 20 or 60 mOhm. It doesn’t depend on which slot do I insert battery to in an obvious way.

Any idea why is it so?
It’s my first analyzing charger and I don’t really know what to expect. Is it OK? Should I RMA? Something in between?

You should RMA it, my C4 is very consistent down to less than 10mAh. Even internal resistance is consistent within 5 “mR” between reinsertions.

Fellows I do not mean to be a wet blanket but bear in mind the fact that whatever cell to be internal resistance measured in the charger needs two physical connections to it, two contact resistances whose magnitude against the internal resistance of a typical cell is considerable. There's no real “fix” other than soldering or spot-welding the cells to the rail feeding contacts for this to be dismissed.

Cheers :-)

For 500mA discharge current it shouldn’t matter, the connection resistance generates negligible amounts of voltage drop at this current. 100mAh discrepancies on the discharge test are a fault and not a design issue. While 4 contacts are ideal for IR measurement, this should have no bearing on the issue the previous poster encounters, that is, completely inconsistent capacity measurements and IR readings. My own C4 operates to spec and Henrik’s review shows that IR measurement is consistent between reinsertions.

ferongr, I was not particularly referring to Agro's issue. I just wanted to point out that rail to cell contact resistances are in the same order of magnitude to that of the cell's internal resistance and, at the same time, they're not constant and predictable. To me this means that in order to get some meaningful data we should at least gather a set of measurements to average for each cell and make sure the cell's well seated for each measurement. Just in my opinion, of course.

Cheers fellows :-)

The Zanflare C4 does a lot better than expected. Even with my 20A+ cells (LG HB6) with very low internal resistance I’m getting stable and consistent readings. While the reading will obviously be offset due to the rail and contact resistance, if those two remain constant then you get usable and consistent results.

(Chart from HJK’s review )

Note that the multiple tests on all slots remain consistent, and increasing resistance also increases the reading consistently. This is a lot better than other analyzing chargers, a very usable result to see the condition of a cell and also a lot better compared to many other chargers.

Does anyone have any codes for this? Those that I could find ($19 on GB) are long dead.

While you may have received a very good sample or are extremely consistent with cell placement, I think it’s a bit much to expect that level of precision given the price point. Even a 100mah difference in capacity is only around 3% to 5% variation for a 3000+ mAh cell which I think is pretty darn good and consistent with other analyzers in the same price range.

KuoH