It’s similar to 29E(–6) and 29E-7, the revision 7 brought notable improvements and sellers like Nkon sell both revisions distinctively, I’m sure that they’ll do the same with 30Q-6 if the previous revision is cheaper and not depreciated.
I would like to test one (or a pair) of them!
Any seller wants to be reviewed??
Strange price structure for those new, upgraded Samsung 30QT-6 batteries on Vapcell’s store on AliExpress:
1x battery = US$ 6.00
2x battery = US$ 9.00 = US$ 4.50 per battery
3x battery = US$ 13.99 = US$ 4.66 per battery
4x battery = US$ 19.00 = US$ 4.75 per battery
5x battery = US$ 27.00 = US$ 5.40 per battery
This seems like a new type of toilet paper math.
Those 3 cells all have different markings and only 1 has a date code.
Hard pass.
Chris
Trying to understand the date code system for Samsung:
Anyone care to better explain this mishmash? Why a capacity value in the date code; what’s with a letter for the year?? And can I presume the initial date of production to be 2010 (“A”)?
Samsung isn’t helping people distinguish fakes with such disparities. Should be straight forward. Just look at the can marking system - totally heterogeneous.
I’ve steered away from the 30Q. Prefer the VTC6 for lesser counterfeits.
Very sorry, colleague accounting error
It has been corrected
Thanks
Please refer to the specification
There’s a description of these markers
@vapecell Denis:
That was from Samsung’s spec sheet. Unless you have a different one, then you should link.
三星电芯喷码规则
马来西亚产喷码规则：
ICR18650 - 22FM ( M : 表示 Malaysia 电芯)
SAMSUNG SDIEM ( EM : 在马来西亚的电芯厂的名称是三星Energy Malaysia )
5CZ1 (是 Date Code C是年度, Z是月份, 1是周别)
- Date code的解释
*5 ：三星工厂内部代码 无参考价值
* C : 2012年
* Z : 11月
* 1 : 表示第一周
马来西亚产电芯生产日期月份对照表：
P Q R S T U V W X Y
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Z 0
11 12
天津产喷码规则：
INR18650 – 35E
SAMSUNG SDI
3（代表版本号）
JG1T (是 Date Code J是年度, G是月份, 1是周别)
- Date code的解释
* J : 2019年（A代表2010年，以此类推）
* G : 4月 份
* 1 : 表示第一周
*T ：代表天津工产生产
天津产电芯生产日期月份对照表：
D E F G H I J K L M
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
N 0
11 12
三星电芯喷码规则
韩国产喷码规则：
ICR18650 – 29E
SAMSUNG SDI
2H22 (是 Date Code H是年度, 2是月份, 2是周别)
- Date code的解释
*2 ：三星工厂内部代码 无参考价值
* H : 2017年
* 2 : 2月
* 2 : 表示第2周
韩国产电芯生产日期月份对照表：
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
B C
11 12
Huh…
Those are taken from where?
And they refer to INR 18650 22F / 35E / 29E
Anyways, why defend Samsung? My comment was in regards to their coding from what is published. You haven’t given the link to that gibberish; if there’s no drawing / explanation to refer to what those numbers / letters to.
To get things straight, you offer new battery chemistry with a new nomenclature (30QT-6), but don’t have the documentation to support this. Yes, you have your in-house analysis, but not Samsung’s.
And then to defend Sam’s confusing coding, you post more gibberish.
My take is re-wrapped cells.
Now if they were wrapped with Vapcell, I’d be more forgiving. I like your batteries and find they do perform as stated. And you do sell newer chemistries -staying on top of the curve.
Yes, now the batteries get cheaper when the quantity is higher, but why the big price difference all of a sudden?
1x battery = US$ 9.98
2x battery = US$ 12.98 = US$ 6.49 per battery
3x battery = US$ 17.98 = US$ 5.99 per battery
4x battery = US$ 22.98 = US$ 5,74 per battery
5x battery = US$ 27.98 = US$ 5.60 per battery
The new 30Qs I just got in from 18650BatteryStore look just like these with the added warning stamped on them. Don’t know if that’s new or I just haven’t ordered them in a while 
These guys are my source the last six months here in the US and I’ve been very happy buying from them.
I paid $4.99 each for the 30Qs with shipping VERY reasonable ($6 for 8 cells to Kansas). They also have some great sales monthly. My super cool new Molicel P42a 21700s came from these guys too. Of course they just dropped in price this week from $7.50 to $5.99 each. 
I can’t speak to the existence of a new version, or how to discern them, but the markings on my cells (from Illumn) are consistent with the document. Other threads here on the discussion of authenticity have pictures illustrating the markings on the cell body beneath the wrapper, which are more descriptive and perhaps more difficult to counterfeit than those on the wrapper.
Such markings are for meant Samsung’s internal usage, and the partners it decides to share them with. They’re not designed for easy decipherability by members of the general public, who aren’t the intended market.
There are three cells in the picture, all are different.
The top one has an improper date code and the warning; the middle cell is the Malaysian 30Q and again with an improper date code (the last line should have a number (capacity group), a letter (for year; 2010 = A), two digits (month, week) according to Samsung’s datasheet). But all the cells I’ve encountered have three numbers and if they are the date code then the top cell code would imply 2011, March, 1st week. And if this is a newer chemistry cell, that can’t be from 2011.
The bottom cell I can’t make why only one number and what the KF5T would attribute.
And as I firstly remarked, these cells are not labeled as “30QT-6”.
Your cells are consistent with which document? The Samsung Datasheet that I posted or the one from Vapcell Denis (which I believe refers to the can markings)?
As for authenticity, the cells that are pictured show the PET tube markings. Samsung has a code system for this and if it is so construed to not be decipherable by the general public, they further the proliferation of counterfeits. It may not be in one’s interest to remove the wrapper to inspect the can.
And then Samsung makes a warning intended to the general public - so, not exclusive to the OEM market…
So my beef is with this “30QT-6” There is no such marking on the cells that are posted on Facebook. And what better way to gain traction with a FB post!
this is 30QT
@Vapcell Dennis;
Prove it!
Show me some legit documentation from Samsung. Not some excerpt as you previously did.
Link a datasheet. Not FB, Not other battery types.
Try to pass PDF document on Baidu website
Comparison between new version 30qt-6 and old version
Verification Code: uawn
Can you look up the PDF file？
Can’t download the PDF but got screenshots. Album
1st- the cell is deemed “30Q6” and not “30QT-6”
2nd - this is but a minor upgrade; other than a slightly better cycle life and cold temperature discharge all other characteristics are almost the same.
Thank you very much for sharing
yeah，but only 30QT have new version in market
Maybe there will be 6 version in other places in the future
The power performance was also improved, and the samples were sent to HKJ
I have also done the test and comparison, especially the discharge end has been improved
Expect power performance to surpass Sony vtc6 and match vtc6a
High end batteries, whether in terms of power or capacity, are very exciting. Because the progress of lithium battery technology is very slow
Most importantly, the cycle life has been significantly improved
So it’s a very good cell