Which type of usb charging port do you prefer on flashlight

66 posts / 0 new
Last post

Pages

mrheosuper
Online
Last seen: 1 min 39 sec ago
Joined: 09/30/2016 - 12:44
Posts: 1140
Location: Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
Which type of usb charging port do you prefer on flashlight
Micro USB
31% (33 votes)
USB type C
69% (74 votes)
Custom USB charging port
1% (1 vote)
Total votes: 108

Forgot my pen

mrheosuper
Online
Last seen: 1 min 39 sec ago
Joined: 09/30/2016 - 12:44
Posts: 1140
Location: Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

for more clearly: Custom usb charging port is the port that the manufactures design and make by thier own and it’s not an international standard

Forgot my pen

hIKARInoob
hIKARInoob's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 31 min ago
Joined: 08/28/2016 - 08:15
Posts: 3650

Type C is the future, but for today’s need I prefer micro USB. Cool

raccoon city
raccoon city's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 hours 55 min ago
Joined: 10/06/2010 - 02:35
Posts: 10677
Location: रॅकून सिटी Palm Desert CA USA

mrheosuper wrote:

for more clearly: Custom usb charging port is the port that the manufactures design and make by thier own and it's not an international standard

I think the word you're looking for is proprietary.  :THUMBS-UP:

Agro
Offline
Last seen: 15 hours 9 min ago
Joined: 05/14/2017 - 11:16
Posts: 2287
Location: Ślōnsk

Either magnetic or type C. Didn’t vote because the poll doesn’t me allow to express such preference.

MascaratumB
MascaratumB's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 25 min ago
Joined: 10/29/2016 - 12:12
Posts: 2039
Location: Portugal

Based on the lights I have and how I use them, I would say magnetic charger (proprietary, as said by raccoon city).

(With this I am not sayin the other types are useless; on the contrary, they are, I just prefer to use magnetic chargers. Apart from these, Micro USB is my choice, as there are many cables laying around… Big Smile )

REVIEWS : Amutorch S3 /  AM S3 vs Neal 219c  /  Amutorch AM30 / Nitefox UT20 / Sofirn SF14 & SP10A / Sofirn SP32A / Sofirn SP10B / Odepro KL52 / Acebeam H20 / SS AAA / Wuben TO10R / BlitzWolf BW-ET1 / Odepro B018 / DQG Slim Ti / XTAR PB2 Charger / Nitefox ES10K / Nitefox K3 / Amutorch AX1 / Amutorch VG10 / Olight M2R Warrior   

Mods and tricks: 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7     Convoy S2+ TIR Lenses: XML2 / XPL-HI     Others: Convoy S2+ Mini (Biscotti 3 & 1*7135)     Sofirn K6 Discussion: 1 / 2 / 3    Triple TIR & XP-G2                   MY GIVEAWAY (FW3A) = ACTIVE

DB Custom said: "Hide your billfold, cut up your credit cards... you're a perfect candidate for full blown flashaholism and will soon need dedicated flashlight cabinets. [...] Have fun! Modding is next... :P" 

 

Speed4goal
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 06/11/2016 - 13:03
Posts: 1204
Location: Bay, St. Louis Mississippi

I voted micro b everyone has a dozen of those cables around. The USB c is much newer my phone now has it. But flashlights don’t need to charge at 3+ amps. The two amps the micro b can do is plenty.

My wife had a phone about a year and half ago that was USB c and the factory cable caught fire in the phone within 2 weeks of use. It burned the charging port up. Original wall block, original cable, phone and battery. Luckily we were right there on the bed and smelled it and saw the smoke rising. Battery was perfectly fine I kept it as a back up for mine.

2/9 Fox Co (2009-2015) Semper Fi 0311/0331 Rifleman/Machine Gunner
Blf has changed a lot since I've been here. Lots of snow flakes and easily offended over nothing. When the forum use to be great and people joked around and could take a joke. It's a forum it's not that serious. Let's make BLF great again!

mortuus
mortuus's picture
Offline
Last seen: 9 hours 18 min ago
Joined: 12/16/2014 - 09:33
Posts: 718
Location: Sweden

now that i have a phone with usb c i would have to vote that, also the charging is fast if a light would use that contact.

...where Frugal meets with Flashlight!

AntmanQ
Offline
Last seen: 3 weeks 15 hours ago
Joined: 06/25/2018 - 08:36
Posts: 3

I prefer type C

Barkuti
Barkuti's picture
Offline
Last seen: 9 hours 20 min ago
Joined: 02/19/2014 - 14:46
Posts: 2532
Location: Alhama de Murcia, Spain

mortuus wrote:
now that i have a phone with usb c i would have to vote that, also the charging is fast if a light would use that contact.

Charging speed has nothing to do with connection type, at least for as long as the current capabilities of the connector aren't exceeded.

The USB type-C connector is a bit more robust than USB micro-B and a tad more current capable. The USB micro-B is widespread and cheap; I can even buy 10-packs of USB micro-B male connectors for less than $1 on eBay. Both are great and I endorse availability of both options.

On the other  hand, screw propietary connectors and standards.

 

Cheers Smile

Newlumen
Newlumen's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 27 min ago
Joined: 05/27/2017 - 00:19
Posts: 1146
Location: United states

I voted for the micro.. you can find it at any gas station, or anywhere.

mrheosuper
Online
Last seen: 1 min 39 sec ago
Joined: 09/30/2016 - 12:44
Posts: 1140
Location: Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

raccoon city wrote:

mrheosuper wrote:

for more clearly: Custom usb charging port is the port that the manufactures design and make by thier own and it’s not an international standard


I think the word you’re looking for is proprietary.  :THUMBS-UP:


yeah, i guess so, English is not my native language Sad

Forgot my pen

atbglenn
atbglenn's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 40 min ago
Joined: 07/29/2011 - 12:04
Posts: 5279
Location: Long Island, New York

USB-C for me. I like that it plugs in either way.

We need ICE to keep our country safe. 

teacher
teacher's picture
Online
Last seen: 56 sec ago
Joined: 02/23/2016 - 19:04
Posts: 5497
Location: NE & SW Alabama

Micro for now.
C will be fine when & if it becomes ‘standard’.

      You never know how a horse will pull until you hook him up to a heavy load. / Paul "Bear" Bryant ~/~\~ "Slow is Smooth, Smooth is Fast"

       Texas Lumens Flashlights  <>   M4D M4X Deals : sign up - save $$$$    ||||

         Rudeness Level /\ mΩ /\ {width:70%} /\ LightWiki /\ LED Tint Chart /\ LED Tint Picture /\ Xlamp size chart /\ BatteryU                   Flashaholic? Need Professional Help???   wink   /\ TheOriginal /\ TAB /\ LightSearch /\ BatterySearch /\ 14500's /\ DiCal                                                       

Enderman
Enderman's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 4 min ago
Joined: 11/03/2016 - 22:42
Posts: 3051
Location: Vancouver, Canada

C because in a few years when almost all devices are using USB C I don’t want an outdated port on my flashlight.
Futureproofing Smile

zak.wilson
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 17 min ago
Joined: 09/29/2014 - 14:27
Posts: 510

C > Micro because it’s more durable, non-directional and will definitely be the more common connector at some point in the future even if it isn’t yet.

Ceilingbounce – flashlight testing and runtime graphs for Android

Delta_V
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 8 min ago
Joined: 09/21/2017 - 15:25
Posts: 173

Magnetic charging like Armyteks or Klarus, where it works with any battery. Not having to deal with rubber port covers or worry about them failing is nice. Just don’t make it like Olight where it only works with their proprietary batteries.

Type C would be my 2nd choice because it is reversible, more durable, and it would be nice to get all of my electronics using a single cable type.

RotorHead64
RotorHead64's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 22 min ago
Joined: 10/31/2015 - 02:49
Posts: 401
Location: United States

C is where we’re heading. Micro is terrible

Enderman
Enderman's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 4 min ago
Joined: 11/03/2016 - 22:42
Posts: 3051
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Delta_V wrote:
Magnetic charging like Armyteks or Klarus, where it works with any battery. Not having to deal with rubber port covers or worry about them failing is nice. Just don’t make it like Olight where it only works with their proprietary batteries.

Type C would be my 2nd choice because it is reversible, more durable, and it would be nice to get all of my electronics using a single cable type.


Magnetic chargers kinda suck because you have exposed contacts which can short, but also require a proprietary connector.
Not only do you need a different magnetic charger for every brand of flashlight but you also can’t use the regular USB C cables you probably already have (or will have) for phones and computers.

It is possible to make USB C ports waterproof so that they don’t require a cover, but the cover is still good to prevent dirt from getting in.
Some flashlights have the USB port inside so it is protected by the flashlight body instead of a cover.

Dave_C
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 4 days ago
Joined: 12/28/2015 - 16:24
Posts: 35
Location: Cincinnati

So in other words, charging speed has everything to do with connection type, if we don’t want to be stuck with current charge rates forever. A new USB standard needs to emerge with higher current capacity. Frankly it is all madness. (Most) Flashlights are not tiny and would benefit from a larger charge port, that is not only capable of more current but more mechanically robust. The batteries themselves are obviously another limit to charge rate, but there is and always will be a race to improve them and a need for standards to support evolving battery tech.

It is very common for both USB C and mUSB sockets to break off of PCBs, at least their solder joints do. For this reason I feel that either are terrible choices for anything that is not disposable and costing under $10, but it becomes absurd when on a phone or camera costing several hundred dollars, or something like an LED flashlight which, if it did not have terrible design choices like that, might be viable for far longer since tech advances tend to only make incremental brightness updates to flashlights, not anything revolutionary to the core purpose of making light. In other words a good flashlight could last for decades of casual use.

Flashlights should use USB A. Phones and other thinner devices should use USB mini-B. Nothing should use micro USB or USB C. The consumer electronics industry has seen over 50 years of consumer devices with flaky connectors (starting with 1/8 headphone jacks ?) and still hasn’t learned much. It’s one thing to make “disposable” products and another to make them so fragile that core functionality is lost because they tried to save 3 millimeters worth of connector size.

BlueSwordM
BlueSwordM's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 56 min ago
Joined: 11/29/2017 - 12:34
Posts: 1055
Location: Canada

No, flashlights should not be using USB-A!

That would be extremely dangerous and would just result in a short.

Let’s just go with USB-C, as the connector itself can handle 5A without trouble, and most flashlights would only draw 2-3A max.

Dave_C
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 4 days ago
Joined: 12/28/2015 - 16:24
Posts: 35
Location: Cincinnati

Enderman wrote:
Delta_V wrote:
Magnetic charging like Armyteks or Klarus, where it works with any battery. Not having to deal with rubber port covers or worry about them failing is nice. Just don’t make it like Olight where it only works with their proprietary batteries.

Type C would be my 2nd choice because it is reversible, more durable, and it would be nice to get all of my electronics using a single cable type.


Magnetic chargers kinda suck because you have exposed contacts which can short, but also require a proprietary connector.
Not only do you need a different magnetic charger for every brand of flashlight but you also can’t use the regular USB C cables you probably already have (or will have) for phones and computers.

It is possible to make USB C ports waterproof so that they don’t require a cover, but the cover is still good to prevent dirt from getting in.
Some flashlights have the USB port inside so it is protected by the flashlight body instead of a cover.

I agree that magnetic charging is not ubiquitous enough yet but the way to get there is make a robust design and NOT patent it, or only do so in order that others can’t, and freely offer it to the industry. Get it out in to the world and let others copy it into their designs.

It would not need to have exposed contacts to the extent that it was easy to short them out. They could easily be recessed just enough that it would take a deliberately matching shape, piece of metal to do so. For example we see this all the time with small mechanical connectors, don’t usually have objects getting inside them and shorting the connector out, unless you happened to have a pocket full of metal shavings. Wink

DavidEF
DavidEF's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 17 min ago
Joined: 06/05/2014 - 06:00
Posts: 5656
Location: Salisbury, North Carolina, USA

Dave_C wrote:
Enderman wrote:
Delta_V wrote:
Magnetic charging like Armyteks or Klarus, where it works with any battery. Not having to deal with rubber port covers or worry about them failing is nice. Just don’t make it like Olight where it only works with their proprietary batteries.

Type C would be my 2nd choice because it is reversible, more durable, and it would be nice to get all of my electronics using a single cable type.


Magnetic chargers kinda suck because you have exposed contacts which can short, but also require a proprietary connector.
Not only do you need a different magnetic charger for every brand of flashlight but you also can’t use the regular USB C cables you probably already have (or will have) for phones and computers.

It is possible to make USB C ports waterproof so that they don’t require a cover, but the cover is still good to prevent dirt from getting in.
Some flashlights have the USB port inside so it is protected by the flashlight body instead of a cover.

I agree that magnetic charging is not ubiquitous enough yet but the way to get there is make a robust design and NOT patent it, or only do so in order that others can’t, and freely offer it to the industry. Get it out in to the world and let others copy it into their designs.

It would not need to have exposed contacts to the extent that it was easy to short them out. They could easily be recessed just enough that it would take a deliberately matching shape, piece of metal to do so. For example we see this all the time with small mechanical connectors, don’t usually have objects getting inside them and shorting the connector out, unless you happened to have a pocket full of metal shavings. Wink


I think somebody is confused about magnetic charging. It doesn’t need any contacts at all! It uses a changing magnetic field to induce a charge. Some phones have magnetic charging capability in addition to a regular USB charging jack. Magnetism is universal and AFAIK, magnetic charge induction isn’t a patented process.

Reason is not automatic. Those who deny it cannot be conquered by it. Do not count on them. Leave them alone.
-Ayn Rand

Enderman
Enderman's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 4 min ago
Joined: 11/03/2016 - 22:42
Posts: 3051
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Dave_C wrote:
So in other words, charging speed has everything to do with connection type, if we don’t want to be stuck with current charge rates forever. A new USB standard needs to emerge with higher current capacity. Frankly it is all madness. (Most) Flashlights are not tiny and would benefit from a larger charge port, that is not only capable of more current but more mechanically robust. The batteries themselves are obviously another limit to charge rate, but there is and always will be a race to improve them and a need for standards to support evolving battery tech.

It is very common for both USB C and mUSB sockets to break off of PCBs, at least their solder joints do. For this reason I feel that either are terrible choices for anything that is not disposable and costing under $10, but it becomes absurd when on a phone or camera costing several hundred dollars, or something like an LED flashlight which, if it did not have terrible design choices like that, might be viable for far longer since tech advances tend to only make incremental brightness updates to flashlights, not anything revolutionary to the core purpose of making light. In other words a good flashlight could last for decades of casual use.

Flashlights should use USB A. Phones and other thinner devices should use USB mini-B. Nothing should use micro USB or USB C. The consumer electronics industry has seen over 50 years of consumer devices with flaky connectors (starting with 1/8 headphone jacks ?) and still hasn’t learned much. It’s one thing to make “disposable” products and another to make them so fragile that core functionality is lost because they tried to save 3 millimeters worth of connector size.


USB has a higher current capability than any previous USB connection.
It is also more robust than all other USB connectors.
If someone is breaking USB C off of their phone then they have absolutely no care for their device and are probably pulling the entire cable to rip the connector off.
No other port will magically be more robust and endure this kind of abuse.
Instead of making everything idiot-proof just take care of your devices and there will be no problems.
And no I have never heard of someone ripping USB C off their phone.

Dave_C wrote:

I agree that magnetic charging is not ubiquitous enough yet but the way to get there is make a robust design and NOT patent it, or only do so in order that others can’t, and freely offer it to the industry. Get it out in to the world and let others copy it into their designs.

It would not need to have exposed contacts to the extent that it was easy to short them out. They could easily be recessed just enough that it would take a deliberately matching shape, piece of metal to do so. For example we see this all the time with small mechanical connectors, don’t usually have objects getting inside them and shorting the connector out, unless you happened to have a pocket full of metal shavings. Wink


Unless USB develops a new magnetic connector that all devices implement, it’s not gonna happen.
Magsafe died in favour of USB C.
freeme
freeme's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 7 min ago
Joined: 11/14/2013 - 22:00
Posts: 5997
Location: freedailydeals.org

Wireless?

Dave_C
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 4 days ago
Joined: 12/28/2015 - 16:24
Posts: 35
Location: Cincinnati
DavidEF wrote:
I think somebody is confused about magnetic charging. It doesn’t need any contacts at all! It uses a changing magnetic field to induce a charge. Some phones have magnetic charging capability in addition to a regular USB charging jack. Magnetism is universal and AFAIK, magnetic charge induction isn’t a patented process.

Magnetic charge connectors are not the same thing as induction charging. I would never, nor should anyone else, refer to induction charging as only “magnetic” in the context of a topic talking about connectors.

There are products with magnetic coupled, charge connectors. I have also made some myself. Briefly the process is epoxying neo magnets onto a housing, with wires soldered between each and the battery +/- contacts. The polarity of the exposed faces of each is reversed so it can only go on the charge base one way, not reversed (so no need for a diode reverse-charge protection). In cases where a device might go into a pocket or other area where there is metal, the contacts can be recessed as easily as drilling a hole deeper than the depth of the magnet. That process is pretty basic/quick DIY, a manufacturer can make it much more refined by designing in a location for the magnets.
Dave_C
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 4 days ago
Joined: 12/28/2015 - 16:24
Posts: 35
Location: Cincinnati

Enderman wrote:

USB has a higher current capability than any previous USB connection.
It is also more robust than all other USB connectors.
If someone is breaking USB C off of their phone then they have absolutely no care for their device and are probably pulling the entire cable to rip the connector off.

I assume you mean USB C? You are welcome to feel that subjectively, you have to baby your devices because that fragile connector is “good enough”, but personally, it seems really ridiculous and you couldn’t be more wrong about “absolutely no care”. In fact, something as simple as dropping the device while the cable is plugged in, can easily damage it, and I don’t mean from some great height onto concrete, I mean a small drop which the device would otherwise survive. Products that cost hundreds of dollars should not be this fragile.

Are you seriously trying to suggest that mobile products should not survive the shock that comes from something as common as dropping them? We have completely different concepts of good engineering if we disagree about this.

Quote:
No other port will magically be more robust and endure this kind of abuse. Instead of making everything idiot-proof just take care of your devices and there will be no problems. And no I have never heard of someone ripping USB C off their phone.

Merely making the port larger, yet otherwise similar, does make it more robust. To use that word “magic” tells me you chose words poorly. There’s nothing at all magic about making something mechanical, larger to bear a larger force against it. It is true of the hinge on your refrigerator, the bolts on your car, your arms and legs, just about anywhere you look, if something has a mechanical weakness then it can be improved by strengthening this weak area.

I imagine that you haven’t really thought about your position much, because if everything else in your life were as fragile as a soldered on USB C connector, you couldn’t go a single day without breaking something, unless just sitting around doing little to nothing.

I am in favor of products improving. Not excuses.

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 2 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 7075
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

I am with the rest that say USB C because in a few years it will be the standard. I can’t wait until it is, it offers so much more flexibility then micro USB when you consider you have thunderbolt and other options that use the same port.

Know guns, know peace, know safety. No guns, no peace, no safety.

The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools. --Herbert Spencer , English Philosopher (1820-1903)

Texas Avenger Driver Series

My LED Test series - XP-L2 V5  - Nichia 219C 90+ CRILatticebright "XM-L"XHP35 & PWM efficiency - XHP50 - XP-L V5 - XM-L2 U2 - XP-G3 S5  - XP-L HI V2 - Oslon Square & direct comparison to Djozz tests - Nichia 319A - Nichia 219B 9080 CRI - Nichia 219C D320 - Nichia 229AT - XHP70.2 P2 - XHP50.2 J4 - Samsung LH351D

Easy comparison tool for all my LED tests

Enderman
Enderman's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 4 min ago
Joined: 11/03/2016 - 22:42
Posts: 3051
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Dave_C wrote:

If you think a USB C connector breaks from a drop with a cable inserted, you are mistaken.
If you think USB A is more durable than USB C, you are also mistaken. Go look up the insertion cycle lifespan.
If you want to join the USB IF and give them your ideas then go ahead, but I would never pay for a modern device like a flashlight with an outdated port on it that is being phased out to be obsolete soon (type A).
In fact USB C is having a new design coming with no housing so that the body of the device can take more of the stress and make it far more durable than it already is.
nquinn
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 25 min ago
Joined: 09/11/2017 - 21:55
Posts: 185
Location: DC

Magnetic if possible. Jacks break.

bullpupfan
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 3 days ago
Joined: 06/27/2018 - 18:38
Posts: 24
Location: United States

Magnetic

Pages