Which type of usb charging port do you prefer on flashlight

81 posts / 0 new
Last post
WalkIntoTheLight
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 6 hours ago
Joined: 12/05/2015 - 10:26
Posts: 1929
Location: Canada
Enderman wrote:
I would never pay for a modern device like a flashlight with an outdated port on it that is being phased out to be obsolete soon (type A).

Well, it’s not like your micro USB cables and power bricks are going to suddenly disappear when USB-C becomes the new standard. You can still use and charge micro-USB lights the same as you always could. So, I wouldn’t disregard a light just because it happens to use micro-USB. When they become available with USB-C, great, but I wouldn’t wait for it.

Dave_C
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 1 week ago
Joined: 12/28/2015 - 16:24
Posts: 37
Location: Cincinnati
Enderman wrote:
Dave_C wrote:
If you think a USB C connector breaks from a drop with a cable inserted, you are mistaken.

No, I’m not. That and many other stresses easily break them. Have it plugged in to charge while driving, get in an accident, phone flies from where it was, connector damaged.

Put it in your pocket with a portable power pack to charge it, move the wrong direction, stress on the connector breaks it.

It is not at all uncommon to break a USB C connector, quite the contrary it is one of the number one causes of phone damage after a cracked screen.

Quote:
If you think USB A is more durable than USB C, you are also mistaken. Go look up the insertion cycle lifespan.

It seems as though you are having trouble following the conversation. I said nothing about which has a higher insertion cycle lifespan. However, you completely misunderstand what that spec means. It is a guideline for a minimum endurance in the design, which does not mean that any particular product meets that, nor does it mean that USB A won’t withstand not just as many, but more insertion cycles.

Quote:
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the USB IF and give them your ideas then go ahead, but I would never pay for a modern device like a flashlight with an outdated port on it that is being phased out to be obsolete soon (type A).

“Modern device like a flashlight”? You do realize that flashlights have been around for 100 years? Do you realize that there’s nothing outdated about USB A, that millions of people have devices with USB A? Do you realize that most of the USB power banks on the market, including the new ones coming out daily, use USB A? Do you have any idea that most of the things you’re writing are completely backwards?

Quote:
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.

So essentially this is to address what I’ve been writing, that it has an inherent weakness. Above you wrote “join the USB IF” but apparently they are conceding what I stated and you argued against. You have managed to prove yourself wrong.

It’s not even that I consider USB A to be the ultimate connector form factor. Not at all. It just beats USB B and C hands down, which is why it is used on things like USB power banks, hubs, motherboard ports, etc. Essentially it is used far more when there is no space constrain and my argument is that there isn’t that much space being saved, particularly on something larger and thicker like a flashlight.

Besides, the fact of the matter is, there are far more flashlights with mUSB than USB C, so I have no idea where you’re getting the idea that you can just insist that you’re only going to buy them with USB C. If you mean in some glorious future you will, at some point USB C will be “outdated” too.

It is pretty silly to make a weak USB port on something like a flashlight, especially (considering the intent of this website, budget lights) lower cost offerings which aren’t necessarily built to the same standards as more expensive lights. If you sincerely believe some generic light with the tiniest USB C PCB they can shoehorn into the available space is going to be durable, then you’re in for a surprise.

BlueSwordM
BlueSwordM's picture
Offline
Last seen: 22 min 8 sec ago
Joined: 11/29/2017 - 12:34
Posts: 5355
Location: Canada

@Dave, have you thought about the danger factor of using USB-A in a flashlight?

It’s really dangerous to do this, and completely banned by the USB-IF due to a massive risk of shorts.

Also, in its specifications, USB-C can handle much more power, and has much more uses. For example, without needing enlarged contacts, it can handle 5A, can handle much more datastream, and is more durable due to its circular symetrical shape, unlike USB-A and micro-USB.

In fact, for us enthusiasts, USB-C is a huge boon. Using the additionnal pins of USB-C, we could do some amazing stuff, such as directly wiring the data pins for directly programming the IC with NarsilM, Anduril, etc.

My very own high current Beryllium Copper springs Gen 3:
http://budgetlightforum.com/node/67401
Liitokala Aliexpress Stores Battery Fraud: http://budgetlightforum.com/node/60547

WalkIntoTheLight
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 6 hours ago
Joined: 12/05/2015 - 10:26
Posts: 1929
Location: Canada
BlueSwordM wrote:
Using the additionnal pins of USB-C, we could do some amazing stuff, such as directly wiring the data pins for directly programming the IC with NarsilM, Anduril, etc.

That would be cool. I’m sold!

Dave_C
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 1 week ago
Joined: 12/28/2015 - 16:24
Posts: 37
Location: Cincinnati

^^ It is dangerous to misuse the cable between two powered hosts, not inherently dangerous to plug it into a flashlight. Two different issues.

Frankly I’d just as soon have a standard 5.5mm DC barrel jack, that is a very common, non-proprietary connector, but kids these days insist on USB-everything, and I can see the benefit of having fewer cables. Hopefully soon we can do away with data cables on portable devices entirely, have data only done wirelessly and move the power connector to a DC barrel jack. This will make the cables thinner and cheaper too, not needing the data lines.

It doesn’t really matter if it’s banned by USB IF, it is not in any way illegal to make or sell them. Remember this is a charging cable, not a data cable.

USB C is not more durable. The failure point is not the connector shell shape on either, rather it is the connector socket to PCB solder joints. If anything a more durable connector shell just subjects the solder joints to more stress. This would have been less of a problem before the industry moved to lead-free solder, but is also particularly problematic on budgetized designs like you’d find on a budget flashlight PCB, using thin copper pads on a thin PCB.

Other things you can use USB C for, great, but in this case it’s just for charging a flashlight. Making it weaker because some other device needs data, doesn’t seem like the path towards durability.

altonx
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 3 weeks ago
Joined: 02/22/2016 - 08:34
Posts: 241
Location: Central Europe

Definitely USB type C.

Micro type B is already obsolete and started to be phased out. If you have many cables with micro B connector just buy eg. this type of adapter (micro type B female to type C male):

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.

USB Type C is the most robust of the USB connectors to date. Also look up USB PD (Power Delivery) standard – this permits up to 100W of power over type C plug – soon we will see ultrabooks and normal notebooks powered by USB-C type chargers.

Dave_C wrote:

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.

Wrong. USB type A socket according to USB standard should only be used on host side to avoid connecting two hosts together. Peripherals should use Type B sockets. That’s why printer cables etc use Type B plug (full size). Only standard breaking chinese hardware like USB drive enclosures use Type-A sockets on peripheral side and Type-A to Type A cables which are not standard compliant as far as I know.
Mini type B is more fragile than micro-B (cycle rating). Type A also would take to much space on driver PCB.
Jacks persist because they are cheap, simple and you symmetrical (you don’ have to wonder which side to plug you headphones). USB-C replace in new phones even the jack port for headphones.

Dave_C wrote:

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.

Wait – are you trying to say that Type-C sockets are so fragile they only last one day on average? I’ve have yet to see type C socket broken off of PCB but granted they are not as ubiquitous as micro-b yet. That will change soon as phone mfgs adopted type C already. You seriously must have some “non-standard usage scenarios” Wink if you think Type-C sockets are fragile…

Enderman wrote:
Unless USB develops a new magnetic connector that all devices implement, it’s not gonna happen. Magsafe died in favour of USB C.

Magsafe died because in fact it was MagUNsafe Wink Poor execution resulted in burned connectors, Apple censored photos, whole mess resulted in class action suit.
There are many magnetic 3rd party USB cables out there – like this for example:

But this also suffer from exposed contacts… I think wireless charging will become more and more popular – at least in phones.

freeme wrote:

Wireless?

Would inductive charging (like Qi) even work if the receiving coil is behind ~2mm of metal casing?

scottie888
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 1 month ago
Joined: 05/25/2018 - 20:31
Posts: 6
Location: Canada

usb type C FTW! another bonus of using type c is the potential of utilizing type c PD with voltages of up to 20V 100W = super fast charging.

Dave_C
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 1 week ago
Joined: 12/28/2015 - 16:24
Posts: 37
Location: Cincinnati

altonx wrote:
Definitely USB type C.

Micro type B is already obsolete and started to be phased out. If you have many cables with micro B connector just buy eg. this type of adapter (micro type B female to type C male):

That would be a bit silly when you consider that you can buy a 5 pack of USB C cables for $3 delivered, and that the only thing worse than one tiny fragile USB socket would be adding a second one in series.

Quote:
USB Type C is the most robust of the USB connectors to date. Also look up USB PD (Power Delivery) standard – this permits up to 100W of power over type C plug – soon we will see ultrabooks and normal notebooks powered by USB-C type chargers.

It is mechanically inferior. It’s almost as though I am in the twilight zone to have a conversation with people who can’t even grasp the basic fundamentals of mechanical strength, which benefits from more material. It is impossible to make a tiny connector with a small fraction of the amount of the same material, as strong.

I’ll leave it at that and you can buy whatever you want, but I for one will not be buying any lights that recharge from a flimsy little USB socket. I only buy lights with very good body threading so I can just swap my cells manually without thread wear concerns, and not have the downtime charging it which is a win/win situation for me.

Newlumen
Newlumen's picture
Offline
Last seen: 14 hours 53 min ago
Joined: 05/27/2017 - 00:19
Posts: 2070
Location: United states

I have a motorola droid zforce that use a usb C.. the charger failed within 8 months..

Enderman
Enderman's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 31 min ago
Joined: 11/03/2016 - 22:42
Posts: 3965
Location: Vancouver, Canada

WalkIntoTheLight wrote:

Well, it’s not like your micro USB cables and power bricks are going to suddenly disappear when USB-C becomes the new standard. You can still use and charge micro-USB lights the same as you always could. So, I wouldn’t disregard a light just because it happens to use micro-USB. When they become available with USB-C, great, but I wouldn’t wait for it.

When my phone, computer, webcam, mouse, etc all use USB C there is 0 reason to have to keep around a legacy USB cable/charger just for a flashlight which isn’t with the times.

Dave_C wrote:

No, I’m not. That and many other stresses easily break them. Have it plugged in to charge while driving, get in an accident, phone flies from where it was, connector damaged.
Put it in your pocket with a portable power pack to charge it, move the wrong direction, stress on the connector breaks it.
It is not at all uncommon to break a USB C connector, quite the contrary it is one of the number one causes of phone damage after a cracked screen.

If you get in a car accident you have bigger problems than a broken port on a flashlight.
Also, a more robust connector (for example USB A as you suggested) would not help at all in that situation, unless you want a port the size of a neutrik NAC3FC-HC on your stupidly large device, any connector would break.

USB C connectors do not break when putting it in your pocket with stress on the connector, now you’re just making up BS.
Obviously people have the charging port on their phones break if they are abused, that happenes with USB C, micro USB, lighting, and literally everything else because people don’t know how to take care of their stuff.

Dave_C wrote:
It seems as though you are having trouble following the conversation. I said nothing about which has a higher insertion cycle lifespan. However, you completely misunderstand what that spec means. It is a guideline for a minimum endurance in the design, which does not mean that any particular product meets that, nor does it mean that USB A won’t withstand not just as many, but more insertion cycles.

Insertion is one of the main ways that a connector’s robustness is defined by. Maybe you should google it?
https://www.arrow.com/en/research-and-events/articles/usb-type-c-living-...

Dave_C wrote:

“Modern device like a flashlight”? You do realize that flashlights have been around for 100 years? Do you realize that there’s nothing outdated about USB A, that millions of people have devices with USB A? Do you realize that most of the USB power banks on the market, including the new ones coming out daily, use USB A? Do you have any idea that most of the things you’re writing are completely backwards?

It’s only been within the past decade that built in charging has become common to find on flashlights.
Also, in case you haven’t noticed, new flashlgihts are being designed and released every few months, so yes if I’m buying a newly released flashlight it is modern, it is not some 100 year old potato.

Dave_C wrote:

It’s not even that I consider USB A to be the ultimate connector form factor. Not at all. It just beats USB B and C hands down, which is why it is used on things like USB power banks, hubs, motherboard ports, etc. Essentially it is used far more when there is no space constrain and my argument is that there isn’t that much space being saved, particularly on something larger and thicker like a flashlight.

Besides, the fact of the matter is, there are far more flashlights with mUSB than USB C, so I have no idea where you’re getting the idea that you can just insist that you’re only going to buy them with USB C. If you mean in some glorious future you will, at some point USB C will be “outdated” too.


USB C is new that’s why it’s not on many things yet.
It’s replacing type A, as well as micro USB, mini USB, USB B, USB 3B, etc etc etc.
Obviously more things have the old ports but in the near future I don’t want to carry around an extra cable and charger for an outdated flashlight when all my other devices use type C.
The point is that if you want to adapt to the future you can’t stick to old technology and refuse to evolve (although many old people do this because they’re afraid of change)

Dave_C wrote:

It is pretty silly to make a weak USB port on something like a flashlight, especially (considering the intent of this website, budget lights) lower cost offerings which aren’t necessarily built to the same standards as more expensive lights. If you sincerely believe some generic light with the tiniest USB C PCB they can shoehorn into the available space is going to be durable, then you’re in for a surprise.

Still, for some reason you choose to deceive yourself into believing it is weaker because it is smaller.
Maybe you drive a big truck too because of course bigger is always better! Facepalm
toddcshoe
toddcshoe's picture
Offline
Last seen: 14 hours 42 min ago
Joined: 01/24/2018 - 23:49
Posts: 1927
Location: Foley, MO

I really don’t want any of the above mentioned. I just like to charge my cells with a charger not built into a flashlight. Don’t know why, there is probably no good reason I should prefer that method but it just works for me. If for some reason, and it’s a very small chance that something would happen with my battery I don’t want it taking out my light in the process. Single cell chargers are a dime a dozen most of the time. I always have a spare cell on me, I always have a charger within easy getting to distance. I guess the way I look at it is if you have room for the proper cable for whatever your flashlight takes to charge the battery inside, why not have a charger on hand that can charge any number of different cells. Maybe I am just talking out of my butt or something. I just really don’t take into consideration on board charging when I buy a light. Have never used that feature and don’t see why I would.

"Everywhere I go, there I am"

Phlogiston
Phlogiston's picture
Offline
Last seen: 15 hours 18 min ago
Joined: 10/27/2016 - 16:57
Posts: 849
Location: Scotland

I voted for micro USB because it’s still the most common connector, and very few flashlights need more than 5V 2.4A for charging. Nothing I own uses USB-C.

Another point is that USB-C equipped desk chargers often have one or two USB-C outputs, along with three or four old-style USB outputs. In that case, I want to keep the USB-C port free for something like a tablet or small laptop, so I’d rather plug the flashlight into an ordinary USB port.

Give it two or three years. As USB-C adoption rises and I upgrade my devices, I’ll probably be voting for USB-C.

I have no interest in proprietary connectors of any kind, whether mechanical or magnetic. Lose the cable, lose the charging capability. I want something that’s both standard and commonly used enough that I’ll have an identical cable for another device already. Even if you lose all your cables on a trip, you can still nip into a supermarket and buy a USB cable.

Some people have mentioned 5.5mm barrel connectors, and I see where they’re coming from, but I wouldn’t want them. Consumer consensus has already gone for USB-based options; most people already have lots of USB chargers and cables to use, so it makes sense to me to join the herd.

waxing twilight
waxing twilight's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 4 days ago
Joined: 01/21/2016 - 08:34
Posts: 17
Location: Somewhere near the Mason-Dixon Line, US
Barkuti wrote:

On the other  hand, screw propietary connectors and standards.

 

+1

No option for “Prefer NO USB port/internal charging”? That’s my vote.

There’s no way I’m trusting charging Li-ion cells as an afterthought with the quality deficiencies rampant in the marketplace and the consequences of improper charging/treatment of Li-ion cells. I’ll continue charging my cells externally where I can keep an eye on them.
Maybe some manufacturer with a proven trustworthy and strict quality control track record might get my green light for internal charging some day, but for now, the only instance I can think of that it might be a good idea is for solar charging DBSAR’s BLF Ultimate Lantern while in the field as being worth the risk.

BlueSwordM wrote:
Using the additionnal pins of USB-C, we could do some amazing stuff, such as directly wiring the data pins for directly programming the IC with NarsilM, Anduril, etc.

Hmm, that would be pretty handy though.

Phlogiston wrote:

Give it two or three years. As USB-C adoption rises and I upgrade my devices, I’ll probably be voting for USB-C.

I have no interest in proprietary connectors of any kind, whether mechanical or magnetic. Lose the cable, lose the charging capability. I want something that’s both standard and commonly used enough that I’ll have an identical cable for another device already. Even if you lose all your cables on a trip, you can still nip into a supermarket and buy a USB cable.

most people already have lots of USB chargers and cables to use, so it makes sense to me to join the herd.

Good points, Phlogiston. +1

Who knows if in a year or two USB-C falls short and a version superior to USB-C is adopted. That may make it not easy to find USB-C cables. My personal preference on USB-C is that I will wait and see how it does once it has been widely implemented and used for long enough for real world durability to be accepted. Maybe it will live up to the expectations and be universally adopted or maybe it will be quickly passed over for the next bigger innovation. Hopefully it does live up to expectations and increases the universality and durability of charging, but I won’t be surprised if it doesn’t.

I’m still sticking with my external charger.

Enderman
Enderman's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 31 min ago
Joined: 11/03/2016 - 22:42
Posts: 3965
Location: Vancouver, Canada
toddcshoe wrote:
I really don’t want any of the above mentioned. I just like to charge my cells with a charger not built into a flashlight. Don’t know why, there is probably no good reason I should prefer that method but it just works for me. If for some reason, and it’s a very small chance that something would happen with my battery I don’t want it taking out my light in the process. Single cell chargers are a dime a dozen most of the time. I always have a spare cell on me, I always have a charger within easy getting to distance. I guess the way I look at it is if you have room for the proper cable for whatever your flashlight takes to charge the battery inside, why not have a charger on hand that can charge any number of different cells. Maybe I am just talking out of my butt or something. I just really don’t take into consideration on board charging when I buy a light. Have never used that feature and don’t see why I would.

Carrying around a cable is far lighter, smaller, and more convenient than carrying around a whole charger.
Especially if your phone already uses that same type of cable and then you don’t need to carry around any additional stuff.
Great for when you need to charge the flashlight outside of home, like at work or when travelling.

Instead of 1) unscrewing flashlight 2) removing battery 3) placing battery in charger 4) screwing flashlight together to avoid misplacing a part 5) waiting for the battery to charge 6) unscrewing the flashlight again 7) placing the battery back into the flashlight 8) screwing the flashlight together again
You can simply plug in a cable, wait for it to charge, and unplug the cable.
Just like a phone.
You can charge it from a laptop or phone charger without needing a bulky li-ion charger.

Lexel
Lexel's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 51 min ago
Joined: 11/01/2016 - 08:00
Posts: 5370
Location: Germany

no charging port at all

toddcshoe
toddcshoe's picture
Offline
Last seen: 14 hours 42 min ago
Joined: 01/24/2018 - 23:49
Posts: 1927
Location: Foley, MO

Enderman wrote:
Carrying around a cable is far lighter, smaller, and more convenient than carrying around a whole charger.
Especially if your phone already uses that same type of cable and then you don’t need to carry around any additional stuff.
Great for when you need to charge the flashlight outside of home, like at work or when travelling.

Instead of 1) unscrewing flashlight 2) removing battery 3) placing battery in charger 4) screwing flashlight together to avoid misplacing a part 5) waiting for the battery to charge 6) unscrewing the flashlight again 7) placing the battery back into the flashlight 8) screwing the flashlight together again
You can simply plug in a cable, wait for it to charge, and unplug the cable.
Just like a phone.
You can charge it from a laptop or phone charger without needing a bulky li-ion charger.

I completely understand. I am just not very trusting of charging cells inside the light I may be depending on. If I know I will be gone for most of the day I will throw a few extra cells in my pocket and not even take a charger with me. When travelling I take a charger. My work doesn’t require the use of a flashlight for any kind of extended duration’s so that really never comes up. I am kinda anal bout lights. I usually have at least two on me and if I know I will be gone for the entire day I usually have a few more in my “zombie bag” that goes everywhere with me. That’s what the wife calls my bag I carry with all the things a man thinks he needs to go grocery shopping. You know, knives, guns, flashlights, fire starters, first aid kit, multi tool, para cord, etc. LOL

I don’t know, I just don’t trust onboard charging. I don’t want a 4 dollar battery destroying a 50 dollar light. Will it happen? Most likely not. I just don’t want to take the chance. I do like a lot of the options that USB C can bring into the flashlight industry though.

"Everywhere I go, there I am"

Enderman
Enderman's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 31 min ago
Joined: 11/03/2016 - 22:42
Posts: 3965
Location: Vancouver, Canada

toddcshoe wrote:

I completely understand. I am just not very trusting of charging cells inside the light I may be depending on. If I know I will be gone for most of the day I will throw a few extra cells in my pocket and not even take a charger with me. When travelling I take a charger. My work doesn’t require the use of a flashlight for any kind of extended duration’s so that really never comes up. I am kinda anal bout lights. I usually have at least two on me and if I know I will be gone for the entire day I usually have a few more in my “zombie bag” that goes everywhere with me. That’s what the wife calls my bag I carry with all the things a man thinks he needs to go grocery shopping. You know, knives, guns, flashlights, fire starters, first aid kit, multi tool, para cord, etc. LOL

I don’t know, I just don’t trust onboard charging. I don’t want a 4 dollar battery destroying a 50 dollar light. Will it happen? Most likely not. I just don’t want to take the chance. I do like a lot of the options that USB C can bring into the flashlight industry though.


Obviously both the battery you use and the charging circuitry in the light should be high quality for safe use.
This is no different or any less safe than having a high quality li-ion charger.

Built in charging does not require a special battery, it could be any battery you currently use.

toddcshoe
toddcshoe's picture
Offline
Last seen: 14 hours 42 min ago
Joined: 01/24/2018 - 23:49
Posts: 1927
Location: Foley, MO

Enderman wrote:
Obviously both the battery you use and the charging circuitry in the light should be high quality for safe use.
This is no different or any less safe than having a high quality li-ion charger.

Built in charging does not require a special battery, it could be any battery you currently use.

Yes, I understand that I don’t need a special battery and we would all like to think that what we are buying and using are high quality and will work perfect without anything happening to them. Just me personally if, and it’s a big if, something does happen to a cell I would prefer it to destroy itself and not take my light out with it. That’s it. If the battery takes out a charger with it that is fine with me but I would prefer to still have my light intact and working for the back up cells I have in my pocket. Some folks spend lots of money to mod and fine tune their lights and make them truly unique. I am sure they wouldn’t want a cell, cheap junk or good quality, even quality stuff fails occasionally, destroying their light.

I do have a few of those cells with the charging circuit built on top of the cell itself so I can remove the cell and plug the micro usb cable into it. They are pretty cool and work fairly well but they do make the cell not fit in some picky lights. I guess if I had to choose I would take that over any light with on board charging.

"Everywhere I go, there I am"

Enderman
Enderman's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 31 min ago
Joined: 11/03/2016 - 22:42
Posts: 3965
Location: Vancouver, Canada

toddcshoe wrote:

Yes, I understand that I don’t need a special battery and we would all like to think that what we are buying and using are high quality and will work perfect without anything happening to them. Just me personally if, and it’s a big if, something does happen to a cell I would prefer it to destroy itself and not take my light out with it. That’s it. If the battery takes out a charger with it that is fine with me but I would prefer to still have my light intact and working for the back up cells I have in my pocket. Some folks spend lots of money to mod and fine tune their lights and make them truly unique. I am sure they wouldn’t want a cell, cheap junk or good quality, even quality stuff fails occasionally, destroying their light.

I do have a few of those cells with the charging circuit built on top of the cell itself so I can remove the cell and plug the micro usb cable into it. They are pretty cool and work fairly well but they do make the cell not fit in some picky lights. I guess if I had to choose I would take that over any light with on board charging.


Seems like people severely overestimate how often a cell “goes bad”.
Even if a cell does go bad there is pretty much no chance of it destroying a light.
Go look at some video of people shorting the cells, the worst that happens is they get hot and stop working.

Having the charging built into the cell just makes it a smaller and lower quality charging circuit, and limits the cells available unless you want to mod a high quality cell like a 35E to have that circuit.
Having it built in to the flashlight is basically the same thing as having it built into the cell, but you have the option of using any standard cell.

Siftah
Siftah's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 36 min ago
Joined: 01/07/2012 - 08:08
Posts: 118
Location: Barcelona, Spain
zak.wilson wrote:
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.

I voted Micro B because they’re currently super common, most all my other camping gear charge from them, so it means less cables to carry.

Honestly, if it had been an option I’d have voted lightning cable as I prefer the lightning cable to even USB C – it has the benefits of USB C and is currently more common.

I own nothing with USB C yet so don’t want to have to take yet another “universal standard” cable with me Smile

jigsaw
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 35 min ago
Joined: 01/15/2016 - 17:35
Posts: 209
Location: Michigan, USA

what exactly are you calling magnetic?

Phlogiston
Phlogiston's picture
Offline
Last seen: 15 hours 18 min ago
Joined: 10/27/2016 - 16:57
Posts: 849
Location: Scotland

waxing twilight wrote:
No option for “Prefer NO USB port/internal charging”? That’s my vote.

There’s no way I’m trusting charging Li-ion cells as an afterthought with the quality deficiencies rampant in the marketplace and the consequences of improper charging/treatment of Li-ion cells. I’ll continue charging my cells externally where I can keep an eye on them.
Maybe some manufacturer with a proven trustworthy and strict quality control track record might get my green light for internal charging some day, but for now, the only instance I can think of that it might be a good idea is for solar charging DBSAR’s BLF Ultimate Lantern while in the field as being worth the risk.

I know where you’re coming from there, waxing twilight.

I’m very picky about what lights I might buy with internal charging. At the moment, the only model I have like that is the Fenix UC35. Reputable brand, good reviews, tested to make sure my unit is behaving itself.

I don’t actually use the UC35, but I carry it as my backup 18650 light in backpack EDC. I don’t like the cold white LED, but it’s fully IPX8 waterproof, even if the USB port is uncovered, so it serves as a waterproof spare cell carrier and USB charger. I can even use it as a light if I’m really stuck Smile

Normally, I prefer to swap cells and take the depleted ones home for charging in a dedicated charger. The UC35 only comes into play when I’m travelling or I expect to go through several cells that day.

Phlogiston
Phlogiston's picture
Offline
Last seen: 15 hours 18 min ago
Joined: 10/27/2016 - 16:57
Posts: 849
Location: Scotland

Here’s an interesting post from angerdan on DBSAR’s BLF Lantern thread:

http://budgetlightforum.com/comment/1342971#comment-1342971

The link that caught my eye was:

http://www.digitaleurope.org/DesktopModules/Bring2mind/DMX/Download.aspx...

As of 20th March 2018, the major smartphone manufacturers have agreed with the EU to support USB-C in all new smartphone models within 3 years. That can mean direct USB-C support, or the provision of a cable allowing the phone to interoperate USB-C with some other connector.

angerdan
angerdan's picture
Offline
Last seen: 23 min 26 sec ago
Joined: 11/01/2015 - 10:07
Posts: 426

Thanks for the hint to the poll Wink

I voted for USB-C because (flash)lights with this newer standard will be still usable with the cables current in 5 years.
And i like the dual insertable socket/plug.

Here are some german language news articles, from which i’d found the english links i’d post at BLF:
https://www.heise.de/mac-and-i/meldung/iPhone-Apple-plant-offenbar-Umsti...USB-C-4076889.html
https://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Einheitliche-USB-C-Ladegeraete-in-der-EU-sollen-kommen-4069422.html
https://www.heise-gruppe.de/presse/Technology-website-heise-online-launc...

Phlogiston
Phlogiston's picture
Offline
Last seen: 15 hours 18 min ago
Joined: 10/27/2016 - 16:57
Posts: 849
Location: Scotland

Cool. I found the last couple of paragraphs in this one interesting:

https://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Einheitliche-USB-C-Ladegeraete-in-der-EU-sollen-kommen-4069422.html

I agree with the EU that devices should not come with a USB charger in the box, both to avoid electronic waste and because I prefer to pick a nice, universal multi-port charger for myself anyway.

Among other things, there will be a transitional period sooner or later where I have a mixture of old devices using micro USB and new devices using USB-C. Manufacturer-supplied chargers tend to be basic, single port units, so they only support one connector type. I’d far rather buy a universal charger with both connector types from Anker and just have one charger to carry.

mrheosuper
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 17 min ago
Joined: 09/30/2016 - 12:44
Posts: 1479
Location: Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

i also agree that the charger shouldn’t be supplied now, i have several charger that i forgot completely about them
my charger has 5+1 Quick charge port+1 Type C port and it is enough for a geek like me

Forgot my pen

angerdan
angerdan's picture
Offline
Last seen: 23 min 26 sec ago
Joined: 11/01/2015 - 10:07
Posts: 426

I remember the time around 2007, when miniUSB was the most common plug. Even when microUSB was released, i had a lot devices with miniUSB, which has been more sturdily in my opinion.
I hope USB-C will be as good as miniUSB.

HKJ did review the Xiaomi CDQ06ZM 60W Fast+QC+PD USB charger, which can replace my old Ravpower RP-UC07.
https://lygte-info.dk/review/USBpower%20Xiaomi%20Mi%2060W%20Fast%2BQC%2B...
https://lygte-info.dk/review/USBpower%20RAVpower%20Bolt%204%20port%20des...

To bad the Pirl Charger don’t support QC.
https://lygte-info.dk/review/USBpower%20Pirl%20Charger%204×2.7A%20usb.html

DavidEF
DavidEF's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 19 hours ago
Joined: 06/05/2014 - 06:00
Posts: 7646
Location: Salisbury, North Carolina, USA
Dave_C wrote:
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.
Well, I would never call a magnetically coupled charge connector simply “magnetic charger” either. But, you’re right that it’s probably the most common interpretation of that phrase. Induction chargers are simply called “wireless” chargers usually. Sorry if I caused anybody confusion (ironically Facepalm )

The Cycle of Goodness: “No one prospers without rendering benefit to others”
- The YKK Philosophy

nvanlaar
nvanlaar's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 18 hours ago
Joined: 08/30/2017 - 16:57
Posts: 259
Location: CA, USA

altonx wrote:

Would inductive charging (like Qi) even work if the receiving coil is behind ~2mm of metal casing?

It doesn’t work on my phone with a small thin metal disc. Although to be fair, the disc is ferrous so it probably messes with the magnetic field…
Where would the receiving coil even go on an 18650 tube light? The tail?

“Facts don’t care about your feelings.”
~Ben Shapiro

ZoomieFan
ZoomieFan's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 5 days ago
Joined: 08/19/2016 - 05:25
Posts: 483
Location: Netherlands & Indiana

I have preference for USB micro because most chargers have this connector.
Switching to USB-C is only useful with high A charging. Considering the chargers in a flashlight usually are weak there isn’t a real benefit for USB-C.

Magnetic is I don’t want.

Chargers: 1xBasen BD01 5/5, 1x Gyrfalcon All-88, LiitoKala: 3x100 4/5, 2x202 5/5, 1x402 3/5., MiBoxer C4-12 3/5.
Flashlights: BLF Q8 4/5, DQG Tiny III 26650 5/5, FiTorch MR35 3/5, Haikelite SC26 HD 3/5, Lumintop Tool AA/AAA 4/5, Nitecore LA10, Sofirn C01 BLF 3200k/5600k, Zebralight H600Fc 3/5.
Powerbanks: EasyAcc 26800 mAh 3/5, Xtar PB2 4/5.
Waiting for: (DQG Tiny) 21700 EDCs. Xtar powerbank that (also) takes 20700, 21700, 26650

Pages