【New Product】XTAR VC2L Charger

Wurkkos

XTAR Light

Enlightened
Manufacturer
Joined
Apr 26, 2010
Messages
556
Location
China
Glad to share this new VC2L released online! For xtar official retail store only. Based on VC2, this new VC2L charger can charge all popular 3.6V/3.7V Li-ion batteries, also 1.2V Ni-MH batteries. And it has extended slots, compatible with protected 20700/21700 batteries. With upgraded popular type-C input, you can charge anywhere. 2Ax1/1Ax2/0.5Ax2 are available.

View more on website: https://www.xtar.cc/product/XTAR-VC2L-Charger-177.html

XTAR VC2L P1.jpg
 

yazkaz

Flashlight Enthusiast
CPF Supporter
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
1,078
No offence but I'm not too impressed with this update. A few things:

1. NiMH compatibility: IMHO, this is redundant. I had the experience with such capability while using the older VC2+ and didn't feel confident about it. If I remember correctly reviewer HKJ also made similar concerns with the NiMH charging strategy.

So instead of making a charger "universal" why not just concentrate on just one charging strategy (ie. LiIon) and optimize it onto such charger?

2. USB-C connection: Again, is it absolutely necessary? Or is it being implemented just because of popularity? AFAIK a USB Micro-b connection can still implement QC2/3 charging (5V/9V/12V), if any connected USB charger permits. IMHO, really no need to implement USB-C port unless if absolutely necessary;

3. "2Ax1/1Ax2/0.5Ax2 are available": How about manually selectable charging speeds, down to 0.25A or even lower? With the VC2S/4S, reading from HKJ's reviews, there's a tendency that smaller cells can be accidentally charged at higher charge speeds. Will this happen to the VC2L as well? On the original VC2 the max rate is 500mA but it can adjust itself from 100-500mA AFAIK depending on battery.

4. When devising an update to the VC2, why not start from the VC2S? IMHO the current model VC2S deserves more of an update with the sole purpose of being protected 21xxx-compatible. Same thing goes to the VC4L -- it should be a continuation to the VC4S instead.

I've been using the original VC2 for some years now but have no plans on replacing it. It's not perfect, but it still does the job decently while not giving me too much worry. If I need to acquire another VC model that would the VC2S, but NOT the VC2L -- especially, as long as protected 21xxx batteries are out of my usage scenario.
 

XTAR Light

Enlightened
Manufacturer
Joined
Apr 26, 2010
Messages
556
Location
China
No offence but I'm not too impressed with this update. A few things:

1. NiMH compatibility: IMHO, this is redundant. I had the experience with such capability while using the older VC2+ and didn't feel confident about it. If I remember correctly reviewer HKJ also made similar concerns with the NiMH charging strategy.

So instead of making a charger "universal" why not just concentrate on just one charging strategy (ie. LiIon) and optimize it onto such charger?

2. USB-C connection: Again, is it absolutely necessary? Or is it being implemented just because of popularity? AFAIK a USB Micro-b connection can still implement QC2/3 charging (5V/9V/12V), if any connected USB charger permits. IMHO, really no need to implement USB-C port unless if absolutely necessary;

3. "2Ax1/1Ax2/0.5Ax2 are available": How about manually selectable charging speeds, down to 0.25A or even lower? With the VC2S/4S, reading from HKJ's reviews, there's a tendency that smaller cells can be accidentally charged at higher charge speeds. Will this happen to the VC2L as well? On the original VC2 the max rate is 500mA but it can adjust itself from 100-500mA AFAIK depending on battery.

4. When devising an update to the VC2, why not start from the VC2S? IMHO the current model VC2S deserves more of an update with the sole purpose of being protected 21xxx-compatible. Same thing goes to the VC4L -- it should be a continuation to the VC4S instead.

I've been using the original VC2 for some years now but have no plans on replacing it. It's not perfect, but it still does the job decently while not giving me too much worry. If I need to acquire another VC model that would the VC2S, but NOT the VC2L -- especially, as long as protected 21xxx batteries are out of my usage scenario.
Hi there, thanks for your kind comment. We will collect the feedback, and give it to the engineers team and factory!
 

yazkaz

Flashlight Enthusiast
CPF Supporter
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
1,078
Hi there, thanks for your kind comment. We will collect the feedback, and give it to the engineers team and factory!
I'd like to reiterate the problem regarding implementing USB-C connection. A battery charger is NOT a smartphone. While in the modern smartphone scenario the industry has been pushing to adopt the USB-C port connection as standard, this is not quite the case with battery chargers. And if your product portfolio consists of charger models that have a mixture of Micro-b and C input ports, that's going to confuse all customers, in that they'll have to invest on both A-to-Micro-b and A-to-C cables just for the charging tasks; and to those repeating customers who have been accustomed to the years-long USB Micro-b charging connection routine, switching to C port for no justifiable reason is just as annoying.

Also don't forget that your X2/L and X4/L chargers still get equipped with Micro-b ports, meaning such ports are good enough to perform under USB charging connection, in addition to the conventional AC charging connection.

Back to this VC2L. It probably has a relatively lower power requirement like other VC2 variants, and if a Micro-b connection is more than suffice in this battery charger form, then why forcibly change to Type C? Remember, these days, change is not always for the better (but rather, industrial greed).
 

henrik274

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Oct 22, 2021
Messages
1
Location
Denmark
Hi Xtar,

Please do not take yazkaz opinion as if it was the consensus on the CPF. Personally, I am very happy to see this charger with USB-C input as I am trying to eliminate Micro USB cables in my household. Also while traveling it is much nicer to carry only one cable. So for me this is awesome news!
 

knucklegary

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 11, 2017
Messages
1,530
Location
NorCal
Is it cost effective to supply USB C verses the single pin jack style cable?

The old style cable connection is more secure than C, and just as easy to carry

Just adding my two cents...
 

XTAR Light

Enlightened
Manufacturer
Joined
Apr 26, 2010
Messages
556
Location
China
Hi Xtar,

Please do not take yazkaz opinion as if it was the consensus on the CPF. Personally, I am very happy to see this charger with USB-C input as I am trying to eliminate Micro USB cables in my household. Also while traveling it is much nicer to carry only one cable. So for me this is awesome news!
Thanks for your kind supports here!
 

yazkaz

Flashlight Enthusiast
CPF Supporter
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
1,078
Is it cost effective to supply USB C verses the single pin jack style cable?

The old style cable connection is more secure than C, and just as easy to carry

Just adding my two cents...
USB-C receptacles can be made good or bad. When it's good the said connection will be secure; however when it's bad then the C receptacle will only go worse as the connection will become gradually more loose, to the point that the cable's C-plug cannot click into the C receptacle and falls out. I've experienced a few products with inferior USB C receptacles.

As far as minimalist carry is concerned (and only just "one" cable), that's completely absurd and stupid. USB cables deteriorate after very long use and need to be replaced (regardless of the plug type). Therefore, wherever I go, I'll have multiple cables ready just in case.

Back to USB-C connection... If Xtar wants to implement it, then it needs to be implemented at maximum specs as possible. Take the VC8+ for example, the QC3 connection can still only go up to 9V at 2A, and not 12V at 1.5A? This will drive customers away from using the C connection and revert to the traditional DC ([email protected]) connection instead. But for the VC2L discussed here, I don't see an absolutely stable power delivery provided via USB-C/QC3 as a top priority.
 
Last edited:

Olumin

Enlightened
CPF Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 2020
Messages
658
Location
"...that famous Texas part of Hamburg"
As far as minimalist carry is concerned (and only just "one" cable), that's completely absurd and stupid. USB cables deteriorate after very long use and need to be replaced (regardless of the plug type). Therefore, wherever I go, I'll have multiple cables ready just in case.
So you carry multible usb cables at all times in case one spontaneously wears out? :unsure:
 

3_gun

Enlightened
Joined
Jun 27, 2021
Messages
259
I have cables in my backpack, laptop bag, glove box & go bag & still have dozens hanging on the back of my door. I have more trouble finding an open USB than I do a cable to use.

(Don't forget to keep a "power only" cable handy if you need to recharge personal devices in public places)
 

yazkaz

Flashlight Enthusiast
CPF Supporter
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
1,078
So you carry multible usb cables at all times in case one spontaneously wears out? :unsure:
For peripherals requiring USB connections, you'd better carry multiple quality cables just in case. That doesn't mean you can't do so an organized way. For me I carry cables, chargers, powerbank(s) into one ThinkTank accessory pouch, which resides in my daypack at all times. It's bulky, but given the current situation, it's deemed necessary IMO.

Furthermore, to cope with more upcoming USB-C connections, all USB A/Micro-b cables come installed with plug adapters (Micro-b female to C male). I find this arrangement working for me, but the reverse plug adapter arrangement does NOT -- as, in my experience, such adapter (C female to Micro-b male) wears out the cable's C plug faster, resulting in a looser USB-C connection in the long run.
 

yazkaz

Flashlight Enthusiast
CPF Supporter
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
1,078
I have cables in my backpack, laptop bag, glove box & go bag & still have dozens hanging on the back of my door. I have more trouble finding an open USB than I do a cable to use.

(Don't forget to keep a "power only" cable handy if you need to recharge personal devices in public places)
USB cables are easily replaceable; USB ports (receptacles) are NOT. That's why mfyers need to pay more attention to the QC of USB receptacles, whether on a USB charger, or other computer/mobile peripheral.

I kind of see your point regarding the "power only" cable. But that will cause some companies to play slacky and include such cables (ie. non-data transferrable) into products like the said Xtar chargers, where some customers would try to use that for their smartphone connections...

The other slight advantage to USB "power only" cable is that when used in conjunction with a powerbank (or public USB charging outlet) and a phone, the phone will definitely not mistake such USB connection as a data transfer connection (which defeats charging), and will switch to charging mode without issue.
 
Last edited:

knucklegary

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 11, 2017
Messages
1,530
Location
NorCal
I have noticed some, usually with device mfgr supplied, USB-C cables the metal oblong connector is made with a seam. Whereas the higher grade such as Anker Powerline III C to C are seamless construction. Fitment is snug, the way I prefer them
 

TimMc

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Jun 2, 2013
Messages
28
Location
Melbourne, Australia
3. "2Ax1/1Ax2/0.5Ax2 are available": How about manually selectable charging speeds, down to 0.25A or even lower? With the VC2S/4S, reading from HKJ's reviews, there's a tendency that smaller cells can be accidentally charged at higher charge speeds. Will this happen to the VC2L as well? On the original VC2 the max rate is 500mA but it can adjust itself from 100-500mA AFAIK depending on battery.

I received an early version of the VC2L for review. Thanks XTAR!

The button allows you to manually select the charging speed but it only goes down to 0.5A:
While charging one cell, the button cycles through 2.0 > 1.0 > 0.5 > 2.0 A.
While charging two cells, the button cycles through 1.0 > 0.5 > 1.0 A.

It would be nice if the charger let you manually cycle through 0.2 > 0.5 > 1.0 > 1.5 > 2.0 A.

Smaller cells might be accidentally charged at a higher charge speed. I accidentally did this while charging a 16340 when I incorrectly assumed that the VC2L had some kind of automatic charging current selection. It doesn't automatically select the current based on the cell size. It defaults to 2.0A. The actual current may be lower (e.g. 0.4A) than the 2.0A displayed.
 
Top