What's latest version/firmware/model for Maha C9000?

[SilverFox]

Hello Mr Happy,

I totally agree.

As much scrutiny as the C9000 gets and as often as it gets put under the magnifying glass, if there were functional differences I would expect them to be "discovered."

I would also expect Maha to announce a major revision and use that as a sales effort. I also believe that they have documented that they do minor revisions and those are not announced because their minor revisions don't impact the base functionality of the unit.

I would love to see an upgrade, but as is it works pretty good.

Tom

 

[45/70]

I'll say this again, perhaps a bit more clearly. I've had, at different times, one 0G0IA alongside two 0H0FA's and now, these same two 0H0FA's working alongside a single 0I0IA, performing various C9000 functions with 10 identical cells at a time, and there is no difference in how they work. There may in fact be PCB revisions, but as Mr H suggested, they apparently do not affect how these four chargers actually work, as all four have performed identically.

Dave

 

[Mikl1984]

So, in function what is the difference between version 8 and version 9?

Function store in FW
I am pretty sure that main target of last redesign was high freq noise reported before
In 0J0 with REV9 PCB this issue was disappear

 

[jalyst]

<SNIP>Tom

Tom, thanks for the wonderfully in depth explanation, tis very much appreciated.
So were you a bit pissed that you had to get your original c9000 "modified"?
From what you explained, it sounds like the original was only an issue if one had no clue what they were doing!
For the more technically adept/informed, it shouldn't have been an issue.

Tom, you forgot about the 50 Watt HID back light for the LCD display! And jalyst, it is important to note that all of these modifications happened at the same time, ie, they didn't happen over a period of time but rather all in the same revision. Dave

Okay thanks very much Dave.

 

[jalyst]

After visible modifications in FW during last 5 years we saw 9!!! revisions of PCB for example
Maha-MH-C9000-Disassembled

Are you saying you've seen visible modifications to the firmware & 9 revisions to the PCB since release?
So what fixes or improvements have come about as a result?

I think it's difficult to figure this out without having both examples in hand and doing a detailed analysis of the differences. It is not unusual for circuit boards to go through revisions during production, and there might not necessarily be any functional differences implied. It might be, for instance, that one or two components had be swapped out for equivalents from a different source due to availability. However, I do recall that the shape of the negative battery clip for AAA cells was changed at some point, and this might be one reason for a revision.

This is true, not all revisions -fw or otherwise- will necessarily improve functionality.
There may just be firmware or hardware "bug fixes" ...

Or just different components sourced because original supplier is not available.
Which -for transparency- has to be reflected in a new revision.

I would also expect Maha to announce a major revision and use that as a sales effort. I also believe that they have documented that they do minor revisions and those are not announced because their minor revisions don't impact the base functionality of the unit.

Can you recall where you saw this documentation of theirs?
Were they referring only to revisions of PCB or both PCB & firmware?

As there's only tiny fixes they're occasionally doing...
I can see why they don't bother rolling them into one heavily marketed "major new release".

Some fixes are bound to affect base functionality surely.
But they wouldn't necessarily make a big deal out of that.

I'll say this again, perhaps a bit more clearly. I've had, at different times, one 0G0IA alongside two 0H0FA's and now, these same two 0H0FA's working alongside a single 0I0IA, performing various C9000 functions with 10 identical cells at a time, and there is no difference in how they work. There may in fact be PCB revisions, but as Mr H suggested, they apparently do not affect how these four chargers actually work, as all four have performed identically.

Shame you don't still have the OG to compare more closely to your others.
It's possible there's been subtle hw/fw revisions between 0H0FA & 0I0IA.
But they may not be changes that impacted base functionality in any way.
It's also possible that there no fw or hw revisions at all during that time.

 

[billcushman]

The Maha C9000 is a mature product. I own two C9000s that were originally the very first version and those were cheerfully replaced by Maha with the revised version at no cost including free S & H, when the revised units were available. These units have performed flawlessly for over four years.

Most electronic product manufacturers continually revise their products. This may be caused by parts availability, cost reduction, problem elimination, and many other factors. Detailed information is often not provided to customers or support personnel. The newest version is not necessarily the most desirable.

Buy your Maha C9000s from a reputable supplier. In the rare event you have a problem, you should have no difficulty getting it resolved to your satisfaction.

 

[45/70]

Shame you don't still have the OG to compare more closely to your others.
It's possible there's been subtle hw/fw revisions between 0H0FA & 0I0IA.
But they may not be changes that impacted base functionality in any way.
It's also possible that there no fw or hw revisions at all during that time.

Hi jalyst. The point I was making is that all four of these chargers work(ed) identically. I purchase AA cells in sets of 20. Having three C9000 chargers, I can perform maintenance on 10 cells at a time. This gives me two slots left over if I should need to charge up one or two cells during a "Break-In", or whatever.

As I said the oldest charger worked the same as the two middle aged ones, and the newest one the same as the two middle aged ones. So, deductively, one can reason that the the oldest performed identically to the newest one.

As for the newer C9000's, as far as I know, the 0J and 0K chargers are identical, as well. It is only the very first run of the C9000 chargers (0F0xx, or among those I guess) that worked differently. There of course, as has been mentioned, have been some minor mechanical differences, but all the C9000 chargers since the first and one and only firmware revision, that I am aware of, work exactly the same, as far as the characteristics of the firmware is concerned. That is to say that a 0G0xx C9000 will function identically to a 0K0xx C9000, so I wouldn't worry too much about which specific date code a "new" C9000 has on it, provided it's not a 0F0xx. As I said, it's very unlikely you would run into one of these for sale "new" nowadays.

Dave

 

[SilverFox]

Hello Jalyst,

Actually another issue surfaced. The original units termination method had a tendency to heat the cells to a higher temperature even when everything was working normally. The revision reduced that heating.

Since NiMh chemistry is sensitive to damage from heat, the modification made sense to me.

Tom

 

[jalyst]

Actually another issue surfaced. The original units termination method had a tendency to heat the cells to a higher temperature even when everything was working normally. The revision reduced that heating.
Since NiMh chemistry is sensitive to damage from heat, the modification made sense to me.

Ah i see,
So "on the whole" you would've been happy they took that 20k mAh functionality away.
Given what they fixed in return

Cheers

 

[jalyst]

@Tom ^
Am-i-rite or am-i-wrong, or am-i-rite?

 

[SilverFox]

Hello Jalyst,

You are wrong...

I am happy that they addressed the "issues" we were having with some cells. I think it made the charger that much more solid and trustworthy.

I have never viewed the C9000 as a "do it all" charger. It is excellent for AA cells, and really good for AAA cells. I have another charger to deal with other sized cells, and I have test equipment that allows me to verify the health of cells. The change in the maximum charge timer had no effect on me at all, so I don't view it as having something taken away from me, or as any functionality being removed.

Tom

 

[jalyst]

Hello Jalyst, You are wrong...

Don't you mean my understanding was right?
This is what I said in my last post:

Ah i see,
So "on the whole" you were happy they took that 20k mAh functionality away.
Given what they fixed in return

I have another charger to deal with other sized cells, and I have test equipment that allows me to verify the health of cells.

Cool, what's the other charger and test equipment you use?

Thanks mate.

 

[SilverFox]

Hello Jalyst,

If you read what you wrote and what I wrote you will see that your emphasis seems to be that they took something away, while my emphasis is that they improved the charger. "On the whole" I am pleased with the improvement, but it has nothing to do with the maximum capacity timer.

I use my Schulze charger for other size cells, other chemistries, and for battery packs. I use the CBA from West Mountain Radio for cell testing.

Tom

 

[jalyst]

But they did take some functionality away, & as you say they also fixed some nasty bugs.

And now that i understand what that functionality was, & the nature of the bugs corrected.
Given the choice between the two, I -like you- would also take the latter...

If you don't mind my asking....
What's the model names of the Schulz charger & the CBA?

Thanks!

 

[SilverFox]

Hello Jalyst,

Once again you are wrong...

The purpose of the C9000 is to charge AA and AAA cells. By modifying the termination algorithm, they improved the functionality of the charger. It is now more tolerant of a wider range of cells that may be in poorer condition.

I think the word you may be looking for is capability.

By reducing the maximum charge timer value, the capability of the charger to do damage to a cell, in the event of missed termination, has been reduced. Since this is a desired feature, the functionality of the unit has actually been increased...

The Schulze is the isl 6-330d RS. The CBA started out as the original, but has been revised several times. I think if you were to purchase a new on you would get version 3.

Tom

 

[Bright+]

Did they correct the current regulation mechanism?

When you put it in 100mA discharge, the charger simply pulsed 1A for 10% cycle, but took "flash voltage reading" under load and caused high impedance cells to read "done" even if they work just fine on real 100mA load for a long time, because the read voltage represents voltage at 1A load.

 

[Mikl1984]

Did they correct the current regulation mechanism?

No
The same PWM 1A and the same behavior on 0.1/0.5/1A
If you need normal discharge look at hobby charger (my choice is iCharger)

 

[jalyst]

The Schulze is the isl 6-330d RS. The CBA started out as the original, but has been revised several times. I think if you were to purchase a new on you would get version 3.

LOL okay, I won't bother getting further into semantics.
C9000 on it's way, Feb 2011 batch 2 model.
Thanks Tom/everyone for the thoughts!

 

[jdmc]

As I mention somewhere else at this forum......Another happy owner just to let everybody know interested in the numbers on the back...bought mine last month (nov '11) and with this batch: 0K0IA

 

[Lyubo Yanev]

Recieved mine today: 0K0GA. I'm so happy :laughing: