Русский
العربية
Français
Español
TürkçeComparing the Scania VCI 2 Diagnostic Adapter
The Scantruck Laboratory continues to compare the genuine vehicle diagnostic adapter and its various fakes. This time we took the original device – the Scania VCI2 diagnostic adapter – and its rather a good-looking clone.
Table of Contents
The OBD-II connector cable is long, whereas the USB connector cable is rather short.
The OBD-II connector cable is short, whereas the USB connector cable is long.
As you can see, the copy’s housing looks identical to the original one from physical overview, but the length of device cables differs considerably. The OBD-II connector cable of the original is made short as there is no need to place the device far away from the connector, though the computer may be set outside the vehicle. The Chinese seem to have ignored this logic in their copy and made the USB connector cable relatively short to the point that you will have to carry your computer into the car interior or just keep the device on the floor. After all, it doesn’t exclude the possibility that one may carelessly step on or drop the tool, etc.
Even if not to take an unbalanced cable length as a flop, let’s look at both devices in detail, it’s quite likely that some more flaws will take place.
1. PACKAGING
It looks a bit strange, but the Chinese copy is supplied in a special plastic case whereas the original device is merely in a plastic bag. For this reason the fake looks more attractive for purchase, but actually it’s far from it.
The device comes in an unsealed plastic case.
No information on what is inside.
The device is packed in a sealed bag.
The stick-on label with the device details and certificates is available.
The delivery package includes a device, a software CD, a USB flash drive, a set of wires with an adapter.
The components inside the case are simply packed without filling the voids so that they can be easily damaged during transportation.
The package and contents inside are not sealed.
All accessories can be purchased from a dealer.
2. HOUSING
Let’s take the devices out and try to figure out how they differ. We have mentioned before about the difference in the cable length.
The device weighs less than the genuine one as the housing is made of plastic. It’s obvious that this makes the device vulnerable to damage during operation.
The label is misaligned as it covers a bit of the LED holes.
The label is of a wrong size as it noticeably doesn’t match the area meant for it on the cover. So, basically, it can’t be stuck properly.
The cable is thinner and the adapters are of smaller cross section which means the quality of data communication via CAN bus is worse than in the original.
The housing of the original device is made of metal which is important, for example, when using it in a car repair shop.
The labels have no warranty information available.
The housing holds the warranty seal label.
The OBD-II plastic connector has no identification mark.
The OBD-II connector is rubberized which makes it easy to grip.
The connector is provided with the identification mark.
3. REVIEWING THE BOARD
After the disassembling the device housing we found out that the circuit board of the Chinese clone is quite different from the original one. As you may see in the photo, the integrated circuits used are the same (so it goes), but all the the rest circuit design is different. The Chinese makers not only used other components (we may assume that they are of worse quality and with high defect rate), but, moreover, they redesigned the circuit in such a way that we may only guess what features they maintained and which ones they abandoned for the sake of simplification (cost-cutting).
The board is fitted with the flat LEDs of wide light dispersion. And taking into account that the stick-on label with the holes for the LEDs is misaligned and the output channel is partially overlapped, the indicators will provide worse display compared to the original.
Data on the processing unit and the USB microcircuit is effaced, in this way the Chinese makers try to protect the device from copying.
The circuit is simplified which may produce unstable or faulty operation of the device and failure of the vehicle onboard computer or other equipment.
Messy soldering, the circuit board has traces of flux residue. It’s easy to notice that many components are hand-soldered, and that makes sense for the components with high defect rate which commonly need soldering after assembling and testing (it stands to reason that it is done manually).
The lens LEDs make the light directed precisely to the specified channels.
An error in the PCB layout produced pressing of the capacitor by the connector which may lead to its physical damage.
CONCLUSION
The Chinese copy turned out to be far different from the genuine device, though the device is not so complicated in terms of design for copying. The point is not in the fact that the clone is less easy to useand it has the plastic housing, but not the metal one. The Chinese producers changed the circuit board itself so that it can’t be said for sure whether it performs its functions or not. Moreover, we have a suspicion that the Chinese device may pose a risk of damage to the connected equipment. It would be unreasonable to think that the European engineers made some device features excessive. Their implementation is most likely to be based on some valid reasons.
Don’t deal with fakes – stick only to genuine devices.
