Victron seemingly offers two different AC/DC Smart chargers:
- Smart IP43 Charger 230V
- Phoenix Smart IP43 Charger 120-240V
I am wondering if those two model types also differ in their support for VE.Smart Networking and if both support synchronized charging.
Despite the obvious difference that the latter supports a wider range of input voltage I thought the two models were identical. (Both models support 1+1 or 3 output configuration, but this is not the point here.) Additionally, I have been looking at the prefix “Phoenix” for the latter as a minor inconsistency, in particular as each of their manuals does not use the word “Phoenix”.
The datasheets for both models are identical. Page 1 states
Optional external battery voltage and temperature sensing via Bluetooth
A Smart Battery Sense, SmartShunt or a BMV-712 Smart Battery Monitor can be used to communicate battery voltage and temperature to one or more Smart IP43 Chargers via VE.Smart Networking.
in both dataheets, but only the datasheet for the 120-240V models additionally contains the entry
Synchronised charging
Pairing two or more Smart IP43 Chargers in a VE.Smart Network, enables synchronised charging. This improves the charge efficiency and battery life.
Moreover, the manual for the VE.Smart Neworking, ch. 4 contains the following surprising entry
Product range Compatibility Function Smart IP43 Charger Yes 120-230V model: Uses received sense data to optimize charging and synchronize charging process. 230V model: Uses received voltage-sense and temperature-sense.
Is it true, that the 230V model does not support synchronized charging? How so? Does a FW upgrade remedy this lack?
More importantly, how do I ensure that my reseller sends me the correct variant? Currently, I feat that I ordered a “Phoenix Smart” from my reseller, but most likely get a “Smart”. Usually, in Europe the 230V would be sufficient. On top, the designation “Phoenix Smart” vs. “Smart” (without the Phoenix prefix) are very often used interchangeably, in particular as VE is not very consistent with its usage either. Also, VE does not publish easily to find EANs and the only visual difference between both types seems to be the position of the Bluetooth logo on the enclosures.