Revised Battery Module (FP2-BAT02)

Does this mean, there would be a new revised battery in the future? I’m just curious, what this entry could mean :slight_smile:


Interesting, is it just some meta data that is going to change with the revised battery module or can we expect any other changes (e.g. capacity…)?

And apart from that: Thanks again for the update!

1 Like

Probably related to the new battery cell supplier.


That’s exactly it, we’re preparing (software) grounds.

The revised battery has a slightly different capacity (2440 mAh vs 2420 mAh for FP2-BAT01) but the overall performance is close to the original battery.


I would had expected since having a slightly higher capacity than the initial battery performance would at least meet the first type delivered or even outperform it and not only come close to it. Did I get something wrong here?

Often here in this forum can be read about users believing the original batteries capacity is not sufficient.


I think “performance is close to” in this case doesn’t mean “it comes close to (but doesn’t quite reach)”, but simply “it is similar to”.
Whether it’s slightly better or just about the same will have to be determined in long term testing by us the customers I guess.


Given the variance in production and performance and the small nominal difference in capacity, my guess would be, that some old batteries might perform better than some new ones and vice versa.

I guess here I am a bit too demanding. Although I do not (yet) own anything therefrom. But there is only one direction to go if I look at Elon Musks Tesla and Gigafactory. More, more, more power, more range, more capacity at the end.

True, especially since the battery performance really leaves quite some room for improvement.
What I don’t know, is where the limit for the FP2-battery would be (safetywise); because Samsung has proved impressively that there is a limit for the amount of capacity you can squeeze into a given battery size, before it starts overheating and burning.
Maybe the FP2 battery is already at a point were safety and capacity are at a limit?

The physical capacity of the FP2 battery isn’t that bad (more mAh than the iPhone 8 battery and just around 10% less than the iPhone 8 plus and the iPhone X battery). I think there would be more to gain on the power hunger side of the FP2.



Yes, this could be. I am only a bit into the battery theme which is most related to UPS systems.
And I don´t want to belong to those who had to experience for them self how it is being in the near vicinity of an exploding battery no matter of which type.
That´s an experience I easily can sacrifice on.


I totally agree on this. I would also rather tend to save energy instead of pumping up energy storage systems. But I think this rather complies to end-user products. In concerns of global renewable power solutions we rather need more/better energy storage systems with increasing capacity, mainly to balance the power grid.

The platform is set and now FP can only try to advance on the software side. I have realized it quite done so already. At the time in 2016 as I have received my FP it was nearly impossible for me to keep it up even one day without recharging. This was just in standby hardly using it.
Now even using it regularly still gives me at least one full day.
I am unsure if there is much more room to advance on this for FP.

More recent phone types also have a more advanced hardware, mainly the core as I think has the most influence on performance.
Reading e.g. Qualcomms cpu specs show that power consumption steadily decreases while performance and also kernel quantity increases per successor.
A proper choice here may be essential for the FP3 to come. This cannot be fixed later by software :grinning:

The largest (also in dimensions) battery I held was the 3000mAh of an LG G4 from my girlfriend. Compared to our FP battery it has about 50% more in size. My first thought was…where is the phone, did she only order a battery…:rofl:
But with Android 6 it has no problem to run 3 days on one charge and the supplied charger only takes ~1,5 hours to recharge.


The screen is the biggest consumer so they might as well design a new one (OLED?). My FP2 lasted up to 4 days (but I admit it was a dare: I was barely using it ;))

1 Like

4 Days sounds very good!

Oh, yes. This is a good point I have forgotten. The screen is one important component taking a noticable impact.
I don´t know what has been changed now with the new replacement displays. But indeed there is an option to advance here. Since FP3 is in mind already I am unsure if there will be much more focus on new FP2 advancements or rather put more energy into a successor.

Future will show…:confused:

1 Like

Well, at least I would be p…d, should they stop support or development for the FP2 as long as a working OS is available. As the FP2 is a design of their own, the problems, that lead to the end of support for FP1 should not reoccur here.
To me, there are two possible sensible ways for a FP3

  • a new additional phone aimed at users with different needs (smaller, mid-class), so FP has two product lines (which of course will mean much more work and stuff needed for support and development.
  • a successor to the FP2, that is sharing genes with the FP2, making it possible to ideally share modules as well. I just don’t know, if that’s realistic with a new phone using a new SOC.
1 Like

Correct, that would not be satisfying. Lessons should be learned with each step forward.

Yes, Two product lines would cover more customer desires at least if there are not too many “all I can get” individuals among them. Afaik FP2 does not fully work in some countries depending on the available network. But if someone (businessman/woman) is a globetrotter he/she may not want to keep more than one phone.
To catch more customers a successor should generally cover more network options as many main stream phones do already.
One counterparts would be how much attention someone would give FP2 if a more advanced newer FP3 was right next to it probably also at a lower price.
Of course stocking up staff would be mandatory if moving further into the marked.
But again sales need to cover the costs.

If dimensions change sharing modules between both FP probably won´t work anymore.
I only have changed the camera module so far and did not disassemble the entire phone.
But I do assume the SOC pcb is independent and could be redesigned (mechanically) without necessarily modifying modules as well.
Concerning compatibility there may be a need to also (electrically) redesign module(s).
But there was a redesign of the camera module already without any more to do as simply replacing it (and reconfigurate software settings).
I am not sure if all other modules could be taken over that easy.

Anyway I think the design so far is a very good basis to build up on.
As you write a new FP should meet FP2s best attributes. To keep interest I would expect it to be as potential as my FP2 now but if the marked expects it to be smaller, more slim etc. it should fulfill these expectations as well.
I think for the camera there would not be much to modify, but its software side should be advanced. This also applies for the entire OS which should catch up with the latest Android or derivative.

1 Like

right on. Otherwise there is much less point of owning a FairPhone and FP makes one step closer to become like the others. Already the modular concept is under-used since there is almost no choice to upgrade components.

1 Like

maybe a naive question… what’s the point of a revised battery if the overall performance is only lose to the original battery??

I’m guessing the point of a revised battery is to keep having a batteries at all since the past supplier stopped producing them.


Such a small difference in specs will not make a difference in daily use.

Sigh …

It might be tricky to figure out, but:


Not significantly, but it is BIGGER.

a slightly different capacity (2440 mAh vs 2420 mAh for FP2-BAT01)