Jump Starter 2023 Test: Which Brand Wins?

made very easy work of the V6 Ford Ranger, spinning the starter and engine very quickly; had not been used in a full year and was still fully charged

did a lot better job than anticipated, plenty of juice to start the engine

rated for 6,000 amps and did a great job spinning over the engine

rated for 4,250 cranking amps, doing a terrific job spinning over the engine at a high RPM

made more than enough cranking amps to get the engine to spin over quickly

not messing around, spun the engine over even faster than BRPOM

not directly tested/no result stated in the transcript given the pre-screening failure

did a pretty good job spinning over the engine but not nearly as fast as GooLoo

not going to work with a completely dead battery in this specific sub-test; acted normal until connected to a low battery, then gave up

spun over the engine but not quite as enthusiastically as GooLoo or HOMPOW

makes more than enough cranking amps to spin over the Ford Ranger engine

spun the engine over more than fast enough to start the vehicle

spun over the engine a little bit faster than the light duty cables, but not nearly fast enough to start it

just not going to get the job done; tested against a fully charged 950 cranking amp battery reading 12.8 volts and making 941 amps, and still could not start the disconnected-ignition test vehicle

at 8 volts, just over 7,000 watts; won the bench test outright, taking the lead from the KeenPower super capacitor

at 8.2 volts, over 6,500 watts; finished second behind NOCO

at 7.2 volts, almost 5,300 watts; finished third behind NOCO and KeenPower

at 8.4 volts, 4,788 watts; described as moving into second place behind GooLoo at that point in testing

at 6.5 volts, almost 4,300 watts

at 9.2 volts, almost 5,000 watts, described as really good for a $100 jump starter; narrator retested this unit since it had performed well in past videos

at 6.6 volts, 3,570 watts; performed a lot better than Veama at this later bench-test attempt despite the earlier pre-screening failure

the transcript reads 'a butcher is rated for 3,500 amps and it couldn't quite keep up with the burp and the Gulu 588 amps at 6.5 volts works out to only 3,822 watts'; interpreted as Buture's own bench result being 588 amps at 6.5 volts (3,822 watts), with 'the Gulu' likely an extraneous caption artifact rather than indicating the number belongs to GooLoo, since GooLoo already has its own clearly stated bench figure earlier (537 amps at 9.2 volts); flagged as an ambiguous attribution rather than fully certain

transcript reads 'the pacy met at to 5133 amps at 8 volts which works out to 4,14 watts to move into third place'; 5,133 amps at 8 volts would compute to roughly 41,000 watts, not 4,140 watts, so the amp figure is very likely a garbled/dropped-or-duplicated-digit number (possibly intended as roughly 513 or 517 amps, which would be consistent with the stated ~4,140 watt figure); preserved verbatim rather than corrected, and flagged as unreliable

at 7.3 volts; described as good enough to move into fifth place at that point in testing

at 8.2 volts, almost 4,900 watts

at 7.4 volts, described as nowhere near its claimed 4,500 amp rating though still more than enough to start a car

at 4.5 volts, 1,264 watts, far less than any of the jump starters

at 2.9 volts, only 458 watts, the weakest result of the entire lineup including the heavy duty cables

no specific amp claim stated at introduction; used as 4,250 rated amps for bench-test comparison purposes

claimed; claims usable up to a million times (not independently tested); charges from a car battery in about 1 minute 40 seconds to just under 2 minutes depending on source charge level, and never needs to be pre-charged at home

claims 6,000 cranking amps, and claims it can start all gasoline engines and diesel engines up to 12 L; jump starter plus power bank, no tire inflator; USB, two USB-C, and 12V ports; made in China

claimed; air compressor rated up to 160 PSI; USB, USB-C, and 12V ports; made in China

claims 4,000 amp jump starter with 24,000 mAh battery capacity; claims its tire pump can inflate a tire in 3 minutes; includes carrying case, LED light, two USB, USB-C, and 12V ports; made in China

jump starter only, does not have a tire inflator; dual USB and USB-C charging ports; made in China

claims 4,000 cranking amps and 26,800 mAh battery capacity; has a tire inflator, USB, 12V, and USB-C ports, but no carrying case; made in China

jump starter and air compressor with a 27,000 mAh battery, four input/output ports, up to 4,000 peak amps claimed, dual carrying-case pouches; made in China

has a tire inflator and a jump starter, claims to inflate a tire from 0 to 36 PSI in 7 minutes, claims 3,500 amp jump starter, 12V, two USB, and USB-C ports

jump starter and air compressor with a 27,000 mAh battery, four input/output ports, up to 4,000 peak amps claimed, dual carrying-case pouches; made in China

claims 6,000 cranking amps and includes an air compressor, battery charge indicator, two USB ports, but no USB-C; made in China

claims 4,500 amp peak capacity and 22,000 mAh power pack capacity, claimed operating range of -4 F to 140 F (not independently tested), two USB and one USB-C port, includes a battery life indicator LED; made in China

no result found in the transcript for this brand in this specific test; a probable gap

made very easy work of starting the motorhome in all three attempts

made very easy work of spinning over and starting the 454

no result found in the transcript for this brand in this specific test using the clearly-resolved name; a probable gap or resolved under an ambiguous mangled mention ('an Ain') that could not be confidently attributed

made very easy work of the big block 454

spun over the engine even faster than BRPOM

still not functioning properly during this test

no result found in the transcript for this brand in this specific test

skipped in this test since it was not working properly

makes more than enough juice to start the 454

also more than powerful enough to jump start the motorhome

was able to spin over the engine, but it was definitely a struggle

made very easy work of the diesel, described as just as powerful as the KeenPower super capacitor

seemed even more powerful than the jump starters tested so far

made this look easy, seemed at least as powerful as any of the other jump starters

made very easy work of starting the diesel, seemed about as powerful as HOMPOW

made more than enough cranking amps to start the engine

seemed more powerful than BRPOM, made very easy work of the diesel engine

no result found in the transcript for this brand in this specific test

no clearly attributable result found in the transcript for this brand in this specific test

not up to the challenge, did not start the diesel

has enough to start the truck but definitely not as powerful as HOMPOW or GooLoo

did a great job starting the diesel, seemed just as powerful as VTOMAN

the diesel's cranking demand was just too much for this jump starter

by far the best of all jump starters tested in the cold (4 F after 15 hours), 'not even close'; only the super capacitor outperformed it

outperformed all the jump starters in the cold test, very impressive

spun the engine over a little slower than GooLoo

performed better than AUTOGEN but not nearly as well as GooLoo or HOMPOW

cold temperature set it back somewhat, but it did spin over the engine

by far the best jump starter yet in the cold test, plenty of cold cranking amps

no result found in the transcript for this brand in this specific test

did not like the cold, barely had enough power to turn over the engine

no result found in the transcript for this brand in this specific test

did not like the cold temperature and really struggled

took a couple of tries to wake up, but then did about as well as GooLoo and HOMPOW

the very cold unit just did not have what it takes to jump start the engine

not applicable; no tire inflator on this unit

not applicable; no tire inflator on this unit

not applicable; no tire inflator on this unit

(as loud as Veama and AlphaBot); fastest tire pump of the lineup at just over 5.1 minutes to reach 30 PSI; gauge accurate within 1 PSI of the calibrated reference

almost as noisy as AlphaBot; a little faster than AlphaBot at just over 5.5 minutes; gauge off by about 1 to 1.5 PSI

not applicable; this model has no tire inflator

the loudest of the lineup; finished inflating in very close to 6 minutes; gauge agreed with the calibrated reference at about 31 PSI; battery level at two bars during the test

noticeably quieter than AlphaBot and BRPOM; finished inflating in around 5 minutes 40 seconds, about the same speed as BRPOM; gauge off by about 1 PSI

notably quieter than Veama and AlphaBot; a little slower than the other inflators at around 6 minutes 15 seconds; gauge described as very close to accurate

the quietest of the lineup so far, but the slowest pump at very close to 8 minutes to reach 30 PSI; gauge off by about 6 PSI, the least accurate gauge of the lineup

fairly noisy; just as fast as most of the other inflators at just over 5.5 minutes; both gauges showing just under 30 PSI

not applicable; no tire inflator on this unit

specific watt-hour figure not stated in the transcript for this brand individually; named as one of only four brands (with GooLoo, HOMPOW, and VTOMAN) to achieve over 70% of its advertised battery capacity

not applicable; this is a capacitor, not a battery bank, by design

the best result among all jump starters tested at that point (battery is described as very heavy from the number of cells); one of the four brands to exceed 70% of advertised capacity

moved into second place behind HOMPOW; one of the four brands to exceed 70% of advertised capacity

against an advertised capacity of almost 89 Wh, only about half of the advertised figure

against an advertised capacity of just over 88 Wh, by far the best result among jump starters up to that point in testing; one of the four brands to exceed 70% of advertised capacity

against an advertised capacity of 99 Wh, well short of the advertised figure

against an advertised capacity of 99 Wh, described as really struggling

against an advertised capacity of 88 Wh

only about 20 percent of its advertised capacity at a $130 price point, described as a disappointing result

against a claimed capacity of over 81 Wh, only about one third of the advertised figure