Wouldn't a 2-prong IEC C7/C8 coupler cord or even IEC C1/C2 (even with the same miniscule amount of copper) have been cheaper than to produce a 3-prong "faked" C13/C14 type cord? Not to mention the use of a 3-prong C13/14 type coupler on the power supply itself (that doesn't even hook up to the ground on the PCB)?
Seems like the C13/C14 solution used in my cheap fake would cost more to make simply because of the ends... use the same cord with almost no copper in it... just tack on a cheaper connector. I would think the cheapest option would have been to use a C1/C2 or C7/C8 if cost is an issue.... save the cost of an extra pin on the power cord, and less rubber/plastic. Have a look here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEC_60320C1/C2:
C7/C8:
Also with the above cord couplers (especially C1/C2) may be less likely to be used on something with higher current draw capability. Seems C1/C2 are typically used for charging up rechargeable shavers which likely do not draw too much current when charging.
Whereas I would be able to plug in the C13/C14 in so many more high-current draw devices (computers, servers) and expect ground as well:
It's obvious that this product I bought is cheap and I don't expect a high quality cord. I am just curious as to why use a C13/C14 when it is completely unexpected and unnecessary, only to fake the label on it, when a cheaper cord like a C1/C2 or C7/C8 would have sufficed, even with as tiny piss-ant amount of copper in it also.
Why bother to fake something that is not relevant at all to me buying the product? Was it to try to show that there is more "quality" because people assume a C13/C14 cord-powered device is more legit compared to a C1/C2 or C7/C8? Who thinks that?