I just received my new Sonoff TP-WGZBA thermostat, and unfortunately, the experience so far has been extremely frustrating. As a long-time Sonoff user, I’m hoping to get some feedback from the community or an official response from the eWeLink team.
Here is what I’m experiencing across different Sonoff Zigbee bridges:
1. Paired with Bridge-M (Ultra-broken)
The thermostat pairs and shows as “Online” in the eWeLink app.
Problem: Absolutely no control works. Whenever I try to adjust the set temperature or save any settings, the app instantly pops up with:
“Failed. Please try again.”
Troubleshooting tried: Power-cycled the thermostat multiple times and re-paired it with the Bridge-M hub several times. No change—total non-functional state.
2. Paired with Bridge-P (Partial control, major reporting bugs)
After giving up on the Bridge-M, I re-paired it with a Bridge-P. Basic temperature setpoints and saving settings actually work here, but critical features are broken:
Current Temperature Bug: The “Current Temp.” reported in the app (reading from the thermostat’s internal sensor) is locked at 0°C constantly.
Broken Automation/Scenes: I set up a basic scene:
IF: Thermostat state = Heating
THEN: Turn on MINI-ZBD
Result: The scene is completely ignored and never triggers, even when the thermostat actively enters the heating state.
Environment & Firmware:
All bridges, devices, and the eWeLink app are updated to the latest firmware/app versions.
TP-WGZBA: 1.0.4
ZBBridge-P: 3.5.0
MINI-ZBD: 1.0.2
Bridge-ML 1.0.1
Experienced with setting up eWeLink automation scenes.
Is anyone else running into these issues with the TP-WGZBA on recent bridge firmware, or did I just receive a defective unit? If anyone from Sonoff/eWeLink support is reading this, is a firmware patch in the works?
I would like to get a comment from the eWeLink team—@Archarr , @KwayLi99 , @Miao , @Milk , @Minnie … I have also sent an email directly to Sonoff support. I honestly cannot understand how products are being released in this state.
Do you really need a response from almost entire eWeLink/Sonoff team? Surely one person who actually works with this particular device would be enough, provided they have something concrete to say.
I’m sure they’re reading this. But identifying the cause and providing a meaningful answer takes time. Support staff have other things to do, and verified answers don’t just materialize out of thin air. A little patience goes a long way.
You’ve identified several concrete issues, but I think it’s a bit premature to label the whole thing “ultra-broken” or assume a firmware patch is needed before establishing where the problems actually originate.
The fact that the thermostat behaves differently with Bridge-M and Bridge-P is useful diagnostic information. It suggests that the bridge, its device support, or the way it handles the thermostat’s reported state may be relevant. But the 0°C reading and the scene not triggering are separate symptoms and don’t necessarily share the same cause.
It would help to establish whether these are known compatibility issues with the TP-WGZBA, rather than concluding that the device itself is defective or that the firmware is fundamentally broken.
Bro, I agree with you, but it’s not acceptable for me as a customer to open a released product and have to do product development together with eWeLink and Sonoff just to get the device working. Are they selling a DIY kit or a finished product?
I’m happy to help them diagnose the issues, but this keeps happening with every new product release. Sonoff does the HW, and it feels like eWeLink is using Claude on light settings to save tokens.
I agree that customers should receive a properly working product, not a DIY development project. But that’s a different argument from claiming that a product you don’t own has the same flaws as another one.
If there’s a specific issue with the NSPanel Pro thermostat, let’s identify it and establish what’s causing it. Otherwise, we’re just generalising from past experiences and guessing how the software is developed.
Hello, thank you for your detailed feedback. We sincerely apologize for the poor experience you have encountered with the TP-WGZBA thermostat.
We have urgently arranged internal reproduction attempts, but have not yet been able to reproduce your situation. To accurately identify the cause, we need your assistance with the following information:
The Device IDs of the Bridge-M and the TP-WGZBA;
The Bridge-M logs: You can download them via the local web page — access the Bridge-M’s IP address in a browser, click “Download Logs”, save the log file, and send it to us.
Once we receive the logs, we will arrange for our technical team to analyze them as soon as possible and continue to follow up on the issue you reported. We apologize again for the inconvenience and appreciate your patience and support.
Keep in mind this is not a one time thing, I get this and nothing more from this combo tp-wgzba + Bridge Max, even after multiple power cycles and repairs.
Basically, you only buy new Sonoff products after they’ve been out for a year and received a heap of updates to make them actually work; otherwise, it’s often a nightmare.
I don’t want to blame anybody, but the fact that the hardware is the same from the beginning and SW improves finally at some point, clearly means that eWeLink could do a better job. A lot of Sonoff hardware is wasted.
The fact that a heap of updates eventually resolves most issues demonstrates that the hardware itself isn’t the only critical factor; while the products are admittedly quite reliable in terms of hardware, the development of the necessary software and firmware lags woefully behind. Of course, this applies not just to the specific thermostat mentioned, but to the vast majority of products that make promises while the software isn’t even on the drawing board—let alone tested. Manufacturers really need to focus more on testing before a product hits the market; I understand that minor glitches can crop up outside the testing environment, but when basic functions fail—like the thermostat’s inability to control or display the temperature or retain settings (as a colleague described)—those aren’t issues that would have gone unnoticed during testing. These are fundamental capabilities a thermostat simply must have; without them, it shouldn’t be released.
Quite impressive how we went from one thermostat issue to a full diagnosis of Sonoff’s entire product development process.
A possible configuration issue, a software bug, inadequate testing and a company-wide development problem are four different things. Yet somehow, we’ve managed to establish all of them without even confirming the cause of the original issue.
Meanwhile, @Minnie — whose perfectly plausible and easily testable explanation involving the Keep setting has been almost completely ignored — offered a more useful starting point than diagnosing Sonoff’s entire development process.
Perhaps we should fix the thermostat first and save the post-mortem on the entire company for later.
We’ve certainly come a long way since the thermostat, and while no one disputes that an upgrade was offered, the fact that we’re here on a discussion forum means we can talk about it—and I think most people here would agree that the pattern of new products and updates remains much the same.
“Most people here would agree” is a very convenient assumption.
Of course we can discuss the broader pattern. No doubt about it! Just not in a thread about a specific thermostat issue, before we’ve even established its cause. My point was simply that a plausible, testable explanation for the specific issue had been offered, yet the discussion moved on to diagnosing the entire company before that explanation was even checked.
I think we can agree that they have a lot of room for improvement. Also, I think eWeLink and Sonoff should be thankful for our complaints and our willingness to help diagnose these issues. If I were a regular customer who just mounted this thermostat on the wall and encountered this, I most likely would have returned it or thrown it back at whoever sold it to me!
So I’m open to your recommendations—what else could I try to get it out of this state? However, I don’t want to reset my Bridge-M and lose all my scenes. I do have a Bridge-P that I could play around with, though.
Hello, thank you for your feedback. We have received the video and screenshots you provided.
We have attempted to reproduce the issue internally but have not yet been able to do so. We will arrange for our technical team to analyze the logs as soon as possible and continue to follow up. We sincerely apologize for the inconvenience and appreciate your patience and support.
We are very sorry for the inconvenience. We have analyzed the logs you provided. The Bridge-M you are using is a beta recruitment version and is not an official sales version. Therefore, compared with the official online release version, the current beta sample units and firmware do have some differences and issues, which may affect your user experience. We sincerely apologize for the inconvenience.
That makes sense. Although, to be honest, I assumed the hardware and firmware were identical—I don’t recall seeing any notice that beta units differed from retail, and believe me, I provided quite a bit of feedback regarding the Bridge-M!
If I end up getting a replacement unit, I’ll keep you posted.
However, that doesn’t explain the issues with the Bridge-P. I’ll run a few more tests with it and open a new ticket if necessary. That one is definitely a retail version, and I’m already seeing the behavior I described in my initial post.
Thank you for your feedback. Regarding the issues you reported with TP-WGZBA when paired with ZBBridge-P, could you confirm whether you paired TP-WGZBA before updating the ZBBridge-P firmware?
If the gateway firmware did not fully support the device when it was first paired, some functions may still be missing or may not work correctly after the update. Please make sure your ZBBridge-P is running the latest firmware, then remove TP-WGZBA from the app and pair it again to see whether this resolves the issues.
If the issue persists, please send us the device ID of your ZBBridge-P so we can investigate further.
