Same runtimes with LSD 2100 mAh cells and 2600 mAh cells

I thought higher mAh meant longer runtimes, but that isn't what I am getting.

I carried out some simple non-rigorous tests with a Fenix L2D Q5 on turbo mode and the following cells:

• Panasonic Infinium 2100 mAh NiNH (LSD type)
• Panasonic Accu 2600 eAh (non-LSD type).

I thought the latter would give longer runtimes, but both lasted about 1 hour 45 minutes before the light dimmer noticeably followed by a few minutes of dim light, in agreement with results elsewhere such as 'selfbuilt' using Duracell 2650mAh NiMH cells. The non-LSD cells cost about 50% more. :huh:

In both cases the cells were first discharged (in a torch) and then fully charged before the test. And all cells should be in good condition having been purchased over the last six months.

It makes we wonder what the point of the non-LSD cell is. It is possible that they would last longer on a lower power level. Perhaps there is more heat loss on turbo mode. Or perhaps in one case the light is running at a higher output level. Unfortunately I do not have the tools to measure the output levels. In case on cell is duff, I'm repeating the 2600mAh test with different cells.

Has anyone else had similar experiences?

It would be interesting to know what the true capacity of both of those cells really are.

You are using quality cells, but without knowing what the actual capacity (i.e. obtained via a charger/analyzer) it's difficult to say for sure.

The 2600 mAh cells might have a higher internal resistance, which could have an affect on runtime.

I've done completely unscientific runtime tests with my Quark 2xAA on turbo.
Duracell 2650 vs Eneloops. Both brands were conditioned twice on my C808M (haven't got a C9000 yet). Duracells are 2 yrs old, Eneloops are new.
Each brand went straight from the charger to the light.
Eneloops gave me 60 minutes on turbo before dropping to high mode.
Duracells went 93 minutes on turbo before dropping to high.

If I know I'll be using the batteries within 48 hrs or so, I much prefer the 2650's or Powerex 2700's for the increased runtime....otherwise I've always got Eneloops sitting by waiting....knowing that if they sit for 2-3 months they'll still have plenty of power left.
2650's are worthless after 2-3 months without charging.

What I've found with my limited experiance is the higher capacity ni-mh batterys seem to self discharge at a quicker rate than the lower capacity batterys. I have run Titanium 2700mah,Titanium 1800mah and eneloop 2000mha in my m*g85. I found if I ran the 2700s the next day after charging I could get over 40 mins. run time before going dim. On the other hand if the light wasn't used more than a few mins. after charging in 2 wks. the batterys would have less than 15 mins. of run time. The lower capacity 1800s don't self discharge as fast and I have some Elite 1700s that will run my m*g458 for 8-9 mins. after sitting 2 wks. eneloops are the best in the m*g85 that doesn't get used for long periods of time right after charging.
Billy

Black Rose said:

It would be interesting to know what the true capacity of both of those cells really are.

You are using quality cells, but without knowing what the actual capacity (i.e. obtained via a charger/analyzer) it's difficult to say for sure.

The 2600 mAh cells might have a higher internal resistance, which could have an affect on runtime.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately I do not have hthe tools to measure.

scot said:

I've done completely unscientific runtime tests with my Quark 2xAA on turbo.
Duracell 2650 vs Eneloops. Both brands were conditioned twice on my C808M (haven't got a C9000 yet). Duracells are 2 yrs old, Eneloops are new.
Each brand went straight from the charger to the light.
Eneloops gave me 60 minutes on turbo before dropping to high mode.
Duracells went 93 minutes on turbo before dropping to high.

Click to expand...

I would have expected something closer to your results.

I tried again last night with the other 2600mAh cells, and this time they ran for just over 1 hour 55 minutes which is roughly 10% longer than the others.