Question regarding 18350 batteries

Sorry if I'm putting this in the wrong forum. I didn't see one that might fit, so I figured I'd place in the one forum I spend the most time viewing.

I recently purchased a Mac Tri-EDC, and am in need of batteries to put in it (18350), a little general recharging and safety knowledge, as well as a safe and highly recommended charger for said batteries.

Up to this point my knowledge in batteries has only extended as far as the CR123 which I have been using with my only light thus far, the Quark 123^2. So I need to know what the best and safest type of 18350 I can buy and how to charge it as well. I would like to be able to avoid any horror stories if possible. Please let the education, with links of what to purchase and where if possible begin. Thanks!

Zen Ape said:

Sorry if I'm putting this in the wrong forum. I didn't see one that might fit, so I figured I'd place in the one forum I spend the most time viewing.

Click to expand...

You've been here 2 months and never noticed the Batteries forum? :ironic:

Moving it there...

Sorry, not sure how I missed it even after looking for it... Thanks for putting me proper.

I've got a Tri-EDC which is powered with an Ultrafire 18350 protected cell. It works well for me and the protection circuit minimizes the risks associated with Li-ion rechargeables. Alternatively, AW is now selling an IMR 18350 which has a different and safer chemistry and thus doesn't need a protection circuit. The downside to IMR batteries is less energy density than Li-ion, which translates to shorter runtimes. I would recommend the Ultrafire battery with its higher density because the Tri-EDC, with its high output, sucks the power from batteries real fast. As for battery chargers, the one preferred and owned by many on this forum is the Pila charger, more expensive than most but very well made. I have one and am real happy with it. A less expensive, yet reliable and safe charger (from what I've read) is the Ultrafire wf-139. Good luck!

rich297 said:

I've got a Tri-EDC which is powered with an Ultrafire 18350 protected cell. It works well for me and the protection circuit minimizes the risks associated with Li-ion rechargeables.

Click to expand...

Do you have a photo or link handy? The UF 18350's I've been able to find are unprotected.

He's mistaken. Theres no protected 18350's at all. There are only two ultrafire's and AW's IMR version with lower maH.

ElectronGuru said:

Do you have a photo or link handy? The UF 18350's I've been able to find are unprotected.

Click to expand...

But anyone that believes that they are really 1200 mah is stupid.... Seeing as AW's gained 27% in capacity, 27% more than the 600mah at best you can expect from a LiCo 16340 gives you 764 mah. Im going to round that up to 780, because Lico gains more with additional volume than LiMn. So the best you can expect is about 780-800mah, and doubt the ultrafire has that kind of capacity.

Oy vey I'm so confused...

JMP said:

He's mistaken. Theres no protected 18350's at all. There are only two ultrafire's and AW's IMR version with lower maH.

Click to expand...

Quite right, I am mistaken. The Ultrafire 18350 that came with my Tri-EDC is unprotected. Sorry for the misinformation. The choice between the two available batteries comes down to what's more important to you: the superior capacity of the Ultrafire (1200maH versus 700maH for the IMR) or the safer chemistry of the AW IMR cell. I usually place safety as the higher priority but with the Tri-EDC, I don't think a 700maH cell is very practical.

srfreddy said:

But anyone that believes that they are really 1200 mah is stupid.... Seeing as AW's gained 27% in capacity, 27% more than the 600mah at best you can expect from a LiCo 16340 gives you 764 mah. Im going to round that up to 780, because Lico gains more with additional volume than LiMn. So the best you can expect is about 780-800mah, and doubt the ultrafire has that kind of capacity.

Click to expand...

I don't believe the capacity claims of ANY battery manufacturer. What is indisputable is that IMR batteries inherently have substantially less capacity of like-sized LiCo batteries.

rich297 said:

I don't believe the capacity claims of ANY battery manufacturer. What is indisputable is that IMR batteries inherently have substantially less capacity of like-sized LiCo batteries.

Click to expand...

I'm with you on that one, but I do believe, from personal experience anyway, that AW's cells are pretty close in capacity to what they are rated at. So, AW's IMR is likely about the same capacity as the UltraFire 18350 cells, however will offer more capacity under heavier loads due to being lithium manganese instead of lithium cobalt cells.

Dave

Ok, so if I'm understanding this correctly I have exactly two choices, those being the Ultrafire 1200mah, and the AW 700mah. The Ultrafire will allow a light like the Tri-EDC to do what it does best, but is the less safe of the two? And if I went with the safer, being the AW, let's chance of poof but less output as well? So the claimed 700 lumens would not be something I was achieving, or would I get that output, just for a lesser time? Not sure how that works.

You will get the same output (ie. lumens) from the AW IMR but less runtime. I read somewhere a few weeks ago someone tested the runtime with the Ultrafire and as best as I can recall it was about 15-20 minutes in high mode. From that I would estimate 10-15 minutes high mode runtime with the AW IMR. As a practical matter, you won't want to run the Tri-EDC in high mode for more than a few minutes at a time because of heat generation.

rich297 said:

As a practical matter, you won't want to run the Tri-EDC in high mode for more than a few minutes at a time because of heat generation.

Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but my understanding is that the Tri-EDC automatically drops to Medium if it gets to hot (Thermal Protection). This being the case, doesn't the light itself protect you from misjudgement?

Zen Ape said:

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but my understanding is that the Tri-EDC automatically drops to Medium if it gets to hot (Thermal Protection). This being the case, doesn't the light itself protect you from misjudgement?

Click to expand...

Not sure about that. I've never operated mine in high mode for more than a minute or two. If that is true, I'm left to wonder how anyone could do a battery run test in high mode for the duration of 15+ minutes. My light starts getting hot within a minute.

Zen Ape said:

The Ultrafire will allow a light like the Tri-EDC to do what it does best, but is the less safe of the two? And if I went with the safer, being the AW, let's chance of poof but less output as well?

Click to expand...

Compared to IMR, the only advantage of LiCo (normal lithium ion) is capacity. If the unprotected UF 18350 LiCo offers little capacity advantage, using it would be quite a bit of risk for little reward.

rich297 said:

I've never operated mine in high mode for more than a minute or two. If that is true, I'm left to wonder how anyone could do a battery run test in high mode for the duration of 15+ minutes. My light starts getting hot within a minute.

Click to expand...

You can surround the light with all kinds of extra cold heat sinking, but its usually easier to just to stop the light and stopwatch for a cooling period before continuing.

BTW, I've spent the afternoon doing runtime testing with an L333 equipped light. Running on high, I got:


50% more runtime for 50% more cell length

rich297 said:

I read somewhere a few weeks ago someone tested the runtime with the Ultrafire and as best as I can recall it was about 15-20 minutes in high mode.

Click to expand...

If this is true, then the light is drawing about 2400mA current. Since the UF 18350 cells are actually about 800mAh, this is about a 3C drain rate for these cells. Electron's info seems to back this up. While you may get away with discharging these cells at this high rate, IMO, IMR cells would be a much better choice. Yes, the runtime may be a bit shorter, but IMR cells will hold up in the long run much better than LiCo cells that are discharged at a 3C rate. IMR cells would be a lot safer in such an application as well.

Zen Ape, bottom line, I'd go with the AW IMR cells and a Pila IBC charger. Keep in mind that to use the Pila, you will need one or two spacers to charge 18350 cells, depending on whether you want to charge one or two cells at a time.

Dave

The capacity advantage of the LiCo over the IMR shrinks as the cells get smaller.
For example, at 18650 the LiCo has about 80% more capacity, but at 18500 the advantage shrinks to UNDER 40%. And at 18350 it shrink even more.

Most of the smaller batteries are greatly overrated so it may appear that the LiCo has large capacity advantage, but it really isn't all that much.

My turn to show my ignorance again... Spacers?

Zen Ape said:

Spacers?

Click to expand...

In the case of the Pila IBC charger, it is designed to charge 17500, 18500, (~50mm long). and 17670, 18650 (~65mm long) cells. In order to charge a cell that is only 35mm long, you need to put a spacer (that is conductive) in the charging bay in order for the cell to make contact at both ends.

The Pila chargers come with two 15mm spacers so that 50mm cells can be charged (15+50=65mm). A lot of dealers that sell the Pila also sell spacers that can be used to charge 35mm cells (or for other applications where you need a 35mm spacer that is not an "active" cell). I know that Lighthound does. By inserting one of these spacers in each channel along with a 16340, or 18350 cell, the length is about the same as a 17670, or 18650 cell, and the cell(s) can be charged.

Dave