123 Battery Shoot Out

[this_is_nascar]

Nice job SilverFox. This is certainly great data and very useful.

 

[dano]

Yup..I sent 'em a few days ago. Too bad they're (Ray-o-Vacs) still at "retail" pricing levels, and not the bargain of other brands.

I just wanna see the graph!

--dan

 

[SilverFox]

Hello Dano,

I received your RayOVac 123's yesterday. I will test them as soon as I get my CBA back from the firmware upgrade and re-calibration.

Thanks,

Tom

 

[dano]

Cool...I'll look forward to the results...

--dan

 

[SilverFox]

Update:

I added the testing at 0.5 amps to the first post.

Thanks to JohnN and Dano for providing additional batteries for me to test.

Tom

 

[SilverFox]

Update:

I have updated the 1.0 Amp Rate graph. I bought a bunch of Energizer batteries and this batch is performing better. I upgraded the graph to reflect the current Energizer test data.

I also added:
Maxell Gold
GI
and RayOVac test results.

Tom

 

[John N]

Thanks very much Tom for this great data!

-john

 

[SilverFox]

I am just finishing up beta testing the new CBA software that allows testing below 0.5 amps. There are a couple of minor issues, but I think it will be ready for "prime time" shortly.

Now that I can test at lower rates, is there any interest?

I have a personal interest in checking the published rating of the various cells. It is interesting how different manufacturers test at different rates to get a published capacity. I am aware of some that are rated at 0.010 amps. I am wondering what device that uses 123's has such a low current draw... At least Duracell and Energizer publish higher current curves along with their official capacity rating.

I am trying to figure out what the current draws of the various lights we use are. Do we have any 123 lights that draw under 0.5 amps?

Tom

 

[Reptilezs]

maybe a red led inova x5t but im not to sure

 

[HarryN]

A number of the LED lights on the market are running at 350ma since they are mostly Lux I brightness (even if they use a Lux III). Also, there is increasing use of multi brightness settings in LED lights.

Perhaps for simplicity, (and if you are really bored) a check in the 100 ish and 200 - 250 ish range would be nice.

BTW - I am still working to get those other cells to you for testing.

 

[SilverFox]

Hello Harry,

I was thinking a run at 0.25 amps might be close enough for the lower settings and those lights that draw less. That would give us a good range of data to interpret from.

Tom

 

[SilverFox]

Update:

I have added the Titanium and Marathon test results to the 0.5 and 1.0 Amp Rate graphs in the first post.

Tom

 

[greenLED]

hmmm... looks like the GI, Titanium, and Marathon are in a group of their own. Interesting. Thank you SilverFox for posting such useful info. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/happy14.gif

 

[SilverFox]

Update:

The data for the Golston tests had been added to the first post.

Interesting... The Golston cells tested better at 1.0 amps then they did at 0.5 amps. Also note that they heated up during both tests to over 80 degrees F. The 1.0 amp graph looks like there is some additional internal resistance in the cells. The 0.5 amp graph could suggest some consistency issues.

Thanks Chevrofreak for sending those cells to me for testing.

Tom

 

[chevrofreak]

Haha, wow, those Golstons suck ***. Wont be ordering more of those...

 

[greenLED]

How many Golstons did you test? Could it be a batch issue? It's weird that they do horribly at 0.5A but are similar to the Titanium and the Marathons at greater A. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon3.gif

 

[SilverFox]

Hello GreenLED,

I should have pointed out that I only tested 1 cell at each AmpRate. That's all I had to test.

With the "less than stellar" performance, I am not sure I want to invest in more to test...

Although it does have me wondering what is going on.

Tom

 

[greenLED]

I understand the cost involved. Hopefully more people can provide you with more cells so you can increase your sample size. Testing with just one cell may lead to erroneous results due to chance alone.

Golstons still seem bottom of the back, but the inconsistency between 0.5 and 1 A is puzzling. Unless there's an electronics explanation (I'm ignorant in that respect)...

In any case, it's awesome that you're doing this for us. It seems like a lot of work and is an important contribution. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif

Ed: Do you need specific brands, or are people just sending you whatever they have? Maybe if we knew how many cells you've tested of each brand people can send you more (or less) of each kind to increase sample size.

 

[KevinL]

Hmm......those test results are a real eye opener. Thanks for doing these tests!

It seems that Batterystation really knows their batteries.

 

[wintermute]

I'd love to see a rechargable 123 shootout as well, the JSBurly R123s vs. the BatteryStation R123s really interests me. Although I was looking at rechargable 123s previously, but it looks like the low-cost and greater energy capacities of the BatteryStation CR123A seem like the best fit for high current uses.