# AA l91 vs cr123 revisted?

#### raggie33

##### *the raggedier*
which has more power today since now i see 1600 mah 123s

#### hamhanded

##### Enlightened
1600 mAh @ 2.8v = 4.16 Wh
1900 mAh @ 1.2v = 2.28 Wh

#### chip100t

##### Enlightened
Who makes 1600 cr123a, I’ve only seen 1450

#### aznsx

##### Flashlight Enthusiast
Who makes 1600 cr123a, I’ve only seen 1450
While we're talkin' capacity, make that 1650 (advertised)

#### aznsx

##### Flashlight Enthusiast
1600 mAh @ 2.8v = 4.16 Wh
1900 mAh @ 1.2v = 2.28 Wh

If that 1.2V is for L91, you may be a bit conservative with that. This 'discharge profile' graph doesn't show 'em dropping to that until they're pretty much clinically dead (the vertical drop):

Also, I get the 2.28 Wh number, but is that 4.16 Wh a little low, or is my math just bad (again)?

#### hamhanded

##### Enlightened
If that 1.2V is for L91, you may be a bit conservative with that. This 'discharge profile' graph doesn't show 'em dropping to that until they're pretty much clinically dead (the vertical drop):

Also, I get the 2.28 Wh number, but is that 4.16 Wh a little low, or is my math just bad (again)?
Oops, my mistake, I was quoting NiMH, I think L91 would be 2900 mAh @ 1.7v = 4.93 Wh

And yes my math on the other was wrong too!
1600 mAh @ 2.8v = 4.48 Wh.
1650 mAh @ 2.8v = 4.62 Wh

Thanks for the catch. Seems like energy content comes pretty close

#### xxo

##### Flashlight Enthusiast
Using HKJ's data for a 1 Amp load:

L91 Energizer AA (tested in 2019) – 4.053 Wh/3.228Ah (implied average Voltage under load = 1.256 V)

Old Panasonic CR123A (tested in 2013) – 3.180 Wh/1.450 Ah (implied average Voltage under load = 2.193 V)

I don't know of any published tests of the new 1650 mAh cells, but Panasonic lists their CR123 at 1550 mAh nominal, which would give the newer 1650 mAh cell a theoretical advantage of about 6 %. Energizer lists their CR123 at 1500 mAh nominal and if we use that number the new cells would have a 10% advantage.

Using the 10% increase number the 1650 mAh CR123's should have about 3.498 Wh – giving the L91, with 4.053 Wh about a 16% advantage (both for a 1 Amp load).

The comparison might not be quite so bad for the CR123 in a single cell light, since it would require less of a boost to run a typical LED, but unless the driver is super inefficient, the AA L91 still should have an edge.

In multi cell lights, the advantage would swing further in favor of the L91's for LEDs around 3 Volts.

https://lygte-info.dk/review/batteries2012/Energizer Ultimate Lithium AA 2019 UK.html

Last edited:

#### ampdude

##### Flashlight Enthusiast
Who makes the 1650 cells?

#### raggie33

##### *the raggedier*
i saw the 1650 at battery junction but they cost like 2 times there 1600 cells

#### Lynx_Arc

##### Flashaholic
L91s under load shouldn't drop much below about 1.5v as under no load 1.6v is near dead so I can't really buy into 1.2v as a nominal rating which should make for more W/h from them