Sanyo Eneloop CR123!

[xiaowenzu]

Haha, now that got your attention didn't it? :laughing: Anyways, I just had a brain-flash. Like, why don't they make it!? It would easily be the KILLER batt of the decade. Imagine 3VOLTS of low discharge joy sitting for 1 year in your SF U2 losing only 85% charge at the end. Now lets cross our fingers and hope they will make them! hehe

 

[Empath]

It would require the battery to consists of two cells in series, and a charger specifically designed for it. The small size of the cells involved would likely restrict the capacity to impractical levels.

 

[xiaowenzu]

It would require the battery to consists of two cells in series, and a charger specifically designed for it. The small size of the cells involved would likely restrict the capacity to impractical levels.

Well can't they just squash the AA to make it short and fatter? I'm sure it can be done, it's just that I can't do it. AA is not that much different than a CR123 size wise. :thumbsup:

 

[Windscale]

I'll second that.

AA Eneloop at 2700mah would be an awful killer.

 

[boosterboy]

most misleading thread title EVER:shakehead

 

[h2xblive]

On a slight tangent, why don't companies make a rechargeable 3.0v lithium (cr123) cell? It would be nice to have a drop in rechargeable replacement for our SureFire lights...

 

[Windscale]

On a slight tangent, why don't companies make a rechargeable 3.0v lithium (cr123) cell? It would be nice to have a drop in rechargeable replacement for our SureFire lights...

There are RCR123As 3.0V in existence. They have been out for quite long. But many experts in CPF seem to suggest that we should avoid them as they are really 3.7V with an extra resistor which can easily malfunction. Also although 3.0V RCRs are in existence, they are not happy substitutes for primary CR123As. I have a few lights which behave this way. Hope someone will produce a proper rechargeable option for CR123As soon.

 

[h2xblive]

There are RCR123As 3.0V in existence. They have been out for quite long. But many experts in CPF seem to suggest that we should avoid them as they are really 3.7V with an extra resistor which can easily malfunction. Also although 3.0V RCRs are in existence, they are not happy substitutes for primary CR123As. I have a few lights which behave this way. Hope someone will produce a proper rechargeable option for CR123As soon.

But why do manufacturers produce 3.7v cells? I can't think of a device that is designed to run off of non-recharbeable batteries, that would use such an exotic voltage.

 

[GarageBoy]

Thats because thats all the chemisty offers...
why are NiMhs 1.2V

 

[SilverFox]

Hello H2xblive,

The voltage is the result of the chemistry. Different chemicals combine to result in different voltages.

The 3.7 volt chemistry was designed to replace 3 NiMh, NiCd or Alkaline cells.

Tom

 

[h2xblive]

Hello H2xblive,

The voltage is the result of the chemistry. Different chemicals combine to result in different voltages.

The 3.7 volt chemistry was designed to replace 3 NiMh, NiCd or Alkaline cells.

Tom

I understand if the 3.7v chemistry was designed to replace 3.6v nicad or nimhs (3 batteries in series), but what about the shape? Why design a cell that is the shape of a cr123s if it wasn't designed to replace cr123 cells?

 

[N162E]

Imagine 3VOLTS of low discharge joy sitting for 1 year in your SF U2 losing only 85% charge at the end. Now lets cross our fingers and hope they will make them! hehe

I'd rather they retained 85% of the full charge.

 

[h2xblive]

I'd rather they retained 85% of the full charge.

Hehehe

 

[springbok]

Haha, now that got your attention didn't it? :laughing:

VERY VERY cruel post. i got so excited when reading the title. :nana:

 

[barkingmad]

What about LiFEPO4 Lithium rechargeables - they are a nominal 3.3v from what I remember - work fine in my Fenix P1D-CE (enabling all modes) whereas normal 3.7 Li-ion 'work' but you lose the low power modes.

LiFEPO4 are also supposed to be a lot safer... the downside is reduced capacity compared to normal Li-ion cells and they usually use a different charger to Li-ion.

 

[robm]

Well can't they just squash the AA to make it short and fatter? I'm sure it can be done, it's just that I can't do it. AA is not that much different than a CR123 size wise. :thumbsup:

Unfortunately, even if they could just 'squash' an AA - it would still only be 1.2v :shakehead

I am also a bit confused about when CR123/RCR123 cells started self- discharging?

 

[DM51]

I understand if the 3.7v chemistry was designed to replace 3.6v nicad or nimhs (3 batteries in series), but what about the shape? Why design a cell that is the shape of a cr123s if it wasn't designed to replace cr123 cells?

3 x CR123A primaries occupy the same space as 2 x 17500 Li-Ion cells. These combinations are interchangeable - both will run the same 9v LAs.

 

[h2xblive]

3 x CR123A primaries occupy the same space as 2 x 17500 Li-Ion cells. These combinations are interchangeable - both will run the same 9v LAs.

Last time I checked, there were a lot of flashlights (especially SureFire) that run off of 6 volts, not 9.

 

[Fallingwater]

Rechargeable 123 cells are lithium-ion or lithium-iron. Neither chemistry has significant self-discharge.
An Eneloop 123 makes therefore no sense.

 

[VidPro]

3.6v battery, 3.6v LED seems to me the question should be who needs 3V , not who needs 3.6