When your life depends on your battery . . . yeah right!

[Luminescent]

About two years ago I bought a Dorcy LED flashlight which appeared to be defective out of the box, till I figured out that one of the two brand new Duracell batteries supplied with the light was completely dead (0.00 volts)

Then several months ago, I also experienced a situation where a Duracell battery leaked in one of my lights.

Needless to say, I stopped using them in any of my lights.

I thought that I had also tossed all the Duracells that I had in my other electronics, but I forgot my travel clock.

Today I noticed some fuzzy white crap around the battery cover on the clock, and this is what I found when I pulled the battery.

Note that like the leaking battery in the picture, the dead Duracell supplied by Dorcy, and the two other Duracells that leaked in my other devices were all well within their freshness dates, and were from separate date batches purchased months apart.

As if all this wasn't bad enough, a few days ago I was walking throuh the local Lowes home center, and one of the packages of 2 x AA Duracells hanging on the peg was almost completly full of the same goo and fuzzy white crap that I just found in my travel clock. In other words, TWO BRAND NEW DURACELL BATTERIES, NOT EVEN OUT OF THE PACKAGE, HAD ALREADY LEAKED!

I'm not sure what is going on with Duracell, but I haven't seen more than one or two other batteries leak in my entire life, and they were always ultra cheap-o carbon-zinc cells; I have NEVER seen a high quality alkaline from another manufacture leak.

Just a heads up . . .

If my life depended on my battery, it damn sure wouldn't be a Duracell :thumbsdow

 

[amigafan2003]

If your life depends on a battery then don't use alkalines full stop.

 

[GSMGuy]

Hmm, interesting, as you said - I myself have only ever seen "cheapies" leak, but last week pulled my hanheld microscope out of a drawer (very handy, esp as it came from a kids toystore!!) to use it shecking for cracks on a PCB - It's been in the drawer for about 4 months, and BOTH of the duracells were weeping, both from the tail (neg) ends... They are dated July 2014!!!

Binned and replaced with yet more eneloops, although there is a trade off in illumination, as it's one of those pre focussed incan bulbs...

Looks like QC and build is slipping @ duracell....

Mike

 

[Magic Matt]

Sadly I've also had quite a few duracells leak. I don't buy them any more for that reason unless I'm going to use them straight away.

 

[vali]

I have to say I never saw a duracell leak either, but AFAIK all of them sold here are made in EC (European Comunity). I saw several kinds of tests and runtime charts over the internet and always felt the guys testing things were using "different" duracells. For example, most runtime tests on the RC-N3 get 2 hours using alkies, but I got 3 hours. The same with the K-106: my own test showed 37-38 hours at minimun whereas most ppl report runtimes in the twenties. Of course, they were basic tests and due the high tolerances those cheapos have, it means almost nothing...

Can the cells be so different depending where they were made? Its just some kind of "placebo" effect? It seems there can be huge differencies between alkalines too. Just an example -> http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=115020 (BTW, that cegasa cells are a spanish local brand and almost as expensive as duracell or energizer here, and that is VERY EXPENSIVE). AFAIK cegasa is a big manufacturer and lots of cheap alkalines around here are just rebranded cegasa.

Maybe I am being a bit conspiranoic...

The fact is I dont really care. I use the few alkalines I have in my DX lights and misc/cheap electronic devices I dont really care about being trashed and most of the time I use LSD NiMH.

 

[kramer5150]

This months issue of "Alkalines spilled their caustic guts on my__________"

Alkalines should not be used in any light you intend to keep.

I have had duracell leaks (and the Kirkland rebrands) in all kinds of electronic devices. My most $$$ was my RC transmitter. I think the key point is not to store them in the light. Just keep the light unloaded on standby.
LSD NiMH is the only way. I have been pleasantly surprised with the ray o vac 4.0 cells. They are $1 each at Frys. They may still have some more on sale. I use them in my smaller, low current lights.

 

[Codswallop]

Just checked a cheapo Chinese rear cycle light that arrived about a year ago with two Duracell Plus AA's in and has lain unused. Both are marked 'Made in EC' and 'MAR 2014. Both leaking furry white goo from the tail end. The country of origin, cheapness of the light, and the 'EC' instead of EU makes me wonder if some of these cells are fakes?. Surprisingly the light still works with them in.

 

[carrot]

When your life depends on your battery... go lithium...

 

[Nell]

When your life depends on your battery... go lithium...

What I am learning from this thread is to use LSD nimh or lithium. Are you talking about cells like the E2? I generally don't get them due to cost, but if they don't leak like alkaline cells, then it is the cheap insurance.

I've just found a hand held radio and a Streamlight flashlight with bad leaking stuff..... agr..

 

[carrot]

Energizer E2 Lithiums, not to be mistaken for Advanced Lithium (similarly good, but too expensive) or Titanium (ridiculously named alkaline technology), are definitely one of the kinds of lithium battery I refer to. They will not leak, and have a shelf life of ten years. Also, all CR123 batteries will not leak and have a shelf life of ten years. LSD NiMH will work similarly well as far as not leaking is concerned. IMHO Duracell is one of the best alkalines for not leaking but being alkaline are still prone to leakage.

 

[Robin24k]

I've had a bit better luck with Duracell Ultra compared to the regular coppertops.

Nowadays, I use Duracell ProCell for remotes, clocks, etc. and Duracell Ultra or Energizer Lithium for lights.

 

[JohnR66]

My experience:
Had Duracells leak.
Had one cell of Energizers die before the rest.
No problem with Rayovacs. Not saying they don't leak, but I don't recall them ever leaking. They cost much less than the big brand and they last the same, so...

Check this out. These are the older gold labeled Rayovacs. They are somewhat run down, but they haven't leaked. (I just took this shot for this thread)

I use LSD cells in my nice flashlights and I just tried a lithium in my Maratac AAA. I think I'm in love with the lithiums now. They really do last.

 

[Apollo Cree]

It's probably a good idea to throw away any batteries that come with a device, no matter what the brand. Who knows how long they've been on the shelf, storage temp, etc.?

 

[Luminescent]

It's probably a good idea to throw away any batteries that come with a device, no matter what the brand. Who knows how long they've been on the shelf, storage temp, etc.?

I did discard both the Duracells that came with that Dorcy light when I found that one of the cells was completly dead, because I felt the other cell couldn't be trusted (even though it was still well within it's printed use date).

All the Duracell batteries that leaked on me were purchased in Duracell retail packs (not freebies supplied with lights)

With the 'freebee' generic noname batteries supplied with some lights, it's true that they often lack date codes so you don't have any idea about how old they are, but in theory at least, Duracells are supposed to have a safe use freshness date printed right on them.

Unfortunately, all the Duracells that leaked in my electronics devices still had years left on their safe 'use-by' date, and as I noted above, I have even seen Duracells leaking while still hanging on the peg at the store WITH SEVERAL YEARS LEFT ON THE PRINTED DATE CODE.

Getting back to your original point, while I agree it's probably not a good idea to put too much trust in the no-name cells without date codes that come with some lights, I have had dozens of electronic devices that came with various no-name batteries and NONE OF THOSE NO-NAME CELLS HAS EVER LET ME DOWN AND LEAKED.

 

[Luminescent]

Energizer E2 Lithiums, not to be mistaken for Advanced Lithium (similarly good, but too expensive) or Titanium (ridiculously named alkaline technology), are definitely one of the kinds of lithium battery I refer to. They will not leak, and have a shelf life of ten years. Also, all CR123 batteries will not leak and have a shelf life of ten years. LSD NiMH will work similarly well as far as not leaking is concerned. IMHO Duracell is one of the best alkalines for not leaking but being alkaline are still prone to leakage.

Actually, I am a little pissed off with Energizer also, but in this case it's not because the L91 and L92 Lithiums were not great batteries, but rather because some CEO type at Energizer seems to have decided to play the same kind of silly *** marketing games with Energizer's lithium product line that they have played with Alkaline batteries for years.

Do you want our Good, Really-Good, Really-Really-Good, or Extra-Special-Really-Really-Good Alkaline?

The truth has always been that the 'premium' alkalines offered very very little real improvement for most folks, at HUGELY INFLATED PRICES.

The L91 and L92 lithium cells have always been advertised as providing 8x the life of Alkaline. True, this was total BS, except in ultra high load applications where they might manage 4X or 5X, but let's assume that 8x number was valid for the moment.

Now, if you check you will see that Energizer's new basic type Lithium AAA and AA cells are advertised as providing only a 4X improvement.

To get the supposed "8X" capacity performance of the old L91 and L92 lithiums you have to buy the so called 'Advanced' lithium.

This is fine in some stores were the basic 'standard' lithium cells are now sold at lower prices, but other stores are playing deceptive games by only stocking the 'standard' Energizer lithium cells (the ones that supposidly only have ONE-HALF the capacity of the 'advanced' cells), and are still charging nearly the same premium prices as the old L91 and L92 cells.

Energizer is either selling nearly the same battery in both 'standard lithium' and 'advanced lithium' packs, so they can play BS 'skim the cream' marketing games to take advantage of those poor gullible fools who will pay premium prices even if there is little real difference in performance (like they have done for YEARS with Alkaline cells) or alternatly, they really HAVE crippled the 'standard' lithium cells by reduceing the capacity substantial compared to the old standard L91 and L92 cells (in which case the stores that are selling these crippled down cells for nearly the same prices as the old E1 or E2 cells are ripping people off).

Does someone have a link to a CPF thread where these newly packaged lithium Energizer cells have actually been tested, so we can tell how they REALLY stack up to each other and to the old L91 and L92 lithium cells?

 

[Robin24k]

I really couldn't care much about capacity of the battery. For me, I want lithium cold-weather performance, lighter weight, and no leaks. I went with Energizer Advanced Lithiums because of it's the cheaper one of the lithiums (again, capacity isn't a concern and L91 is more expensive).

 

[Quension]

Now, if you check you will see that Energizer's new basic type Lithium AAA and AA cells are advertised as providing only a 4X improvement.

To get the supposed "8X" capacity performance of the old L91 and L92 lithiums you have to buy the so called 'Advanced' lithium.

I think you're a bit off on the naming. There are two current versions of the Energizer lithium AA/AAA primaries being sold right now: Advanced (EA9x) which is marketed as 4X, and Ultimate (L9x) which is marketed as 8X. Advanced is the cheaper one.

Does someone have a link to a CPF thread where these newly packaged lithium Energizer cells have actually been tested, so we can tell how they REALLY stack up to each other and to the old L91 and L92 lithium cells?

There's a thread discussing them, including links to the datasheets, but I've yet to see any tests. The datasheets show differences in shelf life ratings (Advanced: 10 years to 80%; Ultimate: 15 years to 90%), capacity under high-drain conditions (Advanced appears to have roughly half the capacity @ 1A), and different max discharge ratings (AA Advanced: 1.5A; AA Ultimate: 2A). They apparently weigh the same, which is interesting in context.

 

[Luminescent]

I think you're a bit off on the naming. There are two current versions of the Energizer lithium AA/AAA primaries being sold right now: Advanced (EA9x) which is marketed as 4X, and Ultimate (L9x) which is marketed as 8X. Advanced is the cheaper one.

There's a thread discussing them, including links to the datasheets, but I've yet to see any tests. The datasheets show differences in shelf life ratings (Advanced: 10 years to 80%; Ultimate: 15 years to 90%), capacity under high-drain conditions (Advanced appears to have roughly half the capacity @ 1A), and different max discharge ratings (AA Advanced: 1.5A; AA Ultimate: 2A). They apparently weigh the same, which is interesting in context.

Thanks for the corrections and the link.

You are right, I had forgotten that Advanced lithium was the base level and 'Ultimate' was the new higher level.

From the specs, it would indeed appear that it's the 'Ultimate' cells that seem to be equivelent to the old L91 L92 series cells.

I know from my own tests that L91/L92 cells will outperform alkalines by a wide margin, and beat NiMH by a somewhat slimmer margin.

For example in one light on high output I saw-

- Less than 30 minutes on Alkaline
- 50 minutes on an Low Self Discharge NiMH,
- A full hour on High Capacity NiMH.
- An Hour and twenty minutes on a L91 or L92 series Lithium cell.

But if you cut the L91/L92 performance in half, all you are left with is a still expensive battery that performs only so-so (the same or even slightly worse than NiMH).

 

[Luminescent]

I really couldn't care much about capacity of the battery. For me, I want lithium cold-weather performance, lighter weight, and no leaks. I went with Energizer Advanced Lithiums because of it's the cheaper one of the lithiums (again, capacity isn't a concern and L91 is more expensive).

Hi Robin,

I noticed that Energizer carefully does NOT spec any kind of low temp performance for the less expensive 'Advanced' cells in thier data sheet. They do show the operating temprature range as going down to -40, but don't give give actual performance numbers, and I am sure that if you emailed them about it, the scumbags would tell you something like "For guaranteed low temperature performance, you should go with the 'Ultimate' L91/L92 series cells".

The simple fact is that Energizer would prefer that EVERYONE pay the higher price, EVEN IF THE REAL WORLD PERFORMANCE OF THE LESS EXPENSIVE CELLS IS EXACTLY THE SAME.

So they played some slightly sleazy games with the data sheets.

Not only did the Energizer folks omit low temp performance data for the 'Advanced' cells to make them more questionable in low temp applications, but they also fudged the way they plotted the calculated capacity to make the 'Ultimate' cells look better.

For example, Energizer rates the 'Ultimate' L91/L92 capacity all the way down to 0.9 volts, but rates the newer 'Advanced' cells only down to 1.0 volts.

This may not sound like much, but it does make the 'Ultimate' cells look a few percent better, and makes the 'Advanced' cells look slightly worse than they should.

Even after playing these games to make the more expensive 'Ultimate' cells look better, the data sheets claim only a capacity difference over the 'Advanced' cells of slightly less than 50% at a 1 amp discharge rate. (NOT the two-to-one implied by the simplistic 8X vs. 4X ratings)

At lower discharge rates below about 500mA there doesn't seem to be any difference at all.

So the smart money may be on the less expensive 'Advanced' option, just like the case with Alkalines, where paying two or three times as much for a 'Ultimate-Max-Extreme' battery that is really only 10% better is a sucker bet.

Having said that, weight and Low temperature performance aside, I am concerned about ANY loss of capacity in flashlight applications, because even the older 'Ultimate' type L91/L92 cells only have a slight advantage over NiMH.

 

[Elliot]

If I remember correctly someone did actually compare the "advanced" lithiums against the "ultimate." The difference was that the "advanced" had about 75 - 80% of the runtime vs the "ultimate". So the Ultimate is better, but may not justify the large price difference if your life isn't on the line. And my Duracells leak just as badly as anything else.