Why do toy manufacturers specify "No rechargeables" in their toys?

[Turbo DV8]

I've posted this question on behalf of my brother, who asked me this question. I have no kids, hence no toys, hence no answer!

Why do so many toys and other electronic items say "no rechargeables". The rechargeables seem to work fine in them. It's not like they are high drain devices or voltage sensitive. Do these companies have some type of kickback agreement with the battery companies or something?

 

[Mr Happy]

It might be because some things like motorized toys do not have a low voltage cut-off. So there is a danger they could run rechargeable batteries too low and harm them. For instance if a child left a toy running until it stopped working and then didn't switch if off afterwards the batteries could be ruined. Just a guess...

 

[Linger]

All respect aside, that seems a bit 3rd party - toy company protecting rechargable battery? That seems more like a battery companies warning, you know? Unless toy companies accepted payment from battery companies for carrying the warning?

But aside from that I've nothing to add you wouldn't have thought of on your own...

 

[Zeruel]

Toy > ?

Then kid > :mecry:

 

[B0wz3r]

Toy > ?

Then kid > :mecry:

+1

This is probably because there is a much wider range of voltages in rechargeables than primaries. If you put a 14500 in something that would normally take a 1.5v primary, it might not be too bad. But, most kids toys require at least two, and often times three or four, sometimes even 6 or 8, (I have two kiddos). So two 14500's (7+ volts) in a toy that only can handle the 3 volts from a couple of primaries, and definitely... and probably the toy going up in flames to boot...

After all... we're used to this kind of stuff, we read up on it, post here on CPF about it, etc., etc., etc. Most non-flashaholics aren't going to know a 14500 from a NiMH from a primary, and so on. They're just covering their a**ess from customer ignorance (stupidity) and keeping themselves from getting sued.

 

[Mr Happy]

+1

This is probably because there is a much wider range of voltages in rechargeables than primaries. If you put a 14500 in something that would normally take a 1.5v primary, it might not be too bad. But, most kids toys require at least two, and often times three or four, sometimes even 6 or 8, (I have two kiddos). So two 14500's (7+ volts) in a toy that only can handle the 3 volts from a couple of primaries, and definitely... and probably the toy going up in flames to boot...

After all... we're used to this kind of stuff, we read up on it, post here on CPF about it, etc., etc., etc. Most non-flashaholics aren't going to know a 14500 from a NiMH from a primary, and so on. They're just covering their a**ess from customer ignorance (stupidity) and keeping themselves from getting sued.

That's true in theory, but 14500's are absolutely not available to consumers in shops, so I don't think they can be part of the reason.

 

[greenLED]

Toys are designed with 1.5V in mind; lower performance comes from using 1.2V rechargeables. No harm done, just lower performance (which, IME, is negligible).

 

[GarageBoy]

They work better in high drain toys for me

 

[Ny0ng1]

hmm those primary manufacturers must be paying them so the consumer would keep buying batteries endlessly! j/k

i got no other idea other than what have been mentioned here.

to OP: its been a while since i play with 'toys' that require batteries with that kind of warning. may I know a couple examples of toys that carry this warning? and what kind of batteries do they require?

 

[Illum]

Based on personal observations...

• Rechargeables, when shorted, dumps a hell of a lot of amps compaed to alkalines, so it could pose as a fire hazard to products that rely on the stability and internal resistance of alkalines to operate correctly.
• Certain manufacturers of products have direct ties to battery makers [or the battery department within the company] so ideally you'll want to promote the consumption of your own batteries. Energizer did this pretty well creating lights than are designed to run on their 14500 or 10440 sized Lithium primaries
• Some products draw very little current when used and most of the time consumes batteries through transient current draw. NiMH, NiCd are designed for high current draw and moderate duration, then recharged. Whereas alkalines are more functional, replaced by a rechargeable [assuming no such thing as LSD] the battery might die sitting in idle and causes a reduced operation time for the product. throwing eneloops into clocks and remote controls are examples.
• Cell voltage sag. Alkalines, as we know, sag in voltage under the slightest load, products that rely on this sagging [2D flashlight lamps with 2.4V bulbs illustrate this pretty well] may be overdriven with rechareables because the voltage doesn't sag as expected when load is applied.
• Cell voltage differences, different chemistry you'll have a different voltage per cell, this is especially important when converting between battery types. LiCoO2 cells are 3.6V/cell, NiMH are 1.2V/cell, PbSo4 are 2V/cell, etc. if this is a flashlight we're referring to, the driver may or may not have sufficient overhead to operate on lithium 14500s in compared to its designed alkaline AAs. What physically fit may not work at all.
• Voltage cutoff, with rechargeables comethe issue of deep cycling. For products with direct drive or step-up power management circuits, the product expects alkalines are used and will give you the best bang for the buck to draw as much power as it can afford before the drop out [input-output differential is reached] Products wth buck circuits are only somewhat better. This creates a very expensive situation when rechargeables are left unattended in a functioning product, especially if its a radio or scanner that involves a very low current draw.

There are other reasons, but none needed with expressive emphasis as those above

 

[Lynx_Arc]

also rechargeables don't leak, which destroys toys and forcing replacement making them more profit.

 

[asdalton]

It probably comes down to CYA for liability. When alkaline batteries are shorted, typically they just become very warm. When the same is done to NiMH or NiCd batteries, there is a more serious risk of burns or fire.

The manual for the Swiffer WetJet has a similar warning, with an explanation that rechargeable batteries are dangerous "under fault conditions," which I suspect means short circuit.

 

[45/70]

There are some pretty good ideas here already. I've said this for a long time now, but I think they state that to support the battery industry (which is based about 99% on alkaline cells).

Hey, it doesn't hurt if one of the major battery companies gives you free batteries to supply with your product. All you have to do in return, is say not to use rechargeable batteries. The device maker makes their product more attractive by including the cells, and the battery maker will sell zillions more batteries. Everybody wins except, of course, the consumer.

M@glite does this, and I can't think of a single M@glite, incan or LED that doesn't run better, at least after the first few minutes, on rechargeable cells. How else are you going to keep a multi billion dollar industry afloat that is based, for the most part, on obsolete technology?

Dave

 

[SilverFox]

Hello Turbo DV8

My personal opinion, and I have nothing to back this up, is that if they recommended a rechargeable cell to use, they would also have to recommend a proper charger.

This would add to the cost of the toy, and heavens knows that deciding on what the proper charger would be could be very difficult... Just look at some of the discussions that take place here...

Tom

 

[Bones]

Hello Turbo DV8

My personal opinion, and I have nothing to back this up, is that if they recommended a rechargeable cell to use, they would also have to recommend a proper charger.

This would add to the cost of the toy, and heavens knows that deciding on what the proper charger would be could be very difficult... Just look at some of the discussions that take place here...

Tom

Why do I get the impression that the smile you inserted is grinning...?

Anyway, your post brought to mind the possible synergy between a toy maker and a quality cell and charger manufacturer, ie: Sanyo (of course).

Considering ongoing costs and the ever-increasing awareness of environmental issues, I can see real market advantages to maximizing a toys performance for use with the newest version of the Eneloop and a suitable charger.

 

[45/70]

Considering ongoing costs and the ever-increasing awareness of environmental issues, I can see real market advantages to maximizing a toys performance for use with the newest version of the Eneloop and a suitable charger.

Let me make it clear that I'm with ya Bones, but most battery manufacturers are not going to be happy with this plan. As I pointed out in another thread a long time ago, Sanyo makes more than just batteries. Other battery manufacturers are a lot less diverse.

They won't see any advantage to selling a couple sets of rechargeable cells for a toy every couple of years (or, likely less often than that), rather they'd prefer to sell a couple sets of primary cells a week. Don't think that this subject isn't being discussed in boardrooms as we post!

I can't blame them, a lot of jobs are on the table, and not just the manufacturers will be affected, but the whole distribution chain down to the retail level, to some extent. People will not be buying batteries very often (or shelling out nearly as much cash), period. Eventually it's gonna happen. They're doomed. All this isn't just a conspiracy theory, it's real.

Dave

 

[Lynx_Arc]

Let me make it clear that I'm with ya Bones, but most battery manufacturers are not going to be happy with this plan. As I pointed out in another thread a long time ago, Sanyo makes more than just batteries. Other battery manufacturers are a lot less diverse.

They won't see any advantage to selling a couple sets of rechargeable cells for a toy every couple of years (or, likely less often than that), rather they'd prefer to sell a couple sets of primary cells a week. Don't think that this subject isn't being discussed in boardrooms as we post!

I can't blame them, a lot of jobs are on the table, and not just the manufacturers will be affected, but the whole distribution chain down to the retail level, to some extent. People will not be buying batteries very often (or shelling out nearly as much cash), period. Eventually it's gonna happen. They're doomed. All this isn't just a conspiracy theory, it's real.

Dave

makes you wonder if they purposely made the 2500 nimh energizers to self destruct so they could sell more of them

 

[45/70]

makes you wonder if they purposely made the 2500 nimh energizers to self destruct so they could sell more of them

Heh, I brought that up in another thread a while back. :naughty:

Dave

 

[sfmartin]

I recently bought a professional hand-held digital recorder. It came with a warning to not use rechargeable batteries. It has a low battery indicator and I tried some Eneloops, which worked fine. I called their customer service and asked why not rechargeables. The customer service rep said, "Because rechargeable batteries have been known to explode". Oh, all right. :thumbsdow

 

[Wangstang]

Bringing a very old thread back to life...

Any reason why I shouldn't use a pair of AAA Energizer NiMH 700mha 1.2v rechargeables in my new Target branded SHARP SPC 525 alarm clock? It's marked for 1.5v AAA's in the battery compartment if that matters.

Edit to add...This would be short term, two or three days at the most. I get that Alkalines would be best for long term use, and I'll pick some up this coming weekend.

Thanks
Wes