"Flashlights and "AA" Batteries"

  • Thread starter **DONOTDELETE**
  • Start date
D

**DONOTDELETE**

Guest
Anybody noticed big difference in flashlight burntime between these two brands of batteries?

I run 2 sets of regular Duracell AA Alkaline batteries, expiration of 1 set is 2002 (remains from cheapbatteries.com last year) and the other set is 2005 (newly bought from sidewalk vendor), into my SL4AA, TEC40, and UK4AA flashlights and the most I can get is 3 1/2 hours of burntime, while with Energizer AA Alkaline (exp: 01-2007) burntime is almost 5 hours.

One may not notice it because seldom do we use our flashlights continously "ON" until batteries run dead.

The one with the shortest runtime among the 3 flashlights (SL4AA, TEC40, UK4AA) regardless of batteries (Duracell or Energizer) used is TEC40. TEC40 is almost an hour less runtime compared to the other 2 flashlights.

Anyone have the same or opposite observation? How about other brand of battery and flashlight?

- verge -
 

Brock

Flashaholic
Joined
Aug 6, 2000
Messages
6,346
Location
Green Bay, WI USA
2D did you get those differnt run times in differnt lights? I know the UKE 4AA and the Streamlight 4AA draw differnt amounts of power, so they should be differnt. I have noticed that older alkaline batteries do run dead sooner. What is the self decay rate on them? Was it 10% in 5 years?
 
D

**DONOTDELETE**

Guest
I did 3 runs of Duracell AA batteries and 1 run of Energizer batteries on TEC40 and here are the results;

1st run TEC40/Duracell exp:2005 (from sidewalk vendor) time = 2 hrs. 20mins
2nd run TEC40/Duracell exp:2005 (from sidewalk vendor) time = 1 hr. 30mins
3rd run TEC40/Duracell exp:2002 (from cheapbatteries) time = 2 hrs. 50mins
4th run TEC40/Energizer exp:01-2007 (from kmart) time = 3hrs. 40mins.

Duracell batteries with earlier (2002) expiration date burn longer than ones with later (2005) expiration date.

I'll do another run on TEC40, SL4AA, and UK4AA with Duracell batteries from different vendor and another run with Energizer and Rayovac batteries this weekend.

- verge -
 

Brock

Flashaholic
Joined
Aug 6, 2000
Messages
6,346
Location
Green Bay, WI USA
Now that is odd. And the packs wern't opened at all? I wonder if it could have to do with how the batteries are stored. Maybe the shorter running ones were in a hot damp enviroment. I guess it makes me appreciate lithium even more since they aren't as effected my outside forces as much. Or maybe you somehow got a hold of a bad batch???
 

lightlover

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 28, 2001
Messages
1,901
Location
London, UK (Parallel Universe)
Over here, I've bought batteries from a 'street-market stall', guess that's the UK equivalent of a 'sidewalk vendor'.

I can never quite bring myself to trust them, no matter what name is on them, or how they are packaged ......

lite-lover
frown.gif
shocked.gif
mad.gif
wink.gif
 
D

**DONOTDELETE**

Guest
Here's the result of my battery runtime observation on UK4AA.

1st Rayovac/Alkaline Maximum Dec 2005 = 5:20
2nd Rayovac/Alkaline Maximum Dec 2005 = 5:55
3rd Rayovac/Alkaline Maximum Dec 2005 = 5:55

1st Energizer/Alkaline 01-2007 = 4:40
2nd Energizer/Alkaline 01-2007 = 4:55

1st Duracell/Alkaline Regular 2005 = 3:15
2nd Duracell/Alkaline Regular 2005 = 3:55
3rd Duracell/Alkaline Regular 2005 = 3:45
4th Duracell/Alkaline Coppertop 2008 = 4:05

I don't know how Rayovac is doing it but it sure makes flashlights glow bright and for longer time.

- verge -
 
D

**DONOTDELETE**

Guest
Hi

I've also found the ray-o-vacs to equal or better the other 2 better known batteries.
HOWEVER I find that the ray-o-vacs (AA's) seem to leak faster.
I wouldn't reccommend putting them in remote controls or other items that you store in a drawer.
Consumer Reports usually does a story on batteries every two years or so.... Usually some competitor beats out the top two when the price per cell is entered into the equation.
 

geepondy

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Apr 15, 2001
Messages
4,896
Location
Massachusetts
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by horn:

Consumer Reports usually does a story on batteries every two years or so.... Usually some competitor beats out the top two when the price per cell is entered into the equation.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I just reviewed their ratings on AA alkaline batteries. The Duracell Ultras do slightly better on high drain devices but on longevitity only, not on a cost basis. By far the best value were the Costco ones for 19 cents a cell. Basically they said "an alkaline is an alkaline" regardless of the manufacturer.
 
Top