Anyone paying attention to cell phone batteries knew this already.
I used to repair mobile phones, including battery replacements. The heavy-user, always-fast-charge crowd is the first to need replacements. Of course, cell phones are usually charging to 4.35V anyway, which is another significant cycle life reduction.
The only thing I'd seen that was counter-intuitive to me about fast charging, was data that suggested Teslas that used superchargers more often, had better battery longevity. I unfortunately can't find that source anymore, but as I recall it was gathered from an owners' forum.
I’ve probably posted this before, but phones are often very bad at battery care. People always seem to want their phones charged to 100% at all times, so the manufacturers tend to make the phones charge too fast and then top up the charge again any time it gets below like 97%. This destroys the batteries pretty quickly.
For example, here’s the charge cycle on one I measured. After it reaches 100%, it runs on battery power for a bit and then tops up, then runs on battery and tops up, etc… forever. Rocking back and forth across “full” is terrible for the battery:
After a while, the battery started to expand… and it didn’t take long before it got so big that the back cover wouldn’t fit any more. Here are two identical models, one which was plugged in for a few months and one which was left alone:
Without the back cover attached, the battery is quite inflated:
Eventually it got so bad it looked like the battery was going to actually float away like a balloon. This was just a few days before the phone finally died. It took a little over a year to get to this point:
… and it’s not just off-brand lights which do this. I have a Google Nexus 4 which is doing the same thing. This is kind of an issue for me since it’s the light I use for Zak’s ceilingbounce app, and I want it to survive for a long time. I don’t use it as a phone though… now I just leave it off and unplugged except during tests.
OTOH, I also have an old Motorola phone from 2011 which still uses its original battery and it’s totally fine despite being in operation continuously for 8 years. So the problem isn’t universal. But it is at least common.
I HATE the color of LED lights below 5000.
The colder the better for me! 6500+….perfect.
Built in chargers are not acceptable. I use a Sky RC MC-3000 and a MAHA 9000.
I love my cells and want to keep them a long time.
And I can quick charge if I am in a hurry too!
Stainless steel is worthless for hosts…it is a poor heatsink compared to aluminum. Heavier too.
Copper hosts suck unless you want to see how fast they can bore a hole in your pocket.
Pocket clips on flashlights are retarded. If it is small and light, pop it in your pocket.
If it is too big for that, a holster is better.
OTOH, with current tech, quick-charging and long cell life are mutually exclusive.
That reminds me. I’d like to add something which which has come to mind several times in the life of this thread, and might be an unpopular opinion: This is the unpopular opinion thread, not the quarrelsome proclamation thread. It’s a fine line sometimes, given that the nature of the thread kinda encourages flexing, but my unpopular opinion is that strongly-held beliefs and disagreements can be expressed in a manner which isn’t combative.
Sorry about that…I was ranting… I did not mean to offend at all.
It is true quick charges reduce cell life…so I almost never do it. But it is nice to be able to.
I don’t like twisty lights much either…but I got a free Olight 3e eos and I liked it so much I bought a couple more!
Unlike previous twisty lights I owned it has giant square anodized threads that after a bit of silicone grease
feel great! It makes a good cell holder too when traveling. I never would have bought it…but after getting
it initially…I just love it. Twisty lights on fine threads…not cool.
I have mostly AA and AAA lights too. 3 of them are 4 AA lights that have great runtime when the power is out.
8 is too many.
I'm not sold on high CRI. While I'm planning to make a high CRI light just for the sake of doing it, I don't expect any of my daily carries to be high CRI until the technology improves.
If you remove the phosphor layer, the light becomes extremely blue. Or even violet, really. Possibly even a little ultraviolet, but it’s hard to say for sure.
Here’s how a Cree XHP50.2 looks without the phosphor…
Flashlights should have an external charger.
Lemme explain.
I’m always after compact flashlights. Integrated charging circuits take up space and I never saw one with decent amps.
So my wish is flashlight with a charging cradle that charges with the max allowable amps the cell or cells in the flashlight can handle. Even if it reduces charging cycles.
I got plenty of amps in my otherwise cigaret lighter in my vehicles. So amps should be no issue.
True. I don’t see any UV in the royal blue Cree emitters I’ve tried. This damaged XHP50 looks different though, more purple. I haven’t measured it in a spectrometer though. I should find a way to do that.
The way to sum it up perfectly would be "95+ CRI Luxeon V"
It has low forward voltage so a strong single cell can run it to its max, it has high output (nudging out the SST40), it doesn't burn its bond wires at 9A like the SST40, There's almost no tint shift whatsoever throughout the beam, and the tint is fantastic to my eyes (for the 4000k at least, I haven't tried the others).
But really, I'd like higher output and good tint (and tint uniformity). As well as good efficiency.
The better bins of SST20 hold promise. I could put 219b in a triple or quad. I could slice a DOGFARTS lh351d. I could put Lee minus green filters on a few emitters. But mostly, my Luxeons are fine.
