If it is approx 5x the current 48G 21700 capacity, then compared to a 4*18650 battery carrier;
VTC6s: 4 * 3.7V * 3Ah = 44.4Wh
46800: 5 * 3.7V * 4.8Ah = 88.8Wh
It may not exactly meet Tesla’s “5x capacity” claim, but even so, it would nearly double the total energy capacity of current 4x18650 lights.
However, the voltage of the single cell will be limited at 3.7V, whereas the 18650 carriers can be configured to 1S4P, 2S2P, or 4S1P, giving a wide voltage range for lots of different emitters more capable of higher powers.
So a moderate to high-power light using this cell would either need to take the Emisar ‘loads of parallel XPLs’ approach (or the 3V XHP50), or start using some serious boost driver tech.
Yeah, with 300W that these should be able to deliver even GXB100 is not powerful enough. At the same time this driver would suddenly become so much more useful.
Real Tesla ones? Not until cars using them are totaled. I suppose we may see a small number of them slip out one way or another. It has happened with other Tesla cells.
21700 cells of various quality appeared not long after Tesla started using 2170.
I predict we will see Chinese 4680s sooner or later. They may not be as good as the Tesla ones.
Cells from totaled cars and mediocre cells from small makers are not enough to drive adoption.
We need good cell makers to start making them like they did with 21700.
Now cordless tools won’t be among the drivers for this. I’m concerned whether this will happen. If it does - we’ll end up with much better pop can lights.
I suspect that it’s is because Tesla had Panasonic manufacture most of it’s cells, and the 21700 were exactly the same manufacturing process and chemistry that the 18650, with the 4680 things change a lot, tabless cells, dry electode and cell to pack (no module) plus Tesla’s will of vertical integration and projections of in house battery production ramping orders of magnitude.
Will Tesla ever buy a 4680 from an external battery manufacturer is the question, and if not, will other manufacturers still want to copy this new form factor ?
This cell sounds like a nice upgrade for the BLF LT1 lantern
One 46800 should give the LT1 70% extra runtime, based on the Tesla plan. Even if Tesla falls a bit short, 50% extra runtime should still be within easy reach.
I’m beginning to wonder whether a mainstream charger manufacturer might make the jump to having a common charging module for the electronics and the controls, with plug-in cell holders in a range of sizes, like people already do with hobby chargers. New cell size? Sell a new cell holder, no charger redesign required.
People used to make adapters for SLR camera bodies to allow using lenses from other manufacturers.
simple flat rings with each side configured for one brand’s bayonet or thread connection.
It ought to be possible to make new size battery tubes along with adapters for currently existing flashlight heads.
46mm is 3mm extra width, about the height of 3 stacked dimes.
But now you don’t need springs to accommodate 4 possibly variable-length cells (sort unprotected vs long protected), but can use a bunch of shallow domes or a big fat metal “leaf” to allow only a few mm of slop to make good solid contact.
I’d say it could probably drop into a Q8 right now by just boring it out and modding the bottom-inside of the tube.
These batteries make no sense in flashlights.
You don’t understand that the 40-50% increase in capacity and power is only noticeable in Tesla cars? Actually the larger the cell, the higher the car range will be. 4680 is not an ideal size. It’s just the maximum cell size they currently are able to produce.
But in a flashlight there wouldn’t be any difference between 5x18650 and 1x4680.
As Lightbringer points out it would fit in a 4x18650 space…
and fill the voids around the cells, providing more energy in the same volume - and eventually more available power/current.
Some prefer 8x18650 lights to 4x18650 because of ergonomy.
But others prefer it because of increased runtime.
Tell them that they’d be better off with 18650.