Just tested another one of my Blazars. My charger doesn’t charge my 18650’s right up to 4.2v, so this one started out at 4.14. Result was 2804 mAh down to 2.7v @ 3A.
The eBay seller that the Blazar branded batteries come from has been selling genuine Panasonic NCR18650A cells for over a year, without a single bad piece of feedback. Not even a neutral. And given that they are quality cells, at the expected price point for such, there’s a good chance that a significant portion of his customers know the difference. I do, as do some other Aussie members around here who use the same cells. I think it’s ridiculously unlikely that he’s trying to scam anyone by repackaging shitty cells. That sort of thing would get noticed pretty quicky by the sort of customer base he would have.
EDIT: Tested a third Blazar, purchased recently (7th Oct). This time, 4.11v down to 2.7 @ 3.0A resulted in 2723 mAh.
Note: I’m not convinced that my discharge setup is low resistance enough either. I’m using cheap single bay chargers with the guts ripped out of them, which are perfectly fine for charging batteries, but weren’t modded with high discharge in mind. I guess that means I have a new project
doesn’t give me hope for the efest 2600’s on manafont…(claimed sanyo cell)…
edit:
old…your test of the solarforce v3 at 3a showed similar results…i’ve seen other solarforce v3 tests that contradict your findings (link after paragraph) on those cells…these blazar and efests cells are showing the same low capacity at 3a on your tests like the solarforces did…what equipment are you using? is there a way to know for sure that it isn’t malfunctioning? not being disrespectful or rude here just trying to get to the bottom of the difference in the tests…what do your genuine unprotected panasonic 2900 and 3100 show for capacity at 3a?
+1,I also was lead to beleive these tobe Panasonic cells.Infact the supplier[Bestvapping] posted the info on another thread.May do a check myself over the weekend.
Well , its not capacity in direct relation to energy stored :
Its voltage sag : @ 3amp discharge , the voltage sag is severe , [ on my charger ] Turnigy Accucell –8150
The other charger is a Imax B6 , so only discharges to 1A
I did voltage calibrate the Turnigy when I got it …
Might recheck it right now …
Hmmmm, been thinking of getting another charger !
As for the battery ? Not sure the re-seller has much choice as to what goes into the components …
But these batteries were only just sourced this month …
So ??
I have no direct experience with Blazar, but they look to be keeppower OEM. Efest make top quality batteries too afaik so I personally would not question either of these cells being genuine. Maybe something to do with the testing set-up?
I would 2nd a 3 amp test on some unprotected and clearly genuine Panasonic cells to verify this if possible.
Have you considered the possibility that there may be a significant degree of resistance in your discharge setup? For example, I use cheap single bay chargers with the circuitry removed, hooked up to my Hyperion EOS1210i. One of them is unsuitable for high current discharge tests because when using it, the voltage almost immediately sags to around 3.4 when doing a 3A discharge on a fresh cell. Using the same cell in a different bay that applies significantly more contact pressure on the battery terminals (and probably has lower resistance internally as well) results in a voltage reading slightly above 3.7 at a 3A discharge, which is right where it should be for a freshly charged cell.
Discharging at 5A drives the point home. All my Blazars will fail dismally in the high resistance bay, with the setup sagging to 2.7v within seconds. In the better one, they’ll stay at just over 3.5v initially, and discharge in a much more respectable manner from there.
Even my good charging bay needs improvement I think. I’m going to get stuck into fixing them both up soon.
And you’re certain that it’s not your DMM that is doing the struggling? High resistance leads, and cheap inaccurate DMMs, are probably the true source of much of the woe regarding lower than expected current readings.
EDIT: Nevermind. If you can actually measure the superior performance of your IMR’s, I guess the variance is indeed in your cells.