Redilast 2900 mah 18650

46 posts / 0 new
Last post
mitro
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 2 months ago
Joined: 01/25/2011 - 11:58
Posts: 707
Location: Montgomery, IL USA

Hikelite wrote:

I can't see any photos or links in the post.

Sorry. Fixed.
Hikelite
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 27 min ago
Joined: 07/13/2011 - 16:18
Posts: 3835
Location: RO

Your graphs are very nice.

Sanyo 2600 vs AW 2900

There's a 9% difference. So the difference reduced from 11.5% to 9%. Probably because the AW 2900 wasn't discharged down to 2.5

 

 

 

 

benckie
benckie's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 7 months ago
Joined: 07/04/2011 - 08:36
Posts: 1513
Location: Western Austraila
I posted a link on post #4 that contains a few different 18650 test's including aw's and redilast batteries the redilast seam to perform better and test of CPF seams to show they are better protected, the might be the same cells ? but the redilast seam to perform better and would be my choice over aw's
Hikelite
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 27 min ago
Joined: 07/13/2011 - 16:18
Posts: 3835
Location: RO

I've just had a AW 2900 shut itself off. 0.0V.  After two seconds in the charger the voltage was 2.9XX 

It was a double cell configuration and this one wasn't charged identical to the other one. The other one had 3.0V

benckie
benckie's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 7 months ago
Joined: 07/04/2011 - 08:36
Posts: 1513
Location: Western Austraila

Hikelite wrote:

I've just had a AW 2900 shut itself off. 0.0V.  After two seconds in the charger the voltage was 2.9XX 

It was a double cell configuration and this one wasn't charged identical to the other one. The other one had 3.0V

you should of brought  trustfire flame's

Stephen Wallace
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 6 months ago
Joined: 06/25/2011 - 11:03
Posts: 221
Location: London, UK

Considering that one cell is closer to the emitter and driver, and any heat they generate (assuming the cells are in line of course), you would expect some difference in battery performance and hence end voltage. With that in mind, with only 0.1v difference at the point that the PCB cut in, they sound pretty well matched. 

benckie
benckie's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 7 months ago
Joined: 07/04/2011 - 08:36
Posts: 1513
Location: Western Austraila

agreeded 2.9x volt vs 3 volt is not bad for a multi cell set up in my multi cell lights there is always a slight diffrence after use even if they are all be balance charged together, even then you might get a 10 mv diffence

Hikelite
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 27 min ago
Joined: 07/13/2011 - 16:18
Posts: 3835
Location: RO

They were not equal in capacity (voltage more precisely) because I used on of the cells in a single cell flashlight for several minutes.

Now got them both charged, 4.16V each.

Stephen Wallace
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 6 months ago
Joined: 06/25/2011 - 11:03
Posts: 221
Location: London, UK

Yep, you had said that they weren't equal to begin with, but without knowing just how big a difference there was between them, it was hard to take that in to account.

ILIKEFLASHLIGHTS
ILIKEFLASHLIGHTS's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 months ago
Joined: 08/04/2011 - 23:47
Posts: 5693
Location: southeast MO

robertkoa wrote:

I think it's significant the ILIKEFFLASHLIGHTS  is getting good results and good Trustfire Flames- seems I read that there are some inferior or counterfeit versions of those around as well.

18650s- great power source, but very quirky supplies.....

But- I've been reading lots of threads and charts lately- and the Trustfire Flames have been one of the most consistent performers of all always- 2400-2450 mah- which is really amazing considering they are a budget battery.

And for about 3 times the price -you can get about 20%- 30 % more performance from the Panasonic repackaged cells, and a very few exotics ( depending on which spec )  -  and you can get about 10% to 15% more performance for about double the price on a few other brands ( depending on which spec ).

Not an expert so please correct me if the above is wrong regarding increased performance- it's oversimplified at best- I know many of you have done some accurate tests, so I'll edit if it's wrong

That's been my whole point.  I have heard of fake flames, but I have yet to get any.  All the ones I have actually burn with greater tailcap amps in at least the light I compared them to using Xtar and Hi-Max batteries.  now that don't mean much.  But like I said, for the money and time will tell how many charges they will take and hold a charge with out losing much of their overall capacity, one has got to say they are a very good deal for the price.  Maybe one of the best deals out there. 

Hikelite
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 27 min ago
Joined: 07/13/2011 - 16:18
Posts: 3835
Location: RO

ILIKEFLASHLIGHTS wrote:

All the ones I have actually burn with greater tailcap amps in at least the light I compared them to using Xtar and Hi-Max batteries.  now that don't mean much.

That can also mean resistance. Not that the flashlight is brighter. Those higher amps in any situation will mean less runtime, even if it's a direct drive. Also it depends what that specific driver is capable of.

 

 

2100
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 weeks ago
Joined: 05/28/2011 - 10:28
Posts: 4512
Location: SINGAPORE

ILIKEFLASHLIGHTS wrote:

That's been my whole point.  I have heard of fake flames, but I have yet to get any.  All the ones I have actually burn with greater tailcap amps in at least the light I compared them to using Xtar and Hi-Max batteries.  now that don't mean much.  But like I said, for the money and time will tell how many charges they will take and hold a charge with out losing much of their overall capacity, one has got to say they are a very good deal for the price.  Maybe one of the best deals out there. 

Well for $10.70 shipped, the TF Flames are merely average...ok.  The XTAR 2600s are very strong contenders.

But at 6.71 shipped @ DD, they are very good to use esp on current regulated lights (2 x 18650 esp) in which seriously speaking you won't see no diff 99.98% of the time .  And if you participated in the DD group buys then you can use those 50 dino points (50 cents) on them.   A bit regret now that i did not get more. 

But if you put safety first as absolutely top priority and you don't regularly measure your cells, then the XTARs probably give more confidence.

yavi
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 7 months ago
Joined: 09/01/2011 - 12:24
Posts: 720
Location: Spain

I have ordered these ones:

 

http://www.intl-outdoor.com/panasonic-ncr18650a-3100mah-liion-battery-p-...

 

They are the same Panasonic NCR18650A as t he redilast 3100mAh, I asked the seller, and the protection circuit is also designed to give up to 6A.

I do not know if anyone else has bought these batteries, as I do not have any good charger to check their performance.

benckie
benckie's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 7 months ago
Joined: 07/04/2011 - 08:36
Posts: 1513
Location: Western Austraila

Regarding the DD flames drawing better current draws, there is another way of thinking, I have ultrfires that draw higher then my flames from manafont but it does not mean the ultrafires are better the ultrafires suffer bad from voltage sag, they can not supply the volts so the current goes up not to mention they takes less then half the claimed mAh, so since my flames suffer less from voltage sag take the claimed mAh they are the better battery even with lower tail cap readings, most torches you will notices as the volts go down the amps go up unless they are truly regulated, so if the DD flames might not be better or they could be better, we need some one to test a few for true mAh, internal resistance and so on.....

benckie
benckie's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 7 months ago
Joined: 07/04/2011 - 08:36
Posts: 1513
Location: Western Austraila
I brought some redilast 2600 last night to try out, I didn't get the 2900 or 3100 because of the 2.5v bolt cut off as in my regulated lights I might not be able to use 100% of the capacity and so they will be close to the mAh of some up and comming battery test I will do

Pages