When I unwrapped my epoch 2600mah 8A battery I found this underneath. When I looked it up online I got this information from keepower website. I’m pretty sure they are the same battery. However the amps are different. Epoch claims 8A and Eve says 7.5A, am I reading this right?
● Model: ICR18650/26V
● Typical Capacity: 2600mAh
● Minimum Capacity: 2450mAh
● Nominal Voltage: 3.6V
● Charging Method: CC-CV
● Charging Voltage: 4.20V
● Standard Charging Current: 500mA
● Standard Charging Time: 5.5 hours
● Discharging Cut-off Voltage: 2.5V
● Continuous Standard Discharge Current: 500mA
● Continuous Maximum Discharge Current: 7500mA
● Weight: 45±2.0g
● Size: D-18.30±0.20mm, L-65.05±0.20mm
● Operating Temperature
Charge: 0 to +50° C
Discharge: -20 to +60° C
I agree with you. I just wanted to make sure that I was reading it right. Though it does make me wonder why they would change it, especially with the correct information under the wrap.
Two questions. Can you take the stuff off that makes a battery a protected battery and use it as an unprotected battery?
Second question. Do you have a Sig Sauer rifle? I ask because of your username. I just bought a Sig Sauer 7.62 with a leupold scope at an auction last month.
Agreed, and technically when someone says “N” without a decimal dot, it means “N +/- 0.5” so it’s not even cheating.
What would worry me more is the “ICR” prefix in the model number inside the wrapper: if that’s indeed the chemistry it’s based on, it’s by far the more dangerous one. IMR is much safer, and INR almost as much as IMR but with better energy density: Exploring the Differences Between IMR, ICR, and INR 18650 Batteries - Deals1 Promo
Nowadays I try and buy only INR batteries.
@ToddZiegler1024 thanks for the exposé, I was considering Epoch batteries a while ago, now they’re definitely off my list.
I’ve taken the protection circuit off of a number of protected batteries and it’s a straightforward procedure. Just take your time so as not to short out the battery.
Don’t have any Sig Sauer rifles but I have a number of Sig handguns. I did think about getting a Sig Sauer rifle at 1 time but I don’t shoot my rifles very often so I never pulled on the trigger on getting one (pun intended ).
I paid a $1,000 for the rifle and scope. The guy who owned the rifle only fired for 3 rounds from it, just to make sure it was good. I looked up the rifle & scope and it was around $1,800 new for both. I got a good deal. Considering how much the other rifles, shotguns and ammunition was bringing.
Sounds like a pretty decent deal. Hopefully you reload given the price of ammo these days . Plus of course you can also tune the rounds for your rifle.
I have a number of 45ACP, 9mm, 40 S&W, and 38/357 handguns in my safe. Plus of course the assorted shotguns and 5.56mm rifles.
Luckily I have lots of reloading components, enough to last me the rest of my life I think
We don’t reload. The sold 3 complete reloaders at the auction but they brought just 10% less of what a new setup would be. But we bought 500 rounds that day and they were not cheap.
Just out of curiosity, wouldn’t that ammo have gone bad by now? I’m in no way a gun expert, but I remember from my time in the army the word was to use ammo before 5 years since manufacture date, 10 years at the latest. Black powder is hygroscopic and it’s going to suck humidity from the air no matter what, sealants and dry place storage will slow it down but if there’s one thing we don’t want with semi- or automated weapons is a dud requiring manual ejection in the middle of a gunfight…
This was a long time ago, so perhaps ammo is more resistant to that nowadays?
In this case, given what I’m seeing, it is the difference in the wording / terminology that I focus on as much as or more than the absolute numeric values.
In your OP:
● Continuous Standard Discharge Current: 500mA
● Continuous Maximum Discharge Current: 7500m
Note that in the specs in Sig’s post, the specification is:
“Standard Discharge”, and “Max Intantaneous Discharge”.
‘Standard / Normal’, and ‘Maximum’ are terms often used in such specs.
“Continuous”, and “Instantaneous / Pulse” are also terms (even more) often used.
The latter 2 involve timing / duty cycle (expressed / defined or implied) while the first 2 do not.
That mix of terms between the 2 sources makes it difficult / impossible for me to accurately interpret the numbers, or account for the small numeric discrepancy. The 2 sources could be intending the same thing, but the differing terms used means there could be some apple/orange element implied. Can’t say, but the numeric difference is small enough that in this case, it may be practically negligible, even if the terminology is inconsistent(?).
It would be nice if everyone used common terms in such specs, but that’s not always the case.
In my experience modern ammo will last for decades if not more if stored properly (moderate temperatures, dry storage, etc). I know some people who are still shooting WW2 ammo without any issues. Don’t know if they’re primed with corrosive primers or not.
I recently shot 300 rounds of 38spl’s that I reloaded in 1988 and all fired fine. The military and other people who need the upmost reliability in ammo definitely rotate their ammo on a prescribed cycle, but I’m not at much risk of being attacked by paper targets or clay birds if the round doesn’t go off
I normally load my semi-auto rounds light (less wear & tear on the guns, more bang for the bucks, etc) and I haven’t experienced any malfunctions that would indicate the rounds have degraded.
I should chronograph my rounds but I don’t have one handy anymore
Here’s a link to a NRA article that talks about old ammo (note that you have to enter you DOB to access the article).
A post by a guy named “Tiger”(??) on a website called “deals1.promo” probably isn’t a reliable source
ICR isn’t a chemistry, INR and IMR aren’t a chemistry.
Theyre just codes manufacturers came up with to designate a series of products. Like a model number. It’s not standardized, it’s definitely not regulated, any battery can say ICR, any battery can say INR, it doesn’t mean anything. But many years ago the internet decided they they did and now they are associated with certain chemistries.
They are not necessarily going to be these chemistries, again, theyre not standardized or regulated they have no real meaning.
Despite that, ICR is associated with LCO, a lithium cobalt oxide cathode, probably because cobalt starts with “c”, even though they all have cobalt.
INR is associated with nickel, because “N”, even though there are no lithium nickel oxide batteries. But it is used in NMC, lithium nickel manganese cobalt, and NCA, lithium nickel cobalt aluminum. So INR is associated with those.
IMR is also associated with NMC. There are LMO batteries but those are coin cells and lithium primaries. So I guess it’s supposed to be NMC. Kinda silly because NMC can be more LMO or more LCO. Sometimes used with LCO, you’ll see cells called LCO+NMC blended cathodes. Not sure how that works or at what ratios.
IMR is the most meaningless of all. It’s entirely a marketing term. And one that went out of style years ago. I don’t believe any major manufacturers even use it.
Because the ratios of nickel, cobalt, manganese and/or aluminum vary with NCA and NMC different combinations have different properties and don’t necessarily mean they’re safer, they can be anything.
And it’s not really even clear which is safer. We’re trending away from cobalt because it’s expensive. Theres too many variables to say one is universally safer than another. There are studies that have NCA going into thermal runaway the most often or at the lowest temperature or lowest overcharge, others show NMC or LCO does. Theres been NCA cells that go into thermal runaway with the slightest overcharge. Others that show NMC has more thermal runaway events than LCO.
There’s a lot of variables at play. One chemistry isn’t universally safer than another. There’s other factors to consider. Whether they wrote ICR, INR, or IMR on the wrap isnt one of those factors.
Agreed. I should have been more careful and supplied a more credible reference; here’s another one, from a company website that calls itself “Guangxi Donglai New Energy Technology Co. Ltd”, no author mentioned (so probably “corporate” material, FWIW) and dated just 3 days ago (again FWIW); It says basically the same thing as the reference I’ve posted previously, which I’ve actually read before in other places.
In fact, googling for "icr imr inr batteries" indeed seems to bring many similar pages up, all stating basically the same thing (ie, ICR is unsafe but has best capacity and price, IMR is better because it’s safest but has less capacity and worse price, and INR is best because of good safety and capacity even if still more expensive than ICR). So it could all be false or irrelevant info, but it’s what I’ve heard until now.
As per the rest of your post, well, thanks for explaining it so thoroughly. I think I understand the gist of it, ie that the acronyms ICR, IMR and INR mean next to nothing even when applied by the manufacturers themselves, due to the varied reasons you exposed. But I’m not sure I agree with you, as for one think you didn’t provide any references; I’m sure it’s not all your original research (which is when references wouldn’t make sense) as you at one point say “there are studies”, but do not indicate them. And without references, then (with all due respect) we’re in an even worse situation than the “Tiger” page I originally referenced to, because the info on that page at least has corroboration (ie, many other pages stating basically the same thing).
Please don’t get me wrong, I’m not criticizing (much less attacking) you in any way, shape or form; my interest is just to find out the truth of the matter. It’s just that the information you provided is in total opposition to everything I thought I knew, and so I’m naturally a bit skeptical and would be grateful if you could supply at least a few references supporting the claims you made.
Thanks in advance if you do, but no problem at all if you don’t, as of course not everyone has the time or the patience, and it’s definitely not your job to instruct me or anyone, and I’m already thankful for what you’ve provided.
There were around 5,000 rounds of shotgun shells, mostly for clay pigeons, around 500 rounds 9mm, 500 rounds of .45’s, 300 rounds .308, 200 rounds .3030 and they were all at least 2 years old with some of shotgun shells being 4 years old and it was all selling at just 5%-10% less than brand new ammo.
Me and my dad were the auctioneers and we sold everything in this guy’s house in 2 separate auctions. Everything in the house including a 2 year old fully equipped fishing boat and 2 year old car brought $25,000 and it took 4 hours to sell it all.
The gun and ammo auction took 2 hours and totaled $32,000. We sold 2 shotguns and one brought $6,000 and the other $3,000. Everything was used or reloads except for the 7.62 but it didn’t matter at all that day.
Nice that you can sell guns & ammo in auctions. Does the buyer need the actual transfer done by a FFL or licensed ammunition vendor? In Calif guns (other than antiques) have to go through a FFL. It’s crazy that ammo has to go through a license vendor and what that has done is to drive up prices since on-line sales have to go to a FFL/vendor who usually charges a fee.
I’d be REALLY reluctant buying reloaded ammo unless I knew the person loading them. One never knows if the powder amount is within specs, the cases aren’t to worn out, etc.
It’s pretty amazing what firearms and ammo goes for these days. I probably have > $30k in guns and ammo. I told one of my kids that when I die not to just toss the ammo and components. Given that I’m 71 and have prostate & lung cancer I should probably start selling more stuff.
This guy was one of the best competition skeet shooters in the state and nationaly. He was a retired navy officer who had something to do with munitions in the navy. Anyone who knew him, trusted his reloads. I think that is why his reloads sold so well.
The laws have changed in Indiana. We used to have to run all sales through a licensed gun seller but last year the legislature changed that and the only thing we had to verify was that they were 18 years old.
).
. Plus of course you can also tune the rounds for your rifle.
