I’m looking at this battery on eBay:
Does that price look too good to be a healthy battery?
That’s the one I have. Cells look fine.
Same ones I bought 6 of, from the same seller.
cancels FastTech order, logs back into evilbay
Thanks for the affirmation guys. 
What's a safe charge rate for these? Hobby charger will do a max of 7A. Doing 4 at a time in parallel at 4A is gonna take thirty forevers, I have 36 of em to do!
I didn't make a note of the time/mAh of the first set of 4, but currently the second batch of 4 cells after 2h45m has only dropped from 4A at the start down to 1.3A, and taken 8300mAh. There's probably another hour to go... This initial charge takes a whole lot longer than a full charge after they've been drained down to 3v in a light.
edit: Here's the .pdf, in case anybody else went looking for it on Samsung's site and found nothing of the sort exists there, they're too busy wanking about projecting efficient management synergy and that Six Sigma BS to worry about things like technical info related to their products:
Well comfy, I think you’re right. Something is wrong with the date code instructions. So now BOTH Panasonic’s and Samsung’s date code explanations have turned out to be wrong.
I don’t have any 15q cells, but I do have 13q cells, and the date code works for those. Ditto for 3000, 2600 and 2400 Samsung cells, or atleast the ones I tried. (Although who knows if the translation is correct however.) But checking through all my batteries, I found some 2200 Samsungs and those date codes can’t be translated using the formula. The first line is “H59C,” so since “C” is not a number. it can’t be translated.
So much for Samsung’s date translation instructions. Ugggghhh. Glad I spent a couple hours for nothing figuring it out.
But on the good side — on the amazing side actually — here’s a reason for ALL BLFers to consider using Samsung batterys +IF+ I’m reading this correctly.
From the pdf comfy discovered … If this is true, man this is impressive:
9. Safety
9.1 Overcharge Test
Test method: To charge the standard charged cell with 12V and 2.8A at 25℃
for 2.5 hours.
Criteria: No fire, and no explosion.
9.2 External Short-circuit Test
Test method: To short-circuit the standard charged cell by connecting positive and
negative terminal by less than 50mΩ wire for 3hours.
Criteria: No fire, and no explosion.
9.3 Reverse Charge Test
Test method: To charge the standard charged cell with charge current 2.8A
By –12V for 2.5 hours.
Criteria: No fire, and no explosion.
9.4 Heating Test
Test method: To heat up the standard charged cell at heating rate 5℃ per minute up to
130℃ and keep the cell in oven for 60 minutes.
Criteria: No fire, and no explosion.
Of course, these torture tests were probably done in the open air and the cell probably did vent in some way, which means if it was sealed in an aluminum tube (i.e., a flashlight), an explosion probably still will have resulted. However, if manufacturers installed some fail-safe vent in flashlights (won’t happen), they actually could be made safe!
Still, 9.2 is pretty amazing if true.
>>>>>This is an HP MU06…it says “10.8v – 4200mAh” what’s in there?
Depends on the number of cells. Someone who knows more about the mah division should be answering this.
BUT my guess would be 2200mah cells, which there is nothing wrong with BTW for 2.8a or less lights. Or at least they work fine for me in some of my lights that don’t have high-amp drivers. Some 2200 cells are rated at 2125 (2x2100=4200), so that’s why I’m guessing 2200mah, but I could be way wrong.
Could also be 1300 or 1500 cells. (10.8 divided by 3 = 3.6; 4200 divided by three = 1400.
Let us know what you find if you do open it.
Thanks for posting the data sheet. These cells appear to be extremely tolerant of some serious abuse and should be perfect for my bike light project.
I opened up 4 of the same packs and have the same results and observations as you. They literally took less than a minute to extract the cells from the packs and another minute to carefully separate them. Super easy, and what a relief! Im charging them to 4.3V now and will observe how they hold a charge before building a 24P pack. The tabs eliminate so much of the hassle and worry of soldering directly to the cell casing and will make this an easy project. Considering the 2010 build dates, if I can get two seasons out of them I will be more than satisfied.
Thanks to Ubehebe for posting this deal and to all who contributed.
>>>>They literally took less than a minute to extract the cells from the packs and another minute to carefully separate
The white packs are very easy to pop open. The previous acer black-plastic packs — ahem — were a different story however. Not the most difficult but certainly not the easiest.
One member vowed he wouldn’t open a pack again after opening a black one.
Before the day that Acer acquired Texas Instruments (and far before the advent of LED flashlights) I used to tear open TI packs that were absolutely bulletproof. They could probably have survived a drop from 40 feet onto concrete and still worked. After tearing those things open, everything else seems super-easy by comparison.
I imagine drilling a hole or two in the PCB of the tailcap switch would suffice. It would need some creativity but theoretically one could engineer a vent into almost all flashlights and still have a waterproof body by leaving the tailcap boot as the weak link. (This comes from examining my TF X9’s tailcap structure, YMMV.
That must be me. You guys should give me a medal, equivalent to a purple heart, for a nasty cut and a pin prick. The cells also went thru ‘trauma’ and a couple of them bear the nasty wounds. The terminals show scraping marks and as a consequence they don’t look anything like new ones. Also I have only a 2-cell 600mA total output charger which takes well over 16 hours to charge 2 cells. Anyway now I have more 18650s I don’t know what to do with.
>>>>>for a nasty cut and a pin prick
Every time I said “I don’t need gloves to pry this open,” I slipped and gouged myself. One time was really bad. I should have gone to the hospital for stitches. Took a month to heal.
Now I ALWAYS wear gloves whenever I stick a finger inside one of those packs to snap it open. That plastic ends up being razor sharp whenyou tear pieces off the pack.
>>>>>Also I have only a 2-cell 600mA total output charger which takes well over 16 hours to charge 2 cells
Intellicharger takes about 8 hours, give or take, to bring ’em up from 2.8 or so. Once they have been charged, they come back much quicker. I think they must get the equivalent of “stale” until you charge ’em a few times, if they have been sitting around for a year or so.
The older compaq packs are the worst. The plastic is like an 1/8” thick and it’s like tearing steel.
Wear your wounds with pride!
Oh, I haven't seen this stated here yet but by the datasheet these 28As are 4.3v, not 4.35v.
I got the batteries out of there!!! They are indeed Samsung 2200s! 4 of them read 4.05v and 2 of them read 4.15v….is this good, bad, or ugly?!! 
Easy for you to say that :bigsmile:
My blood and your pride ?!
FYI, I used gloves! 
They look better than this now, but the wrappers got damaged a bit.
>>>>They look better than this now, but the wrappers got damaged a bit.
Hey good find!! You can buy 18650 shrink tube on flea bay, the clear stuff. Will cover up most nicks. Fasttech also has some but I think it costs more.
I have 6 of those 2200s, the green samsungs, and they work in every light I have, just get dim kinda fast in a DD or 4-amper. But with a 2.8 driver or below, they work fine for me for around the house. I mean everyone would rather have 2800s or 3000s, but who can argue with 6 free batteries? Sure beats 1500mah tool batteries!
Can’t beat the voltage they had. That either means they work great or don’t hold a charge at all. Just try em out and see what happens.
I dunno, I have some 1500s that came from a tool pack, the INR 15Qs... good for dragsters, they push .6A more into the same load compared to the ICRs. A small light running at 4.5 amps will set your hand on fire before the battery goes flat. :p