But Gerald, that is not what I was attempting to do; compare two that were very similar. I don’t mind that the test was not fair in that sense.The Tenergys cost 62% of the cost of Eneloops. I would have to find that Eneloops have longer run times to justify that difference. So far I have not determined that, and until I or someone else proves that, I will prefer Tenergy.
I do not question the quality of Eneloops, but have not been persuaded that they out perform the Tenergys. I don’t really care if the Eneloops will last 10 years and the Tenergys 6 years.
After I check them in a week, and then a month without recharging them I might find that the Eneloops are worth the difference in cost, but until then I will stick by my opinion that Tenergy gives more bang for the buck.
Also it makes no difference to me what they do at xx amps draw, but how do they perform in my lights, etc. I have no idea what my lights draw. I wouldn’t mind knowing, but do not know how to find out. I do not know the technicalities that are used to prove what is the best. However, I can measure how long a battery last in my lights.
Interestingly I like the Tank 007 e09 and usually carry that. But I have found that the Fenix LD01 burns 50% longer than the Tank. The difference in light output is not obvious to me.
But why bother to compare them if they are not both LSD? The comparison is meaningless. They are designed for different purposes.
If you don’t need LSD you would not need eneloop so why compare them?
If you need LSD, compare the eneloop to the tenergy LSD which are also a fraction of the eneloop price.
The tests were all done long before you showed up. LSD cells are well known to have lower capacity hot off the charger. They continue to exist and remain popular because of their ability to retain that energy. All of this stuff has been tested. You don’t need to generate test results for anyone but yourself! I linked you to a pretty comprehensive post from SilverFox showing the retention of early Eneloops vs standard NiMH at 0.7%/day (which is also test data from another SilverFox thread). Just because you choose not to look at the graphs doesn’t mean they aren’t there. So that testing is done. The test you did because of “why not” is also old news. HKJ tests plenty of cells (so do others, some test many more AA’s than HKJ). HKJ’s AA data is available here: http://lygte-info.dk/review/batteries2012/CommonAAcomparator.php You’ll have to look around if you want other folks’ data.
Again, the fact that standard NiMH can store more energy temporarily with a fresh charge is not relevant for most people. I/we/you don’t do regular nighttime patrols with AA lights. I don’t run my AA’s down. Anyone who does irregular cycles spaced weeks/months apart needs LSD… Done.
Really the only reason I’m sticking with this issue is in case you somehow accidentally convince someone else who actually cares - it seems to me that you don’t (you didn’t follow the test link and continued to claim an absence of test data) and that’s fine! It’s fine not to care about a handful of AA batteries and how they perform. Running a valid test on them and then badly interpreting that data on a flashlight forum will get you responses like this.
There is certainly no malice on my part. But you folks seem not to understand that I care not a whit about the technicalities. I want to know how Tenergy compares with eneloop batteries for my use and at what cost. Is that so difficult?
I drive a Toyota instead of a Cadillac or Mercedes because it suits my purpose. It is well that it cost less, but that is not the primary reason I drive a Toyota.
Now you have told me that eneloop is much better in the long term than Tenergy regardless of the cost differential. But you have offered no evidence by run tests that what you say is true.
I did not do my test to prove Tenergy is better or as good as eneloop, and have no thought that it is. But is the eneloop enough better to justify the cost differential. All you have done is say it is, but where are tests to establish your view. That is all I want.
I have been involved in much R&D of missiles including defensive missiles. While I am not an expert on anything I am not totally ignorant of methodology and specifications. But to get the truth one needs proof by tests. Now my idea in testing the two was only to see what suited me as to cost and performance.
You have only been critical without showing one test that establishes that eneloop will run enough longer in a flashlight to justify the cost or will that the life span of Tenergy batteries is so short as to pay more for eneloops. Understand that I will never cycle a battery over 200 times so if it does not go for 1600 cycles I don’t care.
Have you access to any test that establishes the number of cycles of Tenergy batteries. If so show me. I am not wedded to
Tenergy, and did not think of them until the thread was started.
Please get off your high horse about eneloops being so much better than Tenergy without proof. And unless the technical data includes Tenergy and eneloops, and establishes the life of each, don’t bother.
Why do you keep bringing up cycle count? (and how you don’t care about cycle count because you don’t do many cycles.) You must be misinterpreting someone. No one else is discussing cycle count. If you don’t care then that’s good, because we aren’t talking about it. Please stop bringing up cycle count.
Did you look over the SilverFox data or not? Yes or No answer.
Hi Wight,
Cycle count was a point in the discussion, and I was not the one who mentioned it first.
Here is what I want to know.
Battery cost.
Run times for my applications-in this case it is flashlights. I don’t care if I am mixing apples and oranges. I am starving and I want the one that will keep me going longer.
Life of the battery-This is not a big issue, but obviously if it fails after 5 cycles that would not be satisfactory, while 100 would be more than enough for me. Tenergy claims 1,000 cycles and eneloop claims 2100 cycles. Either will be many times more than I will need.
How long can one sit on the shelf without losing some % of voltage. So far I have not had a problem with finding a battery that will not operate satisfactorily. I do have some I am going to test in a week and then a month as has been suggested. LSD might be a factor , but I doubt it for my use.
Yes, I did look at the data. It is excellent and would be meaningful if I were trying to find a battery for some application I were designing. But it does not answer the questions above.
Whether eneloop is the superior battery for my application or not does not really matter, but eneloop is about to price itself out of competition unless there is no good alternative. That is what I am trying to find out for my use. I probably have more batteries (most are eneloops) than I will ever use. This is just a fun exercise.
Hank, I forget whether we used eneloop, Tenergy or EBL. But we would only select one after thorough testing. Hopefully some contractor who had political connections would not force us to use eneloops whether or not they were the best, and whether we could afford them. :bigsmile:
My knowledge of flashlights, batteries, and the thing we discuss is minute compared to yours. I recognize that, but I can measure how long a battery burns in my lights, and in time how long it lasts until discarded, and what it costs. I have some Panasonics I bought at least 10 years ago when I was into Ham Radio. I am surprised they still are good. They only charge to about 1.37 Volts. I also bought some Sanyo, but only one is left. The others finally failed to take a charge.
I apologize if my last post was warmer than necessary, and it was.
Following a suggestion I tried a Tenergy and an eneloop after one month after charging. Using a Sipik 68 clone in high mode here are the results. I used a 5 lm light to determine when I would find the battery discharged enough so that it was not usable to me.
Tenergy Premium lasted 2 hrs 5 min.
Eneloop 1 hr 58 min
FWIW a Tenergy Centura that had not been recharged for a month lasted 2 hrs 26 min. On balance the Centura appears to be the best choice for me as it does not discharge as quickly as the Premium.
Jerry
Good info. The performance of the Centura cell is surprising to me. How much more do you get out of that with a fresh charge? The Centura’s one-month-rested-performance seems very close to the fresh Tenergy Premium. (The Tenergy Premium is rated for 25% more capacity than the Centura, right?)
It seems that the Eneloop did not lose any charge at all vs your original test. Is 5lm a lower endpoint for this test than the original test?
Originally I let the light run until it was in a “moon mode. However that took longer than I wanted to wait sometimes. As a result I decided to compare it with an old ARC light which I think was 5 lm.
Yes, the Premium is rated as higher capacity, but it has not worked out that way. I realize the number of batteries used is statistically insignificant, but I did not want to take the time make it a big production.
Actually the eneloop fared better in the second, after 1 month, test. I suspect that the difference is within the tolerance between batteries. When checking the voltage of the batteries the eneloop does not lose as much as the Tenergy Premium. The eneloops freshly charged have a higher voltage than the Tenergys. The eneloops end up charged to as much as 1.44 volts compared to the Tenergy mostly at or below below 1.4 volts. I am interested in how the Centura will do over time.
I suspect the newer eneloops will do better, but I don’t want to pay $4 per battery. I am going to buy off eBay some of the Ion Core Duracells. I have a bid for a lot of 20, but i expect to get outbid. However, there are “buy now” auctions that are $2.00 each for the Duracells. Assuming that they are Eneloop XX clones, that seems to be a good buy.
I had thought the Tenergy Blue batteries had a greater capacity than the Premiums, but the few I have used have not proven that to be correct.
Ebay has auctions for Enegizers at about the same price as the Duracells. Upon my query as to where they were manufactured, one seller replied, “Made in Japan. For ENERGIZER Holdings, INC. St. Louis, MO” I do not know who did manufacture them so whether they are as good as the Duracells or not.
Please stop talking about EBLs... if even NLee thinks they aren`t recommendable, then that must be a clear sign for some.
EBL do not live up to their exectation.. From the (probably) 8 batteries NLee had, already 1 died within a month! Plus they couldnt keep up to their discharge claim....
I would be very disappointed if anyone would actually recommend them to me.
If you want charts and graphs you have the wrong guy.
After going through the break in cycle on the opus 3100 the 16 2800 EBL’s drained avg 2750. The 24 blue tenergy 2600 came up short, 16 between 2100 and 1900, 4 between 1600 and 1200, & 4 at 2300.
the 2tone blue tenergy aa 2600 i had were poor too.
highest was around 2150 and HSD!!!
as in 2 weeks and useless.they were new when i got them and were charged/tested on a c9000.
and the on site reviews are not to be relied on either as my review was never posted.i suppose no negatives will ever be.
however the tenergy premium c and d have been fine.
