Turnigy Nano-Tech 65C-130C 1800mAh 3S LiPo Pack Bench Test Results...preposterously overrated

[Mooch]

To prevent any confusion with the eGo-type "batteries", I use the term "cell" here to refer to a single 18350, 18650, 26650, LiPo pouch, etc.

While the test results are hard data, the conclusions and recommendations I make based on these tests are only my personal opinion based on my criteria for setting a rating. Carefully research any cell you are considering using before purchasing.

Testing cells or packs at their limits is dangerous and should never, ever, be attempted by anyone who has not thoroughly studied the dangers involved and how to minimize them.

If the cell or pack has only one current rating number on it, or if it says "max", then I have to assume that the company is stating that the cell can be discharged at that current level in any way, including continuously.




Bottom Line
This Turnigy Nano-Tech is a decent performing pack but is absurdly overrated.

Discharging this pack at its 117A (65C) continuous current rating would quickly bring the voltage down to about 9V and quickly heat it up past Turnigy's max temperature rating, causing the pack to permanently puff and be damaged. It can't even be considered a 65C pulse-rated pack. Its 130C (234A) "pulse" rating is ridiculous. The fusing current rating for 12AWG wire, where it melts in a few seconds, is 217A. Pulsing this pack at its 234A rating can easily heat the wiring and connections up to several hundred degrees. Long pulses would melt the copper wiring.

Any decent pack can be pulsed for very, very short time periods at these crazy high current levels but that doesn't make those discharge current levels a rating. It's just a capability of the pack. Without knowing the length of the pulse, how often you can do it (its duty cycle), and the criteria used to set the rating (voltage? temperature? run time? cycle life?) these numbers are useless. They can't be used to compare any pack against any other.

It's shame that Turnigy felt the need to exaggerate the rating of this pack so badly as it's a decent performing pack.

CAUTION: LiPo's use the most volatile of the Li-Ion battery chemistries and can cause extreme injury if abused. Never use a LiPo unless the cells, wraps, wiring, and connector are in perfect condition. Never exceed the CDR of the LiPo unless you understand and accept the risks involved. You are responsible for your own safety, be careful!


My Ratings
Capacity = 1800mAh
Continuous Discharge Rating (CDR) = 35A (19C)
Average Pack IR = 16.5mOhms
Average Cell IR = 3.8mOhms
Dimensions/Weight = 104 x 34 x 25mm/ 176gms

IR = Internal Resistance
mOhms = milliohms


Continuous-Current Test Results



Pulse-Current Test Results



Comments
CDR = Continuous Discharge Rating. The nearest 5A-multiple of constant-current continuous discharge current that brings the inner cell of a 3S pack to a temperature of 60°C. This is what the LiPo assemblers recommend as the max running temperature so it makes sense to use it as the rating. Especially since the inner cell will be hotter internally than this temperature, perhaps considerably.


Links
LiPo ratings table: LiPo Pack Safety Grades and Performance Table | E-Cigarette Forum

To see how other packs and cells have tested and how hard you can safely push them, check out these links: List of Battery Tests | E-Cigarette Forum

 

[pineappledan]

This was a battery I was looking foreward to seeing because I was planning on using it(and still do for the time being, but also to try to get a hard comparison between your results and this:Battery Shootout.xlsx - Microsoft Excel Online

I found this test and wanted to see how valid his results were, as it's the only multiple lipo testing I found in my research. A video of his testing is here:

And even though it's an apples to oranges comparison as far as usage goes, I think there's comparable data collected on this battery.

If you feel these links should not be here for any reason, let me know and I'll take them down.
Thanks for the testing mooch, I look foreward to the rest of the results!

 

[Mooch]

This was a battery I was looking foreward to seeing because I was planning on using it(and still do for the time being, but also to try to get a hard comparison between your results and this:Battery Shootout.xlsx - Microsoft Excel Online

I found this test and wanted to see how valid his results were, as it's the only multiple lipo testing I found in my research. A video of his testing is here:

And even though it's an apples to oranges comparison as far as usage goes, I think there's comparable data collected on this battery.

If you feel these links should not be here for any reason, let me know and I'll take them down.
Thanks for the testing mooch, I look foreward to the rest of the results!

Whoa...almost two hours? Won't have time to check that out.
If he's not measuring temperature then he is only measuring performance (voltage, wattage, etc.) and not setting any kind of ratings for safety or cycle life.

This is a perfectly valid way to test if you're just looking for the best performing pack without regard for cycle life, pack damage, or perhaps safety (depending on how hot he lets them get). If his testing methodology is consistent and repeatable then you can compare one pack's performance to another's without dealing with ratings (if they're not important to you).

 

[pineappledan]

Whoa...almost two hours? Won't have time to check that out.
If he's not measuring temperature then he is only measuring performance (voltage, wattage, etc.) and not setting any kind of ratings for safety or cycle life.

This is a perfectly valid way to test if you're just looking for the best performing pack without regard for cycle life, pack damage, or perhaps safety (depending on how hot he lets them get). If his testing methodology is consistent and repeatable then you can compare one pack's performance to another's without dealing with ratings (if they're not important to you).

yup, he's definitely not taking it as far in depth as you. He did take temps with infrared(colomb BA), and got between 103f and as high as 142f
a big key difference was that his testing was stopped based on voltage sag, not temps.
anyways, figured I'd share, thanks again!

 

[Mooch]

yup, he's definitely not taking it as far in depth as you. He did take temps with infrared(colomb BA), and got between 103f and as high as 142f
a big key difference was that his testing was stopped based on voltage sag, not temps.
anyways, figured I'd share, thanks again!

Thanks!
Yowch....at 142°F (external) the inside temperature is above the max limit the pack assemblers set. He probably got some fairly high current ratings that way.