Thank you
Indeed you are correct my good sir and the post has been amended accordingly.
I was using the terms interchangeably, which I have since come to the understanding that we cannot.
i was wrong as well. the stated difference in mAh should only be 50 between the AW IMR14500 and the 16340, which are 600mAh and 550 mAh respectively. consequently, while the stated amp flow was 4A on both cells, the charge/discharge value should be @6.7C on the 14500 and @7.3C on the 16340. the amp flow and drain rate, or C, tell us much the same thing or at least lead us in much the same direction, which is why i think they are used side by side, i.e. 4A/8C, etc., though as you've correctly noted they are not interchangeable in the equations.
The C rating is a tricky metric to get my head around. Max drain and mAh are conceptually easier. Although from this discussion, seems like the C rating can be useful to reason about how long a battery will last (although I still haven't quite got the concept of the C rating down).
Looking at the numbers, its clear the 18650 IMR is not required for delivering the power needed to vape. I guess some people still might prefer them for their more stable chemistry.
I haven't looked closely at the hi drain 10440s since I don't use them or intend to. Can they actually drive LR attys and keep within their specs? Just curious. From the inconsistent "specs" Drozd posted about BDLs 10440 IMR it looks like a "maybe"
you're right, and the C rate is the max drain rate, the A, or Amp rating is just a function of the Amp hours, or run time, multiplied by C, or maximum discharge rate. the big problem, and i think even AW is guilty here, is that the math rarely pans out. this is largely because we need two of the components to solve for the third, all of them dependent upon the other, and the one that is almost always given is the mAh which is usually inflated. as switched just noted in regards to the AW IMR18650, the the stated mAh is 1600, the drain rate is 10C. We should be able to multiply the 1.6 Amp hours by the drain rate of 10 and receive the Amps...the AW IMR 600 mAh 14500 should then exhibit a discharge rate of about 6.7C. but as drozd pointed out, the bdl specs cause confusion. on their website, they list the IMR14500 "electronic cigarette" battery as having a discharge rate of 3C and a mAh rating of 600, or .6 Amp hours. So the Amp flow rating for this cell should be 3(C) * .6(Ah), which equals 1.8A. a standard 2.3 Ohm 510 atty is already pulling 1.6A and a 1.5 Ohm LR would be pulling 2.4A. this cell is a joke, heck, the company is a joke, and the end user is not doing any justice to their atomizer or their vaping experience by using this cell.
I was unable to find a battery spec on it either. But, based on reasonably sound reasoning from "known data" I would have to say no. IMHO if the BDL 14500 doesn't make it, I doubt that the BDL 10440 would. IMHO that is the type of information we should not be seeing on a vendors site
i cannot find an IMR 10440 cell listed on the BDL homepage:
LiMn2O4 Cell Series direct from China (Mainland)
but i have no doubt that with an email to them, they will make this cell and any other for you in a heartbeat, if they haven't done so already. so, switched, when you say that based on the bdl specs for their IMR14500, that an IMR10440 from them would not fit the bill for LR atty usage, i agree...heck, i guarantee it. all of the IMR10440 batteries i've seen are listed at 350 mAh, or .35 Amp hours. if you need 3 Amps to pull off an LR atty effectively, then you're talking about a minimum 8.5C max drain rate for that cell. to give you an idea, that kind of drain rate doesn't come into play with AW's IMR cells until you reach the IMR18490 at 8C and the IMR18650 at 10C. LiFePO4 chemistry cells at 10C, no Li-Ion cells, as the 17670 (which is the entry point for Li-Ion with LR atties is only 2C/3.2A and the 2C/5.2A respectively. it's not that it can't be done, but it would be a hell of a feat and if it's done, AW, not BDL, will likely be the one to do it.
