LR vs LR

[buGG]

I got the specs for it from BB over at COV that's carrying this BDL IMR 10440...of course there were no specs listed on his site...I asked him in the thread here and those were the numbers he gave me... http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/clouds-vapor/104960-battery-talk-thread-cov-3.html posts 25 and 26

thanks, i just took a look at them. are you sure these are BDL though, wouldn't doubt it, but there's other shoddy alibaba battery sources that would make these too. but why do the specs say 300mAh and the actual battery say 350mAh?

yeah the specs from Andrew at AW on the 14500 AND the 16340 did change slightly from when they were first released.... they're BOTH listed now as 4A continuous discharge...
if we work the max drain rate problem backwards to solve for C there's just a slight difference...
if mAh * Crate = max drain rate in mA...

the 14500.... 4000mA / 600mAh = 6.66666667 C
the 16340.... 4000mA / 550mAh = 7.272727273 C

IMR16340 / IMR18500 / IMR18650 / IMR26500 *Part 2* - CPFMarketPlace



several places including lighthound list them at 8C... the wierd thing is that at first they had them listed at 4A continuous discharge and didn't give a C rating... I'm clueless as to why they changed it to what seems to be an inaccurate C rating... you think vendors would go by what the manufacturer specs are...

but yeah the BDL 14500ones I was told are 3C continuous and 5C "burst".... then again BDL isnt exactly known for their tight quality control or accuracy with their specs either...their new high drain 10440s are a prime example of the spec wierdness ...check this out:
Item IMR10440
Capacity（0.2C 5A） 300 mAh
Max charge voltage 4.2V
Dischage cut voltage 2.75V
MAX CHARGE CURRENT 0.5C 5A
max continue discharge current 1C 5A
MAX burst discharge current 3C 5A


they are close...like the specs from andrew are now...they're BOTH listed as a max 4A continuous discharge... the difference being that the 14500 are 600 mAh and the 16340 being 550 mAh

the specs are all messed up with these cells. i know you guys have been saying this, post after post, but really this is just silly. these little cells are 5A, but their 14500s are only 1.8A? the whole thing is messed up, and it's because you can't rely on even a ballpark accuracy of two out of the three figures needed to do the math and therefore you can't believe anything about them. if they had a charge/discharge rating of 1C and Amp flow of 5A then they should demonstrate 5 Amp hours, or 5000 mAh. if you take the 5A and 300 mAh spec provided and do the math it's got a 16.7C charge/discharge rate. if you take the 1C and 300mAh specs provided and do the math that way it's only got .3A. either it's a super hero battery or it's another brushfire 10440. but because you can't trust the mAh, the Amp flow or the C rate, you can't do any of the math with even a semblance of veracity.

i think if the demand picks up, AW will build them, and the best that 10440 users can probably hope for is a realistic 250 mAh, 1.5A, 6C IMR cell. even that might be a stretch, but there really is only so much that you can do with that chemistry and with a cell that size.

 

[Switched]

*SNIP
i think if the demand picks up, AW will build them, and the best that 10440 users can probably hope for is a realistic 250 mAh, 1.5A, 6C IMR cell. even that might be a stretch, but there really is only so much that you can do with that chemistry and with a cell that size.

In all candor, regurgitating previously posted information in this thread will only lead to more confusion IMHO. As we know there is enough of that to go around. No....

If you have an inside with AW then I would strongly recommend you get the ball rolling for us. Yes the 10440 would be a hit. far toooooooo many people are vaping LRs on stock 10440 batteries. I know several P10 (Precise 10440) vapers would kiss you if this could happen, not to mention folks that have hung up their 10440 devices for their lack lustre performance