What is the highest capacity 18350?

[Arnie H]

Does anyone know where I can get some ultra high capacity 18350's, decent quality?
I want something higher than 800 mAh.

Also what is the next step up in size/capacity?

Thanks.

 

[soba1]

Its 18350, 18490/500, and 18650.
U might want to consider charge cycles over mah rating.
Meaning a batt with 500 charge cycles will perform bettor ver a longer period
of time if you don't let your batts drain til they die that helps
make them last longer as well.

 

[zoiDman]

Does anyone know where I can get some ultra high capacity 18350's, decent quality?
I want something higher than 800 mAh.

Also what is the next step up in size/capacity?

Thanks.

I haven't seen any 18350's that had more than 800mAh.

Not saying that there might not be one, but I haven't seen it.

 

[Thin]

Does anyone know where I can get some ultra high capacity 18350's, decent quality?
I want something higher than 800 mAh.

Also what is the next step up in size/capacity?

The battery code is supposed to be it's dimensions...
18350 is 18mm by 35mm
18490 is 18mm by 49mm
18500 is 18mm by 50mm
18650 is 18mm by 65mm

Beware tho that the sizes vary, have a look around on fasttech.com site and you'll see that some of the big capacity 18650's are longer than 65mm, so might not fit in your mod.

edit...for a typo

 

[hazarada]

around 800 is the best you can hope for, some claim more but none of them are reputable companies and simply lie. Technically more is possible with current technology but 18350's arent that popular outside ecigs so there is little interest in developing them. You can find the best energy densities in 10440's, 14500's or 18650's

 

[soba1]

The battery code is supposed to be it's dimensions...
18350 is 18mm by 35mm
18490 is 18mm by 49mm
18500 is 18mm by 50mm
18650 is 18mm by 65mm

Beware tho that the sizes vary, have a look around on fasttech.com site and you'll see that some of the big capacity 18650's are longer than 65mm, so might not fit in your mod.

edit...for a typo

Was wondering about the 18490 and the 18500 difference..

 

[Rickajho]

Hmmm... RTD Vapor has an EFest protected 18350 listed as 900 mAh capacity. That's the highest I've seen in that form factor.

Batteries : Efest Protected 18350 900mAh

If considering that one check your dimensions. As standards go, with these batteries dimensions are a loose suggestion more than anything else. This particular "standard" size 18350 measures 37.2 mm long.

With any battery once you get past chemical composition, to a great degree mAh capacity comes down to physical size. There is only so much battery goo you can cram into any given size can. Have to move up in physical size if you need longer run times or higher mAh available current.

 

[Coastal Cowboy]

The only ones I've seen are ICR 350's with a 900mAh rating. They come from DKI, a Chinese manufacturer of unknown repute.

I wouldn't put ICR batteries in any device that didn't have redundant safety features and I'd only stack them if someone was holding a gun to my head. In that case, I'd stack in an unprotected mod, aim it at'em and mash the "FIRE!" button.

 

[dr g]

Label ratings are irrelevant, the actual discharged energy is highly dependent on how hard you draw on the battery. All available testing shows AW 18350s are currently the best as far as capacity under ecig use.

 

[Arnie H]

Thanks for the replies. Will check out those 900 mAh Efests and see what's the best I can find in an 18500.

 

[Coastal Cowboy]

Label ratings are irrelevant, the actual discharged energy is highly dependent on how hard you draw on the battery. All available testing shows AW 18350s are currently the best as far as capacity under ecig use.

Well, the ratings aren't irrelevant. But neither are they an absolute measure of performance over time because of the variables you mention.

That said, batteries rated at 900mAh represent about 40% more capacity than those rated at 650. Test large numbers of the two classifications, subjecting both to the same conditions and drainage parameters, both with the same chemistry from the same maufacturer, and the 900's will produce an average of 40% more energy.

This can be shown statistically, and that is what the manufacturers are doing as part of their QC procedures.

 

[dr g]

Well, the ratings aren't irrelevant. But neither are they an absolute measure of performance over time because of the variables you mention.

That said, batteries rated at 900mAh represent about 40% more capacity than those rated at 650. Test large numbers of the two classifications, subjecting both to the same conditions and drainage parameters, both with the same chemistry from the same maufacturer, and the 900's will produce an average of 40% more energy.

This can be shown statistically, and that is what the manufacturers are doing as part of their QC procedures.

I have never seen anything show this statistically at vaping amperages and voltages.

 

[Coastal Cowboy]

I have never seen anything show this statistically at vaping amperages and voltages.

If you can control for all of the variables involved, it can be shown statistically. However, the test has to be performed on a large sample of both classifications to allow for variations between individual batteries within the class.

Test a large number of cells from both classifications using the same equipment, with the same voltage demand, the same resistance, the same everything, and the 900's will outperform the 650's by an average of about 40%. That's true with flashlights, RC devices, GPS equipment and PV's.

 

[Arnie H]

How does one test the capacity of a battery? What equipment is used and so forth. Aside from just measuring your vape time and stuff. I often wonder about the stated capacities of many of my batteries. And I'm a pretty light vaper, yet I don't seem to get the average 6 hours from a 650 mAh battery.

 

[Coastal Cowboy]

How does one test the capacity of a battery? What equipment is used and so forth. Aside from just measuring your vape time and stuff. I often wonder about the stated capacities of many of my batteries. And I'm a pretty light vaper, yet I don't seem to get the average 6 hours from a 650 mAh battery.

It's really not feasible for an individual to perform the kind of statistically valid tests I'm referring to. A good multimeter is a must have if you're going to get into mech mods and building your own atomizer. You can do some limited testing on your own, but your results will be anecdotal.

Ratings accuracy can vary from manufacturer to manufacturer, and even from battery to battery from the same manufacturer. That's part of why dr g is skeptical about their accuracy (if I'm reading him right).

If a particular manufacturer has a very tight QC standard of say, +/- 5.0mAh with p=0.95 for his 650 class and his manufacturing standards are strictly controlled, then there is a 95% chance that a battery purchased from him will have a capacity of between 645 and 655mAh.

If another manufacturer allows more variability in capacity, say +/- 15.0mAh with p=0.95, then the range opens up to 635 to 665.

These are assumptions to demonstrate the process. I have no idea what the QC standards are at Efest, Panasonic, AWR, etc.

 

[zoiDman]

...

If a particular manufacturer has a very tight QC standard of say, +/- 5.0mAh with p=0.95 for his 650 class and his manufacturing standards are strictly controlled, then there is a 95% chance that a battery purchased from him will have a capacity of between 645 and 655mAh.

If another manufacturer allows more variability in capacity, say +/- 15.0mAh with p=0.95, then the range opens up to 635 to 665.

These are assumptions to demonstrate the process. I have no idea what the QC standards are at Efest, Panasonic, AWR, etc.

Or a Tester can simply Relax the P-Value.

There are no Statistic Police that will Kick In your Door and Drag you Into the Street if you Don't Reject the Null Hypothesis based on a 95% Significance Level

 

[dr g]

How does one test the capacity of a battery? What equipment is used and so forth. Aside from just measuring your vape time and stuff. I often wonder about the stated capacities of many of my batteries. And I'm a pretty light vaper, yet I don't seem to get the average 6 hours from a 650 mAh battery.

A DC load/discharge tester, maybe like this one: Battery Amp-hour Discharge Test Using an 8500 Series DC Electronic Load - YouTube
There are datalogging versions or data can be logged manually.
Several individuals have been doing testing like this, the results are available e.g. here:
Battery test-review small battery comparator
AkkuDB
There are one or two here on ecf that do testing but I have not seen their work collected anywhere.

So for example, using the small-battery comparator, you can see that the 700mah rated AW battery does as well or better than the Xtar 900mah battery at vaping amperages (2A+) down to vaping end voltages (~3.2v), even without taking into account the variable nature of vaping current.

The AW battery is also capable of 5A+ which the Xtar 900mah is not due to its protection circuitry, but the AW battery's chemistry would ensure better performance at that amp draw even if the Xtar was unprotected.

It's really not feasible for an individual to perform the kind of statistically valid tests I'm referring to. A good multimeter is a must have if you're going to get into mech mods and building your own atomizer. You can do some limited testing on your own, but your results will be anecdotal.

Ratings accuracy can vary from manufacturer to manufacturer, and even from battery to battery from the same manufacturer. That's part of why dr g is skeptical about their accuracy (if I'm reading him right).

If a particular manufacturer has a very tight QC standard of say, +/- 5.0mAh with p=0.95 for his 650 class and his manufacturing standards are strictly controlled, then there is a 95% chance that a battery purchased from him will have a capacity of between 645 and 655mAh.

If another manufacturer allows more variability in capacity, say +/- 15.0mAh with p=0.95, then the range opens up to 635 to 665.

These are assumptions to demonstrate the process. I have no idea what the QC standards are at Efest, Panasonic, AWR, etc.

No, I'm not skeptical of their accuracy, most reputable manufacturers rate their batteries legitimately at *some* discharge current. Problem is that current is not standardized, nor is the end voltage, so the label rating is literally irrelevant without knowing those other factors.

Or a Tester can simply Relax the P-Value.

There are no Statistic Police that will Kick In your Door and Drag you Into the Street if you Don't Reject the Null Hypothesis based on a 95% Significance Level

Almost all end-user testing falls into this category, but provides actual useful data to compare batteries. Label ratings are useless.

 

[Coastal Cowboy]

No, I'm not skeptical of their accuracy, most reputable manufacturers rate their batteries legitimately at *some* discharge current. Problem is that current is not standardized, nor is the end voltage, so the label rating is literally irrelevant without knowing those other factors.

We're gaining on concurrence. As long as two separate battery classifications are compared (in large numbers to account for normal variations between batteries from the same manufacturer), using the same current, same voltage demand, same resistance, same every other thing that can affect battery capacity, the difference between the two classifications can be identified and tested using elementary statistics.

Similar tests can be made for charging time, charging cycles, nominal voltage and state at which the batteries fail catastrophically.

They do it with nuts, bolts, washers and capacitors. They gotta be doing it with rechargeable batteries, right?

 

[dr g]

As long as two separate battery classifications are compared (in large numbers to account for normal variations between batteries from the same manufacturer), using the same current, same voltage demand, same resistance, same every other thing that can affect battery capacity, the difference between the two classifications can be identified and tested using elementary statistics.

Correct, however that is practically the opposite of what label ratings are. Thus, label ratings are irrelevant.

 

[Coastal Cowboy]

Correct, however that is practically the opposite of what label ratings are. Thus, label ratings are irrelevant.

Test large numbers of the two classifications, subjecting both to the same conditions and drainage parameters, both with the same chemistry from the same maufacturer, and the 900's will produce an average of 40% more energy than the 650's.

This can be shown statistically.