ROAR of the Pelican (CR123 Explosion during use, firsthand account)

[Lunal_Tic]

I don't know if this helps but I just had a light that apparently has a bad switch take 2 cells down to .3V and 1.3V. It was in a ASP Triad that's been in a drawer for months. It would seem that the mismatch in cells doesn't become a problem if just sitting, i.e. not in use.

-LT

 

[OutdoorIdiot]

What if the thick spring transfers more heat to the 1st cell than a thin spring would?


I don't have a pelican, or I would take a look at the bulb/spring assembly.

That reminds me, I've been in touch with Kevin @ BatteryStation to see if he has the original, focussing PM6 that doesn't have a one-piece lamp-and-reflector assembly, just in case there are noticeably different thermal properties between new and old models. It seems that the 3 notable failures (including Toppers') have been with the old style. Kevin says he doesn't have the old model, but that Pelican do, and are looking into it.

Anyway, with that in mind:


Topper, would you be willing to carry out a test similar to that suggested in post #378? It probably seems a bit rude to ask, since you've already sacrificed a flashlight and batteries, and put yourself at risk. However, you seem to have the equipment to do it, if I'm reading things correctly. I would assume (hope!) it would be a non-destructive test on your remaining PM6. However it would use 4 batteries, which I'd be happy to PayPal you the cost of, as a small contribution to this thing.

 

[Topper]

I would if I could but I can't. I do have another PM6 but it has been modified with a clicky and sports a SF P60 lamp. I can look for the original lamp and if found I can put it in but no chance of finding the original tailcap guts.
So what is post 378??? I will have to look.
Topper

 

[batterystation]

We are compiling a list of the lights and combinations we are going to attempt this Saturday. I hope to have a variety covered. We will use a "new" M6 incan and a Surefire G2 as guinea pigs. We currently plan to do mixed pairs of several percentages, preheated batteries by blue oven, and bezel down tests to trap the heat. I also have access to a friends device here in the heating/cooling business that we can read surface temps with from a short distance accurately. If I have time, I will even try one preheated cell and one at room temp. Perhaps the dead one preheated? As a previous poster noted, the ions seem to be very foolproof. But again, the numbers of the disposables is obviously a factor as well regardless of brand. There are a lot of them being used. Anyway, that is what we are currently planning. Thanks for the good ideas by email too. Surely some good will come of this. I believe we have the worlds best minds here. I am also game to donate needed guinea pig flashlights if someone needs them. Hey, whatever it takes to reduce the odds of this happening. There is no budget limit for safety.

 

[RA40]

This has been a very serious thread and it's been great seeing the community join as it has.

One factor that is being overlooked...the testing should be near as identical to LM's as possible. Saying that...a trip to HI is necessary. Who's going to make that ultimate sacrifice?

Kevin, Topper?

 

[metalhed]

...There is no budget limit for safety.

Thank you, Kevin. :thumbsup: Damn, I love to hear that (or read it. I guess.)

 

[rcashel11]

Thank you, Kevin. :thumbsup: Damn, I love to hear that (or read it. I guess.)

Agreed.

 

[Brighteyez]

Very admirable and socially responsible. Thank you, Kevin.

Hey, whatever it takes to reduce the odds of this happening. There is no budget limit for safety.

 

[hookoo]

I honestly believe after this is all said and done. The Batterystation brand will have one of the safest products for the consumer. Simply put, Kevin is a great businessman.

 

[OldGreyGuy]

I honestly believe after this is all said and done. The Batterystation brand will have one of the safest products for the consumer. Simply put, Kevin is a great businessman.

Well he has impressed me with the responsiveness and attention to detail. I guess I know where I'm going next time I need an order of batteries.

 

[Varmint1]

Maybe there is a problem with the batteries. After this thread and I decided to test some BS 123's because I had a big supply sitting around. Sometime before last Christmas I ordered 80 BS cells. 32 of them were in a nice foam fitted Otter case. I also have recently purchased a Mini ZTS tester to screw around with. I also just received 10 BS cells free with a HDS light that I purchased from BS within the last week.

Here are the results:

The 10 batteries that came this week with the HDS all tested at 100%. The date on the bottom is 0206.

Out of 58 that I tested from my order last December (I must have used some or have them stashed in my BOB's or at work because there are 22 unaccounted for) the results are as follows:

20%=4

40%=2

60%=10

80%=6

100%=36

The code on the bottom of them all is 1005.

I rechecked all the cells under 100% and came up with the same results except for 3. Those 3 tested at 100% several times and then checked at 80%.

I checked a stash of Surefire's and they all tested at 100%. Even 12 that were in an old Hurricane light that has been sitting around for years.

I tested hot off the charger nimh aa's and they tested at 100%. I tested some used nimh aa's and they tested anywhere from 20%-60%.

I mention testing the other cells only to suggest that the ZTS seems to be working reliably.

I'm a little worried that I may have used a 20% and a 100% cell in one of my lights.

I'm not trying to bash BS, but I'm a little concerned that the QC of the batteries I have is so low. I didn't really save much money by going with the BS seeing how I have to ditch 25% of what I purchased.

On the other hand, maybe the ZTS is not a reliable means of testing. I'll have to do some runtime tests with a one cell light (E1L?) and some of the 20% cells and a 100 cell and see what happens. I might as well make some use of them.

 

[OutdoorIdiot]

I would if I could but I can't. I do have another PM6 but it has been modified with a clicky and sports a SF P60 lamp. I can look for the original lamp and if found I can put it in but no chance of finding the original tailcap guts.
So what is post 378??? I will have to look.
Topper

Okay, thanks Topper. I assumed you had all the original PM6 bits. Hopefully Pelican are looking into the old design anyway, just would be nicer if we could get a more first-hand account of any issues, if you see what I mean.


Varmint1, I seem to remember people doing similar exercises (and getting a surprising number off what were called "duds") with two other brands, one being SF. I can't help having suspicions that the shelf lives of CR123s are not as great (or as reliable) as is often claimed, but I suspect the issue applies to CR123 design, rather than any particular brand. And of course there is always the usual disclaimer about the potential for the ZTS to make mistakes. I believe SilverFox has discovered that a battery with a low reading on the ZTS may, occasionally, have the same kind of energy in it as one with a 100% reading (though I seem to recall it might have a lower voltage, in spite of overall power output being the same).

 

[Varmint1]

Could be. It just seems strange that no Surefire 123's tested low. The only time off the top of my head that I specifically remember using the BS was testing runtime on my A2. It was quite a bit less runtime than with Surefire although I understand that to be a pretty common trend.

Hopefully you're right though and they aren't "duds". I was just a little surprised and worried after reading about the possibility of mis-matched cells being the cause of the problem.

 

[OutdoorIdiot]

On the issue of the validity of ZTS measurements, I'm with SilverFox.

Yes, it can give misleading results. However, it would seem prudent not to mix batteries that it gives different readings for. In spite of any debates about how the ZTS works (and whether this is valid), I think it's fairly safe to say that if it consistently gives different readings for 2 batteries, then there is something different about those two batteries. What seems less reliable is the idea that if it consistently gives 2 identical readings, then this must mean the two batteries are identical. However, the question then becomes, "is there a better way" to identify whether 2 batteries are identical. To my knowledge, there isn't a method that has been generally accepted as being better, and I certainly can't think of one. I think the only certain way of finding out how much life a battery has in it, is to run it to death.

It could of course turn out that your results reflect the reality very well, e.g. perhaps your "20%" batteries won't last very long at all. If you have a single-cell light you feel comfortable with testing them in, the results would be interesting...

 

[StoneDog]

Okay, thanks Topper. I assumed you had all the original PM6 bits. Hopefully Pelican are looking into the old design anyway, just would be nicer if we could get a more first-hand account of any issues, if you see what I mean.


Varmint1, I seem to remember people doing similar exercises (and getting a surprising number off what were called "duds") with two other brands, one being SF. I can't help having suspicions that the shelf lives of CR123s are not as great (or as reliable) as is often claimed, but I suspect the issue applies to CR123 design, rather than any particular brand. And of course there is always the usual disclaimer about the potential for the ZTS to make mistakes. I believe SilverFox has discovered that a battery with a low reading on the ZTS may, occasionally, have the same kind of energy in it as one with a 100% reading (though I seem to recall it might have a lower voltage, in spite of overall power output being the same).

I seem to remember from WAAAAYYYY back that there is something peculiar about the initial discharge rates of CR123s. This is from memory (and mine is horrible) but 123s have some sort of internal membrane or protection that affords them the long shelf life becaise it acts to prevent the chemical reactions that lead to self discharge. When a new CR123 is first used this "barrier" must be overcome - usually very quickly but with a slight drop in voltage/output.

Please tell me I'm not making this up... If I'm not then might this explain the initial low voltage readings for many brand new cells?

Jon

 

[David_Campen]

I'm not trying to bash BS, but I'm a little concerned that the QC of the batteries I have is so low. I didn't really save much money by going with the BS seeing how I have to ditch 25% of what I purchased.

On the other hand, maybe the ZTS is not a reliable means of testing.

Yep, it is one or the other, either the BatteryStation 123 cells are junk or the MBT test results are junk.

 

[batterystation]

Anyone that has what they feel to be "junk" can email me for replacements that have been tested and drop what they have in the trash or send them back. No questions. Just email me. I would note that in this frenzy here of testing CR123A batteries over the last week with the ZTS tester, I have found a few Energizers and Sanyos (no Duracells yet) that seem to be junk too by the ZTS method.

EDIT: I just want this potential for trouble to go away. That is all. Anyone that has anything they feel to be inferior may exchange them for tested product. I do believe that the ZTS tester gives a fair indication for matching of batteries, but a 60% battery is not necessarily 40% dead. I took one that showed 60% and it ran my E1E/KL1 almost to the minute as long as one that read 100%. THAT is the part that still has me curious.

Yep, it is one or the other, either the BatteryStation 123 cells are junk or the MBT test results are junk.

 

[David_Campen]

that seem to be junk by your definition.

No, I said either the tester or the batteries were junk (this is an exclusive "or"). It is my opinion that it is the tester that is junk.

 

[OutdoorIdiot]

Several people have already made their opinions about the ZTS tester very clear, over and over in this thread. This has lead to what has been called "bickering".

I will limit my opinions to the one post where I have already expressed my opinion, and I won't repeat it. If everybody stuck to that, then this thread would be a lot less bogged-down with what comes across as bickering.

I'm not suggesting that the subject of the ZTS tester should be taboo, I'm suggesting that if it is so contentious that people want to post repeatedly about it, then a discussion about it could be opened in another thread, instead of this one.

 

[David_Campen]

here is an interesting thread from a year and a half ago. Then it was SF123 that were having problems:
http://candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=63338

The thread includes a possibly prophetic post:
http://candlepowerforums.com/vb/showpost.php?p=729005&postcount=17
'But IMHO the real question is ... what will happen when such a cell "dies" in an M4 ? Will it be reverse-charged and explode when the light is activted?'