# Test/Review of Panasonic NCR18650B 3400mAh (Green)



## HKJ (Jul 23, 2012)

[SIZE=+3]Panasonic NCR18650B 3400mAh (Green)[/SIZE]







Official specifications:

Real capacity: NCR 3400mAh 
Size: 18mmx65mm 
Netweight: 45g 
<=45mOhm 
Cut off at 2.75V, full charge 4.35V  (Wrong value) 






This is the latest cells from Panasonic with the highest capacity.
The cell used can be discharged down to 2.5 volt, in my test I only discharges to 2.8 volt, i.e. I do not measure the full capacity. But then, not all lights will be able to use the full capacity.






















These batteries are good at both low and higher current.


























These are unprotected cell, i.e. the protection will not trip.








[SIZE=+3]Conclusion[/SIZE]

This is genuine Panasonic cells and cannot get any other rathing than very good, but remember that they are unprotected!



[SIZE=+3]Notes and links[/SIZE]

How is the test done and how to read the charts
How is a protected LiIon battery constructed
More about button top and flat top batteries


----------



## Colonel Sanders (Jul 23, 2012)

That's strange. So far I've tested 3 of these cells at a 4a draw and the worst checked in at 3297mah with the best at 3305mah. You got 3103 at a 3a draw. My cells were charged to 4.22v. Yours were charged to 4.35? 

I guess it could be a difference in equipment. I'm using an iCharger 3010b.


----------



## HKJ (Jul 23, 2012)

Colonel Sanders said:


> That's strange. So far I've tested 3 of these cells at a 4a draw and the worst checked in at 3297mah with the best at 3305mah. You got 3103 at a 3a draw. My cells were charged to 4.22v. Yours were charged to 4.35?
> 
> I guess it could be a difference in equipment. I'm using an iCharger 3010b.



Mine where charger to 4.2 volt (4.166 volt 1 hour after charging stopped) and discharged to 2.8 volt.
You can see my equipment here, one reason I do not use a iCharger is because I am not satisfied with the precision (I have two 208B).


----------



## Colonel Sanders (Jul 23, 2012)

Mine were tested hot off the charger at 4.22v. The test was done on the 2.7v setting though I find through using my DMM while running the test that the iCharger reports a lower voltage when under load than the DMM. This is more so the case the higher the discharge current used. So, the cutoff, according to my DMM was actually 2.75v.

I doubt our starting and ending voltages fully account for the discrepancy so I guess my iCharger is perhaps a bit optimistic.

Thanks as always for the great testing! :thumbsup:


----------



## 45/70 (Jul 23, 2012)

HKJ said:


> ......one reason I do not use a iCharger is because I am not satisfied with the precision......





Colonel Sanders said:


> ......I find through using my DMM while running the test that the iCharger reports a lower voltage when under load than the DMM. This is more so the case the higher the discharge current used......



HKJ is referring to precision, so unrelated, as precision is one thing, and accuracy is another. Anyway, not sure if you are aware or not, but the voltage readout on most iCharger's can be calibrtated (from epbuddy).

As noted, a meter with 4 1/2 digit precision is required, and, of course, I would use one that is known to be accurate, as well. My 106B+ read about 0.01 Volt high, when I received it. On the other hand, you're saying the voltage accuracy changes with charge/discharge rate, that is, of course, a different matter.

I don't use my iCharger for discharging cells/batteries. I prefer to use the CBA II, as it is designed specifically for discharging, and built to better handle the heat dissipated during discharge. This way, it saves some wear and tear on the charger, by using it for charging, only.

Dave


----------



## Colonel Sanders (Jul 23, 2012)

Dave, I did calibrate my 3010b (like yours, it was a little high from the factory) some time ago and it does read accurately except when under a discharge load. 

Could you try charging (using your 106B+) something at a >4-5a load with your DMM hooked up see if the charger readout and DMM still agree? Thanks.

Heat during discharge doesn't seem to be a problem with the 3010b. I've used it to discharge as high as 13a (Feilong 32650) with no problem.


----------



## 45/70 (Jul 23, 2012)

OK on the recalibration. I don't do much discharging at 5A, except with my hotwire packs. Problem is both of them are "getting there" and should actually be replaced. On top of that, nobody makes them anymore, at least good ones. I may give a shot with a 24 Volt Pb wheelchair setup that needs charging, if I get around to it, although 5A is pushing the limits at that voltage, IIRC.

The 3010B no doubt has a bigger heatsink and such than the 106B, but I doubt it compares to the PC processor type used on the CBA with 70mm fan. I just figure the iCharger will last longer if only used for charging. It seems many whose hobby chargers poop out on them are also those that discharge cells/packs a lot. I seriously doubt that the CBA is any more accurate, it just handles the discharging better and hopefully, will last a while.

Dave


----------



## HKJ (Jul 23, 2012)

45/70 said:


> HKJ is referring to precision, so unrelated, as precision is one thing, and accuracy is another. Anyway, not sure if you are aware or not, but the voltage readout on most iCharger's can be calibrtated (from epbuddy).



I did mean both precision and accuracy.

Both hobby chargers and CBA also has the problem with wire and connection resistance, this mostly affect the voltage readout. 
In my current setup I uses separate wires for charge/discharge/measure, the only common part is the copper pole that connect to the battery.


----------



## grego15 (Jul 23, 2012)

Thanks so much for the in depth review of these batteries. The timing of this post couldn't have been more perfect. This past week I have been hunting for these batteries at prices lower than $8 each. Good to see the actual review, I think I'll continue my quest for these batteries. :thumbsup:


----------



## rijola (Aug 24, 2013)

Any possibility some discrepancies in the data exist not only due to some of the suggestions mentioned previously, but also due to some minuscule differences in Panasonic's strange marketing as seen in this discussion: http://www.fasttech.com/forums/1341105/t/1002841/what-is-the-different-with-sku-1141104/1 ? FT offers two different (protected) NCR18650B 3400mAh (Green) batteries -- one listed as item number 1141104 and the other 1341105. Posters report inconclusive answers from FT support as to why one is listed as max volts 4.35 while the other is max volts 4.27. They show a whole penny difference in price as of this writing.


----------



## torukmakto4 (Aug 24, 2013)

That is not Panasonic's marketing. Panasonic has absolutely zero role in this mess. If you look at the datasheets for this cell, they state CLEARLY that it is a 4.2 CV cell. The protected cells in question are not a Panasonic product, they are a Panasonic product modified/used/packed by a third party (add PCB and button and rewrap).

What happened here is a common mistake seen on fasttech. Often an item will be listed twice with a slightly different price. Furthermore, typos and misconceptions tend to get into the specs on the Fasttech pages for batteries, so ALWAYS check with the manufacturer.

Edit: And this HKJ review is of the bare Panasonic cell, not the cell with PCB and button top that Fasttech sells and is the subject of the confusion. Protected cells have extra resistance from the PCB mosfets, which results in different test results (more sag under load).


----------



## HKJ (Aug 24, 2013)

rijola said:


> why one is listed as max volts 4.35



That mistake has been around from before the battery was released. The correct value is 4.20 volt and usual there is a +/-0.05 volt tolerance on that, but this tolerance is not included in the shortform datasheet.


----------



## markr6 (Sep 10, 2013)

I recently got two from Fasttech, my first UNprotected 18650s. They charge to 4.20v on my Xtar WP2 II, unlike my EagleTac 3400s that seem to max out a 4.16v (fine by me). It must have to do with the PCB??

Mine appear shiny like they have a clear wrapper, but HKJs photos look like a dull matte finish. Maybe it's just the lighting in the photo.


----------



## torukmakto4 (Sep 10, 2013)

The factory heatshrink on mine is "semi-gloss". It's a typical super thin PET heatshrink as used by all battery manufacturers now, since PVC is frowned upon for RoHS or whatever, and PET has greater heat resistance for safety/short protection.

Do you have button tops from fasttech? Those are a rewrap and will have clear pvc shrinkwrap.


----------



## markr6 (Sep 10, 2013)

I believe they are button top. SKU 1345500. The website says so, but it's confusing sometimes and don't trust it completely. I guess if they are, it's a very short button. I got them since the contacts looked the same as my EagleTacs minus the PCB


----------



## torukmakto4 (Sep 10, 2013)

Yeah those are Fasttech's rewrap with added button and a layer of clear shrinkwrap. The factory positive terminal is flush with the insulator.


----------



## ledmitter_nli (Sep 10, 2013)

^^^ If it's shiny and there is this orange lead tape running up the side, then it's protected as well.


----------



## NeedMoreLight (Sep 10, 2013)

Can someone please measure the dia. of the protected version from Fasttech? The site shows 18.1mm. I would like to know for sure before I order a lot of them.


----------



## SAMongoose (Apr 25, 2016)

How long still until these batteries are not available anymore. Tesla is using the 18650 for Power Wall and the have patent on 18650. IF they dont stop our supply we can build our own alternative for the Power Wall.


----------



## StorminMatt (Apr 26, 2016)

SAMongoose said:


> How long still until these batteries are not available anymore. Tesla is using the 18650 for Power Wall and the have patent on 18650. IF they dont stop our supply we can build our own alternative for the Power Wall.



As a universal battery size used in many applications, Tesla CANNOT patent 18650 batteries. That would be like someone trying to patent bread. They can only patent specific uses of 18650s (like the Power Wall). As for the availability of the NCR18650B, I am not sure how longer they will be available, particularly since most people now buying the NCR18650GA. Then again, you can still get older cells like the NCR18650PD.


----------



## SAMongoose (Apr 26, 2016)

https://batterybro.com/blogs/18650-...-li-ion-battery-wholesalers-and-manufacturers .... http://mybroadband.co.za/news/energy/125594-tesla-powerwall-confirmed-for-south-africa.html.

Both involved individuals are South African. I read on a weekly basis updates on battles. That is just why I asked. It is not an NCR ICR IMR....etc. story Im interested in... It is how they WILL protect their interests. Like JP Morgan did with N. Tesla (yeah our own Elon musk at the helm). JP is responsible for you paying daily for electricity....that electricity could have been free.....


----------



## Gauss163 (Apr 26, 2016)

The Li-ion patent wars have been raging since the dawn of the technology. You can read about them in many popular accounts, e.g. below is an excerpt from Gizmodo's The Knock-Down, Drag-Out Fight Over the Next Generation of Batteries, which is excerpted from Seth Fletcher's book Bottled Lightning: Superbatteries, Electric Cars, and the New Lithium Economy.

--------

Michel Armand is still furious. To Armand, patents "are tearing the community apart." The saga of lithium iron phosphate is a "horror story" of "meanness and greed." "Oh, yeah, of course, he feels very angry," Goodenough said. "Because I must say Michel Armand was the one who recognized that the LiFePO4 was potentially very interesting." ...

"You need to talk to Michel Armand! He's just a broken, broken man. The last time he was here, you know what he said? He said, ‘The number-one property of lithium iron phosphate is that it is an excellent catalyst for human greed.'"


----------



## StorminMatt (Apr 27, 2016)

Gauss163 said:


> Michel Armand is still furious. To Armand, patents "are tearing the community apart." The saga of lithium iron phosphate is a "horror story" of "meanness and greed." "Oh, yeah, of course, he feels very angry," Goodenough said. "Because I must say Michel Armand was the one who recognized that the LiFePO4 was potentially very interesting." ...
> 
> "You need to talk to Michel Armand! He's just a broken, broken man. The last time he was here, you know what he said? He said, ‘The number-one property of lithium iron phosphate is that it is an excellent catalyst for human greed.'"



Kind of interesting, especially since LiFePO4 never really ended up amounting to much. It IS a great technology in many ways. I actually had a Tenergy LiFePO4 discharge down to around half a volt in a light some time back. I pulled it out, charged it, and ran it series with a known good battery in a light and watched the voltage of both. They tracked each other almost PERFECTLY. So they are certainly tough little buggers! Maybe, much like Beta VCRs, patents are part of what is hurting this technology.


----------

