# Anyone prefer AA over 123



## tenaciousj (Nov 26, 2009)

the only benefit that i see is that AA is very common, easy to find and slightly slimmer light, whereas the 123 generally has more lumens and longer runtime, or am i missing something?


----------



## CampingLED (Nov 26, 2009)

Many AA lights are also 14500 compatible. This gives you more battery options, especially in emergencies when AA is more freely available. Capacity between 14500 and 123A is fairly similar and not the deciding factor. AA lights are more slender, but longer. This is nice for pocket carrying. So, looking at the above, most of my EDC lights are AA/14500.


----------



## BentHeadTX (Nov 26, 2009)

I prefer AA over 123 for many reasons

Alkaline in a pinch
1.6V Energizer E2 lithium AA
14500 "AA" sized lithium-ion generally has 20% longer run time

I prefer the more slender barrel on AA over 123. Consider that most of my electronics run on AA, it all goes together well. Besides, when somebody remarks about how bright the flashlight it, it is more impressive that it runs on AA cells.


----------



## tenaciousj (Nov 26, 2009)

sorry i am new to this, what is a protected 14500 vs a non-protected 14500?


----------



## 289 (Nov 26, 2009)

BentHeadTX said:


> I prefer AA over 123 for many reasons
> 
> Alkaline in a pinch
> 1.6V Energizer E2 lithium AA
> ...




+1, even though I pretty much run eneloops in all my AA lights.


----------



## HarveyRich (Nov 26, 2009)

When you read more posts on CPF, you'll see that the verdict seems to be split. Many prefer the availability of the Alkalines or NiMH batteries, while others prefer the smallness of 123 and the brightness you typically get compared to AA. However, as mentioned above, you can substitute 14500 li-ion for AAs in many new lights. They're still bigger though. As an alternative to both, I like the smallness of AAA with the substitutability (frequently) of 10440s. There are some new lites coming out with CR2 li-ions, which make them smaller (although still wider than AAA). Nitecore EZCr2 and Aeon come to mind.


----------



## Dances with Flashlight (Nov 26, 2009)

What BentheadTX said!

LiIon cells require caution. See this important link:
http://www.batteryuniversity.com/partone-5B.htm

Rechargeable LiIon's at 3.7v offer higher performance opportunities than primary (non-rechargeable) cells at 3.0v. "Protected" cells reduce (but do not eliminate) potential trouble.

Before the advent of protected 14500's (AA sized 3.7v LiIOn's) you needed two AA's (for a total of 3.0v) to equal the output of a LiIon, making the more compact 123 a better choice for small, higher performance lights. But today, a trim 14500 based light with the proper emitter is just ideal for many uses, especially one like the Peak El Capitan in Brass or SS.


----------



## curtispdx (Nov 26, 2009)

I like having lights that can be powered by both. (The Derelight C2H and the JetBeam RRT-0 come to mind.)


----------



## PhantomPhoton (Nov 26, 2009)

I lost any interest in CR123 lights once I found the 18650 cell. Between Eneloops and L91 AAs aren't just as good now as CR123. So for smaller lights I love AA, for something a bit larger 18650. I stopped buying CR123 a couple years ago and haven't looked back.


----------



## Billy Berue (Nov 26, 2009)

AA for me, especially when the input voltage also allows the use of 14500 Li-Ions. AA lights are just more versatile IMO, and I prefer the form factor. 1x123 lights are too fat and too short for my taste. The slightly longer, more slender form factor of most 1xAA lights is just right. :thumbsup:


----------



## Cheapskate (Nov 26, 2009)

Another plus for AA's is that they tend to be cheaper. CR123's are usually not cheap when bought in brick and mortar stores.

Just a quick search reveals you can get a Panasonic CR123 from here - http://www.battery-force.co.uk - for $3.23. For $3.06 from the same place you can get a pack of *10* AA Panasonic alkalines.


----------



## TONY M (Nov 26, 2009)

I have always liked AA lights personally. 

RCR123s have less capacity than NIMH AAs which is one reason to go for AAs if you plan on using the light regularly and can not afford primary lithiums. In Europe they are more expensive than in the USA too.

As _PhantomPhoton_ said above the 18650 cell is a good replacement for 2xCR123s, though they are not easy to find in emergencies lol. 

One reason to dislike AAs is that primary lithiums (L91s) although good are *not* cheap.


----------



## regulator (Nov 26, 2009)

BentHeadTX said:


> I prefer AA over 123 for many reasons
> 
> Alkaline in a pinch
> 1.6V Energizer E2 lithium AA
> ...


 
These are my comments as well. It is nice to be able to very easily find an 8 pack of lithium cells for around $16-17 without having to order them. This will keep you going for a LONG time. And the 14500 cell option is nice to have. But the main benefit to me is the dimensions of the AA light. 

I would not pass up on a nice CR123 light that had functions/features that I could not find in an AA light.


----------



## NoFair (Nov 26, 2009)

BentHeadTX said:


> I prefer AA over 123 for many reasons
> 
> Alkaline in a pinch
> 1.6V Energizer E2 lithium AA
> ...



This^


----------



## curtispdx (Nov 26, 2009)

A little off-topic: I see that Walmart is selling 2 packs of the Energizer Ultimate Lithium for $5.00.


----------



## Outdoors Fanatic (Nov 26, 2009)

Not me. I refuse to buy AA/AAA lights.


----------



## Henk_Lu (Nov 26, 2009)

I usually preffered CR123A as the batteries have a long shelf life and work under extreme condition, they are lightweight and have more capacity.

L91 & L92 have changed that though, their shelf life is even longer, I'm not sure about the capacity and they should also work under extreme conditions.

My preference was based on the fact that I used primaries only for the CR123A lights and NiMh-LSD for my AA lights. As I didn't treat my NiMh right and as my charger wasn't the best, my results with the AA lights weren't the best. That'll change now, as I got a better charger and as I'll start with li-ions.

So, my new preference goes to those AA lights that can take li-ions, they are the most versatile lights! I won't however get extenders, I don't really see the point as I have a good stock of CR123A and RCR123 work as well.


----------



## Th232 (Nov 26, 2009)

+1 to what BentHead said, although I'm leaning more towards 18650s over both of them.


----------



## rtt (Nov 26, 2009)

I now use AA alkalines only. Can get them everywhere and they are cheap. My favorite combination is a SF 9P with a Lumens Factory led drop-in designed for a single cell 123. Good output and long runtime.

Went through all the phases cr123 and rechargables in various sizes. The AA alkalines really makes life simple!


----------



## mcnair55 (Nov 26, 2009)

Living in the UK it is more cost effective to run either AA or AAA cell lights.The 123 cells are just to expensive to buy from a retail shop.

I have a decent LCD charger that will charge AA and AAA at the same time if needed plus mine has the advantage of charging single cells.

Not that keen on the tiny cell lights but running around with one on my neck at night to spot the bathroom etc as it runs on low low with a little twisty action and to be fair was less than a UK pound,only bought it for the decent fastener on it but it is quite cute.


----------



## HeadCSO (Nov 26, 2009)

AA now for me. I started with CR123A when I got my first Surefire several years ago.

Living in the UK, I put up with the high cost of the 123's because of the wow factor of the Surefire. Although I can now get 123's much cheaper, AA lights now have a good enough performance for me. I've got several 1 and 2 AA lights, all running on Eneloops. The ability to use alkaline in an emergency was also useful.


----------



## Marduke (Nov 26, 2009)

rtt said:


> I now use AA alkalines only. Can get them everywhere and they are cheap. My favorite combination is a SF 9P with a Lumens Factory led drop-in designed for a single cell 123. Good output and long runtime.
> 
> Went through all the phases cr123 and rechargables in various sizes. The AA alkalines really makes life simple!


FYI, NiMH cells are over 100 times cheaper than alkalines.

Edit:
10000 posts :wave:


----------



## MY (Nov 26, 2009)

1. I do not have AAA lights because of the low power density of the cells, and the batteries are expensive.
2. I find that most AA lights are significantly bigger that 123 lights. Take for example the quarks. The AA quark is much longer than the 123 version but only the middle tube is somewhat smaller, with maybe 50% more volume. 14500 cells are much more difficult to find than rc123.
3. There are many more quality 123 lights than AA lights. Most higher end manufacturers tend to focus their designs on 123 (although this is changing as is the tint preference from cool to warm). 
4. I would rather use CR2s than AAAs. I prefer 123s to AAs. I am now discovering 18650s and see the logic in their use. 
5. I only use rechargeables so the aspect of cost is not a factor.


----------



## Brasso (Nov 26, 2009)

I too prefer the AA lights for their dimensions. The 14500's put out pretty much the same power as 123's and in a pinch standard AA or e2 can be used and found anywhere.


----------



## corvettesR1 (Nov 26, 2009)

I dont see it as an either/or situation. I enjoy having both AA and cr123s.Each version sems to have its own benefits.


----------



## PCC (Nov 26, 2009)

I currently own 5 (five) CR123a cells. Two of them are Duracell brand that I bought some time ago and three came with my G3. With any luck these will be the only CR123a cells I will ever buy in my life. I have one flashlight that takes a single AA cell that I am modifying to take a single CR123a and it will be put away for emergencies along with the spare cells. The majority of my lights are AA lights because I have tons of AA batteries, which include AA NiMH and alkaline batteries.

All of the AAA lights that I have were given to me. Two of them are actually three N-cell lights that I'm running two AAAs in. I'll buy more NiMH AAA batteries as the need arises.


----------



## Max_Power (Nov 26, 2009)

I recently bought a FiveMega three-AA body with a SureFire 6P head. It can run any standard module that works with a single Li or Li-Ion battery. Right now I have 3 eneloops in it, which seems to be the best trade-off for brightness (decent current source at 3+ volts), runtime, long shelf life, and rechargeability. At the moment it is driving a Malkoff M30W (Warm-neutral) at about the same brightness I see with an 18650 cell. Of course the ability to run on alkalines is useful in a doomsday scenario too. 

I've also experimented with 2xAA eneloop cells in a Malkoff MD3, which also works pretty well at a reduced light output. Surefire 9P can do the same trick.

What do I pick up on the way to work?

I find that I prefer the hand-feel and shorter length of a Surefire 6P, 9p, or Malkoff equivalents. The switches on these lights are superior quality. The 18650, 18500, 17670, and (R)CR123 batteries they support will provide higher current for longer. I have plenty of batteries and lights, there would have to be a month long power outage before I would have to rely on my AA stash. Then I'd be down to 8 lights that use AA, and I can charge AA batteries in my solar powered garden lights. (Hmm, maybe I need to set up a way to charge the Li-Ion cells with solar power too!)

I bought a Romisen NC3-warm light for my mom, it can be used with 2xAA or 1xCR123. She prefers the CR123 configuration. It is more compact, lightweight, and just as bright. I have a bunch of CR123 cells which have a shelf life of 10 years, so she's set for a while.

Beyond pocket lights, the uber-bright 400-700 lumen multi-die LEDs require Li chemistry... I don't want to have gobs of AAs in series due to safety and reliability considerations.

So, I prefer Li battery chemistry, but it's nice to have the option to use batteries from the grocery store.


----------



## yowzer (Nov 26, 2009)

I prefer AA and AAA because of the convenience to me. Aside from my phone, laptop and some radios that have custom battery packs, all my electronics work on those cells. Only having to worry about keeping two types of batteries around and charged up makes life simpler. Runtimes are fine, and most current (hah!) AA or AAx2 lights are bright enough for my needs.

Which isn't to say I won't buy a CR123 light... it'll just need to have something unique or very special about it. The 4sevens RGB and Surefire Titan are really calling my name...


----------



## erlon (Nov 26, 2009)

BentHeadTX said:


> I prefer AA over 123 for many reasons
> 
> *Alkaline in a pinch
> 1.6V Energizer E2 lithium AA
> 14500 "AA" sized lithium-ion generally has 20% longer run time*



:thumbsup:


----------



## Beacon of Light (Nov 26, 2009)

tenaciousj said:


> the only benefit that i see is that AA is very common, easy to find and slightly slimmer light, whereas the 123 generally has more lumens and longer runtime, or am i missing something?



rcr123 cells are EXPENSIVE. /thread


----------



## waddup (Nov 26, 2009)

i like 1 x AA lights A LOT.

need a battery?

turn around and there's one sitting on a shelf

LIGHT


----------



## MY (Nov 26, 2009)

Beacon of Light said:


> rcr123 cells are EXPENSIVE. /thread



My experience is that while "AW" brands are a little more expensive, off brands which I have had some luck with (although they are inconsistent) are not that much more expensive than quality disposable alkalines and on par with NiMH cells. Keep in mind too that the price is amortized over 100 or more charges.

Regards


----------



## wrencher (Nov 26, 2009)

I'd like a multi function 1 x AA made by Ra lights.


----------



## adirondackdestroyer (Nov 26, 2009)

I used to have lights that used pretty much every battery imaginable, but I recently sold all of my CR2/CR123 lights. I ended up sticking with AA cells because of how versatile the lights are that use them. They can use either alkalines, L91, NIMH, and 14500.


----------



## regulator (Nov 26, 2009)

Typically if I am using a small light and want/need a LOT of lumens, I prefer using rechargable cells because of the power demand and economy of rechargables. 

In this area - I think the 14500 cell does great and provides another level of versitality to the AA light (that can run on 14500 cells). The 14500 cell seems to have just a tad bit more capacity than a RCR123 cell as well. This is just another advantage to an AA light.

But in general, my small pocket lights serve as EDC and do not require more than 25 lumens for most tasks - and generally less than that. Having high output is nice but rarely used. Typically if I need or want a light with a lot of lumens - I know in advance and will bring a larger light.


----------



## John_Galt (Nov 26, 2009)

I have two lights, both use AA's. I currently run Duraloops (rockin the 15 minute dumb charger). Locally, CR123 batteries are about the same for a two pack, as a set of four lithium AA's (~$10.99), so I'm trying to limit myself to AA's. But there are a few CR123 only lights that are tempting me.


----------



## mchlwise (Nov 26, 2009)

corvettesR1 said:


> I dont see it as an either/or situation. I enjoy having both AA and cr123s.Each version sems to have its own benefits.



+1

I really like 123 lights and with my rechargeable 123s, that's what I mostly use, but wouldn't *EVER* be without a AA light handy.


----------



## clg0159 (Nov 26, 2009)

I definately prefer AA. The ability to choose Nimh, lithium primary or the globally available alkaline seals it for me. The price is just a nail in the coffin.


----------



## dracodoc (Nov 27, 2009)

I only use AA lights. I even don't want AAA lights since smallest AA lights today are not much bigger than AAA lights.
If you want more power, you can either use 14500 or choose a 2AA light.


----------



## shark_za (Nov 27, 2009)

I have two main uses for a good torch. 

1. General tasks - power failures, looking under desks, EDC.

2. Security - I may need to fight for my life at night. 

I use AA's and AAA's for the first task, also 18650 gets used for basic day to day stuff too. Camping, tasks like that. 
Guilt free lumens rock and the Maha keeps the LSD's all tip top charged.
Got chargers for 18650 and 16340 too. All in this class.
I was not into AAA's till I got the Microstream and now the iTP A3. Love em now. Only have 2x Uniross LSD AAA's and a bunch of L92's for them. I also have serious amounts of alkalines that I will never use before expiry date.

For the second I use Surefire 6P types with CR123's. 
I practice at the range using 16340's but drop in new or unused CR123's to store them in my sidestand or wherever these lights are kept for serious purposes.

Some are a blur between the two, like going out at night. The security factor becomes higher but the torch is usually a 1xAA with an battery I know is fully charged or an e2. A spare torch is usually around somewhere too.

_
I'm considering buying a few SAFT 14500 primaries, this would make some AA lights more security focussed. Use the iTP for general tasks at night and have the main light sitting there ready to pump out 3.7v. On looking into this the discharge rate makes it impractical_

When travelling it seems the choice is my 2AA iTP C8 and a 1AA multimode like the LD10 for general tasks. Can be used for both.


----------



## kramer5150 (Nov 27, 2009)

There are pros and cons to either. I own both and pick either depending on the task at hand. Although *R*CR123 is my preference. Its nominal voltage is closer (or slightly greater than) the Vf of most emitters. That generally yields more Lumens OTF. Its not uncommon for RCR123 lights to reach over 150L. I supplement the shorter run times with backup cells in my belt pack. I find it easier to EDC a small RCR123 light and a backup cell in my pack than a single larger 1AA light.

If you are after MAX lumens from a pocketable tool... 1AA is not going to push an MCE, P7 or M30.


----------



## DM51 (Nov 27, 2009)

41 posts so far, and not a single one of you thought to report that it was in the wrong section? Good grief! :shakehead

Moving it to Batteries...


----------



## LEDninja (Nov 27, 2009)

I have never used CR123A lights. The 2 for $19.99 price for the batteries stopped me from getting started.
If I need more light than my AAA/AA lights, I reach for my 3C P7 Mag.


----------



## drmaxx (Nov 27, 2009)

Outside of the USA 123 are simply prohibitive expensive. And it looks like that for us foreigner ordering in the US and shipping will be soon not an option anymore (the Li panic in the airplanes...).
So, despite all the benefits


----------



## pathalogical (Nov 27, 2009)

For simple, everyday flashlight useage, I am also leaning towards AA lights, for the simple and already stated reason of ease of availability. Even if you didn't have any new cells around, you could easily scrounge a few from wall clocks, tv remotes and childrens toys. For specific or occasional need of a powerful light, then a multi 123 light may be better. But, as flashaholics, we're not gonna settle for one type of light or batteries !


----------



## n3eg (Nov 27, 2009)

Advantage of CR123s - Kids won't steal 'em for their Christmas toys.

Advantages of AAs - Too many to list.


----------



## kwkarth (Nov 27, 2009)

Cheapskate said:


> Another plus for AA's is that they tend to be cheaper. CR123's are usually not cheap when bought in brick and mortar stores.
> 
> Just a quick search reveals you can get a Panasonic CR123 from here - http://www.battery-force.co.uk - for $3.23. For $3.06 from the same place you can get a pack of *10* AA Panasonic alkalines.



Let's be realistic here. 123's are readily available for a dollar or less each on the web. It would be silly to buy a 123 cell at a brick and mortar store at this point. As I have had a few failures with L91/92's I have sworn off them. Eveready is trash, period.

LSD NiMH for AA and AAA size with the option of using alkies in an emergency, and 123's for everything else when energy density and compactness is a priority


----------



## vali (Nov 27, 2009)

Not that easy if you live in some countries. A lot of cheap and free-shipping battery online stores only deliver to US or add shipping costs to international purchases.

Unless you buy them in places like DX (usually crappy or faked cells) there is not real cheap places where to get cheap CR123, eneloops, E92, etc here. At least I didnt found them. I will be very grateful if you can list some online stores with cheap batteries and free/cheap delivery to Spain. Buying large amounts to lower the shipping for each cell is not an option.


----------



## kwkarth (Nov 27, 2009)

Sorry to hear they're (CR123's) still hard to obtain in some other countries.


----------



## 45/70 (Nov 27, 2009)

vali said:


> Buying large amounts to lower the shipping for each cell is not an option.



In some cases, that's a bad option to leave out. Some vendors have a flat shipping rate, regardless of the size of the order. If you could take advantage of buying in larger quantities, it could take some of the "sting" out of the purchase. With lithium cells that have a 10-15 year shelf life, there's no disadvantage to stocking up.



tenaciousj said:


> Anyone prefer AA over 123



I can't say I have a preference for one over the other. CR123's have more Wh in a smaller size, so are capable of powering smaller lights, with equivalent output and runtime. AA lithium's are somewhat easier to obtain. I don't use alkalines, so their availability would only be useful when lithium's couldn't be found. Actually I only use one CR123 and two L91's. I'm 95% Li-Ion and NiMH.

On the rechargeable side, AA's are a bit more practical, but RCR123's still have the advantage of being able to power smaller lights. That said, my AA NiMH's outnumber my RCR123's by about 4 to 1. I guess you could say I prefer the AA's, but not really. Also, I use AA's in other devices besides lights.

Dave


----------



## vaughnsphotoart (Nov 27, 2009)

I prefer AA over CR123, and 18650 over either of them.


----------



## moldyoldy (Nov 30, 2009)

as I have previously stated more than once, RCR Li-Ion cells simply do not survive the "institutionalization" problem. "Institutionalization" means adapting flashaholic lights to a non-flashaholic work-a-day world. What will easily survive the normal consumer/use are primarily AA cells, or maybe AAA or maybe C and D cells. or maybe the non-rechargeable Lithium cells for police/military and firefighters. Who are we talking about? Plumbers, building maintenance personnel, mechanics, teachers, etc.etc.etc. This is most definitely NOT flashaholic territory where afficiondos and enthusiasts will willingly spend lots of $$ and time for an edge in light output or small size or some other esoteric feature (HID vs LED vs Quad-LED). 

I have tried to educate many different people in many different user environments and reduce the flashlight and battery complexity for them - all attempts have eventually failed and the people went back to something that did not require any gung-ho techno-geek to tell them what to do. They all like the smaller size and greater brightness from an RCR flashlight system....until they run in to the charging and multiple cell problems of RCR cells. They do not easily manage the problem of matching the RCR cell and charger. and then there is the problem of an "emergency" battery replacement when they are away from their specialized charger and they have to purchase a replacement Lithium cell or 2 in brick/mortar stores - ehhhhhh, that nonsense ceases very quickly! The final incentive killer is an protected RCR cell that cuts off the current when the cell voltage drops too low for safety. Try explaining that to a plumber who lost his light 20 feet into a narrow crawl space. Let that happen more than once and they will drop the idea of RCR Li-Ion cells instantly. Graceful degradation to any flashlight system is important. a more engineering word is "robustness".

Bottom line: I have progressively pulled back or exchanged all RCR Li-Ion cells and flashlights from over a dozen typical users, even those that do understand the nominal needs of RCR Li-Ion cells. Nearly all of the flashlights left in the hands of non-flashaholics are stuffed with non-rechargeable Lithium cells. and as those fail, and they do fail, I am replacing them with AA or possibly AAA flashlights with Ni-MH LSD cells. 

Also, FWIW, I really have to admit that the LSD NiMH cells solved a major problem - self discharge. Now users are asking for more LSD cells for their digital cameras - they can rely on adequate charge left after sitting on the shelf for a couple months and still have a standardized rechargeable battery. Even Nikon brought out the L20 with standard AA cells although their high-end digital cameras require too much power density for the small size and they switched to non-standard Li-Ion battery packs.

as for protected RCR cells, here is a good example of a problem: an EagleTac flashlight lost it's reverse-polarity bumpers - as usual. The problem was that a loose bumper bridged to cause a short in the head of the light. The protective circuit in the AW RCR123 cell sacrificed itself to protect the user. However explaining the idea of "protected" Li-Ion RCR123 cells and why the protection is needed was not easy. another case of back to AA cells. 'nuff said.

signed - an old engineer who has lost too many technology battles....


----------



## kwkarth (Nov 30, 2009)

LSD cells solve a lot of problems for many users. The other half of that equation, however, still is largely unsolved for the general population. A good charger that is affordable, easy to use, and treats NiMH cells properly so as to maximize both their utility and life cycle.

Some day maybe we will see the proliferation of good chargers, but for the general public, most of what they can easily see and obtain is trash. Too bad, because it holds the whole progress, commerce, and viability of reusable cells back from ultimate success.


----------



## NutSAK (Nov 30, 2009)

MY said:


> I find that most AA lights are significantly bigger that 123 lights. Take for example the quarks. The AA quark is much longer than the 123 version but only the middle tube is somewhat smaller, with maybe 50% more volume.



I would say that Quarks are a bad example. The reason is that Quarks are designed to be "legoed". This means that the head and the tail have to be large enough to accommodate the width of the CR123 or 16340, and not slimmed down to the dimensions of the AA cell.

I would say that the Quark MiNi 123 compared to the MiNi AA would be a better example, because each light was designed to be as small as possible based on a specific cell dimension.


----------



## NutSAK (Nov 30, 2009)

vaughnsphotoart said:


> I prefer AA over CR123, and 18650 over either of them.


 
+1 That pretty well describes it for me. AA for ease of carry and cell availability, 18650 for excellent power density & runtimes.


----------



## kaichu dento (Nov 30, 2009)

I prefer AA's for the body slimness and ready availability anywhere, anytime.


----------



## vali (Nov 30, 2009)

Li-ion is just too dangerous for the average user. People tend to get a flashligth, stick a couple of cells inside, put it in a drawer and forgot about it until the next blackout. Charging means "stick the cells in the charger until I need them" and so on...

Sometimes I come across forums that keep recommending 18650 and P7 because anything lower is just "too dim" and 2xAA format is just useless, but they never warn about lithium dangers. In fact they usually think li-ion is like Ni-MH but more powerfull.


----------



## RAGE CAGE (Nov 30, 2009)

AA only for me....except for my 1 18650, 1 N cell, 1 LR44, 4 AAA's and 2 Maglite Rebels 3 D cells that I just picked up at Lowes.......Do'h!:sick2:


----------



## Paul520 (Nov 30, 2009)

Yes, AA's (eneloops) last 50 times longer and don't catch fire or explode.


----------



## flatline (Nov 30, 2009)

As a rule of thumb, I don't want a flashlight that I can't feed using easily obtainable cells (like from a grocery store). I use 14500s in all my AA lights, but I like the fact that I can use a regular AA cell if the need arises.

The only power source that is compelling enough for me to break that rule is the 18650. I own three 18650 lights and will likely purchase more in the future, but even when carrying an 18650 light, I always have a AA or AAA light with me.

I do have a 2x123 light mounted to my Glock, but that's a special case.

--flatline


----------



## Patriot (Nov 30, 2009)

I used to be a diehard CR123 fan, but in this age of easily attainable protected li-ion batteries I'm gravitating to the AA formate once again. I agree with *flatline *in that if I'm going to purchase a special cell for daily use (li-ion) it might as well be the 14500, that way I've got 3 other chemistry options besides my main battery. Yes, the shorter light is somtimes nice but more often than not the diameter of a light is more restrictive than it's length. I'm looking forward to a wave of AA XP-G super lights to hit the market.


----------



## carrot (Nov 30, 2009)

I'm a big fan of CR123. There are still very few premium lights that use AA, in production or custom.


----------



## kaichu dento (Nov 30, 2009)

carrot said:


> I'm a big fan of CR123. There are still very few premium lights that use AA, in production or custom.


I would be all over a AA Ra Twisty!


----------



## MarioJP (Dec 1, 2009)

And I thought AA/AAA were becoming obsolete


----------



## kaichu dento (Dec 1, 2009)

MarioJP said:


> And I thought AA/AAA were becoming obsolete


----------



## Guy's Dropper (Dec 3, 2009)

I have a bunch of 17670 batteries from an old laptop battery, so 2x123A size is my current favorite. Another reason I like CR123A is the 10 year shelf life. Sure, you can buy AA lithium batteries, but they are more expensive that CR123As. Of course, AA does have the advantage of being much more common, so if I had to pick a light for a long trip, I'd have to choose AA.


----------



## kwkarth (Dec 3, 2009)

Guy's Dropper said:


> I have a bunch of 17670 batteries from an old laptop battery, so 2x123A size is my current favorite. Another reason I like CR123A is the 10 year shelf life. Sure, you can buy AA lithium batteries, but they are more expensive that CR123As. Of course, AA does have the advantage of being much more common, so if I had to pick a light for a long trip, I'd have to choose AA.



Guy, 
Very good reasoning here, and I agree on all points. This was one of the things that drew me to the Quark interchangeable head/body concept. One head, two bodies so you can use either AA or CR123 cells with the "same" light.


----------



## T0RN4D0 (Dec 3, 2009)

Well i prefer AA over 123s any time, since nobody is selling any kind of 123s here anyways. I did order some because i want to modify a small RC car i have, but for serious use 18650 packs three times as much power at only twice the size. 

For small flashlights AAs because they are dirt cheap (rechargable and alkalines), you can buy them litterally everywhere, heck even your local butcher is probably selling rechargable AAs... Also everyone has a charger and their size is nice so yeah... 

Must admit that there are alot of sexy cr123 midget flashlights out there, so for the fancy factor i would go with 123 maybe :]


----------



## NutSAK (Dec 3, 2009)

Guy's Dropper said:


> I have a bunch of 17670 batteries from an old laptop battery, so 2x123A size is my current favorite. Another reason I like CR123A is the 10 year shelf life. Sure, you can buy AA lithium batteries, but they are more expensive that CR123As. Of course, AA does have the advantage of being much more common, so if I had to pick a light for a long trip, I'd have to choose AA.



I would agree with these points also. But, my reasoning becomes more complicated if I also consider rechargeable batteries, especially when considering the expense. If you use rechargeable batteries day to day, you're going to save A LOT of money in the long run, especially if you're using NiMH LSD AAs and charging them with a good charger. Plus, you have a usable shelf life of well over a year with LSD. You also have the option to use 14500 Li-Ions in many of the newer AA lights if you want higher lumens and equal runtime to RCR123.

If you are storing a flashlight for years on end without using it, does the price difference of lithium AA vs. CR123 really make that much difference? Consumption of batteries should be very low in this case.


----------



## kwkarth (Dec 3, 2009)

NutSAK said:


> I would agree with these points also. But, my reasoning becomes more complicated if I also consider rechargeable batteries, especially when considering the expense. If you use rechargeable batteries day to day, you're going to save A LOT of money in the long run, especially if you're using NiMH LSD AAs and charging them with a good charger. Plus, you have a usable shelf life of well over a year with LSD. You also have the option to use 14500 Li-Ions in many of the newer AA lights if you want higher lumens and equal runtime to RCR123.
> 
> If you are storing a flashlight for years on end without using it, does the price difference of lithium AA vs. CR123 really make that much difference? Consumption of batteries should be very low in this case.


I love LSD AA's They have transformed my attitude toward rechargeables.

Regarding the Neverready L91/92's... I've had them fail on me so many times, i wouldn't touch them with your flashlight, let alone mine. 
They're junk in my book.


----------



## NutSAK (Dec 3, 2009)

kwkarth said:


> Regarding the Neverready E91/92's... I've had them fail on me so many times, i wouldn't touch them with your flashlight, let alone mine.
> They're junk in my book.



I wouldn't consider using _any_ Alkaline battery in your flashlight, let alone mine, unless it was an emergency.


----------



## kwkarth (Dec 3, 2009)

NutSAK said:


> I wouldn't consider using _any_ Alkaline battery in your flashlight, let alone mine, unless it was an emergency.



We totally agree about that!!:thumbsup:
If it weren't for the LSD NiMH cells, i wouldn't have any batteries to put in all my AA flashlights!


----------



## Marduke (Dec 3, 2009)

L91's are typically cheaper than equivalantly purchased CR123's, store more energy, and have twice the shelf life to the same % initial capacity (20 vs 10 years to 80%). Not to mention they work in most all of your electronics, not just you CR123 powered flashlights...


----------



## kwkarth (Dec 3, 2009)

Marduke said:


> L91's are typically cheaper than equivalantly purchased CR123's, store more energy, and have twice the shelf life to the same % initial capacity (20 vs 10 years to 80%). Not to mention they work in most all of your electronics, not just you CR123 powered flashlights...



But why are they so failure prone as I have experienced?


----------



## flatline (Dec 3, 2009)

kwkarth said:


> But why are they so failure prone as I have experienced?



What kind of failures have you experienced with the L91/L92?


----------



## NutSAK (Dec 3, 2009)

kwkarth said:


> But why are they so failure prone as I have experienced?



You said you had failures with E91/92. Did you mean you had failures with L91/92?

What type of failures?


----------



## kwkarth (Dec 3, 2009)

flatline said:


> What kind of failures have you experienced with the L91/L92?



Sorry, yes, I meant L91/92. 

There are more than a few of my AA lights that they just do not work reliably in for one, but the last failure that really cheesed me was in my mailbox.

I have an electronic locking mailbox. 4xAA batteries are used to power the keypad and combination uP and to run an electric motor and some LED's. The motor moves 4 crossbar locking bolts back and forth through a gear reduction system to secure the access door, much like a vault door.

4 alkalines are supposed to work for year. They did, but I had the bright idea that if I used lithiums, I could get even longer service life out of them.

They're a pain to change because they always seem to fail in the coldest weather. duh The mailbox is all the way down the driveway, around the corner, on the street.

So, I put in a 4 pak of fresh Eveready Energizer Lithiums. Six months later, not only had they failed, but they were stone dead so I had to use an emergency external portable battery pak that plugs in externally to open the door. At least when the alkies start to fail, I can still open the door with their failing power. I don't like using alkies in anything either because of their propensity to leak, but I'm stuck with them for this app. I would think that the L91s would be perfect for the mailbox, with a 10 year shelf life, better low temperature performance, etc. What's up with that? :thinking:

BTW, they have let me down prematurely in flashlights too.


----------



## Outdoors Fanatic (Dec 3, 2009)

Marduke said:


> L91's are typically cheaper than equivalantly purchased CR123's, store more energy, and have twice the shelf life to the same % initial capacity (20 vs 10 years to 80%). Not to mention they work in most all of your electronics, not just you CR123 powered flashlights...


 

_



"L91's are typically cheaper than equivalantly purchased CR123's"

Click to expand...

_ 
Let's see about that_:_


2xAA Lithium L91's = $*3.95*
http://www.batteryjunction.com/aa2lienaahie.html

2xCR123 (from the same brand as L91's, there are many other brands which are cheaper, not just Energizers) = $*2.86*
http://www.batteryjunction.com/energizer-cr123a.html


CR123's are cheaper even if you go for the more expensive brands.




> "_store more energy_"


 
Energy is: Amps X Volts = Watts


Lithium AA = 3000mAh x 1.5 = 4500
CR123 = 1500mAh x 3.0 = 4500

It's a tie, but the CR123 is substantially more compact.




> "Not to mention they work in most all of your electronics"


 

Not exactly true... Lithium AAs have a initial voltage of 1.72v (as opposed to Alkaline which cannot even maintain 1.2v under a small load), so there is a high risk of destroying an eletronic device designed only for common alkalines. Even many flashlight manuals state that the use of lithium cells is not recommended. I've lost a few headlamps trying that myself...


----------



## h2xblive (Dec 3, 2009)

AA, since they're more common, cheaper at the drug store, and used in many devices other than flashlights.


----------



## NutSAK (Dec 3, 2009)

hmmmm... I've never had an L91 fail me, but then I've not used many for other than storage.

kwkarth, could you use LSD NiMH in that mailbox? Eneloops should give you better cold weather performance than alky, and you wouldn't have to worry about leakage.


----------



## kwkarth (Dec 3, 2009)

NutSAK said:


> hmmmm... I've never had an L91 fail me, but then I've not used many for other than storage.
> 
> kwkarth, could you use LSD NiMH in that mailbox? Eneloops should give you better cold weather performance than alky, and you wouldn't have to worry about leakage.



I've been using LSD cells long enough now, that I'm close to making that happen. I figure the next time I need to change the batteries, that's when I'll go with some LSD's.
Thanks,
k


----------



## Marduke (Dec 3, 2009)

Outdoors Fanatic said:


> Let's see about that_:_
> 
> 2xAA Lithium L91's = $*3.95*
> http://www.batteryjunction.com/aa2lienaahie.html
> ...



B&M, L91's are $1.67-$2.50 each. CR123's are $2.50-$8.00
Online, L91's are ~$1-$2.50, CR123's are ~$1.50 (name brand)

Locally, I OFTEN find L91's on sale for $0.50-$1.00 each at common stores such as CVS or Walgreens.




Outdoors Fanatic said:


> Energy is: Amps X Volts = Watts
> 
> 
> Lithium AA = 3000mAh x 1.5 = 4500
> ...


 
How about taking nominal voltage under load into account? L91's will hold ~1.5v, CR123's will dip down to ~2.5-2.8v. 

Depending on brand at similar wattage discharge, you are looking at 4-4.5Wh for L91's, and 3.5-4Wh for CR123's.

While the difference is not huge, the stored Wh definitely goes to L91's over CR123's.

BTW, L91's are 7% larger, but are also 8.25% _lighter in weight_ vs CR123's... 



Outdoors Fanatic said:


> Not exactly true... Lithium AAs have a initial voltage of 1.72v (as opposed to Alkaline which cannot even maintain 1.2v under a small load), so there is a high risk of destroying an eletronic device designed only for common alkalines. Even many flashlight manuals state that the use of lithium cells is not recommended. I've lost a few headlamps trying that myself...



Okay, the VAST MAJORITY of consumer electronics that use AA's will operate just fine on L91's. Flashlights, radios, cameras, fans: all the devices you would want/need during an emergency. How many consumer electronics devices operate on CR123's other than flashlights and some archaic 35mm cameras?


----------



## Locoboy5150 (Dec 3, 2009)

I definitely prefer AAs over 123s or any of the other "specialized" batteries on the market that high performance flashlights use. My preference has nothing to do with performance though. It has to do with convenience because one other obsession in my life is photography and all of my Nikon camera equipment uses AA batteries. Whenever I travel, I take at least one light and all of my Nikon equipment with me and thus, AAs are all that I ever need when I'm on the road.

I thought that I'd have to get some flashlight-specific batteries when I went shopping for a new light, but then Fenix came out with the TK40 and voila...I'm an AA-guy all the way! 

My EDC light, a modified Mini-Maglite, also uses AAs so I live in an AA powered world. Even when I went to China on a two week vacation last year, I was able to find AA batteries if I needed them. A marginally "clean" bathroom was *impossible* to find in that country, but AA batteries were EVERYWHERE.

But...I just started modifying my 4 D cell Maglite, so there's a monkey wrench in the system!


----------



## kwkarth (Dec 3, 2009)

Locoboy5150 said:


> I...Even when I went to China on a two week vacation last year, I was able to find AA batteries if I needed them. A marginally "clean" bathroom was *impossible* to find in that country, but AA batteries were EVERYWHERE.



Clean bathrooms are only in nice hotels.


----------



## WDG (Dec 5, 2009)

AA Eneloops, for me.

When I started looking at what I might replace my Streamlight Scorpion with, I briefly considered rechargeable 123s. I discovered Eneloops and how far LEDs had advanced about the same time, and realized that there is nothing I need to do with an EDC that single-cell AA Eneloop can't handle. Plus, I like the increased likelihood of being able to scavenge cells if it ever comes to that.

BTW, my experience with those 10-year shelf-life claims indicates you might want to check them from time to time, especially if you're "saving money" on cheap online CR123s. Before my switch, I bought 20 bargain CR123s, and put them safely away to feed the Scorpion. That was a bit over two years ago, and the last time I checked them about half were nearly dead, and the rest not doing well. Meanwhile, the Energizer CR123s still in the Scorpion are near fully charged. Cheap does not always mean inexpensive.

FWIW, I've never had a problem with L91/L92 cells, though I no longer need them since the advent of LSDs.


----------



## JCup (Dec 6, 2009)

Locoboy5150 said:


> I definitely prefer AAs over 123s or any of the other "specialized" batteries on the market that high performance flashlights use. My preference has nothing to do with performance though. It has to do with convenience because one other obsession in my life is photography and all of my Nikon camera equipment uses AA batteries. Whenever I travel, I take at least one light and all of my Nikon equipment with me and thus, AAs are all that I ever need when I'm on the road.



Agree, and you have a key point.

Yes, I greatly prefer AA over CR123. And I have a Surefire 9P with a Malkoff M60, one of the better lights that use the CR123 format. I've had a long experience with high performance flashlights, dating to the early Surefire and Streamlight incandescent options.

Set aside the context of flashlights. If you invest in some of the outstanding Sanyo Eneloop AA's, and a good charger (Maha C9000 for instance), you have batteries to power radios, lights, cameras, a wide variety of battery powered items one might want in a power emergency. And the Eneloops provide you with a very low cost option if you use them to any degree; cost per watt, the lowest.

Low self-discharge (LSD) nickel metal hydride (NiMH) batteries are the best choice out there for portable power. They are reliable, inexpensive in use (after an initial investment), and powerful. I have C and D converters to use AA Eneloops in a couple of devices needing that format, and they serve pretty well.

Back to the context of flashlights, you have LED based single AA choices like the Nitecore, Fenix, and JetBeam, amazing performance from similar 2xAA lights, and now the big 8xAA Fenix TK40 (my new "wow" light, too).

Even in the flashlight junkie world, AA based lights are right up there in performance with the exotic lithium choices, both primary and rechargeable.

If you need/want primary batteries, the AA format L91 Energizer lithium is a solid performer. Adverse reports on their safety and performance are far less common than those about the CR123. I keep some of them put away for special situations. They are priced pretty close to the CR123's, especially at retail, and have similar features for long shelf life, weight, etc.

If you do decide on CR123, avoid the uncommon but widely touted $1 variants. Stay with name brands only, and expect to pay more like $1.50 even when ordering online at the best possible pricing.


----------



## ltiu (Dec 6, 2009)

JCup said:


> If you need/want primary batteries, the AA format L92 Energizer lithium is a solid performer.



Correction, L91 is the AA format. L92 is the AAA format.

http://data.energizer.com/PDFs/l91.pdf

http://data.energizer.com/PDFs/l92.pdf

In retail, both Lithium AA and CR123 are about the same price.


----------



## kwkarth (Dec 6, 2009)

ltiu said:


> Correction, L91 is the AA format. L92 is the AAA format.
> 
> http://data.energizer.com/PDFs/l91.pdf
> 
> ...



Who, in their right mind, buys "retail?"


----------



## kwkarth (Dec 6, 2009)

WDG said:


> AA Eneloops, for me.
> 
> When I started looking at what I might replace my Streamlight Scorpion with, I briefly considered rechargeable 123s. I discovered Eneloops and how far LEDs had advanced about the same time, and realized that there is nothing I need to do with an EDC that single-cell AA Eneloop can't handle. Plus, I like the increased likelihood of being able to scavenge cells if it ever comes to that.
> 
> ...



What was the "Brand name" of those "cheap" 123 cells?


----------



## GaryF (Dec 6, 2009)

I prefer AA's for various reasons, although I'll acknowledge 123's have a small advantage over L91's in terms of size and working voltage for led lights. The truth is I hate primaries for everyday use where I have to guess the batteries charge level. I'd much rather head out with a freshly topped up rechargeable, usually an AA Eneloop. I will switch to Lithiums when I travel / backpack though to take advantage of their lighter weight and higher energy density.

Has anyone else noticed that 123's have disappeared from a lot of small shops / convenience stores in the last couple of years? Digital cameras that use CR123's are fairly rare compared to 35mm cameras in the film days, and flashaholics are more likely to buy in bulk / online.


----------



## Dude Dudeson (Dec 6, 2009)

If I could only have one light I'd prefer AA.

In reality my preference is to have at least one light that CAN use them (and I do), but otherwise I prefer 123's.


----------



## flasohollic (Dec 6, 2009)

LSD: 2100mah x 1,2v = 2,520 wh
123: 800mah x 3,7 = 2,960 wh

+ the 123 is smaller , lighter and deliver more "punch"


----------



## GaryF (Dec 6, 2009)

flasohollic said:


> 123: 800mah x 3,7 = 2960 wh




Of course if I wanted to venture into rechargeable lithium, I could accomplish the same with 14500.


----------



## shark_za (Dec 6, 2009)

Do 16340's actually give 800mAh ?

Isn't 650-700 a more realistic output. 

Good LSD NiMh give a real 2000mAh.


----------



## ltiu (Dec 6, 2009)

kwkarth said:


> Who, in their right mind, buys "retail?"



On Sale, quality CR123 can go down to about $1 each vs. about $1.20 for the L91. Lesser quality CR123 can go down to $0.50 each.

The lesser Lithium Advanced EA91 (AA) and EA92 (AAA) can go down to about $1 each:

http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showthread.php?t=206863

http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showthread.php?t=206177


----------



## ltiu (Dec 6, 2009)

Can use any battery size:

http://www.rei.com/product/769769


----------



## ltiu (Dec 6, 2009)

GaryF said:


> Has anyone else noticed that 123's have disappeared from a lot of small shops / convenience stores in the last couple of years? Digital cameras that use CR123's are fairly rare compared to 35mm cameras in the film days, and flashaholics are more likely to buy in bulk / online.



And if you notice, these small shops / convenience stores are getting rid of their old stock by selling them for cheap?

Go around town and visit these stores and you will find good deals.


----------



## Justintoxicated (Dec 6, 2009)

Beacon of Light said:


> rcr123 cells are EXPENSIVE. /thread



Not that bad, especially if you only need a couple.

My Dad hates all rechargeable batteries because they require extra care and he always ends up killing or losing them. Sometimes I think he accidentally tosses them in the trash, or maybe someone else using his stuff.

I prefer 123 over AA for small lights because they have MORE capacity for the size, not less as someone else suggested. You have to remember you don't need 2 batteries to get to 3v...

My EDC is a AAA light, because it is very small. For other small lights I like 123A, I'd like to move on to 18650 lights over 2x123 lights though.

IMO they all have their place.

18650 is only a replacement for 2x123 lights, AA cannot replace single 123 lights either unless you buy other special batteries (I wont use unprotected lithium rechargeables). If you count the 14500, then it's comparable to RCR123's... That said I think it's ALWAYS good to have an AA flashlight around for backup because you can always find alkaline batteries (just don't leave them in your lights or they might leak!)


----------



## Black Rose (Dec 6, 2009)

My preferred lights are single cell 18650 lights, followed by 1xAA and 2xAA.

For awhile I was into CR123A lights but only have 4 left now, and they don't get used much at all.

Once all of my CR123A primary cells are used up (or given away), I'll probably retire those lights since it is not advised to use 16340 cells in 3 of them (unless I use LiFePO4). 
The other CR123A light can use 17670 cells, although it's not as bright.

Based on my battery inventory, it would appear that I prefer AA over CR123:
AA: 38 Alkaline, 48 L91 Lithium, 82 NiMh rechargeables

CR123A: 20 Lithium primaries, 4 16340 rechargables


----------



## Paul_in_Maryland (Dec 6, 2009)

*Re: using a flashlight for security at night*



shark_za said:


> I have two main uses for a good torch.
> 
> 2. Security - I may need to fight for my life at night.


Partly for this reason, I've ordered a 3xAA Dereelight Javelin for my keychain light. Yep, I'm talking about having a flashlight that can double as a whacking baton. I'm aware of the pro's and cons of this tactic; I own the book Flashlight Fighting.

Men's trouser pockets are so deep, the upper-half seldom gets used. There's plenty of space for a 3AA flashlight. In fact, I used to EDC a 4x123A body with two 18650s, but that body was almost embarrassingly thick, if you get my drift.

I may replace the Javelin with a more substantial 3AA: The FiveMega with a FiveMega all-stainless-steel bezel. Then I could use it to break glass--say, the next time Tiger Woods is trapped in his Escalade.


----------



## C-Beam (Dec 6, 2009)

flasohollic said:


> LSD: 2100mah x 1,2v = 2,520 wh
> 123: 800mah x 3,7 = 2,960 wh
> 
> + the 123 is smaller , lighter and deliver more "punch"



I disagree. I've never seen an RCR123 tested over 600mah, and that's only at .5 amps. At 1 amp, none over 450mah. 

LSD: 2100mah x 1,2v = 2,520 wh
rcr123: 450mah x 3,7 = 1665 wh


----------



## hoongern (Dec 7, 2009)

C-Beam said:


> I disagree. I've never seen an RCR123 tested over 600mah, and that's only at .5 amps. At 1 amp, none over 450mah.
> 
> LSD: 2100mah x 1,2v = 2,520 wh
> rcr123: 450mah x 3,7 = 1665 wh



Silverfox's NiMh Shootout 
Silverfox's Li-Ion Shootout
Silverfox's 123 Shootout
Silverfox's Alkaline/L91/L92 Shootout
*
For 1.85W discharge power:

AW RCR123 *@ 0.5A*3.7V = 1.85W measured *2.073Wh*

*Duracell CR123* @ 0.5A*3V = 1.5W measured 3.975Wh (which would be a bit lower with a 0.62A current discharge to generate 1.85W) ESTIMATE ~ *3.9Wh*

*Eneloop 2000* @ 1A*1.2V = 1.2W measured 2.320Wh
@ 2A*1.2V = 2.4W measured 2.158Wh
*@* 1.5A (required for 1.85W power) would be somewhere in between ESTIMATED ~ *2.239Wh*
*
Sanyo 2700* @ 1A*1.2V = 1.2W measured 3.088Wh
@ 2A*1.2V = 2.4W measured 2.887Wh
*@ *1.5A (required for 1.85W power) would be somewhere in between ESTIMATED ~ *2.988Wh*

*Energizer L91 *@ 1A*1.7V = 1.7W measured *3.738Wh* (For 1.85W, would be slightly lower)

*For 3W discharge power
*
*AW RCR123 *@ 1A*3.7V = 3.7W measured 1.363Wh. At 0.8A/3W it would be slightly higher, let's ESTIMATE ~ *1.5Wh*

*Duracell CR123* @ 1A*3V = 3W measured *3.170Wh* (which would be a bit lower with a 0.62A current discharge to generate 1.85W)
*
Eneloop 2000 *@ 2A*1.2V = 2.4W measured 2.158Wh
@ 3A*1.2V = 3.6W measured 2.039Wh
*@ *1.5A (required for 1.85W power) would be somewhere in ESTIMATED ~ *2.099Wh*

*Sanyo 2700* @ 2A*1.2V = 2.4W measured 2.887Wh
@ 3A*1.2V = 3.6W measured 2.666Wh
*@ *1.5A (required for 1.85W power) would be somewhere in between ESTIMATED ~ *2.777Wh*

*Energizer L91 *@ 1.76A*1.7V = 3W measured* ???*

Of course, afaik boosting voltages from AAs can be inefficient, so driving 3V+ LEDs may result in different results - i.e. an Eneloop can't drive a Quark at maximum while an RCR can.

Anyway, take my estimates with a grain of salt. They're obviously NOT accurate, I'm just taking guesses here and there


----------



## Marduke (Dec 7, 2009)

hoongern said:


> *Energizer L91 ???*



@0.5A load, 4.511 Wh
@1.0A load, 3.738 Wh


----------



## hoongern (Dec 7, 2009)

Marduke said:


> @0.5A load, 4.511 Wh
> @1.0A load, 3.738 Wh



Yup, I used the 1A load for the 1.85W (or in their case, 1.7W) values.

For the 3Watt discharge, you'd need the L91 to be @ 1.76A (1.76A*1.7V = 3W)


----------



## JaguarDave-in-Oz (Dec 7, 2009)

I remember my wife had a camera that needed those 123 batteries and it was always troublesome and expensive to get replacements (I live in rural Australia). In the end we both bought digital cameras that take AA batteries and things are so much easier. I wouldn't even think about buying a torch that used those 123 batteries. Batteries too hard to get and too pricey and I doubt that I'd ever bring myself to buy batteries from overseas via the internet even if that did make 123 cheaper and easier to get.

For torches, I have come to the conclusion that the only batteries I ever want to buy for them are D cells and AA's. The D's I keep for a big LedLenser P17 I use for lighting up the paddock when foxes come to kill sheep. It makes for a great shooting light. That's the only use for the D's that I have though.

I stopped daily use of my LedLenser p7 because it uses triple A's and replaced it with a Fenix Tk20 just to be able to use AA's. I also have Nitecore D10, fenix L1D and Ultrafire uf-m2 torches in single AA and an old double AA Maglite with a led conversion.

I use only Duracell AA alkaline. Those batteries are so convenient because you can buy them anywhere, often in large packs and they come very cheap unlike the lithium L91 AA's which in most shops in our area are twenty bucks just for a packet of four.

For twenty bucks I could get about forty Duracell alkies but I get em for nothing so that helps the choice. There's nothing better than when the wife comes home from shopping and tosses me a a pack of twenty duracell alkies that she picked up on special. Batteries for free, you beauty!! She usually tosses the kids a pack of twenty as well so I know I can pinch some off them if I run out. A great backup plan.

Rechargeables are not for me, I don't have the time or the organisational ability to manage the charging and frankly when the brightness goes down it's just a heap more convenient to reach for that plastic pack and grab a nice new alky or two.

I tried rechargeable lights in the past with the big halogen spotlights and it was just too inconvenient. Crikey, I can't even remember to charge my phone most of the time so I'd never have the discipline to manage a dozen little batteries.


----------



## WDG (Dec 7, 2009)

kwkarth said:


> What was the "Brand name" of those "cheap" 123 cells?



UltraLast... and they are certainly mis-named!


----------



## kwkarth (Dec 7, 2009)

WDG said:


> UltraLast... and they are certainly mis-named!



I guess so! I'll make sure I never test those cells!! I've had good luck with the Titaniums so far, and have used the Surefire brand for many years.

Thanks,
k


----------



## bob_ninja (Dec 7, 2009)

Why is there any discussion at all?
Seems to me 123s made sense in the past when there was less choice.
Today for me having no LiIon, only AA NiMH the choice is clear:

- single cell instead of 123 I will use 14500 as already stated
- for two cells instead of 2x 123 I will use 18650 again already stated

Clearly I want AA/14500 flexibility. Clearly I want a single 18650 cell for bigger lights instead of 2 cells (and balancing issues).

Really 123s are obsolete.

Given the availability and costs, AA format is far superior.


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Dec 7, 2009)

Again, AA's, 123's, 14500's, 18650's, etc all have their uses, and it is only personal preference that makes one better than the other. CPF is about information sharing, and it is important for us to know what other people prefer, and their reasons, so we can make some informed choices, and some of us may come to the conclusion that all of the different battery choices can have a good use, depending on the situtation.

Bill


----------



## baterija (Dec 7, 2009)

I have no non-flashlight devices which take 123. For most of my typical light uses AA offers more than enough performance and capacity while retaining commonality.


----------



## KiwiMark (Dec 7, 2009)

MY said:


> 2. I find that most AA lights are significantly bigger that 123 lights. Take for example the quarks. The AA quark is much longer than the 123 version but only the middle tube is somewhat smaller, with maybe 50% more volume. 14500 cells are much more difficult to find than rc123.



I don't know if the Quark is a good example - from what I understand it was deliberately designed to be able to swap body tubes. Take a Nitecore EZAA - that sucker is small! How about the Zebralight H501/H501w - also very small.



MY said:


> 3. There are many more quality 123 lights than AA lights. Most higher end manufacturers tend to focus their designs on 123 (although this is changing as is the tint preference from cool to warm).



I read this and had to check the date in case I was reading an old thread that had been dredged up, but no. Quality AA lights seem plentiful to me, even beyond my own collection. With Nitecore, Jetbeam, Liteflux, Zebralight, Fenix and many others offering good choices.

I only own one 1 x 123 light, but I have six 1 x AA lights - the slimmer profile fits better in a tight jeans pocket. I mostly use 14500 cells, but a couple of my lights aren't designed for that voltage so I use Eneloops in them. I like the fact that I can use batteries readily available in an emergency - but I have plenty of rechargeable Li-ion and NiMH to cover my needs.


----------



## C-Beam (Dec 7, 2009)

hoongern said:


> data snip
> 
> Of course, afaik boosting voltages from AAs can be inefficient, so driving 3V+ LEDs may result in different results - i.e. an Eneloop can't drive a Quark at maximum while an RCR can.
> 
> Anyway, take my estimates with a grain of salt. They're obviously NOT accurate, I'm just taking guesses here and there



That's a good synopsis. The numbers vary, but AAs come out on top in capacity. If you need more voltage, run a 14500.


----------



## KiwiMark (Dec 7, 2009)

bob_ninja said:


> Really 123s are obsolete.
> 
> Given the availability and costs, AA format is far superior.




AA cells are more versatile and I like them, but what about a light that you want to power with ~7V? 2 x 16340 is a different shape to 2 x 14500 in that there is 32mm less length needed for the battery tube. For 2 cell lights the shorter stubbier 123 sized cells can be an advantage.


----------



## dandism (Dec 7, 2009)

*Re: using a flashlight for security at night*



Paul_in_Maryland said:


> Then I could use it to break glass--say, the next time Tiger Woods is trapped in his Escalade.


----------



## Dude Dudeson (Dec 7, 2009)

bob_ninja said:


> Really 123s are obsolete.
> 
> Given the availability and costs, AA format is far superior.


 
That's an opinion.


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Dec 7, 2009)

Dude Dudeson said:


> That's an opinion.



+1

Bill


----------



## RGB_LED (Dec 7, 2009)

While all the comments about cost vs. size vs. stored energy are valid arguments for CR/RCR123's, it really comes down to personal preference. I prefer the size of my 1xAA lights a bit more vs. my 1xR123 lights (with some exceptions such as my HDS U60) but, that said, I do have both AA and R123 lights and use both (in addition to 18650 lights). When it comes down to it, I prefer to have at least one AA light on me or in my courier bag since it gives me the option of running a 14500 or using eneloops or, last resort, alkaline AA's . :thumbsup: 

To add to this, a friend of mine has a 2xCR/RCR123 light and I'm always reminding him to take the cells off the charger as there is always a potential fire hazard with overcharging cells - there is no real comparable danger with AA batteries... at least, good quality AA batteries.



DM51 said:


> 41 posts so far, and not a single one of you thought to report that it was in the wrong section? Good grief! :shakehead


----------



## was.lost.but.now.found (Dec 8, 2009)

You can chalk it up to inexperience, but a number of years back, we'll say 7 years ago, I was walking out of the woods in pitch black darkness after a long day of deer hunting. I had a 2x123a incan flashlight, and the batteries started to go dim. I thought well I only have about 5 more minutes on my walk I can get out of the woods with the light I have left. Two minutes later the flashlight was COMPLETELY dead and I had to search my pack for backup batteries in the dark by feel only. It was not a good experience and it somewhat permanently soured my to 123a batteries. The relatively high price does not help things.


----------



## ltiu (Dec 8, 2009)

was.lost.but.now.found said:


> I had a 2x123a incan flashlight, and the batteries started to go dim. I thought well I only have about 5 more minutes on my walk I can get out of the woods with the light I have left. Two minutes later the flashlight was COMPLETELY dead and I had to search my pack for backup batteries in the dark by feel only. It was not a good experience and it somewhat permanently soured my to 123a batteries. The relatively high price does not help things.


 
Give credit where credit is due.

It's the incan's fault. Not the CR123's fault.

The same thing would have happened with any type of battery.

That's why we have LEDs now. Because incans SUCK ( ... suck battery power that is).


----------



## bob_ninja (Dec 8, 2009)

I guess my point is that 123s format specifically has these major negatives:
- limited applications (mostly flashlights)
- limited availability or high price (outside of US)
- no significant advantage over other LiIon formats (14500, 18650, etc)

Sure personal preference can be anything. My preference is that I could care less about few mm difference between AA, AAA and 123. Others seem to care a great deal. Fine.

From my perspective having no LiIon cells and wanting to get some, is there *ANY SIGNIFICANT* reason to go with 123s? I see them mentioned a lot, for sale and flashlights using it. Outside of the flashlight universe I never came across them anywhere. Just seems very odd to me.


----------



## mfm (Dec 8, 2009)

bob_ninja said:


> From my perspective having no LiIon cells and wanting to get some, is there *ANY SIGNIFICANT* reason to go with 123s?


Some lights are brighter with 2x123 than with 18650 (but you can just avoid those lights).


----------



## KiwiMark (Dec 8, 2009)

was.lost.but.now.found said:


> You can chalk it up to inexperience, but a number of years back, we'll say 7 years ago, I was walking out of the woods in pitch black darkness after a long day of deer hunting. I had a 2x123a incan flashlight, and the batteries started to go dim. I thought well I only have about 5 more minutes on my walk I can get out of the woods with the light I have left. Two minutes later the flashlight was COMPLETELY dead and I had to search my pack for backup batteries in the dark by feel only. It was not a good experience and it somewhat permanently soured my to 123a batteries.



What it should have done is taught you the value of carrying a backup. If you had a Mag Solitaire on your keyring then you could have either walked out of the woods using that or used it to find some batteries in your pack.
You can't blame the batteries or the light for that one IMO.


----------



## kwkarth (Dec 8, 2009)

mfm said:


> Some lights are brighter with 2x123 than with 18650 (but you can just avoid those lights).



What lights are the same brightness between CR123 and any chemistry AA?
None that I can think of. (a 14500 is not an AA cell)

Any CR123 light should be almost twice as bright as any AA light. Likewise, any 2x123 will be brighter than most any 2xAA.


----------



## Marduke (Dec 8, 2009)

kwkarth said:


> What lights are the same brightness between CR123 and any chemistry AA?
> None that I can think of. (a 14500 is not an AA cell)
> 
> Any CR123 light should be almost twice as bright as any AA light. Likewise, any 2x123 will be brighter than most any 2xAA.



However, you can get every chemistry available in 16340 size cells in 14500 sized cells, so quality lights capable of utilizing the voltage range will have the added benefit of ~10-20% longer runtime at the same brightness as the 16340 counterpart.


----------



## kwkarth (Dec 8, 2009)

Marduke said:


> However, you can get every chemistry available in 16340 size cells in 14500 sized cells, so quality lights capable of utilizing the voltage range will have the added benefit of ~10-20% longer runtime at the same brightness as the 16340 counterpart.



Granted. I guess my main thought was that if max lumens for a given size is a consideration, then a 123 based torch is hard to beat. 123 primaries are cheap if you buy them ahead of time off the net. I have both AA based and 123 based lights because both form factors have their strong points and weak points, and with the advent of Quark, you can use one head with either type of battery.


----------



## GaryF (Dec 8, 2009)

KiwiMark said:


> What it should have done is taught you the value of carrying a backup. If you had a Mag Solitaire on your keyring then you could have either walked out of the woods using that or used it to find some batteries in your pack.
> You can't blame the batteries or the light for that one IMO.




To me it illustrates a downside to using primaries, be they 123's or AA's. Unless you always carry a spare, or throw away partially used batteries, on a fairly regular basis you can count on being left without light. It's been years since my rechargeables in my EDC have been run down to empty.


----------



## ltiu (Dec 8, 2009)

GaryF said:


> Unless you always carry a spare, or throw away partially used batteries



I change the primary lithiums in my EDC before they run down. I think I replace them when they are still at 50% to 70% full (just an estimate, I replace these at around 1.65v) - happens about once every 3 months. 

I then use these partially (still more than half-full) used batteries in my camping and house flashlights, where I am always near my car/home, where if I run out of battery power, I am near spares.

I also carry more than one EDC (2 at least, 3 normally, all small lights in keychains). Each EDC acts as a spare battery carrier to the other.


----------



## ltiu (Dec 8, 2009)

KiwiMark said:


> What it should have done is taught you the value of carrying a backup. If you had a Mag Solitaire on your keyring then you could have either walked out of the woods using that or used it to find some batteries in your pack.
> You can't blame the batteries or the light for that one IMO.



I would not carry a Solitare, another sad incan (did I say Incans SUCK, battery power that is). 

Get a LD01 or an E01.


----------



## 45/70 (Dec 8, 2009)

I see we've gone from Ford vs. Chevy (or was it Mopar?) to LP's vs. CD's (DVD Audio?). 

Dave


----------



## kwkarth (Dec 8, 2009)

ltiu said:


> I would not carry a Solitare, another sad incan (did I say Incans SUCK, battery power that is).
> 
> Get a LD01 or an E01.



What? How about an Itanium or a Preon, or a mini AA, or a mini 123? The LD01 and E01 are yesterday's news, man!!


----------



## KiwiMark (Dec 8, 2009)

ltiu said:


> I would not carry a Solitare, another sad incan (did I say Incans SUCK, battery power that is).
> 
> Get a LD01 or an E01.



I was referring to 7 (or so) years ago when the story took place and it would still have worked as I described. I used to keep a Solitaire on my keyring until I replaced it with a Microstream. Now days a good AAA sized LED on the keyring would be capable of running a LONG time on low mode - I have a choice of a Liteflux LF2XT R2, a Fenix L0D or an ITP A3 EOS. I did have a E01 but I couldn't stand its purple beam so I traded it away.


----------



## JCup (Dec 9, 2009)

kwkarth said:


> 123 primaries are cheap if you buy them ahead of time off the net.



I see this frequently stated, but in my frame of reference, $1.50 each or so is NOT cheap, and to get the price below that level, you must buy bulk quantities.

The cost in use of a NiMH rechargeable offering capacity in the same ballpark is way, WAY less, and geometrically so if you really use the light.


----------



## ltiu (Dec 9, 2009)

kwkarth said:


> What? How about an Itanium or a Preon, or a mini AA, or a mini 123? The LD01 and E01 are yesterday's news, man!!


 
I tried mini AA (Nitecores) and Mini CR123 (P1D, P2D). These lights are too big in the pocket. It's got to be AAA or Cr2 format lights, for me.

The Itanium, IlluminaTi and Preon sounds promising, but the specs and prices are about the same as the L0D , maybe a bit better and a bit more expensive ...


----------



## kwkarth (Dec 9, 2009)

JCup said:


> I see this frequently stated, but in my frame of reference, $1.50 each or so is NOT cheap, and to get the price below that level, you must buy bulk quantities.
> 
> The cost in use of a NiMH rechargeable offering capacity in the same ballpark is way, WAY less, and geometrically so if you really use the light.



Not true in my experience. Battery Junction sells Titanium CR123's for a buck a piece, and I've found them to be at least as good as any Surefire 123. You're comparing use/cost of rechargeable to primary cells? That's not really anything more than apples to cumquats. I use NiMH LSD cells too, and in most cases, I prefer the form factor of a 123 cell for compact power delivery, but AA form factors have their place too.


----------



## Black Rose (Dec 9, 2009)

kwkarth said:


> Not true in my experience. Battery Station sells Titanium CR123's for a buck a piece,


That would be Battery Junction.


----------



## kwkarth (Dec 9, 2009)

ltiu said:


> I tried mini AA (Nitecores) and Mini CR123 (P1D, P2D). These lights are too big in the pocket. It's got to be AAA or Cr2 format lights, for me.
> 
> The Itanium, IlluminaTi and Preon sounds promising, but the specs and prices are about the same as the L0D , maybe a bit better and a bit more expensive ...



I understand what you're saying. Ofttimes, AA or 123 based EDCs are more bulk than I want to carry. The Preon for 2xAAA and the illuminaTi for 1xAAA are my current faves. I also like the EZCR2. For size comparison, the IlluminaTi is quite a bit smaller than the L0D/L01D, and has a floddier, but brighter beam.


----------



## kwkarth (Dec 9, 2009)

Black Rose said:


> That would be Battery Junction.



Oops, you're right of course, thanks !!


----------



## was.lost.but.now.found (Dec 9, 2009)

KiwiMark said:


> What it should have done is taught you the value of carrying a backup. If you had a Mag Solitaire on your keyring then you could have either walked out of the woods using that or used it to find some batteries in your pack.
> You can't blame the batteries or the light for that one IMO.


 
It did; I carry an E01 on my keychain everywhere I go. It may be blue and purple, but it is dependable.


----------



## KiwiMark (Dec 9, 2009)

was.lost.but.now.found said:


> It did; I carry an E01 on my keychain everywhere I go. It may be blue and purple, but it is dependable.



Very good! Everyone is ignorant, that is nothing to be ashamed of - anyone smart will become less ignorant in certain areas as they go. It is only the stupid people that fail to learn. Any mistake that doesn't kill you is an opportunity to learn something. I have no problems learning because the amount of stuff that I am ignorant of is many orders of magnitude greater than the amount of stuff that I am knowledgeable of.


----------



## Lightcrazycanuck (Dec 9, 2009)

ltiu said:


> I tried mini AA (Nitecores) and Mini CR123 (P1D, P2D). These lights are too big in the pocket. It's got to be AAA or Cr2 format lights, for me.
> 
> The Itanium, IlluminaTi and Preon sounds promising, but the specs and prices are about the same as the L0D , maybe a bit better and a bit more expensive ...


 
I have been EDCing a P1D since the light came out.I carry it in my change pocket in my jeans.I do not even know its there.

Your pockets must be really small compared to my change pocket.My P1D fits perfect with room to spare.

lovecpflovecpflovecpf


----------



## ltiu (Dec 9, 2009)

Lightcrazycanuck said:


> I have been EDCing a P1D since the light came out.I carry it in my change pocket in my jeans.I do not even know its there.
> 
> Your pockets must be really small compared to my change pocket.My P1D fits perfect with room to spare.
> 
> lovecpflovecpflovecpf


 
I keep my EDC on my keychain. I have keys and garage remotes with it. The whole bundle is big. So need the smallest light I can get that still has a WOW factor.


----------



## Lightcrazycanuck (Dec 9, 2009)

ltiu said:


> I keep my EDC on my keychain. I have keys and garage remotes with it. The whole bundle is big. So need the smallest light I can get that still has a WOW factor.


 

So why did you say that the P1D is too big for the pocket in your post.:shrug::shrug::shrug:

For keychain carry,yes they are too big if you have alot of stuff on your keychain.Thats why I prefer to carry my P1D in my change pocket.


----------



## JCup (Dec 9, 2009)

kwkarth said:


> Not true in my experience. Battery Junction sells Titanium CR123's for a buck a piece, and I've found them to be at least as good as any Surefire 123. You're comparing use/cost of rechargeable to primary cells? That's not really anything more than apples to cumquats. I use NiMH LSD cells too, and in most cases, I prefer the form factor of a 123 cell for compact power delivery, but AA form factors have their place too.



Your experience is abnormal. My statement is absolutely true, in all but some exceptional cases. CR123's are expensive. You want "cheap", buy AA's at Walgreens or Costco. There are compromises there, but in a pinch cheap is EASY with AA format, just about anywhere you go.

CR123's have never been "cheap". The best deal you can find for an "off" brand is a buck. I don't accept $1 each to be "cheap". Even web dealers with aggressive pricing get more than that for name brands. And if you have to get one tonight at Walmart, the price is more like $3-4 each. 

Surefire gets $21 plus shipping for a box of 12 of their branded CR123, plus shipping. Surefire "broke" the pricing on these cells when they first made that offer. Back when I bought my 9P, they were way more.

You say comparing AA rechargeables to CR123 primaries is not reasonable? Hogwash! That's exactly what I DO recommend, and why I prefer AA format (as originally posed).

I prefer AA over CR123, and specifically, NiMH low self discharge AA's, and my assertion is that they are the better, less expensive choice, especially for anyone who plans to make regular use of a light with a high current drain.

The Sanyo Eneloop battery has made small high current portable power a new game, and one that CR123 format doesn't play nearly as well.


----------



## uk_caver (Dec 9, 2009)

Personally, I'd stick with AAs over 123, but that's largely down to the things I want to power.
All my lights are LED, my major lighting use is headlamps, and the ones I have are either AA or use larger NiMH/alkaline packs.

I have one cheap single-cell 123 flashlight, but I only got that since I had inherited some rechargeable 3V 123 cells that had been bought for one of my sister's SLRs, but didn't have adequate life in that, and wanted to find a use for them.
As it turned out, the flashlight didn't like the rechargeable cells anyway, so it's now basically an emergency light using primaries.

Maybe it's a UK thing (the price of primary 123s?) or a caver thing, or maybe it's just that I don't interact with any flashaholics IRL, but I'm not sure of *anyone* I know well who has a 123-powered light - they all use AAs, larger NiMH/alkaline packs, and maybe AAAs, though I guess that like me, they are mainly biased towards headtorches, with flashlights as very much secondary devices.


----------



## ltiu (Dec 9, 2009)

Lightcrazycanuck said:


> So why did you say that the P1D is too big for the pocket in your post.:shrug::shrug::shrug:



Yah, not enough information ... "Because there are other things in the pocket".


----------



## ltiu (Dec 9, 2009)

JCup said:


> You say comparing AA rechargeables to CR123 primaries is not reasonable? Hogwash! That's exactly what I DO recommend, and why I prefer AA format (as originally posed).



Apples to apples. You need to compare AA rechargeables against RCR123 rechargeables.

Primary AA against primary CR123.


----------



## uk_caver (Dec 10, 2009)

ltiu said:


> Apples to apples. You need to compare AA rechargeables against RCR123 rechargeables.
> 
> Primary AA against primary CR123.


Why?

Rechargeable (NiMH) AA are superior to primary (Alkaline) at anything other than light/occasional loads, so for most lights that run at more than low power, they're the obvious choice.

Just because rechargeable 123s don't have the same kinds of advantages over primary 123s isn't of any relevance to someone choosing which kind of AA to put in their AA light.


----------



## ltiu (Dec 10, 2009)

uk_caver said:


> Why?


 
I already mentioned, apples to apples, rechargeables to rechargeables, primaries to primaries. My eyes are rolling up my skull.

You just love AA. Yes. I get it.


----------



## uk_caver (Dec 10, 2009)

ltiu said:


> I already mentioned, apples to apples, rechargeables to rechargeables, primaries to primaries. My eyes are rolling up my skull.


 For anyone with an AA light, they'd choose the most sensible AA for their application, which these days is generally going to be NiMH, whether quality high capacity or LSD, unless the application is light or very intermittent use, or they just don't want to deal with rechargeables.

For anyone with a 123 light, they'd choose the most sensible 123 for their application, which could easily be either rechargeable or primary.

For anyone comparing AA and 123 lights for a given application, they'd look at the most sensible power sources for each light depending on that application.

In practice, that means for all but low power/low use applications, rechargeable AA is likely to end up being compared to both primary and rechargeable 123, at least for people for whom practical use is more important than some kind of language-based idea of 'fairness'.

Try a thought experiment where alkaline technology didn't exist.
Would you *still* insist that primary 123 should only be compared against zinc-carbon AA cells _even if everyone had stopped using zinc-carbon years ago for any serious application_?



ltiu said:


> You just love AA. Yes. I get it.


It's nothing to do with what I _love_, merely what I _use_, and, as it happens, what pretty much everyone I know uses.


----------



## funkL (Dec 10, 2009)

+1 for AAs because of cost and convenience.

I prefer AAs because they are less expensive and much easier to get a hold of in a pinch. Additionally, I can use rechargeable AAs and/or cells from a AA pack for other common items around the house, which is very convenient and economical.

If I needed the extra brightness, or functionality from a particular CR123 light, then I would invest more in CR123 cells.


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Dec 10, 2009)

It is still a personal thing. There is no universal understanding here on CPF that the majority of the members prefer AA lights. In follering CPF for years it seems to me that died in the wool CPF'ers are very flexable and do not necessarly limit themselves to one type of battery, or preference to one type of battery.

Bill


----------



## 45/70 (Dec 10, 2009)

Bullzeyebill said:


> In follering CPF for years it seems to me that died in the wool CPF'ers are very flexable and do not necessarly limit themselves to one type of battery, or preference to one type of battery.




"So say we all"..... Well, almost. 

Just thinking, I have 8 different sizes in two chemistries of Li-Ion cells for lights, and then I use AAA, AA, and to a very small extent, D NiMH's.

For most EDC (I'm a _pocket_ light collector, no, there isn't such a thing as an 18650 _pocket_ light), it's pretty much divided equally between AAA/10440, AA/14500, and RCR123/16340. Oh, and I have a CR123A light that sees little use in my car. 

Dave


----------



## kwkarth (Dec 10, 2009)

JCup said:


> Your experience is abnormal. My statement is absolutely true, in all but some exceptional cases. CR123's are expensive. You want "cheap", buy AA's at Walgreens or Costco. There are compromises there, but in a pinch cheap is EASY with AA format, just about anywhere you go.
> 
> CR123's have never been "cheap". The best deal you can find for an "off" brand is a buck. I don't accept $1 each to be "cheap". Even web dealers with aggressive pricing get more than that for name brands. And if you have to get one tonight at Walmart, the price is more like $3-4 each.
> 
> ...



Dude, if you want to compare primary alkaline AA's with primary Lithium CR123, be my guest. If you want to compare secondary NiMH AA to Primary CR123 Lithium, be my guest. I do not feel you're being realistic. Further, if you expect your one trick pony is what the rest of the world needs, well, good luck! Your brand of _truth_ may work for you, but don't assume it applies to anyone else. As I've said before, there are appropriate uses for pretty much all types and chemistries of cells. I guess you can pretty much cross carbon zinc off the list, but hey...
Cheers!


----------



## KiwiMark (Dec 10, 2009)

ltiu said:


> Apples to apples. You need to compare AA rechargeables against RCR123 rechargeables.
> 
> Primary AA against primary CR123.



Why couldn't someone compare every option available for powering a flashlight with each other? Are NiMH AA cells and Lithium CR123a cells not both valid options for powering a light?

NiMH AA:
Need to own a charger to recharge them.
Need to recharge them periodically.
Need a light designed to take AA cells.
.
.
.

Lithium CR123a:
No need to worry about charging.
Need to buy new cells, could get expensive.
Need a light designed to take 123 cells.
.
.
.

Why can't anyone look at those options, compare them and decide what way they want to go? What about the lights that are designed to use primary 123 cells only and advise not to use the Li-ion cells because the voltage is too high? If they also can't use protected Li-ion because the cells are too big then someone could decide that rather than buy a light that runs on primary 123 cells they will opt for an AA light, some Eneloops and a charger.


----------



## ltiu (Dec 10, 2009)

KiwiMark said:


> What about the lights that are designed to use primary 123 cells only and advise not to use the Li-ion cells because the voltage is too high? If they also can't use protected Li-ion because the cells are too big then someone could decide that rather than buy a light that runs on primary 123 cells they will opt for an AA light, some Eneloops and a charger.


 
Some lights run brighter (just for a while) and longer with Energizer primary Lithium AA (L91). For those lights, I prefer using AA L91 ... vs. using AA Eneloops/NiMH.

The Fenix L2D/LD20 is a good example of such a light:

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/155819

When in a cave, I prefer using primary Lithium AA (and primary CR123) as these are lighter and have more energy to weight ratio - don't have to carry heavy loads of batteries in a cave is always a big plus. They last longer (than non-lithium alkaline primaries and NiMH rechargeables) means, I don't have to change batteries as often. Hate doing that in a cave full of water


----------



## KiwiMark (Dec 10, 2009)

ltiu said:


> When in a cave, I prefer using primary Lithium AA (and primary CR123) as these are lighter and have more energy to weight ratio - don't have to carry heavy loads of batteries in a cave is always a big plus. They last longer (than non-lithium alkaline primaries and NiMH rechargeables) means, I don't have to change batteries as often. Hate doing that in a cave full of water



So you consider the important factors (size/weight/run time/etc) and make a decision on what to use based on your particular requirements? This seems like a sensible approach.


----------



## kwkarth (Dec 10, 2009)

KiwiMark said:


> So you consider the important factors (size/weight/run time/etc) and make a decision on what to use based on your particular requirements? This seems like a sensible approach.



What a concept! :naughty::twothumbs


----------



## ltiu (Dec 10, 2009)

kwkarth said:


> What a concept! :naughty::twothumbs



Yes. Good.


----------



## KiwiMark (Dec 10, 2009)

kwkarth said:


> What a concept! :naughty::twothumbs



But is it as good as just saying "I think 123 sized batteries are stupid and wrong so I only ever use AA Eneloops" or vice versa? I mean it involves thinking and using some common sense - how crazy is that?


----------



## ltiu (Dec 10, 2009)

KiwiMark said:


> ... using some common sense - how crazy is that?



Very.


----------



## 45/70 (Dec 10, 2009)

Whew! Ford vs. Chevy, LP's vs. CD's...... now, mindgames? 

Dave


----------



## JCup (Dec 10, 2009)

kwkarth said:


> Dude, if you want to compare primary alkaline AA's with primary Lithium CR123, be my guest. If you want to compare secondary NiMH AA to Primary CR123 Lithium, be my guest. I do not feel you're being realistic. Further, if you expect your one trick pony is what the rest of the world needs, well, good luck! Your brand of _truth_ may work for you, but don't assume it applies to anyone else. As I've said before, there are appropriate uses for pretty much all types and chemistries of cells. I guess you can pretty much cross carbon zinc off the list, but hey...
> Cheers!



I expressed a strong preference for AA vs 123, as the question was posed. As it happens there are no decent secondary 123's for that side, and NiMH AA format batteries own the day in my selection process. All your other logic constructs for sake of argument have little bearing on the original question, "dude". 

I am quite pleased with my ancient Surefire 9P and Malkoff M60. But it burns through $5 worth of CR123's in a couple of hours. As a comparison, a 2xAA Fenix L2D is pretty close to the output, longer run time, and the $4 pair of Eneloops will recharge in two hours for almost nothing - a thousand times. 

AA's are preferable to many of us, and you can equivocate ad infinitum.


----------



## Black Rose (Dec 10, 2009)

Bullzeyebill said:


> In follering CPF for years it seems to me that died in the wool CPF'ers are very flexable and do not necessarly limit themselves to one type of battery, or preference to one type of battery.


So true. I started out with AA and D alkaline cells, and now look at the mess I have 

NiMh: AA, AAA, C, D
Alk: AA, AAA, D, 9V
Lithium: AA, 2016, CR123A
Li-Ion: 16340, 17670, 18650

I'll probably add LiFePO4 and IMR to the mix next year.


----------



## kwkarth (Dec 10, 2009)

KiwiMark said:


> But is it as good as just saying "I think 123 sized batteries are stupid and wrong so I only ever use AA Eneloops" or vice versa? I mean it involves thinking and using some common sense - how crazy is that?



No, no, it's MUCH better because it shows common sense and REASON. It does not show dogmatism or elitism, nor narrow thinking. Good stuff that!


----------



## kwkarth (Dec 10, 2009)

JCup said:


> I expressed a strong preference for AA vs 123, as the question was posed. As it happens there are no decent secondary 123's for that side, and NiMH AA format batteries own the day in my selection process. All your other logic constructs for sake of argument have little bearing on the original question, "dude".
> 
> I am quite pleased with my ancient Surefire 9P and Malkoff M60. But it burns through $5 worth of CR123's in a couple of hours. As a comparison, a 2xAA Fenix L2D is pretty close to the output, longer run time, and the $4 pair of Eneloops will recharge in two hours for almost nothing - a thousand times.
> 
> AA's are preferable to many of us, and you can equivocate ad infinitum.



Well, I guess I've been told then, haven't I.

I still don't understand why you insist upon paying at least twice as much for good 123's as you need to. Puzzling. :thinking: 

Surprisingly enough, some folks have needs and priorities differing from your own, so while your choices work for you, they're clearly not best for everyone.

By the way, I really like Eneloops for many of my lights, so we certainly agree there, and you're sometimes a hard man to agree with !


----------



## kwkarth (Dec 10, 2009)

45/70 said:


> Whew! Ford vs. Chevy, LP's vs. CD's...... now, mindgames?
> 
> Dave



No kiddin' ! sheesh! Religious discussions!


----------



## JCup (Dec 10, 2009)

kwkarth said:


> No, no, it's MUCH better because it shows common sense and REASON. It does not show dogmatism or elitism, nor narrow thinking. Good stuff that!



I like my reasoning a lot more than your offensive labelling. I gave my preference, and the reasons. You descend to diatribe.


----------



## kwkarth (Dec 10, 2009)

JCup said:


> I like my reasoning a lot more than your offensive labelling. I gave my preference, and the reasons. You descend to diatribe.


If I've offended you in any way, please forgive me, it was not my intention.


----------



## ltiu (Dec 11, 2009)

kwkarth said:


> I still don't understand why you insist upon paying at least twice as much for good 123's as you need to. Puzzling. :thinking:



If budget is priority, then you buy the cheapest (AA alkaline) or use the cheapest to operate (NiMH/RCR123) in the long-run.

If performance (power to weight, longevity/endurance) is priority, you buy what you need, regardless of price.

Having said that, I do buy my poop (Primary Lithium AA and Primary Lithium CR123) on-sale, always. I find I am too effective at finding sales that for the past two years, I have been buying more batteries than I can use. So my stockpile is growing. Thank goodness for Primary Lithium's 10 to 15 year shelf life.


----------



## ltiu (Dec 11, 2009)

Black Rose said:


> So true. I started out with AA and D alkaline cells, and now look at the mess I have
> 
> NiMh: AA, AAA, C, D
> Alk: AA, AAA, D, 9V
> ...



It all depends on usage, needs, technical requirements and budget. Every battery type has pros and cons.

That's why battery types are proliferating.


----------



## LightCannon (Dec 11, 2009)

ltiu said:


> If budget is priority, then you buy the cheapest (AA alkaline) or use the cheapest to operate (NiMH/RCR123) in the long-run.
> 
> If performance (power to weight, longevity/endurance) is priority, you buy what you need, regardless of price.
> 
> Having said that, I do buy my poop (Primary Lithium AA and Primary Lithium CR123) on-sale, always. I find I am too effective at finding sales that for the past two years, I have been buying more batteries than I can use. So my stockpile is growing. Thank goodness for Primary Lithium's 10 to 15 year shelf life.


If you've got too many to use, feel free to ship a few over to me. I'll put them to good use


----------



## ltiu (Dec 11, 2009)

kwkarth said:


> By the way, I really like Eneloops for many of my lights, so we certainly agree there, and you're sometimes a hard man to agree with !



I really like my Eneloops as well. 

But as has been mentioned many times in other threads, sometimes, managing/maintaining rechargeables takes too much time and effort and some people do not have the time nor the organizational skillz for it. Sometimes resulting in rechargeables being tossed out when it should have been sent to the charger.

For these cases, it's easier to grab fresh primaries and toss these out when done. Yes, this is more expensive in the long run but for many people, time is more expensive and better spent doing other things than spent managing rechargebles.


----------



## ltiu (Dec 11, 2009)

LightCannon said:


> If you've got too many to use, feel free to ship a few over to me. I'll put them to good use



Yes, in 10 to 15 years


----------



## uk_caver (Dec 11, 2009)

Presumably for lithium (of any size), the killer application mandating them is cold weather, with voltage-per-unit-volume and energy-per-unit-weight (and maybe shelf-life) being important other factors in some circumstances.

For a lot of people (maybe most people?), if they weren't already using 123-based lights, there can be quite a hurdle to get over to start using them, unless there's either a significant driving factor in terms of usage, or a particular light they really want which forces their hand.

Obviously, there's a vicious circle there - if few people use them, cells are likely to be more expensive/less available, which stays as a disincentive for people who don't want to have to mail-order their cells, and also means that stores may be less likely to stock the lights, etc.

Maybe that's more the case over here than in the US?
Is there much of a retail market over there for 123-based lights in physical stores (not mail-order)?

I guess that with lighting, there's also always the subjective side.
Even there were two headtorches/flashlights that were the same price, same weight, tuned for the same runtime, and with the same running costs, but one was 50% or 100% brighter than the other due to its power source, unless someone with the dimmer torch was going out of their way to do brightness comparisons, they might not be meaningfully less happy with the dimmer one than they would have been if they'd bought the other one, even if someone else might think they should be.

If 123 and AA technology are both basically mature, I wonder if there'd be likely to be much of a shift at the bulk consumer end of the market.

Possibly the existence of mail order basically filling the needs of the niche market that does exist makes it less attractive for consumer retail stores to enter the field unless they think they can significantly expand demand?
And if that expansion would be at the expense of other things they currently sell...?


----------



## js (Dec 11, 2009)

JCup said:


> kwkarth said:
> 
> 
> > No, no, it's MUCH better because it shows common sense and REASON. It does not show dogmatism or elitism, nor narrow thinking. Good stuff that!
> ...



JCup,

kwkarth was responding to someone else here, and not to you. I've read over the dialog here and I didn't see any offensive labelling or a diatribe. You are free to disagree, of course--I have no problem with that. The problem is in redirecting the discussion to the style and language and people instead of the _subject matter_. If you feel a post is offensive, report it--that's the best approach. Turning the discussion to people and posting style and summary judgments of the same will tend to cause it to degenerate.

Everyone is free to express his or her opinion, including the opinion that the answer depends upon the person and his or her needs.

kwkarth has expressly stated that he was not intending to offend, and has even offered an apology. Please consider that you and he have an honest difference of opinion, and that neither of you is trying to offend or slap offensive labels on each other.

Back to the regularly scheduled discussion.


----------



## uk_caver (Dec 11, 2009)

ltiu said:


> But as has been mentioned many times in other threads, sometimes, managing/maintaining rechargeables takes too much time and effort and some people do not have the time nor the organizational skillz for it. Sometimes resulting in rechargeables being tossed out when it should have been sent to the charger.


It _can_ certainly be easier using primaries from that respect.

Even if single-cell-per-channel smart chargers make it very much quicker and easier to recover from a full/part-used/empty rechargeable mix-up than it used to be, there can be a definite issue with the sheer numbers of cells needed if managing multiple devices at the same time.
Also, given that all chargers and cells are definitely not equal, people can have (or have had) bad experiences which put them off the whole idea.


----------



## moldyoldy (Dec 11, 2009)

There is another factor in the NiMH vs Li-Ion debate - that of supply. There have been several threads in the CPF archives on the subject of the world's supply of Lithium. A search on "Lithium supply" returns quite a few hits. Here is one of them:

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/212904

The point for this discussion is that the market factors for Lithium for any type of Lithium-xxx cells are only starting to be influenced by car manufacturers looking at high-energy storage sources. By comparison, the market factors for the raw materials in NiMH cells are relatively established.


----------



## ltiu (Dec 11, 2009)

moldyoldy said:


> The point for this discussion is that the market factors for Lithium for any type of Lithium-xxx cells are only starting to be influenced by car manufacturers looking at high-energy storage sources. By comparison, the market factors for the raw materials in NiMH cells are relatively established.


 
Lithium is also used in the manufacture of meth 

Steet meth prices are going to sky rocket!!!


----------



## ltiu (Dec 11, 2009)

moldyoldy said:


> There is another factor in the NiMH vs Li-Ion debate - that of supply. There have been several threads in the CPF archives on the subject of the world's supply of Lithium. A search on "Lithium supply" returns quite a few hits. Here is one of them:
> 
> https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/212904


 
More reason to stock up now!

How about recycling?

I hear about Nickel recycling all the time, but never about Lithium recycling.


----------



## uk_caver (Dec 11, 2009)

I wonder if people would be more likely to recycle rechargeable cells than primary ones, even if similarly labelled?

Primaries do have more of a disposable feel (no value once flat, just consuming space) whereas at least some fraction of the people who use rechargeables is used to have them hanging around, so might be more amenable to collecting them up for eventual recycling.

If they go flat when away from home, unless someone has a good reason to assume they're also end-of-life, there's a reason (and a habit) to bring rechargeables back home where they might be accumulated for recycling.
Even if it is likely a cell is on its last legs, it may welll be taken home for a quick test to make sure, or relegated to lesser duties until it finally dies, or at least until it ages enough to be included in a future recycling run.


----------



## WDG (Dec 11, 2009)

As a side note on cell voltage, I recall AA Lithium cells were 3v when they first came to market, requiring the use of dummy cells in some applications. Now that we could use the extra voltage, whatever happened to those? It's clearly possible, if there were a market for them.


----------



## uk_caver (Dec 11, 2009)

WDG said:


> Now that we could use the extra voltage, whatever happened to those? It's clearly possible, if there were a market for them.


If these were primary cells, what was the supposed market at the time?

Did they have twice the power capacity of alkalines, to make up for the halving of overall cell numbers/volume?


----------



## ltiu (Dec 11, 2009)

WDG said:


> As a side note on cell voltage, I recall AA Lithium cells were 3v when they first came to market, requiring the use of dummy cells in some applications. Now that we could use the extra voltage, whatever happened to those? It's clearly possible, if there were a market for them.


 
Hmmm ...

The CR-V3 format has 2AA sized cells in parallel. Fits some cameras that use 2AA.

If you cut it open, you get 2 AA Lithiums, each is ~3.2v. The chemistry is similar to CR123, but different from the L91 Lithium AA, which is at ~1.7v.


----------



## uk_caver (Dec 11, 2009)

ltiu said:


> The CR-V3 format has 2AA sized cells in parallel. Fits some cameras that use 2AA.
> 
> If you cut it open, you get 2 AA Lithiums, each is ~3.2v. The chemistry is similar to CR123, but different from the L91 Lithium AA, which is at ~1.7v.


Seems like the capacity is around 3000-3200mAh, so an AA half of a CR-V3 would be pretty much equivalent to two regular primary lithium AAs in terms of voltage/capacity/power.

I guess before equipment was around that could cope with a wide input voltage range (which presumably still isn't much more than some flashlights), a 3.2V primary AA + spacer wouldn't have any obvious advantage over 2xL91s, but would have the big drawback of likely damage if put into the wrong equipment (which included almost everything).


----------

