# CR123A Comparison Review: 4Sevens, Titanium Innovations, Tenergy, Surefire, Duracell



## selfbuilt

_*UPDATE May 16, 2013: *The CR123A testing results in this thread have been superseded by a new 2013 comparison posted here. Please refer to that thread for more up to date info._

_*UPDATE SEPT 29, 2012:* New results based on a December 2011 comparison have been added to the end of the review._

_*Reviewer’s Note:* Following up my initial CR123A/AA Battery Shoot-out, here I provide a more detailed comparison of how three of the more popular made-in-China cells (4Sevens, Titanium Innovations, and Tenergy) compare to the top-of-the-line USA cells that I routinely use (Duracell & Surefire)._

For more information on the differences between the various USA brands (including estimated capacity loss over time), please see my earlier review listed above. All USA brands perform well in my testing, but some fall into a second-tier category where overall capacity seems to be ~5% less than these top-tier Surefire/Duracell cells, when matched for age.







*Batteries:* 

All batteries were purchased new within the last three months from major distributors. Duracells and Surefires used in this study both have a manufacture date of August 2008, and were purchased from cfrlights and Tetragon (local Surefire distributor), respectively. 

Made-in-China batteries do not have a manufacture date, but all were purchased within the last one month. 4Sevens batteries were from 4sevens.com, Titanium Innovations batteries were from batteryjunction.com, and Tenergy batteries were from 4sevens.ca. 

*Flashlights:*

I have chosen four single-cell CR123A lights for comparisons. Each light has a different type of regulation circuitry. All light were run on Max/Turbo settings.
4Sevens Quark Q123 (R2)
LiteFlux LF3XT (R2)
Olight T10 (Q5)
NiteCore EX10 (Q5)

*Testing Method:* 

All my output numbers are relative for my home-made light box setup, a la Quickbeam's flashlightreviews.com method. You can directly compare all my relative output values from different lights - i.e. an output value of "10" in one graph is the same as "10" in another. All runtimes are done under a cooling fan.

_*In addition to time to 50% output (the standard runtime measure), I have also done an area-under-the curve measure (labelled as AOC – I can’t spell ).* _ This gives you a relative measure of the total capacity for each cell in each light. It is in completely arbitrary units (as it integrates my relative output values over time), but it will allow you roughly compare overall capacity within each flashlight model.

*Runtimes:*
















_*UPDATE JUNE 28, 2009:* Added a "Med-Hi" runtime on the NiteCore EX10 (Q5), to see how the batteries fare until a lower current load._






_*UPDATE JULY 10, 2009:* Added a "Med-Hi" runtime (L4) on the Olight T10 (Q5)_






*Preliminary Observations:*

USA Cells (Surefire/Duracell)

As mentioned in my original CR123A/AA Battery Shoot-out, Duracell and Surefire cells typically have equivalent performance that is among the best I’ve seen for made-in-the-USA cells. These are the standard by which I compare other batteries. Please see my earlier review for how other USA brands compare.

Titanium Innovations cells:

On Max, the Titanium cells consistently provided equivalent runtime and overall capacity to the top-tier USA cells.  In fact, they were the only China-made cells to do so. But they do have a slightly different runtime pattern – as the cells near depletion, they drop in output more rapidly than the USA cells (which tend to enter a longer “moon mode” of gradually reducing output). So while time to 50% and overall capacity are similar, expect to have a more rapid drop-off as the Titaniums near depletion. Note that I have tested 3 different lots of Titanium cells so far, and the “average” batch (in terms of capacity) is shown above. Performance was generally similar on all three batches when run on Max.

On the Med output EX10 and T10 runs, the Titanium Innovations cells showed lower capacity and runtime than the Surefire or 4Sevens cells. Although difficult to generalize from the limited testing above, it seems that the Titanium cells are best suited to high drain situations (although are still quite reasonable at these lower drive currents).

4Sevens cells:

The new 4Sevens cells do remarkably well in the 4Sevens Quark lights. In fact, they are basically indistinguishable from the top-tier USA cells in terms of time to 50%, overall capacity, and runtime pattern. :thumbsup: 

However, when tested on Max in the Olight T10 and LiteFlux LF3XT, their total capacity appears to be ~10% lower than the top-tier USA brands or Titanium cells. I am not sure of the reason for this discrepancy. :thinking: I have tested several batteries from the same lot, and get identical runtime traces each time in the lights above. 

Interestingly, in the Med output EX10 and T10 runs, the 4Sevens cells performed better - fairly close to to the top-tier USA, in fact. This suggests that the 4Sevens cells perform best at less-than-maximal drive currents, except in some lights (like the Quarks), where their performance is consistently top-level at all outputs. Note that the runtime pattern of the 4Sevens cells remains similar to the USA brands in all lights (i.e. good long moon mode). 

Tenergy cells:

Tenergy cells consistently under-performed in all 4 lights. Total capacity of the Tenergy cells appears to be consistently ~25-30% less than the top-tier USA cells. :sigh: They also tend to drain much faster than the other batteries once the circuits drop out of regulation.

*Bottom line:* I think you could do well with either the Titanium Innovations or 4Sevens cells. The 4Sevens cells have a pattern very reminiscent of the USA brands, but with slightly lower overall capacity on Max in some lights. The Titanium cells were consistently in line with the top USA brands in all lights on Max, but performed a little below on the lower outputs.

------------------------------

*UPDATE:*

Back in December 2011, I did some additional comparison tests of these cells in a few newer lights. Sorry I never got around to posting the results here, but here they are: 
















As you'll see, modern made-in-the-USA cells continue to consistently match each other's performance. The older Energizer cells fall behind in the max current draw example above (which may be due to age effects, or more likely improvements in the more recently manufactured cells). 

The Titanium Innovation cells continue to do at least as well as the name-brands on Hi current draws. The issue I noted in my original review was slightly lower performance on the mid-level current draws. At least in the case of the Foursevens Quark 123-X above, you'll see the more recent Titanium Innovation cells are doing quite well now.


----------



## Black Rose

As usual, nice work :thumbsup:


----------



## nanotech17

la magnifique battery diagnose selfbuilt :thumbsup:
the titanium seems to be more consistent through out all the testing.


----------



## gswitter

Good test.

Wish you could do the same tests after letting the cells sit for two or three years.


----------



## Burgess

_


----------



## tygger

Thanks selfbuilt. Great work as always.


----------



## wapkil

selfbuilt said:


> 4Sevens cells:
> 
> The new 4Sevens cells do remarkably well in the 4Sevens Quark lights. In fact, they are basically indistinguishable from the top-tier USA cells in terms of time to 50%, overall capacity, and runtime pattern. :thumbsup:
> 
> However, when tested in the T10 and LF3XT, their total capacity appears to be ~10% lower than the top-tier USA brands or Titanium cells. I am not sure of the reason for this discrepancy. :thinking: I have tested several batteries from the same lot, and get identical runtime traces each time in the lights above.



Just my initial thoughts but maybe the 4Sevens cells are better suited for high current applications but are lower capacity when the current is lower? I remember from HKJ's review that the current draw at the beginning of the Q123 runtime is 2A - quite demanding for such a small battery. This could be some explanation for the difference between Q123 and LF3XT, I don't know why it happens for Olight, though.


----------



## selfbuilt

gswitter said:


> Wish you could do the same tests after letting the cells sit for two or three years.


I've done that for several of the USA brands (especially Duracell and Energizer), as shown in my earlier battery round-up review.

Because a light's performance could change over time, I kept samples of certain older lots of cells where a manufacture date is given (hence why only USA cells tested). These were all re-tested in my Olight T10 within a few weeks of each other (range was from 9-30 months old at time of testing). As you will see, there is a fairly consistent loss over time, ~3% per year, based on my very limited sample size.



wapkil said:


> Just my initial thoughts but maybe the 4Sevens cells are better suited for high current applications but are lower capacity when the current is lower? I remember from HKJ's review that the current draw at the beginning of the Q123 runtime is 2A - quite demanding for such a small battery. This could be some explanation for the difference between Q123 and LF3XT, I don't know why it happens for Olight, though.


Yes, it occurs to me that may be an issue. Testing at lower outputs (and hence lower currents) should help reveal a bit more. Unfortunately, I'm running out of a number of the brands, so I will have to give this some "strategic" thought when the lightbox is free again (busy testing new lights right now).


----------



## lrp

Great source of information on cells!!!


----------



## swampgator

selfbuilt said:


> Tenergy cells:
> 
> Tenergy cells consistently under-performed in all 3 lights. Total capacity of the Tenergy cells appears to be consistently ~25% less than the top-tier USA cells. They also tend to drain much faster than the other batteries once the circuits dropped out of regulation.


 
This matches my experiences with Tenergy cells. Granted I only used 10 cells in a E2E but they under performed all the cells I'd used up to and after that point.


----------



## Sharpy_swe

Great test, thanks :twothumbs


----------



## zipplet

Thank you for the review/shootout selfbuilt. Very useful information.


----------



## rookiedaddy

selfbuilt said:


> As you will see, there is a fairly consistent loss over time, ~3% per year, based on my very limited sample size.


Pardon my n00b question, based on this observation, when the battery expire, it still has ~70% of energy left, what properties has change that it is not recommended/safe to use? or is it still useable? or the % loss tend to increase towards the end of the battery life?


----------



## Mr Happy

rookiedaddy said:


> Pardon my n00b question, based on this observation, when the battery expire, it still has ~70% of energy left, what properties has change that it is not recommended/safe to use? or is it still useable? or the % loss tend to increase towards the end of the battery life?


Why do you say it has 70% of energy left?

On the contrary, when the battery expires it has almost no energy left. The light output decreases to zero and the battery is no longer useful.


----------



## selfbuilt

rookiedaddy said:


> Pardon my n00b question, based on this observation, when the battery expire, it still has ~70% of energy left, what properties has change that it is not recommended/safe to use? or is it still useable? or the % loss tend to increase towards the end of the battery life?





Mr Happy said:


> Why do you say it has 70% of energy left?


I believe rookiedaddy is referring to my estimate of ~3% loss of capacity per year, and the 10-year rated shelf life of USA-made cells (i.e. the "expiry date").

The cells are still perfectly safe to use at that point, provided they were properly stored during that time (i.e. no huge swings in temperature, etc). You should always check for leaks or damage as well, when they are that old. The expiry date is really a "best before date".

As to the final capacity of a 10-year old cell, I have not measured this yet - my ~3% estimate is based on 6-30 months decay. It is quite possible that the rate of loss increases with time, so I think ~70% is probably an upper estimate of remaining capacity.


----------



## Mr Happy

selfbuilt said:


> I believe rookiedaddy is referring to my estimate of ~3% loss of capacity per year, and the 10-year rated shelf life of USA-made cells (i.e. the "expiry date").


Ah, I missed that. I see now.


----------



## gswitter

selfbuilt said:


> gswitter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wish you could do the same tests after letting the cells sit for two or three years.
> 
> 
> 
> I've done that for several of the USA brands (especially Duracell and Energizer), as shown in my earlier battery round-up review.
Click to expand...

I guess what I'm really curious about is if the new Titaniums (and the 4Sevens) hold up better in long term storage than the previous generation. It's great that they perform well when new - and the new Titaniums look impressive - but I tend to buy CR123A's in bulk, and the majority of them will be in storage for quite a while before they're used. My experience with the old, orange-labeled titaniums was not good in this regard.


----------



## rookiedaddy

selfbuilt said:


> The cells are still perfectly safe to use at that point, provided they were properly stored during that time (i.e. no huge swings in temperature, etc). You should always check for leaks or damage as well, when they are that old. The expiry date is really a "best before date".


Thanks. I guess my rate of loss will be higher as I'm living in a country with room temperature of 28-33C (humidity ~80-90%). 
Thread like yours and Silverfox's battery shoutout has got me paying more attention to how I use and what devices I use these batteries in.


----------



## selfbuilt

nanotech17 said:


> the titanium seems to be more consistent through out all the testing.


That was certainly true on all the Max output runtimes. But to further round-out the review, I've added results from the NiteCore EX10 on a Med-Hi setting:






As you can see, the Titanium cell didn't last as long as the Surefire this time. :shrug: 

Good to see the 4Sevens still holding its own ... it looks like it's not initial current draw that is the issue for the lower capacity in T10 or LF3XT. 



gswitter said:


> I guess what I'm really curious about is if the new Titaniums (and the 4Sevens) hold up better in long term storage than the previous generation. It's great that they perform well when new - and the new Titaniums look impressive - but I tend to buy CR123A's in bulk, and the majority of them will be in storage for quite a while before they're used. My experience with the old, orange-labeled titaniums was not good in this regard.



Good question ... I'm hanging on to a couple of cells from these batches for future testing, but it will literally take years before I know.


----------



## dmonay

How well do they work/compare on a medium draw light?
Like my Novatac on 60-80% brightness setting.


----------



## Toohotruk

I'm curious how well the 4 Sevens batteries do compared with Battery Station (USA) cells...


----------



## selfbuilt

dmonay said:


> How well do they work/compare on a medium draw light?
> Like my Novatac on 60-80% brightness setting.


The NiteCore EX10 Med/Hi run is at about the same output as 60-85 lumens on the Novatac, so that should give you a general idea. But the Novatac has a fairly specific step-down pattern, so it would be difficult to say with any certainty without testing it.


Toohotruk said:


> I'm curious how well the 4 Sevens batteries do compared with Battery Station (USA) cells...


Based on my limited testing of one batch of Battery Station cells in my CR123A Round-up thread, their performance appears comparable to Energizer or Rayovac - once adjusted for sample age. 

As you'll see in my testing there, all the USA brands tend to have a similar profile in the Olight T10 - but the Duracell/Panasonic/Surefire seem to have slightly more capacity than the Energizer/Rayovac/BatteryStation.


----------



## Toohotruk

Thanks for the info...I wasn't aware of the other thread.


----------



## selfbuilt

Thought I'd show you all my spent battery bucket (old kitty litter container in my garage). Admitedly not the best way to store batteries - it's been about six months since my last trip to the recycling centre. 







Looks a little more colourful now that I've started testing some additional CR123A brands (was pretty boring with all Duracells before ... )


----------



## alfreddajero

Once again nice work on testing the cells out...might get a few of the 4sevens brand.:thumbsup:


----------



## brightnorm

Selfbuilt, thank you for the (as always) excellent review. 

In the early days of CPF some members believed that cr123 auto-discharge accelerated significantly after even the briefest use. You could use your light for a minute and store it in the glove compartment, and after a week the battery was dead or near death. The idea was that a new cell had some kind of physical protection against rapid self-depletion but as soon as the cell was used that protection (some called it a kind of "membrane"), was in effect breached. 

Have you ever heard of this phenomenon, and if so is there any truth to it? 

Brightnorm


----------



## selfbuilt

brightnorm said:


> In the early days of CPF some members believed that cr123 auto-discharge accelerated significantly after even the briefest use. You could use your light for a minute and store it in the glove compartment, and after a week the battery was dead or near death. The idea was that a new cell had some kind of physical protection against rapid self-depletion but as soon as the cell was used that protection (some called it a kind of "membrane"), was in effect breached.
> 
> Have you ever heard of this phenomenon, and if so is there any truth to it?


Interesting question, I hadn't heard of that before. I think I can dispel it, at least for Energizer CR123A cells (may be different for cheapo foreign cells).

Below is a comparison of two cells from the same batch (manufactured March 2007). One was left untouched in original packaging for two years ("Unused"), and one has been one of my "tester" cells for the last one year or so ("Lightly Used"). As a tester, I have been using it to quickly test the max output/throw on new lights as they arrive (i.e. click on Max, take a reading, turn off). I would estimate that I have used up the equivalent of ~1.5mins of continuous runtime, scattered over a one year period.






As you can see, there is no difference in time to 50%, and only a slight reduction in total capacity as measured by area under the curve. 

Looks pretty convincing to me that Energizers don't suffer any ill effects from "breaking the seal". :twothumbs


----------



## Justin Case

It might be useful to know, at least at initial turn-on, what the tail current draw is for each of 123A cells for each of the tests.


----------



## brightnorm

selfbuilt said:


> Interesting question, I hadn't heard of that before. I think I can dispel it, at least for Energizer CR123A cells (may be different for cheapo foreign cells)...


The issue may have originally come up because what seemed to be an inordinate number of Surefire cells were dying after brief use. Whatever the cause, I haven't seen the issue raised in a long time. Thanks for your answer.

Brightnorm


----------



## VidPro

selfbuilt said:


>


 
this is obviously a bad case of Rechargophobia 

cool tests, specially when you changed the levels and mixed things up again.
Me wonders if some of the cells tested are the same exact manufacture, with pretty new labels on them, and different "batches" or freshnesses .


----------



## selfbuilt

Just updated the main post with an additional lower output Med mode runtime on the Olight T10






As in the case of the NiteCore EX10 Med mode, the 4sevens cells again approach the top-tier USA-made Surefire cells, and the Titanium Innovations do a little lower.

Interesting result considering the 4sevens cells under-performed in the T10 on Max output. I've beginning to think the Titanium cells are best in high-drain applications, the 4sevens cells are best in lower-than-max applications (except for the Quark lights, when they perform well at all levels).



Justin Case said:


> It might be useful to know, at least at initial turn-on, what the tail current draw is for each of 123A cells for each of the tests.


Just tried a couple of samples in the T10:

T10 Max Energizer: 1.30A
T10 Max 4Sevens: 1.24A
T10 Max Titanium Innovations: 1.31A

T10 Med (L4) Energizer: 0.34A
T10 Med (L4) 4Sevens: 0.33A
T10 Med (L4) Titanium Innovations: 0.35A

For Quark, initial readings fluctuated rapidly between ~1.65-1.85A on all cells, so I waited ~10 secs or so for the results to stabilize:

Quark 123 Max Energizer: 1.74A
Quark 123 Max 4Sevens: 1.80A
Quarks 123 Max Titanium Innovations: 1.71A



VidPro said:


> Me wonders if some of the cells tested are the same exact manufacture, with pretty new labels on them, and different "batches" or freshnesses .



The various USA cells fall into two discrete categories in my testing, once you account for age - a top-tier (e.g. Duracell, Surefire, Panasonic) and a second-tier (e.g. Energizer, Rayovac, Battery Station) that has just slightly less capacity. For detailed results, see my:
Quick CR123A and AA Battery Shoot-out Comparison

I suspect that the USA-brands do indeed reflect a limited number of manufacturing sources. But the China-brands likely come from different factories given their different runtime performances.


----------



## bodhran

Thanks for a great review. I purchased a 50 pack of the Titanium Innovation's from Battery Junction awhile back, and have been very happy with them. It was nice to see how they compare to other brands.


----------



## MattK

Sweet work Eric! 

How did I miss this before today???


----------



## selfbuilt

MattK said:


> How did I miss this before today???


I thought you might be happy with the Titanium cell performance Matt. :laughing:

I meant to draw your attention to results, but frankly got distracted with new light reviews once I had these results up. The purpose of this testing was really for my own edification, as I was wondering how the other cells compared to my standard Duracell/Surefire test bed. But by posting them here, everyone can now "calibrate" their cells against my runtimes a bit better. :wave:


----------



## kaptein america

Awesome stuff.
Keep up the good works


----------



## recDNA

Which company makes 4Sevens batteries for them?


----------



## smopoim86

recDNA said:


> Which company makes 4Sevens batteries for them?


Unknown... I'm pretty sure David said he could loose the supplier if the manufacturer was known.

Seems a little odd, but I trust David's quality standards.


----------



## bertie123

I think i'll buy a Titanium or a surefire cr123a for my fenix PD30+. Does anyone know if they are protected or not ? and wich is the best (not about runtime but about quality meaning no errors, or things go wrong) ! And wich is the best brand for rechargeble batteries ? and do rechargeble batteries lose there energy when the flashlights is turned off or while there just not in the flashlight ?
Thanx !! :twothumbs


----------



## 4sevens

smopoim86 said:


> Unknown... I'm pretty sure David said he could loose the supplier if the manufacturer was known.
> 
> Seems a little odd, but I trust David's quality standards.


We sampled every major lithium manufacturer in the area and found most of 
them to be utterly inferior. I personally tested each source.

When we found this particular vendor we really had 
to pull some teeth to get them to do it for us  
The performance was just stellar compared to others, plus
most of the others didn't even offer to install a PTC - which
we instantly turned down.

I just hope they continue to work with us when we need the next batch


----------



## nbp

I have up until this point been buying SF 123s for my lights, and because I don't go through them that fast, it has been fine, despite their higher cost. I have had zero problems with them. 

Since 47s came out with their cells, I have been considering buying a big bulk pack from them so I'm set for a while. This will be a savings of about $1 per cell over the SF cells I buy. And for my purposes, their performance in this shootout is certainly adequate. Seems like a no brainer. 

*My only question is: is there any concern over the safety of these cells, as they are made in China?* In the past, I remember reading here about some foreign cells being poorly made and venting or popping. I'm pretty confident 47s would not have purchased crappy cells like that, based on my excellent experiences with his business in the past. But I am not a battery expert, so I thought I'd ask. :shrug:

Thanks for all your hard work, Selfbuilt, these tests are very helpful :thumbsup:


----------



## zwerky

nbp said:


> I have up until this point been buying SF 123s for my lights, and because I don't go through them that fast, it has been fine, despite their higher cost. I have had zero problems with them.
> 
> Since 47s came out with their cells, I have been considering buying a big bulk pack from them so I'm set for a while. This will be a savings of about $1 per cell over the SF cells I buy. And for my purposes, their performance in this shootout is certainly adequate. Seems like a no brainer.
> 
> My only question is: is there any concern over the safety of these cells, as they are made in China? In the past, I remember reading here about some foreign cells being poorly made and venting or popping. I'm pretty confident 47s would not have purchased crappy cells like that, based on my excellent experiences with his business in the past. But I am not a battery expert, so I thought I'd ask. :shrug:
> 
> Thanks for all your hard work, Selfbuilt, these tests are very helpful :thumbsup:



+1 I'm also curious. Thanks.


----------



## nbp

Thoughts on my question above? Anyone? :candle: :candle:


----------



## jeffe

I've seen individual reports (On the Lightfighter Forum) on Chinese made "Power Rite", "Ultralast", and "WF" batteries venting/exploding/failing. 
I don't have any info on 47's batteries, though.


----------



## nbp

Still curious about the safety of the 4-7s cells compared to the premium 'made
in America' cells. I've been holding off on buying them. Anyone?


----------



## 4sevens

nbp said:


> Still curious about the safety of the 4-7s cells compared to the premium 'made
> in America' cells. I've been holding off on buying them. Anyone?


What specifically are you looking for? All our a cells are fitted with a PTC device that will acts like a fuse should a short take place. They are only found on quality safety-conscious cells since they are a significant part of the cost of the cell. I can tell you that most china cells do not have them. I've disassembled quite a few in my own investigation.


----------



## zipplet

4sevens would not put his name on a poor product with safety issues, that's my opinion. I have been using some 7777 cells and they seem to perform pretty much the same as pricier USA branded cells.

The bottom line is, would 4sevens put his reputation at risk? Definately not


----------



## nbp

> 4sevens said:
> 
> 
> 
> What specifically are you looking for? All our a cells are fitted with a PTC device that will acts like a fuse should a short take place. They are only found on quality safety-conscious cells since they are a significant part of the cost of the cell. I can tell you that most china cells do not have them. I've disassembled quite a few in my own investigation.
Click to expand...


As I noted in my first post #40, I just have read quite a number of CR123 venting/explosion incidents in the 'smoke and fire' section. And many of these incidents involved cheaper foreign made cells. I have been purchasing Surefire cells up until now as they are highly regarded. I am interested in buying a bulk pack of 4/7s 123s though, due to the better price and my desire to support you guys, as my experiences with you have been excellent in the past. 

Granted, I am not an expert on battery construction and manufacturing, but my question, which you partly answered, basically is: have the issues, whatever they may have been, that caused so many problems in Chinese made batteries in the past been corrected in the manufacturing of these batteries?

Like I said, based on the good service I have received from Fenixstore/4sevens, I sincerely doubt you'd be selling crappy cells, but I was just curious about their dependability.


----------



## ltiu

smopoim86 said:


> Unknown... I'm pretty sure David said he could loose the supplier if the manufacturer was known.



Why would 47 loose the supplier if the manufacturer was known? 

I am not a business person. So, can someone enlighten me what kind of business protocol this is?


----------



## zipplet

There are many reasons an OEM may not want it made public who they make batteries for. I think in this kind of situation a company will agree on a unit price from the OEM and get batteries made. This agreed price may not necessarily be the same as what the OEM charges other customers! Therefore if the cat got out of the bag and Company A found out that ChinaBatteryCo made batteries for Company B - and saw Company B sold batteries much more cheaply than A - then they might go to the OEM and complain about the pricing they are paying.

This is one possibility. The other is that public knowledge of who makes what will affect purchasing decisions.


----------



## Ace12

How do Streamlight batteries compare to the rest? Who actually makes them?


----------



## MattK

Streamlight CR123A's are made by Panasonic.


----------



## BleedingEdge

4sevens said:


> ... All our a cells are fitted with a PTC device that will acts like a fuse should a short take place. They are only found on quality safety-conscious cells since they are a significant part of the cost of the cell. I can tell you that most china cells do not have them. I've disassembled quite a few in my own investigation.



PTC?
Protect The Circuit?
Protective Thermo-Couple?
Prevents Thermal Combustion?


----------



## MattK

PTC = positive temperature coefficient.

A thermister or thermal fuse. A self resetting thermal fuse/over-temperature protection device.

They look like a washer. They deform at a 'set' temperature cutting off current flow until the temperature drops below the set point when they regain their shape and current flow resumes.

Here's a pic: http://www.tcem.com.cn/images/PTC/Battery_Caps.jpg

Here's a pic of one that failed: http://www.molalla.net/members/leeper/ptc4.jpg


----------



## BleedingEdge

Thanks Matt, I appreciate the information!


----------



## shipwreck

This is a fantastic thread. SUPER great job!

Looks like I'll stick with the Surefires from now on  All of my lights are now turning into being 123 lights, since I also use the battery size for my 2 Eotechs. I try to keep at least 20 of them on hand at all times.


----------



## 4sevens

MattK said:


> They look like a washer. They deform at a 'set' temperature cutting off current flow until the temperature drops below the set point when they regain their shape and current flow resumes.


Matt - actually your statement is *incorrect*. PTC's do *not* "cut off current flow." 

Rather behave like resistors where their resistance increases gradually with temperature over a limited range - typically the resistance is linearly proportional to temperature - hence the *coefficient* in PTC.

Keep in mind that there is a limited number of cycles that the PTC will operate, don't don't mess around with shorting your cells.

I've personally done extensive testing of the PTC on our 4Sevens cells (as well as all the major brands). We use an epoxy-carbon material that triggers around 100-130C. We did our homework before we put our name on those cells 



MattK said:


> Streamlight CR123A's are made by Panasonic.


Not all. I've disassembled some and discovered otherwise.


----------



## iocheretyanny

selfbuilt said:


> _*Reviewer’s Note:* Following up my initial CR123A/AA Battery Shoot-out, here I provide a more detailed comparison of how three of the more popular made-in-China cells (4Sevens, Titanium Innovations, and Tenergy) compare to the top-of-the-line USA cells that I routinely use (Duracell & Surefire)._




I thought 4Sevens cells are made in USA (re-branded Panasonic)?


----------



## tre

MattK, I know you spent some $$ to make your cells great (and UL approved). Do you have a PTC on the Titanium Innovations cells?


----------



## selfbuilt

> Written by *MattK* on 12-19-2010 08:39 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> tre said:
> 
> 
> 
> MattK, I know you spent some $$ to make your cells great (and UL approved). Do you have a PTC on the Titanium Innovations cells?
> 
> 
> 
> Absolutely - yes that's essential for us and not a corner we'd ever consider cutting! Absolutely - yes that's essential for us and not a corner we'd ever consider cutting!
Click to expand...




> Written by *megawatt* on 12-22-2010 09:17 PM GMT
> 
> I have about 40 orange labeled Titanium cr123a batteries that I received in Jnauary of 2007 to keep for long term storage in case of another hurricane or other disaster. Every one of these unused batteries I tried in my Surefire L4 has become weak and unusable in the L4. Long term shelf life is not good.





> Written by *megawatt* on 12-23-2010 05:22 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> megawatt said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have about 40 orange labeled Titanium cr123a batteries that I received in Jnauary of 2007 to keep for long term storage in case of another hurricane or other disaster. Every one of these unused batteries I tried in my Surefire L4 has become weak and unusable in the L4. Long term shelf life is not good.
> 
> 
> 
> UPDATE: I received an email from MattK at Battery Junction reminding me that the CR123A batteries could form a passivization layer causing them to appear to go dim. As instructed by Matt, I put the batteries in the light and turned it on. Matt said the batteries would come back to life by doing so. After 2 to 3 minutes the light started to flicker like a strobe light from a slow flicker at first then gradually to a very fast flicker then actually coming back to full brightness. I have never heard of this "passivization" before so I learned something today. UPDATE: I received an email from MattK at Battery Junction reminding me that the CR123A batteries could form a passivization layer causing them to appear to go dim. As instructed by Matt, I put the batteries in the light and turned it on. Matt said the batteries would come back to life by doing so. After 2 to 3 minutes the light started to flicker like a strobe light from a slow flicker at first then gradually to a very fast flicker then actually coming back to full brightness. I have never heard of this "passivization" before so I learned something today.
> 
> Thank you Matt k for the information on fixing the problem and the excellent service waaay after the sale.
Click to expand...


----------



## selfbuilt

The thread discussions have been partially restored from the search engine cache data (thank you tandem!).

Unfortunately, I could only track down search engine cache data for the original p.3 (i.e. Dec 19, 2010 onward). Anything posted between Nov 2010 and that date has been lost. If you happen to have cache data in that time period, please let me know and I will re-post.

Please carry on!


----------



## goodfellas

Are the 4Sevens batteries made in China or the US? The company itself is headquarted in the US, though, right?


----------



## selfbuilt

goodfellas said:


> Are the 4Sevens batteries made in China or the US? The company itself is headquarted in the US, though, right?


Made in China, to 4Sevens' specifications. 4Sevens is a US-based company.


----------



## tobrien

one question: I see from the _original_ shootout you did, that Panasonic didn't make it to this 'final round.' are Panasonic-brand cells not as good as, say, Duracell, Titanium Innovations, etc?

edit: because I'm looking at purchasing a bulk/50 pack of 123s and I'm down to Panasonic, Duracell Ultra, *maybe* four cases of Duracell ProCell (any difference between these and the "ultra" moniker?), Energizer, and Ti Innovations. 

in all honesty, they're probably not all that different, right? performance differences are likely gonna be negligible in my setups (2x 123 lights).


----------



## selfbuilt

The made-in-the-USA Panasonics are excellent cells, equivalent to my Duracell Ultras and Surefires, in all my testing. In fact, Panasonic is probably the manufacturer for most of the USA cells.

AFAIK, the Duracell procells and ultras are identical.


----------



## tobrien

selfbuilt said:


> The made-in-the-USA Panasonics are excellent cells, equivalent to my Duracell Ultras and Surefires, in all my testing. In fact, Panasonic is probably the manufacturer for most of the USA cells.
> 
> AFAIK, the Duracell procells and ultras are identical.


thank you 

so money aside, would it be better to get Pannys?


----------



## selfbuilt

tobrien said:


> so money aside, would it be better to get Pannys?


If cheaper than Surefire/Duracell, sure - performance has always been equivalent in my runtime testing.


----------



## tobrien

selfbuilt said:


> If cheaper than Surefire/Duracell, sure - performance has always been equivalent in my runtime testing.


thank you very much!


----------



## LightCrazy

I know this thread is old, but do you have any input on how the current Titanium Innovation CR123 cells are holding up? Just wondering if performance has changed before I buy some. I still have some Tenergy Propel, silver and purple label to burn up first. Thanks.


----------



## selfbuilt

LightCrazy said:


> I know this thread is old, but do you have any input on how the current Titanium Innovation CR123 cells are holding up? Just wondering if performance has changed before I buy some. I still have some Tenergy Propel, silver and purple label to burn up first. Thanks.


I do have some more recent data - the performance of Titanium Innovation cells have improved since this original comparison was posted.

Here are some tests I did last December, but never got around to posting here: 

















I used differrent lights for these tests, but as you'll see, the Titanium Innovation cells continue to do at least as well as the name-brands on Hi current draws. The issue I noted in my original review was slightly lower performance on the mid-level current draws. In the case of the Foursevens Quark above, you'll see the more recent Titanium Innovation cells are doing quite well now.

I'll add these graphs to the first post ...


----------



## lumen aeternum

>I have chosen four single-cell CR123A lights for comparisons. Each light has a different type of regulation circuitry.

It would help if you would discuss what the different circuitries are and why it makes a difference. You mention draw rate?


----------



## selfbuilt

lumen aeternum said:


> It would help if you would discuss what the different circuitries are and why it makes a difference. You mention draw rate?


The different circuitries can be inferred by the different output runtime patterns. The light clearly differ in drive level (based on different outputs for equivalent emitters) and regulation pattern. To investigate the individual responses of different batteries to specific discharge currents would require the use of a hobby charger (which many here have done). The purpose of this thread is simply to demonstate how the batteries actually perform in the real world of individual lights.


----------



## lumen aeternum

>The different circuitries can be inferred by the different output runtime patterns.

If you ALREADY know about these different circuitries... got a FAQ?


----------



## xevious

It's good to see Titanium Innovations holding up so well, better than before. But I wonder... how good they are in terms of shelf life. I'd seen someone post about having some go dead after only a few years on the shelf, before their expiration date.

Also, would you find any merit to the idea of running cells down to about 50%, shelving them for a few months, then running them for the remainder of their capacities? I'd be interested to see if any cells "recover" a little versus degrading, after having a few months rest. I've found that with infrequent use of a few lights that Surefire cells seem to hold out the longest, whereas others I used (Panasonic, Duracell, and Tenergy) degrade and run flat sooner.


----------



## jrdrum

New forum member here.

Found this very useful before stocking up on CR123a batteries. Pardon the "Newbie" question, but would these evaluations give you a somewhat accurate picture as to how these batteries would function in flashlights, weapons lights w/lasers and/or red dot scopes (mostly Surefire or EOtech products)?

Thanks!


----------



## ChrisGarrett

jrdrum said:


> New forum member here.
> 
> Found this very useful before stocking up on CR123a batteries. Pardon the "Newbie" question, but would these evaluations give you a somewhat accurate picture as to how these batteries would function in flashlights, weapons lights w/lasers and/or red dot scopes (mostly Surefire or EOtech products)?
> 
> Thanks!



Stay with cells using the Panasonic USA made 1550mAh cell: Panasonic, BatteryStation, some Rayovacs, SureFire, StreamLight, Duracell and Energizer, or the Sanyo Japan 1400mAh cells.

Buy fresh cells and you should fine.

Chris


----------



## selfbuilt

jrdrum said:


> Pardon the "Newbie" question, but would these evaluations give you a somewhat accurate picture as to how these batteries would function in flashlights, weapons lights w/lasers and/or red dot scopes (mostly Surefire or EOtech products)?


Approximately, yes. Although it would be ideal to test batteries under standardized laboratory conditions where you could monitor actual voltage, I don't have the setup. My goal here was to show a couple of "real world" performance comparisons in a couple of flashlights. The results are hopefully comparable to other lights driven the comparable output levels.

And :welcome:


----------



## Blglover96

Hey quick question I bought some tenergy rechargeables and when I get them in my fenix pd35 they don't run in turbo for very long maybe 5 seconds before the light shuts down. When I put non rechargeables in it runs fine on turbo. These batteries also work fine in my tk09 maybe because the output is almost half of the pd35? I'm not sure what's going on here they probably have 6 charges and discharges on them. I think it's because they need to be broken in for a few more cycles. Any input would be greatly appreciated, thanks.


----------



## selfbuilt

Blglover96 said:


> Hey quick question I bought some tenergy rechargeables and when I get them in my fenix pd35 they don't run in turbo for very long maybe 5 seconds before the light shuts down. ... I think it's because they need to be broken in for a few more cycles.


I doubt they will get better - the problem is that Tenergy does not make very high quality cells (in either primary or rechargeable forms). Lights like the PD35 put a heavy drain on 2xRCR when run on Turbo. You will need to source higher quality RCR cells, or switch to 18650.


----------



## raggie33

my simple testing shows the Titanium Innovations are great more runtime at .5 and 1 amp then panny 123s also get more amps so im guessing better at high drain. i just short them with my volt metter on amps


----------

