# 18350 vs CR123



## InternetDominus (Jan 16, 2017)

Hello,

I have been reading some posts about both commercial, and custom flashlights, and some people even want their SureFire modified to use them with 18350. Why is that? 

I personally think CR123 are easier to get, and there is also the rechargable 16340. So, why do lots of flashlight enthusiats prefer the 18350 battery?

thanks for the help.


----------



## chillinn (Jan 16, 2017)

I would guess it is the desparity between the capacity of CR123A (~1500mAh) and 16340 (~500mAh). 18350 holds ~1.6x more capacity than 16340, and it has about half the capacity of CR123A.


----------



## ElectronGuru (Jan 16, 2017)

Yeah, capacity + amps 

CRs max out about 1a
16350 struggle with 4a
18350 can handle twice that

And most lights that handle two are 18650 ready


----------



## Woods Walker (Jan 16, 2017)

It's really just math. 18350 has more energy than 16340 (notice the mAh in the batteries shown). Also lithium ion can support the flashlight enthusiast's craving for even brighter higher draw lights than lithium primary chemistry can support. For really cold weather or preps/backup I take CR123. Also both 16340 and 18350 are cheaper to run. For smaller lights which can take all 3 (not all can) I guess the real question is why use 16340 if a person could use 18350? Naturally it's a hypothetical question as often we use what's on hand.


----------



## ChrisGarrett (Jan 16, 2017)

Current handling.

CR123As are rated for 1.5A.

16340 IMRs, maybe up to 2.5A.

18350 IMRs are stable up to about 7A.

I've got a 3Tronic Convoy S2+ triple that I have the 18350 body for and it pulls 6A at the tail, on high. You can't do that with the other two and still remain 'small.'

Chris


----------



## chillinn (Jan 17, 2017)

Woods Walker said:


> Also both 16340 and 18350 are cheaper to run.



I don't believe this is true in all situations. I think it depends on the task and task timeframe. Over the life of a secondary, if you use all the available cycles, then I suppose it is true. But considering capacity, and initial cost of investment, primary CR123A may be exponentially less expensive.


----------



## staticx57 (Jan 17, 2017)

chillinn said:


> I don't believe this is true in all situations. I think it depends on the task and task timeframe. Over the life of a secondary, if you use all the available cycles, then I suppose it is true. But considering capacity, and initial cost of investment, primary CR123A may be exponentially less expensive.



No way, it gets cheaper much faster than that. A quality 18350 <$5 and a quality charger <$5 and say you get a screaming deal at $1a cr123. The tenth time you get through the charges the secondary is now cheaper.

Let's take a look at 18650 versus 2xCR123 $2 per uses and $6 per quality 18650 and $5 for a charger you need to use the light 6 times before secondaries are cheaper.

Let's say you buy another light and buy another 18650. You already have a charger so now you only need to use the light 3x before it's cheaper


----------



## bykfixer (Jan 17, 2017)

Where you get a charger for $5? Much less a quailty one.

Not trying to start anything here... just curious.

To this user the 18mm cells are for lights other cells couldn't keep up with.


----------



## staticx57 (Jan 17, 2017)

Nothing wrong with primaries, but I find I use my lights often and the running costs of primaries are too high. In the same thought I prefer NiMh over Alkaline or Lithium. I don't need my lights for combat (luckily) or arctic conditions so there's no risks with secondaries. 

You can get a no frills Xtar MC1 charger for $4.90 at Mountain Electronics.

Well reviewed by HKJ as well.
http://lygte-info.dk/review/Review Charger Xtar MC1 UK.html

You can also get a liitokala Lii-100 for ~$5.00 all day long if you don't mind ordering from China
http://lygte-info.dk/review/Review Charger LiitoKala Lii-100 UK.html


----------



## bykfixer (Jan 17, 2017)

Thanks for that info.


----------



## chillinn (Jan 17, 2017)

staticx57 said:


> The tenth time you get through the charges the secondary is now cheaper.



Only if your time is free, especially with that single slot charger.

Let's use a test case of a week of nights using cells, say, 80 hours of darkness. For 80 hours of use, you could pay close to $80 for primaries for the whole week, assuming you're using that much capacity per hour.
With 18350 secondaries, the first night is going to cost you $110, and you won't have enough time during the next day to recharge them all unless you get a couple _full-sized chargers_. Let's say you get a deal and can get a couple chargers for $30, now you're up to $140. But if you want your secondary cells to go the distance, you're resting them for a day after charging, so you need another $110 worth of cells for the second night. That's $250. And that isn't counting the cost of the electricity, which also isn't free, but should be negligible compared to the bottom line for a few weeks use.
So it's only after three weeks (_of using cells for light all night long_) that the cost of primaries catches up with the greater initial cost of secondaries.

If you're a flashlighter, secondaries are the way to go, will be cheaper and more environmentally sound in the long run. But if you aren't using your light every night, if you use a flashlight like most ordinary people, _it may take years_ before the low initial cost of primaries catches up with the higher initial cost of secondaries. Some use a flashlight once every 6 months for 20 minutes. In this case, primaries would be the only economically sane option.

It depends on the task, and the time it takes to compete the task, and how many subsequent flashlighting tasks are expected, and how often.


----------



## ChrisGarrett (Jan 17, 2017)

bykfixer said:


> Where you get a charger for $5? Much less a quailty one.
> 
> Not trying to start anything here... just curious.
> 
> To this user the 18mm cells are for lights other cells couldn't keep up with.



Liitokala Lii 100 and 202. Multi chem USB chargers that test out well and do all the common li-ion chemistries/voltages and NiMH. Power bank functions aren't the greatest, but they're good up to about 1.2A. Consider that just a bonus.

<$4 and <$7 respectively, shipped, from GearBest, for instance. At those prices, I bought two of each.

Chris


----------



## staticx57 (Jan 17, 2017)

chillinn said:


> Only if your time is free, especially with that single slot charger.
> 
> Let's use a test case of a week of nights using cells, say, 80 hours of darkness. For 80 hours of use, you could pay close to $80 for primaries for the whole week, assuming you're using that much capacity per hour.
> With 18350 secondaries, the first night is going to cost you $110, and you won't have enough time during the next day to recharge them all unless you get a couple _full-sized chargers_. Let's say you get a deal and can get a couple chargers for $30, now you're up to $140. But if you want your secondary cells to go the distance, you're resting them for a day after charging, so you need another $110 worth of cells for the second night. That's $250. And that isn't counting the cost of the electricity, which also isn't free, but should be negligible compared to the bottom line for a few weeks use.
> ...



I would be better served with a light that uses 18650s. At more than 4x the capacity of an 18350 and more than 2x the capacity of a CR123 and much easier to coordinate charging it would prove to be much cheaper and easier.


----------



## Woods Walker (Jan 19, 2017)

chillinn said:


> I don't believe this is true in all situations. I think it depends on the task and task timeframe. Over the life of a secondary, if you use all the available cycles, then I suppose it is true. But considering capacity, and initial cost of investment, primary CR123A may be exponentially less expensive.



Nothing in life is true in all situations so will never debate anything starting with those words.


----------



## Woods Walker (Jan 19, 2017)

bykfixer said:


> Where you get a charger for $5? Much less a quailty one.
> 
> Not trying to start anything here... just curious.
> 
> To this user the 18mm cells are for lights other cells couldn't keep up with.


 5 dollars. Why so much? LOL! Paid 2.50 for this from illumination supply sale. 





Works like a champ. The XTAR MC1 plus was 50% off so that's 5 bucks full priced or 2.50 for me. I got it as needed the simplest thing possible. Purchased a fancier MC1 (forgot the designation) for 3.25 as a gift to go along with a Keeppower protected 3500 mAh 18650 for an AT Wizard also purchased on sale. I hate paying full price.

The simpler the charger often the better it goes solar in my experience.

edit.

Anyone reading this don't run off to eBay and buy a cheap charger and lithium ion batteries. Buy from a known seller etc etc etc.


----------



## chillinn (Jan 19, 2017)

Woods Walker said:


> Nothing in life is true in all situations so will never debate anything starting with those words.



Fair enough, Walker. My small point was that it takes some forethought to decide, especially in making recommendations for the less experienced, and especially for the non-flashaholics, we shouldn't necessarily initially recommend jumping into such an investment. But on the other hand, the flashaholic should probably nearly always invest in secondaries and a charger... and yet still will probably sometimes want to run primaries. Flashlights and flashlighting are only deceptively simple. Once the story and the music starts, needs and how they're ideally met can easily bird's nest into vast complexities with many aspects worth considering. This is a terrible metaphor, but it's not at all like it once was trying to decide which long distance telephone provider to choose in N. America back in the Summer of 1982, but more like trying to decide which movie to go see during that Summer. We have a lot of choices today, and many are optimized for different stuff.


----------



## ChrisGarrett (Jan 19, 2017)

Woods Walker said:


> 5 dollars. Why so much? LOL! Paid 2.50 for this from illumination supply sale.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The MC1+ ANT has the little voltage readout, but it still under $10, IIRC.

I bought an MC1+ and the Xtar XP-1 Hummingbird a couple of years back, to run with a SunKingdom 14w USB folding solar panel and both work well. I got both, ($9 and $7) because I use 16340s a lot and wanted the 250mA rate that the MC1+ lacks. They weren't a lot of cash. The XP-1 also does NiMH at 250mA and 500mA. Since then, I've added the two Liitokala 100s and 202s mentioned above. $22 for the four of them, shipped.

They all test out well, although the Liitokala power bank functions aren't all that with 2.1A smartphones. Still, they're small, flexible, adept and cheap to purchase.

Chris


----------

