Primary or Rechargable Poll

[spellitout]

This poll was created following a blanket statement I made regarding the cr2 mini. I believed most CPFers preferred rechargable batteries. After the post I realized I wasn't actually certain most preferred one over the other but rather was based more on my own usage.

Yes, this poll could break it down to each battery type, percentage of usage, or even particular flashlights, but I feel this poll can offer a decent representation of what people prefer regardless of flashlight brand or model. Either Primary or Rechargable. K.I.S.S.

If someone else wants to add a new post offering additional options, please feel free. It would be interesting for sure.

 

[stallion2]

this question is a little blunt. too many factors at play so i use what works best for my given application. anything i EDC get primaries, no exceptions. anything that may be left in my car for longer periods of time (usually a P60 or similar size/performance) gets lithium primaries but no alkalines. the rest of my lights, generally +500 lumens, get Li ions. this is because when i grab one of these lights then i'm certain i'll be using it and for a relatively long period of...either out in the woods or out on the lake.

 

[BlueMarble]

I like rechargeables because I can ensure I have a fully loaded/charged battery for my flashlights. I don't want to take my light out with a 60% full battery as I want a full charge on me whenever possible. With primaries, I would not have the luxury of always having a full battery in my light unless I relegated my "used" primary to a backup role and threw a fresh primary in my light. That would certainly be more costly than running rechargeables. For a light I won't be using often, I consider primaries a good option, but for my 4 everyday carry lights, it's all about rechargeables as I constantly use my flashlights every day for no reason at all. With primaries, my care free usage would be limited. I do carry some primaries as backup, but as much as I like to play with my lights, primaries are not the best first option for me.

I am exactly the same. I like topping off my batteries before I head outdoors. I carry some lightweight primaries for backup but plan not to use them unless I'm out longer than expected. I keep a couple of lights around the house and in the car that I never use and they have primaries in them.

 

[bondr006]

I use rechargeables (10400, 14500, rcr2, rcr123, 18650, and lsd nimh) in all my lights for many reasons.

1. Guilt free lumens.
2. I like being green and keeping batteries out of the landfills.
3. Cost effective.
4. Never have to worry about running out of batteries.

Out of the many lights I have, 97% of them will take lithium rechargeables. 2% will take nimh. and 1% primarys. The 1% is a SF E2L that is stowed away for emergencies. I do keep a few 123's around for backup.

 

[NutSAK]

True enough, but ky70 was saying how he likes to top off his rechargeables because he's worried about having low capacity, when 50% of the time (100-50% capacity) the CR123A primary has greater capacity than an RCR123. The other 50% of the time, you still have 2x the capacity of a freshly charged RCR123, because you'd be crazy to not carry a spare cell, whether you use RCR or not or not.

I'm wondering how this thread narrowed from a general discussion of primary vs. rechargeable into a discussion of RCR123 vs. CR123 primary capacities. ky70 didn't mention what cells he was using before you started comparing the energy capacity of CR123 vs RCR123.

Could we not just as easily compare the energy capacity of 18650 vs. 2xCR123 and come up with a completely different conclusion? After all, there are many lights available that allow you to power them with either of these options. 2xCR123 would never have more stored energy than a fully charged 18650, regardless of the state of the 2xCR123 depletion.

I use rechargeables for everything except long-term storage, but I don't use RCR123 because I don't feel their energy capacity is worthwhile. I use 18650, 17670, 14500 and Eneloops. I particularly like the option of using Eneloops as backup for a 14500 in a AA-based EDC. If I run out of charged Li-Ions or Eneloops, and don't have a way to charge them, lithium primary AAs or even alkaline AAs are an option. Since I can charge from AA, DC, USB or solar, that's not an option I plan to use often.

 

[chenko]

I use rechargeables because I care for the environment.

 

[carrot]

I'm wondering how this thread narrowed from a general discussion of primary vs. rechargeable into a discussion of RCR123 vs. CR123 primary capacities. ky70 didn't mention what cells he was using before you started comparing the energy capacity of CR123 vs RCR123.

Could we not just as easily compare the energy capacity of 18650 vs. 2xCR123 and come up with a completely different conclusion? After all, there are many lights available that allow you to power them with either of these options. 2xCR123 would never have more stored energy than a fully charged 18650, regardless of the state of the 2xCR123 depletion.

I use rechargeables for everything except long-term storage, but I don't use RCR123 because I don't feel their energy capacity is worthwhile. I use 18650, 17670, 14500 and Eneloops. I particularly like the option of using Eneloops as backup for a 14500 in a AA-based EDC. If I run out of charged Li-Ions or Eneloops, and don't have a way to charge them, lithium primary AAs or even alkaline AAs are an option. Since I can charge from AA, DC, USB or solar, that's not an option I plan to use often.

Very true, NutSAK. 18650 has more power than 2xCR123, although not significantly more, perhaps 10%. You are right that the real strength of Li-ion is in the larger cells, a fact that I overlooked at first simply because I only EDC single-celled lights.

Do note, however, that this thread was started to gauge interest in rechargeable RCR2, and RCR2 is similar to RCR123 in that it has incredibly low capacity. On the other hand, since the intentions of the OP were and are not clear, I agree that the larger lithium-ion cells are welcome in this discussion, and allow us to come to completely different conclusions.

 

[45/70]

This was an easy one.

Out of my meager ~40 light collection, only one uses a primary cell. The light I keep in my car uses a single CR123A primary.

My choice to run rechargeable cells over primaries has nothing to do with cost, rather their superior performance. If you consider the time spent properly maintaining and caring for rechargeable cells, they probably cost more than primaries anyway.

In the case of 1.2-1.5 Volt/cell applications, NiMH cells provide both longer runtime, as well as superior output (with regard to unregulated lights, such as incans).

In the case of lithium primary vs. Li-Ion, most of my lights require a nominal 3.6-3.7 Volts to work properly anyway. The output of MR Bulk lights for example, is dismal using lithium primary cells :sigh: The other lights that I use various chemistry Li-Ion cells in, benefit from the fact that when I use one, I know the cell is fully charged and do not have to guess how much charge is left in a primary cell. They are always at 100%, when put to use. This tends to offset the fact that Li-Ion cells do not have as much capacity as primary lithium cells. I also consider Li-Ion cells (properly maintained and cared for) to be safer, when in use, than lithium primary cells.

Overall, I think the biggest advantage to rechargeable cells, is the fact that I allways know where I stand, with either chemistry, as far as remaining capacity. With little, or no warning, I can always go on a "mission" with fully charged cells. That alone is a good enough reason to pick rechargeable cells over primaries, IMO. Another advantage, that I often forget about, is neither nickel based cells, nor Li-Ions are prone to leaking.

Dave

 

[NutSAK]

Do note, however, that this thread was started to gauge interest in rechargeable RCR2, and RCR2 is similar to RCR123 in that it has incredibly low capacity.

Duly noted. I was not aware of that when I posted.

Your points about RCR123 vs. CR123 were certainly valid.

 

[Black Rose]

Pretty much every device we have uses rechargeable cells of some sort (AA, AAA, C, D, 17670, 18650).

I recently sold my 16340/RCR123 cells.

I keep a supply of CR123A and Energizer Lithium L91 primary cells around for use in car or cold weather lights.
I also keep a small amount of C & D cells around for emergency use.

 

[carrot]

Duly noted. I was not aware of that when I posted.

Your points about RCR123 vs. CR123 were certainly valid.

Well, I did only know because of the OP's post over at CPFMP... :shrug:

 

[LightChaser]

I use both.

My two EDC lights are an LD10 and an E01. I also keep a G2 in a bag, so I guess that counts as my 3rd EDC.

The LD10 gets more use, and as such, gets a pair of Eneloops - one in the light, and a spare in the bag. These cells get a recharge every so often. There's also a lithium primary (Energizer L91) in the same spares carrier.

The E01 gets lithium primaries (Energizer L92) since it sips juice so slowly - it isn't worth the hassle to keep rotating rechargeable cells, even LSD cells, for this light.

The G2 gets the least use, and as such, takes lithium primaries too.

 

[Federal LG]

With CR123 batteries: only primary.

With AA or AAA batteries: rechargeable.

 

[MorePower]

A few LSD AA cells, primary in everything else. Then again, cost isn't a factor.