View Single Post
Old Jan 22, 2013, 09:19 PM
PeterVRC is online now
Find More Posts by PeterVRC
Registered User
Australia, VIC, Melbourne
Joined Nov 2006
13,917 Posts
I couldn't make sense of that last paragraph Max, but anyway...

Yes, there are variations in battery brands and what they claim etc.
But a good rule is "NONE do as they claim", LOL.
So you use the maths off the specs, hoping you might get that... but TESTING tells you what any given application will give.
And in the end, Lower C equals lower performance.... almost assured. (rare cases of some surprisingly good battery)

Put a data logger in the plane and see what it does... (or even a long run on a bench logging it all).
But I can assure you now that NO 25C matches a 65C !!! LOL. Even the 'luckiest" of those rare cases" would not! And especially as they are the same brand/manufacturer.

Even the 35C Nano's are much better than the 25C's. The 25C's ARE the 'failed the test" 35's. Well, they are identical battery sizes, so that shows they were the same cells.
They would just IR test them during manufacture... not current load test them at all.... and place them into 'bins' of the IR, to be assembled as the appropriate C then.
I doubt they would ever load test even one single battery again, once the initial design was made. It burns the storage goop.... and adds a big waste of time to manufacture anyway. No need. Via IR is easier and close enough anyway.
PeterVRC is online now Find More Posts by PeterVRC
Last edited by PeterVRC; Jan 22, 2013 at 09:26 PM.
Reply With Quote