"cavelamb himself" wrote in message
...
Ed Huntress wrote:

"cavelamb himself" wrote in message
...
snip

I've switched over to AA rechargables entirely.

2 amp types last 200 to 500 precent lomger than non-rechargable
alkalines.


What do you mean by "last 200 to 500 percent longer"? Rechargeable
alkalines have about half the amp-hour capacity of regular alkalines. Do
you mean their entire service life is 2 to 5 times longer? If so, you
should be getting much more life out of them than that.

I use them for a few things, but the low amp-hour capacity is a problem
for some applications.

--
Ed Huntress

Practice will improve snipping skills, Ed.


My rechargables are all rated at 2200 mah or better.

NON-Rechargables alkalines are rated 400 to 800 mah.

???

You'd better do some more research, Richard. A new-technology RAM
(rechargable alkaline magnesium), the best of the lot, may be rated at 2.2
Ah the first few times, and if your drain rate is 30 mA. But at those
parameters a non-rechargeable will deliver a lot mo 3.0 Ah or so.

If you draw your RAMs down all the way, capacity falls off fast after a
dozen re-chargings. And a drain rate of 300 mA on a Pure Energy brand AA
cell (latest technology rechargeable) will give you only around 1.2 Ah
capacity:

http://www.pureenergybattery.com/press/oemguide2007.pdf

As far as I know, no rechargeable alkaline has reached the capacity of
primary (non-rechargeable) alkalines, even when they're brand-new. Unless
you use them in a capacity-limited application, where you're never drawing
them down to less than 75% of capacity, their capacity will start to drop
significantly after a dozen or so recharges. To get performance and long
life out of them you have to really limit the percentage of their capacity
that you use.

From your figures it looks as if someone is comparing the perfect-case,
first-use, very-low-discharge-rate capacity of a Pure Energy rechargeable
with a Chinese primary alkaline operating at ten times the drain rate. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress