On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 15:07:32 UTC+1, Brian Gaff wrote:
So why do they bother to make them differently marked. I'd have thought if
its the same design, making them as different designs on the labels was an
unnecessary cost, unless they have some kind of fiddle that they do to make
more money out of them in some way.
I remember when cassette tapes were around that could record Hi Fi, Maxell
were expensive but the same ones were made as Hitachi and other own brand
ones with a lower price. Basf used to do the same with whsmith, and 3M with
currys.
I never did understand the logic.
Brian

--
----- -

Perceived value.

On Wed, 12 Oct 2016 02:05:41 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 08:20:42 UTC+1, Tricky Dicky wrote:
Bought a couple of boxes of AAA and AA Duracell industrial Batteries at Toolstation and was wondering how they compared to the normal gold tops and ultras available retail. They were certainly cheaper than their retail variants but how do they compare power and duration wise?

Richard

Tests have shown that brand makes little difference to performance in most cases. The well advertised brands are not exceptions.

NT

There's a site that has tested cells (can't unforget which site atm) and,
although not right at the top but almost, Ikea did very well. Usually
long-dated and are £1.50/10 in AA and AAA.
The rechargeable ones have reasonable capacities and are good prices;
labelled as "ready to use" so could be lsd NiMh.
--
Peter.
The gods will stay away
whilst religions hold sway

On 12/10/2016 14:57, wrote:
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 13:38:20 UTC+1, John Rumm wrote:
On 12/10/2016 10:05, tabbypurr wrote:
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 08:20:42 UTC+1, Tricky Dicky wrote:

Bought a couple of boxes of AAA and AA Duracell industrial Batteries at Toolstation and was wondering how they compared to the normal gold tops and ultras available retail. They were certainly cheaper than their retail variants but how do they compare power and duration wise?

Richard

Tests have shown that brand makes little difference to performance in most cases. The well advertised brands are not exceptions.

Most of the sets of test results I have seen at moderate loads (~200mA),
show a spread of around 0.5Ah between the best and worst AA alkalines.
Which is a reasonable significant difference on a cell with a total
capacity in the 2 to 3Ah range.

but only for a small minority of brands.

Not sure that makes sense!

Take one of your links below:

http://www.batteryshowdown.com/stati...arge_200mA.png

That shows Energiser standard doing about 1800mAh, and VARTA HE Alkaline
doing say 2250mAh.

Adding results from more brands will not make that range get any smaller
- it might even make it wider.

Price, advertising and bunnies have nothing to do with how much you get.

Agreed, but we are talking total capacity not price or price per mAh.


http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/...413b16f948ed04

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/e...6/overview.htm

http://www.batteryshowdown.com/index.html

http://www.varta-consumer.com/~/medi...y_testing.ashx


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 15:07:32 UTC+1, Brian Gaff wrote:
So why do they bother to make them differently marked. I'd have thought if
its the same design, making them as different designs on the labels was an
unnecessary cost

The more brands you release, each marketed differently, the more market share you get.


NT

On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 19:12:59 UTC+1, John Rumm wrote:
On 12/10/2016 14:57, tabbypurr wrote:
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 13:38:20 UTC+1, John Rumm wrote:
On 12/10/2016 10:05, tabbypurr wrote:
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 08:20:42 UTC+1, Tricky Dicky wrote:

Bought a couple of boxes of AAA and AA Duracell industrial Batteries at Toolstation and was wondering how they compared to the normal gold tops and ultras available retail. They were certainly cheaper than their retail variants but how do they compare power and duration wise?

Richard

Tests have shown that brand makes little difference to performance in most cases. The well advertised brands are not exceptions.

Most of the sets of test results I have seen at moderate loads (~200mA),
show a spread of around 0.5Ah between the best and worst AA alkalines.
Which is a reasonable significant difference on a cell with a total
capacity in the 2 to 3Ah range.

but only for a small minority of brands.

Not sure that makes sense!

Take one of your links below:

http://www.batteryshowdown.com/stati...arge_200mA.png

That shows Energiser standard doing about 1800mAh, and VARTA HE Alkaline
doing say 2250mAh.

It means most brands are very similar. I cba to describe the chart, anyone can see it.

On Wed, 12 Oct 2016 13:19:55 +0100, Adrian Caspersz
wrote:

On 12/10/16 11:48, wrote:
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 10:51:44 UTC+1, Adrian Caspersz wrote:
On 12/10/16 10:05, tabbypurr wrote:

Tests have shown that brand makes little difference to performance in most cases. The well advertised brands are not exceptions.


Favourite cell, Kodak Alkaline from Poundland, 6 for a pound.

I'm more concerned which models leak! (remote controls / test equipment)

all do.

I do remember long ago Duracell had a guarantee on their cells that
confidently said that their cells did not leak, and that they would
repair or replace any equipment that suffered if they did.

That promise has mysteriously disappeared or been hushed. Anyone find it
online?

When I've lain electronics down for a long while it's a pain to check
and remove the cells. Ruined a good camera once

The last battery I had that leaked was Kodak.

On Wed, 12 Oct 2016 08:42:01 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 12/10/16 08:20, Tricky Dicky wrote:
Bought a couple of boxes of AAA and AA Duracell industrial Batteries at Toolstation and was wondering how they compared to the normal gold tops and ultras available retail. They were certainly cheaper than their retail variants but how do they compare power and duration wise?

Richard

Probably identical except they dont have to pay for national TV advertising.

Could the cheaper ones be made in China? Could there be some
arrangement with the EU to make the consumer ones in the EU? Sure
I've seen OEM ones made in China. It would certainly make no sense to
ship batteries from Belgium to China to be packaged with electronic
goods for return to the EU market.

wrote:
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 15:07:32 UTC+1, Brian Gaff wrote:
So why do they bother to make them differently marked. I'd have thought
if its the same design, making them as different designs on the labels
was an unnecessary cost

The more brands you release, each marketed differently, the more market
share you get.

For this taken to extreme:
http://progx.ch/home-voip-prixbetamax-3-1-2.html

(for Brian's benefit, 65 phone company brands, all run by the same outfit.
The websites are all clones, with slightly different names/graphics. The
prices of each brand to call each of the different destinations in the world
vary daily. Hence the uber-spreadsheet to find the best deal)

Theo

wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 15:07:32 UTC+1, Brian Gaff wrote:
So why do they bother to make them differently marked. I'd have thought
if
its the same design, making them as different designs on the labels was
an
unnecessary cost

The more brands you release, each marketed differently, the more market
share you get.

Not when everyone does that.

In article ,
says...

wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 15:07:32 UTC+1, Brian Gaff wrote:
So why do they bother to make them differently marked. I'd have thought
if
its the same design, making them as different designs on the labels was
an
unnecessary cost

The more brands you release, each marketed differently, the more market
share you get.

Not when everyone does that.

If everyone is doing it, you'd be a poor loser[1] if you
didn't.

[1] Literally

In article ,
lid says...

On 12/10/16 11:48, wrote:
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 10:51:44 UTC+1, Adrian Caspersz wrote:
On 12/10/16 10:05, tabbypurr wrote:

Tests have shown that brand makes little difference to performance in most cases. The well advertised brands are not exceptions.


Favourite cell, Kodak Alkaline from Poundland, 6 for a pound.

Which (of course) aren't made by Kodak.
They are "made under licence" by Strand Europe Ltd.

Dunno if the licence includes any conditions about
quality.

"Sam Plusnet" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 15:07:32 UTC+1, Brian Gaff wrote:
So why do they bother to make them differently marked. I'd have
thought
if its the same design, making them as different designs on the labels
was
an unnecessary cost

The more brands you release, each marketed differently, the more market
share you get.

Not when everyone does that.

If everyone is doing it, you'd be a poor loser[1] if you
didn't.

[1] Literally

And yet not everyone does that.

On 12/10/2016 19:29, wrote:
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 19:12:59 UTC+1, John Rumm wrote:
On 12/10/2016 14:57, tabbypurr wrote:
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 13:38:20 UTC+1, John Rumm wrote:
On 12/10/2016 10:05, tabbypurr wrote:
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 08:20:42 UTC+1, Tricky Dicky wrote:

Bought a couple of boxes of AAA and AA Duracell industrial Batteries at Toolstation and was wondering how they compared to the normal gold tops and ultras available retail. They were certainly cheaper than their retail variants but how do they compare power and duration wise?

Richard

Tests have shown that brand makes little difference to performance in most cases. The well advertised brands are not exceptions.

Most of the sets of test results I have seen at moderate loads (~200mA),
show a spread of around 0.5Ah between the best and worst AA alkalines.
Which is a reasonable significant difference on a cell with a total
capacity in the 2 to 3Ah range.

but only for a small minority of brands.

Not sure that makes sense!

Take one of your links below:

http://www.batteryshowdown.com/stati...arge_200mA.png

That shows Energiser standard doing about 1800mAh, and VARTA HE Alkaline
doing say 2250mAh.

It means most brands are very similar.

If you consider a 20% difference in capacity "very similar"...

I cba to describe the chart, anyone can see it.

Yup, it shows a 50% increase in mWh moving from a Sony Alkaline to the
Energiser Industrial Alkaline on the high drain test.


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Wednesday, October 12, 2016 at 10:04:13 AM UTC+1, DerbyBorn wrote:
I bet JCB batteries are good - because they make good earthmoving
equipment! (grin)

I once got some cheapo 9v JCB alkalines at Halfords but they didn't last too long.
"Which" magazine did a battery commparison earlier in the year and concluded you get what you pay for, higher price gives higher capacity, though falls a bit short of pro rata.

On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 19:36:28 UTC+1, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 12 Oct 2016 08:42:01 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 12/10/16 08:20, Tricky Dicky wrote:
Bought a couple of boxes of AAA and AA Duracell industrial Batteries at Toolstation and was wondering how they compared to the normal gold tops and ultras available retail. They were certainly cheaper than their retail variants but how do they compare power and duration wise?

Richard

Probably identical except they dont have to pay for national TV advertising.

Could the cheaper ones be made in China? Could there be some
arrangement with the EU to make the consumer ones in the EU? Sure
I've seen OEM ones made in China. It would certainly make no sense to
ship batteries from Belgium to China to be packaged with electronic
goods for return to the EU market.

Then that's how it will be done. It's about profit nothing more.

On Thursday, 13 October 2016 09:04:05 UTC+1, therustyone wrote:
On Wednesday, October 12, 2016 at 10:04:13 AM UTC+1, DerbyBorn wrote:

I bet JCB batteries are good - because they make good earthmoving
equipment! (grin)

I once got some cheapo 9v JCB alkalines at Halfords but they didn't last too long.
"Which" magazine did a battery commparison earlier in the year and concluded you get what you pay for, higher price gives higher capacity, though falls a bit short of pro rata.

If they really concluded that then it's about par for the course with Which - just rubbish.


NT