Re: Quick charger vs Slow: Which last longer NiMH batteries?

On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 09:21:57 -0800, John Navas wrote:

I don't think that this was addressed in the part of the thread
that I saw, but I agree. Charging takes its toll whether the rate
is fast or slow, and a battery's average performance/capacity over
its lifetime is about the same, whether it was charged quickly or
slowly, the primary difference being its lifetime. If NiMH
batteries cost far more than they do this might be a concern, but
they don't, and it's not, at least for me and thee. :)

The great majority of consumer chargers aren't fast enough to do any
substantial harm to the batteries.

Thanks for the irrelevant response. Or did you mistakenly assume
that if any fast chargers exist they must have a large market share?


The only significant risk is from a charger that doesn't sense charge
completion properly and overcharges the batteries, as when a fast
NiCd charger is used on NiMH batteries, for which different charge
completion sensing is needed.

Ah, I recall the good old days, when "Fast" NiCd chargers took
from 5 to 7 hours to recharge 450 and 600mAh NiCd cells. Most of
the fast chargers sold 4 to 5 years ago automatically sensed whether
NiCd or NiMH cells were used. Earlier one allowed you to change a
switch position to tell the charger whether you were using NiCd or
NiMH cells. These days, it's usually assumed that only NiMH cells
are used, and for good reason. Those that think they really need
NiCd batteries (Such as you, for your flash units, although you're
wrong. Did you miss the message that explained all or did your
filter break?) should know where to go to get a compatible charger
if they don't already have one. I have several, and they make
excellent NiMH trickle chargers. :)

.

Relevant Pages
Loading