Author: John Muchow

That’s not a typo, it’s not a 25% overrating. It is a 250% overrating. This cell has “50A max” on the wrap. This is an obscene overrating as there are no 18650’s available with a capacity of 3000mAh or higher that have a current rating over 20A.

If “max” is some sort of “pulse” rating it is useless because we don’t know the pulse length, time between pulses, and the criteria used to set the rating. It cannot be used to compare this battery against any other.

The 3100mAh capacity of this cell is also exaggerated. It is a 3000mAh cell.

The wrap has “IMR18650” on it but this cell does not use the chemistry associated with the IMR model number prefix. It uses the chemistry sometimes indicated by the INR prefix.

Its appearance is identical, and it’s performance essentially identical, to the Sony VTC6. I am rating this Brillipower cell at 15A and 3000mAh.

With all the other cells that are available to us, without this degree of overrating and incorrect info, this one is a terrible choice and earns a Do Not Buy recommendation from me.

The two cells that were tested were purchased for that purpose by me.

Test results, discharge graph, photos: https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/threads/bench-retest-results-brillipower-blue-3100mah-50a-18650-grotesquely-overrated-by-250-not-imr.826193/

All my test results to date: https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/blog-entry/list-of-battery-tests.7436/

This cell has “40A max” on the wrap, which is an impossible overrating as there are no 18650’s available with a capacity of 3000mAh or higher that have a current rating over 20A.

If “max” is some sort of “pulse” rating it is useless because we don’t know the pulse length, time between pulses, and the criteria used to set the rating. It cannot be used to compare this battery against any other.

The 3100mAh capacity of this cell is also exaggerated. It is a 3000mAh cell.

The wrap has “IMR18650” on it but this cell does not use the chemistry associated with the IMR model number prefix. It uses the chemistry sometimes indicated by the INR prefix.

Its appearance is identical to the LG HG2 but this Brillipower doesn’t perform quite as well as my reference HG2’s. It does perform about as well as a lot of the HG2’s being sold now though and better than it did on my previous test when Brillipower was obviously using lower grade cells (something they do often).

I am rating this Brillipower cell at 20A and 3000mAh.

I was very close to giving this cell a Do Not Buy recommendation but the use of cells that were not obviously, but might still be, a lower grade means they are just not a great choice considering what else is available.

The two cells that were tested were purchased for that purpose by me.

Test results, discharge graph, photos: https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/threads/bench-retest-results-brillipower-green-3100mah-40a-18650-preposterously-overrated-not-imr.826025/

All my test results to date: https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/blog-entry/list-of-battery-tests.7436/

This cell has “45A max” on the wrap, which is an impossible overrating. If “max” is some sort of “pulse” rating it is useless because we don’t know the pulse length, time between pulses, and the criteria used to set the rating. It cannot be used to compare this battery against any other.

The wrap has “IMR18650” on it but this cell does not use the chemistry associated with the IMR model number prefix. It uses the chemistry sometimes indicated by the INR prefix.

Its appearance is identical to the Sony VTC5 but this Brillipower doesn’t perform as well. It appears to be a lower grade VTC5.

I am rating this Brillipower cell at 20A and 2600mAh. With all the other cells that are available to us this one is a terrible choice and earns a Do Not Buy recommendation from me.

The two cells that were tested were purchased for that purpose by me.

Test results, discharge graph, photos: https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/threads/bench-test-results-brillipower-pink-2600mah-45a-18650-ludicrously-overrated-lower-grade-not-imr.825891/

All my test results to date: https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/blog-entry/list-of-battery-tests.7436/

This cell has “40A max” on the wrap, which is an absurd overrating. Its appearance is identical to the Samsung 25R5 but this Brillipower doesn’t perform as well. It appears to be a lower grade 25R5.

It has an exaggerated capacity rating of 2600mAh on the wrap. This is only a 2500mAh cell.

The wrap has “IMR18650” on it but this cell does not use the chemistry associated with the IMR model number prefix. It uses the chemistry sometimes indicated by the INR prefix.

I am rating this Brillipower cell at 20A and 2500mAh. With all the other cells that are available to us this one is a terrible choice and earns a Do Not Buy recommendation from me.

The two cells that were tested were purchased for that purpose by me.

Test results, discharge graph, photos: https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/threads/bench-test-results-brillipower-green-2600mah-40a-18650-absurdly-overrated-low-grade-non-imr.825747/

All my test results to date: https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/blog-entry/list-of-battery-tests.7436/

This is a 21700 cell. It is about 21mm in diameter and 70mm long.

This cell performs about as well as the 15A 4000mAh Sanyo NCR20700B down to 3.2V. While the internal resistance of this Samsung is a bit higher than the Sanyo, causing a bit more voltage sag, the higher capacity of this Samsung helps compensate for that.

The datasheet’s mention that the 9.6A continuous current rating given to this cell would result in reduced cycle life made me think it would probably end up being a 7A-8A cell in my testing. Especially considering that Samsung used 4.8A for their cycle life testing. But, I was wrong. Samsung does underrate their cells and this one has a 500 cycle rating at 4.8A. Even with the accelerated aging caused by using it as a 10A battery, versus as a 4.8A battery, the cycle life would only be reduced down to the level where the other batteries we use are rated, about 200 cycles. This is why I am still rating it at 10A.

This cell ran quite cool when discharged its continuous rating. It’s limited more by its own higher internal resistance, causing greater voltage sag, than by high temperatures when run too hard.

This bottom of this cell is unique, being recessed and scored unlike any other cell I’ve tested. It almost seems like the bottom is designed to split open, i.e., vent, if there is an overpressure situation. But there is no mention of this in the datasheet so assume I am wrong for now. If stacking these cells in a mod you will need a magnet between them to allow them to make reliable contact.

Both of the cell’s I tested were 70.3mm long and were an uncomfortably tight fit in LUC V4 chargers. I do not know which others chargers they may or may not fit in.

The model number and batch/date code printing are on both the wrap and the metal can of the cell.

I am rating this Samsung cell at 10A and 4800mAh.

The two cells that were tested were purchased for that purpose by me.

Test results, discharge graph, photos: https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/threads/bench-test-results-samsung-48g-4800mah-21700-rated-10a-about-equal-to-sanyo-ncr20700b.825429/

All my test results to date: https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/blog-entry/list-of-battery-tests.7436/

This is a 20650 cell, NOT a 26650. It is 20mm in diameter and 65mm long. It is another of the larger-than-18650 size cells available along with 26650’s, 20700’s and 21700’s

This cell performs as well, or a little better than, the Ampking/EBAT/Efest/iJoy cell but not quite as well as the elusive Sanyo NCR20700A.

The shorter length of this Sanyo 20650 offers mod builders and companies a different option without compromising performance versus the mid-performance 20700’s. I do not know of any companies that have a mod that fits this size cell but a sleeve should allow them to work in a 26650 mod.

There is also the LG HG6 30A 3000mAh cell but I do not know when I’ll be testing it.

I am rating this Sanyo cell at 30A and 2900mAh.

The two cells that were tested were purchased for that purpose by me.

Test results, discharge graph, photos: https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/threads/bench-test-results-sanyo-ncr20650a-2900mah-20650-equal-to-ampking-ebat-efest-ijoy-20700.824627/

All my test results to date: https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/blog-entry/list-of-battery-tests.7436/

While this cell has a useless 30A “max” rating on the wrap its 20A continuous current and 5500mAh capacity ratings are accurate.

This cell has a huge 5500mAh capacity rating but its slightly higher internal resistance means that at above 20A pulsed or so it doesn’t offer any additional vaping time versus the good 30A 4200mAh-4300mAh cells like the Aspire/Golisi/iJoy (all the same cell).

At below about 20A pulsed though, about 65W per cell (130W in a two-cell mod, etc.), this Shockli cell is a great choice, a little better than the Aspire/Golisi/iJoy cell.

I do not know whether this Shockli cell actually uses the chemistry most often associated with the “IMR” model number prefix, which appears on the wrap of this cell.

The length of the two cells I tested were 65.0mm and 65.1mm, at the short end of the range of 26650 cell lengths.

I am rating this Shockli cell at 20A and 5500mAh.

The two cells that were tested were donated for that purpose by Shockli (www.shockli.com). Thank you! A big thank you also to Richard McDougal for donating two of the earlier 5000mAh versions of this cell for testing. I wasn’t able to test them before I received the 5500mAh version.

Test results, discharge graph, photos: https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/threads/bench-test-results-shockli-20a-5500mah-26650-accurately-rated-great-choice-for-under-65w.824465/

All my test results to date: https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/blog-entry/list-of-battery-tests.7436/

While this is a classically underrated Samsung cell it has a low current rating combined with only moderate capacity. It is a poor choice for vapers as there are much better cells available with more capacity at the same current rating and/or a much higher current rating.

I only tested this cell because it is being used in some fake Samsung 25R cells. The 22P is easily identified by the four equally spaced radial lines in the venting disk (see photo below). The 25R does not have any radial lines on the venting disk.

NOTE: Other Samsung cells might have these radial lines too.

The 22P’s I tested are from the Malaysia factory (“M” on the right end of the first line of printing on the wrap with “SDIEM” below it). I am rating the 22P(M) cell at 14A and 2100mAh.

The two cells that were tested were purchased by me for that reason.

Test results, discharge graph, photos: https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/threads/bench-test-results-samsung-22p-m-underrated-but-a-poor-choice-for-vaping.823747/

All my test results to date: https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/blog-entry/list-of-battery-tests.7436/

This a great performing cell, one of the top three 26650’s. It is equal to the Golisi 4300mAh and the iJoy 4200mAh.

For some reason Aspire does not give this cell a rating. Instead, they include an “Aspire Battery Safety Chart” (https://imgur.com/a/IW0M4) that you must interpret to figure out how hard you can safely run it. The chart appears to say that this cell is rated at somewhere above 20A continuous.

Going to Aspire’s web site (http://www.aspirecig.com/accessories/battery-cells/battery461.html) leads you to a series of discharge graphs that must be reviewed and interpreted if you want to try to figure out this battery’s rating.

While I applaud Aspire’s posting of the discharge graphs, not having a rating on the cell only invites confusion. Expecially if the cell changes hands at some time. Will the original owner always pass on the chart to the new owner? Will vapers actually try to determine how hard they can safely run this cell by studying the discharge graphs? Why not just put an accurate continuous current rating on the wrap?

I am rating this Aspire cell at 30A and 4300mAh. This seems to match Aspire’s numbers on their 26650 Battery Safety Chart. The Aspire is identical in appearance and essentially identical in performance to the Golisi and iJoy 26650’s and all three appear to rewrap the same cell.

The two cells that were tested were purchased by me for that reason.

Test results, discharge graph, photos: https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/threads/bench-test-results-aspire-4300mah-26650-a-great-30a-battery-but-why-unrated.823535/

All my test results to date: https://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/blog-entry/list-of-battery-tests.7436/

This is follow-up to my previous post about this cotton. I’ll keep this as short as I can but there is a lot to cover.

1) Tony Wang, a sales manager, and I have had a days-long email conversation. He said the regulatory compliance certificates had trade secrets and he couldn’t show them to me unless I kept them confidential. If I didn’t he said they would sue me. I asked for an NDA. He has not replied in days, even after several additional emails to him regarding this and other things described below. These documents are not secret. They are meant to be given to customs inspectors, prospective customers, etc., as proof of claimed compliance and testing.

2) Another version of Angorabbit cotton being sold at 3fvape, Fasttech, DHGate, etc., is using the Bugs Bunny character on the front and says “Made in USA” on the back. That’s IP theft and an interesting country-of-manufacture claim. No, there is no city in China named “USA”. 🙂 Photos here: https://imgur.com/a/Eyqql

3) The photos that Angorabbit, Tina Yang, and Tony Wang have posted on Facebook and Instagram, and said were the fields where their Angorabbit cotton is grown, appear as generic pictures on several China news sites in articles about the cotton harvest and market in 2016 and later. Photos here: https://imgur.com/a/ifT8E

4) The Angorabbit package claims FCC and RoHS regulatory compliance. That’s preposterous as these only apply to electronics. Lion Eco-Technology Co., Ltd (“Lion”) has no idea what these compliance marks are for, not a good sign. Photos here: https://imgur.com/a/DpXdP

5) The Angorabbit package claims CE and FDA regulations/standards compliance. You can self-certify for CE compliance, no secrets are in that document. The FDA claim was made, Lion says, because they sell medical cotton too so the FDA “approval” is also for Angorabbit cotton. Umm…no. Show us the documents or tell us the FDA file number so we can check the public database. Lion won’t tell anyone.

6) The Angorabbit package claims compliance with ISO standards. There are over 20,000 of them and very few deal with cotton. Those that do address things like cotton bale density and color fastness along with other stuff. Claiming compliance is useless unless we know which standards. Lion won’t tell anyone.

So what’s actually in the Angorabbit bag? I don’t know.

Does Lion have all those technicians and fields of cotton? Did they take seven months to develop this cotton? I don’t know.

But I do know there are a lot of things here that I don’t like. I would like to see test results for pesticides, heavy metals and bacteria (done for medical cotton) for Angorabbit cotton done by an EU or US lab. Actually, I’d love to see this for all the cotton we use.

I don’t care what batteries, mods, wire, or cotton each of us uses, we’re all adults here. But I do want us to have all the information we need to make an informed decision. I’m hoping Lion provides us with that information.

Mooch