Why Do Batteries Suck So Much And When Is It Going To Stop?

"Roy Smith" wrote

> On the wet side of the house, the modern lead-acid cell isn't much
> different from a lead-acid cell from the Civil War era. The glass tank
> gave way to bakelite and then to plastic, and we've got gel cells now, but
> all those are minor details.
>

Let's see ... just since the 1970s we have gone from batteries that lasted
at best three years to batteries that routinely have a five-year warranty.
Further, I'd achieved 9+ years on a battery in my small truck ... replaced
it only because I had the opportunity (free). Current battery is 7 years old
and shows no signs of needing replacement.

The alloys used in the construction of the battery grids has changed both
the short and long term lifespan of lead acid batteries. Further, additions
to the paste, grid construction, grid alloys, and seperator construction
have lead to increased cold-crank and reserve capacities in this same
period.

Maintenance free (actually recombinant cells) that capture the gases
generated during charging, and convert them back into water have been around
about the same time ... when was the last time you checked or added water to
your car battery?

Typically put, the lead-acid battery of today has a much higher power to
weight ratio than the batteries of 30 years ago, but we tend to forget.

I'd say the lead-acid battery of today is far ahead of even 30 years ago ...
let alone when Plante first immersed two lead sheets into a mild acid
electrolyte.




> In dry cells, we've gone from carbon-zinc to alkaline for primary cells
and
> from NiCd to NiMH for rechargables, but again, these are incremental
> improvements.

Again, NiCd cell capacity has quadrupled in the last 30 years ... 500 mA/hr
size "AA" cells were the hot ticket back in the 1970s, and today you can get
2400 mA/Hr in the same volume ( an actual 480% improvement). Yes, its an
incremental improvement ... I'd tend to call it a magnitude of order
improvement.

NiMH cells have about double the energy/lb storage capacity as NiCD cells
(you do have to remember here that we're talking about a gelled or wet-paste
electrolyte, not a flooded electrolyte NiCD cell). Again, I wouldn't call it
an incremental improvement, but again a magnitude of order improvement.
Point of fact ... can you remember when cell phones all had Lead-Acid
batteries?


> Fuel cells work, but despite the occasional blather out of
> Detroit and Washington, remain uneconomical for all but the most high-end
> applications (i.e. space flight).


Here we are in full agreement, if only because the typical fuel cell
requires hydrogen and oxygen supplies, and it isn't practical to store
either without specialized storage and cooling. Reformer-equipped fuel cells
ARE making inroads ... in fact you can buy a reformer-equipped fuel cell
that runs off of methane (or is it butane?) to power your laptop today. It's
bigger than the laptop, but given an adequate fuel supply it's an attractive
alternative to lugging a generator around.

>
> If you could invent a way to store electrical energy which gave a 2x
> performance improvement in any of:
>
> Energy per unit volume

Already discussed that above.

> Energy per unit weight

Already discussed that above.

> Manufacturing cost

Lead-acid batteries have come down in price to commodity-level priced items.
The early automobile batteries were, in some cases, rented to the auto
owner.

> Useful lifetime (recharge cycles)

Here's another interesting factor ... if you plug your cell phone in every
night and recharge it (because it was run down by the end of the day), and
the battery lasted 365 cycles ... you'd be replacing the battery every year.
Many batteries are now lasting well beyond this ... some consumer batteries
are up to 700-800 cycles.

To get really large cycles (say 15,000-20,000 charge/discharge cycles), you
need only invest in nickel-hydrogen technology. Not exactly portable, since
you need a large pressure vessel for the hydrogen ... these batteries are
typically used where changing the batteries is ... uh ... difficult, say in
a geosynchronous satellite.


> Environmental impact

Around 97% of the lead-acid batteries are recycled. The lead-acid battery
industry has a very tight loop ... virgin and recycled lead from the smelter
goes to the battery plant, batteries go from the plant to the consumer, old
batteries go from the consumer to the smelter. Can't get that loop any
tighter without eliminating the customer from the loop! NiCD and NiMH are
more difficult to recycle, and work continues on that front (because there
IS a lot of money in recycling these items). Most batteries escape the
recycle loop through ignorance, rather than difficulty in finding an entry
port to the recycle stream.

>
> while holding the line on all the other factors, you would become a very
> rich man in short order.

Probably not. The profit margin is paper-thin on commodity items ... if we
can make $.01 per battery made here, someone willing to work for less
overhead will allow that manufacturer to make a bit more profit. This means
the other manufacturer can/will drop prices to the point where on-shore
manufacturing goes broke. No ... the money is made by recycling, because
EVERYONE needs batteries, and ALL the manufacturers need raw (virgin or
recycled) materials to make more.

*****

Perhaps batteries suck ... I think our memory is faulty. I've had
rechargable batteries in electronics and in tools for about 30 years now,
and I find myself getting upset over the lifespan, until I recalibrate.

Energy efficiency in our equipment that uses batteries is where we need to
make a big improvement. Face it ... cell phones of even 10 years ago hogged
power ... but all they did was send and receive phone calls. As the
technology improved, the actual "telephone" current requirement dropped ...
but the marketplace demanded "toys" in addition to their telephone. Current
consumption has gone up ... in some cases as fast as battery capacity.


Regards,



Rick

"Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> I'm looking into a new car, with the express intent of reducing the
> cost per mile, so that my sixty miles of commuting a day will not
> continue to eat my wallet.
>
> I'd be interested in some of this current drop of hybrids, which use
> batteries - except for one thing...
>
> Batteries Suck.
>
>
I have heard that the batteries in these hybrids only last 6 years or so.
It costs $$$$ to replace the battery pack. The high cost of replacement
means that you will not save money by buying a hybrid.
Also, the high cost of replacement is well known to used car lot folks...
Jim

In article <[email protected]>, Eugene Nine
<[email protected]> wrote:

> My makita 9.6v batteries lasted 8 years.

I've got a consumer level Wally world brand 12 volt drill whose battery
pack was starting to suck pretty bad after 5 years.

I had it rebuilt for $60 CAD, with a one year warranty, and can't
believe the difference.

I've got another cheapo 9.6 volt and will take that pack in next week
for rebuilding as well.

--
Life. Nature's way of keeping meat fresh. -- Dr. Who

Steve Peterson wrote:

>>>Having read most of this thread, I am now convinced, more than ever, that
>>>I was right in not joining the cord-free movement when it first raised
>>>its ugly head.
>>>
>>>I know I must be an ante-deluvial throwback but, just as I never leave
>>>home in the summer in my auto without my golf clubs in the trunk, I never
>>>leave home in my work truck without my generator for my corded tools.
>>>
>>>The only batteries I have are clearly marked A, C, D, AA, or AAA.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Got any AAAA's?
>>
>>Dave
>
>
> I think I have a couple. Want to stop by and pick them up?
>
> Steve
>
>
What kinda beer have you got on hand? :)

dave

Tom Watson wrote:

> Had a simple enough job to do today. Wanted to run the base, chair
> rail and bed molding in our 5' x 8' bath.
>
> I've a Paslode finish nailer but, since I don't make my living doing
> this sort of thing anymore, when the extra battery fried, I didn't
> replace it. I just used this sucker about two weeks ago and set the
> battery in the charger when I was done, as is my habit. I took it out
> the next day and put it in the box.
>
> Today I go to fire the bad boy up and got this weak assed response
> from the battery.
>
> Batteries Suck.
>
> I was an early adopter of battery driven drills, starting with a
> troika of Makita's and currently housing a similar group of Dewalts.
>
> In every instance I bought extra batteries, treated them according to
> specs, and cursed them as they quickly degraded into too short useful
> run times.
>
> Batteries Suck.
>
> Blought myself a nice Dell laptop about eighteen months ago and only
> got one battery because, with a runtime of about four hours, I didn't
> figure on needing more. Now the battery runs for about two hours -
> and that ain't enough. Yes, I followed all of the instructions and
> advice about how to maintain battery life.
>
> Batteries Suck.
>
> I'm looking into a new car, with the express intent of reducing the
> cost per mile, so that my sixty miles of commuting a day will not
> continue to eat my wallet.
>
> I'd be interested in some of this current drop of hybrids, which use
> batteries - except for one thing...
>
> Batteries Suck.
>
>
> watson - who is thinking about oiling up the old Yankee, cleaning the
> rust off the trim hammer, and looking for a good mileage car that
> doesn't rely on batteries - because...
>
>
> Batteries Suck.
>
>
> Tom Watson - WoodDorker
> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (email)
> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/ (website)

My makita 9.6v batteries lasted 8 years.
My dell laptop battery still has the full 4 hours after 3 years
What are you doing to yours.
Years and years ago you needed fully discharge and recharge batteries to
prevent the memory effect, but modern batteries you cause more wear buy
doing that and I still see a lot of people that still think you have to and
wear out their batteries early.

Tom Watson wrote:
> Batteries Suck.

We hit the limits of battery chemistry long ago, Tom. It'll never get
any better.

Fuel cells may be more to your liking. Hang in there.

Larry Jaques wrote:
> On 4 Sep 2005 20:53:42 -0700, the blithe spirit "Dhakala"
> <[email protected]> clearly indicated:
>
> >Tom Watson wrote:
> >> Batteries Suck.
> >
> >We hit the limits of battery chemistry long ago, Tom. It'll never get
> >any better.
> >
> >Fuel cells may be more to your liking. Hang in there.
>
> Oh, bullpuckey. Nicads improved, LIon batts came out, air batteries
> came out, lithiums improved, chargers improved. Change is still
> happening.

You're right, Larry. Why, just look at this breakthrough in batter
technology!

http://tinyurl.com/a99c2 (National Geographic)

"BillyBob" <[email protected]> wrote:


>I still love my 1991 Toyota previa with 180,000 miles. My average mainteance
>cost for last four years has been less than $400/year.

Have to make sure SWMBO doesn't see this or she will get all
teary-eyed! We sold ours a few years ago with 235k miles on it. And we
did so only after finally giving up on trying to find a rational
reason to sell it, and just admitting we wanted a change. It was
probably the best vehicle we have owned, and was running great and
looking pretty darned good too when we sold it.
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

TWS wrote:

> <snip>
>
>>Batteries Suck.
>>
>
> Yup. My last project, framing a mirror in the bathroom, started
> simple enough until I went to use my 3 year old Hitachi cordless
> drill. Since their charger is 'smart' it stops charging after
> reaching full charge so you can leave it in the charger as long as you
> want - it won't harm the battery. Problem is - it is so smart, it
> doesn't check to see that the battery self-discharged on its own while
> sitting there so it doesn't charge it back up - keeping it in the
> charger is useless. Two dead batteries.
>
> So, to finish my project I have to use my VERY old 3/8 inch corded
> drill with the kind of chuck that requires a key - it's also the kind
> of chuck that sits pretty loose in its bearing - this doesn't have
> runout - it's more like a marathon. Anyway, it's amazing how quickly
> one can get used to have a hand tightened chuck and how quickly we
> forget that the key, which is tie-wrapped to the cord, needs to be
> removed from the chuck before you pull the switch - that cord got
> really short in a hurry! Ok, so I'm past that but at every turn I'm
> either knocking stuff off the counter with the cord or can't reach the
> damn hole I want to drill 'cause the cord's caught on something or I
> trip on the cord going to get the spackle to repair the hole I just
> put in the wall because the drill stopped short and dinged the wall.
>
> I just bought a new cordless drill and chose it almost entirely
> because the manufacturer promises 'lifetime' replacement of batteries.
> We'll see. Either their promise is full of holes or they're going to
> go out of business because...
>
> Batteries Suck.
>
> TWS
What mfgr offers lifetime replacement of batteries? and what's their
criteria for replacement? Is there a large fee for shipping/handling?

Dave

On Sun, 04 Sep 2005 16:30:51 -0400, Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:

... snip
>
>I'm looking into a new car, with the express intent of reducing the
>cost per mile, so that my sixty miles of commuting a day will not
>continue to eat my wallet.
>
>I'd be interested in some of this current drop of hybrids, which use
>batteries - except for one thing...
>
>Batteries Suck.
>

Can't comment from direct experience with hybrids, but battery life would
be one of my concerns with them as well. Here in AZ, a car battery is
usually good for about 2 years, whether it is a 36, 48, or 60 month battery
-- it's good for about 2 years. After having experienced this on my
pickup, in our old Explorer, and in our replacement for the Explorer, the
result has been the same -- batteries in Tucson are good for about 2 years.
After frying my dash panel in the F-150 trying to jump start the 48 month
battery that died after about 2 years, I decided that I was going to
replace my batteries every two years -- it's cheaper than a $500 dash panel
replacement.

So, when I see these hybrids, I wonder the same thing as you, only I'm
asking, how expensive is it to replace *those* batteries every 2 years?

Yep -- batteries suck.


>
>watson - who is thinking about oiling up the old Yankee, cleaning the
>rust off the trim hammer, and looking for a good mileage car that
>doesn't rely on batteries - because...
>
>
>Batteries Suck.
>
>
>Tom Watson - WoodDorker
>tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (email)
>http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/ (website)



+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

On 9 Sep 2005 11:23:42 -0400, [email protected] (Roy Smith) wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>, Joe User <[email protected]> wrote:
>>Roy Smith wrote:
>>
>>> Googling "aaaa cell" found http://www.batterystore.com/Eveready/E96.htm.
>>> That is most certainly not what's inside the last 9V battery I tore open
>>> (granted, that was years ago, but I can't imagine they've changed much).
>>> The 9V was a stack of (6, I guess) flat rectangular shaped cells.
>>
>>Well, it's been years, but I read something (either a circuit or a
>>repair for a device with an AAAA battery) that told me to tear open a 9V
>>to get some AAAA batteries. I didn't need the AAAAs but, being the
>>curious type, tore one open anyway. It was, in fact, 6 itty bitty
>>cells, just like a AA only smaller. They were in actual packaging, but
>>with brown paper, no artwork.
>>
>>I haven't broken one open in years, so things certainly may have changed
>>since then.
>
>Interesting. I can swear I found 6 little flat cells stack one on top
>of each other (I was a kid; it might have been 30 years ago), but some
>more googling found:
>
>http://quiz2.chem.arizona.edu/preproom/Demo%20Files/9-volt_battery.htm
>
>whcih certainly supports the AAAA theory! I know what I'm doing this
>weekend :-)



there could be lots of ways to build a 9v battery. no reason all
manufacturers have to do it the same way.

On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 13:00:51 -0700, David <[email protected]> wrote:
> BillyBob wrote:
>
>>
>> Anyone remember the Cadillac 4-6-8?

> yeah--a true POS. I used to work on those turds.

Worse than Caddy's HT4100 aluminum block abomination? You know, the
"let's leak coolant into the oil" engine?

On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 22:59:00 -0400, W Canaday <[email protected]> wrote:

> I have, however, owned two Geo Metros. Very reliable little car, very high
> mileage. My first long trip in one (4 spd. manual, 3 cyl.) netted 52 mpg,
> Detroit to Minneapolis ... mostly at speeds clearly not posted. City
> mileage was about 37 mpg.

> It's a good car. Easy to maintain. Needs to come back.

And, how exactly do they fare in crash tests? If I'm dead, good mileage
didn't help me much.

On Thu, 08 Sep 2005 10:17:43 -0700, David <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dave Hinz wrote:
>
>> Worse than Caddy's HT4100 aluminum block abomination? You know, the
>> "let's leak coolant into the oil" engine?

> The 4100 was another POS that leaked coolant into the oil because of the
> ridiculously long intake manifold bolts that were underneath the valve
> covers. Almost no one bothered to retorque them and hence the leaks.
> I'd find many of the bolts so loose upon disassembly that I could remove
> them with my fingers.

Hm, I was told it was an o-ring leaking between the steel sleeves and
the aluminum block. Or, do those bolts allow that leak? Mind, I'm not
saying there aren't more than one problem with the engine. My folks got
bit by that one - GM's "fix" was to pour radiator stop-leak into the
tank & hope for the best. Oddly enough, next winter, my dad had to buy
a new heater core... and then the camshaft became, well, not all that
cammy.

On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 22:14:02 GMT, Scott Lurndal <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I've got an old radio that needs a B and two A batteries. IIRC
> the B is about 45v. Anyone know of a source? (It's a
> Stewart-Warner three dial battery set from the 30's).

Got two of 'em, right (touch) here. Gonna put 'em on eBay one of these
days. I can check voltage & let you know if they're any good.
But, here's what they look like:
http://www.duck-creek.net/dave/collections/electronics/
30 volts, it says on the label.

Unquestionably Confused wrote:

> Morris Dovey wrote:
> > Australopithecus scobis (in
> > [email protected]) said:
> >
> > | I don't have any battery-powered tools (just scads of small AA-eater
> > | gadgets). Just wanted to toss this idea out to you folks who use
> > | them: would you find any use for a cranked charger, like the
> > | cranked radios? Higher current draw, of course...
> >
> > I think I sense a great idea coming on: How about attaching the crank
> > directly to the tool so as to eliminate batteries altogether - I think
> > you could make a drill with cranked gearing...or even a drill that is
> > just a chuck attached to a crank.
> >
> > Some of the tools in this family could even be simple push-pull tools:
> > How about a screwdriver that all you had to do was push-pull on the
> > handle? A push-pull saw or a push-pull jointer (or even a push-pull
> > sander!)
>
> Great ideas, Morris. You could even add a little red lens and
> magnifying glass and equip those saws with a solar guide!
>
> Iowa retro tools. Gotta love it!<g>

Now you're on to something! ROTFLMAO

Yeah, batteries suck. All my power tools need electrical receptacles.
They don't run out of power, they are less expensive, and last a lot
longer.

On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 15:11:19 GMT, the blithe spirit "Rick M"
<[email protected]> clearly indicated:

>"Larry Jaques" wrote
>> Oh, bullpuckey. Nicads improved, LIon batts came out, air batteries
>> came out, lithiums improved, chargers improved. Change is still
>> happening.
>
>You're absolutely right Larry ... but since the discussions on the wreck
>have devolved into subjective shouting matches, any attempt to apply facts
>and analyze the situation gets drowned out.
>
>"Facts ... we don't need no stinkin' facts!"

You're probably right. <sigh>


>This thread will be spun the way of pretty much every other thread in the
>past year or so ... completely out of control, with logic tossed out the
>window, and the "winner" will be the person that enflames the most readers.
>Kind of like what our press is doing today ... except the press does it for
>money, these amateurs do it for fun.

<g>


>I countered most of the arguments brought forth on the theory that battery
>technology hit the ceiling, only to see yet another "yea, but" divergence
>that has little or nothing to do with the topic at hand. It has gotten to
>the point where I killfile people that "yea, but" conversations just to
>argue ... and I see that I'm nuking about 50% of the daily messages.

My "I" button kicks out a lot more than that nowadays. <sigh2>


>I think I'll just head back to my shop and make some sawdust. I've decided I
>need to make a couple of scratch gauges and I'm going to attempt to make
>myself some cam clamps. Once I've gotten those out of the way I'm going to
>start on a scratch-built guitar (no kits, no reverse-engineered plans ...
>just starting with an idea and a book). I like the idea of using native
>woods in my projects, thought the thought of anything but a spruce top has
>people cringing.

Acoustic gitfiddle? Yeah, they probably cringe for good reason.
But your first is your -practice- gitfiddle, so go for it!


>Let's see ... rock maple and cherry, no poly and no stain
>(well, I MIGHT tint the fretboard for contrast). If it doesn't play, I'll
>use it as a splitting maul!

If you must, fume the cherry or use some potassium dichromate on it.


>Any progress on your bow saw? (really big grin!)

No, not lately. Hold your breath and I'll let you know, Blue.


.-.
Better Living Through Denial
---
http://www.diversify.com Wondrous Website Design

"John Emmons" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> You know else sucks about laptops, they're still being made out of plastic
> that breaks when you drop it.

I guess you're not familiar with some of the IBM/Lenevo models - Titanium
composite - a long cry from plastic.

Bob

Joe User wrote:

> Roy Smith wrote:
>
>> Googling "aaaa cell" found
>> http://www.batterystore.com/Eveready/E96.htm. That is most certainly
>> not what's inside the last 9V battery I tore open (granted, that was
>> years ago, but I can't imagine they've changed much). The 9V was a
>> stack of (6, I guess) flat rectangular shaped cells.
>
>
> Well, it's been years, but I read something (either a circuit or a
> repair for a device with an AAAA battery) that told me to tear open a 9V
> to get some AAAA batteries. I didn't need the AAAAs but, being the
> curious type, tore one open anyway. It was, in fact, 6 itty bitty
> cells, just like a AA only smaller. They were in actual packaging, but
> with brown paper, no artwork.
>
> I haven't broken one open in years, so things certainly may have changed
> since then.
>
> -j
I broke a 9V Duracell open last year, for grins. (Or maybe early this
year). It contained a series of AAAA's.

Dave

Australopithecus scobis (in
[email protected]) said:

| I don't have any battery-powered tools (just scads of small AA-eater
| gadgets). Just wanted to toss this idea out to you folks who use
| them: would you find any use for a cranked charger, like the
| cranked radios? Higher current draw, of course...

I think I sense a great idea coming on: How about attaching the crank
directly to the tool so as to eliminate batteries altogether - I think
you could make a drill with cranked gearing...or even a drill that is
just a chuck attached to a crank.

Some of the tools in this family could even be simple push-pull tools:
How about a screwdriver that all you had to do was push-pull on the
handle? A push-pull saw or a push-pull jointer (or even a push-pull
sander!)

:-)

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/solar.html

[email protected] writes:
>
>>>> The only batteries I have are clearly marked A, C, D, AA, or AAA.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Got any AAAA's?
>>>
>>
>> Isn't that two AA's side by side? :-)
>
>nope. it's one AA cut in half. lengthwise.


I've got an old radio that needs a B and two A batteries. IIRC
the B is about 45v. Anyone know of a source? (It's a
Stewart-Warner three dial battery set from the 30's).

scott

Dave Hinz wrote:

> On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 22:59:00 -0400, W Canaday <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> I have, however, owned two Geo Metros. Very reliable little car, very
>> high mileage. My first long trip in one (4 spd. manual, 3 cyl.) netted 52
>> mpg, Detroit to Minneapolis ... mostly at speeds clearly not posted. City
>> mileage was about 37 mpg.
>
>> It's a good car. Easy to maintain. Needs to come back.
>
> And, how exactly do they fare in crash tests? If I'm dead, good mileage
> didn't help me much.
They actually do decent in crash _tests_ like other small cars since they
have such low weight they practically bounce off of the test wall. IN real
world crashes they don't do so well.

Dave Hinz wrote:

> On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 13:00:51 -0700, David <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>BillyBob wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Anyone remember the Cadillac 4-6-8?
>
>
>
>>yeah--a true POS. I used to work on those turds.
>
>
> Worse than Caddy's HT4100 aluminum block abomination? You know, the
> "let's leak coolant into the oil" engine?

The 4100 was another POS that leaked coolant into the oil because of the
ridiculously long intake manifold bolts that were underneath the valve
covers. Almost no one bothered to retorque them and hence the leaks.
I'd find many of the bolts so loose upon disassembly that I could remove
them with my fingers.

Dave

Roy Smith wrote:
[snip]> span are more like 1000's fold.
>
> I'm typing this on a 2-year old laptop. 3/4 of a gig ram, 40 gig hard
> drive, 1 GHz processor, 1024 x 768 x 24-bit color display, wireless
> ethernet, DVD-reader (CD-burner). It cost me about $1800 and weighs under
> 5 lbs. 30 years ago, some of those specs could be met for millions of
> dollars, some couldn't be met for any money. The machine that could come
> closest would fill a room bigger than my house and I couldn't afford the
> electric bill to keep the lights blinking.
>
> But, you know what sucks about my laptop? The battery. It's probably 25%
> of the weight of the machine, and can't keep it running more than about a
> half hour any more.

I have a laptop that is about three years old. Battery is fine. Why is
that you say? I usually use it in a house that has electric outlets.
I plug the damn thing into to the house current. I guess you use it
in places where there is no such thing?
twitch,
jo4hn

Tom Watson wrote:

> Had a simple enough job to do today. Wanted to run the base, chair
> rail and bed molding in our 5' x 8' bath.
>
> I've a Paslode finish nailer but, since I don't make my living doing
> this sort of thing anymore, when the extra battery fried, I didn't
> replace it. I just used this sucker about two weeks ago and set the
> battery in the charger when I was done, as is my habit. I took it out
> the next day and put it in the box.
>
> Today I go to fire the bad boy up and got this weak assed response
> from the battery.
>
> Batteries Suck.
>
> I was an early adopter of battery driven drills, starting with a
> troika of Makita's and currently housing a similar group of Dewalts.
>
> In every instance I bought extra batteries, treated them according to
> specs, and cursed them as they quickly degraded into too short useful
> run times.
>
> Batteries Suck.
>
> Blought myself a nice Dell laptop about eighteen months ago and only
> got one battery because, with a runtime of about four hours, I didn't
> figure on needing more. Now the battery runs for about two hours -
> and that ain't enough. Yes, I followed all of the instructions and
> advice about how to maintain battery life.
>
> Batteries Suck.
>
> I'm looking into a new car, with the express intent of reducing the
> cost per mile, so that my sixty miles of commuting a day will not
> continue to eat my wallet.
>
> I'd be interested in some of this current drop of hybrids, which use
> batteries - except for one thing...
>
> Batteries Suck.
>
>
> watson - who is thinking about oiling up the old Yankee, cleaning the
> rust off the trim hammer, and looking for a good mileage car that
> doesn't rely on batteries - because...
>
>
> Batteries Suck.
>
>
> Tom Watson - WoodDorker
> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (email)
> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/ (website)
Yes, Tom batteries SUCK. Especially Makita batteries. I've already
thrown out a couple year old 18V Makita, and now another is pretty much
shot. Those suckers are $70 a copy and I'm not happy with their
performance. I have 4 Makitas and like the tools but I get ticked every
time I go to use one and it grinds to a halt in a few moments. If
anyone knows of a good aftermarket battery for Makita products, don't
keep it a secret.

Dave

According to the Battery Store Site, AAAA capacity is 625 mAh, the same as
for a 9V. So it takes six 1.5V cells to make 9V, but the total capacity is
not 6 times AAAA capacity.

Steve

"Roy Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, Joe User <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> David wrote:
>>
>> > Got any AAAA's?
>>
>> break open a 9v battery. a true battery, i.e., made up of multiuple
>> cells. The cells happen to be AAAA size.
>>
>> -j
>
> Googling "aaaa cell" found http://www.batterystore.com/Eveready/E96.htm.
> That is most certainly not what's inside the last 9V battery I tore open
> (granted, that was years ago, but I can't imagine they've changed much).
> The 9V was a stack of (6, I guess) flat rectangular shaped cells.

"Morris Dovey" <[email protected]> writes:
>Scott Lurndal (in [email protected])
>said:
>
>
>| I've got an old radio that needs a B and two A batteries. IIRC
>| the B is about 45v. Anyone know of a source? (It's a
>| Stewart-Warner three dial battery set from the 30's).
>
>I don't think A and B refer to battery types in this context - but
>rather to power _inputs_. IIRC the B supply was the filament supply
>and was somewhere around six and a half volts.
>

There is a diagram attached to the inside of the lid (it's a
gorgeous walnut case) that shows the "A" Battery (yes, I suspect
you are correct in your assessment, A and B are just reference
letters in this context) sized and shaped much like an automobile
battery, and it specifies it as 6v. That would be the filament
supply, I suppose.

The diagram also shows two 45v batteries (both labelled 'B', oddly).
They're short squat square batteries with binding posts on the
top surface.

FWIW it is Stewart-Warner model 303.

scott

>Any _really_ old-timers out there who can help with this one?
>--
>Morris Dovey
>DeSoto Solar
>DeSoto, Iowa USA
>http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/solar.html
>
>

apples to oranges

You're comparing a system to a component.

It's like asking why metal alloys haven't improved 1000 times over time.

Nickel Hydride is an improvement, a major improvement so far as consumer
usable batteries are concerned, when we find an entirely new way to store
energy, batteries will improve again.

You know else sucks about laptops, they're still being made out of plastic
that breaks when you drop it. Asking why the case material hasn't improved
like the insides have is a better comparison to a battery.

Batteries are bad, no batteries is worse.

John Emmons

"Roy Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Rick M" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > "Roy Smith" wrote
> >
> > > On the wet side of the house, the modern lead-acid cell isn't much
> > > different from a lead-acid cell from the Civil War era. The glass
tank
> > > gave way to bakelite and then to plastic, and we've got gel cells now,
but
> > > all those are minor details.
> > >
> >
> > Let's see ... just since the 1970s we have gone from batteries that
lasted
> > at best three years to batteries that routinely have a five-year
warranty.
> > Further, I'd achieved 9+ years on a battery in my small truck
>
> That's a 2-3x improvement.
>
> > Again, NiCd cell capacity has quadrupled in the last 30 years
>
> OK, a 4x improvement.
>
> 2, 3, 4x over the span of 30 years is certainly an improvement, but I'm
> comparing it to digital electronics, where improvements over a similar
time
> span are more like 1000's fold.
>
> I'm typing this on a 2-year old laptop. 3/4 of a gig ram, 40 gig hard
> drive, 1 GHz processor, 1024 x 768 x 24-bit color display, wireless
> ethernet, DVD-reader (CD-burner). It cost me about $1800 and weighs under
> 5 lbs. 30 years ago, some of those specs could be met for millions of
> dollars, some couldn't be met for any money. The machine that could come
> closest would fill a room bigger than my house and I couldn't afford the
> electric bill to keep the lights blinking.
>
> But, you know what sucks about my laptop? The battery. It's probably 25%
> of the weight of the machine, and can't keep it running more than about a
> half hour any more.

Dave Hinz wrote:

> On Thu, 08 Sep 2005 10:17:43 -0700, David <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Dave Hinz wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Worse than Caddy's HT4100 aluminum block abomination? You know, the
>>>"let's leak coolant into the oil" engine?
>
>
>>The 4100 was another POS that leaked coolant into the oil because of the
>>ridiculously long intake manifold bolts that were underneath the valve
>>covers. Almost no one bothered to retorque them and hence the leaks.
>>I'd find many of the bolts so loose upon disassembly that I could remove
>>them with my fingers.
>
>
> Hm, I was told it was an o-ring leaking between the steel sleeves and
> the aluminum block. Or, do those bolts allow that leak? Mind, I'm not
> saying there aren't more than one problem with the engine. My folks got
> bit by that one - GM's "fix" was to pour radiator stop-leak into the
> tank & hope for the best. Oddly enough, next winter, my dad had to buy
> a new heater core... and then the camshaft became, well, not all that
> cammy.
>
>
oil would leak past the manifold gasket, at the water passages, after
the bolts had lost their torque.

PDQ wrote:

> "Larry Jaques" <novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> | On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 15:11:19 GMT, the blithe spirit "Rick M"
> | <[email protected]> clearly indicated:
> |
> | >"Larry Jaques" wrote
> | >> Oh, bullpuckey. Nicads improved, LIon batts came out, air batteries
> | >> came out, lithiums improved, chargers improved. Change is still
> | >> happening.
> | >
> | >You're absolutely right Larry ... but since the discussions on the wreck
> | >have devolved into subjective shouting matches, any attempt to apply facts
> | >and analyze the situation gets drowned out.
> | >
> | >"Facts ... we don't need no stinkin' facts!"
> |
> | You're probably right. <sigh>
> |
> |
> | >This thread will be spun the way of pretty much every other thread in the
> | >past year or so ... completely out of control, with logic tossed out the
> | >window, and the "winner" will be the person that enflames the most readers.
> | >Kind of like what our press is doing today ... except the press does it for
> | >money, these amateurs do it for fun.
> |
> | <g>
> |
> |
> | >I countered most of the arguments brought forth on the theory that battery
> | >technology hit the ceiling, only to see yet another "yea, but" divergence
> | >that has little or nothing to do with the topic at hand. It has gotten to
> | >the point where I killfile people that "yea, but" conversations just to
> | >argue ... and I see that I'm nuking about 50% of the daily messages.
> |
> | My "I" button kicks out a lot more than that nowadays. <sigh2>
> |
> |
> | >I think I'll just head back to my shop and make some sawdust. I've decided I
> | >need to make a couple of scratch gauges and I'm going to attempt to make
> | >myself some cam clamps. Once I've gotten those out of the way I'm going to
> | >start on a scratch-built guitar (no kits, no reverse-engineered plans ...
> | >just starting with an idea and a book). I like the idea of using native
> | >woods in my projects, thought the thought of anything but a spruce top has
> | >people cringing.
> |
> | Acoustic gitfiddle? Yeah, they probably cringe for good reason.
> | But your first is your -practice- gitfiddle, so go for it!
> |
> |
> | >Let's see ... rock maple and cherry, no poly and no stain
> | >(well, I MIGHT tint the fretboard for contrast). If it doesn't play, I'll
> | >use it as a splitting maul!
> |
> | If you must, fume the cherry or use some potassium dichromate on it.
> |
> |
> | >Any progress on your bow saw? (really big grin!)
> |
> | No, not lately. Hold your breath and I'll let you know, Blue.
> |
> |
> | .-.
> | Better Living Through Denial
> | ---
> | http://www.diversify.com Wondrous Website Design
>
>
> Having read most of this thread, I am now convinced, more than ever, that I was right in not joining the cord-free movement when it first raised its ugly head.
>
> I know I must be an ante-deluvial throwback but, just as I never leave home in the summer in my auto without my golf clubs in the trunk, I never leave home in my work truck without my generator for my corded tools.
>
> The only batteries I have are clearly marked A, C, D, AA, or AAA.
>
>
Got any AAAA's?

Dave

BillyBob wrote:

>
> Anyone remember the Cadillac 4-6-8?
>
> Bob
>
>
yeah--a true POS. I used to work on those turds.

Dave

Tom Watson wrote:

> On Sun, 04 Sep 2005 18:11:17 -0400, Eugene Nine <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>My makita 9.6v batteries lasted 8 years.
>>My dell laptop battery still has the full 4 hours after 3 years
>>What are you doing to yours.
>
> I use them.
>
>
I use mine too. remodeled my kitchen, two bathrooms, garage, shed, various
wood working projects, etc. First couple years after I bought the set I
worked installing e911 systems so I screwed various 66 nd 110 blocks and
equipment to the walls in the equipment rooms and drilled all kinds of
holes to run cables, mine were well used.

jo4hn wrote:

> Roy Smith wrote:
> [snip]> span are more like 1000's fold.
>>
>> I'm typing this on a 2-year old laptop. 3/4 of a gig ram, 40 gig hard
>> drive, 1 GHz processor, 1024 x 768 x 24-bit color display, wireless
>> ethernet, DVD-reader (CD-burner). It cost me about $1800 and weighs
>> under
>> 5 lbs. 30 years ago, some of those specs could be met for millions of
>> dollars, some couldn't be met for any money. The machine that could come
>> closest would fill a room bigger than my house and I couldn't afford the
>> electric bill to keep the lights blinking.
>>
>> But, you know what sucks about my laptop? The battery. It's probably
>> 25% of the weight of the machine, and can't keep it running more than
>> about a half hour any more.
>
> I have a laptop that is about three years old. Battery is fine. Why is
> that you say? I usually use it in a house that has electric outlets.
> I plug the damn thing into to the house current. I guess you use it
> in places where there is no such thing?
> twitch,
> jo4hn
Thats probably the reason. Most laptops made in the last 5 years or so all
use Lithium Ion batteries and the MTBF spec is usually 300 full cycles. So
if you completely discharged and recharged it once a day you would wear the
battery out in a year.

John Emmons wrote:

> apples to oranges
>
> You're comparing a system to a component.
>
> It's like asking why metal alloys haven't improved 1000 times over time.
>
> Nickel Hydride is an improvement, a major improvement so far as consumer
> usable batteries are concerned, when we find an entirely new way to store
> energy, batteries will improve again.
>
> You know else sucks about laptops, they're still being made out of plastic
> that breaks when you drop it. Asking why the case material hasn't improved
> like the insides have is a better comparison to a battery.
>

Actually you can buy laptops that are not plastic, My dell is a metal case
and has the dent in the back from a drop to proove it.

Phisherman (in [email protected]) said:

| Yeah, batteries suck. All my power tools need electrical
| receptacles. They don't run out of power, they are less expensive,
| and last a lot longer.

Most of mine as well - although I have a small assortment of pneumatic
tools that I've found helpful.

My one rechargable tool is an 18v HF cordless drill that I use for
pocket hole screws because I haven't found a (reasonably-priced)
corded drill with an adjustable clutch.

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/solar.html

On 7 Sep 2005 16:02:02 -0700, "Dhakala" <[email protected]>
scribbled:

>You're right, Larry. Why, just look at this breakthrough in batter
>technology!
>
>http://tinyurl.com/a99c2 (National Geographic)

Cool. No more need for the pee bucket or the walks to the compost bin.
Just recharge the batteries.
Luigi
Replace "nonet" with "yukonomics" for real email address
www.yukonomics.ca/wooddorking/humour.html
www.yukonomics.ca/wooddorking/antifaq.html

David wrote:

> Got any AAAA's?

break open a 9v battery. a true battery, i.e., made up of multiuple
cells. The cells happen to be AAAA size.

-j

Roy Smith wrote:

> Googling "aaaa cell" found http://www.batterystore.com/Eveready/E96.htm.
> That is most certainly not what's inside the last 9V battery I tore open
> (granted, that was years ago, but I can't imagine they've changed much).
> The 9V was a stack of (6, I guess) flat rectangular shaped cells.

Well, it's been years, but I read something (either a circuit or a
repair for a device with an AAAA battery) that told me to tear open a 9V
to get some AAAA batteries. I didn't need the AAAAs but, being the
curious type, tore one open anyway. It was, in fact, 6 itty bitty
cells, just like a AA only smaller. They were in actual packaging, but
with brown paper, no artwork.

I haven't broken one open in years, so things certainly may have changed
since then.

-j

Steve Peterson wrote:
> According to the Battery Store Site, AAAA capacity is 625 mAh, the same as
> for a 9V. So it takes six 1.5V cells to make 9V, but the total capacity is
> not 6 times AAAA capacity.


I made this same mistake (in a different scenario) just the other day.
You actually prove my point, since the max current from a single cell
will be the max current of the battery.

The difference is voltage and power: the single AAAA will have 937.5
mWh, whereas the 9v battery will have 5625 mWh.

As I posted earlier, once upon a time I read this and found it to be the
case. Things may have changed. I wish I had a 9V here, just so I could
see.

-j

In article <[email protected]>, Joe User <[email protected]> wrote:
>Roy Smith wrote:
>
>> Googling "aaaa cell" found http://www.batterystore.com/Eveready/E96.htm.
>> That is most certainly not what's inside the last 9V battery I tore open
>> (granted, that was years ago, but I can't imagine they've changed much).
>> The 9V was a stack of (6, I guess) flat rectangular shaped cells.
>
>Well, it's been years, but I read something (either a circuit or a
>repair for a device with an AAAA battery) that told me to tear open a 9V
>to get some AAAA batteries. I didn't need the AAAAs but, being the
>curious type, tore one open anyway. It was, in fact, 6 itty bitty
>cells, just like a AA only smaller. They were in actual packaging, but
>with brown paper, no artwork.
>
>I haven't broken one open in years, so things certainly may have changed
>since then.

Interesting. I can swear I found 6 little flat cells stack one on top
of each other (I was a kid; it might have been 30 years ago), but some
more googling found:

http://quiz2.chem.arizona.edu/preproom/Demo%20Files/9-volt_battery.htm

whcih certainly supports the AAAA theory! I know what I'm doing this
weekend :-)

Scott Lurndal wrote:

> I've got an old radio that needs a B and two A batteries. IIRC
> the B is about 45v. Anyone know of a source?

try BatteriesPlus, if there's a store near you, and I assume they're
online. One just opened near me (Huntsville, AL) and they have some
slightly oddball stuff on the shelf, and can order really oddball stuff.
I wouldn't be surprised if they had an A in the store.

I've never seen a B.

-j

On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 08:55:01 -0400, Roy Smith <[email protected]> wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>,
> "BillyBob" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Or you could pay a few thousand more for an unproven hybrid and hope it will
>> get the purported 40 mi/gal
>
>My wife's Prius (a 2001 model, IIRC), really does get in the low to mid
>40's. Here's a guy (http://randyrathbun.org/prius/prius_mileage/) who kept
>track of his gas for 3 years, and averaged 47 MPG (that's probably the
>newer model, which gets better mileage than the older one my wife has).
>
>> Or you could pay a few thousand more for an unproven hybrid and hope it will
>> get the purported 40 mi/gal and save $750/year. That's at $3.00/gal.
>
>I'm not sure what "a few thousand" means, but let's assume you mean $5k.
>That pays for itself in about 6-1/2 years. That's not a bad ROI.

... if, and this may be a big "if", you don't have to replace the
batteries in those 6 1/2 years. Then the payoff is farther out. Seems
like waiting 6 1/2 years is a pretty long time to wait for break-even to
me. I certainly would think twice if I was told that an investment would
take that long to just break even.



+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

jo4hn <[email protected]> wrote:
> Roy Smith wrote:
> [snip]> span are more like 1000's fold.
>>
>> But, you know what sucks about my laptop? The battery. It's probably 25%
>> of the weight of the machine, and can't keep it running more than about a
>> half hour any more.
>
> I have a laptop that is about three years old. Battery is fine. Why is
> that you say? I usually use it in a house that has electric outlets.
> I plug the damn thing into to the house current. I guess you use it
> in places where there is no such thing?

So how come they don't make a dual-power recharable tools?

...although I'm guessing the answer to this is because a battery is
capable of delivering a crapload of power in a short timeframe, which
would require a prohibitavely expensive power delivery unit
(e.g. massive transformer) for that kind of current draw.

Still, that's an option I'd like to be able to buy, or include instead
of the extra battery.

On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 10:31:54 -0700, Mark & Juanita
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 08:55:01 -0400, Roy Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>In article <[email protected]>,
>> "BillyBob" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Or you could pay a few thousand more for an unproven hybrid and hope it will
>>> get the purported 40 mi/gal
>>
>>My wife's Prius (a 2001 model, IIRC), really does get in the low to mid
>>40's. Here's a guy (http://randyrathbun.org/prius/prius_mileage/) who kept
>>track of his gas for 3 years, and averaged 47 MPG (that's probably the
>>newer model, which gets better mileage than the older one my wife has).
>>
>>> Or you could pay a few thousand more for an unproven hybrid and hope it will
>>> get the purported 40 mi/gal and save $750/year. That's at $3.00/gal.
>>
>>I'm not sure what "a few thousand" means, but let's assume you mean $5k.
>>That pays for itself in about 6-1/2 years. That's not a bad ROI.
>
>... if, and this may be a big "if", you don't have to replace the
>batteries in those 6 1/2 years. Then the payoff is farther out. Seems
>like waiting 6 1/2 years is a pretty long time to wait for break-even to
>me. I certainly would think twice if I was told that an investment would
>take that long to just break even.

I eyeballed a hybrid a couple years ago but lost interest when they
said I'd have to replace the batteries every 3-5 years at a cost of
more than 8 grand. I sincerely hope that's not true of the newer ones,
but it's kept me away from serious consideration ever since.

--
"We need to make a sacrifice to the gods, find me a young virgin... oh, and bring something to kill"

Tim Douglass

http://www.DouglassClan.com

On Sun, 04 Sep 2005 15:06:48 -0700, David <[email protected]> wrote:


>What mfgr offers lifetime replacement of batteries?
Ridgid just began a 'Limited Lifetime' warranty on their power tools.

>and what's their
>criteria for replacement?
It will be interesting to see on batteries. Here is the statement on
their limited lifetime warranty description:
================
The Lifetime Service Agreement on RIDGID® Hand Held Power Tools,
Stationary Power Tools and
Pneumatic Tools covers all worn parts in properly maintained tools,
including normal wear items such
as brushes, chucks, motors, switches, gears and even cordless
batteries in your qualifying
RIDGID®Brand hand held and stationary power tools; and replacement
rings, driver blades and
bumpers on RIDGID® Brand pneumatic tools for the lifetime of the
original owner.
==============
You can see the whole text at:
http://www.ridgid.com/Manuals/RidgidLSA.pdf

>Is there a large fee for shipping/handling?
>
>Dave
I don't know, they don't itemize this in their statement and probably
won't tell you until it's time to make a claim. As I said in my
original post, I'm skeptical but it sure beats anything else I've seen
related to cordless equipment...

TWS

"Larry Jaques" <novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> wrote in message =
news:[email protected]...
| On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 15:11:19 GMT, the blithe spirit "Rick M"
| <[email protected]> clearly indicated:
|=20
| >"Larry Jaques" wrote
| >> Oh, bullpuckey. Nicads improved, LIon batts came out, air batteries
| >> came out, lithiums improved, chargers improved. Change is still
| >> happening.
| >
| >You're absolutely right Larry ... but since the discussions on the =
wreck
| >have devolved into subjective shouting matches, any attempt to apply =
facts
| >and analyze the situation gets drowned out.
| >
| >"Facts ... we don't need no stinkin' facts!"
|=20
| You're probably right. <sigh>
|=20
|=20
| >This thread will be spun the way of pretty much every other thread in =
the
| >past year or so ... completely out of control, with logic tossed out =
the
| >window, and the "winner" will be the person that enflames the most =
readers.
| >Kind of like what our press is doing today ... except the press does =
it for
| >money, these amateurs do it for fun.
|=20
| <g>
|=20
|=20
| >I countered most of the arguments brought forth on the theory that =
battery
| >technology hit the ceiling, only to see yet another "yea, but" =
divergence
| >that has little or nothing to do with the topic at hand. It has =
gotten to
| >the point where I killfile people that "yea, but" conversations just =
to
| >argue ... and I see that I'm nuking about 50% of the daily messages.
|=20
| My "I" button kicks out a lot more than that nowadays. <sigh2>
|=20
|=20
| >I think I'll just head back to my shop and make some sawdust. I've =
decided I
| >need to make a couple of scratch gauges and I'm going to attempt to =
make
| >myself some cam clamps. Once I've gotten those out of the way I'm =
going to
| >start on a scratch-built guitar (no kits, no reverse-engineered plans =
...
| >just starting with an idea and a book). I like the idea of using =
native
| >woods in my projects, thought the thought of anything but a spruce =
top has
| >people cringing.=20
|=20
| Acoustic gitfiddle? Yeah, they probably cringe for good reason.
| But your first is your -practice- gitfiddle, so go for it!
|=20
|=20
| >Let's see ... rock maple and cherry, no poly and no stain
| >(well, I MIGHT tint the fretboard for contrast). If it doesn't play, =
I'll
| >use it as a splitting maul!
|=20
| If you must, fume the cherry or use some potassium dichromate on it.
|=20
|=20
| >Any progress on your bow saw? (really big grin!)
|=20
| No, not lately. Hold your breath and I'll let you know, Blue.
|=20
|=20
| .-.
| Better Living Through Denial
| ---
| http://www.diversify.com Wondrous Website Design


Having read most of this thread, I am now convinced, more than ever, =
that I was right in not joining the cord-free movement when it first =
raised its ugly head.

I know I must be an ante-deluvial throwback but, just as I never leave =
home in the summer in my auto without my golf clubs in the trunk, I =
never leave home in my work truck without my generator for my corded =
tools.

The only batteries I have are clearly marked A, C, D, AA, or AAA.


--=20
PDQ

On 4 Sep 2005 20:53:42 -0700, the blithe spirit "Dhakala"
<[email protected]> clearly indicated:

>Tom Watson wrote:
>> Batteries Suck.
>
>We hit the limits of battery chemistry long ago, Tom. It'll never get
>any better.
>
>Fuel cells may be more to your liking. Hang in there.

Oh, bullpuckey. Nicads improved, LIon batts came out, air batteries
came out, lithiums improved, chargers improved. Change is still
happening.


.-.
Better Living Through Denial
---
http://www.diversify.com Wondrous Website Design

"Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> I'm looking into a new car, with the express intent of reducing the
> cost per mile, so that my sixty miles of commuting a day will not
> continue to eat my wallet.
>
> I'd be interested in some of this current drop of hybrids, which use
> batteries - except for one thing...
>
> Batteries Suck.

I don't know if you pay attention to boring, straight rags like consumer
reports but they give a pretty sobering picture about hybrids in this
month's issue. They are not what they are cracked up to be. I'm also
surprised at the emotional drive over a few miles per gallon. At your 60
miles/day, you could drive a car that gets a real 24 mi/gal with
conventional reliable proven gasoline engine and cost $1890/year for gas.
Or you could pay a few thousand more for an unproven hybrid and hope it will
get the purported 40 mi/gal and save $750/year. That's at $3.00/gal.

'tain't worth it to me.

Bob

Check that warranty. Some of those "lifetime warranties" apply to the
lifetime of the tool, or in this case, battery. When it dies, the lifetime
is up and so is the warranty.

"TWS" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> <snip>
manufacturer promises 'lifetime' replacement of batteries.
> We'll see. Either their promise is full of holes or they're going to
> go out of business because...
>
> Batteries Suck.
>
> TWS

Mark & Juanita wrote:

> On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 13:01:35 -0700, David <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>PDQ wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Larry Jaques" <novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>>>| On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 15:11:19 GMT, the blithe spirit "Rick M"
>>>| <[email protected]> clearly indicated:
>>>|
>>>| >"Larry Jaques" wrote
>
> ... snip
>
>>>The only batteries I have are clearly marked A, C, D, AA, or AAA.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Got any AAAA's?
>>
>
>
> Isn't that two AA's side by side? :-)
>
>
>>Dave
>
>
>
>
> +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
>
> If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough
>
> +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
in case you haven't heard of AAAA's
http://www.flashlightsunlimited.com/alkaline-aaaa.htm

dave

Morris Dovey wrote:
> Australopithecus scobis (in
> [email protected]) said:
>
> | I don't have any battery-powered tools (just scads of small AA-eater
> | gadgets). Just wanted to toss this idea out to you folks who use
> | them: would you find any use for a cranked charger, like the
> | cranked radios? Higher current draw, of course...
>
> I think I sense a great idea coming on: How about attaching the crank
> directly to the tool so as to eliminate batteries altogether - I think
> you could make a drill with cranked gearing...or even a drill that is
> just a chuck attached to a crank.
>
> Some of the tools in this family could even be simple push-pull tools:
> How about a screwdriver that all you had to do was push-pull on the
> handle? A push-pull saw or a push-pull jointer (or even a push-pull
> sander!)

Great ideas, Morris. You could even add a little red lens and
magnifying glass and equip those saws with a solar guide!

Iowa retro tools. Gotta love it!<g>

On 7 Sep 2005 16:02:02 -0700, the blithe spirit "Dhakala"
<[email protected]> clearly indicated:

>You're right, Larry. Why, just look at this breakthrough in batter
>technology!

<g>


>http://tinyurl.com/a99c2 (National Geographic)

Alas, poor Uric. I knew him, Horatio.

I'll keep one of those saliva phones in my glove box for emergencies.


-------------------------------------------------------------
give me The Luxuries Of Life * http://www.diversify.com
i can live without the necessities * 2 Tee collections online
-------------------------------------------------------------

On Sun, 04 Sep 2005 18:11:17 -0400, Eugene Nine <[email protected]> wrote:


>
>My makita 9.6v batteries lasted 8 years.
>My dell laptop battery still has the full 4 hours after 3 years
>What are you doing to yours.

I use them.



Tom Watson - WoodDorker
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/ (website)

On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 02:18:57 +0000, BillyBob wrote:

> conventional reliable proven gasoline engine and cost $1890/year for gas.
> Or you could pay a few thousand more for an unproven hybrid and hope it will
> get the purported 40 mi/gal and save $750/year. That's at $3.00/gal.
>
> 'tain't worth it to me.

I think the point of the hybrids is to reduce the externalized costs of
conventional engines. Greenhouse, smog, uppity furriners, that sort of
thing. It's hard (for me, anyway) to quantify those other costs, though.

I don't have any battery-powered tools (just scads of small AA-eater
gadgets). Just wanted to toss this idea out to you folks who use them:
would you find any use for a cranked charger, like the cranked radios?
Higher current draw, of course...

--
"Keep your ass behind you"
vladimir a t mad {dot} scientist {dot} com

On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 19:08:15 +0000, BillyBob wrote:

>
> "Tim Douglass" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>

>
> Anyone remember the Cadillac 4-6-8?
>
> Bob

Just barely.

I have, however, owned two Geo Metros. Very reliable little car, very high
mileage. My first long trip in one (4 spd. manual, 3 cyl.) netted 52 mpg,
Detroit to Minneapolis ... mostly at speeds clearly not posted. City
mileage was about 37 mpg.

It's a good car. Easy to maintain. Needs to come back.

<snip>
>
>Batteries Suck.
>
Yup. My last project, framing a mirror in the bathroom, started
simple enough until I went to use my 3 year old Hitachi cordless
drill. Since their charger is 'smart' it stops charging after
reaching full charge so you can leave it in the charger as long as you
want - it won't harm the battery. Problem is - it is so smart, it
doesn't check to see that the battery self-discharged on its own while
sitting there so it doesn't charge it back up - keeping it in the
charger is useless. Two dead batteries.

So, to finish my project I have to use my VERY old 3/8 inch corded
drill with the kind of chuck that requires a key - it's also the kind
of chuck that sits pretty loose in its bearing - this doesn't have
runout - it's more like a marathon. Anyway, it's amazing how quickly
one can get used to have a hand tightened chuck and how quickly we
forget that the key, which is tie-wrapped to the cord, needs to be
removed from the chuck before you pull the switch - that cord got
really short in a hurry! Ok, so I'm past that but at every turn I'm
either knocking stuff off the counter with the cord or can't reach the
damn hole I want to drill 'cause the cord's caught on something or I
trip on the cord going to get the spackle to repair the hole I just
put in the wall because the drill stopped short and dinged the wall.

I just bought a new cordless drill and chose it almost entirely
because the manufacturer promises 'lifetime' replacement of batteries.
We'll see. Either their promise is full of holes or they're going to
go out of business because...

Batteries Suck.

TWS

>>> The only batteries I have are clearly marked A, C, D, AA, or AAA.
>>>
>>>
>>Got any AAAA's?
>>
>
> Isn't that two AA's side by side? :-)

nope. it's one AA cut in half. lengthwise.

On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 13:01:35 -0700, David <[email protected]> wrote:

>PDQ wrote:
>
>> "Larry Jaques" <novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>> | On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 15:11:19 GMT, the blithe spirit "Rick M"
>> | <[email protected]> clearly indicated:
>> |
>> | >"Larry Jaques" wrote
... snip
>> The only batteries I have are clearly marked A, C, D, AA, or AAA.
>>
>>
>Got any AAAA's?
>

Isn't that two AA's side by side? :-)

>Dave



+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

>> Having read most of this thread, I am now convinced, more than ever, that
>> I was right in not joining the cord-free movement when it first raised
>> its ugly head.
>>
>> I know I must be an ante-deluvial throwback but, just as I never leave
>> home in the summer in my auto without my golf clubs in the trunk, I never
>> leave home in my work truck without my generator for my corded tools.
>>
>> The only batteries I have are clearly marked A, C, D, AA, or AAA.
>>
>>
> Got any AAAA's?
>
> Dave

I think I have a couple. Want to stop by and pick them up?

Steve

"Scott Lurndal" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Morris Dovey" <[email protected]> writes:
>>Scott Lurndal (in [email protected])
>>said:
>>
>>
>>| I've got an old radio that needs a B and two A batteries. IIRC
>>| the B is about 45v. Anyone know of a source? (It's a
>>| Stewart-Warner three dial battery set from the 30's).
>>
>>I don't think A and B refer to battery types in this context - but
>>rather to power _inputs_. IIRC the B supply was the filament supply
>>and was somewhere around six and a half volts.
>>
>
> There is a diagram attached to the inside of the lid (it's a
> gorgeous walnut case) that shows the "A" Battery (yes, I suspect
> you are correct in your assessment, A and B are just reference
> letters in this context) sized and shaped much like an automobile
> battery, and it specifies it as 6v. That would be the filament
> supply, I suppose.
>
> The diagram also shows two 45v batteries (both labelled 'B', oddly).
> They're short squat square batteries with binding posts on the
> top surface.
>
> FWIW it is Stewart-Warner model 303.
>
> scott
>
>>Any _really_ old-timers out there who can help with this one?
>>--
>>Morris Dovey
>>DeSoto Solar
>>DeSoto, Iowa USA
>>http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/solar.html
>>
>>

Try googling B Battery. You will find a few hits on where you can learn
more about this. The three poles on the b battery prevented it from being
put in wrong. You may have to use a battey eliminator instead of the
battery at this point. There are some 22.5 volt batteries to be had,
though I don't recall their designation.

Try this location:
http://www.acksupply.com/catalog/battery.pdf

It may get you what you need.

Michael

"Larry Jaques" wrote
> On 4 Sep 2005 20:53:42 -0700, the blithe spirit "Dhakala" clearly
indicated:

> >Tom Watson wrote:
> >> Batteries Suck.
> >
> >We hit the limits of battery chemistry long ago, Tom. It'll never get
> >any better.
> >
> >Fuel cells may be more to your liking. Hang in there.
>
> Oh, bullpuckey. Nicads improved, LIon batts came out, air batteries
> came out, lithiums improved, chargers improved. Change is still
> happening.
>

You're absolutely right Larry ... but since the discussions on the wreck
have devolved into subjective shouting matches, any attempt to apply facts
and analyze the situation gets drowned out.

"Facts ... we don't need no stinkin' facts!"

This thread will be spun the way of pretty much every other thread in the
past year or so ... completely out of control, with logic tossed out the
window, and the "winner" will be the person that enflames the most readers.
Kind of like what our press is doing today ... except the press does it for
money, these amateurs do it for fun.

I countered most of the arguments brought forth on the theory that battery
technology hit the ceiling, only to see yet another "yea, but" divergence
that has little or nothing to do with the topic at hand. It has gotten to
the point where I killfile people that "yea, but" conversations just to
argue ... and I see that I'm nuking about 50% of the daily messages.

I think I'll just head back to my shop and make some sawdust. I've decided I
need to make a couple of scratch gauges and I'm going to attempt to make
myself some cam clamps. Once I've gotten those out of the way I'm going to
start on a scratch-built guitar (no kits, no reverse-engineered plans ...
just starting with an idea and a book). I like the idea of using native
woods in my projects, thought the thought of anything but a spruce top has
people cringing. Let's see ... rock maple and cherry, no poly and no stain
(well, I MIGHT tint the fretboard for contrast). If it doesn't play, I'll
use it as a splitting maul!

Any progress on your bow saw? (really big grin!)


Rick

Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:
> Batteries Suck.

They certainly do. Unlike digital electronics, which are improving so fast
it makes your head spin, technology for storing electricity hasn't improved
much in over 100 years. There's some history at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_%28electricity%29

On the wet side of the house, the modern lead-acid cell isn't much
different from a lead-acid cell from the Civil War era. The glass tank
gave way to bakelite and then to plastic, and we've got gel cells now, but
all those are minor details.

In dry cells, we've gone from carbon-zinc to alkaline for primary cells and
from NiCd to NiMH for rechargables, but again, these are incremental
improvements. Fuel cells work, but despite the occasional blather out of
Detroit and Washington, remain uneconomical for all but the most high-end
applications (i.e. space flight).

If you could invent a way to store electrical energy which gave a 2x
performance improvement in any of:

Energy per unit volume
Energy per unit weight
Manufacturing cost
Useful lifetime (recharge cycles)
Environmental impact

while holding the line on all the other factors, you would become a very
rich man in short order.

In article <[email protected]>,
"BillyBob" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Or you could pay a few thousand more for an unproven hybrid and hope it will
> get the purported 40 mi/gal

My wife's Prius (a 2001 model, IIRC), really does get in the low to mid
40's. Here's a guy (http://randyrathbun.org/prius/prius_mileage/) who kept
track of his gas for 3 years, and averaged 47 MPG (that's probably the
newer model, which gets better mileage than the older one my wife has).

> Or you could pay a few thousand more for an unproven hybrid and hope it will
> get the purported 40 mi/gal and save $750/year. That's at $3.00/gal.

I'm not sure what "a few thousand" means, but let's assume you mean $5k.
That pays for itself in about 6-1/2 years. That's not a bad ROI.

In article <[email protected]>, Joe User <[email protected]>
wrote:

> David wrote:
>
> > Got any AAAA's?
>
> break open a 9v battery. a true battery, i.e., made up of multiuple
> cells. The cells happen to be AAAA size.
>
> -j

Googling "aaaa cell" found http://www.batterystore.com/Eveready/E96.htm.
That is most certainly not what's inside the last 9V battery I tore open
(granted, that was years ago, but I can't imagine they've changed much).
The 9V was a stack of (6, I guess) flat rectangular shaped cells.

In article <[email protected]>, jo4hn <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Roy Smith wrote:
> [snip]> span are more like 1000's fold.
> >
> > I'm typing this on a 2-year old laptop. 3/4 of a gig ram, 40 gig hard
> > drive, 1 GHz processor, 1024 x 768 x 24-bit color display, wireless
> > ethernet, DVD-reader (CD-burner). It cost me about $1800 and weighs under
> > 5 lbs. 30 years ago, some of those specs could be met for millions of
> > dollars, some couldn't be met for any money. The machine that could come
> > closest would fill a room bigger than my house and I couldn't afford the
> > electric bill to keep the lights blinking.
> >
> > But, you know what sucks about my laptop? The battery. It's probably 25%
> > of the weight of the machine, and can't keep it running more than about a
> > half hour any more.
>
> I have a laptop that is about three years old. Battery is fine. Why is
> that you say? I usually use it in a house that has electric outlets.
> I plug the damn thing into to the house current. I guess you use it
> in places where there is no such thing?

Not any more I don't :-(

"Rick M" <[email protected]> wrote:

> "Roy Smith" wrote
>
> > On the wet side of the house, the modern lead-acid cell isn't much
> > different from a lead-acid cell from the Civil War era. The glass tank
> > gave way to bakelite and then to plastic, and we've got gel cells now, but
> > all those are minor details.
> >
>
> Let's see ... just since the 1970s we have gone from batteries that lasted
> at best three years to batteries that routinely have a five-year warranty.
> Further, I'd achieved 9+ years on a battery in my small truck

That's a 2-3x improvement.

> Again, NiCd cell capacity has quadrupled in the last 30 years

OK, a 4x improvement.

2, 3, 4x over the span of 30 years is certainly an improvement, but I'm
comparing it to digital electronics, where improvements over a similar time
span are more like 1000's fold.

I'm typing this on a 2-year old laptop. 3/4 of a gig ram, 40 gig hard
drive, 1 GHz processor, 1024 x 768 x 24-bit color display, wireless
ethernet, DVD-reader (CD-burner). It cost me about $1800 and weighs under
5 lbs. 30 years ago, some of those specs could be met for millions of
dollars, some couldn't be met for any money. The machine that could come
closest would fill a room bigger than my house and I couldn't afford the
electric bill to keep the lights blinking.

But, you know what sucks about my laptop? The battery. It's probably 25%
of the weight of the machine, and can't keep it running more than about a
half hour any more.

Joe User wrote:

> Steve Peterson wrote:
>> According to the Battery Store Site, AAAA capacity is 625 mAh, the same
>> as
>> for a 9V. So it takes six 1.5V cells to make 9V, but the total capacity
>> is not 6 times AAAA capacity.
>
>
> I made this same mistake (in a different scenario) just the other day.
> You actually prove my point, since the max current from a single cell
> will be the max current of the battery.
>
> The difference is voltage and power: the single AAAA will have 937.5
> mWh, whereas the 9v battery will have 5625 mWh.
>
> As I posted earlier, once upon a time I read this and found it to be the
> case. Things may have changed. I wish I had a 9V here, just so I could
> see.
>
> -j
I've ripped one open before and found 6 aaaa's and ripped another open and
found nothing but smelly stuff so it seems they are not all made the same.

Scott Lurndal (in [email protected])
said:


| I've got an old radio that needs a B and two A batteries. IIRC
| the B is about 45v. Anyone know of a source? (It's a
| Stewart-Warner three dial battery set from the 30's).

I don't think A and B refer to battery types in this context - but
rather to power _inputs_. IIRC the B supply was the filament supply
and was somewhere around six and a half volts.

Any _really_ old-timers out there who can help with this one?
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/solar.html

On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 22:14:02 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:

>[email protected] writes:
>>
>>>>> The only batteries I have are clearly marked A, C, D, AA, or AAA.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>Got any AAAA's?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Isn't that two AA's side by side? :-)
>>
>>nope. it's one AA cut in half. lengthwise.
>
>
>I've got an old radio that needs a B and two A batteries. IIRC
>the B is about 45v. Anyone know of a source? (It's a
>Stewart-Warner three dial battery set from the 30's).
>
>scott


I think I'd build a power supply first.

On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 19:08:15 GMT, "BillyBob"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Anyone remember the Cadillac 4-6-8?

That technology is making a comeback: Chrysler has it on the 300C.
Cadillac had a good idea that needed some advances in technology to
make it work right.

Lee

"CW" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Check that warranty. Some of those "lifetime warranties" apply to the
> lifetime of the tool, or in this case, battery. When it dies, the lifetime
> is up and so is the warranty.
>

JC Penney lost their shirts on such a deal on car batteries. They didn't
even last as long conventional lead-acid batteries.

Bob

"Tim Douglass" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> I eyeballed a hybrid a couple years ago but lost interest when they
> said I'd have to replace the batteries every 3-5 years at a cost of
> more than 8 grand. I sincerely hope that's not true of the newer ones,
> but it's kept me away from serious consideration ever since.

The other factor is that a hybrid is a *MUCH* more complex and sophisticated
piece of machinery - more things to break, more specialized parts. Early
reports of high reliability are just that - early reports. Let's see what
happens to them in 5-10 years.

I still love my 1991 Toyota previa with 180,000 miles. My average mainteance
cost for last four years has been less than $400/year. I don't need no
stinkin' electric motor.

Anyone remember the Cadillac 4-6-8?

Bob