On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 16:58:46 GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse"
<veldy71@yahoo.com> wrote in
<aN07h.5957$XV2.1408@fe62.usenetserver.com>:

>In alt.cellular.cingular John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>
>> I got some of the first IC3 units on the market, and they are still
>> performing superbly, at least as well as conventional NiMH cells.
>
>AA NiMH batteries are cheap enough that you can replace them and still make it
>worth it if the life is shortened. I am not sure the scale of the damage, but
>it is considered significant.

By whom? What actual evidence of damage to IC3 cells?

>If you go to Thomas Distributing,
>http://www.thomas-distributing.com/index.htm, you will find many chargers
>available that are built explicity to avoid this affect. I use one, the Maha
>C401FS, http://www.thomas-distributing.com/mhc401fs.htm, which offers the
>ability to recondition old batteries, slow and fast charge (not 15 minutes
>though) and it does a very good job with getting the most out of my power
>cells.

There's some good stuff on that website, but there's some baloney as
well; e.g., reconditioning, which is a hangover from old NiCd designs
that doesn't even apply to modern NiCd designs, much less NiMH or LiIon.

FWIW, I have a MAHA charger, but it's old technology compared to IC3.

>> Temperature actually stays within the safe range for these IC3 NiMH
>> cells, due to self-monitoring in each cell.
>
>Yes, they made the batteries safe, but they still allow the heat to get high
>enough to reduce the life of the battery. It is a tradeoff between minimizing
>the charge time or maximizing the usable cell life.

Have you actually measured the temperature? I have, which is how I know
it stays within the recommended limit for NiMH cells.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>