TPSCAN wrote:Assuming the power consumption is the same in each flash light (3 watts/60% efficiency = 5 watts), each combo should provide power for similar times, but the AA combo costs 20% to 50% less.
How's my math?
How does that compare with you calculations and observations?
fluxon wrote:The calculation is "recharge 1,500 times."
Cool, Fluxon, I know he referenced the R/CR123, the general gist was that AAA cells would be uncompetitive. Though I think the 1500 recharges is a rarely achieved number, I agree that any number of recharge cycles greater than 4-5-6 reverses the equation.
However, there are NiMH AAA that offer an adequate power density. Including the alternate technologies in the cost matrix radically alters the cost per watt-hour, but does not negate the conclusion I offered.
At 400-600 recharges the numbers get so small and so close ($0.001667 vs $0.0015 per Watt-Hour) the difference is meaningless.
But buying (or rejecting) this item based solely on the power source, Cr123 or AAA or AA, without considering the other factors of durability, convenience, output and ergonomics seems rather cavalier.
To each his own, but considering this is an off-the-shelf, occasional use flash, priced at about $8 and includes the first set of batteries, the life cycle economics already seem pretty good. It seems to me that a serious modder might enjoy getting the Cree modules and reflector and wiring them to a handy Mr. Fusion unit just to show what can be achieved. I'd buy it just for parts and gigglez.