Forum Discussion
MEXICOWANDERER
Jan 05, 2016Explorer
Good report.
When comparing automobiles, a 600 series Mercedes should not go head-to-head with a Ford Crown Victoria.
Thusly to be fair, the lithium units should have been squared off with Lifeline, which charge significantly faster than lesser AGM batteries. The higher initial charge acceptance must be taken advantage of. My 31 CEF allows a 103 ampere initial rate. Dinking around with 20-amperes charge rate coupled with a finite number of daily solar hours skews the bias much in favor of lithium.
Reality rules and badly trumps hypothesis. The total kWh of activity associated with total battery lifespan is a primary element. The COST generator wise including fuel, maintenance, and lifespan enters the picture.
The cost of lithium batteries MUST include the management system to protect life and property. Was the battery management system totalled into the price of the batteries?
It is significant that a realization of 85% filled capacity (ampere hours) may have a positive effect on total lifespan. But this means for each dollar spent fifteen percent will not be used I.E. a 1000 AH bank in reality is a 850 AH bank.
A significant number of reality scenarios have to be entertained before a cognizant summation can filter down. Products that do well in limited consumer tests can end up superior ordinary or utter failures. A larger user database is need. An example of one must be heeded as such.
When several hundred examples have expended their useful or useless lifespans then a rational summation can be derived. A test is one thing, a list of observed functional characteristics quite another.
This may seem somewhat harsh to some folks. In reality it is reality. Having spent a good portion of my career testing and evaluating batteries for OEM and customers my outlook must be greatly tempered. If a convincing majority percentage "live" X number of kWh and maintain 80% capacity rating then that is inarguable evidence. If cost per kWh was more competitive with a quality AGM battery then such a critical eye would be unfair. But it isn't. And careful scrutiny must be employed. Emotional enthusiasm cannot vie with cold hard facts. Those facts are missing. Time will tell.
When comparing automobiles, a 600 series Mercedes should not go head-to-head with a Ford Crown Victoria.
Thusly to be fair, the lithium units should have been squared off with Lifeline, which charge significantly faster than lesser AGM batteries. The higher initial charge acceptance must be taken advantage of. My 31 CEF allows a 103 ampere initial rate. Dinking around with 20-amperes charge rate coupled with a finite number of daily solar hours skews the bias much in favor of lithium.
Reality rules and badly trumps hypothesis. The total kWh of activity associated with total battery lifespan is a primary element. The COST generator wise including fuel, maintenance, and lifespan enters the picture.
The cost of lithium batteries MUST include the management system to protect life and property. Was the battery management system totalled into the price of the batteries?
It is significant that a realization of 85% filled capacity (ampere hours) may have a positive effect on total lifespan. But this means for each dollar spent fifteen percent will not be used I.E. a 1000 AH bank in reality is a 850 AH bank.
A significant number of reality scenarios have to be entertained before a cognizant summation can filter down. Products that do well in limited consumer tests can end up superior ordinary or utter failures. A larger user database is need. An example of one must be heeded as such.
When several hundred examples have expended their useful or useless lifespans then a rational summation can be derived. A test is one thing, a list of observed functional characteristics quite another.
This may seem somewhat harsh to some folks. In reality it is reality. Having spent a good portion of my career testing and evaluating batteries for OEM and customers my outlook must be greatly tempered. If a convincing majority percentage "live" X number of kWh and maintain 80% capacity rating then that is inarguable evidence. If cost per kWh was more competitive with a quality AGM battery then such a critical eye would be unfair. But it isn't. And careful scrutiny must be employed. Emotional enthusiasm cannot vie with cold hard facts. Those facts are missing. Time will tell.
About Technical Issues
Having RV issues? Connect with others who have been in your shoes.24,193 PostsLatest Activity: Jan 28, 2025