HP Forum Archive 19

[ Return to Index | Top of Index ]

Cell types for Pioneers Message #1 Posted by Martin Pinckney on 15 Nov 2010, 12:49 p.m. I know this topic has been covered on this Forum in years past, but I thought it might be useful to see if there are any newer perspectives. I have several Pioneers in regular use, so I have to feed them fairly often. Does anyone have any data (as opposed to opinion) on the practical cost comparison (that is, in use) of silver vs. alkaline? It looks like silver costs about 2.3X alkaline. I mainly use 17b, 20s, 22s, 27s, 32sii. Occasionally 21s or 42s. Most get turned on and used for a few minutes at a time several times a day, except the 20s which stays in my truck and gets used for a few seconds perhaps once a week. The rest of the time it just bakes (SW Florida). And the 42s which mostly sits in the drawer (until I start programming it). About half the time I turn them off, about half the time they turn themselves off with the timer. Curious, I checked various manuals I have. The 27s manual refers to either mercury(!) or alkaline. 32sii and 21s manual say use any brand of LR44 (alkaline). 42s manual is silent on cell type. So the question is, even though I know silver lasts longer, are they cheaper in net cost, or alkaline?

Re: Cell types for Pioneers Message #2 Posted by Dieter on 16 Nov 2010, 8:34 a.m., in response to message #1 by Martin Pinckney I assume we're talking about a certain battery size with the dimensions 11,6 x 5,4 mm that, for example, is knows as LR44, A76, 357, A13, ... as an alkaline cell SR44, S76, V76PX, ... in its silver oxide version. Mercury cells are no longer available. Both in the US and in Europe they have been banned for environmental reasons. Technically, there were great (constant voltage, very high capacity per volume unit). A look at the manufacturers' technical specs shows the two main differences between alkaline and silver oxide batteries: capacity and voltage. On average, a LR/SR44-sized "silver cell" has roughly 50% more capacity ("more than 100 mAh" compared to "more than 150 mAh") and a higher average voltage that also drops very slowly. Quote: I have several Pioneers in regular use, so I have to feed them fairly often. Does anyone have any data (as opposed to opinion) on the practical cost comparison (that is, in use) of silver vs. alkaline? It looks like silver costs about 2.3X alkaline. (...) So the question is, even though I know silver lasts longer, are they cheaper in net cost, or alkaline? Well... since there is an extremely wide price range, all you can say is that both (!) battery types may cost "some cents" as well as "some EUR/USD". For instance, over here in Europe we have those "One-Euro-Shops" where you can get (almost) everything they carry for one Euro. Including battery sets with ten or more different coin cells, three or five of which are usually LR44s. Of course I wouldn't expect the same battery life as a quality cell from a major brand, bought in an electronics or photo store for, say, 3 or 5 EUR/USD, but I don't think the question whether to choose an alkaline or a silver oxide cell can be boiled down to a factor 2,3. :-) For my part, I almost exclusively use higher capacity cells, so in this case I would choose the silver oxide version. They last significantly longer and I don't think a few more cents really make a difference. Dieter

[ Return to Index | Top of Index ]

Go back to the main exhibit hall