EagleTac 18650 accu - 3400mAh - button top

Article number: ET-3400
EagleTac
EagleTac 18650 accu - 3400mAh - button top EagleTac 18650 accu - 3400mAh - button top
EagleTac 18650 accu - 3400mAh - button top
EagleTac 18650 accu - 3400mAh - button top
16,95 *

Description

EagleTac 18650 accu - 3400mAh - button top

Innovative

Ultra-high capacity

These second generation 18650 cells offer world-highest capacity at 3400mAh.

Only 68mm in height

We are the first to offer protected 3400mAh 18650 li-ion with only 68mm in height. That makes it highly compatible with all 18650 flashlights and chargers in the market.

Button top design

The protruded button top design makes it work with any flashlight that uses hardware anti-reversed battery polarity protection. It also ensure good conductivity when multiple batteries are used in series.

Features


  • Made in Japan NNP battery cells
  • Uses newest and best LiNiCoAlO2 chemistry
  • 304 Stainless steel button top
  • IC protected against short, over-discharge, over-charge
  • Measures only 68mm in height
  • Button top design
  • Steel plate reinfocred bottom
  • Ultra high capacity and high voltage even under heavy loading
  • Safety vent with thermal cut-off protection


Specifications:
  • Voltage: Typical 3.6V (4.2V when fully charged)
  • Capacity: 3400mAh (discharged at 0.2C)
  • Dimensions: 18.6mm x 68mm (+/-0.1mm)
  • Current over-flow protection: 5A-6A
  • Weight: 50gram





High capacity

Our 3400mAh cells give the highest capacitor, especially during heavy current loading. It is tested to yield 3400mAh at 0.2C of constant current discharge (see our own discharge testing below).

High voltage platform

The ET 3400mAh 18650 offers high voltage output even under heavy loading. This offers longer constant regulated output runtime in a single cell application (buck circuit type).

High consistency

ET 3400mA batteries, when discharged at 1.5A, yields 3303mAh capacity. When discharged at 680mA, it yields full 3400mAh capacity.

Reviews

No reviews yet

Add review

What do you think of the article?

5,0