At 01:12 PM 11/21/97 +0000, you wrote:
>     After testing various AA sized Alkalines (all retail standard - not
>     specials), for use in our Hand-held PCs, at various discharge
>     currents, we were shocked to find Duracells (European - may be
>     different to US) were very low down the performance table. (ie
>     pathetic!)
>
>     We have now dumped them, and recommend Panasonic AA alkalines, which
>     are half the price, double the performance, and companies using our
>     PCs find they are not nicked as much by their employees for walkmans,
>     as the employees believe them to be inferior!
>
>     This said, there were other alkalines that were close to the Panasonic
>     level, so do the trials on you product to see if a different make
>     excels at your specific application. (And don't be surprised by the
>     results)
>
>     I now have an attitude problem with all Duracell adverts!


Oddly enough, Consumer reports rated Duracell near the middle of the pack.
The little Energizer bunny was at the bottom :(

Rob
>                Steve Lawther
>
>     Webpage:-
>
>     http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/steve_lawther/
>
>______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
>
>Mike Harrison wrote:-
>
>>Manufacturers don't say much about the capacity of alkaline batteries, I
>>think a safe assumption would be about 4x the capacity of the same size
>>Ni-Cd.  But not rechargeable, or rechargeable only a small number of
>>times.  This is the least expensive battery system to manufacture, since
>>the user pays someone else for the batteries.
>I recently needed detailed discharge curve info on alkalines, and was
>staggered to find that Duracell couldn't supply anything othr than a
>couple of reference curves at specific loads & temps. Surely these guys
>have been making batteries long enough to be able to supply a simple
>program which would give a discharge curve at any given load & temp
>(i.e. what the customer really NEEDS) - apparently not! We had to spend
>a lot of time testing, as we had to provide a lo-bat warning with a
>specific amount of running time available (due to the standards the
>product had to comply with). Lack of info was a REAL pain.
>     <snip>
>
>