XPost: sci.electronics, uk.radio.amateur   
   From: Aero.Spike@S&T.invalid   
      
   Brian Morrison wrote:   
      
   >... but I have to say that my reason for buying it was to allow me to   
   >resurrect some batteries that have been run flat to the point of being   
   >unable to charge in my other chargers. So far the C9000 seems to be   
   >able to sort out 3 out of 5 that I've tried, with another 3 to go.   
      
   Wouldn't it have been more cost-effective to buy new cells?   
      
   While there are some good techniques about for reviving ones that are   
   otherwise defunct, as mentioned elsewhere in this thread, the cost   
   these days even for good quality cells is not high.   
      
   If the use to which the recovered cells is in any way critical, then   
   that's another argument for replacement.   
      
   The effectiveness of chargers with a brain depends very much on the   
   charge-discharge algorithm; I have a 'smart' USB charger here that   
   flags up nearly any almost-new cell as defunct. While the concept of   
   the charger is a good one, it is impossible to overcome the inbuilt   
   algorithm and make the unit a useful item.   
      
   These days I stick to Eneloop cells; I find their very long (by other   
   rechargeable cell's standards) charge-retention times more useful than   
   outright capacity - 95 percent after 6 months and 80 percent after a   
   year is a useful bonus in occasionally-used gear.   
      
      
   Spike   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)