[JeroendeV]

On dansdata.com i read (regarding AA's):

"Rechargeables are likely to work fine, and cheap 1800mAh or 2000mAh off-brand NiMH cells will give you the roughly 36 and 40 hour run times you'd expect from the above figure. If you're using the device a lot, this will be an OK way to go; a couple of sets of rechargeables and a basic charger will pay for themselves in a non-ridiculous amount of time.

Note, however, that the rapid self-discharge of NiMH cells means that if you leave the device on the shelf for a month after putting freshly charged batteries in it, you may find it's got a surprisingly small amount of run time once you pick it up again. For things you use occasionally, alkaline AAs are a much better choice.

Also note that at this current level, dirt cheap carbon-zinc (or slightly more capacious "zinc chloride") AAs will perform well, and deliver better value per hour of run time than alkalines.

I seem to remember reading somewhere that the difference in performance is negligible when using low drain applications such as mp3 players"

I guess one can assume that there is little difference between for instance 850 and 1000 mAh AAA cells if you read the above.

Also, what are good chargers to use?

 

[Eagle_Driver]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JeroendeV "...at this current level, dirt cheap carbon-zinc (or slightly more capacious "zinc chloride") AAs will perform well, and deliver better value per hour of run time than alkalines. "

Actually, that's not the case any more. Carbon-zinc batteries are virtually extinct nowadays, and "zinc chloride" batteries are on the brink of becoming so; in fact, Energizer (formerly Eveready Battery Co.) a few years ago had replaced their zinc chloride battery line with a budget-priced alkaline battery line (named Eveready instead of Energizer). And at the prices that such batteries went for when they were last marketed, they were no bargain - as far as value to runtime is concerned (they cost about half as much as alkalines, but last 4 to 10 times less than alkalines, making such "cheapies" actually cost 2 to 5 times more money than alkalines per hour of runtime). And the carbon-zinc and zinc chloride batteries had discharge curves that were similar to that of an alkaline battery - but with much less overall stamina. Those facts make the cheapies ill-suited to high-drain electronic devices.