Leisure Batteries Con.

[Tracker]

An interesting article by Gentleman Jack (aka Jonathon Lloyd) in this month's MCC magazine about the claims and realities of leisure batteries.

 

Given that so many of us have or have had problems with leisure batteries, like many others, I have long suspected that we are being ripped off with these essential items.

 

In a nutshell the unscientific and far from definitive test concluded that out of six leading brand leisure batteries only two did what it said on the label, the others falling far short of expectations.

 

The testing involved charging and checking the discharging to check the capacity and and then draining the acid and cutting them open to see what they are made of.

 

The two that measured up were Banner and Exide - well no surprise there - but those that did not were not specified but it seems that construction and quality were absent on many and even the heavier ones did not necessarily contain more lead in their plates.

 

Not conclusive, scientific or definitive but informative enough to let me know which brand battery I will (and will not) be buying when next I need to - thanks Jonathon - much appreciated.

 

 

 

[josie gibblebucket]

We may have to get one soon, so that is worth knowing, thankyou Tracker. The only other problem is getting one with the right dimensions to fit under the bonnet...needs to be quite small really. :-S

[Tracker]

josie gibblebucket - 2013-05-02 10:39 AM

 

We may have to get one soon, so that is worth knowing, thank you Tracker. The only other problem is getting one with the right dimensions to fit under the bonnet...needs to be quite small really. :-S

 

Size does not always matter Nicola as long as the measurements suit your needs!

[Derek Uzzell]

A very similar test was described as part of a longish article "Battery Use and Abuse" by John Wickersham in the MMM July 2010 issue (pages 181-186).

 

The testing was said to have been carried out by a group of three battery specialists and the procedures involved appear to have been rigorous. There were no obvious reasons to consider the conclusions as other than conclusive, scientific and definitive.

 

In the MMM article positive comments were made about "Banner" and "Platinum" batteries. As with the MCC magazine, the makes of the batteries that tested badly were not revealed.

[Sydney1]

Wouldn't want to upset the advertisers would we

[Guest 1footinthegrave]

I've always wondered about this, years ago I always used a car battery and normally a half knackered one at that, mmmmm :D but I'd stop short of saying we're being ripped off, after all my plastic Dometic fridge catch costing no doubt 20p to produce was only £21. >:-(

[Derek Uzzell]

Sydney1 - 2013-05-02 12:55 PM

 

Wouldn't want to upset the advertisers would we

 

Presumably you are not able to read the MMM article I mentioned.

 

To summarise, 4 new compact batteries labelled as 'leisure' products and claiming to offer a performance within a 75ah-100Ah range were purchased. 4 new larger batteries labelled as 'leisure' products and claiming to offer a performance within a 90Ah-125Ah range were also bought.

 

Of these two sets of 4 batteries, a Banner battery in Set One exceeded its stated Ah capacity when tested and a Banner battery in Set Two did the same. Second best in both Set One and Set Two was a "Platinum"-labelled battery, but neither of the Platinum batteries met their claimed Ah capacity (75Ah = 65Ah and 110Ah = 95.3Ah). There was clearly a Banner and a Platinum battery in Set One and Set Two, but manufacturer-details of the other 4 batteries were not given.

 

All the batteries were cut apart and, except for the Banner ("Energy Bull") ones, were found to have characteristics typical of starter-battery construction (eg, thin, rather than thick, lead plates). So, of the 8 batteries tested, only the Banner products met their Ah claimed capacity and had the constructional characteristics of a purpose-made 'leisure' battery.

 

The MMM article said that the test results made it obvious that further research was urgently needed and that the National Caravan Council was fully aware of the problem. There was a promise of a follow-up at some later stage but (as far as I'm aware) this has yet to be provided.

 

As 4 of the 8 batteries were Banner or Platinum-branded products, this was a pretty limited test. There might be other 'leisure' batteries that, if tested, prove to be the equal or superior to the Banner products, or prove to be worse than the worst batteries that were tested in 2010.

 

Unless a comprehensive test is carried out, it will continue to be difficult for people to sort the wheat from the chaff, but I suggest that the least risky approach when choosing a leisure-battery would be to opt for one clearly advertised as such, made by an EN-registered company (eg. Banner, Exide, Varta) and that weighs heavy. As thick lead plates are a plus for a leisure-battery, the heavier the battery the thicker the plates inside should be. It's a rough-and-ready rule, but better than no rule.

[Tracker]

Derek Uzzell - 2013-05-02 2:04 PM

I suggest that the least risky approach when choosing a leisure-battery would be to opt for one clearly advertised as such, made by an EN-registered company (eg. Banner, Exide, Varta) and that weighs heavy. As thick lead plates are a plus for a leisure-battery, the heavier the battery the thicker the plates inside should be. It's a rough-and-ready rule, but better than no rule.

 

Not quite Derek - according to the MCC article some batteries are made heavier by the addition of extra weight or thicker cases to give the illusion of a greater lead content - sneaky eh - and clearly demonstrative of deliberate subterfuge as opposed to careless or optimistic labelling?

 

If you want to be sure - cut it in half before you buy it otherwise stick to the brands mentioned and pay a bit more for peace of mind.

[Overdrive]

Interesting recent episode of Motorhome Channel, also showed up a lot of flaws on the manufacture of different leisure batteries, and why some fail quicker than others.

 

Did anyone else see it ?

 

David

[Keithl]

David,

 

A quick Google search has found Episode 1 and Episode 2.

 

Keith.

[Retread24800]

Yes and heres a link to the video, note John Whickersham and Andy from Roadpro presenting.

[sambukashot]

After 2 Varta Proffesional leisure batteries failing me within 15 months i just got 2 x 110amp Monbat batteries from the internet at £72.5 each and they are great! and come with a 2 year warranty so no big loss if they fail me :)

[Derek Uzzell]

Tracker - 2013-05-02 3:08 PM

 

Derek Uzzell - 2013-05-02 2:04 PM

I suggest that the least risky approach when choosing a leisure-battery would be to opt for one clearly advertised as such, made by an EN-registered company (eg. Banner, Exide, Varta) and that weighs heavy. As thick lead plates are a plus for a leisure-battery, the heavier the battery the thicker the plates inside should be. It's a rough-and-ready rule, but better than no rule.

 

Not quite Derek - according to the MCC article some batteries are made heavier by the addition of extra weight or thicker cases to give the illusion of a greater lead content - sneaky eh - and clearly demonstrative of deliberate subterfuge as opposed to careless or optimistic labelling?

 

If you want to be sure - cut it in half before you buy it otherwise stick to the brands mentioned and pay a bit more for peace of mind.

 

The weight component was just one of the 'reduce-the-risk' factors I mentioned. I'm sure the MCC article doesn't suggest that reputable EN-registered companies like Banner, Varta or Exide are faking the weight.

 

Sambukashot's experience indicates that, even if one follows received wisdom, there's no certainty that a battery's lifespan will be long.

[Tracker]

Derek Uzzell - 2013-05-02 9:15 PM

The weight component was just one of the 'reduce-the-risk' factors I mentioned. I'm sure the MCC article doesn't suggest that reputable EN-registered companies like Banner, Varta or Exide are faking the weight.

 

Sambukashot's experience indicates that, even if one follows received wisdom, there's no certainty that a battery's lifespan will be long.

 

The MCC article was very clear that nothing untoward was found inside the Banner or Exide batteries which is why they performed well. Varta was not mentioned and I don't know whether that is because they were not tested or were found wanting?

 

My own experience of 2 Varta 110 ah was very good up to about 33 months old and then their capacity seemed to tail off even though the voltage patterns appeared to be normal. Disappointing, but I won't buy them again.

[dipsticks]

We have two Varta 90ah batteries in their 6th year still going fine. Gave them both a capacity test using a headlamp bulb last month and they seem to perform at around 90% of the same test performed 4 years ago, so I think I would consider them again. I thought they were quite expensive when I bought them.

[Brambles]

If I recall correctly Tracker I did advise on the 90Ah batteries possibly being better, can't really remember, but was my favoured option as full calcium semi traction where the 110 was a hybrid. The difference being the 90 Ah battery could be taken down 60% and the hybrid only 50%. for long life. 54Ah v 55Ah available, but you were drawn by the larger 110 Capacity because it sounds bigger and gave that extra capacity for 'emergency' use should you ever need more than 55Ah. However I am dissapointed you are not happy with them, but then again if you are spending many nights away and using your heater then the batteries are getting a lot of cycling. How has the water consumption been as it has always concerned me the solar panels may tend to overcharge them as it is PWM to 14.7 ( or 14.8 volts)? It may give you an extra few Ah's but is not good for a battrey to be what they call overcharged pushnig it beyond it's 100% capacity but the jury has always been out on this one. The Battery manufacturers say its not good, the charger manufacturers say it does no harm.

 

 

 

 

[Derek Uzzell]

When you buy a starter-battery for your vehicle, how it operates subsequently will largely be out of your hands. Each time the vehicle is started the battery will be heavily loaded, but subsequently the vehicle’s own electrical system will be in control of the battery’s operation. Depending on the battery’s design there may be a requirement to check/top-up the battery’s electrolyte-level but, other than that, there’s no vehicle-owner interaction.

 

Things are different for a motorhome leisure-battery. As well as the battery being charged via the vehicle’s alternator, it can receive charge from a variety of other sources. An on-board battery charger is the norm, but a solar panel, a generator or fuel-cell are alternatives. And it’s not too uncommon for the vehicle’s via-the-alternator leisure-battery charging capability to be seriously tweaked via a B2B system.

 

Exactly the same leisure-battery may be utilised brutally by one motorcaravanner, but gently by another. On this thread, two people have complained about Varta leisure-batteries, while one has a pair of Vartas performing well 6 years on. My 1996 Herald had a Varta leisure-battery and there was no indication this was on the way out when I sold the vehicle in 2004 (and the original Motorcraft starter-battery was also still OK). My 2005 Hobby’s Exide gel leisure-battery failed after 7 years and was replaced by a Banner AGM battery, and I’ve recently replaced the Hobby’s Motorcraft starter-battery (with a Varta “Silver Dynamic”) as a precautionary measure despite it still having been able to start the vehicle without difficulty. But I don’t use my motorhomes much and the demands placed on its batteries are light.

 

If the conclusions of the MMM and MCC articles are consolidated, logically, the only leisure-battery to buy is a Banner. However, another currently-running forum thread reports problems with a 2-year old motohome fitted with a pair of Banner products. The latter are AGM type, which highlights a further complication with leisure-batteries as these can be ‘traditional’ wet-acid, gel or AGM and the charging regimen needs to be compatible with the battery type. I don’t know if the tests described in the MMM and MCC articles tested other than wet-acid batteries (I suspect not), but there’s always the possibility that a battery manufacturer may produce a ‘good’ range of wet-acid leisure-batteries but ‘poor’ AGM or gel ranges (or vice versa).

 

With so many variables and so much conflicting feedback from motorcaravanners, there’s always going to be an element of pot-luck in buying a leisure-battery. A comprehensive warts-and-all analysis of the leisure-batteries marketed in this country - not just a sample of 6 or 8 - would undoubtedly be revealing, but it remains to be seen if any organisation (which I guess means the National Caravan Council in the UK) will be prepared to grasp that nettle.

[Tracker]

Brambles - 2013-05-02 11:18 PM

If I recall correctly Tracker I did advise on the 90Ah batteries possibly being better, can't really remember, but was my favoured option as full calcium semi traction where the 110 was a hybrid. The difference being the 90 Ah battery could be taken down 60% and the hybrid only 50%. for long life. 54Ah v 55Ah available, but you were drawn by the larger 110 Capacity because it sounds bigger and gave that extra capacity for 'emergency' use should you ever need more than 55Ah. However I am disappointed you are not happy with them, but then again if you are spending many nights away and using your heater then the batteries are getting a lot of cycling. How has the water consumption been as it has always concerned me the solar panels may tend to overcharge them as it is PWM to 14.7 ( or 14.8 volts)? It may give you an extra few Ah's but is not good for a battery to be what they call overcharged pushing it beyond it's 100% capacity but the jury has always been out on this one. The Battery manufacturers say its not good, the charger manufacturers say it does no harm.

 

This was early in 2010 and I was very grateful for Bramble's detailed help at that time.

After much soul searching and after chats to suppliers who seemed to think the 'ordinary' hybrid leisure batteries were the best option - even though they cost more - I decided on the Varta A28 and not the full Calcium 90 ah - I seem to recall that the A28 was more easily available and I needed batteries quickly.

They worked fine for three years and never went flat, or ran short of power, not that we were ever camped in one place for more than four nights, due to the solar panel keeping them - and the engine battery - fully charged both when in use and when parked.

If, as is now being suggested, a regulated solar charge is not good for a battery long term then this may well have been a contributory factor to their decline?

Another problem with solar panels is that because they keep a battery charged they mask a deteriorating battery which makes it harder to tell if there is a fault.

So short of switching the solar panel off and using a Ctek charger on permanent mains hook up when at home what other way is there of maintaining charge and replacing self discharge and the fixed drain that comes with the electronics etc on modern vehicles?

Both batteries showed virtually identical voltage when regularly tested off charge and rested, similarly with the electrolyte SG, and I have never needed to top either of them up at any time.

It was primarily the lack of need to top up with deionised water that led me to believe that the solar charger was doing no harm and that the higher voltage was beneficial in keeping the plates de-sulphated.

Batteries have been the bane of my life for years so I have tried hard to do the right thing - and failed - it seems!

The Morningstar Sunsaver controller for the panels does indeed allow 14.7 volts through in full sunlight after an night's use but normally when checked in average daylight the batteries showed around 13.4 volts which I took to be OK?

Is anything ever what it seems with batteries?

[crinklystarfish]

As mentioned, the manner of use / abuse is probably the most important factor. Probably more important that a mm or two of lead plate thickness. Being gentle with them seems to be the key, avoiding any significant current draw / discharge state.

 

Adding capacity can often just mean more flat batteries. I knew a bloke with 5/6 leisure batteries on his narrowboat - he just had 5/6 flat / quickly flattening batteries - all of the time.

[tonyishuk]

josie gibblebucket - 2013-05-02 10:39 AM

 

We may have to get one soon, so that is worth knowing, thankyou Tracker. The only other problem is getting one with the right dimensions to fit under the bonnet...needs to be quite small really. :-S

 

 

Banner make some odd sized batteries, even managed to supply one for a Caterham. (Seen bigger dry cell batteries :D )

 

Rgds

[sambukashot]

This is a great article about leisure batteries, Click Here

[Travelling Tyke]

Hello,

 

Thanks for the link Sambukashot - it makes interesting reading. Err, no. Very interesting reading!

[BGD]

sambukashot - 2013-05-06 9:03 PM

 

This is a great article about leisure batteries, Click Here

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks - VERY interesting reading!

[Derek Uzzell]

Yes, but it does need highlighting that Sterling Power specialises in 'fast charging' equipment that makes maintenance-free batteries a bad choice.

 

Motorhome manufacturers have an unfortunate habit of installing leisure-batteries where maintenance will be pretty much impracticable (eg. under a swivelling cab-seat), so choosing a gel or AGM battery that needs no maintenance or venting makes sense in such cases. If the motorhome owner then has the vehicle modified to 'supercharge' its battery-charging capability and the original gel/AGM battery gets cooked, that's hardly the motorhome manufacturer's fault.

 

I vaguely remember an article by John Wickersham that included him interviewing Charles Sterling (whose background you'll see from his website is marine-related). JW told Mr Sterling about the electrical systems and methodology used in motorhomes and Mr Sterling was startled by the information.

[kevina]

What Sterling say about charging Gel batteries is at odds with what Victron and Mastervolt say.

 

Mastervolt, for instance say (about their own Gel batteries):

 

Choosing your battery charger ?

 

Determine:

•How many battery banks do I want to charge?

•The battery charger must have the same voltage as the battery bank.

•Rule of thumb is that 25% of the battery capacity (up to 50% for gel batteries) as a charge capacity is sufficient to safely and quickly charge batteries while still supplying power to the onboard network. For instance, a battery charger of 50 Amps is sufficient for a 200 Ah battery.

 

Victron have published a 74 page manual on batteries and charging which is extremely comprehensive

http://www.victronenergy.com/upload/documents/Book%20-%20Energy%20Unlimited%20-%20rev%2009%20-%20EN.pdf

 

Also, in their "Gel and AGM batteries" leaflet they state that C/5 charging for Gel batteries is fine without temperature compensation and infers that the charge rate can be higher with temperature compensation.

 

I'm about to buy a 45A German Votronic B2B charger which is a little more than the Sterling ones but designed for motorhomes rather than boats. I'm also due new batteries (4-8 weeks skiing each year) and having discovered that one of my trade suppliers sells Victron will probably splash out for a pair of their 110Ah gel batteries too.