I don't quite follow your reasoning here. Just because you don't abuse high capacity cells with excessive current doesn't mean better longevity than high power cells (which are inherently more resistant to such abuse due to lower IR).john61ct wrote: ↑May 28 2019 6:36pmThanks Matador for taking the time to lay it out so fully and with precise writing, well done, and this does agree with other information on the topic.
There are so many variables, and of course shoddy quality, in materials purity or manufacturing QA will override these finer distinctions.
So, my conclusion, again, is **if** the use case does not involve high discharge rates, say under .2C
**nor** cycling down to very high DoD, say 70-80%
then better longevity will come from energy-dense / higher capacity cells, rather than those designed for power density / higher discharge rates.
Comparing high capacity with high power, with both types used conservatively within their respective max discharge rates; What is it about high capacity cells that would then yield better cycle life?
Is there something about the typical chemistry or construction of high capacity cells that lends itself to this? I don't see it.