Just a FYI post here about my latest characterization work between the Cera base and the Persei using the same load and battery. Which provides the most effecient power delivery system...
First the disclaimers (lawyer BS).
1. This is one data point and only one. Oh actually multiple data points on the Persei. I own 5 heads (2 singles, 2 duals and 1 hammer), 2 normal tubes and 2 SS tubes that house 18650s. Several bottom plates/springs. I ran through them quickly and while there are differences they are within 1-3% of each other. I only have one Cera base however, so to get truly fair, additional Cera's must really be characterized the same way. Mine could be an outlier on the bell curve...
2. The Persei used an adapter to mount a Cera EO cart - the load used to characterize the bases. This adds resistance to the EO cart. However, the measurement point was post adapter on the Persei to remove it. In fact it adds to the Persei drop.
3. No agenda by me and none should be by any of the membership. This is just data to interrupt so you are knowledgeable. Use it wisely and its not to beat on any product. Its not a negative. Use it as a positive. I will continue to own and use both products because both serve me well. Nothing here changes my mind.
OK, remeasured my data using a Cera base and a Persei. Learned something here between the two bases.
I used the same battery in each base and recharged between tests. I put wires on the input of the Cera EO cart and installed in each base. On the Persei I used a 601->3/8-24 adapter to allow the Cera EO to mount. I took two measurements the same way on each base using the same load first on initial turn on, then after 35 seconds of continual power after that.
Cera, fresh charged AW 18650 2000mAh battery.
No load 4.43V.
Full Cera EO load - 3.41, 35 seconds later 3.37
Persei
Recharged same battery...
No load 4.43V
Full Cera EO load - 3.55V, 35 seconds later 3.48V
First to note, even through the Persei must use an adapter it drops (4.43-3.55) or 0.88v, the Cera drops (4.43-3.41) or 1.02V.
That means under even worse conditions the Persei base dropped 0.14V less initially and after 35 seconds was still 0.11 higher. The Cera is only 86% efficient of the Persei so the Persei delivers 14% more voltage given everything thing else equal.
Now lets explore the current flowing.
Initial conditions...
Cera 3.41/0.69 = 4.94 Amps
Persei 3.55/0.69 = 5.14 Amps
After 35 seconds...
Cera 3.37/0.69 = 4.88 Amps
Persei 3.48/0.69 = 5.02 Amp.
Keep in mind this is a square factor - double increase in power. Both the Voltage and current are 14% higher and watts = V * I. Since both increase by 14% there is a square function... win-win
Now to find another Cera base to find out if mine is an exception to the rule.