Fusion Batteries!!!

Reply

Old 03-31-2004, 08:26 PM
  #1  
Tech Addict
Thread Starter
 
Techart27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: AC Schnitzer X5 w/ 22" ACS NorCal
Posts: 677
Default Fusion Batteries!!!

Im not sure if there is already a thread on Fusion batteries but I just want some opinions about the battery from ppl who use them.
Techart27 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 08:28 PM
  #2  
Tech Adept
 
Beeb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Thornton, CO
Posts: 136
Default

I have Fusion batteries but haven't run them yet. It's going to be my battery of choice so, I'm curious to hear some response from users as well.
Beeb is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 08:32 PM
  #3  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Green Bay,WI
Posts: 3,006
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

i haven't run them but saw them in person...those battery bars are definately in a class of its own
R/C Anonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 08:40 PM
  #4  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (10)
 
Brian McGreevy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,081
Trader Rating: 10 (100%+)
Default

They are awesome! Lots-o-punch.
Brian McGreevy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 08:43 PM
  #5  
Tech Master
 
davepull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Orange Park, Florida
Posts: 1,180
Default

i have ran them. @ the snowbirds I had a 1.17 pack which according to them should run like a 1.19. well it ran ok nothin special. i also don't like the fact that they dont shrink wrap there cells. if you tape your stuff in then off with the labels.

i also have a pack of 1.165's that I have run some of my fastest lap times with on asphalt. but that isn't because they provide alot of punch. they actually don't have alot so I am able to ripp on the throttle and not spin the tires.
davepull is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 08:52 PM
  #6  
Tech Adept
 
Beeb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Thornton, CO
Posts: 136
Default

Eh, "not so Super Dave"..
Beeb is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 09:30 PM
  #7  
Tech Master
 
koabich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Detroit Area
Posts: 1,359
Default

I bought what was supposed to be their highest end pack...1.170+...supposed to run like 1.190's. Paid something like $80.00 off the website...figured I'd try one pack.
I received it in the mail and the pack was a 1.168 and not a 1.170+ like I ordered. Cycled the pack to the same specs as I cycle all my packs (GFX Charger) and it measured 10 degrees hotter at the battery bars (guess they do work) but over 5 degrees hotter on the cell itself according to my temp gun. And the numbers were not even close to those on the label! Not good so far.
When I ran the pack, it was really nothing special. Actually I have much better practice packs. I would buy some SMC's, Fantom, Fuku, or Team Orion packs instead...I have never had a bad pack of any of these and thet are much cheaper to buy.
Personally, I will never buy another pack of these cells. I could understand that this pack performed poorly becuase it was just a bad pack and would consider buying somemore just to try them, but at $80.00 a pack, no thanks. Besides several people at my track have bought them and have had the same results as me.
I would look somewhere else for batteries.
koabich is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 09:32 PM
  #8  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (1)
 
JusBox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Central VA
Posts: 2,170
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Originally posted by koabich
I bought what was supposed to be their highest end pack...1.170+...supposed to run like 1.190's. Paid something like $80.00 off the website...figured I'd try one pack.
I received it in the mail and the pack was a 1.168 and not a 1.170+ like I ordered. Cycled the pack to the same specs as I cycle all my packs (GFX Charger) and it measured 10 degrees hotter at the battery bars (guess they do work) but over 5 degrees hotter on the cell itself according to my temp gun. And the numbers were not even close to those on the label! Not good so far.
When I ran the pack, it was really nothing special. Actually I have much better practice packs. I would buy some SMC's, Fantom, Fuku, or Team Orion packs instead...I have never had a bad pack of any of these and thet are much cheaper to buy.
Personally, I will never buy another pack of these cells. I could understand that this pack performed poorly becuase it was just a bad pack and would consider buying somemore just to try them, but at $80.00 a pack, no thanks. Besides several people at my track have bought them and have had the same results as me.
I would look somewhere else for batteries.
Sure they have a hyped product but who doesn't... though with matchers, i tend to stick with the small matchers as they have always come through for me. No gimmicks, just good deals on good packs.

Last edited by AWOLsoldier; 04-01-2004 at 10:31 PM.
JusBox is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 09:34 PM
  #9  
Tech Master
iTrader: (9)
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: FL
Posts: 1,616
Trader Rating: 9 (100%+)
Thumbs up

I have been using Fusion Batteries since they have first been available, first thing i noticed was the punch in the pack. Also, they seem to not get as hot in the car, they definately get warm but not like the packs i assemble. Just cycled some packs that i have had since early december and have run the piss outta them, offroad, sedan stock and 19t. To my surprise the numbers are still really good 1.17 as a pack and great IR considering the abuse. My other packs from different matchers are only good for practice now!!! They are just a few weeks older and have less runs.
barnacle is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 09:35 PM
  #10  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (10)
 
Brian McGreevy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,081
Trader Rating: 10 (100%+)
Default

How long ago was this that you had these experiences, koabich? Recently they got new processing systems and I would bet the packs are better now. I know the ones I ran at the nats had a lot of punch.
Brian McGreevy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 09:42 PM
  #11  
Tech Addict
iTrader: (32)
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: west side, Mi.
Posts: 698
Trader Rating: 32 (97%+)
Default

Originally posted by Brian McGreevy
How long ago was this that you had these experiences, koabich? Recently they got new processing systems and I would bet the packs are better now. I know the ones I ran at the nats had a lot of punch.
my friend brian mcgreevy runs those packs and hes very happy, i run for pro match and im very happy with my packs, but if there is a problem just call the company you bought them from and they should do the right thing, like my sponsors, i had a slight problem with run time so i contacted my sponsor and they did the right thing for me. thanx to jeff rowe at promatch, he took my slightly used packs and replaced them at no charge. thanx again.

john mcintosh

Last edited by Apl Hed; 04-01-2004 at 09:12 AM.
Apl Hed is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 09:46 PM
  #12  
Tech Master
iTrader: (9)
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: FL
Posts: 1,616
Trader Rating: 9 (100%+)
Default

There isnt any hype involved in the batteries, they are zapped and matched just like every other brand out there. Also, they have some patent pending features that make perfect sense, like the assembly process and the heatsink bars. If it was hype, then other companies wouldnt be taking notice the way they have.
barnacle is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 10:16 PM
  #13  
Tech Adept
 
Beeb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Thornton, CO
Posts: 136
Default

I'm inclined to agree.

If there are a couple people out there who've had problems with the batteries then it must be an anomalie (sp?).

If the Us government uses their batteries (mars rovers) then they can't be that bad. I'm assuming they're as good as any other battery maker and that their process is better than the rest.

The bars seems like an obvious advantage since the batteries heat up. And if they heat their batts for a shorter period of time, how could that possibly hurt?

I'm only assuming that the Gov uses their batts, since they'd have to have HUGE BALLS to imply that and not actually be helping the Gov.
Beeb is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2004, 01:32 AM
  #14  
Tech Elite
 
sosidge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bristol, UK
Posts: 3,886
Default

I don't think they supply NASA with batteries.

The claim is that NASA use the same soldering process to manufacture battery packs for their own projects.
sosidge is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2004, 06:12 AM
  #15  
Tech Master
 
koabich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Detroit Area
Posts: 1,359
Default

Originally posted by Brian McGreevy
How long ago was this that you had these experiences, koabich? Recently they got new processing systems and I would bet the packs are better now. I know the ones I ran at the nats had a lot of punch.
The pack I have is about 2 months old. The one thing I did notice is they labeled the pack differently than the other Fusion packs I have seen. They cells were labeled with not the individual cell numbers like we are all used too. Each cell was labeled with the numbers of the pack. For example the label on each cell was identical...voltage 7.008...seconds 360....ect.
koabich is offline  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Terms of Service