NCR18650B 3400 mAh from LiitoKala

A brief review of NCR18650B batteries with the LiitoKala logo, bought on AliExpress. In appearance and specifications, these batteries are very similar to the well-known Panasonic NCR18650B, but cost a little less.
As usual, the review includes an inspection and thorough testing.



The seller offered several lot options: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 10 pcs. I bought lots of 6, but essentially these are just two lots of 3, at a slightly lower price. In other words, the more batteries in a lot, the lower the price per battery.

In the end, I received two neat little boxes, each with three batteries packed very tightly inside.


Overall, I have no real complaints about the packaging or delivery; everything was fairly quick and careful. Personally, I prefer this kind of packaging in cardboard boxes rather than plastic ones. With the latter, you often end up with a broken box, and they usually cost a little more, too.


Why did I say these batteries are similar to the well-known Panasonic NCR18650B? Because they:
1. Have the same markings
2. Look the same
3. Have the same stated capacity

As far as I know, Liitokala itself hardly manufactures anything. It's a company that mostly just puts its own label on products. Yes, its products are generally better quality and more consistent than average, but it's still just a brand, nothing more. They may be cheaper because the products are lower grade, or even unbranded, as was the case with the Liitokala 26650 batteries.


For comparison, here are photos of the NCR18650B from Liitokala (left) and Panasonic (right). There are two differences:
1. The positive terminal has a different shape; the original has a flat terminal
2. An extra layer of clear heat-shrink tubing.

Some flashlight users need a protruding positive terminal, since flat ones can cause problems.


The marking quality is average. The original is slightly better, but the difference is minimal.
The date code, 7130, is printed on the other side.


According to the date-code chart, the batteries were made on January 30, 2017, so they're about a year and a half old. That may explain why they're cheaper than the originals.


Because of the protruding positive terminal and the extra layer of heat-shrink tubing, these batteries are longer and slightly thicker than the originals.


They're also slightly heavier, by about 2 grams. Most likely, that's because the positive terminal here is a metal cap, and the extra heat-shrink tubing adds weight too. So I can say that their weight is in line with the original Panasonic batteries.


Unfortunately, I couldn't find internal resistance data in the datasheet, but high-current batteries typically have an internal resistance of around 10–15 mΩ, so 30 mΩ is perfectly normal for high-capacity cells. More importantly, the difference between individual cells is very small.


This is the first capacity test: charged at 1 A and discharged at 0.5 A.
The two batteries on the left are from one box, and the ones on the right are from the other. You can see that they started at different charge levels.
But after a full charge and discharge, they showed roughly the same capacity. It's a little overstated, though; that's a problem with many chargers like these, including the Opus and Liitokala models.


Since the capacity measurement on the charger shown above is only approximate, I'll now try measuring them “according to the datasheet,” at discharge rates of 0.2C, 1C, and 2C. I'll skip the 0.5C discharge test.


And here's where the problem showed up: the batteries fit in the charger without any trouble, but I couldn't get them into the test holder because they're 2 mm too long. Keep that in mind when buying them.


Test of the first battery at 0.2C. The battery numbering corresponds to the tests above.
Down to 3 V: 3106 mAh / 11.38 Wh
From 3 to 2.8 V: 145 mAh / 0.422 Wh
From 2.8 to 2.5 V: 89 mAh / 0.238 Wh
Total: 3106+145+89 = 3340 mAh, or 12.04 Wh


Test of the second battery at 0.2C
Down to 3 V: 3096 mAh / 11.34 Wh
From 3 to 2.8 V: 144 mAh / 0.42 Wh
From 2.8 to 2.5 V: 88 mAh / 0.235 Wh
Total: 3096+144+88 = 3328 mAh, or 11.995 Wh

Charging used 3348 mAh or 12.8 Wh, giving an “efficiency” of 93.7%.


Test of the first battery at 1C
Down to 3 V: 2926 mAh / 10.24 Wh
From 3 to 2.8 V: 203 mAh / 0.591 Wh
From 2.8 to 2.5 V: 167 mAh / 0.448 Wh
Total: 2926+203+167 = 3296 mAh, or 11.279 Wh

Charging used 3313 mAh or 13.05 Wh, giving an “efficiency” of 86.4%.


Test of the second battery at 2C
Down to 3 V: 2577 mAh / 8.643 Wh
From 3 to 2.8 V: 382 mAh / 1.117 Wh
From 2.8 to 2.5 V: 303 mAh / 0.811 Wh
Total: 2577+382+303 = 3262 mAh, or 10.571 Wh

Charging used 3237 mAh or 12.72 Wh, giving an “efficiency” of 83.1%.


For comparison, here are the test results for the Panasonic NCR18650B: at 2C, it delivered 3344 mAh or 10.74 Wh, compared with 3262 mAh and 10.571 Wh for the LiitoKala.


During the 2C discharge, the battery heated up to almost 70 degrees by the end of the test. For comparison, the photo on the right shows a Panasonic NCR18650B battery; the difference is about 4 degrees. However, room temperature may have affected the results: it’s quite hot right now. Also, I used a better-quality holder for that test.


So, what do we have in the end? These are essentially the same as Panasonic NCR18650B cells, perhaps a lower grade or possibly old stock, but the test results show that they are practically identical to the LiitoKala cells reviewed here.
The price is fairly good. In my opinion, you can confidently buy these for discharge rates of 0.2–0.5C. They’re not such an appealing choice at 1C, and especially at 2C, because capacity in Wh drops significantly. However, if there’s a linear regulator after the battery (for example, in a flashlight), you won’t lose anything, since the capacity in mAh is not much different from what you get at lower discharge rates.

That’s all. I hope you found this review useful.