Buddy vs Blur battery compartment sizing?

Discussion of the Genuine Buddy, Hooligan, Black Jack and other topics, both scooter related and not

Moderator: Modern Buddy Staff

Post Reply
User avatar
Edwub
Member
Posts: 481
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 1:19 am
Location: Los Angeles

Buddy vs Blur battery compartment sizing?

Post by Edwub »

Hey all,

I'm doing some research trying to pick my next battery for my Blur. ( thread made over in the Blur sub-section.)

I found a comment on a battery I was interested in (this one), but there was one comment that concerned me. Talking specifically about a 2010 model Buddy, they said in order for it to fit, you "have to remove some of the plastic fins off the bottom of the compartment door."

I'm assuming the Buddy and Blur take the same battery type/size: but is the compartment sizing different? The battery itself is listed as being the same dimensions as the others (5.88 x 3.5 x 4.13 inches), but this particular one has a built in digital display, so I'm assuming the height is slightly different than what's listed which may be why it didn't fit. I don't think my Blur has 'plastic fins' at the bottom, though I want to measure it tomorrow in daylight to see if it can handle a little extra height to accommodate the display.

The display thing might be kind of goofy, but for a few extra dollars I think I'm interested. I live in an apartment complex, and any cutting down on the random "take the battery out, upstairs, and charge it" would be convenient).

Thanks!


PS: I bought a battery tender several months ago when my battery started weakening; several of the Battery Tender Junior models are now illegal/banned in California. New bill about 'inefficient' chargers, and several of the lower Jr models are not efficient enough for the state for now.
Image
User avatar
Syd
Member
Posts: 4686
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 6:41 am
Location: Tempe

Re: Buddy vs Blur battery compartment sizing?

Post by Syd »

Edwub wrote:Hey all,

I'm doing some research trying to pick my next battery for my Blur. ( thread made over in the Blur sub-section.)

I found a comment on a battery I was interested in (this one), but there was one comment that concerned me. Talking specifically about a 2010 model Buddy, they said in order for it to fit, you "have to remove some of the plastic fins off the bottom of the compartment door."

I'm assuming the Buddy and Blur take the same battery type/size: but is the compartment sizing different? The battery itself is listed as being the same dimensions as the others (5.88 x 3.5 x 4.13 inches), but this particular one has a built in digital display, so I'm assuming the height is slightly different than what's listed which may be why it didn't fit. I don't think my Blur has 'plastic fins' at the bottom, though I want to measure it tomorrow in daylight to see if it can handle a little extra height to accommodate the display.

The display thing might be kind of goofy, but for a few extra dollars I think I'm interested. I live in an apartment complex, and any cutting down on the random "take the battery out, upstairs, and charge it" would be convenient).

Thanks!


PS: I bought a battery tender several months ago when my battery started weakening; several of the Battery Tender Junior models are now illegal/banned in California. New bill about 'inefficient' chargers, and several of the lower Jr models are not efficient enough for the state for now.
Apparently it's more efficient to boil the acid into the atmosphere. :D
The majority is always sane - Nessus
User avatar
Edwub
Member
Posts: 481
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 1:19 am
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Buddy vs Blur battery compartment sizing?

Post by Edwub »

Syd wrote:
Edwub wrote: PS: I bought a battery tender several months ago when my battery started weakening; several of the Battery Tender Junior models are now illegal/banned in California. New bill about 'inefficient' chargers, and several of the lower Jr models are not efficient enough for the state for now.
Apparently it's more efficient to boil the acid into the atmosphere. :D


[.....], the California Energy Commission approved new rules governing efficiency for battery chargers, including those used for phones, laptops, and even vehicles like forklifts or golf carts. Since the Commission estimates that only about 36 percent of electricity used by chargers actually makes it into batteries, companies will have until next year to provide the same performance with improved efficiency in consumer electronics, either by reducing the amount of power needed for a full charge or by no longer drawing electricity once the battery is full. Currently, many chargers continue to use power even after a device is done charging or has been unplugged, a phenomenon known as "vampire" or "no-load" power.

The Commission says the new rules will save 2,200 gigawatt hours a year, enough to power 350,000 homes or a city the size of Bakersfield. Though California is the first state to ban low-efficiency battery chargers, several other states are looking into similar rules, as is the US Department of Energy. While the California rules will provide a good testing ground for the chargers, this also means that manufacturers could potentially be dealing with a confusing patchwork of local and national laws, especially when it comes to customers who buy goods online.


The rules were approved in 2012, went into affect sometime in 2013. I was trying to buy a Tender Jr just in Nov 2014, and it's still not approved. Took me by surprise; I had been trying to submit the order through Amazon and customer service ended up telling me the "shipping destination error" really meant that it wasn't allowed to go to California.

The classic 750mA model is banned, but the next model size up isn't: 800mA output.

Honestly, I'm really intrigued by how much of a difference they actually have in terms of efficiency. Either it's substantially better designed, with the output being minimally greater, or the 750mA model was just a touch under the new standards.
Image
Post Reply