Antigravity batteries.

[D.J.]

I won't have a problem buying another one, if I can get 9 years out of it. Mine is little over 2 years old, so will see.

Let's see if they honor that 3 year free replacement warranty.

Hope they do.

 

[Volfy]

That's from antigravity batteries website: The Antigravity Batteries RE-START system offers the latest technology for the safest, longest life cycle possible. Our superior on-board Battery Management System (BMS) offers Safety Circuitry to prevent Over-Discharge and Over-Charge, and has Short-Circuit protections, while additionally offering Cell Balancing and Thermal protections. These advanced features of our BMS make the battery not only as safe as possible, but also extend the life of the battery by keeping the battery in the prime operating zone and not allowing damage to the battery. Therefore creating the longest possible Life Cycle. From 7-9 years are expected from the Antigravity RE-START Batteries depending on use and climate

OK. I found where your quote came from. So, apparently the FAQ verbiage I read must have been referring to their product lines that do not have their BMS, so their service life depend on a lot more on how they are used - and abused. That would make more sense.

Overall, I'm still bullish on the overall viability of LiFePO4 batts. Because the technology is still in its infancy, a lot depends on how it is implemented... and used.

I've got such a good experience with Shorai, I have no qualms about using LiFePO4 for powersport applications. Most often, motorcycles require mounting orientation that requires AGM at the very least, the cost of an equivalent Shorai batt doesn't cause as much of a sticker shock. Since they last so much longer and weigh practically next to nothing (extra important on a motorcycle), the cost calculation becomes a no brainer.

For automotive applications, LiFePO4 is far more expensive than even a premium AGM, which already can be pretty long lasting, especially when trunk-floor mounted. I might not be ready to dive right in, but I'll definitely be keeping a close eye on your service life report - hopefully a more favorable one. Cutting 40-50 lbs over the rear axle is not trivial. As the technology matures and becomes more widespread, no doubt the cost differential should start trending down.

 

[Snicklefritz]

Cutting 40-50 lbs over the rear axle is not trivial.

This seems like a good point for me to raise the question of weight distribution. I know that you are into handling tweaks and mods. How would losing 40-50 lbs. in the rear affect cornering? I think that the 4 cylinder engine provides better weight distribution than the 6 cylinder. At least, our Premium feels more nimble and balanced than the GT1, even with the Eibach sways on the GT1. Maybe it's tires though. The less grip of the Bridgestone on the Premium lets the car slide instead of the rear stepping out and catching, like the stock sways on the GT1 did, on Michelin PS4(S) - as observed by many on the forum over the years. Anyway, my understanding is that KIA put the heavy battery back there to obtain better weight balance. That seems more important than losing 40-50 lbs.

 

[Volfy]

This seems like a good point for me to raise the question of weight distribution. I know that you are into handling tweaks and mods. How would losing 40-50 lbs. in the rear affect cornering? I think that the 4 cylinder engine provides better weight distribution than the 6 cylinder. At least, our Premium feels more nimble and balanced than the GT1, even with the Eibach sways on the GT1. Maybe it's tires though. The less grip of the Bridgestone on the Premium lets the car slide instead of the rear stepping out and catching, like the stock sways on the GT1 did, on Michelin PS4(S) - as observed by many on the forum over the years. Anyway, my understanding is that KIA put the heavy battery back there to obtain better weight balance. That seems more important than losing 40-50 lbs.

Excellent question. The short answer is that the points you raised are all valid and your assumptions are, for the most part, correct. The long answer, however, is more nuanced than simply a matter of weight distribution.

The reason those 40-50 lbs would matter has to do with... mass centralization. It is a design concept more often talked about in motorcycle world than in automotive circles. However, the principles apply just the same. The simplest way to think about it is to imagine two cars, each with the same weight, but one with its weight distributed like a dumb bells, while the other resemble a big ball bearing with a thin rod through it. Which one would handle better? It doesn't take much to realize the latter will rotate faster and be more stable in all three axis of freedom - pitch, yaw and roll.

Obviously, no car has perfect mass centralization; no car ever will. Nevertheless, just look at how a car is typically designed when cost becomes less of an issue. Just about ALL the supercars gravitate towards a mid-engine configuration... and mass centralization is the reason why that is the case. Unfortunately, it is also the least practically of all the engine configurations, which is why the overwhelming majority of automobiles have the engine up front, freeing up the rest of the car for cargo/passenger space. It is a necessary engineering compromise. If there is a way an automotive engineer can cheat that compromise to gain better vehicle dynamics - even if it's just a little - no doubt he/she would jump at the chance.

Herein lies the significance of that 40-50 lbs savings, which is actually quite far away from the actual center of the car's pitch/yaw axis. It'll allow the car to rotate faster and be more dynamically stable under high lateral-G maneuvers (i.e., faster cornering, emergency swerves, switchbacks, chicanes, slaloms, etc.).

Static weight distribution is a good metrics to gauge a car, but in HPDE, that static weight distribution goes out the window, as the car is always experiencing weight transfer, left, right, front, rear and every combination thereof. A perfect 50/50 weight distribution is nice to have, but ask any chassis engineer and they will tell you that is far from the end game. Perfect mass centralization OTOH is the Holy Grail that improves everything.

 

[Snicklefritz]

Thanks. As always, a fun read and information fest. What you are saying, even if you don't mean it, is that less battery weight in back and 40-50 lbs. of bowling balls in the passenger seat - bagged, of course - plus a hefty driver, is a bigger advantage in maneuvering/handling.

 

[Ohiocruiser]

Main point is, replacement of the battery for lithium one IS the only one part of weight reduction process. If the only thing you are going to do is to replace the battery, than you are really better off leaving the stock one in place and keeping that $1k in your pocket. But if you want to loose 300-400 lbs, it will be pretty close to impossible to achieve without replacing that heavy battery. Overall, weight reduction doesn't make a lot of sense on dd car. But we are car people, and we spit on logic.

 

[Ah GetFd]

I had not come across anti gravity batteries before. I see it's a fun play on words. The battery is lighter than lead acid and that's about it. Batteries in cars get a rough life, There is constant vibration. There are heavy discharges and shallow recharges. There are accidental shallow discharges (leaving the headlights on) that does absolutely no good. A trickle charge in my opinion does no damage whatsoever. It's the heavy recharges that cause the damage to just about all batteries. I would expect an SLA Industrial battery (as used in a telephone exchange, cell phone base station, to last TEN YEARS in a vehicle. Why wouldn't you source one of those instead?

 

[STINGER]

Any warranty?

I know Costco Kirkland AGM batteries have a full free replacement for 5 full years, and then pro-rated after that...

Would be nice if your antigravity, which is SUPPOSED, to last longer, had some warrant

Looks like 3 years free replacement + 2 years pro-rated for antigravity automotive

What was the age of your battery when it failed?

3 yrs - free replacement
4 yrs - 40% discount
5 yrs - 30% discount

Mine lasted a little over 5 years

I bought mine in 2019, back then they were significantly cheaper, costed me $782 with the trickle charger. Today the same battery alone is $919. Im looking at Aliexpress options, will update if I find anything.

 

[djerickd]

I saw a bunch on ebay from china... there can't be too many actual manufacturers of these, right??

 

[Volfy]

Mine lasted a little over 5 years

I bought mine in 2019, back then they were significantly cheaper, costed me $782 with the trickle charger. Today the same battery alone is $919. Im looking at Aliexpress options, will update if I find anything.

Since you're in Bahrain, the heat might also have something to do with the service life. I was in Damman, just across the King Fahd Causeway back in late Summer 2022, and even though I was told it was already past the mid-Summer heat, to me it was still unbearably hot. Being from Houston, I thought I was used to brutally hot Summer. That was a whole 'nother level.

High temp is the No.1 enemy of all battery types, and LiFePO4 is no exception. On the Stinger, being in the trunk away from the engine heat helps, but in the hot desert, you battery likely won't last as long as it would in a cooler climate.

 

[STINGER]

I saw a bunch on ebay from china... there can't be too many actual manufacturers of these, right??

I found a couple suppliers on Alibaba that had some good reviews, I messaged them and waiting to hear back. Lets see what they quote.

Since you're in Bahrain, the heat might also have something to do with the service life. I was in Damman, just across the King Fahd Causeway back in late Summer 2022, and even though I was told it was already past the mid-Summer heat, to me it was still unbearably hot. Being from Houston, I thought I was used to brutally hot Summer. That was a whole 'nother level.

High temp is the No.1 enemy of all battery types, and LiFePO4 is no exception. On the Stinger, being in the trunk away from the engine heat helps, but in the hot desert, you battery likely won't last as long as it would in a cooler climate.

Yeah, Jul to Sep the heat is brutal here, probably had a role in shortening the battery lifespan.

 

[STINGER]

Okay, ordered a Group 47, 60Ah, 1,200CCA with BMS and voltage meter via APP.

Total with hazardous airfreight shipping was $400.

Will let you guys know how it works out once I receive it in 2-3 weeks.

 

[NYBIOMED]

Okay, ordered a Group 47, 60Ah, 1,000CCA with BMS and voltage meter via APP.

Total with hazardous airfreight shipping was $400.

Will let you guys know how it works out once I receive it in 2-3 weeks.

Interesting, yes, keep us updated and send linky

 

[Volfy]

Group 47 is equivalent to H5. Are you sure there is a position for the battery hold down clamp to secure it? IIRC, Stinger has two positions for H7 and H8.

 

[NYBIOMED]

Group 47 is equivalent to H5. Are you sure there is a position for the battery hold down clamp to secure it? IIRC, Stinger has two positions for H7 and H8.

Hmm, not only this, but oftentimes Li+ batteries are half to 1/3 the size of the battery it replaces, do we know the "footprint"?

 

[Volfy]

All the "H" group batteries have the same height and width. The only difference is the length. H5 is the shortest, H9 is the longest. I know for sure Stinger has at least 2 positions. H7 for 2.0T and H8 for 3.3T, I think. If there is a 3rd position for shorter than H7, the threaded hole would be under the existing battery. I have not pull any of my batts yet, so I dunno if there is one. If not, a guy can jerryrig something to use the H7 holder down position to keep an H5 in place. Otherwise, I would not want to rely on just the top hold-down bracket to keep a shorter battery in place.

 

[STINGER]

Interesting, yes, keep us updated and send linky

Group 47 is equivalent to H5. Are you sure there is a position for the battery hold down clamp to secure it? IIRC, Stinger has two positions for H7 and H8.

My Antigravity is an H5 as well. When I purchased the battery 5 years ago, the idea at the time was even if the stinger is sold down the line, I am keeping the battery. So I went with the smallest size to make sure it will fit in any application, a bracket is easy to make to make it fit.

All the "H" group batteries have the same height and width. The only difference is the length. H5 is the shortest, H9 is the longest. I know for sure Stinger has at least 2 positions. H7 for 2.0T and H8 for 3.3T, I think. If there is a 3rd position for shorter than H7, the threaded hole would be under the existing battery. I have not pull any of my batts yet, so I dunno if there is one. If not, a guy can jerryrig something to use the H7 holder down position to keep an H5 in place. Otherwise, I would not want to rely on just the top hold-down bracket to keep a shorter battery in place.

The stinger has two positions. I fabricated a small aluminum bracket to fit the H5.

 

[Volfy]

Nice work. Although, I personally would not have gone with that H5, even if the CCA number suggests it's adequate when compared to a lead acid. In all my motorcycle applications, I always try to oversize the LiFePO4, if at all possible. Shorai quite often have two sizes that would fit a given application, with both having enough CCA to turn the engine over. Both are far lighter weight than the original lead acid, so I always pick the larger one, for several reasons:

1. Larger batt not only provides more CCA but also more AmpHour reserves. This allow the vehicle to power accessories with engine off and to perform better as a deep-cycle as well as a starter batt. This is even more important for a car.

2. LiFePO4 's current output drops with temp. Mfrs quite often have caveats on this for very cold weather and advise owner to turn ON the headlights to draw current, which allows the LiFePO4 to warm up, before attempting to crank the engine over. Doing this safely and effectively requires the batt to have enough reserves (see point 1 above).

3. The larger the current draw vs. it's rated CCA output rating, the harder the battery's internal chemistry has to work to produce that current output. The higher and more frequent that output demand, the more stresses you place on the battery, the higher will be the internal resistance, the less efficient the battery is at producing those high output current, the more heat it produces.

If this were a dedicated track car or even a racer, then all these considerations would bow to the overriding goal of absolute minimum weight possible. Batt lifespan becomes a distant second priority. However, for a daily driver, I would gladly trade a few more lbs of battery weight for more capacity and better service life. Even an H8 LiFePO4 would weight far less than a lead acid batt.

 

[STINGER]

Nice work. Although, I personally would not have gone with that H5, even if the CCA number suggests it's adequate when compared to a lead acid. In all my motorcycle applications, I always try to oversize the LiFePO4, if at all possible. Shorai quite often have two sizes that would fit a given application, with both having enough CCA to turn the engine over. Both are far lighter weight than the original lead acid, so I always pick the larger one, for several reasons:

1. Larger batt not only provides more CCA but also more AmpHour reserves. This allow the vehicle to power accessories with engine off and to perform better as a deep-cycle as well as a starter batt. This is even more important for a car.

2. LiFePO4 's current output drops with temp. Mfrs quite often have caveats on this for very cold weather and advise owner to turn ON the headlights to draw current, which allows the LiFePO4 to warm up, before attempting to crank the engine over. Doing this safely and effectively requires the batt to have enough reserves (see point 1 above).

3. The larger the current draw vs. it's rated CCA output rating, the harder the battery's internal chemistry has to work to produce that current output. The higher and more frequent that output demand, the more stresses you place on the battery, the higher will be the internal resistance, the less efficient the battery is at producing those high output current, the more heat it produces.

If this were a dedicated track car or even a racer, then all these considerations would bow to the overriding goal of absolute minimum weight possible. Batt lifespan becomes a distant second priority. However, for a daily driver, I would gladly trade a few more lbs of battery weight for more capacity and better service life. Even an H8 LiFePO4 would weight far less than a lead acid batt.

Typically, for automotive use the 3 popular capacities for LiFePO4 batteries are, 20Ah, 40Ah or 60Ah. They will recommend something beyond 60Ah if your displacement is above 6L or you have a lot of draw when the car is off. I believe they can offer up to 80Ah in an H5 case, so basically a 80Ah H5 or an 80Ah H9 are the same except for the case obviously. My antigravity was a 40Ah and lasted 5 years, I went with a 60Ah this time which should be more than enough for my needs.

Est. LiFePO4 (depending on the BMS they use),
40Ah - 1,000CCA
60Ah - 1,200CCA

My AGM H9 had 950CCA.

 

[Volfy]

I didn't know you can get an H5 with 80Ah. That's impressive... about what a good H7 AGM has. Antigravity only shows either 24Ah or 40Ah options for H5, neither of which is enough IMHO. Even 60Ah just gets over the adequate threshold, considering how much electronics are in cars these days. This is made worse by the fact that LiFePO4 mfrs tend to play funny games with their doggy "lead acid equivalent Amp-hour" rating methods. The LiFePO4 technology is solid, but their e-Ah ratings are less so.

Realistically though, your Antigravity H5 40Ah lasting 5 Bahrain Summers is not too shabby... all things considered. And if your new one comes close to being a true 60Ah, then you should be fine.